Dear Commissioners,
On behalf of thousands of Rockridge residents, we respectfully request that your Commission not divide our neighborhood, as it is a cohesive community of interest.
As noted in our COI input below, there are dozens of reasons why Rockridge is a Community of Interest and thus, per the FAIR MAPS Act criteria of minimizing the division of COI’s, Rockridge should not be divided in your adopted maps.
We ask that Rockridge be configured as generally shown in Maps A and B. We have attached the boundaries of the Rockridge Community Planning Council which we define as an important part of our neighborhood’s geography.
While much of Upper Rockridge is not within RCPC’s boundaries, one of the FAIR MAPS Act criteria is that “boundaries shall be easily identifiable and understandable.” Upper Rockridge residents are well connected to us via transportation, recreation, schools, and the College Avenue shopping district. Highway 13 would be the clearest dividing line for residents seeking to know which District they live in, for the purposes of “effective government*.” For clarity, including the 1 block south of Lake Temescal and Lake Temescal itself within the same District may better align with the legal criteria. (This small change should not impact your population totals much.)
Signed, Leonora Sea, Chair, RCPC Board of Directors; Robin McDonnell, Vice-chair, RCPC Board of Directors; Casey Farmer, Secretary, RCPC Board of Directors ; Ken Rich, Treasurer, RCPC Board of Directors; Stuart Flashman Land Use Committee Chair; RCPC Board of Directors: Annette Floystrup, David Garcia, Ashley Pandya, Kirk Peterson, Ronnie Spitzer
*Per the definition of a Community of Interest in the FAIR MAPS Act
RCPC boundaries
1. Community Name: Rockridge
2. Characteristics: Walkable, transit rich (Rockridge BART, AC Transit), CN-1 local retail, historically cohesive interesting (craftsman style) houses, apartments, and commercial buildings, long history of community involvement (Rockridge Community Planning Council, established in the 1970s and incorporated in 1985 – a neighborhood non-profit with a board of directors elected by the community), The Rockridge News (newspaper delivered to the doorsteps of 5,500 homes in Rockridge, in circulation since 1986).
3. Geographic footprint: Northeast Oakland, sharing a border with Berkeley on the north, to Telegraph Avenue on the west, 51 st Street on the south, and the more western of either Highway 13 or Broadway Terrace, and Broadway south of intersection with Broadway Terrace. Residents shop locally on College Avenue, recreate at Lake Temescal, Frog Park, Colby Park, and the BART and DMV parking lots (skateboarding, children cycling, etc.). Residents work from home, commute via BART, bicycle, bus, and automobile to employment in the East Bay, San Francisco, and Silicon Valley.
4. Relationship to city government: Rockridge, represented by the local non-profit Rockridge Community Planning Council, has a decades-long history of working cooperatively with the city on planning, transportation, the Rockridge branch library (including voting for a local parcel tax to pay for it), parks, and schools.
5. Why should Rockridge be preserved in a single district? Rockridge has functioned as a single geographical unit for over 100 years, with common issues (housing, transportation), institutions (schools, library, crime prevention council), our shopping district (College Avenue), and opportunities (parks, Library). Our common understanding has allowed us to successfully tackle various issues. Splitting Rockridge between two Council districts would introduce artificial boundaries and impact the community’s ability to work towards future common goals, especially in the areas of housing and transportation. The Rockridge Community Planning Council tries to represents the entire Rockridge neighborhood, and with some elected board members living in one district and some in another, would encounter enormous difficulties effectively cooperating with the City. We have a long history of working collaboratively with whomever our City Councilmember is on many issues (informational issues, emergencies, major developments). Having multiple representatives would make this complicated and ineffective. If Rockridge residents were split into different districts, there would be vast confusion over which councilmember represents which people. When neighborhoods are divided, elected officials often deflect responsibility or responsiveness to the representative where the exact incident occurred. However, our issues are neighborhood-wide and effective government should ensure that a cohesive community is cohesively represented.
