Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20211108_CCRC_Minutes_ApprovedCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CITY COUNCIL AD HOC REDISTRICTING COMMITTEE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS – 100 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE MONDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2021 REGULAR MEETING – 6 P.M. I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER – 6 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Ad Hoc Redistricting Committee Members: Brad Avery, Mayor Diane Dixon, Council Member Will O'Neill, Council Member Staff Present: Seimone Jurjis, Community Development Director Dan Campagnolo, Systems and Administration Manager Yolanda Summerhill, Assistant City Attorney Amanda Lee, Department Assistant Justin Levitt, Consultant, NDC (National Demographics Corporation) III. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS None. IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. Presentation on Redistricting Requirements per City Charter and State Election Code Based on the 2020 Census, Including Mapping Tools, and Community Outreach Recommended Action: 1. Open Public Hearing; and 2. Provide any further direction to staff Systems and Administration Manager Dan Campagnolo introduced himself and explained that he managed the administration staff and the geographic information data for the Community Development Department. He was involved in the redistricting process in 2011. Due to a few annexations from 2000 to 2010 that process was difficult. Because of changes to the law, staff decided to hire a demographic consultant to assist in the redistricting process. This meeting will discuss the redistricting process, the schedule, the results of the 2020 Census, and public participation. NDC Consultant Dr. Justin Levitt introduced himself and gave a presentation on redistricting. Every ten years following the release of the Census data, the City Charter requires City Council to appoint a redistricting committee. It is also required by Federal and State law. They are looking to update City Council Ad Hoc Redistricting Committee Meeting November 8, 2021 Page 2 of 5 the City Council Districts, but it will not change the way the City elects its representatives. Criteria from both the City Charter and State law apply as does the Fair Maps Act. Per the Fair Maps Act they must follow Federal law, the Federal Voting Rights Act, a rank ordered list of criteria which must be considered in order: undivided neighborhoods and communities of interest, easily identifiable boundaries, and compactness. The law prohibits favoring or discriminating against a political party. After the Federal requirements, the Fair Maps Act requirements, and the City Charter requirements, they consider respecting the voters’ choices, preserving the core of existing districts, and future population growth. Dr. Levitt explained that according to the adjusted 2020 Census, the population of Newport Beach was 85,338; therefore, each Council District will be approximately 12,191. A 10 percent deviation is Constitutionally acceptable, so the districts will be from approximately 11,500 to 12,800. Currently Districts 1 and 6 need to grow. The City’s overall deviation of about 20 percent is driven by the fact that District 1 is about 1,500 residents below what it was in 2010. Most of the other districts saw some population growth. District 6 is also underpopulated, but not to the same degree. Districts 4 and 5 are overpopulated. Districts 2, 3, and 7 were within the acceptable deviations, but may change because of adjustments to the other districts. Dr. Levitt described that as part of the Voting Rights Act analysis, protected class communities were reviewed. He showed data related to Latinos, Asian Americans, African Americans, and Native Americans. The State defines neighborhoods as geographically defined areas and communities of interest as neighborhoods put together by shared interests and demographics. Communities of interest are best defined by themselves. The Fair Maps Act defines them as areas of demographic or socioeconomic similarity that should be included in a single district for the purpose of their effective and fair representation. Issues affecting political parties and partisanship do not define a community of interest. Dr. Levitt showed that there are a series of mapping tools available to assist the community. Public participation is encouraged. The first tool is an interactive redistricting map, which allows a user to draw their own map and submit it for public and Ad Hoc Redistricting Committee (“Committee”) review. There are paper and PDF maps available. This presentation and all of the information provided is available on the City’s website at newportbeachca.gov/redistricting. NDC will continue to work on public engagement and participation through the website, social media, and email alerts. The Fair Maps Act requires a minimum of four hearings. This is the first hearing, and the second is scheduled for December 13, 2021. Prior to the December 13 meeting there will be a deadline for the release of the draft maps. The deadline to submit maps is approximately December 6, 2021. All submitted maps will be published on the City’s website. Following the December 13 meeting, the Committee will prepare a recommendation to City Council. City Council will hold two hearings on March 8, 2022, and March 22, 2022. Council Member Diane Dixon stated that the main takeaway was that the Committee welcomed the public’s ideas. Dr. Levitt explained that the public did not have to submit a map of the entire City; they could submit maps of specific neighborhoods and communities that could serve as the building blocks of the districts. Council Member Dixon confirmed that Dr. Levitt would create his own recommendations, in addition to input from the community. City Council Ad Hoc Redistricting Committee Meeting November 8, 2021 Page 3 of 5 Dr. Levitt stated NDC would create three or four draft map options in addition to any full maps provided by the public. All maps received from the public, even those that are not compliant, will be posted as part of the communities of interest testimony. Any population balanced map options by NDC or the public will be prepared with their demographics for direct comparison. Council Member Will O'Neill stated that because of the ferry, a map could be drawn that included a portion of Balboa Island in District 1 and still be compliant. Dr. Levitt agreed that was an option. It may not be the only or the best option, but it was an option. Council Member O'Neill explained that he was trying to understand the contiguous rules. He was also looking for a solution that involved a minimal amount of change since the boundaries seemed to work over the past decade. Dr. Levitt stated that some maps were harder to break up than others because Census blocks were followed. One Census block has 1,967 people and would therefore be difficult to break up. Most of the areas are made up of multiple blocks and could be divided. Council Member O'Neill stated there were 1,550 people in the Newport Shores area, which was more than he expected. Mayor Brad Avery stated the City was made up of villages and those have cultures of their own. Balboa Island especially has its own culture. That aspect is not immediately obvious, and it has nothing to do with mathematics, but these are things the City would want to keep together. Dr. Levitt explained the new law specifically discussed neighborhoods and prioritized them above communities of interest. Mayor Avery said he could not imagine trying to split one apart. Council Member Dixon requested a specific map on the screen be shown. Part of District 2 has 1,550 in excess population. She suggested hypothetically taking the 1,550 and adding it to District 1 and asked if that distorted the 10 percent. Dr. Levitt explained that the numbers listed were the minimums. Therefore, adding 1,000 people to District 1 would leave it 5 percent under what it needs to be. All 1,550 could be added to District 1 and it would be balanced and close to zero deviation. Mayor Avery stated Newport Shores was its own community, possibly more so than Balboa Island. Council Member Dixon said that it should not be split, but that Newport Shores participates a lot with West Newport. Mayor Avery saw the highway as a divider, but noted he was not advocating one way or the other. Council Member Dixon stated that the current President of the West Newport Residents Association lives in Newport Crest. Dr. Levitt showed a slide that contained the full deviations for each of the Districts. District 1 is 1,700 people short of perfectly equal. Adding 1,550 would make it closer to equal, but 1,000 is the City Council Ad Hoc Redistricting Committee Meeting November 8, 2021 Page 4 of 5 minimum necessary to reasonably balance the Districts. Districts 2 and 3 are slightly overpopulated and may need to change as a result of changes to District 1. Mayor Avery expressed that this may be a good solution to District 1’s problems. Dr. Levitt said that solution could be examined in at least one draft map. Mayor Avery said that there could be a domino effect in the redistricting as they went along. Dr. Levitt explained that District 2 could grow into District 3, which could grow into District 4 or 5. Both map options will be shown. Mayor Avery was sure that over time and with residents’ input, the Committee could figure it out. Dr. Levitt explained that sometimes a map option presented does not work and that is fine. The local community college considered a map that was linking Newport Beach to Huntington Beach through the Pacific Coast Highway and all the residents said no, that they should be connected north through Costa Mesa. After hearing from the community, that was the map adopted. Determining which options do not work is part of the process. Mayor Avery said there could be creative or humorous maps prepared. Dr. Levitt admitted that he has seen very creative maps. Anyone submitting a very creative map should also let them know the intent behind it. Mayor Avery called for the public comment. Jim Mosher, Newport Beach resident, inquired about what building blocks should the public use to construct the map. He did not think they were Census blocks and suggested they might be voting precincts. He wanted to know what they were and how they could be broken up. It would also be helpful for the public if they posted historical districting maps of the City. They are easy to find by searching ordinances with the title “boundaries” on the City Clerk’s website. Some of the earlier maps did divide Balboa Island. Historically District 4 wrapped entirely around the Upper Bay and included the bluff top homes. The historical maps do not include Newport Coast. On September 28, he raised a question in his comments to Council about the four criteria found in the State Elections Code, Section 21621(c) which is in conflict with the California Constitution, Article 11, because charter cities have absolute authority to decide how the people of the city elect or appoint officers including the City Council. Therefore, he did not believe the law applied to Newport Beach and the criteria were not mandatory. Mayor Avery requested an answer to Mr. Mosher’s question. Dr. Levitt explained the fundamental building blocks were Census blocks. For convenience the units on the paper kit are Census blocks and combinations of blocks. On the webtool, it starts with precincts, but can go down to the block level. Newport Beach has a few thousand blocks which might be tedious for some users, but it is available. Systems and Administration Manager Mr. Campagnolo added that the boundaries were not only the Census block, but also based off the General Plan statistical areas. The Land Use Element tracks all development in the City per statistical area. It was modified from the General Plan where City Council Ad Hoc Redistricting Committee Meeting November 8, 2021 Page 5 of 5 Newport Coast and Newport Ridge are one statistical area, so it was broken down to approximately five different neighborhood blocks. Mayor Avery called for further public comment, but there was none. He called for Committee comments, but there were none. V. COMMITTEE ANNOUNCEMENTS OR MATTERS WHICH MEMBERS WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION, ACTION OR REPORT (NON-DISCUSSION ITEM) None. VI. ADJOURNMENT – 6:35 p.m. Next Meeting: December 13, 2021, 6 p.m. in the City Council Chambers.