RIVERSIDE, Calif. (CNS) — The ACLU of Southern California announced a lawsuit Wednesday against Riverside County over alleged discriminatory redistricting of supervisorial districts based on the 2020 Census.

County officials countered that the process involved “rigorous statistical analysis” and was predicated on a wide cross-section of interests, including ethnic demographics.

The ACLU is representing Inland Empire United, and particularly six plaintiffs, in a legal challenge to the supervisorial map redraws, which were completed in December after multiple public hearings and studies.

The county’s five supervisorial districts must be redesigned after each decennial census because of population changes. The redistricting proposal on which the board finally settled was approved in a 4-1 vote on Dec. 14, with Supervisor Manuel Perez dissenting.

“For months, Riverside residents demanded the county to do the right thing and adopt maps that would lead to equitable and fair representation,” Inland Empire United Executive Director Michael Gomez Daly said. “Instead, the supervisors ignored the community and adopted maps that would ensure they had easier re-elections. The supervisors’ redistricting plan is a classic case of politicians putting their own interests over people.”

The plaintiffs are alleging violations of Assembly Bill 849, the Fair & Inclusive Redistricting and Political Subdivisions Act, incorporated in state law last year.

“Through rigorous statistical analyses by well-respected experts and consultants, the county ensured that all voters have a meaningful opportunity to elect the candidates of their choice,” the county said in a statement released to City News Service in response to the lawsuit. “The county followed a rigorous method analyzing citizen voting age population data, racially polarized voting analysis ... in addition to holding many community meetings and public hearings to ensure that residents have fair and equal representation.”

One of the maps supported by Perez, Inland Empire United and the ACLU would have sliced multiple cities and communities into disparate parts, particularly on the west side of the county.

“It’s the only map that ... allows for an effective opportunity to elect preferred candidates and does not crack or dilute the Latino vote,” Perez said in December.

However, the overriding goal of the board, as stated by then-Chair Karen Spiegel and others, was to attempt to keep as many communities as possible “whole,” maintaining contiguity without cutting directly through established localities.

In addition to aiming for the numeric baseline of 483,637 residents per district, there were other considerations, including adhering to components of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which prohibit “racially polarized voting,” and mandating that communities of color not be divided up so as to lose their influence in elections.

Inland Empire United and the ACLU said the redistricting failed to ensure districts are more inclusive of Latino voters in Jurupa Valley, Moreno Valley and Perris.

“The warehousing industry in Riverside has seen unmatched economic growth in the Southland,” plaintiff Daisy Lopez of Eastvale said. “Because of the county’s redistricting plan, our family and friends who work in these warehouses have little to no say on where the profits go and how they can help improve our quality of life.”

Like the rest of California, the county’s efforts to research and refine district boundaries were delayed by the U.S. Census Bureau’s postponements in the compilation and release of data because of the coronavirus public health lockdowns. The process got underway before the end of last summer, leading to a series of public hearings and the eventual production of a half-dozen maps containing proposed redraws.

“We have to make the best of the districts we have,” Spiegel said in December. “People are happy where they live, and they’re fighting for their districts. I’m a proponent of what’s best for the county.”

The final map adopted by the board expanded Perez’s and Spiegel’s Fourth and Second districts, respectively, dramatically compressed Supervisor Kevin Jeffries’ First District, and altered the boundaries of Supervisor Chuck Washington’s Third District and Supervisor Jeff Hewitt’s Fifth District, though neither ceded much territory.

“The new supervisorial map is fully compliant with the Federal Voting Rights Act and the California Fair Maps Act,” the county stated. “The new supervisorial map has at least two effective Latino opportunity-to-elect districts.”