1st Draft - Supervisor District Boundaries, 3 options to review
59 registered responses
Open Humboldt is not a certified voting system or ballot box. As with any public comment process, participation in Open Humboldt is voluntary. The responses in this record are not necessarily representative of the whole population, nor do they reflect the opinions of any government agency or elected officials.
Your answers will NOT be saved
This is the form that was used to collect responses. It's here so you can try it and see how it worked when the topic was open.
The topic is now closed, and anything you enter into this form will not be saved.
Translate
How well does the above draft map showing all proposed districts represent your community?
How well does “Draft Plan A, District A” represent your community?
What would you change about "Draft Plan A, District A"?
No response.What would you keep about "Draft Plan A, District A"?
No response.How well does “Draft Plan A, District B” represent your community?
What would you change about "Draft Plan A, District B"?
No response.What would you keep about "Draft Plan A, District B"?
No response.How well does “Draft Plan A, District C” represent your community?
What would you change about "Draft Plan A, District C"?
Please do NOT split the City of Eureka in half. I understand the "Community of Interest" planning process, but I do not understand the justification for claiming a neighborhood in Eureka has more in common with a neighboring city 7 miles away than its own City it is a part of. If we were a larger region with major population disparity between districts, I understand the need to split cities. But the justification that West Eureka has more in common with Arcata is not true as I have lived in Eureka for 11 years in West Eureka where you are proposing to split. I walk 5 days a week from one end of the Eureka to the other, this is a small City that has the Community Interest of being an actual community. Furthermore, you have proposed to allocate a significant portion of Eureka to a new district, of which has the 101 corridor, a public marina, and a harbor which Arcata has no commonalities with. Additionally, you are proposing to split Old Town Eureka in half which is absolutely a Community of Interest. This is a Nationally Registered Historic location, an Arts District (which is coveted and not handed out to many cities in the state), and part of Eureka Main Street. These are just a few reasons how the majority of Eureka have a Community Interest of their own, much stronger than trying to make relations to Arcata.
What would you keep about "Draft Plan A, District C"?
I have heard that those along the peninsula would like to be together and that makes sense to me. Please keep Eureka in tact per the current District Map, NOT what you are proposing here.
How well does “Draft Plan A, District D” represent your community?
What would you change about “Draft Plan A, District D”?
Please do NOT split the City of Eureka in half. I understand the "Community of Interest" planning process, but I do not understand the justification for claiming a neighborhood in Eureka has more in common with a neighboring city 7 miles away than its own City it is a part of. If we were a larger region with major population disparity between districts, I understand the need to split cities. But the justification that West Eureka has more in common with Arcata is not true as I have lived in Eureka for 11 years in West Eureka where you are proposing to split. I walk 5 days a week from one end of the Eureka to the other, this is a small City that has the Community Interest of being an actual community. Furthermore, you have proposed to allocate a significant portion of Eureka to a new district, of which has the 101 corridor, a public marina, and a harbor which Arcata has no commonalities with. Additionally, you are proposing to split Old Town Eureka in half which is absolutely a Community of Interest. This is a Nationally Registered Historic location, an Arts District (which is coveted and not handed out to many cities in the state), and part of Eureka Main Street. These are just a few reasons how the majority of Eureka have a Community Interest of their own, much stronger than trying to make relations to Arcata.What would you keep about “Draft Plan A, District D”?
Nothing.How well does “Draft Plan A, District E” represent your community?
What would you change about “Draft Plan A, District E”?
No response.What would you keep about “Draft Plan A, District E”?
No response.Any other thoughts on "Draft Plan A" you would like to share? Please specify if it is the full county or a specific district you are commenting on.
I am commenting on District 3 and 4, or on this proposal, C & D. I ask that you please do not move forward with this proposal due to the arbitrary splitting of Eureka in half based on some idea that this area has more in common with Arcata then the City it is a part of. I commend you for taking a fresh look at the map and attempting to think outside the box and look for improvement. The proposal to split Eureka in half is not an improvement and would severe a Community of Interest. Please do not do this.
How well does the above draft map showing all proposed districts represent your community?
How well does “Draft Plan B, District A” represent your community?
No response.What would you change about “Draft Plan B, District A”?
No response.What would you keep about “Draft Plan B, District A”?
No response.How well does “Draft Plan B, District B” represent your community?
What would you change about “Draft Plan B, District B”?
No response.What would you keep about “Draft Plan B, District B”?
No response.How well does “Draft Plan B, District C” represent your community?
What would you change about “Draft Plan B, District C”?
I would take the border more North East and include a similar perimeter to the current District 4 map. This example map is not showing any streets but it looks like it cuts off right at the Samoa Bridge which cuts of a portion of the Eureka Waterfront Trail which is a Community of Interest. The current District 4 map continues East of Harrison Ave. including portions of Myrtle Town and along the beginning 101 corridor which is City of Eureka still. While this is an improvement from Draft Plan A, this map should encompass more of North and East Eureka.
I would ask if possible, any more draft maps include street names so I can give more accurate feedback.
What would you keep about “Draft Plan B, District C”?
No response.How well does “Draft Plan B, District D” represent your community?
What would you change about “Draft Plan B, District D”?
I would inch the West most border more East. I would focus on covering the unincorporated county areas outside Eureka city limits. Without street names, it is hard to tell, but I believe this is removing Sequoia Park and Zoo which is the City of Eureka's first and oldest Park. I find Sequoia Park to be a very strong Community Interest for all of Eureka as it originated in 1894 and there are generations of Eurekans who parents, grand parents, and great grandparents have history with this park. It is VERY special to Eurekans.
What would you keep about “Draft Plan B, District D”?
The City of Arcata seems to be in tact which is good for them. Not good for me as a Eureka resident.
How well does “Draft Plan B, District E” represent your community?
What would you change about “Draft Plan B, District E”?
No response.What would you keep about “Draft Plan B, District E”?
No response.Any other thoughts on "Draft Plan B" you would like to share? Please specify if it is the full county or a specific district you are commenting on.
I am commenting on Districts 3 and 4 or on this proposal, C and D. I appreciate at this version is a less dramatic split of Eureka than Plan A, and it is in closer proximity to Arcata. But it is still a significant departure from the current District 4 map, as it takes more of North and East Eureka than the districts currently are. I believe the current District 4 map covering Eureka works well and does not need to be changed short of inching a block or two for population related needs.
How well does the above draft map showing all proposed districts represent your community?
What would you change about “Draft Plan C, District A”?
I live in District 4 or on this map, D. I very much like this map as it keeps most of the City of Eureka in the same district. I have no changes for this map.
What would you keep about “Draft Plan C, District A”?
I live in District 4 or on this map, D. I very much like this map as it keeps most of the City of Eureka in the same district.
How well does “Draft Plan C, District B” represent your community?
What would you change about “Draft Plan C, District B”?
No response.What would you keep about “Draft Plan C, District B”?
No response.How well does “Draft Plan C, District C” represent your community?
What would you change about “Draft Plan C, District C”?
No response.What would you keep about “Draft Plan C, District C”?
No response.How well does “Draft Plan C, District D” represent your community?
What would you change about “Draft Plan C, District D”?
I would not change anything
What would you keep about “Draft Plan C, District D”?
I would keep the coverage of the City of Eureka the same as it keeps it mostly in tact. I find it very important for the City of Eureka to remain together as much as possible within a district. And this is a very strong reflection of that. Thank you very much for offering a Plan which honors this.
How well does “Draft Plan C, District E” represent your community?
What would you change about “Draft Plan C, District E”?
No response.What would you keep about “Draft Plan C, District E”?
No response.Any other thoughts on “Draft Plan C” you would like to share? Please specify if it is the full county or a specific district you are commenting on.
No response.Any other comments you would like to share with the Redistricting Advisory Commission?
Thank you so much for your time and effort on this topic. And thank you for being open-minded about the possibilities and improvements that this process offers.
I would like to again explain why I believe Eureka should remain mostly in tact for county districts, specifically why I am so opposed to Draft A.
A city shares so many different interests, including Eureka: history, commerce, parks, trails, highways, waterfront, bay, culture, communication, government, relationships, and programs.
Unlike cities such as in the bay area, Eureka does not border any other City. When leaving City limits in all directions, it becomes unincorporated county. Arcata is 7 miles north separated by a highway, and Fortuna or Ferndale is over 17 miles South separated by highway. Due to the isolated nature of the City of Eureka, I have not heard of a strong justification why Eureka needs to be split into 2 districts. Returning to the bay area reference, many cities border each other with invisible lines where cities bleed into each other and I can understand how in those situations cities may not get to stick entirely together in a district. This is not the case for Eureka.
After reviewing the committee meetings, I understand that there has not been a huge population shift in the districts. It sounds like we could inch over some lines slightly, and meet the requirements of the state. Rather, the committee sees an opportunity for more improvement beyond the state requirements. Which is awesome! But please, splitting Eureka is not an improvement.
The City of Eureka has the following Community of Interest that I can think of:
-Highway 101 goes right through town- this is unique and comes with many challenges (we have a very high pedestrian vs. vehicle rate and vehicle vs. vehicle rate)
-Parks and the Eureka Waterfront Trail
-Cultural Arts District Designation
-Old Town Eureka
-Eureka Main St.
-The Eureka Chamber of Commerce
-Walkability- you can walk from one end of the City to the other easily, meaning community networking and relationships are strong without being next-door neighbors
-The Humboldt Bay
-The Eureka Public Marina
-Woodley Island
-Humboldt Bay Harbor District
-History, many nationally registered historic places
-Government- The City of Eureka and Eureka City Council and related commissions and public services
-Public Art- over 100 murals
I am sure there are even more I could add. The only overlaps I see with Arcata that cannot be found with any other city or region in the county include proximity to the bay and ocean. Homelessness and housing are county-wide issues not unique to any City.
Lastly, I will say I wholeheartedly disagree that West Eureka and Arcata have more in common than West Eureka and Eureka due to rental rates and housing needs. Housing is a countywide issue and rental houses seem random as compared to every other social issue on our plates these days.
Thank you so much for this opportunity to fill out this survey and providing options. I hope you get a lot of responses and encourage you to place any paid advertising you can to get the word out about this community process. If for some reason the districts become dramatically changed, I really hope everyone it affects gets the opportunity before finalized to weigh in. I only just caught wind of this last week due to Lost Coast Outpost and I am very engaged in local issues. But I understand the challenges of getting the word out especially on issues which might seem boring to the average citizen.
Thank you again to everyone involved in this important public process. Your transparency has been stellar.