An analysis of census data in Anaheim concludes that none of the districts drawn by “The People’s Map” have a CVAP Latino majority.
Anaheim Councilmember Jordan Brandman was vilified for suggesting there were problems with The People’s Map and was steamrolled by a huge public outcry in which the Anaheim City Council adopted the map and sequencing demanded by residents post-haste. This map will be voted on and likely approved by the Council at Tuesday’s meeting, but it certainly appears that Brandman’s suggestion that there were problems with this map may have been right all along.
District 1 increased almost 1% from 30.8% to 31.7 while District 2 bumped up slightly from 32.1% to 32.5%; both solid Latino pluralities. District 3, originally left off the sequencing as Anaheim’s Latino majority district, isn’t a majority district after all. Latino population declined from 50.8 percent to 49.1% making it the largest of the city’s three Latino plurality districts.
District 4, 5 and 6 all increased in Latino population with District 4 going from 46.8% to 47.3; District 5 went from 44.3% to 45.7% and District 6, Anaheim Hills, increased from 15.6% to 16.3%. The city’s overall Latino population when up to 35.4% from 34.7%; again, this is CVAP statistics from the US Census Bureau.
The city’s demographer will explain all of this at Tuesday’s meeting in which the City Council is expected to give final approval to “The People’s Map.” Frankly, there’s no real reason for them not to approve the Map and there’s no real time to make enough subtle changes to push District 3 over 50%.
In a way, these numbers serve to absolve Council member Jordan Brandman who saw problems with the People’s Map and asked for patience to resolve it. Brandman and the Council relented and gave the people want they wanted — the People’s Map. And now we learn the People’s Map has no Latino Majority district. But if two Latino plurality seats were good, adding a third shouldn’t really change the equation, should it?
So now what happens?
District 3 is now a Latino plurality district, not a Latino majority one. Anaheim has three Latino plurality districts. Does this mean additional lawsuits? What new demands might be made? I have to ask, are any apologies due to Brandman from community activists, political bloggers as well as the leadership of the Democratic Party of Orange County? I won’t hold my breath. But while Brandman was correct about his view on the numbers; but for those loudly demanding Justice, there was no listening.
So in light of this statistical information being made public, does the Anaheim City Council’s vote Tuesday to approve the map honor the people’s wishes — a phrase often used in the December 15, 2015 meeting? Or would Anaheim’s Latino voters have been better served by waiting an extra 60 days? It’s impossible to find an answer that will please everyone. I don’t anticipate the city council will do anything but approve the map.
It’s almost certain that demographer’s analysis will be ripped to shreads by pundits, but it doesn’t change statistics on residency, registered voters, and the map.
Yet what’s that line about statistics? “Lies, damn lies and statistics.”