Board Redistricting Public Hearing – Review Draft Maps (Round 1)

Published Notice Required? Yes _______ No ___X__
Public Hearing Required? Yes ___X____ No _____

DEPARTMENTAL RECOMMENDATION:
The County Administrator recommends the Board of Supervisors:

1) Conduct a Public Hearing to review three Draft Supervisorial Redistricting Map Alternatives prepared by the County’s Consultant, Redistricting Partners and receive Public Input as required by the Fair And Inclusive Redistricting for Municipalities And Political Subdivisions (FAIR MAPS) Act of 2019 and subsequent updates in 2020 to the State law; and

2) Provide further input and direction to staff and the consultant on the Map Alternatives and any suggested revisions in preparation for the next Public Hearing scheduled for Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 6 p.m.

SUMMARY:
On October 5, 2021, the Board received a presentation from the County’s redistricting consultant providing a status update on the redistricting process to date and from the Redistricting Advisory Committee (RAC-21) summarizing their report in identifying “communities of interest” which was informed by 10 public meetings held over a 4 month period including one virtual and one in-person meeting in each supervisorial district. Upon receipt of the RAC report, the redistricting process began the transition to the Board and the mandated public hearings required under the FAIR MAPS Act.

The next phase of the redistricting process requires the Board to conduct public hearings to review and receive input regarding draft proposed maps for redrawing supervisorial district boundaries in compliance with the FAIR MAPS Act. The Board will also be considering detailed census information released on September 20, 2021 to ensure population distribution by district conforms to the standards of redistricting law The County’s consultant, Chris Chaffee from Redistricting Partners, will provide an overview of three draft maps
prepared based on input received to date with options to adjust the supervisorial boundaries to ensure they conform to the requirements of the FAIR MAPS Act. The Board will also have an opportunity to review eight maps submitted by citizens on the County’s redistricting website using the online DistrictR mapping tool.

This will be the first of three public hearings for the Board to hear and consider public input and engage in a dialogue on possible various alternatives. A final redistricting map must be determined following the public hearing scheduled for December 7, 2021 and with final action on the redistricting map required at the December 14, 2021 Board meeting.

A full recap of the redistricting project to date is contained in Attachment A of this staff report.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

The cost of the redistricting project and consultant costs are included in the County Administrator ’s FY2021/22 adopted budget.

DISCUSSION:
In the past decades, state law provided general guidance on the redistricting process. The passage of the Fair And Inclusive Redistricting for Municipalities And Political Subdivisions (FAIR MAPS) Act in 2019 with subsequent updates in 2020 to California State Elections Code 21500 (c)(1)-(5), the law now requires specific factors to be addressed when drawing new supervisorial district boundaries which include, in order of priority:

• Must be geographically contiguous;
• Must ensure the geographic integrity of neighborhoods or “communities of interest”;
• To the extent possible, must limit the division of cities;
• Must have easily identifiable boundaries;
• Be geographically compact; and
• Neither favor nor discriminate against a political party or candidate.

Redistricting Partners utilized these factors as they began drawing proposed maps and alternatives in addition to ensuring the maximum deviance of 10% between the supervisorial districts with the highest and lowest population as required by State law.

On September 20, 2021, the final California Census population dataset by the Statewide Database at UC Berkeley was released with the reallocated state prison population data, making this the final dataset that cities and counties must use to comply with the FAIR MAPS Act.

The data released shows the total population for Solano County to be 447,857 which equates to an ideal population for each district to be 89,571. In reviewing the census data for each district, there is a deviation of 14.2% which is above the 10% maximum required by State law. District 4 has the lowest population at 82,397 (-8.0% deviation) and District 5 has the highest population at 95,112 (6.2% deviation), making it a total of 14.2% deviation. Districts 1, 2 and 3’s populations are 91,020 (1.6% deviation), 90,452 (1.0% deviation), and 88,883 (-0.8% deviation) respectively. At minimum, adjustments will have to be made to the District 4 and 5 boundaries to address this population deviance and bring them closer to the ideal population of 89,571. In the process, other district boundaries could also be adjusted as part of re -balancing populations, reflecting Communities of Interest and other public input received.

Redistricting Partners has developed three Draft Redistricting Plans for review and to begin the conversation with the Board of Supervisors to consider final supervisorial district lines. From these draft redistricting plans, staff has created Poster Maps (Attachments B, C, and D) for more detailed review. The consultant’s Draft Redistricting Plans are contained in Attachments E, F, and G. The Poster Maps and Draft Redistricting Plans, along with an interactive map are also available online at the County’s redistricting website at the following link: <https://redistricting.solanocounty.com/proposed-boundaries/>

Below is a synopsis of each draft plan:

DRAFT Plan A (Total Deviation 4.8%) – Attachment B and E
This plan reflects minimal changes to existing supervisorial district boundaries with a focus on minor adjustments between Districts 4 and 5 to close the gap in the overall population deviation and bring their populations closer to ideal population size of 89,571. This is primarily accomplished by shifting a small area of southeast Vacaville from District #5 to District #4.

This plan results in total population and deviation percentages as follows:

• District 1 – 91,020 / 1.6% Deviation
• District 2 – 90,541 / 1.1% Deviation
• District 3 – 88,796 / -0.9% Deviation
• District 4 – 90,778 / 1.3% Deviation
• District 5 – 86,722 / -3.2% Deviation

DRAFT Plan B (Total Deviation 5.9%) – Attachment C and F
This plan builds on Plan A and makes additional changes from Communities of Interest input. It incorporates all neighborhoods in Green Valley into District 2 and Travis Air Force Base and the eastern Fairfield together into District 5. District 3 also expands to include all of Suisun City and the rural area directly south of the city. It also incorporates all of Mare Island into District 1.

This plan results in total population and deviation percentages as follows:

• District 1 – 92,225 / 3.0% Deviation
• District 2 – 89,463 / 0.1% Deviation
• District 3 – 88,391 / -1.3% Deviation
• District 4 – 90,832 / 1.4% Deviation
• District 5 – 86,946 / -2.9% Deviation

DRAFT Plan C (Total Deviation 7.1%) – Attachment D and G
This plan reflects the most significant modifications to existing district boundaries and attempts to incorporate various elements of Communities of Interest input received during of the RAC21 community outreach process. It creates changes to Districts 1 and 2, by using Hwy 80 as the border within Vallejo. District 1 includes Western Vallejo and Mare Island, with District 2 including eastern Vallejo, Benicia and Green Valley. Suisun City, Eastern Fairfield, and Travis Air Force Base are included in District 5. The southern border of District 3 is the railroad tracks and includes western Fairfield and some of the rural, unincorporated area north and west of the city. District 4 expands to include more of Vacaville similar to the other two plan alternatives.

This plan results in total population and deviation percentages as follows:

• District 1 – 91,970 / 2.7% Deviation
• District 2 – 89,512 / 0.1% Deviation
• District 3 – 85,651 / -4.4% Deviation
• District 4 – 90,832 / 1.4% Deviation
• District 5 – 89,892 / 0.4% Deviation

In addition, Attachment H contains eight maps that were received from citizens via the County ’s redistricting website. The online digital ID’s for these maps are: 61936, 67922, 67923, 68119, 68134, 68573, 68796, and 69092. These maps can also be accessed at the following link: <https://districtr.org/event/Solano_County>.

Upcoming Schedule
As a reminder, following this hearing, there are only two additional opportunities to request revisions to these draft versions. Below is the timeline to meet the December 15, 2021 Fair Maps Act deadline to redraw the supervisorial district lines. The timeline includes the 7 days prior to the public hearing that the proposed maps are required to be published for review by the public. Staff will provide paper copies of the maps to the Board members when the draft proposed maps are ready to be published · November 10, 2021 (On or before)

Publish revised proposed maps based on input from the initial public hearing for the public to review.

November 17, 2021 – Special Board Meeting – Public hearing to receive input/feedback. Board’s second opportunity to request revisions.

November 30, 2021 – (On or before) – Publish second revision to proposed maps for the public to review.

December 7, 2021 – Board Meeting – Final public hearing to receive input/feedback. Board’s third and final opportunity to request revisions. Immediately following the public hearing, consultant will make
relevant changes and staff will publish final proposed maps for adoption at the December 14, 2021 Board Meeting.

December 14, 2021 – Board Meeting – Final adoption of supervisorial district maps. No changes can be made.

OTHER AGENCY INVOLVEMENT:
The redistricting process is guided by data released by the United States Census Bureau.

• PDF
• 0.1MB

Download