California Citizens' Redistricting Commission - Who Are The DTS Members? Focus on Forbes

The California Citizens' Redistricting Commission has 14 members. Five of the members are Democratic, five are Republican, and four are "DTS,' or Decline To State party. One requirement for the DTS commissioners was that they had to have been consistently registered with a political party or DTS for 5 years prior to their appointment; as such, they couldn't merely state on their application (for example, for purposes of loading the commission with one party or another) that they were DTS.

So who are the DTS members of the Commission? They are Stanley Forbes of Esparto; Connie Galambos-Malloy of Oakland; Michelle R. DiGuillo (Stockton); and M. Andre Parvenu (Culver City).

I always wonder about "decline to state" voters. Do they truly hew to neither the Democratic or Republican Parties? Do they tend towards a third party? Are they really Democrats or Republicans, but some aspect of state or local politics irritated them enough to change their preferences on their voter registration? Such motivations are not necessarily a part of the public record. However, some information can be gleaned from simple web searches.

Today, we'll focus on Stanley Forbes of Esparto. Forbes is white, male, lives in Esparto in Yolo County and earns between $35,000 and $75,000; has a Bachelor's degree in history from the University of Southern California, and a Master's in history from UCLA. He holds a law degree from Vanderbilt University School of Law. He is co-owner of The Avid Reader bookstore in Sacramento; and owner-operator of Forbes Ranch.

According to the Citizens' Redistricting Commission website:

Mr. Forbes is a co-owner of Avid Reader, a small retail bookstore. There he selects merchandise, sells and markets books, provides customer service and attends to financial matters. Mr. Forbes also has spent the last 32 years operating a family ranch, managing crop selection, market research, financial planning, equipment operation, irrigation, chemical and air quality regulation compliance, pruning and raking almonds. Mr. Forbes received a Bachelor's degree from the University of Southern California, a Master's degree from UCLA, and a Law Degree from Vanderbilt University. Mr. Forbes is registered as Decline-To-State.

"I am applying to serve on the Citizens Redistricting Commission out of a deep concern that unless reformed, California may be unable to effectively address the problems it faces as well as maximize the opportunities that will enable the people of California to pursue and fulfill their potential."

Well, the last statement sounds nice, but substance-wise is little more than political pablum. Granted, the California state Legislature is largely gridlocked now (primarily because the 2/3 majority requirement for raising any fees or taxes give the 36% of Republicans in the Legislature undue influence). However, how does Forbes plan to correct the situation?

Perhaps his Supplemental Application holds some clues. To explain why he wanted to serve on the Commission, Forbes explained that:

Legislative districts should represent communities of interests. This is inherently difficult in California given its regional and demographic diversity. As Mark Baldassare put it in his book, “California in the New Millennium”, California is in many ways four states with mutually suspicious ethnic communities all of which distrust the government. I believe these differences can be overcome provided the districts are based on communities of interest criteria: geographic, ethnic, economic and many others. As it stands now however, the primary community of interest is political party registration. This effectively results in many single party legislative districts that may not represent communities of interest that reflect our common interests in solving the problems facing the state. With single party districts and typically low turnout primaries, party activists who are more ideologically, rather than consensus or compromise, driven exercise a disproportionate influence on who is nominated and therefore who is elected than the public at large in their districts. This results in a Legislature excessively polarized and gripped by legislative gridlock.

California cannot successfully address its problems and build on its opportunities without ridding the Legislature of this partisan paralysis. This paralysis can only be overcome by developing legislative districts that are based on community of interest criteria other than political parties so that compromise and consensus building can be returned to our political process.

So Forbes appears to believe that political affiliation does not represent a "community of interest"? Political party affiliation is a reflection of commonality of interests and values, both economic, social. There's a reason Republican Districts are drawn to encompass wealthier, more upscale, and/or more socially-conservative neighborhoods and areas; that's how they tend to think generally. Political party affiliation is not a cynical substitute for "communities of interest" cooked up by the Legislature; it's the result of communities of interest.

In any event, Forbes looks like a Commissioner who will not just ignore political party affiliation in redrawing district lines, but will actively break political party-based communities whenever possible.

Forbes is right with respect to one community of interest: the 2001 redistricting has been rightly accused of not just preserving incumbents' seats, but acting to suppress the burgeoning Latino vote. We expect the Commission will have, as a primary task, rectifying this situation. Forbes seems attuned to this:

California is our nation’s most diverse state, and there is every reason to believe that that diversity will only increase given immigration and the higher birthrate of our new residents. This can and should be a source of strength, energy, and vitality. But the benefits are not automatic. Left unrecognized, diversity can be a source of social and political corrosion that can result when a population feels alienated and excluded from the political process and proposals made to address California’s opportunities and problems.

Given the remainder of his Supplemental Application, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt that he's alluding to Latinos and not to Republicans. However, the letter of recommendation from Pam Nieberg points to the former interpretation:

Stan, in his work on the [Davis] School Board and City Council, made efforts to recognize the diversity of our citizens and to accommodate that diversity. While on the School Board, Stan strongly supported and voted for the Spanish Immersion Program in our schools and encouraged diversity in hiring. He also studied demographic data to help determine where schools would afford the greatest ethnic and economic diversity. On the Council, his concern for economic diversity encouraged him to ensure that all were represented in the political process. He also worked on policies that ensured that 25% of our housing in all developments qualified as low income housing.

So what else does Forbes believe?

[California] suffers from a taxation system that many consider overburdens business and is too volatile.

I have no idea what "volatile' means here, but complaints about the effects of taxation on business are standard, meat-and-potatoes Republican fare. Consistent with this, according to Davis Wiki, Forbes was registered as a Republican until 2006.

Forbes does, however, appear to have a reputation for patiently listening to all sides of a particular issue. According to research by the Bureau of State Audits:

Bureau staff contacted Pam Nieberg, the author of one of Applicant’s letters of recommendation . . . [S]he witnessed Applicant working in his capacity as a council member, and joined him to support local candidates in campaigns for the Davis City Council and the Yolo County Board of Supervisors. Ms. Nieberg indicated that Applicant operates as a consensus builder. When faced with an opposing viewpoint, Applicant tends not to hastily argue the matter and force his views on the other person, but instead works toward reaching agreement on a solution. Ms. Nieberg stated that Applicant considers all viewpoints when solving problems, as he tries to “get people to agree logically.” Ms. Nieberg also stated that Applicant is known for working well with others.

Nieberg's letter of recommendation states similar views, as does recommender Joseph Martinez'. (Curiously, W. Vasey's letter is not available for inspection; the page comes up blank.)

Although not much more is discernible about Forbes from a simple web search, our take on Forbes is this: He has Republican leanings and sympathies. However, his main focus is getting government to provide solutions that work, both in the sense that they are logical and that they serve the community. We would hazard a guess that his apparent inclination for practicality outweighed, and would outweigh, whatever partisan leanings he has (which might be why he switched from Republican to Decline-To-State). In that sense, Forbes looks like a reasonably non-partisan, practical-minded addition to the Commission. We'll follow his input with interest.