Sonoma council adopts district map B3, introduces ordinance to shift to by‑district elections

The Sonoma City Council on a unanimous vote introduced an ordinance adopting map B3 and the numbering shown on the map to change the city's council elections from at‑large to by‑district under the California Voting Rights Act.

The action follows the fifth public hearing in a series required by state law and a public review process that included five hearings and outreach. City Manager David Guin and a consultant from a redistricting firm presented the single final map, which the city described as contiguous, compact and preserving identified communities of interest such as mobile home communities, West Side renters and the Historic Plaza area. The map has a total population deviation of 5.7 percent; the city noted that is below the 10 percent maximum commonly used for such plans.

City Manager David Guin said the proposed ordinance and the technical files will be submitted to the county registrar for implementation if council confirms the map and sequencing. Liz, a consultant from the redistricting team, told the council, "Tonight is the night where we vote on the final map." The staff-recommended sequencing staggers elections so odd-numbered districts are up in 2026 and even-numbered districts are up in 2028, allowing two at‑large seats to complete their terms during the transition.

During public comment several residents expressed concerns about dividing a small city into districts. Bill Borum said the change felt driven by outside pressure and asked whether councilmembers are distributed across the new districts. He said, "it's very unfortunate that our small city of 10,000 plus people end up being carved up." Another resident, Ken Stokes, questioned the district numbering and sequencing and suggested a different numbering to avoid having the entire east side and then the entire west side up for election in the same year.

Council discussion noted how the map and sequencing affect sitting members: staff identified one district that does not contain a current councilmember (the orange District 1 on the staff display), and one district that contains two current councilmembers (the red District 3). Council members said the numbering was intended to place districts that have incumbents running in 2026 in the odd grouping so incumbency and terms are managed during the transition. The council also discussed map criteria including equal population, contiguity and keeping communities of interest intact.

Councilmembers then moved to adopt the map and the numbering and to introduce the ordinance. During the roll call, the council approved a friendly amendment to the resolution that removed one recital line that stated "the public interest would be better served by transitioning"; the amendment was accepted on the record before the adoption vote. The introduction motion carried unanimously.

City Manager Guin said the next steps are to finalize the ordinance language, deliver the ordinance and technical files to the county registrar, and implement the new district-based election structure for the 2026 cycle as described in the ordinance. The council also encouraged residents interested in running for the seats to prepare for the newly districted elections.

Why this matters: shifting to district-based elections changes who votes for each seat, can alter electoral dynamics, and is the mechanism cities use to comply with state law when litigation or demand letters raise concerns under the California Voting Rights Act. The council adopted a map that staff said balances legal requirements and local communities of interest while keeping population deviation low.