This rich California city is losing its mind over a housing project — and it shows why new rules are needed
Sausalito tried to argue it could build affordable units on underwater eelgrass. La Cañada Flintridge in Los Angeles County flirted with bankruptcy to fight its first multifamily development in more than a decade. And Woodside attempted to declare itself a mountain lion sanctuary to avoid duplexes.
But the affluent city of Menlo Park is bucking the trend. At least it's trying to.
This month, the city issued a request for proposals to transform three downtown city-owned parking lots into at least 345 units of affordable housing near public transit and local businesses. Since the city already owns the lots, it won't have to worry about land acquisition costs — making it easier for the projects to pencil out, Mayor Drew Combs told me.
But this is California, where no good housing deed goes unpunished.
A coalition of residents and small businesses called Save Downtown Menlo is suing to stop the development, alleging that the city lacks legal authority to repurpose the parking lots and that reducing parking would cause 'serious and irreparable harm.' It's also collecting signatures for a ballot measure to require voter approval to repurpose the downtown lots. The group announced this week that it already had 66% of the necessary signatures.
'Hoping to squeeze large apartment buildings into narrow, heavily used downtown parking lots … is not a path to success,' Save Downtown Menlo organizer Alex Beltramo told me in an email. When I pointed out that the Menlo Park City Council has pledged to replace most, if not all, of the 556 parking spaces that would be impacted, Beltramo argued it wouldn't be sufficient for residents and shoppers and replacing surface lots with parking garages would be 'more difficult to navigate and far less convenient.'
Making space for workers who otherwise couldn't afford to live nearby is a no-brainer.
So, who would actually be inconvenienced?
Most likely wealthy shoppers from Portola Valley, Woodside and Atherton who drive to downtown Menlo Park and 'absolutely believe they're entitled to their parking spot in front of their store,' Karen Grove, co-founder of Menlo Together, a group that advocates for affordable housing, sustainability and economic justice, told me.
Marlene Santoyo, a part-time Menlo Together organizer, told me she doubts that there would be as many businesses opposed to the project if it weren't affordable housing.
'They don't think low-income people can afford their coffee, can afford their pastries, can afford them as clients, when that is clearly not true,' she said.
All this is a clear example of why state lawmakers need to pass more robust housing laws, such as state Sen. Scott Wiener's SB79 to legalize dense housing near major transit stops and other bills to exempt most infill housing and infrastructure from frivolous reviews and lawsuits under the California Environmental Quality Act. (Gov. Gavin Newsom is seeking to accomplish the latter objective via a state budget trailer bill and is haggling with lawmakers over the details ahead of a Monday deadline.)
Even though the Menlo Park project would benefit the environment — it's close to transit and would save many residents from soul-draining, climate-polluting commutes — Save Downtown Menlo's lawsuit alleges that it violates CEQA and the city's general plan, which are 'standard fare challenges you'd see in almost any case objecting to new housing,' said Chris Elmendorf, a UC Davis School of Law professor and state housing law expert.
Furthermore, most Menlo Park residents have made it obvious time and again that they support increased development.
In 2014, a measure to limit downtown development was defeated with about 62% of the vote. In 2022, the same percentage of voters defeated a measure that would have prevented the City Council from rezoning land designated for single-family homes.
Even Mayor Combs, the City Council member perhaps most willing to strike a compromise with Save Downtown Menlo, described the situation as 'frustrating.'
He's being nice. The effort is unhinged.
One of the main allegations in the group's lawsuit, for example, is that Menlo Park doesn't technically own the parking lots because they were paid for by assessments on nearby property owners. Only a majority vote of those property owners, the lawsuit contends, could allow the lots to be repurposed.
When I ran this by Darien Shanske, a UC Davis School of Law professor and expert on taxation and local government law, he described the allegations as 'crazy,' noting that California law gives significant leeway to local policymakers to repurpose property paid for by an assessment district.
'I am not sure if this complaint was just drafted to be a nuisance, or by ChatGPT, or both,' Shanske told me in an email. 'For my part, the city should not be intimidated and should proceed.'
The irony is that Save Downtown Menlo's efforts — if successful — could lead to the city being forced to approve even bigger, denser projects. If Menlo Park were to backtrack on its plan to redevelop the parking lots, the state could revoke approval for its housing plan — opening it up to the builder's remedy, which permits developers to bypass local zoning rules for projects with affordable units, a spokesperson for the state Department of Housing and Community Development told me.
David Lanferman, the attorney who filed the lawsuit on behalf of Save Downtown Menlo, filed a similar lawsuit against Palo Alto, which is also seeking to transform a downtown parking lot into affordable housing. He did not respond to my request for comment.
Ultimately, logic may not be the point here. The goal seems to be making it harder to do things that should be simple — like building housing.
The state can't act fast enough. It's still far too easy for a vocal minority of people to hold up projects that would benefit the vast majority of a community.
Emily Hoeven is a columnist and editorial writer for the Opinion section.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Politico
41 minutes ago
- Politico
Newsom goes all-in for Texas Hold'em
FIRE WITH FIRE — California is about to take center stage in a national redistricting arms race, as Democratic state leaders gear up to release a redrawn congressional map and mount a statewide campaign to persuade voters to approve it — which new polling suggests could be an uphill fight. Gov. Gavin Newsom, congressional Democrats and legislative leaders will gather in Los Angeles County this morning where they're expected to unveil the next phase of their plan to counter President Donald Trump and Republicans' effort to gerrymander Texas' congressional districts ahead of next year's midterm elections. The event doubles as an unofficial campaign launch as Newsom and Democratic power brokers embark on a herculean fundraising blitz. Political insiders estimate they must raise upward of $100 million — in less than three months — to mount a statewide campaign to sell it to voters. 'Next week the Legislature is going to move this forward .... we're going to get it on a special election on Nov. 4 and we're going to fight fire with fire,' Newsom said on the latest episode of his podcast, which featured former Texas Rep. Beto O'Rourke. POLLING RAISES DOUBTS: But new polling suggests that persuading Californians — who created the state's Independent Redistricting Commission in 2008 — to reverse course and give state lawmakers the power to redraw a map mid-decade will be difficult, as POLITICO's Melanie Mason reports this morning. By nearly a 2-to-1 margin, voters prefer keeping an independent line-drawing panel to determine the state's House seats, according to the latest POLITICO-Citrin Center-Possibility Lab survey. Just 36 percent of registered voters back returning congressional redistricting authority to state lawmakers. 'It's not surprising, in the sense that California has voted twice for this independent review commission not all that long ago,' Jack Citrin, a veteran political science professor at UC Berkeley and partner on the poll, told Melanie. 'And there's a lot of mistrust and cynicism about politicians and the Legislature.' Last week, legislators were briefed on an internal survey by Newsom's pollster, David Binder, which found a redistricting measure with multiple elements that will appear in the Democrats' proposal — including designating the new maps as temporary and valid only if Texas proceeds — started with slim majority support (52 percent). It grew in popularity when the messaging became more overtly partisan, a strategy Democrats have already signaled. Still, as Melanie writes, the wariness of lawmaker-drawn maps captured in the poll suggests headwinds for Newsom and Democrats. DEMS GET IN LINE: But Democratic leaders are confident they have the votes to get a constitutional amendment and proposed map through the California Legislature, as Blake and POLITICO's Lindsey Holden scooped. Lawmakers are expected to vote next week — and Democrats who expressed earlier objections have quickly backed down. Two-thirds of members have to approve the plan within days of returning from recess Monday in order to meet the secretary of state's Aug. 22 ballot deadline. Democrats in Congress have also lined up behind the plan, with Reps. Zoe Lofgren and Pete Aguilar shaping the delegation's early strategy. And Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has already started making fundraising calls to her large donor network, according to a person familiar who was granted anonymity to speak candidly. 'The good thing is you're seeing consolidation among the Democrats,' said Bill Wong, a veteran Democratic consultant. 'They really have to put aside whatever egos or agendas are out there.' Hakeem Jeffries, the Democratic leader in the House, touted California's plan as an example of how Democrats have 'courageously stepped forward in defense of a free and fair midterm election,' he told Playbook in a statement. GOP TARGETS IN SIGHT: Draft maps suggest five of California's nine incumbent Republican House members could be targeted, including Reps. Darrell Issa, Ken Calvert, Kevin Kiley, Doug LaMalfa and David Valadao. Their districts would likely be redrawn to include more Democratic voters — and to counteract the five GOP seats Republicans hope to gain in Texas. 'This is a bad deal for Republicans overall,' said Matt Rexroad, a Sacramento-based Republican strategist and redistricting attorney. Despite voter support for independent redistricting, he said he fears the GOP faces a losing quest fighting Newsom at the ballot box in a low-turnout special election. Rexroad added, 'It's going to be Newsom versus Trump. (Newsom) gets to raise $100 million with unlimited contributions and appear in every TV spot.' GOOD MORNING. Happy Thursday. Thanks for waking up with Playbook. Like what you're reading? Sign up to get California Playbook in your inbox, and forward it to a friend. You can also text us at 916-562-0685 — save it as 'CA Playbook' in your contacts. Or drop us a line at dgardiner@ and bjones@ or on X — @DustinGardiner and @jonesblakej. WHERE'S GAVIN? In Los Angeles County for his redistricting news conference. Watch here at 11:30 a.m. BIG NEWS: On Wednesday, Aug. 27, POLITICO is hosting its inaugural California policy summit. At The California Agenda, some of the state's most prominent political figures including Sen. Alex Padilla, Katie Porter and Xavier Becerra will share the stage with influential voices in tech, energy, housing and other areas to chart the path forward for a state at the forefront of critical policy debates. The live and streamed event is free, but advanced registration is required. Request an invite here. MORE ON REDISTRICTING REDISTRICTING RECEIPTS — Democrats' plan to gerrymander Republicans like Inland Empire Rep. Ken Calvert out of office won't come cheap — and local elections officials in Calvert's district say they'll need extra resources to pull it off. The Riverside County Registrar of Voters responded to Calvert's request for details by estimating a special election will cost $15 million to $16 million. It predicted that both the November vote and enacting a new map — if the voters approve it — would mean a 'significantly increased workload' and require more funding. A 2021 special recall election cost about $200 million statewide. — Jeremy B. White Meanwhile … Fresno County Clerk James Kus estimates that the special election could cost his county $4 million, as GV Wire reports. 'My biggest concern is not the deadlines but the state paying for this election,' Kus said. Lucky for local governments … A suite of redistricting legislation being released in the coming days is expected to include reimbursements for their election costs. (Other planned legislative vehicles are said to include a constitutional amendment that would create a Nov. 4 ballot measure and a proposal outlining the new congressional map — which is slated to be released later this week.) Unlucky for California Democrats … A representative for the nascent opposition campaign said Charles Munger — who spent more than $10 million in 2010 to strip California lawmakers of their power to draw House lines — will help supply 'the resources necessary' to 'vigorously defend' independent redistricting. And Munger is listed as an official for an updated opposition committee. CLIMATE AND ENERGY BLOWING A GASKET — Gas prices are back on the legislative agenda, but this year, Newsom and lawmakers have even more proposals to keep refineries open and reduce sticker shock at the pump. Read last night's California Climate to see how energy experts are thinking about all of the concepts — from in-state drilling to new fuel blends — on the table. Top Talkers WORKING WOMEN — ICE is looking for a 'women-owned small business' to create a social media campaign for the agency's 14,050-person recruitment spree, The San Francisco Standard reports. ICE is targeting women-owned small businesses because they 'are historically underrepresented in federal procurement.' NOT-SO-NEIGHBORLY — Some residents of the upscale Palo Alto neighborhood where Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg has acquired several homes are losing patience with the compound, SFGate reports. Some neighbors said they've been questioned by his security team while walking around the neighborhood. They also expressed concern about the school that Zuckerberg was operating within one of the homes that allegedly violated Palo Alto city code. AROUND THE STATE — The Los Angeles Unified School District will open the new school year deploying volunteers and school police to protect children in the wake of federal immigration enforcement actions. (The Los Angeles Times) — Huntington Beach police starting next month plan to use drones as first responders rather than officers for some calls. (The Orange County Register) — A federal judge denied San Diego County's request to dismiss parts of a class-action lawsuit over county jails' safety. (The San Diego Union-Tribune) Compiled by Juliann Ventura PLAYBOOKERS SPOTTED: MARTIN AT MANNY'S — DNC Chair Ken Martin was in San Francisco on Tuesday for a fundraising swing, which included a stop at Manny's in the Mission, a popular watering hole for political events. According to an attendee, who was granted anonymity to discuss a private event, Martin expressed support for Newsom's redistricting effort and 'emphasized a need for active resistance and to cast out the consideration of compromise or following the 'old rules.'' MEDIA MOVES — California's capital city has a new local news source! The digital outlet 'Abridged' will launch Sept. 16, publishing daily newsletters and posts on its new website. The Sacramento nonprofit will be supported by local PBS station KVIE and run by a staff dominated by local media alumni. Former Bee reporter and editor Ryan Lillis helped found the venture and will serve as associate general manager, news at the station. Longtime Bee Capitol Bureau Chief Dan Smith will serve as news editor and will be joined by food and drink writer Benjy Egel, who is rebooting his popular newsletter on the local restaurant scene and assuming the role of senior food editor. Contributors will include Bee alums Chris Macias, Phillip Reese and Brianna Taylor as well as ex Bloomberg California tax whiz Laura Mahoney. PEOPLE MOVES — The Plastics Industry Association is adding Hodayah Finman as senior director of regulatory affairs. Finman previously was acting director of the EPA's Office of International Affairs. BIRTHDAYS — former Rep. Tom Campbell (R-Calif.) … Darren Goode … Tiffany Stecker-Gustavson … Spike Whitney … Sara Sadhwani at Pomona College … BELATED B-DAY WISHES — (was Tuesday): Jorge De La Cruz at First 5 California WANT A SHOUT-OUT FEATURED? — Send us a birthday, career move or another special occasion to include in POLITICO's California Playbook. You can now submit a shout-out using this Google form.
Los Angeles Times
3 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
California's signature climate effort is up for renewal — and it's a fight
As California pushes toward its ambitious goals for addressing climate change, the fate of its signature program is hanging in the balance. For months, lawmakers, industry groups and environmental advocates have been mired in negotiations over whether and how to extend the cap-and-trade program, which limits planet-warming emissions, beyond its 2030 expiration date. The cap-and-trade program was nation-leading when it was authorized by state law in 2006. It requires major polluters such as power plants, oil refineries and other industrial facilities to purchase allowances, or credits, for each ton of carbon dioxide they emit, and lets those companies buy or sell their unused allowances at quarterly auctions. Each year fewer credits are created, lowering the total annual climate pollution in the state. Gov. Gavin Newsom is advocating for the program to be extended to 2045, and hopes to see it reauthorized before the end of the legislative session on September 12. Cap-and-trade currently covers about two-thirds of California's greenhouse gas emissions, and its auctions generate billions of dollars for the state each year. Most experts agree the program must continue in order for California to reach its goal of carbon neutrality by 2045. But while Newsom is pushing for it to be reauthorized largely in its current form, critics say considerable reforms are needed to address concerns about how cap-and-trade is run and where the money is spent. The California Air Resources Board, which administers the program, is involved in a halting rulemaking process to evaluate changes, including how the program is structured. 'It is hugely consequential — it is a decadal decision,' said Barry Vesser, chief program officer at nonprofit The Climate Center. 'Californians overwhelmingly support doing something about climate change. We need the program, and it needs to be strengthened.' Among critics' biggest concerns are that the cap is too weak and there are too many credits for polluting companies. While the program has been instrumental in helping California meet its greenhouse gas reduction goals — including a 14% decline in overall emissions since the first cap went into effect in 2013 — the progress has slowed in recent years. California is not on pace to meet its more aggressive future targets, which include a 40% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 and at least 85% by 2045. At the current rate of about 2.5% reductions per year, the state is not on track to meet its 2030 goal, according to an analysis from the nonprofit Next 10, which examines the state's climate progress each year. What's more, emissions would need to fall at about 3.5 times that rate — 8.8% per year — to reach the 2045 goal. These goals are intended to make sure the fourth-largest economy in the world does its part to maintain a recognizable climate in the future. 'It's incredibly important that the cap be ambitious enough that it aligns with our 2045 greenhouse gas reduction target, and we want to make sure that that is clear in the reauthorizing legislation,' said Katelyn Roedner Sutter, California state director with the nonprofit Environmental Defense Fund. 'Frankly, there isn't wiggle room in our ambition. Cap-and-trade is the most cost-effective climate policy that California has.' The stakes are so high, in fact, that a recent report from the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst's Office urges the legislature to 'take the time it needs to weigh its policy choices before deciding on whether and how to reauthorize the program,' as any decision around cap-and-trade will have significant environmental, economic and political ramifications. Indeed, there's no world in which California could meet its climate goals without cap-and-trade, Roedner Sutter said, noting that 'without a limit on pollution, pollution would be unlimited.' She said delaying the program's extension would also lead to lost revenue, jobs and economic growth for California, among other consequences. 'Climate change is costing Californians money right now with wildfires and insurance and extreme heat and all of this, and so we have to keep up the climate ambition,' she said. But while cap-and-trade is a climate program at heart, the revenue it generates often garners the most attention. The auctions have brought in roughly $31 billion since the program's inception, and are projected to bring in anywhere from $70 billion to $260 billion more if it is extended to 2045 The money, which is deposited into the state's Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, is used to support a wide range of environmental projects, including electric vehicle infrastructure, energy efficiency programs and the California Climate Credit, which provides direct savings on residents' utilities bills across the state. But revenue has been tumbling as lawmakers and regulators drag their feet on extending the program. The state missed out on an estimated $3 billion in cap-in-trade revenue over the last year — an amount equal to roughly a quarter of California's budget deficit — and the most recent auction in May ended with about 20% of the credits unsold. Critics also argue that some of the fund's biggest expenditures are politically driven and don't offer immediate carbon benefits as intended. Newsom has proposed setting aside nearly half of the program's average annual revenue to support the high-speed rail project and wildfire operations at the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, which would result in about $1 billion each. 'In just the last decade, cap-and-trade has invested billions of dollars in projects by holding polluters accountable — helping clean our air, protect public health and propel new careers,' the governor said in a joint statement with Senate President Pro Tempore Mike McGuire and Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas when they announced their intention to reauthorize the program in April. 'Cap-and-trade is a huge success and, working together, we'll demonstrate real climate leadership that will attract investment and innovation to deliver the technologies of tomorrow, right here in California.' But California also gives away about half of the program's credits or allowances for free. Most go to oil refineries and industrial facilities in the hope of keeping them in California. Others go to electric utilities and natural gas suppliers to keep them from passing compliance costs onto customers. As a result, opponents say, the cap-and-trade program amounts to a get-out-of-jail-free card for polluters, allowing them to continue business as usual without really eliminating harmful emissions in the state — particularly in the low-income and disadvantaged communities that tend to live closest to polluting facilities. 'It's absurd for our climate policy to include billions in giveaways for Big Oil so it can claim to reduce climate-altering emissions on paper instead of having to do it in real life,' said Asha Sharma, state policy manager at the nonprofit Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability, in a statement. 'If our state leaders don't make serious changes to the cap-and-trade program, polluters will continue to skate, while low-income communities of color neighboring polluters pay the price.' Vesser, of the Climate Center, said he would like to see free allowances phased out. Oil and gas companies are 'fighting tooth and nail for what they see as their interests ... but it shouldn't be the driver of our policy,' he said. He also wants to see the program expand the California Climate Credit for low- and middle-income ratepayers and invest in projects that address equitability. 'There is a revenue-generating side of this, and there is a carbon reduction side of this, and when it's managed well, those things can work and be mutually self-reinforcing,' he said. For its part, the oil and gas industry is also pushing for reforms — but in the opposite direction. Eliminating free credits and strengthening the program's cap run the real risk of driving refineries and other large emitters out of the state, industry officials said. (Chevron executive Andy Walz recently told Politico he'd like to see cap-and-trade paused for up to 20 years). Two major companies, Valero and Phillips 66, have already announced plans to close refineries in California soon, and additional closures would drive gas prices even higher for consumers, they say. 'The reality is that consumers will pay the price through lost jobs, higher prices, and a slower economy if politicians get it wrong on cap-and-trade,' said Catherine Reheis-Boyd, president and chief executive of the Western States Petroleum Assn., in a statement to The Times. 'Updates to the program need to bring down costs to ensure California's oil and gas industry can compete in a global market while protecting workers, lowering emissions, and producing the unique fuel we rely on. If policymakers fail to get cap-and-trade's costs under control, it will send a clear message to those considering whether or not to remain in California. A well-designed market-based system is the best way to achieve our climate goals, but affordability must be a priority.' Experts say the uncertainty around the program's future is largely why its revenue is continuing to fall. The most recent auction in May was not only undersold, but left an estimated $961 million of credits on the table, according to a report from the nonprofit Clean and Prosperous California. They expect similar losses from future auctions, including the next one on August 20, 'until California leadership intervenes.' The governor's office this week said it is still hoping to finalize the extension by mid-September. The California Air Resources Board said removing uncertainty around the program's future is one of its priorities — especially as the Trump administration takes steps to loosen emissions regulations at the federal level. 'In the current atmosphere of federal confusion and uncertainty, it is more important than ever to show political support for California's efforts on climate action,' CARB spokeman Dave Clegern said. 'Legislative extension will send the investment signal for the private sector to keep moving forward on clean energy and technology in the state.' For the most part, experts agree. 'The evidence shows that California's cap-and-trade program has worked well so far to significantly reduce emissions and invest in communities,' said Clayton Munnings, executive director of Clean and Prosperous California. But the present moment represents an opportunity for state leadership to build a foundation for the next 20 years, Munnings said. He urged them to finalize cap-and-trade's extension and ensure that its allowances are cut enough to align with the state's ambitious climate targets. 'Such a program,' he added, 'would be emulated by climate leaders around the world.'
Politico
3 hours ago
- Politico
Poll: Newsom's redistricting gambit complicated by support for independent congressional maps
California Democrats are plowing ahead with a high-stakes gambit to redraw the state's lines to counter a proposed gerrymander by Texas Republicans spurred by President Donald Trump. California officials are expected to unveil newly redrawn maps at the end of this week that would position Democrats to nab five extra seats, neutralizing the Texas redraw. Newsom, who kicks off the campaign in earnest on Thursday, has cast himself as both reluctant and eager to engage in an escalating redistricting war. He and fellow Democrats have repeatedly emphasized how Texas Republicans started this fight and vowed that any measure to overhaul the districts in California would only be 'triggered' if Texas moves ahead. (Texas Democrats have fled the state to stall the vote on the GOP-friendly maps, although Gov. Greg Abbott said he will continue to call for new special legislative sessions until the Democrats return.) California Democrats have also promised not to do away with the state's independent redistricting commission entirely. Instead, they plan to ask voters to approve a constitutional amendment that would put new maps approved by the Legislature in effect for the 2026, 2028 and 2030 election cycles, according to legislative sources familiar with the draft measure. The independent panel would then resume its role as the state's line-drawer after the 2030 census. The POLITICO-Citrin Center-Possibility Lab survey findings underscore why Democrats are stopping short of jettisoning the commission. The poll shows independent redistricting enjoys widespread popularity among the general public, with 64 percent support overall, and across party affiliations. Independent voters were the most enthusiastic backers of the panel, with 72 percent in favor of the commission keeping its line-drawing authority. Support among Republicans and Democrats was roughly equal — 66 percent and 61 percent, respectively — marking a rare spot of bipartisan agreement in this hyper-polarized political moment. 'That surprised me a little bit, given that this is being pushed so heavily by Newsom and by the Democratic Party nationally that we have to combat Texas,' Citrin said. Older respondents were more likely to favor the independent commission, with 77 percent of people aged 80 and older in favor of keeping the status quo. Still, a healthy majority of younger voters, including 62 percent of Gen Z and millennials, supported the commission as well. The independent commission's popularity has grown over time. Californians narrowly approved the creation of an independent panel in 2008, taking the power to draw the boundaries of legislative districts away from lawmakers and giving it to a citizen commission. Two years later, voters had further warmed to independent redistricting, with 61 percent supporting a measure to give the panel authority over congressional lines as well. A measure to repeal the commission was also handily defeated that year. To overcome the popularity of good governance election reforms, Democrats this year are betting on a campaign that will frame the new maps as striking a blow against Trump, who lost the state by 20 points last year. 'I think the voters will approve it. I think the voters understand what's at stake,' Newsom said in a news conference last Friday. 'We live in the most un-Trump state in America.' Last week, legislators were briefed on an internal survey by Newsom's pollster, David Binder, which found a redistricting measure with multiple elements — including designating the new maps as temporary and only valid if Texas proceeds — started with slim majority support (52 percent). It grew in popularity when the messaging became more overtly partisan. Democrats have already signaled that strategy, trotting out talking points about 'fighting fire with fire' and 'rejecting Trump's power grab.' Still, the public wariness of lawmaker-drawn maps captured in the POLITICO-Citrin Center-Possibility Lab poll suggests an uphill climb for Newsom and Democrats. 'If this is the starting point, then they will have a struggle,' Citrin said. The survey also looked at the opinion of policy influencers, a group of roughly 500 POLITICO Pro subscribers who are deeply versed in the state's political landscape. Their views are largely in line with the general electorate: 61 percent support the independent commission while 39 percent back lines being drawn by lawmakers. Among influencers, the partisan divide is more stark. Republican insiders, who are likely keenly aware that multiple GOP-held seats are at risk, overwhelmingly support the commission, with 91 percent. The panel also enjoys strong support among 79 percent of independents. Democratic insiders are the sole group to back legislators holding the redistricting pen — and just barely; 51 percent support returning the redrawing powers to lawmakers, while 49 percent want to keep the commission. This project consists of two separate opinion studies of the California electorate and policy influencers in the state, fielded by TrueDot, the AI-accelerated research platform, in collaboration with the Citrin Center and Possibility Lab at UC Berkeley and POLITICO. The public opinion study, made possible in part with support from the California Constitution Center, was conducted in the field between July 28 and Aug. 12. The sample of 1,445 registered voters was selected at random by Verasight, with interviews conducted in English and Spanish, and includes an oversample of Hispanic voters. The modeled error estimate for the full sample is plus/minus 2.6 percent. The policy influencer study was conducted from July 30 to Aug. 11, among 512 subscribers to POLITICO Pro, and the modeled error estimate is plus/minus 3.7 percent.
