HomeMy WebLinkAboutCA 2021-2022 City Council Redistricting Process____________________________________________________________________________________
FOR CITY CLERK ONLY
Council Meeting: March 21, 2022
Disposition: Resolution 15047 – (the adopted resolution was approved)
Agenda Item No: 6.a
Meeting Date: March 21, 2022
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Department: CITY ATTORNEY
Prepared by: Lisa Goldfien,
Assistant City Attorney
City Manager Approval: ______________
TOPIC: 2021-2022 CITY COUNCIL REDISTRICTING PROCESS
SUBJECT: FOURTH PUBLIC HEARING ON EXISTING CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT LINES
AND POSSIBLE CHANGES; RESOLUTION ADJUSTING THE BOUNDARIES
AND SELECTING A PREFERRED DISTRICT MAP OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DISTRICTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH CALIFORNIA ELECTIONS CODE
SECTIONS 21601-21609 AND SAN RAFAEL MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION
2.02.040
RECOMMENDATION:
Conduct the public hearing and, absent persuasive public comment to the contrary, select the current
district map as the preferred district map, and MOVE:
to adopt a resolution, in the form attached to the staff report, approving the current district map
for use beginning at the City’s November 2022 election.
BACKGROUND:
On April 16, 2018, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1956, approving the move from at-large voting
to “by-district” voting for council elections, in which each member of the Council must reside in a district
and is elected only by the voters within that district, and approving the district map designated as “Canal
3B.” The City’s first general municipal election using the new City Council districts was held on November
3, 2020, for the City Council seats in District 1/South and 4/North. The first elections in Districts 2/West
and 3/East will be held on November 8, 2022.
Even though the City created its four electoral districts only three years ago, Elections Code § 21621
requires that the redistricting process occur again following each federal decennial census to rebalance
the districts’ populations in light of the most recent data available. The most recent decennial census was
conducted in 2020, and the Bureau released its “PL94-171” redistricting data on August 12, 2021.
However, under changes to California law adopted in 2019, known as the FAIR MAPS Act, the City is
required to use data from the California Statewide Database at UC Berkeley (“SWDB”), which “adjust the
Census Bureau’s data to account for legislatively-required reallocation of incarcerated felons within the
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 2
State.” (See Elec. Code § 21621(a)(2).) Those adjusted data were released on September 21, 2021, and
a corrected version of the data was released on September 27, 2021.
At its meeting on July 19, 2021, the Council received a presentation regarding the redistricting process
from the City’s special counsel, Chris Skinnell of Nielsen Merksamer Parrinello Gross & Leoni, after which
the Council approved the timeline for the redistricting process. At its September 13 meeting, the Council
received a further presentation from Mr. Skinnell summarizing the legal rules governing the readjustment
of district lines and the preliminary demographics of the existing districts based on the PL94-171 data.
Pursuant to the FAIR MAPS Act, the Council is required to conduct four public hearings, the first two of
which focused on receiving feedback from the Council and the public regarding the current lines, and
desired changes, and the City’s communities of interest, and the last two of which are to focus on actual
draft maps to readjust the Council districts.
At its meeting on November 15, 2021, the Council received updated information regarding the final
“adjusted” demographics of the existing districts based on the SWDB data, after which the Council
conducted its first duly-noticed public hearing to receive public testimony regarding the composition of
the districts, especially communities of interest. At its meeting on January 18, 2022, the Council
conducted the second duly-noticed public hearing to receive public testimony regarding the composition
of the districts, especially communities of interest.
The Council conducted its first post-mapping public hearing (and third overall) on February 22, 2022,
following a presentation of proposed mapping options by the City’s demographer. This is the fourth
required public hearing and the second post-mapping public hearing, following which it is proposed that
the Council choose a final map. Although the original City Council districts were adopted by ordinance,
the FAIR MAPS Act authorizes subsequent district boundary changes to be approved either by ordinance
or by resolution.
The statutory deadline for completion of the redistricting process is April 17, 2022.
ANALYSIS:
At the meeting, the City’s demographic consultant, Ms. Kristen Parks of National Demographics
Corporation (“NDC”), will again present proposed draft maps to readjust the City Council district
boundaries, and the Council will again be asked to conduct a public hearing to receive feedback from the
public regarding the draft maps.
The following is a summary of the main substantive legal requirements for the redistricting process:
1) The districts must be “substantially equal” in population as defined by the Supreme Court.
2) The districts must comply with the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965 (52 U.S.C. Sec. 10301
et seq.)
3) The districts must comply with constitutional restrictions on “racial gerrymandering.”
4) Subject to the constitutional and federal law requirements noted in paragraphs (1) – (3), voting
districts must be established according to four statutory criteria, ranked in order of priority:
• To the extent practicable, council districts shall be geographically contiguous.
Areas that meet only at the points of adjoining corners are not contiguous.
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 3
Areas that are separated by water and not connected by a bridge, tunnel, or
regular ferry service are not contiguous.
• To the extent practicable, the geographic integrity of any local neighborhood
or local community of interest shall be respected in a manner that minimizes
its division. A “community of interest” is a population that shares common social
or economic interests that should be included within a single district for
purposes of its effective and fair representation. Communities of interest do not
include relationships with political parties, incumbents, or political candidates.
• Council district boundaries should be easily identifiable and understandable by
residents. To the extent practicable, council districts shall be bounded by
natural and artificial barriers, by streets, or by the boundaries of the city.
• To the extent practicable, and where it does not conflict with the preceding
criteria in this subdivision, council districts shall be drawn to encourage
geographical compactness in a manner that nearby areas of population are not
bypassed in favor of more distant populations.
Third Required Public Hearing on February 22, 2022:
As discussed at the February 22 meeting, the current district lines comply with the first three criteria
above, and they are contiguous, so if the City Council believes they adequately respect communities of
interest, retention of the current lines would be an option. (See Attachment 3.a.)
NDC also prepared a second option for the Council to consider in light of the discussion at the previous
meetings. That option, labeled the “NDC Minimal Change Map” begins with the current lines but makes
discrete changes to reduce the population imbalance (to 5.55% compared to 8.53% under the current
map). (See Attachment 3.b.)
At the time of the February 22 City Council meeting, no public draft maps had been submitted and no
public comment was received, and following the public hearing the City Council members appeared to
agree that since the current district map complies with all legal requirements, they did not yet see a need
to change the current boundaries.
Fourth Required Public Hearing on March 21, 2022:
For this fourth public hearing, no public maps were received by the March 7 deadline, though one person
submitted a comment requesting the unification of the Bret Harte neighborhood (Attachment 3). The
demographer has concluded that the requested unification could be accomplished within the 10%
population deviation, but it would dilute the community of interest that currently characterizes District 1.
Therefore, staff has concluded that overall, this requested change would not best maintain the City’s
primary communities of interest.
Thus, for tonight’s public hearing, the City Council still has only the current and the “NDC Minimal
Change” maps to consider. Based on the proceedings to date, it appears that there is little interest on
the part of the public or the City Council to alter the existing district boundaries. Therefore, unless the
fourth public hearing generates requests for substantial changes to the district boundaries, staff
recommends that the City Council vote to retain the current district map.
Once the City Council selects a preferred district map, the attached resolution will be finalized to refer
specifically to and attach a copy of that map.
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 4
Online versions of the current map and the “NDC Minimal Change Map” that would allow a viewer to
zoom in down to the street level are available on the City’s redistricting website, under the “Draft Maps”
tab.
The two maps have both been posted at least seven days in advance of the hearing, as required by the
FAIR MAPS Act.
COMMUNITY OUTREACH:
As staff advised the Council at the prior meetings, the City has established a City redistricting website
with all pertinent documents in both English and Spanish. It can be found at
https://redistrictsanrafael.org/. By visiting that website, members of the public also had the option, until
March 7, to submit proposed district maps for the Council’s consideration, using either a paper mapping
kit or online mapping tools. Staff also conducted additional outreach to interested community groups,
media organizations, and other interested parties.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact from the recommended City Council action. Completion of the redistricting
process will incur expenses of approximately $50,000 in consulting attorney’s fees and $60,000 in
consulting demographer’s fees (including the online mapping tool), in addition to regular staff time.
Sufficient funds have been included in the current budget to cover these expenses.
OPTIONS:
The City Council has the following options to consider on this matter:
1. Accept the information report on the proposed draft maps, conduct the fourth public hearing,
select the current district map as the preferred map and adopt a Resolution approving its use
beginning at the City’s November 2022 election, as recommended by staff.
2. Accept the information report on the proposed draft maps, conduct the fourth public hearing,
select the “NDC Minimal Change Map” as the preferred map and adopt a Resolution approving
its use beginning at the City’s November 2022 election.
3. Hold the fourth public hearing but do not select a preferred map. In this case a fifth public hearing
will be scheduled for the April 4, 2022 City Council meeting, at which time action must be taken
to comply with the statutory deadline of April 17, 2022.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Conduct the public hearing and, absent persuasive public comment to the contrary, select the current
district map as the preferred district map, and MOVE:
to adopt a resolution, in the form attached to the staff report, approving the current district map
for use beginning at the City’s November 2022 election.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. PowerPoint Presentation
2. Draft Resolution adopting (preferred) final map
a. Exhibit A to Resolution: Either
i. Current District Map, or
ii. NDC Minimal Change Map
3. Public correspondence
March 21, 2022
Redistricting Public Hearing #4
National Demographics Corporation
City of San Rafael
March 21, 2022 2
San Rafael’s Transition to Districts
Date Event
November 10, 2017 City received letter alleging
violation of the California
Voting Rights Act (CVRA)
DistrictingJanuary 16, 2018 Council passed resolution to
change to district elections
April 16, 2018 Council adopted district map
November 3, 2020 Elections for Districts 1 & 4
2021 -2022 Districts must be redrawn to
reflect 2020 Census data Redistricting
March 21, 2022 3
Redistricting Timeline
Date Event
August 12, 2021 Release of 2020 Census data
September 27, 2021 Release of California’s official redistricting data
November 15, 2021 Public Hearing #1
January 18, 2022 Public Hearing #2
February 22, 2022 Public Hearing #3
March 21, 2022 Public Hearing #4
April 17, 2022 Legal deadline for Council to adopt redistricting plan
November 8, 2022 First election with new map
March 21, 2022 4
Legal Criteria for Redistricting
1.Ensure geographic
contiguity
2.Minimize division
of neighborhoods
& “communities
of interest”
3.Create easily
identifiable
boundaries
4.Maintain
compactness
✓Do not “favor or
discriminate against
a political party”
✓Ensure equal
population*
✓Comply with
federal Voting
Rights Act
✓Avoid racial
gerrymandering
Traditional CriteriaCalifornia Law
May include:
•Preserve core
of existing
districts
•Minimize
changes to
election cycles
Federal Law
Do not bypass a
nearby population
to take in a more
distant population
* Total population
deviation < 10%
Current District
Map (2018)
6
✓Current Districts Are Pop. Balanced
District 1 2 3 4 Total
2020 2020 Census (Adjusted)14,853 15,732 14,720 16,028 61,333
Deviation from ideal -480 399 -613 695 1,308
% Deviation -3.13%2.60%-4.00%4.53%8.53%
2020 Total Pop
% Hisp 80%21%21%18%34%
% NH White 12%65%64%64%52%
% NH Black 1%2%2%2%2%
% Asian-American 5%7%9%12%8%
Citizen Voting
Age Pop
Total 4,296 10,843 10,421 10,843 36,403
% Hisp 42%7%10%9%12%
% NH White 41%84%76%80%75%
% NH Black 3%3%3%1%3%
% Asian/Pac.Isl.13%5%9%8%8%
March 21, 2022 7
Calculating Population Deviation
Ideal district size = 15,333
▪Calculated by dividing the total population by the number of
districts
▪61,333/4 = 15,333.25
Total deviation = 1,308
▪Calculated by subtracting the smallest district’s population
from the largest district’s population
▪D4 (16,028) -D3 (14,720) = 1,308
Total deviation %= 8.53%
▪Calculated by subtracting the smallest district’s deviation from
the largest district’s deviation
▪D4(4.53) –D3(-4.00) = 8.53%
March 21, 2022 8
Defining “Communities of Interest”
Under California Elections Code, “community of interest” has a
specific definition in the context of redistricting:
Definitions of “communities of interest” do not include relationships
with political parties, incumbents, or political candidates.
A “community of interest”is a population that
shares common social or economic interests that
should be included within a single district for
purposes of its effective and fair representation.
9
NDC Minimal Change Map
Election Cycle:
2022: Districts 2 and 3
2024: Districts 1 and 4
March 21, 2022 10
Share Your Thoughts
Website:redistrictsanrafael.org
1
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL ADJUSTING THE
BOUNDARIES AND SELECTING A PREFERRED DISTRICT MAP OF
THE CITY COUNCIL DISTRICTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH CALIFORNIA
ELECTIONS CODE SECTIONS 21601-21609 AND SAN RAFAEL
MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 2.02.040
WHEREAS, in 2018 the City Council of San Rafael adopted Ordinance No. 1956,
approving the change of the City’s electoral system from an at-large to a “by-district”
electoral system with a separately elected mayor; and
WHEREAS, the districts adopted thereby were used for the first time at the 2020
elections; and
WHEREAS, California Elections Code section 21621 requires each charter city
that uses by-district elections to readjust those district boundaries in the year following
the release of a new Census, to ensure compliance with constitutional equal population
requirements; and
WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court has held that a “total deviation”
under 10% is presumptively constitutional; and
WHEREAS, the existing council districts have a “total deviation” of population
between the districts of 8.53% based on the 2020 Census; and
WHEREAS, under changes to state law adopted by the Legislature in 2019 there
are additional criteria that electoral districts must comply with, including contiguity,
minimizing division of neighborhoods and communities of interest to the extent possible,
following easily understandable boundaries to the extent possible, and encouraging the
compactness of population to the extent practicable; and
WHEREAS, the City has retained an experienced redistricting/demographic
consulting firm, National Demographics Corporation (“NDC”), and experienced legal
counsel, Nielsen Merksamer, to advise it on the process of preparing a revised district
plan; and
WHEREAS, on July 19, 2021, the City Council received a presentation from the
City’s retained special voting rights counsel regarding the redistricting process, after
which the Council approved a detailed timeline and work plan for the redistricting process;
and
WHEREAS, the Census Bureau belatedly released the 2020 “Public Law 94-171”
(“PL94-171”) redistricting data files on August 12, 2021; and
WHEREAS, on September 13, 2021, the City’s special counsel provided the City
Council with an additional presentation summarizing the legal rules governing the
2
readjustment of district lines and the preliminary demographics of the existing districts
based on the PL94-171 data; and
WHEREAS, the California Statewide Database (“SWDB”) released an “adjusted”
version of the Census redistricting data on September 21, 2021, as required by state law,
and a corrected version of those adjusted data on September 27, 2021; and
WHEREAS, on November 15, 2021, the City Council received updated information
regarding the final “adjusted” demographics of the existing districts based on the SWDB
data, after which the Council conducted its first duly-noticed public hearing to receive
public testimony regarding the composition of the districts, especially communities of
interest; and
WHEREAS, on January 18, 2022, the City Council conducted a second duly-
noticed public hearing at its regular council meeting to receive public testimony regarding
the composition of the districts and instructed its consultants to prepare draft maps for
consideration at future public hearings; and
WHEREAS, on February 22, 2022, NDC presented two draft council district plans
to the City Council—both of which were prepared according to the criteria set forth in state
law—one showing the existing lines, which, as noted above, remain population-balanced,
and another “Minimal Change” plan that preserves the communities of interest identified
during the 2018 district process; and
WHEREAS, following the demographic consultant’s presentation on February 22
the City Council conducted a third duly-noticed public hearing to receive public input
regarding the draft maps; and
WHEREAS, on March 21, 2022, the City Council conducted a fourth duly-noticed
public hearing regarding the draft maps; and
WHEREAS, throughout this process the City has maintained a detailed
redistricting website as required by law, https://redistrictsanrafael.org/; and
WHEREAS, the City has provided notices and other materials in Spanish, and has
provided translation services upon request; and
WHEREAS, the City has engaged in good-faith public outreach to community
groups and other interested parties as required by law; and
WHEREAS, the City made available to the public paper and online mapping tools
to permit them to submit draft maps if so desired;
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered all public comments on the proposed
council district plans; and
3
WHEREAS, the Council believes that the districts contained in [the Existing
(2018) map/the “Minimum Change” map] (the “Preferred Map”), incorporated herein,
would best serve the interests of the City and the public at large; and
WHEREAS, the populations in the proposed districts of the Preferred Map are
substantially equal in compliance with legal requirements; and
WHEREAS, Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, 52 U.S.C. § 10301, prohibits the
use of any voting qualification, or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or
procedure in a manner which results in a denial or abridgement of the right of any citizen
of the United States to vote on account of race or color, and the Preferred Map complies
with section 2 of the Voting Rights Act; and
WHEREAS, the Preferred Map is drawn is geographically contiguous; and
WHEREAS, the Preferred Map seeks to minimize the division of communities of
interest and neighborhoods to the extent possible; and
WHEREAS, the Preferred Map uses easily understandable boundaries, like
streets, natural and artificial barriers, and the boundaries of the City, to the extent
possible; and
WHEREAS, the Preferred Map is drawn to encourage geographical compactness
to the extent practicable;
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of San Rafael does hereby resolve, declare,
and determine as follows:
DIVISION 1: FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS.
All of the recitals set forth above are true and correct, and the City Council so finds and
determines.
DIVISION 2: ADOPTION OF NEW COUNCIL DISTRICT MAP.
Pursuant to California Elections Code section 21601 and San Rafael Municipal Code
section 2.02.040, the City Council prefers the district boundaries in [the Existing (2018)
map/the “Minimum Change” map], attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated
herein by this reference; believes that its adoption would best serve the public interest of
the City’s residents and voters; and by this resolution hereby adopts the district
boundaries in that Preferred Map for use at the City’s November 2022 election and
subsequent elections until a further re-alignment is required pursuant to Elections Code
section 21601 and San Rafael Municipal Code section 2.02.040, following the release of
the 2030 Census.
4
DIVISION 3: IMPLEMENTATION.
1. The City Manager and/or designee shall take all actions necessary to notify
the Marin County Registrar’s Office of the Council’s determination forthwith and provide
whatever assistance may be required by the Registrar’s Office to implement the new
district lines.
2. Because the new district plan may contain technical anomalies caused by
errors in the 2020 Census line files that do not substantively affect the populations in the
districts, the district boundaries, or the intent of this Resolution, which anomalies are not
revealed until implementation begins, the City Manager and/or designee is authorized to
make technical emendations to the new plan that do not substantively affect the
populations in the districts, the district boundaries, or the intent of this Resolution, and
shall advise the City Council of any such emendations that are found to be required in
plan implementation by the County Registrar’s Office.
3. The City Manager shall consult with legal counsel and/or the City’s
demographic consultant as necessary to resolve any legal or technical issues necessary
to give effect to this Resolution.
DIVISION 4: CEQA COMPLIANCE.
The City Council finds that the proposed realignment of the existing council district map
is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) pursuant to Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, Section
15061(b)(3) in that it is not a project which has the potential for causing a
significant effect on the environment
DIVISION 5: CONFLICTING MEASURES.
To the extent that the terms and provisions of this Resolution may be inconsistent or in
conflict with the terms or conditions of any prior City ordinance, motion, resolution, rule or
regulation governing the same subject, the terms of this Resolution shall prevail with
respect to the subject matter thereof.
DIVISION 6: INTERPRETATION.
In interpreting this Resolution or resolving any ambiguity, this Resolution shall be
interpreted in a manner that effectively accomplishes its stated purposes.
DIVISION 7: SEVERABILITY
If any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this
Resolution, is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any
court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions of this Resolution. The City Council of the City of San Rafael hereby declares
that it would have adopted this Resolution, and each section, subsection, subdivision,
sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that anyone or more
5
sections, subsections, subdivisions, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions thereof be
declared invalid or unconstitutional.
I, LINDSAY LARA, City Clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby certify that the
foregoing resolution was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting
of the Council of said City held on the 21st day of March 2022, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Lindsay Lara, City Clerk
Attachment:
Exhibit A ([the Existing (2018) map)/the “Minimum Change” map])
6
Exhibit A to Resolution No.
(Map of City Council Districts – 2020 Census)
Current Districts
District 1
Total Pop 14,853
Deviation from ideal -480
% Deviation -3.13%
% Hisp 79.8%
% NH White 12%
% NH Black 1%
% Asian-American 5%
Total 4,296
% Hisp 42%
% NH White 41%
% NH Black 3%
% Asian/Pac.Isl.13%
Total 3,340
% Latino est.33%
% Spanish-Surnamed 30%
% Asian-Surnamed 10%
% Filipino-Surnamed 1%
% NH White est.54%
% NH Black 3%
Total 2,637
% Latino est.30%
% Spanish-Surnamed 28%
% Asian-Surnamed 10%
% Filipino-Surnamed 1%
% NH White est.56%
% NH Black 3%
Total 1,858
% Latino est.22%
% Spanish-Surnamed 21%
% Asian-Surnamed 8%
% Filipino-Surnamed 1%
% NH White est.64%
% NH Black est.3%
ACS Pop. Est.Total 15,353
age0-19 37%
age20-60 54%
age60plus 9%
immigrants 48%
naturalized 17%
english 25%
spanish 67%
asian-lang 4%
other lang 3%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well"48%
hs-grad 32%
bachelor 12%
graduatedegree 8%
Child in Household child-under18 51%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+employed 73%
income 0-25k 20%
income 25-50k 24%
income 50-75k 21%
income 75-200k 25%
income 200k-plus 10%
single family 30%
multi-family 70%
rented 77%
owned 23%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.
Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.
Latino voter registration and turnout data are Spanish-surname counts adjusted using Census Population Department undercount estimates. NH White and NH
Black registration and turnout counts estimated by NDC. Citizen Voting Age Pop., Age, Immigration, and other demographics from the 2015-2019 American
Community Survey and Special Tabulation 5-year data.
2
15,732
399
2.60%
21%
65%
2%
7%
10,843
7%
84%
3%
5%
10,501
7%
7%
3%
1%
85%
3%
9,288
7%
6%
3%
1%
86%
3%
7,801
5%
5%
3%
0%
88%
2%
14,193
17%
57%
25%
18%
38%
82%
12%
2%
4%
7%
29%
37%
22%
22%
71%
12%
17%
12%
38%
22%
53%
47%
58%
42%
3
14,720
-613
-4.00%
21%
64%
2%
9%
10,421
10%
76%
3%
9%
9,653
7%
7%
4%
1%
86%
2%
8,610
6%
6%
4%
1%
87%
2%
7,233
6%
5%
3%
1%
88%
2%
13,721
20%
44%
36%
19%
63%
76%
11%
5%
8%
9%
28%
34%
24%
23%
57%
14%
14%
8%
36%
28%
74%
26%
36%
64%
4
16,028
695
4.53%
18%
64%
2%
12%
10,843
9%
80%
1%
8%
10,440
7%
6%
4%
1%
87%
1%
9,231
6%
6%
4%
1%
87%
1%
7,691
5%
5%
4%
1%
89%
1%
15,632
23%
47%
31%
22%
48%
72%
11%
5%
12%
12%
25%
34%
29%
27%
62%
11%
11%
15%
40%
23%
60%
40%
37%
63%
Total
61,333
1,308
8.53%
34%
52%
2%
8%
36,403
12%
75%
3%
8%
33,934
10%
9%
4%
1%
83%
2%
29,766
9%
8%
4%
1%
84%
2%
24,583
7%
6%
4%
1%
86%
2%
58,898
25%
50%
25%
27%
34%
64%
25%
4%
7%
19%
28%
31%
22%
29%
66%
13%
16%
13%
36%
22%
56%
44%
50%
50%
02/12/2022 15:03 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
NDC Minimal Change
District 1
Total Pop 15,638
Deviation from ideal 305
% Deviation 1.99%
% Hisp 78.4%
% NH White 13%
% NH Black 2%
% Asian-American 5%
Total 4,757
% Hisp 41%
% NH White 43%
% NH Black 3%
% Asian/Pac.Isl.13%
Total 3,738
% Latino est.30%
% Spanish-Surnamed 28%
% Asian-Surnamed 10%
% Filipino-Surnamed 1%
% NH White est.55%
% NH Black 4%
Total 2,957
% Latino est.28%
% Spanish-Surnamed 26%
% Asian-Surnamed 10%
% Filipino-Surnamed 1%
% NH White est.58%
% NH Black 3%
Total 2,084
% Latino est.20%
% Spanish-Surnamed 19%
% Asian-Surnamed 8%
% Filipino-Surnamed 1%
% NH White est.66%
% NH Black est.3%
ACS Pop. Est.Total 16,077
age0-19 36%
age20-60 54%
age60plus 10%
immigrants 47%
naturalized 17%
english 27%
spanish 65%
asian-lang 4%
other lang 3%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well"46%
hs-grad 32%
bachelor 14%
graduatedegree 9%
Child in Household child-under18 48%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+employed 73%
income 0-25k 20%
income 25-50k 24%
income 50-75k 20%
income 75-200k 26%
income 200k-plus 11%
single family 31%
multi-family 69%
rented 76%
owned 24%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.
Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.
Latino voter registration and turnout data are Spanish-surname counts adjusted using Census Population Department undercount estimates. NH White and NH
Black registration and turnout counts estimated by NDC. Citizen Voting Age Pop., Age, Immigration, and other demographics from the 2015-2019 American
Community Survey and Special Tabulation 5-year data.
2
15,700
367
2.39%
21%
65%
2%
7%
10,771
8%
83%
3%
5%
10,355
7%
7%
3%
1%
86%
3%
9,179
7%
6%
3%
1%
86%
2%
7,721
6%
5%
3%
1%
88%
2%
14,087
18%
57%
26%
18%
39%
82%
12%
2%
4%
7%
29%
38%
22%
22%
71%
12%
16%
11%
38%
23%
54%
46%
58%
42%
3
14,849
-484
-3.16%
19%
66%
3%
9%
10,539
7%
80%
3%
8%
10,006
7%
6%
4%
1%
87%
2%
8,887
6%
6%
3%
1%
87%
2%
7,433
5%
5%
3%
1%
89%
2%
13,938
20%
46%
34%
19%
60%
78%
8%
5%
9%
8%
26%
36%
25%
24%
60%
9%
14%
12%
37%
28%
75%
25%
34%
66%
4
15,146
-187
-1.22%
18%
64%
2%
12%
10,336
10%
77%
1%
9%
9,835
7%
6%
4%
1%
87%
1%
8,743
7%
6%
4%
1%
87%
1%
7,345
5%
5%
4%
1%
89%
1%
14,795
23%
45%
32%
23%
49%
71%
13%
5%
11%
12%
26%
32%
29%
27%
59%
15%
11%
12%
39%
24%
58%
42%
39%
61%
Total
61,333
851
5.55%
34%
52%
2%
8%
36,403
12%
75%
3%
8%
33,934
10%
9%
4%
1%
83%
2%
29,766
9%
8%
4%
1%
84%
2%
24,583
7%
6%
4%
1%
86%
2%
58,898
25%
50%
25%
27%
34%
64%
25%
4%
7%
19%
28%
31%
22%
29%
66%
13%
16%
13%
36%
22%
56%
44%
50%
50%
02/11/2022 12:24 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1
RESOLUTION NO. 15047
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL ADJUSTING THE
BOUNDARIES AND SELECTING A PREFERRED DISTRICT MAP OF
THE CITY COUNCIL DISTRICTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH CALIFORNIA
ELECTIONS CODE SECTIONS 21601-21609 AND SAN RAFAEL
MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 2.02.040
WHEREAS, in 2018 the City Council of San Rafael adopted Ordinance No. 1956,
approving the change of the City’s electoral system from an at-large to a “by-district”
electoral system with a separately elected mayor; and
WHEREAS, the districts adopted thereby were used for the first time at the 2020
elections; and
WHEREAS, California Elections Code section 21621 requires each charter city
that uses by-district elections to readjust those district boundaries in the year following
the release of a new Census, to ensure compliance with constitutional equal population
requirements; and
WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court has held that a “total deviation”
under 10% is presumptively constitutional; and
WHEREAS, the existing council districts have a “total deviation” of population
between the districts of 8.53% based on the 2020 Census; and
WHEREAS, under changes to state law adopted by the Legislature in 2019 there
are additional criteria that electoral districts must comply with, including contiguity,
minimizing division of neighborhoods and communities of interest to the extent possible,
following easily understandable boundaries to the extent possible, and encouraging the
compactness of population to the extent practicable; and
WHEREAS, the City has retained an experienced redistricting/demographic
consulting firm, National Demographics Corporation (“NDC”), and experienced legal
counsel, Nielsen Merksamer, to advise it on the process of preparing a revised district
plan; and
WHEREAS, on July 19, 2021, the City Council received a presentation from the
City’s retained special voting rights counsel regarding the redistricting process, after
which the Council approved a detailed timeline and work plan for the redistricting process;
and
WHEREAS, the Census Bureau belatedly released the 2020 “Public Law 94-171”
(“PL94-171”) redistricting data files on August 12, 2021; and
WHEREAS, on September 13, 2021, the City’s special counsel provided the City
Council with an additional presentation summarizing the legal rules governing the
2
readjustment of district lines and the preliminary demographics of the existing districts
based on the PL94-171 data; and
WHEREAS, the California Statewide Database (“SWDB”) released an “adjusted”
version of the Census redistricting data on September 21, 2021, as required by state law,
and a corrected version of those adjusted data on September 27, 2021; and
WHEREAS, on November 15, 2021, the City Council received updated information
regarding the final “adjusted” demographics of the existing districts based on the SWDB
data, after which the Council conducted its first duly-noticed public hearing to receive
public testimony regarding the composition of the districts, especially communities of
interest; and
WHEREAS, on January 18, 2022, the City Council conducted a second duly-
noticed public hearing at its regular council meeting to receive public testimony regarding
the composition of the districts and instructed its consultants to prepare draft maps for
consideration at future public hearings; and
WHEREAS, on February 22, 2022, NDC presented two draft council district plans
to the City Council—both of which were prepared according to the criteria set forth in state
law—one showing the existing lines, which, as noted above, remain population-balanced,
and another “Minimal Change” plan that preserves the communities of interest identified
during the 2018 district process; and
WHEREAS, following the demographic consultant’s presentation on February 22
the City Council conducted a third duly-noticed public hearing to receive public input
regarding the draft maps; and
WHEREAS, on March 21, 2022, the City Council conducted a fourth duly-noticed
public hearing regarding the draft maps; and
WHEREAS, throughout this process the City has maintained a detailed
redistricting website as required by law, https://redistrictsanrafael.org/; and
WHEREAS, the City has provided notices and other materials in Spanish, and has
provided translation services upon request; and
WHEREAS, the City has engaged in good-faith public outreach to community
groups and other interested parties as required by law; and
WHEREAS, the City made available to the public paper and online mapping tools
to permit them to submit draft maps if so desired;
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered all public comments on the proposed
council district plans; and
3
WHEREAS, the Council believes that the districts contained in the Current Districts
map (2018) (the “Preferred Map”), incorporated herein, would best serve the interests of
the City and the public at large; and
WHEREAS, the populations in the proposed districts of the Preferred Map are
substantially equal in compliance with legal requirements; and
WHEREAS, Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, 52 U.S.C. § 10301, prohibits the
use of any voting qualification, or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or
procedure in a manner which results in a denial or abridgement of the right of any citizen
of the United States to vote on account of race or color, and the Preferred Map complies
with section 2 of the Voting Rights Act; and
WHEREAS, the Preferred Map is drawn is geographically contiguous; and
WHEREAS, the Preferred Map seeks to minimize the division of communities of
interest and neighborhoods to the extent possible; and
WHEREAS, the Preferred Map uses easily understandable boundaries, like
streets, natural and artificial barriers, and the boundaries of the City, to the extent
possible; and
WHEREAS, the Preferred Map is drawn to encourage geographical compactness
to the extent practicable;
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of San Rafael does hereby resolve, declare,
and determine as follows:
DIVISION 1: FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS.
All of the recitals set forth above are true and correct, and the City Council so finds and
determines.
DIVISION 2: ADOPTION OF NEW COUNCIL DISTRICT MAP.
Pursuant to California Elections Code section 21601 and San Rafael Municipal Code
section 2.02.040, the City Council prefers the district boundaries in the Current Districts
map (2018), attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein by this reference (the
“Preferred Map”); believes that its adoption would best serve the public interest of the
City’s residents and voters; and by this resolution hereby adopts the district boundaries
in that Preferred Map for use at the City’s November 2022 election and subsequent
elections until a further re-alignment is required pursuant to Elections Code section 21601
and San Rafael Municipal Code section 2.02.040, following the release of the 2030
Census.
4
DIVISION 3: IMPLEMENTATION.
1. The City Manager and/or designee shall take all actions necessary to notify
the Marin County Registrar’s Office of the Council’s determination forthwith and provide
whatever assistance may be required by the Registrar’s Office to implement the new
district lines.
2. Because the new district plan may contain technical anomalies caused by
errors in the 2020 Census line files that do not substantively affect the populations in the
districts, the district boundaries, or the intent of this Resolution, which anomalies are not
revealed until implementation begins, the City Manager and/or designee is authorized to
make technical emendations to the new plan that do not substantively affect the
populations in the districts, the district boundaries, or the intent of this Resolution, and
shall advise the City Council of any such emendations that are found to be required in
plan implementation by the County Registrar’s Office.
3. The City Manager shall consult with legal counsel and/or the City’s
demographic consultant as necessary to resolve any legal or technical issues necessary
to give effect to this Resolution.
DIVISION 4: CEQA COMPLIANCE.
The City Council finds that the proposed realignment of the existing council district map
is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) pursuant to Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, Section
15061(b)(3) in that it is not a project which has the potential for causing a
significant effect on the environment
DIVISION 5: CONFLICTING MEASURES.
To the extent that the terms and provisions of this Resolution may be inconsistent or in
conflict with the terms or conditions of any prior City ordinance, motion, resolution, rule or
regulation governing the same subject, the terms of this Resolution shall prevail with
respect to the subject matter thereof.
DIVISION 6: INTERPRETATION.
In interpreting this Resolution or resolving any ambiguity, this Resolution shall be
interpreted in a manner that effectively accomplishes its stated purposes.
DIVISION 7: SEVERABILITY
If any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this
Resolution, is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any
court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions of this Resolution. The City Council of the City of San Rafael hereby declares
that it would have adopted this Resolution, and each section, subsection, subdivision,
sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that anyone or more
5
sections, subsections, subdivisions, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions thereof be
declared invalid or unconstitutional.
I, LINDSAY LARA, City Clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby certify that the
foregoing resolution was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting
of the Council of said City held on the 21st day of March 2022, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: BUSHEY, HILL, KERTZ, LLORENS GULATI &
MAYOR KATE
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
Lindsay Lara, City Clerk
Attachment:
Exhibit A (the Current Districts map (2018))
6
Exhibit A to Resolution No. 15047
(Map of City Council Districts – 2020 Census)
Current Districts
District 1
Total Pop 14,853
Deviation from ideal -480
% Deviation -3.13%
% Hisp 79.8%
% NH White 12%
% NH Black 1%
% Asian-American 5%
Total 4,296
% Hisp 42%
% NH White 41%
% NH Black 3%
% Asian/Pac.Isl.13%
Total 3,340
% Latino est.33%
% Spanish-Surnamed 30%
% Asian-Surnamed 10%
% Filipino-Surnamed 1%
% NH White est.54%
% NH Black 3%
Total 2,637
% Latino est.30%
% Spanish-Surnamed 28%
% Asian-Surnamed 10%
% Filipino-Surnamed 1%
% NH White est.56%
% NH Black 3%
Total 1,858
% Latino est.22%
% Spanish-Surnamed 21%
% Asian-Surnamed 8%
% Filipino-Surnamed 1%
% NH White est.64%
% NH Black est.3%
ACS Pop. Est.Total 15,353
age0-19 37%
age20-60 54%
age60plus 9%
immigrants 48%
naturalized 17%
english 25%
spanish 67%
asian-lang 4%
other lang 3%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well"48%
hs-grad 32%
bachelor 12%
graduatedegree 8%
Child in Household child-under18 51%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+employed 73%
income 0-25k 20%
income 25-50k 24%
income 50-75k 21%
income 75-200k 25%
income 200k-plus 10%
single family 30%
multi-family 70%
rented 77%
owned 23%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.
Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.
Latino voter registration and turnout data are Spanish-surname counts adjusted using Census Population Department undercount estimates. NH White and NH
Black registration and turnout counts estimated by NDC. Citizen Voting Age Pop., Age, Immigration, and other demographics from the 2015-2019 American
Community Survey and Special Tabulation 5-year data.
2
15,732
399
2.60%
21%
65%
2%
7%
10,843
7%
84%
3%
5%
10,501
7%
7%
3%
1%
85%
3%
9,288
7%
6%
3%
1%
86%
3%
7,801
5%
5%
3%
0%
88%
2%
14,193
17%
57%
25%
18%
38%
82%
12%
2%
4%
7%
29%
37%
22%
22%
71%
12%
17%
12%
38%
22%
53%
47%
58%
42%
3
14,720
-613
-4.00%
21%
64%
2%
9%
10,421
10%
76%
3%
9%
9,653
7%
7%
4%
1%
86%
2%
8,610
6%
6%
4%
1%
87%
2%
7,233
6%
5%
3%
1%
88%
2%
13,721
20%
44%
36%
19%
63%
76%
11%
5%
8%
9%
28%
34%
24%
23%
57%
14%
14%
8%
36%
28%
74%
26%
36%
64%
4
16,028
695
4.53%
18%
64%
2%
12%
10,843
9%
80%
1%
8%
10,440
7%
6%
4%
1%
87%
1%
9,231
6%
6%
4%
1%
87%
1%
7,691
5%
5%
4%
1%
89%
1%
15,632
23%
47%
31%
22%
48%
72%
11%
5%
12%
12%
25%
34%
29%
27%
62%
11%
11%
15%
40%
23%
60%
40%
37%
63%
Total
61,333
1,308
8.53%
34%
52%
2%
8%
36,403
12%
75%
3%
8%
33,934
10%
9%
4%
1%
83%
2%
29,766
9%
8%
4%
1%
84%
2%
24,583
7%
6%
4%
1%
86%
2%
58,898
25%
50%
25%
27%
34%
64%
25%
4%
7%
19%
28%
31%
22%
29%
66%
13%
16%
13%
36%
22%
56%
44%
50%
50%
02/12/2022 15:03 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
