The Riverside County Board of Supervisors will have its second look at possible revisions to its districts’ boundaries as a result of the 2020 Census data.

At the Sept. 28 meeting, the Executive Office Technical Redistricting Committee (EOTC) presented four maps of possible new boundaries to the board. In all four maps, Idyllwild and its neighboring Hill communities were shifted to District 4, which is essentially the desert cities — Palm Desert and Palm Springs east to include Blythe.

The EOTC presented seven maps to the supervisors at a special Tuesday evening meeting. The original four maps and one of the three new ones included Hill communities with the desert.

The other two options kept the Hill with its western neighbors. In one, Idyllwild, Pine Cove, Mountain Center and Garner Valley, along with Valle Vista and East Hemet, remained in District 3. The Temecula to Menifee areas also are in District 3, but Hemet and San Jacinto have been shifted north to District 5.

In this option, the average population of the five districts is nearly equal. The difference between the district with the greatest population and the one with the smallest is about 3,000 people.

In the seventh option, the Hill is split between two districts. The dividing line is in Garner Valley, just south of Lake Hemet. The northern communities — Mountain Center, Idyllwild, Pine Cove to Banning — are moved to District 5, which would include Hemet and San Jacinto. Banning, Beaumont and Moreno Valley also are part of District 5 in this option.

Garner Valley, from south of Lake Hemet, Anza and Aguanga, remain in District 3 with the Temecula to Menifee cities and Valle Vista and East Hemet.

In this option, the districts’ population is not quite so even, with the spread from largest to smallest of about 8,800 people.

Each of the three new boundary options had the district populations much closer to the average of 483,488 than the original four.

Since the beginning of September, EOTC has received 67 online comments about redistricting. Some were very specific on where a community should be placed. Others addressed more general physical and community attributes, such as law enforcement, illegal pot farm, maintain quality of life in rural environment and more California Highway Patrol pullovers rather the political location.

Where the Hill communities should be located was the subject of 16 comments. These comments all preferred aligning the Hill with its western neighbors rather than with the east and the desert.

Here are four examples of the comments submitted that addressed the Hill’s potential supervisorial district. One person wrote, “For one thing, wildfires are not an issue in the desert (it takes a lot to make sand burn), while all the rest of District 3 is/ should be exceptionally concerned.”

Another wrote, “Our mountain communities have common interests and should be represented together. We would be the ugly stepchild of the desert community. We should be in District 3.”

And a third commenter stated, “Please do not separate the areas of Sage, Aguanga, Anza and Idyllwild. That makes no sense from the aspect of respecting we are a community, or however the goal is stated.”

Another person wrote, “Keeping Idyllwild with Hemet. There are many economic, cultural and educational ties that should be respected in deciding in which district Idyllwild should reside.”

Several other commenters were adamant that Valle Vista and East Hemet should not be separated from the larger cities of Hemet and San Jacinto.

The next public sessions about redistricting will be the EOTC presentation to the Advisory Redistricting Commission (Planning Commission) on Nov. 3. This will be followed on Nov. 9 with another presentation to the supervisors.

Visit https://rivco.org/about-county/county-boards-committees-and-commissions/county-redistricting-efforts for how to comment or where to attend meetings on the redistricting process.