The Commissioner and the Columnist … Still at Odds over Who Really Lost K-Town

CROSS TALK - In a March 29 CityWatch article, [CityWatch link] Mr. Mailander claimed that the LA City Council Redistricting Commission actually considered placing the Wilshire Center Koreatown Neighborhood Council (WCKNC) whole in CD10 and that it was WCKNC's organized protests that caused the Commission to split WCKNC between CD10 and CD13.

Since I served on that Commission and knew that the Commission, in fact, had never considered that possibility, I responded to Mr. Mailander's article and even sent him contemporaneous written evidence (Exhibit A to the Minority Report), demonstrating that the Commissioner from CD10, Chris Ellison, had refused to take WCKNC whole in CD10 in drafting the Commission's initial map.  

Not a single map released by the Commission had WCKNC whole in CD10.  Nor wTas there ever any discussion by the Commission at any Commission meeting or public hearing to keep WCKNC whole in CD10.  In short, there is not a shred of evidence in the public record to support the fundamental premise of Mr. Mailander's initial article.   

And I had the temerity to point out this little problem. (CityWatch Link)

So, how does Mr. Mailander respond?  He begins his response with a personal attack:  Citing "a source close to the City of Los Angeles's Redistricting Commission," Mr. Mailander reports that I was the "the first commissioner to become irrelevant" and that "[a]t one point, the City Attorney reprimanded [me] for the kind of email [I] was sending out."  (CityWatch Link)

If the truth is relevant to this discussion, then the truth is that the City Attorney never reprimanded me for any email I sent or for any other action I took as a Commissioner.  As for whether I was "the first commissioner to become irrelevant," I respectfully suggest that it's rather early to make that determination.  

Putting aside Mr. Mailander's ad hominem attacks, what about the merits of his article?  

In his rebuttal, Mr. Mailander now seems comfortable with the notion that the disposition of WCKNC may have been decided in private by less than the full Commission.  In a tacit acknowledgment of my point that there was never any on-the-record discussion of the issue, Mr. Mailander slyly asks, "Is a discussion in a shared ride in an elevator a meeting in violation of the Brown Act?"  

Well, that depends.  If that elevator discussion was one of a series of discussions among a majority of Commissioners, held off-the-record, then, yes, those discussions may be an unlawful Commission meeting in violation of the Brown Act.  Indeed, unlawful discussions of that sort were precisely the sorts of discussions that, as Mr. Mailander notes, "were likely to have taken place entirely out of [my] earshot and even without [my] knowledge."

And how about Mr. Mailander's assertion that "Mayor Villaraigosa, Council President Wesson, and Controller Greuel did a great disservice to the City of Los Angeles when they appointed such identity-partisan Commissioners as Vargas, Ellison, and Kim to re-draw our city's Council districts."  

First, I don't agree with Mr. Mailander's suggestion that I represented only the interests of Asian Americans.  Throughout the Redistricting Commission proceedings, I advocated for openness and transparency, and I objected to Commission decisions and procedural irregularities which, I continue to believe, violated the law.  My objections were not made for the benefit of Asian Americans, alone; they were made for the benefit of all constituents of the City, who were entitled to have city council districts drawn in a proper and lawful redistricting process.  

Second, I make no apologies for being an Asian American or for voicing the concerns of Asian American communities in Los Angeles, namely Chinatown, Koreatown, Historic Filipinotown, Little Tokyo and Thai Town.  Asian Americans represent approximately 11% of the City's population.  Nevertheless, since 1925, when the 15-member City Council was created, there has been only one Asian American who was ever elected to the LA City Council.  There has been no Asian American on the City Council in the past 20 years.  

Unless it is believed that this significant part of the Los Angeles community should continue to have no voice in its affairs, it is critical that important decision-making bodies, such as the Redistricting Commission, fairly reflect the diversity of our City.  And I applaud and thank Controller Wendy Greuel for recognizing the importance of having Asian Americans serve.

Mr. Mailander's preoccupation with who the Commissioners were and who appointed them ignores the only question of continuing importance:  In drawing the map that has now been adopted by the City Council, did the Redistricting Commission and City Council act properly and in accordance with the law?   

In my view, they did not.  The Redistricting Commission was charged with following all federal, state and municipal law, including the City Charter.  The Redistricting Commission was required to abide by the Voting Rights Act and to refrain from violating the U.S. Constitution's Equal Protection Clause.  They were required to comply with Section 204 of the City Charter, which sets forth substantive standards for redistricting, including the requirement that the Redistricting Commission "shall keep neighborhoods and communities intact" to the extent feasible.

The Asian Pacific American Legal Center, the Korean American Coalition, Commissioner Robert Ahn and I submitted numerous maps throughout the Redistricting Commission proceedings demonstrating that, consistent with the City Charter requirements, it was, in fact, quite feasible to keep numerous additional neighborhoods and communities whole, including WCKNC.  

With respect to WCKNC, in particular, we repeatedly demonstrated that it was feasible to keep WCKNC whole in CD13, no matter what lines were drawn in Northeast LA, South Central LA, the Westside or the Valley.  

The Koreatown community organized and objected to the Redistricting Commission's repeated refusal to keep WCKNC whole.  Thousands of members from the Koreatown community testified, in person and in writing, requesting the Commission to keep WCKNC whole in CD13.

Yet, the Redistricting Commission refused to abide by the law.  Instead, as Mr. Mailander candidly acknowledges, "Commissioner Ellison ... indicated early on that his overriding interest was to make Council President Herb Wesson's district more of a lock for an African American candidate than it is presently."  

The Redistricting Commission chose to adopt Commissioner Ellison's race-based line drawing, in violation of the Equal Protection Clause, rather than adopt any of the proffered alternatives that would have kept WCKNC whole.  

The Minority Report I authored, which was joined by three commissioners (not two, as Mr. Mailander states), pointed out the Redistricting Commission's failure to comply with the law.  Two other Commissioners submitted their own Minority Reports, also lamenting the failings of the Redistricting Commission.  The City Council chose to ignore these warnings.  

So, who really lost K-Town?  A majority of the Redistricting Commission and the City Council.  And that's why Koreatown will be suing the City of Los Angeles.

(Helen B. Kim is an attorney and served as an LA City Redistricting Commissioner appointed by City Controller Wendy Greuel.) –cw

Tags: Helen Kim, Commissioner Kim, LA Redistricting Commission, City Redistricting, Wendy Greuel, Herb Wesson, Koreatown, K-Town, Asian Americans, Joseph Mailander







CityWatch
Vol 10 Issue 29
Pub: Apr 10, 2012