As the debate over where new voting district boundaries should be drawn rages throughout the state, Simi Valley city leaders have offered two alternatives that they feel would resolve local concerns by keeping the community and the county intact.

The city recently let it be known that it is not pleased with the proposed congressional redistricting maps.

The City Council had previously taken a firm stance that Simi remain whole and that the communities within Ventura County be kept together to the maximum extent possible in the drawing of electoral district boundaries, which is being carried out by the California Citizens Redistricting Commission under Proposition 11, the Voters First Act of 2008.

However, the city’s wishes were not entirely granted when the draft maps of the proposed congressional, state Senate, Assembly and board of equalization districts were released June 10.

As shown in those maps, the proposed Santa Barbara-Ventura State Senate District would include most communities in Ventura County and parts of Santa Barbara County. The proposed East Ventura State Assembly District would include Simi, Moorpark, a portion of Thousand Oaks, Camarillo and portions of Port Hueneme and Oxnard. The remainder of the county would be represented by the Santa Barbara-West Ventura District and the Thousand Oaks- Santa Monica Mountains District.

The main problem is with the congressional district maps, which place most of Simi in the proposed Antelope Valley-Santa Clarita Valley Congressional District but leave out about 2,000 Wood Ranch residents. They are included instead in the East Ventura Congressional District.

City leaders say this makes no sense—Simi’s neighborhoods should be kept together and remain with communities of similar interest.

“We definitely have more in common with Ventura County cities than we do with cities in the Los Angeles County area,” City Councilmember Glen Becerra said.

The council voiced its displeasure on the slicing up of the community during a special meeting June 27.

But with the second set of draft maps set to be released next week, on July 12, the council decided it needed to do more than complain or send another letter to the commission restating its position.

It needed to offer some solutions.

Councilmember Barbra Williamson attended a public input hearing at Oxnard College on June 22 to relay the city’s position to the commission and request that the maps be modified to put Simi entirely in the East Ventura Congressional District.

Williamson said that after her testimony at the input hearing, a commissioner asked her for a suggestion for keeping Simi in a single congressional district—essentially, where the city thinks the commission should put 2,000 people.

“I think they are looking for an answer from us . . . and according to what I heard from them, keeping us whole is not going to be the solution,” she said.

In a letter to the commission, sent out immediately after the June 27 City Council meeting, the city outlined two alternatives, each of which incorporate Simi into the proposed East Ventura Congressional District.

Both use the mountain range separating L.A. County and the San Fernando Valley from Simi— a clear demarcation line—to create a natural separation of communities of interest, similar to the commission’s approach for proposed districts up north.

“The area between here and the San Fernando Valley and the Santa Clarita Valley is a mountain range no different than the mountain ranges (the commission has) taken in central California separating the central valleys from the coastal areas,” City Manager Mike Sedell said. “It’s no different—it is a mountain range separating us as a community of interest”

One alternative would align the coastal communities of Ventura, Oxnard and Port Hueneme by incorporating them into the proposed San Luis Obispo-Santa Barbara Congressional District.

The other alternative would put the L.A. County communities of Westlake, Agoura Hills and Malibu into the West Los Angeles-Downtown Congressional District. Both proposals present opportunities to respect the boundaries of coastal communities and L.A. County, respectively, the city’s letter said.

Either alternative also presents another benefit to the commission: Placing Simi and Moorpark in the East Ventura Congressional District would allow for the inclusion of a majority of, if not all of, Lancaster in the Antelope Valley- Santa Clarita Congressional District by extending the line north to the Kern County line. This change would avoid another division of a community, Sedell said.

“Lancaster is cut off in that area, which divides that city,” Sedell said. “Much of that could be picked up if the Simi Valley- Moorpark area was taken out of that (Antelope Valley-Santa Clarita) district. Then it allows that community to be kept more of a community of interest.”

On June 27, the council adopted a formal resolution regarding its position on drawing the maps in an effort to send an even stronger message to the commission. The framed resolution and the letter addressing the city’s concerns and ideas was sent by courier to Sacramento.

The final district maps will be certified by the commission and presented to the secretary of state by Aug. 15.