The Redistricting Advisory Commission of the City of San Jose convened in Regular Session at 7:05 p.m. in Conference Room 106 of San Jose City Hall

I         CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL

Chair Fiscalini called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m.

II        WELCOME AND SELF INTRODUCTIONS

A. Frank Fiscalini, Chair, Redistricting Advisory Commission

Chair Fiscalini expressed appreciation to the Commission Members for volunteering their time to the Commission.

B. Redistricting Advisory Commission Members

Commission Members introduced themselves.

Trixie Johnson, District 1 Charlotte Powers, District 2 Terry Christensen, District 3 Jeff Ota, District 4 Tony Arreola, District 5 Amy Dean, District 6 George Sanchez, District 7 Maria Fuentes, District 8 Susie Wilson, District 9 (absent) David Fadness, District 10

C. City Staff

City Staff members introduced themselves

III.      NEW BUSINESS

A.       Redistricting: Summary of Legal Guidelines

Documents Filed: Memorandum from City Attorney, Richard Doyle, dated February 23, 2001, summarizing the redistricting legal guidelines.

Discussion/Action: Norm Sato, Chief Deputy City Attorney, presented a summary of the legal guidelines for the Commission. He stated that the City Charter establishes the Redistricting Advisory Commission to study and make recommendations on redistricting to the City Council. He indicated that the Commission’s report and recommendations are required to be submitted to the City Council within 120 days from the Commission’s appointment, which was January 30, 2001, and that the Commission is required to conduct at least three public hearings within the City of San Jose. He reported that the Charter requires that Council districts be as equal in population as may be practical, and recommended that no more than a 5% deviation be applied between the smallest and largest District. He reviewed the criteria for establishing district boundaries: (a) natural boundaries, street lines and/or City boundaries; (b) geography; (c) cohesiveness, contiguity, integrity and compactness of territory; and (d) community of interests within each District. He indicated that the Commission should avoid irregular shaped Districts, known as “gerrymandering.” Mr. Sato reviewed the Federal Voting Rights Act, which bars redistricting plans that “dilute” the voting strength of minority groups.

B.       Review of Draft Work Outline and Discussion of Census Data/GIS

Documents Filed: (1) Draft 2001 Redistricting Work Outline; (2) Hard copies of PowerPoint presentation, “2001 Redistricting in San Jose”; (3) U. S. Census Bureau Report, “Strength in Numbers,” a guide to Census 2000 redistricting data; (3) “The Realists’ Guide to Redistricting – Avoiding the Legal Pitfalls” booklet; and (4) Map of current Council Districts.

Discussion/Action: Kent Edens, Deputy Director, Planning Services Division, reviewed the draft work outline, noting the Census 2000 maps have been received and will be integrated into the City’s GIS system. He stated that April 1 is the deadline for release of the Census data and that the information may be available at the Commission’s next meeting. He recommended the first public hearing of the Commission be scheduled for March 21, and that it be held at City Hall. He added that the Commission will have working meetings in April and May, as well as two public hearings during those two months. Michael Bills, Senior Planner, stated that Council Districts were established in 1975, and that redistricting occurred in 1981 and 1991. He reported that San Jose’s population, as of January 1, 2000, was estimated at 923,000, accounting for over half of the County population. He indicated that with the 2000 Census, the population will increase to approximately 925,000 – 950,000. He stated that the population growth in the 1990’s rose by approximately 20%, and that occupancy of newly constructed housing accounted for two-thirds of the increase. He added that higher utilization of pre-existing housing accounted for one-third, and City annexation of inhabited territory added a few hundred people. He displayed a map of new housing construction by Council District for the period 1990-1999, and provided a demonstration of the Geographic Information Systems (GIS), which is an electronic map that links geography with attribute data and which will be used in the 2001 redistricting endeavor.

C.       Future Commission Meetings/Public Hearing Schedule and Locations

Documents Filed: None.

Discussion/Action: The consensus of the Commission was to hold regular sessions on March 21, April 4, April 18, May 2, May 16 and May 30 (if needed). Public Hearings were scheduled for March 21, 7:00 P.M., at City Hall, April 25, 7:00 p.m., at Silver Creek High School (if available) and May 9, 7:00 p.m. at Willow Senior Center (if available). Commissioner Ota will report back on the availability of the facilities. Commissioner Christensen asked what type of outreach will be utilized for the public hearings. Mr. Edens responded that staff will compile a list to notify and that he will provide the Commission with this information. City Clerk O’Hearn stated her office will be the channel for contact from the public.

IV. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS

None.

V. PUBLIC COMMENT

Jackie Maruhashi, Asian Law Alliance, asked that notices of public hearings be sent to ethnic media, and commented that several of the Commission’s meetings were scheduled at the same time as the County’s

VII. ADJOURNMENT

The Redistricting Advisory Commission adjourned the meeting at 8:10 p.m.