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

Chairperson Fiscalini called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m.

Documents Filed: Minutes of the regular meeting of March 21, 2001.

Discussion/Action: Commissioner Powers noted that the minutes should be written to clearly reflect which Commissioners are present at the beginning of the meeting. The Minutes, as clarified, were approved. Vote: 7-0-4. Absent: Dean, Johnson, Ota, Sanchez

A. Identification, Relative Ordering, and Adoption of Criteria to Guide Redistricting

Documents Filed: Criteria to Guide Redistricting.

Discussion/Action: Deputy Director Kent Edens reviewed the “Criteria to Guide Redistricting” document that includes both City Charter and 1991 redistricting criteria. He stated that the City Charter requires that Districts shall be formed as nearly equal in population as may be practicable, and that consideration may be given to natural boundaries, cohesiveness, community of interests, etc. He reported that there were nine criteria established for the 1991 Redistricting effort; however, the item relating to income diversity was not available in 1991 and will not be available for the current study. He recommended that the Commission identify criteria that are relevant for use in establishing boundaries, and tier them according to importance. Chair Fiscalini opened the discussion and asked for suggestions from the Commission on proposed criteria. Referring to the 1991 list of criteria, Commissioner Fadness suggested that item No. 1, which requires an equal population count in each District, include a deviation range of five percent. In regard to No. 6., he suggested that it be reworded as follows: ”To the extent possible, distribute parks and public facilities evenly across districts.” Mr. Edens cautioned the Commission to be careful not to move a park that is a point of identity in a community into another District. Commissioner Wilson addressed No. 7, and suggested that it be rephrased as follows: “Maintain continuity of existing Council District boundaries where the boundaries still meet the Charter requirements.” Commissioner Christensen expressed concern that changing the wording of this item would jeopardize its intent. Chair Fiscalini suggested adding a clause to avoid changing boundary lines that would unseat a Council Member. Regarding item No. 5, Commissioner Sanchez suggested that the Commission consider maintaining school district boundaries that currently fall within a Council District and avoid fragmenting them. Commissioner Powers referred to item No. 3 and stressed the importance of diversity within Districts, including income diversity. Commissioner Christensen emphasized the importance of item No. 2 and suggested that it be a high priority. Commissioner Wilson suggested that item No. 9 could be reworded. Commissioner Powers suggested that it say, “Strive for the good of the entire City but not at the exclusion of individual Districts.” Deputy City Attorney Norm Sato recommended that the Commission not rank the criteria, as they are all important. Mr. Edens stated that staff would provide an edited list in the next meeting packet. Upon motion by Commissioner Fadness, and unanimously carried, the Criteria was adopted as presented. Vote: 9-0-2. Absent: Dean, Ota.

B. Review City-wide Census Data and Methodology

Documents Filed: Tables: 2000 Population Variation Among Existing Council Districts; Population and Housing Growth by Existing Council District, 1990-2000; Redistricting Implications of 2000 Population Data; Population by Race and Hispanic Ethnicity, Census 2000; and Census 2000 Brief: Overview of Race and Hispanic Origin.

Discussion/Action: Michael Bills, Planning Department, reported that the City of San Jose received the Census data and prepared the charts for use by the Commission. He reported that the new population of the City is 894,943, less than what staff had estimated. He indicated that this number represents a growth of 112,695 people, or 14%, from 1990. Relative to District growth, he stated that District 8 has the highest population and District 9 has the lowest. He explained that there is a significant decrease from 1990 in the total spread of population across Districts, which may mean fewer boundary changes. Relative to the population and housing growth in the Districts, he indicated that there is a major variance in the number of persons per household. He explained that five Districts will need to expand their boundaries to take in additional population, four will need to contract their boundaries to decrease their population, and one (District 2) could remain as is. In reviewing the City’s population by race and Hispanic ethnicity, he stated that the information is in two tabulation methodologies, “Hispanic Inclusive” format and “Hispanic Exclusive” format. He stated that the Commission needed to adopt one of the two methodologies for use in the redistricting effort, and indicated that staff recommends “Hispanic Inclusive.” He explained that this methodology avoids substantial dilution in the count of smaller race groups without affecting the count of persons of Hispanic ethnicity. He encouraged the Commission to review the “Census 2000 Brief: Overview of Race and Hispanic Origin,” issued by the Department of Commerce, that provides an understanding of the race and Hispanic data from the Census 2000. Commissioner Wilson requested that copies of the “Race Ethnicity Tabulation Methodology” be provided to the Commission. There were several requests from the Commission and audience to provide a breakdown of the “Hispanic Exclusive” as well as the “Hispanic Inclusive.” Mr. Bills responded that it would not be feasible for staff to provide both methodologies, based on the detail of work involved. Upon motion by Commissioner Johnson, and unanimously approved, the staff recommendation to use “Hispanic Inclusive” methodology was approved. Vote: 9-0-2. Absent: Dean, Ota

A. Update on Public Outreach Plan

Documents Filed: Updated Communication Plan

Discussion/Action: Mr. Edens reported that staff has added five additional newspapers and four ethnic mediums to advertise the Commission meetings. He added that 5000 flyers have been printed, and an additional 1500 will be printed, to distribute to the community. He stated that Spanish and Vietnamese interpreters will be available at the public hearings. He indicated that all of the District Boundary maps are on the City’s web site

B. Response to Question from March 21, 1001 Meeting Regarding Post-Census 2000 New Development

Documents Filed: Table of Housing Constructed Since the 2000 Census, by Council District.

Discussion/Action: Mr. Edens explained that the Commission will be using the figures from the 2000 Census; however, staff has provided the number of building permits that were issued for construction per District for the period January 1, 2000 to February 28, 2001. He indicated that the Commission might want to consider this additional information in its study. In response to concerns raised by Commissioner Fadness regarding additional housing numbers, Mr. Sato cautioned the Commission that the redistricting process should only include figures provided by the Census 2000.

C. Distribution of Major Feature Maps and School District

Documents Filed: Major Feature Maps and School District Boundaries Map.

Discussion/Action: Commissioner Fuentes requested that the Council District Boundary Map be provided as a transparency to use as an overlay.

Documents Filed: None

Discussion/Action: Commissioner Fuentes requested that future agendas be more detailed so the Commission will know if items are for action or information only

The Redistricting Advisory Commission adjourned at 8:22 p.m.