Office of the City Manager

2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7000 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 ● Fax: (510) 981-7099 E-Mail: manager@CityofBerkeley.info Website: http://www.CityofBerkeley.info/Manager

ACTION CALENDAR November 15, 2011

To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council

From: Phil Kamlarz, City Manager

Submitted by: Christine Daniel, Deputy City Manager

Subject: Public Hearing #1: City Council Redistricting Plan

RECOMMENDATION Conduct a public hearing and upon conclusion, evaluate plans submitted by the public, and provide direction to staff on the elements of a preferred plan to be considered and finalized at the second public hearing on January 17, 2012.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS The deadline to submit redistricting plans was September 30, 2011. The City Clerk received six plans from members of the public by the deadline.

A. Maximum Participation Minimum Deviation (MAPMIND)

B. Alfred Twu

C. Bateman Neighborhood Association

D. Eric Panzer #1

E. Eric Panzer #2

F. Berkeley Student District Campaign

One partial submission was received after the deadline. On October 4th Vincent Casalaina submitted a proposal via e-mail. This proposal did not contain the required Proposal Map and was not submitted on time or in hard copy as required. While it is included in Attachment 11 for your information, Staff did not conduct an analysis of this plan.

A notice of this public hearing was published on November 4, 2011. The City Manager, City Attorney, City Clerk, and Information Technology Departments have undertaken a complete review of the plans with regards to city, state, and federal regulations. The analysis of each plan is set forth in this report and contains the following components:

Public Hearing #1: City Council Redistricting Plan ACTION CALENDAR November 15, 2011

Page 2

1) Berkeley City Charter Requirements

The Charter establishes three criteria that any redistricting plan must meet. We discuss them briefly below.

a) Districts must be “as nearly equal in population as may be according to [the] census” (shown a deviation percentage).

This criterion requires more comparative analysis than the other two. For instance, in 2002, based on the technology available at that time and the various proposals before the Council, the City Attorney opined that proposals that were within a 2% population variance could be considered “as nearly equal in population as may be.” However, changes in technology and other circumstances can change this standard. For example, several of the current proposals have variance ranges of significantly less than 2%. By comparison, a hypothetical proposal with variance ranges of, 1.9% might not be considered “as nearly equal in population as may be.” The Council should consider whether a given proposal meets this criterion in the context of the other proposals.

b) New district boundaries may not terminate the term of office of an elected Councilmember.

This criterion is self-explanatory.

c) New district boundaries must adhere as closely as possible to the original 1986 boundaries.

This criterion is addressed in terms of the number of blocks proposed to be moved from the original 1986 districts (see following item) and the distance by which boundaries are proposed to be moved.

2) The total number of census blocks that are proposed to be in districts different from the 1986 Charter Districts

On July 19, 2011, the Council received a memorandum suggesting that the federal and state Voting Rights Acts required an Asian majority/minority district, and by necessary implication that Charter requirements that might prevent creation of such a district would be in violation of those laws. The Council referred this memorandum to the City Attorney, who obtained an opinion from outside counsel (Attachment 3), which was provided to the Council and posted on the City’s redistricting web page. The opinion from outside counsel concludes that there is no violation of the federal or state Voting Rights Act, and that the Charter requirements continue to apply.

The staff analysis also contains a list of specific technical errors for the plans, if necessary, that may be addressed by the submitter. The deadline for these technical corrections is December 2, 2011. These corrections will be analyzed by staff and that information will be incorporated into the analysis provided to the Council for the second public hearing on January 17, 2012.

Public Hearing #1: City Council Redistricting Plan ACTION CALENDAR November 15, 2011

Page 3

To enable a more focused discussion at the second public hearing, it would be helpful if the Council provided specific feedback on redistricting preferences and requests for additional analysis of the submitted plans. The timeline for completion is included in Attachment 1.

Analysis of Redistricting Plans Submitted by the Public (listed in the order submitted) A. Maximum Participation Minimum Deviation (MAPMIND) – Attachment 5 1) Berkeley City Charter Requirements

a) Districts are nearly equal in population (shown as deviation percentage)

This Proposal results in an equal population deviation per Council District of less than 1%. The total population, deviation from equal population and deviation percentage for each district based on our corrections are listed in the table below.

MAPMIND CDs Total Pop.  Deviation % 

1          14,072  ‐1 0.01

2          14,074  1 0.01

3          14,094  21 0.15

4          14,064  ‐9 0.06

5          14,105  32 0.23

6          14,077  4 0.03

7          14,060  ‐13 0.09

8          14,034  ‐39 0.28

b) Districts do not terminate the term of office of an elected Councilmember

This Proposal does not terminate the term of a Councilmember.

c) The districts adhere as closely as possible to the original 1986 boundaries

This Proposal adheres to 1986 Charter District boundaries within two blocks except at the border of Districts 4 & 6 which has a four block offset.

2) Total number of blocks different from 1986 boundaries

A total of 26 census blocks are in a different district than the 1986 Charter Districts.

This plan contains the following technical errors:

1) Seven incorrect block/tract numbers on worksheet 2) Map and worksheet do not match due to error 1

Public Hearing #1: City Council Redistricting Plan ACTION CALENDAR November 15, 2011

Page 4

MAPMIND continued Staff created a revised map (Attachment 5.d.) for this submittal based on a reconciliation of the submitted Proposal Map and the Tract-Block Worksheet. We have also provided a marked up Tract-Block Worksheet to assist the submitter with the technical corrections due on December 2nd. B. Alfred Twu – Attachment 6 1) Berkeley City Charter Requirements

a) Districts are nearly equal in population (shown as deviation percentage)

This Proposal results in an equal population deviation per Council District of less than 2%. The total population, deviation from equal population and deviation percentage for each district based on our corrections are listed in the table below.

Twu CDs Total Pop.  Deviation % 

1          14,123  50 0.36

2          14,087  14 0.10

3          13,982  ‐91 0.65

4          13,870  ‐203 1.44

5          14,168  95 0.68

6          14,077  4 0.03

7          14,262  189 1.34

8          14,011  ‐62 0.44

b) Districts do not terminate the term of office of an elected Councilmember

This Proposal does not terminate the term of a Councilmember.

c) The districts adhere as closely as possible to the original 1986 boundaries

This Proposal adheres to 1986 Charter District boundaries within two blocks except at the border of Districts 4 & 5 which has a four block offset and at the border of Districts 7 & 8 which has a five block offset.

2) Total number of blocks different from 1986 boundaries

A total of 33 census blocks are in a different district than the 1986 Charter Districts.

Public Hearing #1: City Council Redistricting Plan ACTION CALENDAR November 15, 2011

Page 5

Alfred Twu (continued) This plan contains the following technical errors:

1) Three incorrect district numbers on worksheet 2) Seven blocks missing from worksheet 3) Map and worksheet do not match due to errors 1 and 2

Staff created a revised map (Attachment 6.d.) for this submittal based on a reconciliation of the submitted Proposal Map and the Tract-Block Worksheet. We have also provided a marked up Tract-Block Worksheet to assist the submitter with the technical corrections due on December 2nd. C. Bateman Neighborhood Association – Attachment 7 1) Berkeley City Charter Requirements

a) Districts are nearly equal in population (shown as deviation percentage)

This Proposal results in an equal population deviation per Council District of less than 4%. The total population, deviation from equal population and deviation percentage for each district based on our corrections (see below) are listed in the table below.

Bateman CDs Total Pop. Deviation % 

1  13995 ‐78 0.55

2  14025 ‐48 0.34

3  14576 503 3.57

4  13616 ‐457 3.25

5  14082 9 0.06

6  13943 ‐130 0.92

7  14220 147 1.04

8  14123 50 0.36

b) Districts do not terminate the term of office of an elected Councilmember

This Proposal does not terminate the term of a Councilmember.

c) The districts adhere as closely as possible to the original 1986 boundaries

Staff was unable to analyze whether this proposal adheres to 1986 Charter District boundaries because of conflicts between the Proposal Map and the Tract-Block Worksheet.

2) Total number of blocks different from 1986 boundaries

Public Hearing #1: City Council Redistricting Plan ACTION CALENDAR November 15, 2011

Page 6

Bateman continued

Staff was unable to determine the total number of blocks different from 1986 boundaries due to conflicts between the Proposal Map and the Tract-Block Worksheet.

This plan contains the following technical errors:

1) Three incorrect block/tract numbers on worksheet 2) Six blocks missing from worksheet 3) Six block changes in worksheet contradict changes in proposal map 4) Map and worksheet do not match due to errors 1, 2 and 3

Staff was unable to reconcile the Proposal Map and Tract-Block Worksheet due to direct conflict in the data contained in each, and thus was not able to create a revised map based on a reconciliation of the submitted Proposal Map and the Tract-Block Worksheet. However, we have provided a marked up Tract-Block Worksheet to assist the submitter with the technical corrections due on December 2nd. D. Eric Panzer #1 – Attachment 8 1) Berkeley City Charter Requirements

a) Districts are nearly equal in population (shown as deviation percentage)

This Proposal results in an equal population deviation per Council District of less than 1%. The total population, deviation from equal population and deviation percentage for each district are listed in the table below.

Panzer 1 CDs Total Pop.  Deviation % 

1              14,134  61 0.43

2              14,026  ‐47 0.33

3              14,070  ‐3 0.02

4              14,082  9 0.06

5              14,108  35 0.25

6              13,966  ‐107 0.76

7              14,156  83 0.59

8              14,038  ‐35 0.25

b) Districts do not terminate the term of office of an elected Councilmember

This Proposal does not terminate the term of a Councilmember.

Public Hearing #1: City Council Redistricting Plan ACTION CALENDAR November 15, 2011

Page 7

Eric Panzer #1 continued c) The districts adhere as closely as possible to the original 1986 boundaries

This Proposal adheres to 1986 Charter District boundaries within two blocks except at the border of Districts 1 & 4 which has a four block offset, and at the border of Districts 7 & 8 which has a six block offset.

2) Total number of blocks different from 1986 boundaries

A total of 48 census blocks are in a different district than the 1986 Charter Districts.

This plan contains the following technical errors: None.

E. Eric Panzer #2 – Attachment 9 1) Berkeley City Charter Requirements

a) Districts are nearly equal in population (shown as deviation percentage)

This Proposal results in an equal population deviation per Council District of less than 1%. The total population, deviation from equal population and deviation percentage for each district are listed in the table below.

Panzer 2 CDs Total Pop. Deviation % 

1  14134 61 0.43 

2  14026 ‐47 0.33 

3  14070 ‐3 0.02 

4  14082 9 0.06 

5  14108 35 0.25 

6  13966 ‐107 0.76 

7  14132 59 0.42 

8  14062 ‐11 0.08 

b) Districts do not terminate the term of office of an elected Councilmember

This Proposal does not terminate the term of a Councilmember.

c) The districts adhere as closely as possible to the original 1986 boundaries

Public Hearing #1: City Council Redistricting Plan ACTION CALENDAR November 15, 2011

Page 8

Eric Panzer #2 continued

This Proposal adheres to 1986 Charter District boundaries within two blocks except at the border of Districts 1 & 4 which has a four block offset, and at the border of Districts 7 & 8 which has a nine block offset.

2) Total number of blocks different from 1986 boundaries

A total of 70 census blocks are in a different district than the 1986 Charter Districts.

This plan contains the following technical errors: None.

F. Berkeley Student District Campaign – Attachment 10 This proposal does not satisfy the requirements of the Berkeley City Charter. As illustrated on the submitted Proposal Map, the district boundaries in this proposal are significantly different from the 1986 district boundaries and this proposal terminates the terms of two Councilmembers. Because these are fundamental requirements of the Charter, no further analysis was conducted. Comparison Matrix    MAPMIND  Twu  Bateman  Panzer #1  Panzer #2  BSDC 

Equal Pop. Deviation %  RANGE  

.01‐.28%  .03‐1.44%  .06‐3.57%  .02‐.76%   .02‐.76%    N/A 

No. of blocks in a different district than 1986 

26  33  N/A  48   70   N/A  

Largest block offset from 1986 boundaries 

4 blocks off District 4/6 border 

5 blocks off District 7/8 border 

N/A 

 6 blocks off District 7/8 border 

 9 blocks off District 7/8 border 

N/A 

Submittal of Corrections Corrections submitted in response to the errors listed in the report must be filed in writing with the City Clerk no later than 5:00 p.m. on Friday, December 2, 2011. Corrections to the Tract-Block Worksheet must be submitted on the approved template.

Public Hearing #1: City Council Redistricting Plan ACTION CALENDAR November 15, 2011

Page 9

BACKGROUND Berkeley City Charter Article V, Section 9 requires City Council district boundaries to be adjusted, if needed, following each decennial census. The census data for Berkeley was released on March 8, 2011. The Council adopted a process and timeline for the completion of redistricting for Berkeley City Council districts that includes public participation and multiple opportunities for analysis and input by the public and the City Council.

The 2010 census data released by the Census Bureau shows Berkeley’s population increased by 9,836 people between 2000 and 2010. The total population for Berkeley is 112,580. This represents a nine-percent increase over the 2000 population count of 102,744.

The deadline in the City Charter to complete the redistricting process is December 31, 2013. However, the adopted timeline would enable completion by April 1, 2012 in order to allow the new districts to be in place for the November 2012 municipal election.

As in prior years, the process for the 2010 Census redistricting began with an opportunity for the public to create and submit redistricting plans. The process also includes at least two public hearings for review and consideration of the proposals. In addition, two community meetings were held for citizens to ask questions of staff and obtain information on the process. Upon completion of the public hearing process, the Council may direct staff to draft a new ordinance with the City Council district boundaries to be used for the next 10 years.

The following describes the process and timeline for the decennial redistricting. Beginning on July 11, 2011, members of the public were able to obtain a Redistricting Packet from the City Clerk with all the information and data needed to create a proposal. The City provided maps and Microsoft Excel spreadsheets, both electronically and in hard copy, to the public. Those files included the data necessary for a community member to assess the population counts in each district, as against the Equal District Population number, and prepare revised district boundaries. Submittals were required to include both the proposed modifications by Census tract and block, as well as a revised district boundary map. The deadline for public submissions in the approved format was September 30, 2011.

Two public hearings are scheduled (November 15, 2011 and January 17, 2012) to review the proposals submitted by the deadline. All completed proposals will be available through the City’s website and will be included in the November 15 agenda packet, which will be available on November 3, 2011. The schedule anticipates that the Council will adopt the new boundaries by way of the first reading of an ordinance on February 28, 2012 and a second reading on March 6, 2012. The process would then be completed by the April 1, 2012 deadline set by the Registrar of Voters for the new districts to be in effect for the November 2012 municipal election.

Public Hearing #1: City Council Redistricting Plan ACTION CALENDAR November 15, 2011

Page 10

Census Data Analysis (from June 14, 2011 City Council Agenda Packet)

Adjustment Process: City staff analyzed the data files provided by the Census and organized the data into map form to verify the accuracy. Staff found that the Census Bureau data erroneously assigned population to some of the median strips of several divided roads in Berkeley. There was a total of 1,392 people assigned to median strips, ranging from a single person in one median area to as many as 158 in another. Out of 94 census blocks where these “median populations” occurred, 86 of them reported populations of less than 50. However, some of the divided roads with this type of data are on the border between council districts and thus staff thought it important to clearly assign them to a Census block.

Information Technology staff contacted the Census Bureau about the median-strip populations. The Census Bureau provided an explanation of how the populations were assigned and a methodology for assigning those populations to the correct census block and tract. The Census Bureau confirmed that the total population count was accurate and that the methodology they provided would properly assign the populations to correct blocks and tracts.

Specifically, the Census Bureau provided guidance on how to use the address ranges contained within the 2010 Census TIGER/Line files to reassign populations to the correct census blocks. TIGER/Line files are spatial extracts from the Census Bureau’s MAF/TIGER database, containing features such as roads, railroads, rivers, as well as legal and statistical geographic areas. They are designed for use with geographic information system (GIS) software. Since the census blocks City staff reported represent the area between two lanes of a double line street, it was possible to use the address ranges in the TIGER/Line files to determine which adjacent census block should receive the housing and population. The Census Bureau provided an example of this method to guide staff’s adjustment of these populations. City staff is confident that applying the Census Bureau’s methodology results in an accurate count for each district. For example, in the five blocks where more than 100 people had been assigned to the median strip, there was a multi-unit building in the adjacent reassigned block, therefore it was clear which block was appropriate for the adjustment.

Equal District Population: The City Charter and the state Elections Code require that districts be drawn to result in a nearly equal population in each district. As can be seen from the table below, the verified data shows significant deviation from the equal population number in the eight city council districts.

The Equal District Population (EDP) number is arrived at by dividing total population (112,580) by eight. For reference, the EDP number from 2000 was 12,843 (102,744 divided by eight). The 2010 EDP number is 14,703.

Public Hearing #1: City Council Redistricting Plan ACTION CALENDAR November 15, 2011

Page 11

2010 Equal Dist. Pop. 2010 Actual Dist. Pop. Deviation

District 1 14,073 13,080 (993)

District 2 14,073 13,381 (692)

District 3 14,073 13,024 (1,049)

District 4 14,073 15,605 1,532

District 5 14,073 12,709 (1,364)

District 6 14,073 12,883 (1,190)

District 7 14,073 16,623 2,550

District 8 14,073 15,275 1,202

In 2001, the City sought a correction from the Census Bureau for undercounted blocks in the student housing area near campus. The Census Bureau made a small adjustment to the block assignments of some populations, but did not add to the total population count. For the 2010 count, the City performed extensive outreach in the student areas as well as the census tracks designated as “hard to count” by the Census Bureau and staff believes this resulted in a more accurate count.

POSSIBLE FUTURE ACTION The Council may provide direction with regards to the plans submitted by the public. If any amendments or alterations are requested, those changes will be reflected in the plan(s) submitted to Council at the second public hearing on January 17, 2012.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF POSSIBLE FUTURE ACTION None.

CONTACT PERSON Christine Daniel, Deputy City Manager, 981-7000 Mark Numainville, Deputy City Clerk, 981-6900

Attachments: 1: Redistricting Timeline 2: City Charter and State Redistricting Regulations 3: Opinion from Outside Council on Voting Rights Act Compliance 4: Map of current boundaries and 1986 boundaries 5: Plan A (MAPMINDs)

a) submittal form b) tract-block worksheet c) submitted proposal map-11x17 d) staff analysis map-11x17 e) marked up worksheet

6: Plan B (Alfred Twu) a) submittal form b) tract-block worksheet

Public Hearing #1: City Council Redistricting Plan ACTION CALENDAR November 15, 2011

Page 12

c) submitted proposal map-11x17 d) staff analysis map-11x17 e) marked up worksheet

7: Plan C (Bateman Neighborhood Association) a) submittal form b) tract-block worksheet c) submitted proposal map-11x17 d) marked up worksheet

8: Plan D (Eric Panzer #1) a) submittal form b) tract-block worksheet c) submitted proposal map-11x17 d) staff analysis map-11x17

9: Plan E (Eric Panzer #2) a) submittal form b) tract-block worksheet c) submitted proposal map-11x17 d) staff analysis map-11x17

10: Plan F (Berkeley Student District Campaign) a) submittal form b) tract-block worksheet c) submitted proposal map-11x17

11: Vincent Casalaina Plan a) submittal form b) tract-block worksheet c) submitted proposal map-11x17

12: Public Hearing Notice

REVISED - JULY 19, 2011 Attachment 1

Redistricting Timeline and Schedule of Public Hearings

MEETING DATE /

DEADLINE

AGENDA PACKET

DELIVERED

ACTION TAKEN

July 11, 2011 Complete packets of public hearing dates, timelines, process, maps and data available for the public at the City Clerk Department and available on the City’s website.

September 30, 2011 Last day for public or councilmembers to submit a redistricting proposal to the City Clerk. Proposals must be submitted in the format established by the City Council.

November 3, 2011 All redistricting proposals to be made available to the public through the City Clerk and published on the City’s website.

November 15, 2011 November 3, 2011 First Public Hearing by Council on proposals to adjust boundaries of a district. (EC 21620.1)

December 2, 2011 Technical corrections due from original submitters in response to staff analysis.

January 17, 2012 January 5, 2012 Second Public Hearing by Council on redistricting proposals. (EC 21620.1)

February 28, 2012 February 16, 2012 Final proposal in form of ordinance. Council adopts first reading of ordinance adopting new district boundaries. (Charter Art. V, Sec. 9)

March 6, 2012 February 23, 2012 Council adopts second reading of ordinance adopting new district boundaries (Charter Art. V, Sec. 9). Final ordinance will be provided to Registrar on April 1st - pending April 6 effective date.

April 1, 2012 Alameda County Registrar of Voters requires cities to

submit new boundary lines and maps for November

election.

June 1, 2012July 26, 2012

July 16, 2012August 10, 2012

November 6, 2012 Mayor, Council Districts 2, 3, 5, 6, Rent Board (4 seats), School Board (2 seats)

December 31, 2013 Statutory deadline for Council to adjust boundaries by ordinance. Districts shall be as nearly equal in population and be preserved to the extent possible to the Council districts as originally established. (Charter Art. V, Sec. 9)

Signatures In Lieu of Filing Fee Period for Nov. 2012 election

Candidate Filing Period for Nov. 6, 2012 election

City Charter and State Redistricting Regulations

Charter: Article V, Section 9. Election. The Mayor, Auditor and School Directors shall be elected at the general municipal election on a general ticket from the City at large.

The Councilmembers shall be elected at the general municipal election by districts. The Councilmembers shall be recalled by districts.

The City is hereby divided into eight Council districts as hereinafter set forth, and, commencing with the general municipal election in November, 1986 and continuing thereafter until new districts are established as hereinafter set forth, such districts shall be used for the election and recall of Councilmembers and for filling any vacancy in the office of Councilmember by appointment. If and when new districts are established, as hereinafter provided, such new districts shall be used for the aforesaid purposes; provided, however, that no change in the boundary or location of any district by redistricting as herein provided shall operate to abolish or terminate the term of office of any Councilmember for which such Councilmember was elected or appointed. The eight Council districts, as established herein, shall be bounded and described as follows:

FIRST COUNCIL DISTRICT shall comprise all of that portion of the City of Berkeley commencing on the point at the center of the intersection of University Avenue and Grant Street, thence northerly along the center line of Grant Street to the center of the intersection of Vine Street; thence westerly along the center line of Vine Street to the center of the intersection of Vine Street and Edith Street; thence northerly along the center line of Edith Street to the center of the intersection of Edith Street and Rose Street; thence westerly along the center line of Rose Street to the center of the intersection of Rose Street and Sacramento Street; thence northerly along the center line of Sacramento Street to the center of the intersection of Sacramento Street and Hopkins Street; thence easterly along the center line of Hopkins Street to the center of the intersection of Hopkins Street and Hopkins Court; thence westerly along the center line of Hopkins Court to the center of the intersection of Hopkins Court and Albina Avenue; thence northerly along the center line of Albina Avenue to the northern boundary line of the City of Berkeley; thence westerly along said northern boundary line to the western boundary line of the City of Berkeley in the San Francisco Bay; thence southerly along said western boundary line to where it intersects with a line which is a direct extension of the center line of University Avenue; thence easterly along said extension line and along the center line of University Avenue to the point of beginning.

SECOND COUNCIL DISTRICT shall comprise all of that portion of the City of Berkeley commencing on the point on the western boundary line of the City of Berkeley in the

San Francisco Bay where an extension of the center line of University Avenue would intersect said western boundary line; thence southerly along said western boundary line to the southern boundary line of the City of Berkeley; thence easterly along said southern boundary line to the intersection of said southern boundary line and the center line of California Street; thence northerly along the center line of California Street to the center of the intersection of California Street and Ashby Avenue; thence westerly along the center line of Ashby Avenue to the center of the intersection of Ashby Avenue and Sacramento Street; thence northerly along the center line of Sacramento Street to the center of the intersection of Sacramento Street and University Avenue; thence westerly along the center line of University Avenue, and along an extension of said center line, to the point of beginning.

THIRD COUNCIL DISTRICT shall comprise all of that portion of the City of Berkeley commencing on the point where the southern boundary line of the City of Berkeley intersects the center line of California Street; thence easterly along said southern boundary line to the intersection of said southern boundary line and the center line of Deakin Street; thence northerly along the center line of Deakin Street to the center of the intersection of Deakin Street and Ashby Avenue; thence easterly along the center line of Ashby Avenue to the center of the intersection of Ashby Avenue and Ellsworth Street; thence northerly along the center line of Ellsworth Street to the center of the intersection of Ellsworth Street and Dwight Way; thence westerly along the center line of Dwight Way to the center of the intersection of Dwight Way and Sacramento Street; thence southerly along the center line of Sacramento Street to the center of the intersection of Sacramento Street and Ashby Avenue; thence easterly along the center line of Ashby Avenue to the center of the intersection of Ashby Avenue and California Street; thence southerly along the center line of California Street to the point of beginning.

FOURTH COUNCIL DISTRICT shall comprise all of that portion of the City of Berkeley commencing on the point at the center of the intersection of Ellsworth Street and Dwight Way; thence northerly along the center line of Ellsworth Street to the center of the intersection of Ellsworth Street and Channing Way; thence westerly along the center line of Channing Way to the center of the intersection of Channing Way and Fulton Street; thence northerly along the center line of Fulton Street to where it becomes Oxford Street and continuing along the center line of Oxford Street to the center of the intersection of Oxford Street and Hearst Avenue; thence easterly along the center line of Hearst Avenue to the center of the intersection of Hearst Avenue, Arch Street and Le Conte Avenue; thence northerly along the center line of Arch Street to the center of Arch Street and Cedar Street; thence westerly along the center line of Cedar Street to the center of the intersection of Cedar Street and Spruce Street; thence northerly along the center line of Spruce Street to the center of the intersection of Spruce Street and

Vine Street; thence westerly along the center line of Vine Street to the center of the intersection of Vine Street and Martin Luther King Jr. Way; thence southerly along the center line of Martin Luther King Jr. Way to the intersection of Martin Luther King Jr. Way and Cedar Street; thence westerly along the center line of Cedar Street to the center of the intersection of Cedar Street and Grant Street; thence southerly along the center line of Grant Street to the center of the intersection of Grant Street and University Avenue; thence westerly along the center line of University Avenue to the center of the intersection of University Avenue and Sacramento Street; thence southerly along the center line of Sacramento Street to the intersection of Sacramento Street and Dwight Way, thence easterly along the center line of Dwight Way to the point of beginning.

FIFTH COUNCIL DISTRICT shall comprise all of that portion of the City of Berkeley commencing on the point at the center of the intersection of Spruce Street and Vine Street; thence northerly along the center line of Spruce Street to the center of the intersection of Spruce Street and Grizzly Peak Blvd; thence northerly along the center line of Grizzly Peak Blvd. to the northern boundary line of the City of Berkeley; thence westerly and thence southerly along said northern boundary line to the intersection of said boundary line with the center line of Albina Avenue; thence southerly along the center line of Albina Avenue to the center of the intersection of Albina Avenue and Hopkins Court; thence easterly along the center line of Hopkins Court to the center of the intersection of Hopkins Court and Hopkins Street; thence westerly along the center line of Hopkins Street to the center of the intersection of Hopkins Street and Sacramento Street; thence southerly along the center line of Sacramento Street to the center of the intersection of Sacramento Street and Rose Street; thence easterly along the center line of Rose Street to the center of the intersection of Rose Street and Edith Street; thence southerly along the center line of Edith Street to the center of the intersection of Edith Street and Vine Street; thence easterly along the center line of Vine Street to the center of the intersection of Vine Street and Grant Street; thence southerly along the center of Grant Street to the center of the intersection of Grant Street and Cedar Street; thence easterly along the center line of Cedar Street to the center of the intersection of Cedar Street and Martin Luther King Jr. Way; thence northerly along the center line of Martin Luther King Jr. Way to the center of the intersection of Martin Luther King Jr. Way and Vine Street; thence easterly along the center line of Vine Street to the point of beginning.

SIXTH COUNCIL DISTRICT shall comprise all of that portion of the City of Berkeley commencing on the point at the center of the intersection of Arch Street, Le Conte Avenue and Hearst Avenue; thence easterly along the center line of Hearst Avenue, and along a direct extension of the center line of Hearst Avenue, to the point where it intersects the boundary line of the campus of the University of California, which boundary line is also the boundary line of federal census tract number 4226, thence

northerly, and thence easterly, along said boundary line to where it intersects the eastern boundary line of the City of Berkeley; thence northerly along said eastern boundary line to the intersection of said boundary line and the center line of Grizzly Peak Blvd.; thence southerly along the center line of Grizzly Peak Blvd. to the center of the intersection of Grizzly Peak Blvd. and Spruce Street; thence westerly and southerly along the center line of Spruce Street to the center of the intersection of Spruce Street and Cedar Street; thence easterly along the center line of Cedar Street to the center of the intersection of Cedar Street and Arch Street; thence southerly along the center line of Arch Street to the point of beginning.

SEVENTH COUNCIL DISTRICT shall comprise all that portion of the City of Berkeley commencing at the point on the southern boundary line of the City of Berkeley where it intersects the center line of Deakin Street; thence easterly along said southern boundary line to the intersection of said southern boundary line and the center line of College Avenue; thence northerly along the center line of College Avenue to the center of the intersection of College Avenue and Ashby Avenue; thence westerly along the center line of Ashby Avenue to the center of the intersection of Ashby Avenue and Benvenue Avenue; thence northerly along the centerline of Benvenue Avenue to the center of the intersection of Benvenue Avenue and Parker Street; thence easterly along the center line of Parker Street to the center of the intersection of Parker Street and College Avenue; thence northerly along the center line of College Avenue to the center of the intersection of College Avenue and Bancroft Way; thence easterly along the center line of Bancroft Way to the center of the intersection of Bancroft Way, Piedmont Avenue and Gayley Road; thence northerly along the center line of Gayley Road to the center of the intersection of Gayley Road and Hearst Avenue; thence westerly along the centerline of Hearst Avenue to the center of the intersection of Hearst Avenue and Oxford Street; thence southerly along the center line of Oxford Street to where it becomes Fulton Street and continuing southerly along the center line of Fulton Street to the center of the intersection of Fulton Street and Channing Way; thence easterly along the center line of Channing Way to the center of the intersection of Channing Way and Ellsworth Street; thence southerly along the center line of Ellsworth Street to the center of the intersection of Ellsworth Street and Ashby Avenue; thence westerly along the center line of Ashby Avenue to the center of the intersection of Ashby Avenue and Deakin Street; thence southerly along the center line of Deakin Street to the point of beginning.

EIGHTH COUNCIL DISTRICT shall comprise all of that portion of the City not otherwise described as constituting the First, Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Council Districts.

The Council shall, by ordinance, adjust if necessary the boundaries of the Council districts herein set forth by December 31st of the third year following the year in which each decennial federal census is taken, commencing with the 2010 census, as provided and required in the Constitution and statutes of the State of California and in order that the eight Council districts shall continue to be as nearly equal in population as may be according to said census. Any such redistricting shall preserve, to the extent possible, the Council districts originally established herein and shall become effective as of the next general election of Councilmembers immediately following the effective date of said ordinance.

Commencing with the general municipal election in November 1986, each Councilmember shall be elected by the electors within a Council district, must have resided in the District in which he or she is elected for a period of not less than thirty days immediately preceding the date he or she files a declaration of candidacy for the office of Councilmember, must continue to reside therein during his or her incumbency, and shall be removed from office upon ceasing to be such resident.

The candidate receiving the highest number of votes for the offices, respectively, of Mayor, Auditor and Councilmembers of the City shall be elected to such offices, provided that such candidate receives at least 40% of the votes cast for each such office. In the event that no candidate for Mayor, Auditor and Councilmember for one or more Council offices receives at least 40% of the votes cast for that office, then there shall be a runoff election between the two candidates receiving the most votes, which runoff election shall be held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in February of the odd numbered year following the initial election. No other issues shall appear on the ballot of any runoff election. The successful candidate in any runoff election shall assume office on March 1, after the election results have been declared by the Council.

Should any provision of the amendment of this section be held invalid, the remainder of the amendment shall not be affected thereby.

California Elections Code 21620. Members elected by district.

If the members of the governing body of a chartered city are nominated or elected "by districts" or "from districts," as defined in Section 34871 of the Government Code, upon the initial establishment thereof, the districts shall be as nearly equal in population as may be according to the latest federal decennial census or, if the city's charter so provides, according to the federal mid-decade census or the official census of the city, as provided for pursuant to Chapter 17 (commencing with Section 40200) of Part 2 of

Division 3 of Title 4 of the Government Code, as the case may be. After the initial establishment of the districts, the districts shall continue to be as nearly equal in population as may be according to the latest federal decennial census or, if authorized by the charter of the city, according to the federal mid-decade census. The districts shall comply with the applicable provisions of the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965, Section 1973 of Title 42 of the United States Code, as amended. In establishing the boundaries of the districts, the council may give consideration to the following factors: (1) topography, (2) geography, (3) cohesiveness, contiguity, integrity, and compactness of territory, and (4) community of interest of the districts.

21620.1 Public hearing on proposal to adjust boundaries.

The governing body shall hold at least one public hearing on any proposal to adjust the boundaries of a district prior to a public hearing at which the council votes to approve or defeat the proposal.

mnumainville

Typewritten Text

Attachment 3

1

2

65

87

3

4

SAN PABLO AV

4TH ST

GILMAN ST

DWIGHT WY

UNIVERSITY AV

ASHBY AV

MARIN AV

SPRU

CE S

T

COLL

EGE A

V

SACR

AMEN

TO S

T

ROSE ST

MART

IN LU

THER

KIN

G J W

Y

TELE

GRAP

H AV

SOLANO AV

ALCATRAZ AV

SHAT

TUCK

AV

BANCROFT WY

THE A

LAME

DA

ADEL

INE S

T

CLAREMONT AV

Current Council DistrictsCouncil District 1Council District 2Council District 3Council District 4Council District 5Council District 6Council District 7Council District 81986 Council Districts Boundaries

CurrentCouncil Districts

and Charter District

Boundaries

This map is for reference purposes only. Care was taken in the creation of this map, but it is provided "AS IS". Please contact the City of Berkeley to verify map information or to report any errors.February 4, 2011

Information Technology 2180 Milvia StreetBerkeley CA 94704

CITY OF BERKELEY

³0 2,000 4,0001,000 Feet

8

8

8

8

8

8

8

8

?

SAN PABLO AV

4TH ST

GILMAN ST

DWIGHT WY

UNIVERSITY AV

ASHBY AV

MARIN AV

SPRU

CE S

T

COLL

EGE A

V

SACR

AMEN

TO S

T

ROSE ST

MART

IN LU

THER

KIN

G J W

Y

TELE

GRAP

H AV

SOLANO AV

ALCATRAZ AV

SHAT

TUCK

AV

BANCROFT WY

THE ALAMEDA AD

ELIN

E ST

CLAREMONT A

V

MapMinds*Staff Analysis

2010 CensusRedistricting

³This map is for reference purposes only. Care was taken in the creation of this map, but it is provided "AS IS". Please contact the City of Berkeley to verify map information or to report any errors.

September 26, 2011Information Technology Department2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley CA 94704

CITY OF BERKELEY

Incumbent LocationsCandidate8 Council

? Mayor1986 Charter Districts Boundaries2010 Census Blocks*Council District 1Council District 2Council District 3Council District 4Council District 5Council District 6Council District 7Council District 8

0 3,0001,500Feet

*Maximum Participation Minumum Deviation Coalition

*Blocks corrected on the worksheet are outlined in blue.

Page 1 of 1 worksheet Exhibit I

Tract/Block Worksheet

Max. Participation Min. Deviation Coalition

____________________________

From To Population Tract Block From To Population Tract Block

8 6 827 4225 2005 5 1 94 4218 1012

8 7 188 4236.01 1001 5 1 68 4218 2008

8 7 148 4236.01 1012 5 1 115 4219 2000

8 7 116 4236.01 2001 5 1 116 4219 1000

7 6 158 4225 3008 5 1 75 4219 1018

7 6 38 4225 3011 5 1 0 4218 2003

7 6 108 4225 3013 5 1 0 4219 1021

7 6 149 4225 2006 5 1 0 4219 1016

7 6 384 4225 3010 5 1 0 4219 1017

7 6 161 4225 2003 4 1 245 4231 1000

7 4 333 4228 3010 4 1 173 4231 1014

7 3 311 4236.02 1003 4 1 66 4231 1016

7 3 273 4236.02 1004 4 2 0 4231 1001

7 3 205 4236.02 3009 4 2 0 4231 1015

7 3 83 4236.01 1016 4239.01 4 5 168 4217 3001

7 3 173 4236.01 1002 4239.01 4 5 119 4217 3002

7 3 155 4236.01 1001 4239.01 4 5 0 4224 1004

7 3 125 4236.01 1005 4239.01 4 5 0 4224 1003

7 3 142 4236.01 3010 4239.01 4 5 0 4224 1006

4 3 0 4235 1004 4 5 250 4224 1002

4 3 87 4235 1003 4 5 68 4224 1008

4 3 0 4235 1002 4 5 451 4224 1007

4 3 2 4235 1001 4 5 0 4224 1015

4 3 135 4235 1000 4 5 177 4224 1014

3 2 104 4240.01 1004 6 5 536 4224 1005

3 2 165 4249.01 1006 6 5 95 4224 1001

3 2 161 4240.01 2004

3 2 146 4240.01 3004 7 3 15 4239.02 2014

3 2 157 4240.01 3008 7 3 97 4239.02 2012

3 2 0 4240.01 1005 7 4 67 4228 3001

3 2 0 4240.01 2005 7 8 38 4239.02 1001

3 2 0 4240.01 3006 2 1 35 4232 1032 4220

3 2 0 4240.01 3007 2 1 5 4232 1030 4220

3 2 0 4240.01 Wool/Sac

District MovementDistrict Movement

This Form Must Accompany the Submital Form. You may make additional copies of the page. For any

discrepancy between the Tract/Block Worksheet and the Proposal Map, the Worksheet will prevail.

8

8

8

8

8

8

8

8

?

SAN PABLO AV

4TH ST

GILMAN ST

DWIGHT WY

UNIVERSITY AV

ASHBY AV

MARIN AV

SPRU

CE S

T

COLL

EGE A

V

SACR

AMEN

TO S

T

ROSE ST

MART

IN LU

THER

KIN

G J W

Y

TELE

GRAP

H AV

SOLANO AV

ALCATRAZ AV

SHAT

TUCK

AV

BANCROFT WY

THE ALAMEDA AD

ELIN

E ST

CLAREMONT A

V

Alfred TwuStaff Analysis

2010 CensusRedistricting

³

This map is for reference purposes only. Care was taken in the creation of this map, but it is provided "AS IS". Please contact the City of Berkeley to verify map information or to report any errors.

September 26, 2011Information Technology Department2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley CA 94704

CITY OF BERKELEY

Incumbent LocationsCandidate8 Council

? Mayor1986 Charter Districts Boundaries2010 Census BlocksCouncil District 1Council District 2Council District 3Council District 4Council District 5Council District 6Council District 7Council District 8

0 3,0001,500Feet

*Blocks corrected on the worksheet are outlined in blue.

Page 1 of 2 Exhibit I

Tract/Block Worksheet

Submitter's Name:

Alfred Twu

_____________________________

From To Population Tract Block From To Population Tract Block

2 1 249 4231 1002 4 5 100 4218 1010

2 1 34 4231 1003 4 5 193 4217 3006

2 1 0 4231 1004 4 5 184 4217 3007

2 1 158 4231 1005 4 5 0 4217 3008

4 1 245 4231 1000 4 5 145 4223 1000

4 1 0 4231 1001 4 5 119 4223 1001

4 1 0 4231 1015 4 5 153 4223 2000

5 1 116 4219 1000 4 5 245 4223 2009

5 1 0 4219 1016 7 6 0 4225 2002

5 1 0 4219 1017 7 6 161 4225 2003

5 1 75 4219 1018 7 6 149 4225 2006

5 1 0 4219 1021 7 6 158 4225 3008

5 1 115 4219 2000 7 6 384 4225 3010

5 1 94 4218 1012 7 6 38 4225 3011

5 1 68 4218 2008 7 6 108 4225 3013

5 1 0 4218 2009 8 6 827 4225 2005

5 1 0 4218 2011 8 7 808 4236.02 2000

3 2 104 4240.01 1004 8 7 188 4236.01 1001

3 2 0 4240.01 1005 8 7 148 4236.01 1012

3 2 165 4240.01 1006 8 7 116 4236.01 2001

3 2 161 4240.01 2004 8 7 0 4239.02 1003

3 2 0 4240.01 2005 7 8 38 4239.02 1001

3 2 146 4240.01 3004 7 8 36 4239.02 1002

3 2 0 4240.01 3005 7 8 19 4239.02 1005

3 2 0 4240.01 3006 7 8 53 4239.02 1006

3 2 0 4240.01 3007 7 8 120 4239.02 1007

3 2 157 4240.01 3008 7 8 137 4239.02 1008

4 2 173 4231 1014 7 8 145 4239.02 1009

4 2 66 4231 1016 7 8 130 4239.02 1010

4 2 76 4230 3006 7 8 15 4239.02 1011

4 2 99 4230 3013 7 8 12 4239.02 1012

4 3 135 4235 1000 7 8 15 4239.02 1013

4 3 2 4235 1001 7 8 0 4239.02 1014

4 3 0 4235 1002 7 8 2 4239.02 1015

4 3 87 4235 1003 7 8 0 4238 3016

4 3 0 4235 1004 7 8 0 4238 3017

4 3 0 4235 1005 7 8 0 4238 3018

District MovementDistrict Movement

This Form Must Accompany the Submital Form. You may make additional copies of the page. For any

discrepancy between the Tract/Block Worksheet and the Proposal Map, the Worksheet will prevail.

Page 2 of 2 Exhibit I

Tract/Block Worksheet

Submitter's Name:

Alfred Twu

_____________________________

From To Population Tract Block From To Population Tract Block

District MovementDistrict Movement

7 3 311 4236.02 1003 7 8 0 4238 3019

7 3 273 4236.02 1004 7 8 0 4238 3025

7 3 205 4236.02 3009

7 3 142 4236.02 3010 On Proposal Map

7 3 155 4239.01 1001 4 5 176 4224 3001

7 3 173 4239.01 1002 4 5 162 4224 3002

7 3 125 4239.01 1005 4 5 191 4224 3005

7 3 83 4239.01 1016 4 5 259 4224 3010

1 4 111 4223 2010 7 8 79 4239.02 2017

5 4 95 4224 1001 6 7 8 11 4239.02 2018

5 4 536 4224 1005 6 7 8 11 4239.02 2019

5 4 0 4226 1026 7

7 4 333 4228 3010

This Form Must Accompany the Submital Form. You may make additional copies of the page. For any

discrepancy between the Tract/Block Worksheet and the Proposal Map, the Worksheet will prevail.

Page_______ of _______ Exhibit I

Tract/Block Worksheet

Submitter's Name:

_____________________________

From To Population Tract Block From To Population Tract Block

7 3 173 4239.01 1002 5 1 94 4218 1012

7 3 155 4239.01 1001 5 1 115 4219 2000

7 3 125 4239.01 1005 5 1 116 4219 1000

7 3 83 4239.01 1016 5 1 75 4219 1018

7 3 141 4239.02 2006 7 8 26 4239.02 2002

7 3 99 4239.02 2010 7 8 38 4239.02 2008

7 3 97 4239.02 2012 7 8 113 4239.02 2016

7 3 64 4239.02 2011 7 8 21 4239.02 2020

7 3 311 4236.02 1003 7 8 115 4239.02 2009

7 3 273 4236.02 1004 7 8 79 4239.02 2017

7 3 205 4236.02 3009 7 8 11 4239.02 2019

7 3 142 4236.02 3010 7 8 11 4239.02 2018

7 4 333 4228 3010 7 8 19 4239.02 1005

7 6 158 4225 3008 7 8 36 4239.02 1002

7 6 38 4225 3011 7 8 38 4239.02 1001

7 6 108 4225 3013 7 8 53 4239.02 1006

7 6 149 4225 2006 7 8 15 4239.02 1013

7 6 384 4225 2010 3010 7 8 12 4239.02 1012

7 6 161 4225 2003 7 8 15 4239.02 1011

8 7 188 4236.01 1001 7 8 120 4239.02 1007

8 7 148 4236.01 1012 7 8 137 4239.02 1008

8 7 116 4236.01 2001 7 8 145 4239.02 1009

8 7 808 4236.02 2000 7 8 130 4239.02 1010

8 7 199 4236.02 3000 4 3 0 4235 1004

8 6 827 4225 2005 4 3 87 4235 1003

4 1 239 4230 1001 4 3 2 4235 1001

4 1 33 4230 1002 4 3 135 4235 1000

4 1 76 4230 1003 4 7 84 4229 3002 4228

4 1 91 4230 1011 4 7 387 4229 3006 4228

4 1 0 4230 1004 4 5 119 4223 1001

4 1 81 4230 1005 4 5 145 4223 1000

4 1 245 4231 1000 4 5 162 4224 3002

4 1 0 4231 1001 4 5 176 4224 3001

4 1 0 4231 1015 4 5 184 4217 3007

4 2 109 4230 1008 4 5 193 4217 3006

4 2 121 4230 3003 4 5 39 4217 3004

District Movement District Movement

This Form Must Accompany the Submital Form. You may make additional copies of the page. For any

discrepancy between the Tract/Block Worksheet and the Proposal Map, the Worksheet will prevail.

Page_______ of _______ Exhibit I

Tract/Block Worksheet

Submitter's Name:

_____________________________

From To Population Tract Block From To Population Tract Block

District Movement District Movement

4 2 76 4230 3006 4 5 119 4217 3002

4 2 99 4230 3013 4 5 168 4217 3001

4 2 173 4231 1014 4 5 100 4218 1010

4 2 66 4234 1016 6 5 229 4217 3000

1 5 139 4218 2010 6 4 536 4224 1005

On Proposal Map

1 4 111 4223 2010

3 4 138 4234 1000

3 4 126 4234 1001

3 4 143 4234 1002

3 4 133 4234 1003

7 8 0 4239.02 2001

This Form Must Accompany the Submital Form. You may make additional copies of the page. For any

discrepancy between the Tract/Block Worksheet and the Proposal Map, the Worksheet will prevail.

8

8

8

8

8

8

8

8

?

SAN PABLO AV

4TH ST

GILMAN ST

DWIGHT WY

UNIVERSITY AV

ASHBY AV

MARIN AV

SPRU

CE S

T

COLL

EGE A

V

SACR

AMEN

TO S

T

ROSE ST

MART

IN LU

THER

KIN

G J W

Y

TELE

GRAP

H AV

SOLANO AV

ALCATRAZ AV

SHAT

TUCK

AV

BANCROFT WY

THE ALAMEDA AD

ELIN

E ST

CLAREMONT A

V

Eric Panzer #1Staff Analysis

2010 CensusRedistricting

³This map is for reference purposes only. Care was taken in the creation of this map, but it is provided "AS IS". Please contact the City of Berkeley to verify map information or to report any errors.

October 5, 2011Information Technology Department2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley CA 94704

CITY OF BERKELEY

Incumbent Locations

8 Council? Mayor

1986 Charter Districts Boundaries2010 Census BlocksCouncil District 1Council District 2Council District 3Council District 4Council District 5Council District 6Council District 7Council District 8

0 3,0001,500Feet

8

8

8

8

8

8

8

8

?

SAN PABLO AV

4TH ST

GILMAN ST

DWIGHT WY

UNIVERSITY AV

ASHBY AV

MARIN AV

SPRU

CE S

T

COLL

EGE A

V

SACR

AMEN

TO S

T

ROSE ST

MART

IN LU

THER

KIN

G J W

Y

TELE

GRAP

H AV

SOLANO AV

ALCATRAZ AV

SHAT

TUCK

AV

BANCROFT WY

THE ALAMEDA AD

ELIN

E ST

CLAREMONT A

V

Eric Panzer #2Staff Analysis

2010 CensusRedistricting

³This map is for reference purposes only. Care was taken in the creation of this map, but it is provided "AS IS". Please contact the City of Berkeley to verify map information or to report any errors.

October 5, 2011Information Technology Department2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley CA 94704

CITY OF BERKELEY

Incumbent Locations

8 Council? Mayor

1986 Charter Districts Boundaries2010 Census BlocksCouncil District 1Council District 2Council District 3Council District 4Council District 5Council District 6Council District 7Council District 8

0 3,0001,500Feet

ALL PROPOSALS MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY CLERK DEPARTMENT BY 5:00 PM, SEPTEMBER 30, 2011

Date of Submittal:

Name of Organization: First Name: Last Name: Address:_______________________________ City:_______________ St: _______ Zip: ___________ Day Phone: (______) _______-__________ Evening Phone: (______) _______-___________ Fax: (______) ______-_________ E-mail: ______________________________________________ Other interested parties/contacts: Name Day Phone Eve Phone Email

Use additional page if necessary

YOU MUST SUBMIT THE TRACT/BLOCK WORKSHEET AND PROPOSAL MAP WITH THIS SUBMITTAL FORM

Note: For any discrepancy between the Tract/Block Worksheet and the Proposal Map, the Worksheet will prevail. Additional Information To Support or Describe Your Redistricting Plan (not required):

You may wish to submit additional pages as background or clarification documentation for your plan.

Proposal for Redistricting 2010 Submittal Form

Individual Organization

Exhibit H Submittal Form REVISED

JULY 19, 2011

 

 

 

 

 

 

                     X  

 

 

 

         Vincent             Casalina  

    2619  Benvenue  Ave.  apt.  A     Berkeley     CA     94704  

           510            504                  2605                                        510              504-­‐2605            

            ProBerk@aol.com  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Berkeley  is  made  up  of  many  distinct  neighborhoods.    I  believe  it  is  possible  to  keep      those  neighborhoods  intact  by  using  the  major  arterials  that  cross  the  city  as  the  primary  dividing  lines  to  Council  Districts.      This  is    redistricting  plan  is  called  the  neighborhood  preservations  plan.    

10/3/11 9:16 PMredistricting proposal

Page 1 of 3http://mail.aol.com/34166-111/aol-6/en-us/mail/PrintMessage.aspx

From: Vincent Casalaina <proberk@aol.com>To: mayor <mayor@CityofBerkeley.info>; lmaio <lmaio@CityofBerkeley.info>; dmoore <dmoore@CityofBerkeley.info>;

manderson <manderson@CityofBerkeley.info>; jarreguin <jarreguin@CityofBerkeley.info>; lcapitelli<lcapitelli@CityofBerkeley.info>; swengraf <swengraf@CityofBerkeley.info>; kworthington<kworthington@CityofBerkeley.info>; gwozniak <gwozniak@CityofBerkeley.info>; clerk <clerk@cityofberkeley.info>

Subject: redistricting proposalDate: Mon, Oct 3, 2011 9:10 pm

Attachments: Proposal_Map.jpg (9197K), Proposal_Map_blocks_moving.jpg (2394K), Exhibit_I_-_Tract-Block_Worksheet.xls(313K), Submittal_Form.pdf (114K)

I'm sorry to say that my day job kept me from spending enough time to finish myredistricting proposal before the deadline last Friday. I finished it up today and wantedto send it on for you to look at and consider even if it does not get the full treatment thatthe other proposals that made the deadline will receive.I started with the premise that there needed to be some major shifts in district lines inthis effort to redistrict the city because of the intense development in District 7 andDistrict 4. Large swaths of those district needed to move to other districts and thequestion was how to decide on a city wide basis what the rationale would be for thechanges. My basic concern in redistricting is the preservation of neighborhoods within Councildistricts. It's relatively easy to find communities of interest in Berkeley and to see howthey usually came into being around a particular problem be it land use, violence, or ashopping area that the community uses. When such areas are split amongst severalCouncil districts that leaves neighbors unable to coordinate their efforts to electcandidates that support their particular interests.Starting with that premise and the idea that major arterials often define the boundariesof those communities of interest, I worked on a plan that would keep as manyneighborhoods whole as possible and would include almost no strange bumps andtwists.If you look at my proposal map, you can see that the most major shifts were to includethe Northside student housing that had been in D7 and D8 into D6. To balance that, a large section of D6 moved to D5 (everything North of Marin and Westof Grisley peak- using the arterials as the dividing line). D8 also lost the East edge Willard to D7. To balance that D8 added the Bateman neighborhood (this is similar to the plansubmitted by the Bateman neighborhood in this regard). (bounded on the North by

10/3/11 9:16 PMredistricting proposal

Page 2 of 3http://mail.aol.com/34166-111/aol-6/en-us/mail/PrintMessage.aspx

Ashby, the East By College, the South by the Oakland Border and the West byTelegraph.D7 also gained most of the West edge of LeConte down to Shattuck from D3.To balance that D3 added the Halcyon neighborhood.D7 needed to shed more residents and they were shifted to D4.D4 needed to lose residents and gave up most of the south end of its district to D3.D4 also gave up residents to D1, 2 and 5. I've included a proposed map that includes just the blocks that moved from one districtto another. You can see that they represent only a small proportion of the total blocks inthe City and almost all the blocks are adjacent to major arterials.Finally my track worksheet shows that the average deviation for my plan is .06% withthe largest variation being 100 residents.I hope this plan will help you envision a City where neighborhoods are kept whole andthe entire City can move forward together. Thanks for your consideration, Vincent CasalainaPS I have a copy of my proposal map as a photoshop document that has a layer foreach of the blocks moving from one Council district to another. I'd be happy to send thatalong to anyone who'd like it. It's a big file so I didn't include it here. 2 Attached Images

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING

CITY OF BERKELEY CITY COUNCIL REDISTRICTING

Notice is hereby given that on Tuesday, November 15, 2011 at 7:00 P.M. the City Council will hold a public hearing on the redrawing City Council district boundaries based on the 2010 census figures. The Berkeley City Council will conduct public hearings on November 15, 2011 and January 17, 2012 to review any and all redistricting proposals submitted. The meeting will be held in council chambers at 2134 Martin Luther King Jr. Way. Redistricting proposals were required to be submitted to the City Clerk no later than September 30, 2011. Copies of these proposals are available in the City Clerk Department at 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA and posted to the City’s website at www.cityofberkeley.info/redistricting. Written comments should be mailed or delivered directly to the City Clerk, 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704, in order to ensure delivery to all Councilmembers and inclusion in the agenda packet. Comments received no later than 5pm Monday, October 31, 2011 will be included in Council agenda packets. Comments received thereafter will be submitted to Council as supplemental communications at the meeting. Communications to the Berkeley City Council are public record and will become part of the City’s electronic records, which are accessible through the City’s website. Please note: e-mail addresses, names, addresses, and other contact information are not required, but if included in any communication to the City Council, will become part of the public record. If you do not want your e-mail address or any other contact information to be made public, you may deliver communications via U.S. Postal Service or in person to the City Clerk. If you do not want your contact information included in the public record, please do not include that information in your communication. Please contact the City Clerk at 981-6908 or clerk@cityofberkeley.info for further information. If you challenge the above in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Berkeley at, or prior to, the public hearing. Background information concerning this proposal will be available at the City Clerk Department and posted on the City of Berkeley webpage at least 10 days prior to the public hearing. For additional information regarding this issue, please contact Deanna Despain, City Clerk, 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704. Telephone: (510) 981-6900 Fax: (510) 981-6901 TDD: (510) 981-6903

Published: 11/4/11 – The Berkeley Voice ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I hereby certify that the Notice for this Public Hearing of the Berkeley City Council was posted at the display case located near the walkway in front of Council Chambers, 2134 Martin Luther King Jr. Way, as well as on the City’s website, on October 27, 2011.

Deanna Despain, CMC, City Clerk

Attachment 12