A LITTLE ABOUT LACCEA
COUNTY RETHINKS DISTRICT LIMIT By Raul Vasquez

LACCEA has been fighting for its individual members since 1969. LACCEA offers representation of the highest quality to our members when they face lack of promotions and discipline, and we look out for their interest at the county level. With over a thousand members, and growing, Victor Manrique, our Attorney, currently provides outstanding representational services through the civil service system. Victor provides representation to our members who wish to have their cases handled by an attorney rather than a union steward or business agent. Victor has won important cases for our members and is well respected by the county for his skill and tenacity when fighting for the rights of our members.

LACCEA’s primary mission since 1969 is to advocate aggressively for policies and issues that benefit our members and the Latino community. Our Director of EEO, Alan Clayton, is in charge of this mission. In 1987, Alan filed the largest Latino discrimination public sector employment discrimination complaint in the United States against the Department of Health Services. The EEOC ordered the County to spend 2.1 million dollars to increase recruitment of Latinos into the Health Department. This year, Alan led the fight to prevent 1,240 layoffs in the Probation Department. In 1996, Alan led the fight to protect over 1,800 jobs in the Department of Social Services and 1,000 jobs in the Probation Department. Alan, for over 12 1/2 years has met with Department heads on the issues of recruitment, hiring, and promotions of Latino employees. Also, for over 12 1/2 years, our Director of EEO has led the fight to have the county departments recruit and hire certified Spanish-speaking staff. Alan also led the fight against unfair restrictions on the awarding of bilingual compensation and the fight to insure that Spanish-speaking services are not reduced by the layoffs of certified Spanish-speaking staff. Also, Alan filed the largest Latino Federal Voting Rights Administrative complaint in the United States against the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors. This historic complaint could result in an additional pro-employee Latino being elected to the Board of Supervisors by 2007 (two out of five Supervisors). Furthermore, this complaint, if successful, could tremendously empower Latino county employees and the Latino community.

LACCEA wouldn’t be able to advocate aggressively for its members without the help of our Assistant to General Manager, Zuly Barrios. Zuly handles membership services and keeps track of our important records. She is the person that designs our newsletters, flyers, programs, and helps to ensure the smooth operation of our office.

* Article was published with permission.

It’s that time of the decade again. Time for elected officials and community leaders to put their heads together-or butt their heads, as is more often the case-and redraw political boundaries. Redistricting, which happens every 10 years after every Census count, is one of the most influential and often contentious processes in American politics; second perhaps only to elections. In fact, redistricting can often decide the outcome of elections long before they happen. Currently the County of Los Angeles, the largest in the nation with 10 million people, covering 4,082-square-miles and responsible for a $15.6 billion budget, is in the midst of deciding how-and if-its five gargantuan districts will be redrawn. As of this week the county supervisors, including Gloria Molina of the Eastside’s First District, favor keeping the county district lines virtually intact.

This has some experts raising red flags that the supervisors are more concerned with protecting their incumbency rather than molding districts that reflect demographic changes in the last decade. On Monday the county’s boundary committee, composed of representatives appointed by each of the supervisors, rejected alternative redistricting plans and decided to forge ahead with a public hearing for the “benchmark” plan-one that keeps the county map basically in tact until at least 2010.

A decision to keep the status quo, says Alan Clayton, director of Los Angeles County Chicano Employees Association, LACCEA, could have dire consequences for Latino and Asian communities in the San Gabriel Valley, as well as for the institution of democracy.

“We’re baffled and surprised [by the boundary committee’s decision.] It doesn’t make sense to us. Basically it appears all the supervisors want to do is protect incumbents,” said Clayton, who co-authored an alternative redistricting proposal rejected on Monday. His plan, which would carve out a board seat to represent the San Gabriel Valley, was co-authored with John Wong, president of the Chinese American Citizens Alliance, founded in 1895.

The current county map breaks up the San Gabriel Valley into three different districts; the First, Fourth and Fifth Districts, represented by Molina, Don Knabe and Michael Antonovich, respectively. Clayton’s proposal would unite the San Gabriel Valley into one single district by cutting into all three of the above mentioned districts, which he argues will give communities in this region a stronger voice to represent their interests on the county board of supervisors. In addition, it will give Latinos a fair shot at christening a second Latino on the board of supervisors, and Asian Americans a chance at their first. “This was put together by an Asian-Latino coalition,” he said. “Our plan gives the Asian and Latino communities an opportunity to work together to elect a candidate in the San Gabriel Valley, which right now has no one who lives there to represent it, and that’s outrageous.” In addition to the San Gabriel seat, their proposal would create one district for the San Fernando Valley, which is currently broken up into two districts, and another one for the coastal communities, which are also represented by two different supervisors. However, Alma Martinez, chief of staff for Molina and her representative on the boundary committee, opposes Clayton’s proposal and is pushing for a status quo plan with only “minor modifications.” “If you’re only looking at it only from the San Gabriel agenda, I’d say that Clayton’s [San Gabriel district] proposal is a good thing. But in his attempt to do good for San Gabriel, he had to do a lot of strange things with other communities,” she said.

For instance, she points out that in the San Gabriel proposal, there is as much as a nine percent discrepancy in population totals between districts. And although the legal maximum is 10 percent, the Department of Justice (which must ultimately approve any final plan) has only accepted a difference of two percent between district populations in the past.

But Martinez’ “overriding concern with the Clayton proposal,” she explained, “is the fact that MALDEF and ACLU …haven’t either supported Clayton’s proposal or opposed ours, and that’s a big indicator.”

In 1990, it was MALDEF and ACLU who helped successfully sue L.A. County to create a virtual “Latino district,” which Molina quickly won and continues to hold on to until the present day. Today, Molina is board president at MALDEF. Ironically, however, Clayton was one of the main proponents and architects of Molina’s district. Even stranger still is that federal laws have changed dramatically since 1990 when the “Latino” district was carved out. Today, race can no longer be the only factor in redistricting, and everyone acknowledges that race was the only factor when the current First District was created, which contributed to its odd shape on the map. “What is wrong with the [status quo] plan?” Clayton asked rhetorically. “One, it’s called packing and it’s illegal. Two, it’s called drawing lines that wrap all over the place and pick up Latinos. So [the supervisors’] plan, in my belief, is illegal, it violates federal law, and we feel we can show that to the Justice Department.” In addition to benefiting the San Gabriel Valley and complying with federal law, Clayton claims his and Wong’s plan will help make county supervisor elections more competitive, which they aren’t now since more often than not, county supervisors run for reelection unopposed, giving voters only one choice: the incumbent. “We make for more competitive races, because in the last election no one ran against the three supervisor incumbents,” said Clayton. “That’s not democracy.”

* Article was published with permission.