HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Minutes - City Council - Meeting Date: 4/5/2011 *PLEASE NOTE: Since the Glendale City Council does not take formal action at the
Workshops,Workshop minutes are not approved by the City Council.
'l'i
GLENDr
MINUTES OF THE
GLENDALE CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP SESSION
Council Chambers—Workshop Room
5850 West Glendale Avenue
April 05, 2011
1:30 p.m.
PRESENT: Mayor Elaine M. Scruggs, Vice Mayor Steven E. Frate and
Councilmembers Norma S. Alvarez, Joyce V. Clark, Yvonne J. Knaack,
H. Phillip Lieberman, and Manuel D. Martinez,
ALSO PRESENT: Ed Beasley, City Manager; Horatio Skeete, Assistant City Manager; Craig
Tindall, City Attorney; and Pamela Hanna, City Clerk
1. CENSUS 2010 UPDATE AND PROPOSED REDISTRICTING STRATEGY
CITY STAFF PRESENTING THIS ITEM: Brent Stoddard, Intergovernmental Programs
Director and Cathy Gorham, Deputy City Manager
This is an opportunity for staff to provide City Council with an update on Census 2010 data and
to seek guidance on a proposed redistricting strategy for the city and broad goals that Council
would like to see achieved through the state redistricting process.
The state has appointed an Independent Redistricting Commission (IRC) to determine the new
boundaries for thirty legislative districts and nine congressional districts.
This item addresses Council's goal of one community that is fiscally sound, as Census data is
critical to ensuring Glendale receives its fair share of funds that are distributed based on
population. Additionally, Council and state redistricting processes ensure the public's voting
rights will be protected and that a diverse and engaged citizenry can have a voice in helping
draw new Council, state legislative, and congressional district boundaries.
On March 15, 2010, the United States (U.S.) Census Bureau sent out its official 2010 Census
questionnaire to all Glendale residents as part of the national 2010 Census campaign. The U.S.
Census counts every resident and is required by the Constitution to occur every 10 years.
On March 10, 2011, the Arizona results of the 2010 Census were released. Glendale's
population grew 3.6% over the decade to 226,721. Arizona's population grew to 6,392,017.
With the state's increase in population, Arizona gains one additional congressional seat.
Based on the U.S. and state constitutions, congressional and legislative districts must be redrawn
to reflect nearly equal populations. Similarly, Glendale's six Council districts must be redrawn
to reflect nearly equal populations.
Based on the 2010 Census population of Glendale of 226,721, the ideal district should contain
37,787 persons (the total population divided by six Council districts).
The city's last redistricting effort followed the 2000 census and the work plan began in 2002 and
concluded with new districts in 2003, one year prior to the filing date for the 2004 election.
The time sensitive nature of the redistricting plan requires that we come before Council on April
5, 2011 to allow enough time to advertise an RFP for a consultant and have the Council approve
the contract at the April 26, 2011 evening meeting. A consultant was utilized in the 1996 mid-
decade redistricting as well as the 2002-2003 redistricting process that followed the 2000
Census.
In order for the city to use the Maricopa County election system for our 2012 election, the city
must complete the redistricting effort for the 2012 jurisdiction election and must submit a
Council adopted plan to the county by October 1, 2011. The county will use the city's proposed
new Council district boundaries to create the appropriate voting precincts which will also be
included in the county's own redistricting submittal to the United States Department of Justice
(DOJ).
Under section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, the city is required to submit the Council redistricting
plan to the DOJ for pre-clearance before the elections can be held using the new districts.
Based on the required timeframes set by the County, staff will execute a work plan to have the
new redistricting plan completed for the 2012 jurisdictional election. Staff will work with the
consultant to submit new Council district boundaries to the DOJ and Maricopa County by
October 2011, for an anticipated DOJ pre-clearance approval by December 2011.
A cross-departmental team with representatives from Intergovernmental Programs, City
Attorney's Office, City Manager's Office, Mayor and Council Offices, Marketing, Planning,
Neighborhood Partnerships, GIS and the City Clerk's Office will assist the selected consultant
with the redistricting process.
Glendale's six Council districts were last redistricted and approved by DOJ in 2003.
Census data is used in the distribution of funds to local governments, including cities. These
funds provide services that impact all of us, such as public safety (police and fire), street
improvements,parks and recreation programs, after school programs, and libraries.
2
Redistricting protects voters' rights by ensuring population equality in congressional, legislative
and Council districts.
The proposed Council redistricting strategy includes a number of meeting opportunities
throughout the city to seek public input. Additionally, stakeholder groups, neighborhood
leaders, those representing specific community interests, and other agencies and institutions will
have the opportunity to participate in the process to determine new boundaries.
Citizen toolkits on the redistricting process have been used in the last two Glendale redistricting
efforts and are recommended as part of the strategy. These toolkits provide citizens an
opportunity to utilize detailed population numbers by Census tracts in Glendale and draw their
own recommended districts to equalize population.
Staff is seeking guidance on the proposed Council redistricting plan; timetable and goals the
Council would like to see achieved through the state redistricting process.
Cathy Gorham, Deputy City Manager, presented a brief summary. She explained the U.S.
Census required a count of every resident living in the country every 10 years. She provided
details on the community outreach done by the City of Glendale. They include: March 2010
Public Outreach programs, city partnerships with MAG and faith based organizations, schools
and businesses to remind people to fill out Census survey questionnaires. She noted the Census
questionnaires were mailed to residents in March 2010 and Census results were released on
March 11, 2011. She indicated that as a result of that outreach, the city's final participation rate
in the 2010 Census was 71%, comparable to the adjusted 2000 rate of 72%. She stated
Glendale's population grew by 3.6% to 226,721 over the last decade. The vacancy rate in
Glendale for 2005 was 3.5% compared to the 2010 number of 12.5%.
Brent Stoddard, Intergovernmental Programs Director, stated now that the Census had been
completed, they will transition into the redistricting efforts. There were two separate tracks of
redistricting in which the city will be involved. They are state redistricting and City Council
redistricting. The first is the redistricting of the State Legislative and Congressional Districts.
He explained Glendale is currently divided into six legislative districts, totaling 18 legislators
and 2 congressional districts.
In 2000, the Arizona voters approved proposition 106 which placed the responsibility of drawing
new legislative and congressional boundaries into the hands of an independent Redistricting
Commission. He explained that commission has been formed through the appointments of the
leaders of the State Legislature. The Commission will accomplish their task through extensive
input from the public and the data provided by the new Census. He indicated with direction from
the Council, Intergovernmental program staff will participate in this process and advocate for the
goals the Council provides today. He explained the second track was the redistricting of the
Glendale City Council Districts. The City Code requires the city to redistrict every 10 years.
The last effort was completed in 2003 with final approval of that plan coming from the United
States Department of Justice, as is required for all Arizona jurisdictions.
3
In order for the city to continue to use to the Maricopa County election system for their elections,
the county requires the final Council adopted redistricting plans be provided by October 2011.
The county will use the new district boundaries to redraw the new voter precincts. The reason
staff was coming before Council today was time sensitivity. He noted in order to begin the
redistricting work plan, staff will need to immediately advertise for a redistricting consultant and
have that consultant's contract approved by the Council at the April 26th evening meeting. The
redistricting work plan is performed by the consultant with support from staff and constant input
from the Council and public. He stated the City of Glendale has developed a very successful
work plan that involves gathering input from many different citizens, minority groups, and all
interested groups throughout the process. He indicated with Council direction, the work will
begin to complete the redistricting efforts in time for the 2012 jurisdictional election by having
the final redistricting plan submitted to the DOJ by October 2011, with anticipated approval
from them in December 2011. The new district boundaries will first be used in the August 28,
2012 primary election.
Councilmember Alvarez asked what the population in the Ocotillo District was. She inquired if
the Census had provided that fact. Ms. Gorham replied no. She added that at this time, they did
not have the data by Council district boundaries and they were still waiting on the block
information. Councilmember Alvarez remarked if Ocotillo District had the ideal 37,000 figure,
there would be no need for redistricting. Ms. Gorham explained that was part of the process the
outside consultants will engage in and provide the information needed. Councilmember Alvarez
asked what type of information was being looked at for redistricting. She questioned if the
redistricting will still take place if the district was in compliance and if so what was the criteria.
Ms. Gorham remarked that she could not speak as to whether new boundaries will or will not be
redrawn. She reiterated that was part of the consultant's process that will be taking place once
they receive the data as compiled via the Census track. Councilmember Alvarez inquired once
again if the Ocotillo District was in compliance, might there be a chance it will be left
unchanged. Ms. Gorham restated she did not want to speculate until all the information was
compiled.
Councilmember Clark commented that one can assume at this point, there has been growth in the
Cholla and Yucca Districts. Those boundaries may have to be adjusted; therefore, there could be
a domino effect and other districts could be affected. She explained a district could be in
compliance; however, other districts may not. Therefore, the consultants will examine the
numbers and try to equalize the population in each of the districts. Councilmember Alvarez
stated her concern with potential irregularities in district lines. She gave the example of past
gerrymandering of school district lines to do with segregation. She noted that she and the
Ocotillo community were going to be very vigilant for any irregularities. Councilmember Clark
explained the city was very careful since all the districts in the state of Arizona must be reviewed
for preclearance by the Department of Justice. She noted they were also very careful when it
came to minority populations. She stated they did not over stuff a minority population into one
district nor do they try and reduce the number of minorities in a district. She believes the
concept of gerrymandering at the city level has not occurred. Councilmember Alvarez agreed;
however, stated she was new to this process and wanted to make clear she would not allow
anything like that to happen; specifically, any changes that may affect boundaries for the 2012
elections.
4
Councilmember Martinez commented on the 2000 Census. He explained at that time, the growth
had occurred in the north part of Glendale, thus, affecting the Cholla district. He stated as part of
the process, anyone can submit a boundary map for consideration. He indicated in 2000, a group
of citizens recommended a different proposal than the consultants and the citizens' proposal was
approved. He noted the many safeguards that are created so no funny business or irregularities
occur. Additionally, before any election is held, the city was required to submit the Council's
redistricting plan to the Department of Justice for preclearance before elections can be held using
the new districts. He added that in this day and age, it would be very difficult to get away with
any shenanigans.
Mayor Scruggs commented on an issue she had been discussing with Mr. Stoddard and Mr.
Craig Tindall, City Attorney. She recalls that when Mr. and Mrs. Stout first began their
initiative creating the district systems, they were very focused on the districts being divided
according to qualified electors, which was a lot different than population. She recalls the
Council going through this item at length with a lot of discussion about the Charter amendment.
She explained staff hasn't located the actual initiative that went to the ballot. Regardless of that,
what they do have in the Charter was that six Councilmembers shall be elected from six
geographic districts within the city. Each district shall contain a substantially equal number of
electors. She explained it did not say equal amount of people. She added the state statute notes
that a qualified elector was a person qualified to register to vote. She asked Mr. Tindall to
further clarify this issue. Councilmember Alvarez remarked she could possibly locate a copy of
the actual initiative and provide it to Council.
Mr. Tindall stated the standard for judicial review for redistricting was based on population. He
noted the ultimate result of the redistricting was population. The population had to be roughly
equal within the districts. Mayor Scruggs added that what the Department of Justice says
regarding population trumps any other consideration. Mr. Tindall indicated this was also
protected under the U.S. Supreme Court and as stated under the constitution. This requires the
protection of one person, one vote, and that was based on population.
Councilmember Lieberman commented that the consultants the city had previously hired for this
task were very good. If considered, he looks forward to working with them since they try to
satisfy not only the Department of Justice, but also their legislative districts. Mayor Scruggs
asked if the city will be taking bids on this issue. Mr. Stoddard explained the city will be putting
out an RFP and will go through the normal bidding process. The results will come before
Council on April 26th for their approval.
Councilmember Clark remarked they had all expressed their dismay to Ms. Gorham and Mr.
Stoddard regarding the six state legislative districts in the city. She asked if staff can do
anything to reduce that number, it would be greatly appreciated. Mayor Scruggs agreed with
Councilmember Clarks' comments on reducing the number of legislative districts in the city.
She noted that the size of Legislative District 14 in the city of Glendale could be measured in
blocks. Therefore, it was very difficult for District 14 representatives to have an appreciation for
the City of Glendale's concerns.
5
Councilmember Lieberman commented he had four legislative districts in his Council district.
He noted it seemed he would have to give up about 2,000 people in his district because of the
Census. Mayor Scruggs explained this went to Councilmember Alvarez's question of needing to
change boundaries. She noted districts might have to be modified because another district had
grown, which caused movement of population to another district. Councilmember Lieberman
agreed and reported on earlier redistricting in his area because of that fact.
Mayor Scruggs stated Council recommends direction for staff to move forward with this item.
As no further business was discussed, Mayor Scruggs adjourned the meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 2:30 p.m.
6