Sonoma holds first public hearing on voluntary shift to district elections

The Sonoma City Council opened a public hearing Dec. 18 on the city’s voluntary transition from an at-large election system to single-member districts, hearing a presentation from demographer Paul Mitchell of Redistricting Partners and public comment. The hearing was the first of a minimum five required by state law for jurisdictions converting under the California Voting Rights Act (CVRA).

The presentation laid out the legal and technical framework for the conversion, explained the data the city will use and outlined a schedule that includes a post-map hearing on Feb. 19, 2025. Paul Mitchell, owner of Redistricting Partners, told the council the city will use 2020 decennial Census counts (with state reallocation of prison population where applicable) for total population and American Community Survey data for demographic estimates such as citizen voting-age population (CVAP).

The matter matters to voters because a switch from at-large to district elections changes who votes for which council seat, affects eligibility to run in particular seats and can alter the geographic focus of campaigns. City staff and the consultant emphasized that district lines do not determine how elected officials must govern; council members may continue to consider citywide interests, the consultant said.

Mitchell summarized key legal constraints and mapping criteria the city must follow: compliance with the California Voting Rights Act, the Fair Maps Act standards adopted in California, and general redistricting principles such as population equality (the consultant noted a statutory 10% allowable deviation between largest and smallest district), contiguity, respect for communities of interest, compactness and avoidance of incumbent- or partisan-driven gerrymanders. He said Sonoma’s total city population from the 2020 Census is “just under 11,000” and the city’s CVAP is about 9,200. The citywide Latino share in the 2020 total population was described as about 19.3 percent; the Latino share of CVAP was described as roughly 11½ percent.

Mitchell explained the five‑hearing structure the state provides for voluntary CVRA conversions. The Dec. 18 hearing and a second “pre-map” hearing will focus on public education and soliciting communities-of-interest testimony; the consultant and staff will not present draft maps until the third hearing. The Feb. 19 hearing was listed as the first “post-map” hearing, when the consultant and members of the public may present maps. The fourth hearing is intended to narrow alternative maps to one or two preferred options for public review; the final hearing is when the council would adopt a map. Mitchell noted every map discussed must be posted publicly for at least seven days before the council can discuss or adopt it, and that all map materials and related documents will remain on the city website for at least the period required by law (stated as 10 years for posted materials).

Council members asked questions about frequency of required redistricting, the tradeoffs in different district configurations and whether the consultant can model both four- and five-district options (for example, 4 districts plus a directly elected mayor vs. 5 council districts). Mitchell said the firm can prepare maps for multiple council-size options and that community input in the early hearings frequently guides which option the council pursues.

During public comment, Alexander Cherniff (Petaluma/Sonoma County) criticized lawyers and raised constitutional concerns during his allotted time. Former councilmember Jack Ding (address given during the meeting) and another resident speaking from Pear Tree Court expressed support for inclusion and representation, saying they hoped the process would ensure all Sonoma communities have a voice.

No formal action to adopt a map or change the council size was taken at the Dec. 18 hearing. The council had previously adopted Resolution 98-2024 on Dec. 4, 2024 to initiate the transition to district-based elections and to retain a demographer; that prior adoption remains the formal step to begin the CVRA conversion process. The Dec. 18 hearing will feed public testimony and community-of-interest materials into the mapping process described by the consultant.

Next steps outlined by staff and the consultant include continued public outreach, a second pre-map hearing, public submission of maps, a Feb. 19 post-map hearing when the consultant and public maps will be presented, and subsequent hearings to narrow and adopt a plan. Council members and staff were directed to post materials online as required and to work with Redistricting Partners on map production and community outreach.