Applications Taken Through Sept. 10 for Leaders to Ensure District Lines Fairly Represent People of Color, Low-Income Communities

BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA – The Greenlining Institute has extended the application deadline for its California Community Redistricting Leaders program. Greenlining is recruiting dynamic grassroots leaders from around California to spearhead a new push to ensure that redistricting — the process of drawing new boundaries for legislative districts — fairly represents communities of color and low-income Californians. Grassroots leaders chosen for the program will receive a stipend of $2,000.

“We urgently need to make sure that communities of color have a say in how new district lines are drawn,” said Greenlining Director of Innovation Tunua Thrash. “Simply put, redistricting is about who represents you in government and whether our communities have a voice in everything from money for our schools to job creation in low-income neighborhoods.”

The boundaries of legislative districts are redrawn every decade following the federal census. Before Proposition 11, passed in 2008, redistricting was done by the state legislature and governor. Prop. 11 gave that responsibility to a 14-member Citizens Redistricting Commission, which is now being selected. Greenlining is pushing to ensure that low-income communities and communities of color are adequately represented throughout the redistricting process.

To make that happen, Greenlining’s California Community Redistricting Leaders program seeks dynamic grassroots leaders to organize communities around redistricting, promote diversity and representation for minorities in the redistricting process, provide technical assistance to local communities to draw their own district maps, outreach to local media, prepare community leaders to testify at Redistricting Commission meetings, and help provide public comment on maps drawn by the commission. Participants will receive leadership and technical training, and will have the backing of Greenlining’s extensive advocacy resources.

The application can be downloaded here, and information about the Citizens Redistricting Commission and Greenlining’s earlier efforts can be found here. The completed application packet should be submitted by Sept. 10 via postal mail to: Greenlining Academy, 1918 University Ave., 2nd Floor, Berkeley, CA 94704.

$350 Billion Loss of Wealth Requires Strong Action to Update Community Reinvestment Act

LOS ANGELES – In testimony today before a Los Angeles hearing convened by the Federal Reserve system and other federal financial agencies, the Greenlining Institute called for strong action to modernize the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), first passed in 1977. “In a sense, communities of color have become the canaries in the coal mine of the economic crisis,” Greenlining Community Reinvestment Director Preeti Vissa told the hearing. “While the nation has experienced a recession, too many in our communities have experienced a depression.”

Vissa’s full testimony is available online here.

Vissa spoke during a day-long hearing called by the Fed to consider updates to rules implementing CRA, passed to encourage banks and other financial institutions to meet the credit needs of the communities they serve. Vissa noted that foreclosures have drained $350 billion in assets from communities of color and Small Business Administration lending to minority-owned businesses has cratered, contributing to a growing racial wealth gap. “For every dollar of wealth owned by a white family, an African American or Latino family owns just 16 cents,” Vissa noted, adding that many Asian American families are doing nearly as badly, but exact patterns are harder to determine because current statistics lump all Asian ethnicities together.

“As it is written today, CRA lacks the power to address the inequities that are contributing to the growing racial wealth gap,” Vissa told the hearing. She called for a series of reforms, including:

1) Place diversity front and center. Although the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston has called on financial institutions to diversify their boards and staffs, African Americans, Latinos and Asian Americans combined heldonly 9.3 percent of senior positions in the financial services industry in 2008.

2) Add minority business contracting to the CRA evaluation process. Minority-led businesses are top job creators in low-income communities. The California Public Utilities Commission’s supplier diversity program represents a successful model that financial regulators could easily adopt.

3) Adapt the CRA rating system to incentivize innovation. The current rating system fails to adequately reward outstanding efforts and sometimes excessively rewards mediocre performance. More grade levels should be added, along with a “community development” test that would reward lending to and investment in community health clinics, community-based loan funds, green affordable housing construction, etc.

4) Expand CRA to include all industries that provide financial products. The financial services industry has transformed radically since 1977, and the law must adjust. A modernized CRA should include investment banks, insurers, hedge funds, and other financial institutions not presently covered.

5) Make CRA matter again. Weak enforcement has left community groups such as Greenlining to try to enforce the law from the outside. In addition to a modern ratings system, CRA needs tougher penalties for non-compliance and systematic opportunities for consumers to comment on the performance of banks.

“The world has changed since CRA was enacted in 1977, and CRA’s failure to keep up has diminished its effectiveness,” Vissa said. “We can make CRA matter again.”

Federal Reserve to Consider Updating Implementation of Landmark Law Boosting Investment in Low-Income Communities

LOS ANGELES – The Federal Reserve system and other federal financial agencies will hold a hearing in Los Angeles Aug. 17 to consider updating regulations implementing the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), a landmark law first passed in 1977 to encourage banks and other financial institutions to meet the credit needs of the communities they serve. While some on the far right have tried to blame CRA for the subprime mortgage meltdown, The Greenlining Institute and others have argued that improving and expanding CRA is the best way to avoid a repeat of the recent housing crisis, as well as being crucial to efforts to address the large and growing racial wealth gap. In May, the New York Times reported that for every dollar of wealth owned by a white family, an average African-American or Latino family has just 16 cents.

Greenlining Community Reinvestment Director Preeti Vissa, one of the scheduled witnesses, will outline specific improvements to CRA regulations needed to make CRA an effective tool in the modern era.

Due to limited space, the Federal Reserve has asked journalists planning to attend to RSVP to Lily Ruiz at Lily.Ruiz@sf.frb.org.

WHAT: Hearing on updating regulations implementing the Community Reinvestment Act.

WHO: Greenlining Institute Community Reinvestment Director Preeti Vissa, other representatives of community groups and the banking industry.

WHERE: Los Angeles Branch of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, 950 South Grand Ave., Los Angeles.

WHEN: 9:00 a.m. – 4:30 p.m. (attendees are asked to arrive 30 minutes early).

Please click here to read full article.

Lo están haciendo otra vez: De nuevo, los intereses especiales están tratando de arrebatar la iniciativa de ley en la boleta de California para enriquecerse a costa de nuestras comunidades.

Dos grandes compañías petroleras están gastando grandes cantidades de dinero para matar la creciente economía verde de California y los cientos de empleos que esta economía ha creado. Prepárense para las mentiras que se esparcirán rápido y recuerden quién está detrás de ellas.

Las palabras “Petróleo texano’” deberían darnos escalofríos a los californianos. Todos hemos presenciado las aterradoras imágenes provenientes de la costa del Golfo – las aves muertas, las playas manchadas de petróleo, y los miles de negocios en el ámbito de la comida marina que han sido eliminados.

Y ahora las grandes compañías de petróleo (Valero Energy y Tesoro Corporation de San Antonio) están diciendo que nos quieren proteger y salvar empleos en nuestras comunidades… Seguramente.

Podemos apostar que van a dirigir todo su falso discurso de “protejamos los empleos” hacia los latinos y africano-americanos, cuyas cifras de desempleo han estado corriendo tres o cuatro puntos porcentuales por encima de los caucásicos.

Pero la iniciativa de ley de las compañías petroleras texanas (la propuesta 23 en la boleta electoral de noviembre) no va a proteger los trabajos en nuestras comunidades; más bien los va a eliminar. Va a estrangular el sector económico de la energía renovable, que además representa en California el sector con mayor crecimiento, justo cuando este comienza a despegar.

La industria de la energía renovable está creciendo con mayor velocidad en California que en cualquier otro estado, gracias en parte a A.B. 32, La Ley para Solucionar el Calentamiento Global, que compromete a nuestro estado a moverse en una dirección hacia una economía más saludable y más limpia.

Para los negocios que quieren equipar hogares para ser eficientes en su uso de energía, producir paneles solares, o construir vehículos eléctricos, la ley ha otorgado certeza de que habrá un mercado creciente para sus productos y servicios. Y ellos, a su vez, han respondido creando más de 500,000 nuevos trabajos, según el Departamento Nacional de Desarrollo, incluyendo 93,000 en el sector de la manufactura y 68,000 en construcción.

Y A.B. 32 está escrita para asegurar que nuestras comunidades obtengan una buena fracción de estos empleos. Específicamente señala que las agencias estatales deben “dirigir la inversión directa pública y privada hacia las comunidades más en desventaja de California y proveer de oportunidades a los negocios pequeños, las escuelas, las asociaciones de vivienda accesible, y otras instituciones comunitarias, para así participar y beneficiarse de los esfuerzos estatales para reducir las emisiones de gases con efecto invernadero”.

Desde que la ley fue instituida, la inversión de tecnología limpia en California se ha disparado, y ahora excede la de todos los otros estados combinados. Una nueva economía que puede impulsar a nuestras comunidades está naciendo, aquí y ahora. Este es el único sector de nuestra economía que ha estado generando empleos constantemente durante la recesión.

Y a los gigantes petroleros tejanos y el resto de la industria de la energía sucia no les gusta esta idea. Escribieron la Proposición 23 para matar la legislación antes de que avance más. La iniciativa 23 alega solamente “suspender” nuestra ley de energía limpia, pero de hecho, hacen casi imposible que la ley surta efecto. Muchos de estos trabajos de energía limpia simplemente van a desaparecer.

Pero no es solamente acerca de los trabajos. Es también sobre nuestras vecindades, el aire que nuestros niños respiran, y el ambiente en el que todos vivimos.

Es bien sabido que en las vecindades de minorías existe el aire más contaminado, en parte por las instalaciones contaminantes como refinerías petroleras y plantas de producción de energía que están conglomeradas en estas áreas. Estos conglomerados aparecen en varias partes del estado, incluyendo el área de Wilmington —Carson área en el condado de Los Ángeles— señalado el año pasado por Communities for a Better Environment (Comunidades por un Mejor Medio Ambiente) como “un claro ejemplo de injusticia ambiental, donde una comunidad de color, en un espacio socioeconómicos bajo, es impactada desproporcionadamente por múltiples instalaciones contaminantes”.

Al estrangular los esfuerzos para separarnos del petróleo y otras fuentes de energía contaminantes, La Propuesta 23 garantiza que nuestros hijos continuarán respirando aire contaminado por décadas.

Entre hoy y noviembre, las grandes petroleras nos van a tratar de convencer de votar contra nuestras propias comunidades con falsas alegaciones de “protección a nuestros trabajos”, y gastarán millones de dólares para hacerlo. La manera real de proteger nuestros empleos —y nuestro aire, y nuestros niños— es diciendo un fuerte NO a las compañías petroleras de Texas y NO a la Proposición 23.

After sitting through two hours of testimony at the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, plumber Carlos Moreno can barely contain his anger.

In January, he lost his home in Menlo Park to foreclosure, after his adjustable rate mortgage reset, and his monthly payments increased by more than $1,000 a month.

“It’s all a bunch of baloney,” he said. “While they’re in there talking, 10 more people will lose their home.”

Moreno was among two dozen homeowners and consumer advocates who attended a special Federal Reserve hearing about what information banks should have to publicly disclose under the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA), a 1975 law designed to combat discrimination in lending.

Advocates say the law is more important than ever given the country’s skyrocketing rate of foreclosures.

“A lot of people are losing their homes and it appears there is a disproportionate effect on communities of color, but we have no information showing whether that’s actually happening,” Kevin Stein of the California Reinvestment Coalition told the panel.

Stein and other consumer advocates say the Fed should begin using the HMDA to require banks and other mortgage lenders to provide more detailed information about a range of mortgage products.

The California Reinvestment Coalition wants lenders to collect and report all loan modification applications and loan modification terms up by the Census tract, race, ethnicity, and gender of the borrower.

The group also wants lenders to disclose the same type of information on reverse mortgages and home equity loans, and they want the statistics for Asian borrowers broken up by nationality to see which Asian ethnic groups are suffering most from the foreclosure crisis.

“We deserve to know who’s getting their loan’s modified and who’s not,” said Yvonne Dunkley, who is trying to get Wachovia to modify the terms of her home in San Francisco’s Ocean View neighborhood.

The Jamaican immigrant lost her job at San Francisco’s Marriot Hotel in 2008 and has been trying change the terms of her loan since she spent down her savings last summer.

“They’re just giving me the run around,” she said, “and most of the people I know are experiencing the same thing.”

Bankers who testified expressed concern about releasing more information, saying if the wrong information were released it might paint an inaccurate picture of how consumers are treated.

Garry Seligson, a senior vice president at Chase Home Lending, told the Fed panel that reporting the race of borrowers on loan modification applications is difficult because many borrowers decline to state it. In such cases, loan officers have typically been required to fill in the box themselves based on the appearance of the borrower and his surname.

“We already have exaggerated claims of discrimination,” he said. “We wouldn’t want to make it worse.”

Officials who presided over the hearing seemed receptive to the consumer advocates’ ideas, but expressed concern about violating the privacy of borrowers who would rather keep their financial information secret.

If the consumer groups requests were granted, “somebody could look at this HMDA data and see where a person lived, what their race and age was, what their credit score was, [and] whether they were late on their mortgage payments,” said Sandra Braunstein, director of the Federal Reserve’s Division of Consumer and Community Affairs.

“If you were on that list, would you want the whole world to know?” she said.

But consumer groups countered that most of that sensitive information is already available to bankers and for-profit marketers.

“The real question,” said Orson Aguilar of the Greenlining Institute, “is why the private sector has access to this information but the public does not.”

Thursday’s hearing was the second in a series of four gatherings hosted by the Federal Reserve on whether to adopt new rules under the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act. The first one occurred last month in Atlanta, and the next two are scheduled for September in Chicago and Washington, D.C.

Testimony at Today’s Hearing Urges Immediate Release of Data on Underwater Mortgages to Prepare For Possible New Crisis; Calls For Better Data on Asian-Americans

SAN FRANCISCO – Greenlining Institute Executive Director Orson Aguilar today urged the Federal Reserve to take immediate action to help the public and private sectors brace for a possible new wave of foreclosures. Aguilar spoke at the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco’s public hearing on the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA).

Aguilar noted that 11 of every 100 African-American homeowners and 17 of every 100 Latino homeowners “either have lost their homes or are at risk of foreclosure,” while over one third of California mortgages are estimated to be “underwater” – that is, with an amount owed that is greater than the home’s worth. With estimates of underwater mortgages running as high as 90 percent in some communities with large minority populations, Aguilar noted, “It is likely that a very large percentage of Latinos are severely underwater.”

In order to help prepare for “what could be a large new wave of foreclosures,” Aguilar urged the Fed to immediately release data on underwater mortgages by region, race and ethnicity. He also urged prompt release of 2009 and 2010 mortgage data to shine a light on what appears to be a disproportionate drop in prime lending to African-Americans and Latinos. Additionally, he urged the Fed to stop lumping Asian-American ethnic groups together in its data, noting that different Asian ethnicities often face starkly different circumstances – differences missed by the current methodology.

Aguilar’s full testimony is available online here.

A Growing Homeownership and Wealth Gap:  Communities of Color More Likely to Be Underwater

The Greenlining Institute thanks the Federal Reserve for this timely review of the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA).  Thank you for inviting Greenlining to address this panel on such an important issue.  I also want to congratulate our very own Janet Yellen for being nominated to be the Vice Chair of the Federal Reserve.   Congratulations Vice Chairman Yellen.

As I speak, we are witnessing a great loss of wealth in communities of color.  A leading reason for this loss of wealth is the growing loss of home equity.  According to the Center for Responsible Lending, widespread foreclosures have drained an estimated $350 billion from communities of color.  For every 100 African-American homeowners, 11 have either lost their homes or at risk of foreclosure.   For Latino families, the figures are worse – 17 of every 100 Latino homeowners are touched by foreclosures (Center for Responsible Lending).

If we had better data for Asian Americans, there would be similar findings for certain ethnic groups.

Given the crisis facing our communities, I am recommending that urgent action be taken immediately by the Federal Reserve.  As we know, HMDA has unfortunately been used as a tool to analyze the past.   We know now that our current crisis could have been prevented had we used HMDA proactively.  Unfortunately, the responsibility to use HMDA largely fell on community advocates who were the first to sound the foreclosure alarm.   Unfortunately, every time we did sound the alarm, nobody listened or excuses were made.  For example, the common excuse we would hear from the Federal Reserve was, “there isn’t enough evidence to make a conclusion as to why certain communities receive higher rate loans.”

Recommendations

Given the magnitude of the crisis facing communities today, Greenlining recommends that the Federal Reserve immediately engage in the following activities:

1. 1. Immediately obtain and release HMDA lending for the first half of 2010 and for all of 2009. We feel that the pendulum has swung too far in home lending to communities of color.   Too many individuals and families that should be provided the opportunity of homeownership are being denied this opportunity, even as we see low home prices coupled with low interest rates.   Greenlining’s soon to be released report on HMDA entitled “Good Enough for Subprime but Not Good Enough for Prime?” shows a large drop in home-lending to African-Americans and Latinos.   Reports by the California Reinvestment Coalition (CRC), and others also point to a lack of prime lending to people of color.

We strongly encourage the Federal Reserve to conduct an immediate study of recent home lending data.   In this examination we might uncover and remove possible artificial barriers to homeownership that might be impeding current homeownership efforts.  Our entire economy will suffer if we allow too many Americans be become permanent renters and if we are unable to turn the tide on foreclosures.

1. 2. Immediately release information on underwater mortgages by region, race, and ethnicity. We know that California leads the nation with the number of mortgages that are underwater.  It is currently estimated that 35% percent of mortgages in California are underwater with some regions such as Riverside being as high as 90%.  Greenlining estimates that a disproportionate number of underwater mortgages are held by Asians, Latinos, and African Americans.    In California, Latinos are likely to be over represented by underwater mortgages especially given the high rates of subprime loans they received from 2004-2007 and their high levels of purchase in the Central Valley and the Inland Empire.  According to Greenlining’s soon to be released report on HMDA, Latino home lending in 2007 actually continued to increase despite drops for other groups.  Given the proximity of this increased lending to the height of the housing bubble, it is likely that a very large percentage of Latinos are severely underwater.

We hesitate to call someone with massive negative equity a homeowner.  Some would even say that severe underwater mortgage holders are worse off than renters.

The biggest victims of this crash are seniors who may not have time to rebuild their equity.  The crash in home values has left many seniors (especially seniors of color) who planned to live off the equity of their house at risk.

We encourage the Federal Reserve to release this data soon so that the public and private sector can better prepare for what could be a new large wave of foreclosures.

1. 3. We highly recommend that the Federal Reserve begin a system to disaggregate Asian American data to better determine the housing situation for the diverse Asian American community. There are currently about 15 million Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders in the United States, 33% of which live in California. The Asian American, Native American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander population is very diverse with over 50 different race/ethnicities (such as East Asians, South Asians, Southeast Asians, Native Hawaiians, Micronesians, Polynesians, and so forth) who speak over 100 different languages.

Breaking down aggregate (or average) data into specific subgroups is needed for a number of reasons.   Some Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander groups have a high proportion of educated people, while other groups have high school drop out rates. For example, a staggering 39% of Hmong, 38% of Laotion, and 35% of Cambodian populations do not complete high school; as compared to 14% of Asian Americans who do not complete high school.

HMDA today is of little to no use for the diverse Asian American community.

1. 4. Make HMDA data matter during the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) examination process. Previous Greenlining reports on HMDA demonstrate that banks can continue to get satisfactory and outstanding grades even when little to no loans were provided to people of color.   HMDA must be an instrumental process of the CRA examination process and irregularities in HMDA data should be made available to the public in a transparent way.

1. 5. We recommend that the Federal Reserve work with the new Consumer Protection Bureau to obtain new data fields, especially data related to loan modification, home refinances, and lines of credit. We specifically request data on:

1. The collection and public reporting of all loan modification applications, denials, and modification terms, broken out by race, ethnicity and gender of applicants and census tract.
2. The disclosure of all Home Equity Lines of Credit (HELOCs).
3. The reporting on reverse mortgages, including the age of loan applicants and whether a reverse mortgage was sold with an annuity.
4. Detailed reporting on multifamily lending that identifies whether the loan was a construction loan or a permanent loan, and whether the housing units for multifamily dwelling in question are deed restricted for affordable housing.  (See CRC letter.)

Greenling supports all of the recommendations made by the California Reinvestment Committee on this issue and has signed to their comment letter.

Conclusion

We agree that more data is necessary to better fulfill the three purposes of HMDA.  However, given the crisis facing us today, we urge the Federal Reserve to take immediate action on today’s HMDA data to ensure that we stop the bleeding of wealth in communities of color.

Thank you.

Urgent Action Needed as Communities of Color Face Greatest Loss of Wealth in History, Greenlining Institute Executive Director Orson Aguilar Will Testify

SAN FRANCISCO – The Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco will host a public hearing on modernization of the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) this Thursday, Aug. 5. Among the experts invited to testify will be Greenlining Institute Executive Director Orson Aguilar, who will argue for urgent action as crashing levels of homeownership drive the greatest loss of wealth in history among communities of color.

Currently available data show that during the recent housing bubble, Latino and African-American borrowers with the best credit scores were four times more likely to receive high-cost, subprime loans than white borrowers with comparable scores. Aguilar will make the case that disproportionate levels of underwater mortgages among communities of color and a dramatic drop in lending to these communities demand immediate action.

Please note that the Federal Reserve has asked news organizations to limit themselves to one reporter each and for journalists to register in advance at https://www.federalreserve.gov/secure/forms/sfhmdaregistrationform.cfm

WHAT: Public hearing: The Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA)

WHO: Representatives of state and local governments, banks and community groups, including Greenlining Institute Executive Director Orson Aguilar, plus public comment. Participant list and agenda available online at http://www.federalreserve.gov/communitydev/hmda_agenda20100805.htm

WHERE: Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, 101 Market St.
WHEN: Thursday, Aug. 5, 8 a.m to 1 p.m.

What has historically been a bureaucratic and secretive process of drawing California’s political boundaries has now become a contentious fight over race, power and government transparency.

Two years ago, voters created an independent commission to redraw the boundaries of California’s legislative districts, a process known as redistricting. But even before the new Citizens Redistricting Commission has begun its work, it has landed in a political tug-of-war between good-government groups and Democratic insiders.

Two propositions this fall will allow voters to decide whether to expand the commission’s power or eliminate it altogether. The commission, created in 2008 when voters narrowly approved Proposition 11, is charged with independently drawing state districts every 10 years.

Prop. 11 took redistricting powers away from the Legislature, which had been accused of drawing districts to strategically incorporate or exclude communities and keep districts safe for incumbents. Supporters of the measure said it would cause more moderate candidates to be elected because districts wouldn’t be so heavily skewed in favor of a single political party.

The ballot measures before voters in November come as the state auditor works to form the independent commission. On July 21, the initial pool of 30,000 applicants for the 14-member body was whittled down to 120; by the end of the year, the final commission will be named.

Supporters of the commission are now backing Proposition 20, which would add congressional redistricting to the commission’s duties.

“If the Legislature was back in control of the redistricting process, they would just go back to their old tricks,” said Kathay Feng, executive director of California Common Cause and an author of Prop. 11.

But voters will also be asked to vote on Proposition 27, which would kill the commission completely, handing the duty back to the Legislature. It has support from Democratic Party stalwarts, including former Assembly Speaker Karen Bass; House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco; and U.S. Rep. Howard Berman, D-North Hollywood (Los Angeles County). Berman’s brother, Michael, is a major redistricting consultant and is working on the effort to kill the commission.

Opponents of the commission say the Legislature better represents the state’s diversity.

“There’s just no way 14 people can represent the diversity of the state,” said Kevin Murray, a former state senator fighting Prop. 20. “Members of the Legislature get to know everything about the district they represent.”

Supporters of the commission argue that politicians want to keep redistricting powers to protect their seats.

“The diversity aspect itself is a smokescreen to hide the real issue,” said Laura Dixon, a spokeswoman for Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Dixon said the other side is “trying to regain political power for themselves” by drawing their own districts.

However, even some of the commission’s supporters acknowledge that state officials must be mindful of its final makeup. Tunua Thrash of the Greenlining Institute – a research and advocacy group for communities of color – noted that the original measure required Democrats, Republicans and independent voters to be represented on the panel but does not require geographic, racial or gender diversity.

“The word ‘diversity’ is used (in the law), but it’s so broad that we want to make sure that it’s definitely inclusive of racial and gender diversity,” she said.

She also questioned whether the commission will have any effect at all.

“We’re supportive of communities having an opportunity to participate,” Thrash said. “Whether this will be any more effective than the legislators themselves is left to be seen.”

Drawing the lines

The Citizens Redistricting Commission was created in 2008 when voters narrowly approved Proposition 11. It is charged with independently drawing state districts every 10 years.

Prop. 20

Would add congressional redistricting to the Citizens Redistricting Commission duties.

Prop. 27

Would kill the Citizens Redistricting Commission completely, handing all duties back to the Legislature.

Click HERE to read more.