(1) Members of the Board of Supervisors are not decision makers in state or federal redistricting, the redistricting commission is the sole decision-making body (as per the voters' wishes).
(2) No one on the redistricting commission is from Lake County and it may be possible that no one on that commission has even been to Lake County.
(3) I testified as both a citizen and as a county official. I was the only citizen from Lake County to testify at the first two hearings on this topic. In subsequent hearings, I was joined by our county administrator and two other citizens from Lake County.
(4) My total allowed “testimony” time was three minutes at the first hearing, two minutes at the second and 90 seconds at the third and subsequent hearings. Others provided an additional 90 seconds and 60 seconds at the last two hearings.
(5) We testified on congressional districts, not those at the state level.
(6) The commission's initial proposed congressional maps had us affiliated with counties to the east and most federal issues do not have us affiliated with those counties
(7) I brought this item to the Board of Supervisors and asked for their opinion prior to my testimony. The board asked me to represent their views in addition to my own.
(8) my initial testimony was simple: We are an isolated county with great distances to reach neighboring areas. At minimum, please keep lake county intact and affiliate us with those with whom we have common issues at the federal level (namely Napa, Sonoma and Yolo and – my personal view – Mendocino).
(9) After my initial testimony, the commission produced a draft federal congressional district map that grouped Lake County with Colusa, Glenn, Yuba, Sutter, and parts of Sacramento and Yolo.
(10) The committee asked Lake County officials for information to help with their decision, specifically – if they needed to “split” our county, what factors should be considered.
(11) When we were asked about a split district my testimony was this: Our board expressed the view that we prefer to remain intact. We also prefer to remain affiliated with the county with whom our workforce investment area is now aligned after many years of effort in doing so (Napa). It is painful to have to choose between these, but If you must split us to accomplish a better affiliation, please do so in a demographically fair manner.
As for my my personal view, I offer this:
While it may be convenient to believe that I have great influence over the citizen redistricting process, all evidence would suggest otherwise. My opinion probably has equal weight to anyone else who testified.
Further, I, like any citizen of Lake County, am free to testify at the commission and weigh in on their decision and I was glad that the Board of Supervisors asked me to also represent their views on this important topic.
Initially, no one else from Lake County showed up at these hearings and expressed any views at all. I doubt if others from Lake County would have been paying attention to this had I not brought it to the attention of the Board of Supervisors and my hope is that, in learning of this issue, other citizens of Lake County have taken the time to express their own views.
As in all things, the earlier in the process an opinion is expressed, the more weight it is likely to have.
The bottom line: This commission will be making their own decision very soon. Hopefully it will be one that serves the best interests of all of the citizens of Lake County.
That's my two cents
Denise Rushing represents District 3 – which includes the Northshore communities of Upper Lake, Nice, Lucerne, Glenhaven, Clearlake Oaks and Spring Valley – on the Lake County Board of Supervisors. She lives in Upper Lake, Calif.
How to resolve AdBlock issue? 
