PDF Return
D. 3
To: Board of Supervisors
From:
Date: February  8, 2011
The Seal of Contra Costa County, CA
Contra
Costa
County
Subject: Report on Board 2011 Redistricting Process

APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE

Action of Board On:   02/08/2011
APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:

VOTE OF SUPERVISORS

AYE:
John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Gayle B. Uilkema, District II Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor
Contact: Patrick Roche (925)335-1242
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED:     February  8, 2011
David Twa,
 
BY: , Deputy

 

RECOMMENDATION(S):

DIRECT the Department of Conservation & Development to undertake activities to facilitate redistricting of the Contra Costa County Supervisorial District boundaries and ADOPT the proposed work program, including approach, public outreach, and timeline/milestone.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There will be direct staff costs borne by the Department of Conservation & Development in order to facilitate the 2011 Board Redistricting process, including preparing map alternatives, arranging and conducting public workshops/meetings, preparing public notices and other public outreach material, and maintaining a webpage dedicated to the 2011 Board Redistricting process. There may be need to purchase additional software to support the 2011 Board Redistricting process, estimated at less than $5,000. County Counsel, County Administrator’s Office and Clerk-Recorder will also incur staff costs.








BACKGROUND:

California law (Elections Code section 21500 et. seq.) requires boards of supervisors to approve supervisorial district boundaries at least once following each federal decennial census so that district boundaries are “nearly equal in population as may be”. Official 2010 U.S. Census data must be used to determine supervisorial district boundaries for the 2012 and all subsequent elections through 2020. The Board must adopt the new district boundaries by November 1, 2011.  
  
Proposed Approach and Work Program for the 2011 Board Redistricting Process:   
  
In the interest of complying with the statutory mandate to adopt new supervisorial district boundaries by November 1, 2011, the Department of Conservation & Development (DCD) recommends the following approach and work program the 2011 Board Redistricting, drawing from prior redistricting experiences:  
  
Guiding Principles/Criteria – Guiding principles or criteria in adjusting district boundaries should be established at the outset of the process to provide clear guidance for staff in mapping new district boundaries and to assure the public that the process will be open and transparent. Preliminarily, the following guiding principles/criteria have been identified for the Board’s consideration:   
  

♦ To the extent possible, achieve near equal population for each district according to census data. Total population for each district should be within 5% of each other (note: the 2001 redistricting effort resulted in districts that had total population within 8% of each other).   
  
♦ Use easily identifiable geographic features and topography to draw compact and contiguous adjusted boundaries.   
  
♦ Maintain communities of interest in a single district and avoid splitting communities when adjusting boundaries. Communities of interest may be defined by existing boundaries for cities, school districts, special districts, and unincorporated communities.   
  
Data Analysis and Mapping – Existing DCD staff and resources, including Geographic Information System (GIS) mapping program, will be used to analyze and map district boundaries. Once the 2010 census data has been received, DCD proposes a 5-6 week period to complete its review on new census geography and 2010 census data and then begin the mapping of district boundary alternatives. This effort assumes a range from 3-6 map alternatives will be prepared. All map alternatives will be approved by the Board for public consideration. All map alternatives will be appropriately labeled to be accompanied with a summary written description so that the public and interested parties can easily track map changes as they may evolve through the process up through adoption.   
  
Public Outreach – A Redistricting webpage on the County’s website will be established as the primary portal for public information and access with up to date information and with ability for the public to provide feedback and comments. DCD will investigate the feasibility to create an interactive feature to the webpage to enable the public and interested parties to draw and submit their own supervisorial district map proposals. DCD will consult with Department of Information Technology (DOIT) on the technological capacities to use of an interactive feature. Absent an interactive feature to the webpage, DCD will establish computer work station in an accessible location in the department’s offices at 651 Pine Street to enable the public and interested parties to draw and submit their own supervisorial map proposals.   
  
In addition, DCD will support up to two meetings in each district, hosted by each Supervisor, to provide background on the redistricting process, present potential boundary changes (map alternatives), answer questions, and receive input.   
  
The department will collaborate with the CAO’s office for public outreach. Outreach efforts will include: press releases to local newspapers, public notices on County website, CCTV, early outreach to interest groups and other strategies to be identified.   
  
Public Hearing and Ordinance Adoption – Redistricting is adopted by an ordinance. State law requires at least two public hearings: at least one public hearing on a map proposal prior the adoption of the Redistricting Ordinance, and a second public hearing on adoption of a Redistricting Ordinance. The proposed schedule incorporates these requirements.  
  
Interdepartmental Leadership Group – The County Administrator has established an interdepartmental leadership group to provide oversight/management of the redistricting process. The leadership group is comprised of the County Administrator, the Department of Conservation and Development, County Counsel, and the County Clerk-Recorder. The roles for the leadership group are as follows:   
  
♦County Administrator: Provide oversight and, as needed, direct assistance to DCD in the public outreach effort.   
  
♦Conservation and Development: Facilitates the redistricting process, provides data analysis, prepares map proposals, prepares board orders and public notices, prepare and maintain redistricting web page and other public information material, and coordinate public outreach effort.   
  
♦County Counsel: Provides legal advice and assistance.   
  
♦County Clerk-Recorder: As the County’s Election Official, Clerk-Recorder provides procedural guidance and input and information.   
  
Public Outreach The public outreach efforts for the 2001 redistricting process included the following:
  
♦Website with redistricting information, proposed maps, data, and key information;   
  
♦Nine public meetings were conducted (at least one in each district) to outline process, present proposed maps, and solicit input.   
  
Recommendation for the 2011 redistricting process would include:   
  
♦Focus public outreach to use electronic or web based communication to the greatest extent possible. This would include a dedicated website with multiple portal or access points, separate area for comments, public access to maps, census data tabulation, and record of comments, and regularly updated (bi-weekly update).   
  
♦Provide up to 2 public meetings/workshops per supervisorial district based on request from Supervisor.   
• Provide multiple avenues for the public to provide comments including, but not limited to, letters, email, and website comments.   
  
• Direct outreach to targeted groups/communities to ensure their awareness and participation in the process. This would include racial minorities and language minorities, as defined under the Voting Rights Act.
  
Proposed Timeline / Milestones  
  
  
January Presentation to the Board of Supervisors on the upcoming redistricting process at January 31, 2011 Special Meeting
Milestone:  
February 8th  
Board meeting
Board adopts work program, including timeline, public outreach, and approach, prior to release of 2010 Census Redistricting Data (P.L. 94-171) Summary File
February - March US Census Bureau releases 2010 Census Redistricting Data (P.L. 94-171) Summary File to states and local government agencies. Note: Redrawing of district boundaries cannot begin until receipt of the official US Census Bureau data.
March - April DCD staff reviews new geography, reviews data, and prepares draft map alternatives. It will require a minimum of 5-6 weeks to complete this process
Milestone:  
May 3rd Board  
meeting
Check-in with Board at its May 3rd meeting to review and confirm draft map alternatives and confirm the schedule for public workshops/meetings.  
  
Optional: May 10th Board meeting to review revised draft map alternatives based on Board member comments (revisions/additions) from May 3rd meeting.  
May  
(May 16-26)
Conduct public workshops/meetings in each Supervisorial District to review redistricting process, present map alternatives, and receive comments.  
  
Optional: Extend public workshops/meetings after Memorial Day weekend into the week of May 31-June 4.
June Board Public Hearing #1: Consideration of a Redistricting  
Map Proposal (Potential hearing dates: June 14, 21, or 28)
Milestone:  
July 12th Board  
meeting
Board Public Hearing #2: Supervisorial Redistricting  
Ordinance introduced.
Milestone:  
July 26th Board  
meeting
Supervisorial Redistricting Ordinance set for adoption
August 26th Statute of limitations to challenge Ordinance adopting boundaries expires (30 days after adoption)
November 1, 2011 Statutory deadline for Board of Supervisors to adopt Redistricting Ordinance (CA Elections Code Section 21501)
  
  

CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:

  

CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:

Not Applicable.

CLERK'S ADDENDUM

Speakers: Ralph Hoffman, resident of Walnut Creek.

ADOPTED the recommendations with minor language changes indicating the number of meetings in order to be more expansive, and to include early contact with the cities and the Mayor's Conference to ensure the widest possible notification and participation.

AgendaQuick©2005 - 2024 Destiny Software Inc., All Rights Reserved