As will occur in all other states, California will redraw the boundaries of its legislative districts this year to reflect updated population data collected by the Census Bureau. Among the key players in this process: Culver City resident M. Andre Parvenu, who last month was selected to the Citizens Redistricting Commission (CRC), which was created following the passage of dual propositions — approved by voters in 2008 and 2010 — that transferred redistricting responsibilities away from elected officials. The commission is comprised of 14 members, who will redraw boundaries for California’s Senate, Assembly, State Board of Equalization and Congressional districts. In an interview, Parvenu, who represents the Southern Coastal region, spoke to The Wave about the selection process, the commission’s goals and how its mission will affect Californians.

When were you appointed to the commission and what was the selection process like?

There were actually a series. The process began earlier this year. I was personally selected on Dec. 15. It was a two-stage process. The first eight members were randomly selected in November, and those eight commissioners then selected the remaining six commissioners from a pool of 28. Initially there were over 30,000 applicants. That list was reduced by the Applicant Review Panel to 120. That list was further reduced to 60 of the most qualified applicants. Then that list was reduced to 36 applicants — 12 Democrats, 12 Republicans and 12 others or Declined to State candidates. I am among the third group, those who declined to state or are independent. From that 36, there was a random selection on Nov. 18, where out of the 12 Republicans, three Republicans, three Democrats and two “others” were randomly selected in a lottery system. Those eight randomly selected commissioners reviewed the applications of the remaining 28 of the pool of 36. From that remaining pool of 28, they selected two Democrats, two Republicans and two “others.” I was one of the two ‘other’ candidates selected.

What party were you with before?

I was a registered Democrat for maybe 20 years or more.

Why the switch?

I’ll be honest. I think both parties have failed the middle class. Both parties have sold the middle class down the river as far as I am concerned, in terms of outsourcing jobs and not turning the tide around. We are still spending billions of dollars per month on three war efforts: Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan. That money needs to be spent at home, building infrastructure, roads, hospitals, clinics and rapid transit. Our bridges are crumbling, our streets need improvement. I am an urban planner, so I see the effects of how our military spending is not going toward things we need here at home — including creating jobs.

What are the demographics of the commission?

We currently have four Asian-Americans. In the first group, four of the eight randomly selected were actually Asian-American. As luck would have it, they made up 50 percent of that first group of eight. Then there are three Latinos — or Hispanic Americans — three Caucasians, two African-Americans — myself being one — one Pacific Islander and one Native American. There are five Democrats, five Republicans and four classified as “other.” There are seven males and seven females. Seven of the commissioners are from the Southern Coastal region, which includes San Diego, Los Angeles County, Orange County and Ventura County.

Do you feel that the way the commission is set up, in terms of demographics, reflects California’s population?

I think it is fairly reflective. There was some discussion as to the representation being proportional to the Caucasian population in the state, by their only being three white commissioners. Their population makes up roughly 50 percent or higher. The two African-Americans is pretty proportionate to our population here, about 12 percent. In terms of the four Asian-Americans, there was some concern that their numbers were higher than what their actual population is statewide. This is just dealing with straight percentages. I think overall, it is a good representative spread.

What is required of the commission?

We are required to have four maps prepared prior to Aug. 15. We have the state senatorial map, which includes 40 state Senate districts. We have an Assembly district map, which includes 80 Assembly districts. We have a Board of Equalization map to draw, that includes four regions within that district. And as a result of Proposition 20 passing this November, we are now responsible for drawing the Congressional district for the 53 Congressional districts for the U.S. representatives. It looks like we have not lost any seats, and early projections indicate that we have not lost any congressional district seats and we have not gained any either. We won’t know until April 1 for sure, but it looks like we are going to maintain our 53 Congressional districts.

Will the maps be redrawn collectively or is each person responsible for a particular area?

We are doing this collectively. Our first meeting as a full body of 14 is scheduled for Jan. 12. This is when we will lay down the ground rules and put a work plan together, as well as a community outreach plan. We will also strategically go over some of the logistics involved with how we are going to approach this. I have not met with the other commissioners yet, nor have I spoken to any of them but I have reviewed their information, combed through their interviews and have read up on them. I am familiar with their backgrounds.

What is the goal of the commission and what is it designed to do?The goal of the commission, according to the Voters FIRST Act of 2008, is to redraw district lines in conformity with strict, nonpartisan rules that are designed to create districts of relatively equal population that will provide a fair representation for all Californians. We are required to hold public hearings and accept public comments. We are also responsible for taking a good look at communities of interest, making certain that we do not divide them or that we do not split certain areas where it would weaken the voter impact in certain sub-regions of the state. We are to look at ethnic diversity, geographics and demographics. After hearing from the public and drawing the four maps, we must vote on these new maps. These maps will be used for the next decade until the 2020. We turn those maps over to the Legislature on Aug. 15. They will then review those maps, and in turn vote to approve or reject one or all. It sounds like an impossible task to satisfy all 120 elected officials — the 40 Senators and 80 Assembly members. It is a momentous, challenging task, but it’s one — when looking at the background of my colleagues and the talent pool — that we are capable of doing.

Why is it so important to redraw the boundaries and how does doing so impact citizens?

It is required by the state and federal government every 10 years in accordance with our census data. We will receive the new data April 1. Once that data is available, drawing maps proportionate to the population and having districts of fairly equal population becomes a priority at that point. As we know, demographic changes and shifts in populations occur — people move from place to place. The new maps are ideal and are supposed to reflect where our population is at this place and time. The idea is to encourage citizen participation in the process so that they can relate and identify with their elected officials, and vice versa. It is designed to give them a sense of place, a sense of being connected so that they can deal with local and regional issues that are unique to them. More importantly, the best result of this is that theoretically if everyone votes then ideally the best candidate in that particular district will emerge. If it is truly a democratic process, then that elected official will have to be accountable to those who elected him or her into office. We get the government that we vote for. If there is low participation at the poles, then no one is to blame but them. They have a stake in what happens in their community.

What is expected to come from the public hearings?

The public hearings, forums and workshops will produce information that will be reviewed by us — the commission. We will take that information into consideration and review it, so that when it comes to drawing the line that might impact a particular community we will use those public comments. We don’t want to divide communities of interest or disempower certain communities or alienate various individuals. People have a strong sense of belonging. Some individuals may not want to be identified as being in South Central, for example, they might want to be more closely associated with Vermont Knolls, Jefferson Park or Baldwin Hills. There are countless examples. We have to take this into account. We have to be cognizant of these various community identifications and recognize them and respect them to the greatest extent possible so that we are not just randomly drawing lines that separate communities that have historical connectivities or other significant considerations. We have to reach out to the people, especially in large metropolitan areas. We have to be very careful with that. I anticipate it being a very controversial process; we aren’t going to make everyone happy. There may be some post litigation involved with this from various community-based organizations who feel our decisions do not serve their best interests. But our intention is to be as reasonable, responsive and impartial as we possibly can be. We want to take everyone’s concerns into consideration.

The process of redrawing maps was once the responsibility of state elected officials, and it was not until the passage of Prop. 11 that the duty was transferred over to the people in the form of the Citizens Redistricting Commission. Why do you think this change took place?

There was some concern that California has what you call “safe seats.” Many elected officials are re-elected because they have district boundaries that have been carved out that gives the incumbent an advantage. Although Prop. 11 passed by a narrow margin, the notion is that politicians — both Democrats and Republicans — were very comfortable in their seats. Gerrymandering is a process by which politicians create districts that serve in their best interests. So, it appears that politicians are selecting the voters, as opposed to voters selecting the politicians. I feel that a significant number of people in the state of California determined that they wanted to shake things up a bit and make these elected official positions more competitive. California is primarily a Democratic state. There are those who feel that this was a Republican-led effort to reduce the Democratic party’s stronghold, to give the Republican candidates more representation in Sacramento. Some feel there is a driving force behind this. I will not comment on that, because I don’t know whether that is the case or not.

Why were you interested in doing this and what qualifications do you have that allow you to be best suited for this position?

[Laughing] Well if you look at the initials of my full name it spells map. I love maps if you can’t tell, that’s probably why. But I am interested because my background is in geography, urban planning and community outreach. I am currently a zoning analyst for the Planning Department of the City of Los Angeles. I deal with maps throughout the entire process. Prior to this I worked as a senior communications officer, as project manager and as a transportation planner for the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA). I also worked as a transportation planning manager for the Los Angeles Department of Transportation, where I managed the DASH program in the San Fernando Valley. I also served as a senior transportation planner for Commuter Transportation Services, doing management reports for employees. I have also worked as a community partnership specialist with the U.S. Census Bureau back in 2000. I was responsible for reaching out to what we call hard to numerate populations to have them participate in the census effort. I outreached to 2-3 million people here locally in the greater Los Angeles area. I was also a crisis relocation planner with FEMA up north in Northern California, where I identified where people could be relocated in the event of a natural or man-made disaster. Here, I also looked at areas vulnerable to fires, floods and earthquakes. I also worked as a migration specialist with the United Nations Higher Commission for Refugees, where I was stationed in Belize and Central America looking at migratory patterns and assisting refugees in getting stabilized. I have a Masters of Science degree in geography from the University of Wisconsin-Madison. I completed undergraduate work in geography, topography, urban planning and urban studies at Morgan State University in Baltimore, Howard University in Washington D.C. and I also attended a few other colleges — such as Michigan State.