Opinion ID: 1151125
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: the process used in drawing plans

Text: Our first step, for both congressional and state legislative districts, was to divide the state into three major geographic regions. The first division was between Northern and Southern California. Our second division was between a coastal and an interior region in Northern California. For both congressional and legislative districts the precise division chosen was designed to produce a whole number of congressional or senate districts. The division between Northern and Southern California for Congress was possible using whole counties. By including Kern County in Northern California [31] and Inyo and San Luis Obispo counties in Southern California, [32] it was possible to assign precisely 21 congressional districts to Northern California and 31 to Southern California. The division for legislative districts was similar. However, because the population required for 16 Senate districts was slightly less than that required for 21 congressional districts, Kern County was divided by a line through the Tehachapi Mountains. [33] With the exception of Solano County the division of the coastal and interior regions of Northern California was done along county lines, which follow the coastal mountain ranges. Without part of Solano County, the other coastal counties do not have quite enough population to form 12 congressional districts or 9 senate districts. Thus, Solano County, which geographically is partly in the coastal region and partly in the interior, was divided to obtain the requisite population. [34] Once the major geographic regions were determined, further division of each region into actual districts proceeded generally in the following manner. First, districts in areas containing sufficient numbers of geographically compact minority populations were drawn to maximize their ability to elect representatives of their choice. ( Thornburg, supra, 478 U.S. 30 at p. 42 [92 L.Ed.2d 25 at p. 41]). [35] Then, the remaining areas were drawn, starting from the borders of each region so as to respect the geographical integrity of counties and cities [36] and in a manner which provided functional contiguity. [37] Generally speaking, we found that proceeding in this order presented no difficulties. Perhaps the major exception occurred in the urban part of Los Angeles County. Having first constructed Latino and African-American congressional and state legislative districts, [38] which occupied a considerable part of the middle of the south-central and eastern parts of the county, the remainder of the districts allocated to Los Angeles County had to be constructed around the periphery; in some instances they became rather elongated. [39] A particular problem exists with Kings, Merced and Monterey Counties because of the requirement of preclearance by the United States Attorney General under section 5 of the Act. [40] As we recited in our procedural history, we are acutely aware that very little time will occur between the consideration by the Supreme Court of our recommendations and the 1992 Primary and General Elections; any delay in implementation of plans for districts would not only be very costly but would also be disruptive of the representative process in the state. In order to make it more likely that these districts would not be challenged by the United States Attorney General, we constructed districts in these areas that require preclearance on the basis of a more expansive interpretation of the Act, which required more subordination of California law than would otherwise have been the case. [41]