Read the December 6 meeting.

делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom

Thank you.

делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать

делать делать делать

! делать Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We'll be right back.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We'll be right back.

делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать делать

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom rom

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Recording in progress.

Mayor, the mayor, the mayor.

I'm not sure if it's my mic.

Let me go ahead and try that again. There, that sounds a lot better. So thank you.

Good evening, everybody. Let me go ahead and call this special open meeting of the Santa City Council meeting for December 6th, 2021 to order. Let me just go ahead and start with some preliminary remarks that we do for every meeting, that this meeting is taking place in person, attendance, and also by teleconference via Zoom, and the public can access the meeting by the Santa Ana YouTube channel or the city's website. So as usual, please bear with us as the technology may disrupt the flow of the meeting. I'm going to go ahead and turn it over to the clerk so she can conduct roll call of the city

council. Thank you, Mayor. Councilmember Becerra? Here. Councilmember Hernandez?

Councilmember Lopez? Here. Councilmember Mendoza? Here. Councilmember Fan? Here. Mayor

Potempeñalosa? Present. Mayor Sarmiento? Here. So I hope everybody had a good Thanksgiving. Welcome back. I hope everybody was safe and had a chance to relax and enjoy family. Seems like it's been a long time ago even though this is our first meeting back since then but but I want to make sure everybody did have a chance to know that we are going to be meeting tonight as a special meeting. We will be meeting again tomorrow night for the regularly scheduled meeting of the council. So with that, let me call on Council Member Mendoza, if she would, to lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance before we get started with our items tonight.

Council Member?

It will be my pleasure. Please stand.

Place your hand over your heart. For the military, people who have served in the armed forces,

David Penaloza

you may salute. Ready? Begin. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice

for all. Yeah, Councilmember, I don't think we'll have the invocation tomorrow night, though. Would

would. Thank you Lord for the opportunity to serve the public in honest ethical and transparent methods. Please guide us, guide the City Council in making the decisions that are going to be beneficial to the entire city. We We thank our staff who have worked very hard and earnestly in providing the necessary services so that we may do our jobs well. Thank you for the audience who has always participated and made some very lively comments

in guiding us as well in making the right decisions. And thank you for our police officers who keep us safe during these meetings. In your name we thank you. Amen.

Thank you for that, Councilmember. Let me go ahead and ask the clerk if we have any members of the public that wish to speak or have we received any written comments?

Thank you, Mayor. Yes, so the public may begin joining the speaker queue or they were able to as of 4.30 and to speak on the special open session items. For public hearing item two, I'm asking if you could please hold your comments until So the mayor holds the public hearing. We actually do not have anyone virtually. We did receive a written communication in support of item number one, which is the extending the Assembly Bill 361.

Great. Thank you for that. Let me go ahead and begin with that item that you referenced there, item number one, which is the business calendar considering approving the continued use of teleconferencing for meetings of the City Council, Boards, Committees, Commissions pursuant to Assembly Bill 361. I don't know if we need, do we need any background? I think there was some confusion earlier as emails were going back and forth what this meant. So the staff want to go ahead and clarify just for the record the intent and purpose of 361 and us considering it tonight. Yes, so this is to adopt

the resolution for council members to be able to participate virtually by way of teleconference without having to place their location of where they're going to be virtually and not having to post an agenda at that location. So this is really strictly for the Brown Act rules of not having to post the address on the agenda and also posting the agenda at

that location. Great, thank you Madam Clerk, thank you for that clarification. I know that we had received some comments by email from some members of the public that thought that we were going to be limiting their access to engage with the City Council virtually and this is really more specific to the Council, the boards, committees and commissions. So hopefully that is clear unless there are any questions from members of the Council. No, but I'll move to approve. We have a motion by Councilmember Fan. Is there a second? I'll second. Okay let's go ahead and we'll give it to

we'll give it to I think Councilmember Lopez beat you, Councilmember Hernandez, so we'll give Councilmember Lopez the second. We can rock paper. All right we have a motion and a second.

Madam Clerk please call roll. The votes are open if Council would like to provide their votes or cast their votes.

you know so i think i'm having trouble with my device i don't see anything on on my screens so

Johnathan Ryan HernandezItem 1

am i um madam city please please have me as a yes okay i'll just go ahead and do roll call vote

councilmember becerra yes councilmember hernandez yes councilmember lopez yes councilmember mendoza yes councilmember fan yes mayor putempeñalosa yes mayor sarmiento yes so that brings us to the

really the purpose of tonight's meeting, which is a public hearing. Let me go ahead and turn it over to the clerk before I open the public hearing to make some comments to members of the public that are present here in person and also may be joining us online or by phone.

Thank you, Mayor. Members of the public joining us by way of Zoom or conference call would like to make a comment for public hearing item two. Please dial star nine now from your phone or select raise hand from Zoom. Thank you, Mayor.

Great, thank you. So this is the public hearing. This is actually our fourth public hearing regarding redistricting ward boundaries. So we've done this before. We'll probably have another opportunity to do it again and have another public hearing. But these have been efforts to engage with the public, engage with the city council as we go through looking at redistricting the ward boundaries. So Madam Clerk, I do believe we have a presentation from staff and our consultant, correct?

Yes, that's correct. Thank you, Mayor. Before I hand this over to Sophia, who's here in person with redistricting partners, we do have Paul Mitchell with redistricting partners who wants to address the details of what will be presented to council tonight because there are some information that may be questioned and wanted to make sure that he addresses that.

Thank you very much. I presume you can hear me okay?

Yes, we can hear you.

Great. My name's Paul Mitchell. I'm the owner of Redistricting Partners. Sofia Garcia and our staff has been working with you and with your staff on this project. You might, if you were on the council last time, remember me being there in 2018, helping to devise the lines that we're now back to try to adjust based on the most recent census data. And it's a census data I wanna talk about just for a moment. The census data, as you might remember from last time, or as we've talked about in this redistricting, is essentially two different data sets. And oftentimes we talk about them without really distinguishing

that they come from two different sources. But it is important to note that the data is coming from different sources. I wanna explain one little subtlety to them that I think has raised some concerns. First off, the main census data set for redistricting is that data set for the equal population. That comes from the U.S. census and then the state adjusts it a tiny bit just to move prison population, to remove the prison population from the census blocks in which they're incarcerated and apply them to the census blocks where they were living prior to their incarceration. It's a part of a piece of creating better equity

in redistricting. And we're happy to address any questions about the prison population reallocation. The second data set is the data set that we use when we're talking about the composition of the district. This can be in a number of different ways. Most commonly the citizen voting age population, when we look at the ethnic composition of the districts, but also in the last redistricting, A lot of the ways which we devised how to draw the district was from renter and homeowner data, which is also from that same survey called the American Community Survey. That second data set is constructed differently than the decennial data set.

The decennial data set of how many people are aware every 10 years is a single point data set. It's counting every individual person and it's putting them in the census blocks based on those, on that decennial redistricting and the state adjustment. The data set from the American Community Survey, which includes the citizen voting age population, data on renters, other social economic factors, that is from a data set that includes average data.

It includes a five-year rolling average of data, and it essentially is derived from a survey where they survey 3.5% of U.S. households every year. And then every year, they slightly adjust that data just a tiny bit. And so if we were to look at the total population and see what we have today versus what we used before, we would see a 10 year gap in that data that that reflects growth and change in the city over 10 year period. Because in the last redistricting, we were using the 2010 data. Now we're using April 1st, 2020 data. When we're looking at the American Community Survey data, we're actually seeing a small

adjustment. So we did your last redistricting in 2018. we would have been using the 2013 to 2017 data for that redistricting. Now we're using the 2015 to 2019 data for the redistricting. So when we see that something is 32% Latino or 48% Latino or 38% Asian, that is an average and it includes a margin of error. It's a little bit of a squishy number. It isn't like meant to be as exact as the decennial census data is. That data was also adjusted for the prison population.

That adjustment for prison population was actually most recently changed just about a month ago, a month and a half ago. And when the state provided that data, we about a month ago or three weeks ago started switching to utilizing that other version of the citizen voting age population, which has two things different from the one that's provided by the census. One is it does adjust for the prison population. So if there are more people being applied into a group of census blocks, it is bringing with them their ethnicity and allowing that to count as a part of that total formula. The second thing has to do with the math.

The way that the state allocates this population to census blocks, the way that it looks when we add it all up, you might find that in the two different citizen voting age population calculations, that in one that we were using since February, a district was 41% Asian. And in another one that we've been using for the last month or so from the statewide database, it might be 38 or it might be 45. So there are these little differences in the citizen voting age population that I think some people have noticed because data that was being developed from our original data set has slightly different numbers

than the data being used by the statewide database and the data that's been put out by the state. Both of these data sets are correct. Neither of these data sets are wrong. They are simply different ways of calculating this data from the census and using these averages and building it into a way that we can use it for redistricting. So in most of our redistricting and in the statewide redistricting, they're using that statewide database calculation for the citizen voting age population. We have one city already that is using the original straight from the census citizen voting age population data in part

because two of the districts that are majority minority Latino districts in that city, when they utilize the new statewide database, the numbers fall just under lower than 50%. And so to not confuse the public about districts that they've been saying are majority minority districts, they chose to stick with the original data set that they've been using at the beginning of their redistricting process. So which data set you use is, I think we'd wanna make sure that your legal counsel is okay with it, but whichever data set you use for the citizen voting age population is probably fine.

But I just want to let you know to not be concerned if you see a district that in one data set from a map produced a few weeks ago has a slightly different number than a data set that's being produced today. It's not that one number's better or one number's worse. It's not that one's right or one's wrong. It's just that there are different methods that each of those databases are using to make those calculations. And I hope that by explaining this, I didn't add to anybody's confusion.

I just wanted to let you know the status of that data and answer any questions that might have come up from folks looking closely at this data and the maps.

Great. Thank you for that explanation, Paul. And I know you helped us redraw the maps in 2018, so it's good to know we have somebody that's familiar with our city. and familiar with them, you know, where we are with respect to the data back in 2018 and now. Madam Clerk, was there any additional presentation that was going to be made by staff if not so I can... Yes, there is.

We do have that prepared. Thank you so much, Paul, for joining us. I know Paul has to jump off here, but I wanted to make sure if any member of the council had any questions before he exited and then we can go ahead and go into... to the presentation.

Well, if we're going to ask any questions of Paul, I want to open the public hearing so it's part of the record. So why don't I go ahead and just do that now? And that way, in case anybody wants to ask anything of Paul before he has to exit off our meeting, I'll go ahead and do that. So let me go ahead and formally open the public hearing, both for in-person and virtual comments. And I'll go ahead and let me just bring it back to the council really quickly before we go to any public comments. Do we have any members of the public, Madam Clerk, that wish to speak to us?

We only have in person three of them.

Got it. Normally we do public comments always in advance of any comments from the council or any questions from the council. But we know, can Paul wait until we're done with the three comments from the public?

Paul, are you able to?

Yeah, that's fine. Sure.

Thank you.

All right, let's do that. Let's go ahead and go to the public comments.

Let me go ahead and start with Carl Benninger, Dale Helvig, Oscar Reyes.

I hope I have enough Michigan on.

There's no way to misinterpret where you're leaning.

Well, it was quite a weekend. I just want to top it off with the fact that my daughter-in-law went into labor Sunday morning at 5.30 a.m., and at 9.05 we had our first grandchild born. So it was a real good weekend for us. Congratulations. I hope everyone else had. My comments are very simple. One, being cognizant of the neighborhoods, over the years we've worked very hard on the south side to get our neighborhoods together. AND THERE HAVE BEEN SOME VERY DECENT PROPOSALS THAT SHOWS THE NORTH SIDE AND SOUTH SIDE TOGETHER. SO NEIGHBORHOODS CAN STAY TOGETHER AND KEEP MOVING FORWARD DEVELOPING TOGETHER.

AND ONE OF THE MAPS I JUST SAW WAS 90477. LOOKS VERY PROMISING. AND ALSO THE 877, I'M SORRY, 36. THESE TWO MAPS DRAWINGS DOES MEET ALL THE CRITERIA THAT HAS BEEN OUTLAID and allows these neighborhoods or these areas to stay together and also doesn't cut up many neighborhoods. I know one or two need to get divided, but just minimize those efforts. So please keep that in your thoughts as you're redistricting to keep our neighborhoods together. Thank you.

Thank you, Carl. Congratulations again. Dale Helwig, followed by Oscar Reyes.

Yeah, good evening. Hope everybody had a good Thanksgiving as well. Wanted to say that the District R website is very nice to use. It's very, very easy to use. And creating some of these maps has been challenging. And it's been challenging because it seems like the ones that District R or the redistricting partners has created has had to essentially adjust for multiple things, not only keeping the neighborhoods intact, which I hope we continue to do, but also to ensure that every council member still has a seat at the table

once the district boundaries are redrawn. That's a challenge, and it's reflected in the way that the maps are drawn out. So if we're trying to be transparent and everything, We ought to be making these redistricting lines fit for the city for the next 10 years, not for the council members for the next four years. So I hope we continue on with that. I understand that the area is 17th and Tustin, north of there. There is some issue with the census, and so that's not included. That was an issue I brought up at the last meeting. So understand that and it's only about 200 residents.

Not a bad thing. The other thing is east of the 55 freeway. 156 people are counted east of the 55 freeway. There's an apartment complex of 1,200 units there. I don't know why we're only getting 156 people out of that. I guess the apartment isn't occupied or not as popular as some people believed. I don't know. But I would have thought that there would have been a lot more people in there in it And if we're going by the census We also know that there's going to be growth in certain areas of the city So I'm hoping that that's taken into consideration to some extent

So if you see like a 9% deviation or whatever, you know, well, maybe they'll pick it up In three four years or something when those areas get developed and added on to so I I urge you guys to take a look at all the public comments that have been made. There's some good maps out there for them to utilize. There's some that are going to definitely get weeded out because they don't meet the basic criteria for everything. But the ones that stand the test of time, that meet the criteria, I'm hoping that the district partners can take a look at that and give more of an in-depth look at it because

Because the ones that are being proposed today, I'm not too enthused about them. But I do think there's some public maps out there that are worth looking into a little bit more detail. 90477 is one of them. There's a few other that Carl mentioned. And thank you very much.

Thank you for those comments. Next is Oscar Reyes, who's our last public comment for this evening.

GOOD EVENING MAYOR SARMIENTO MAYOR PRO TEM PEÑA LOZA COUNCIL MEMBER MENDOZA LOPEZ COUNCIL MEMBER FAN COUNCIL MEMBER VECERA MY NAME IS OSCAR RAYEZ I GREW UP HERE IN SAN ANDA CALIFORNIA AND AS I INFORM AND EDUCATE MYSELF AND JUST GET TO KNOW MY COMMUNITY WHERE I LIVE AND ELSEWHERE. I PROPOSED A MAP FOR THE REDISTRICTING OF THE WARDS TITLED SAN ANA GOALS 2021. I WROTE DOWN A COUPLE COMMENTS BECAUSE I PROBABLY WOULDN'T HAVE REMEMBERED ALL OF THEM.

SO THE FIRST COMMENT FOR SAN ANA GOALS 2021 IS THAT THE MAP REQUEST AND PROPOSAL is looking and aiming to create fair and equitable wards for all our Santa Ana residents, not necessarily for one specific person or corporation or organization, really for our people, our residents in Santa Ana. So I just want to make sure that I stated that before I get to the next point. So the map really respects the geographical areas of our city

AND UNITES COMMUNITIES OF INTEREST WHO SEEK TO BE KEPT TOGETHER WHICH I THINK IS VERY IMPORTANT FOR OUR COMMUNITY. ALSO THE NORTH AND THE NORTH SAN ANA NEIGHBORHOODS AND THE SOUTH COAST METRO NEIGHBORHOODS ARE UNITED IN ONE WARD. THE MIDDLE OF THE CITY NEIGHBORHOODS ARE MOSTLY UNITED WITH ONLY A COUPLE OF NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE SPLIT TO ACHIEVE POPULATION EQUITY. The map also goes along main streets in order to respect neighborhoods and neighborhood integrity

and avoiding to use residential streets as ward boundaries, which has happened in the past. The map is also legally compliant with our state and federal mandates, creating five Latino Section 2 Voting Rights Act districts. It also holds to the spirit of the California Voting Acts by creating a ward where Asians are the plurality of the voters based in West San Ana as well and keeps the Vietnamese community together. Also, the Sullivan Street Corridor is kept in the same ward as has been requested by a lot of our community members there.

And then also has the fewest neighborhood splits out of the majority of the district plans and maps that have been proposed and requested so far. So nearly only three out of the 70 neighborhood maps that have been proposed out of those wards have these few neighborhoods. I just hope you guys consider this map. It's titled Santa Ana Goals 2021. And again, it's meant to create equitable wards for the residents here in Santa Ana, California. Thank you.

Thank you for those comments. I think that was the last public comment for this evening. Let me go ahead and bring it back to the council if there are any questions that we have for Paul Mitchell, who is on the line. Let me start with the council member Pham.

Thai Viet PhanItem 2

Hi, Paul. Thanks for being here. It's not really a question. It's more of a comment regarding the data sets. So I fully understand that sometimes, you know, ACS, like you said, is a survey. I do think we should stick to whatever the data set is being used by a districter because that's the tool we use to promote to residents to draw maps online. They can look at it. They can create their own. So I think that would create some consistency between what they're creating and putting out there for residents as well as what you know we're looking at the information we have so I

Thai Viet PhanItem 2

guess my request moving forward whatever we do with the maps today is that we have the information that is consistent with district or online so I actually don't know what data set it is though

Thank you, Councilmember Phan. Any other questions for Paul?

Before we turn it...

Phil BacerraItem 2

Mayor?

Go ahead, Councilmember.

Phil BacerraItem 2

This is just more of a request. Kind of echo what Councilmember Phan brought up. I would like to see us use a data set that's consistent all across the board, from redistrictor to when the consultant is analyzing the maps as far as whether they achieve of being able to uphold the Federal Voting Rights Act and their standards. To me, we can talk about how certain data sets are close and that we shouldn't be worried, but to me, let's just put everything in Fahrenheit or let's put everything in Celsius. Let's not try to go back and forth between the two measuring.

Phil BacerraItem 2

Yes, we can say that both types of measurements will get us within a certain proximity, but I think that just to be fair and so nobody is confused, because this is a confusing process. So I think that it would just be easier and equitable to use one data set. And I think using the U.S. Census data that we see in Redistriter and the other tools that we're using for this process would probably be most appropriate.

Thank you for that comment. Any other comments for Paul before he disengages?

Okay, Paul, Council Member Hernandez, was that you?

Johnathan Ryan HernandezItem 2

Yeah, I was just going to say no comments on my end, Mr. Mayor.

Thank you. So if nobody has any other comments, and before we turn it over to Sophia so she can go ahead and go through the presentation. So Paul, you know, just a couple of questions. I know that you helped us redraw the maps in 2018 when we went from an at-large election system to a by-ward or by-district election. What data was used then?

So what was used then was the 2010 decennial census data because we were required to use the most recent decennial census data and the 2013-17 American Community Survey data. We didn't have prison population adjustment when we did the redistricting last time. The state hadn't actually implemented that yet. This is the first redistricting in which we're having a statewide prison population adjustment. And so we weren't utilizing this different data set for either the decennial census or the citizen voting age population. And to speak to the two council members who already spoke, we're fine with a decision to use the data set

that's already in Districtr and to keep it all kind of linear and straightforward for the public. And Sophia has actually already gone through all of our map submissions that we've received and all of the draft plans and redone those all into that same data set so you can have them all in one unified data set. And they won't be reflected necessarily in today's presentation because the slides weren't all changed in the PowerPoint, but we will provide those to the city so we can replace those and get them all in line in the same data set. I'm sorry about the confusion that happened about the census data.

We've been dealing with this issue ourselves in every jurisdiction where we're doing redistricting, given the fact that this data that the statewide database put out had slightly different numbers than the data we've been using since February. So I appreciate the understanding and we can get you updated data for your website, all those maps that are posted so that everything's all online.

Great. Thanks for that. And, you know, I do recall seeing some information that was presented to us saying, these aren't drastic deviations. In other words, the disparity between the CVAP numbers and data and the numbers from decennial don't seem to be all that drastic. But, yeah, just for consistency purposes, I think that, you know, we can stick with one source of data just to be clear, especially since we have this, you know, this adjustment for prison population that may affect one data set versus the other. But I didn't see that it was too drastic of a change. But I did want to speak to something you said.

So I know that you're dealing with other jurisdictions right now. What's the statute? I mean, are you dealing with statewide offices or maps or federal? And since you are the principal of the consultant that we've engaged, what's your timeline right now for some of the other jurisdictions? Are they on the same? I know our statutory deadline, I believe, is sometime in mid-April. What's the statutory deadline for some of the other county, state, and federal?

So we are working throughout California and a number of states on redistricting. They do have staggered kind of timelines, and that's how we're able to, I think, conduct, you know, with our relatively small staff, a lot of redistricting around the state and around the country. The statewide redistricting timeline is that they're going to be finishing up around the 23rd of December and having final statewide maps by the 27th. State or the counties and cities, any city that has primaries and all the counties are having their deadline December 15th, meaning that their maps have to be done.

And then we're going to be spending about the week or so after that getting all those files into the county for those. as we have about a dozen counties and probably eight or 10 cities that are on that December 15th deadline. Next up will be community colleges. We're doing redistricting for about 20 community college districts, and they have their deadline of February 28th. Then you and other cities that don't have primaries have a deadline of April 17th. And then that also will be the deadline for a number of special districts.

And then we'll probably have some stragglers going out till mid-June for agencies that are maybe special districts or other agencies that are just trying to meet the county registrar's deadlines that don't have some other specific state deadlines. So it is kind of paced out through 22. And then we will be hopefully taking a much deserved break after that.

Great. Thanks for telling us. I know when you did this in 2018, there wasn't nearly the volume of work, I think, that you are all dealing with. And not just your firm, but many others. And I know it was difficult to engage a firm when we were talking about this early on. So thank you, Paul. I think those are the only questions I had for you. And seeing no others, I guess I'll go ahead and turn it over to Sophia so she can start the presentation. Thank you very much. Thanks.

Thank you, Paul. Thank you, counsel. I'm going to share my screen.

Sophia, so if you're going to be having the mask on, if you could just bring that mic a little closer to you.

A little closer. Can you hear me better now? Okay, great. Are you guys able to see the presentation?

Oh, let's go closer. Okay. And I have a lot of different masks. I'll have to see which is the best to present in. Okay. Hi, everyone. Welcome. Good evening to council staff and the public. My name is Sofia Garcia. I am the GIS and Outreach Director with Redistricting Partners. Today, we are gonna be doing our second draft map hearing with the council. And again, it is a draft map hearing. These are not the final maps. So we are here to hear any additional amendments from council and to continue to hear from the public on any amendments that they would like.

So today we're gonna cover a number of things. We're gonna talk about the traditional redistricting principles. We do this at every time we present in case there's any members from the public or anyone here who is joining us for the first time. We'll talk about the public submissions that we received through a number of different avenues. We'll talk about the community of interest testimony. And then we're gonna get into the maps. We're first gonna review what the current lines look like and the deviations. Then we're gonna review the draft maps. And then finally, we'll talk about next steps.

So we have quite a bit to go through this evening. So thank you for being here. So the traditional redistricting principles, and Paul talked about the first one a little bit, which is the first criteria of creating relatively, districts of relatively equal size. Again, he talked a bit in depth about the specific data that we're utilizing. And again, when we are talking about redistricting and the census file, we're talking about people, not citizens. So we use that point in time file. So where folks were on April 1 of 2020 for the total population. And then we use that estimated population data

when we are looking specifically at our ethnic groups. Again, all of these principles are under the Fair Maps Act. They're the principles that we use for every redistricting. And again, it's in a ranked criteria order. so that first criteria holds a lot of weight for this process the second criteria is to create districts that are contiguous so not to half or jump over a ward if there were any unincorporated areas or islands that were a part of the city those would be an exception where we would maintain those as part of a district that was nearby maintaining communities of interest is a

really high criteria in the 2021 redistricting process, specifically because of that new law, the Fair Maps Act, otherwise known as AB 849 here in California. So it places a high criteria of looking at communities of interest, of looking at neighborhoods and trying to maintain those and split those as least amount of times as possible. We also look at other boundaries or other data. Again, Paul mentioned renter data, homeowner data. So the council can ask us to look at any additional data sets as we're going through this process.

The final criteria is to keep wards that are compact. And this can be in two different ways. One is in appearance. So districts that look like shapes that we're familiar with, that could be one definition of compactness. Another one could be in function. So functionally, does it make sense to have a geography of a specific area due to a highway due to other geographic boundaries. Again these are ranked criteria orders so we may see some wards that have quote unquote funny shapes but again the council and us we have to abide by state law federal law and again these criteria

and again the compactness is the lowest criteria on our list. Additionally we heard mention some things about incumbency. I wanna note that for a number of reasons, the 2021 cycle is a new cycle and is a new redistricting cycle across the board here in California for two reasons. One is the Fair Maps Act, which adds additional criteria for cities and counties to abide by. And again, that prison population data set that Paul talked about. And the Fair Maps Act, it has additional criteria that the city of Santa Ana must abide by. The first one or one of the many is to not consider

incumbency or candidates as we are drawing the ward lines. So we have worked with staff. We do not know where any of the incumbents live. We will not be plotting where the incumbents live as we go through this draft map process. That is not gonna be a consideration as we go through this process. Again, that is specifically stated in the Fair Maps Act. Wards also cannot be drawn to advantage or disadvantage a political party. The council must also hold a minimum set of hearings to encourage public engagement. And then they must have a specific redistricting website that will be held by the city for 10 years.

Again, these are some of the additional criteria as we move forward. So again, we heard, so we understand that members of the public, it's your right to come forward and give testimony to your council. However, it's the job of the council to abide by state in federal law as they're going through this process. So again, we will not be considering incumbency, candidacy, or to disadvantage or advantage of specific political party. As we move forward to talk about the specific draft maps, the process that we've gone through, we started with the community engagement, staff held a number of specific community hearings,

Daisy and her team continue to hold hearings. And so we, under the Fair Maps Act, we really place transparency and public input at the forefront of the process. The process is input driven from the community. And there's also its role driven due to the traditional criteria. And then also we're here to release those draft maps to the public for the engagement.

For public submissions, there's a number of different ways that we've received public submissions one of them that has been discussed already tonight is the use of distrctor which is an online mapping tool out of tufts university in massachusetts it's a tool that is being widely used here in the state of california for cities counties and community college districts to engage their specific districts for the redistricting process

We hosted six community workshops, where we also gave the distrctor tutorial at all of the workshops. We received 19 full citywide plans, three partial plans, and three community of interest submissions. This is as of December 2nd. So when we say full citywide plans, those are members of the public who drew plans that had six wards, excuse me. Partial plans are when the members of the public created wards that were not six wards, but maybe were one or two. And then community of interest submissions is the member of the public used the

district or community of interest mapping to draw a community of interest. And on those there, the public was able to add specific or additional comments or title their specific community of of interest. So that's how we have it broken down. So it was, so it's again, 19 full plans, three partial plans and three community of interest submissions. For each public submission on districtor. And again, we have converted all full and partial plans received by December 2nd to what we call our Atlas format. And as Paul mentioned, we re-ran tonight just before this meeting, all of the draft maps, all of the districtor plans,

and then the Viet Rise plans that we received from staff and we ran them all in the prison population data set. So again, it's not gonna be reflected here in the presentation, but Daisy already has that and is ready to send it to staff after this meeting. All of them have a cover page that is an outline of what the plans look like. They each have a data table, which has the population, deviation, ethnic population, the citizen voting age population data set. And that's the data set that we were talking about tonight, that we had those slight differences and changes.

And that's the data set that is residents or folks who are over the age of 18. Again, we're not talking about voters. We're not talking about voter registration. We're simply talking about folks who are over the age of 18 who are voting age. That is broken down by wards numbered one through six. The Atlas plan also has individual ward maps that have street level detail and data tables and charts so that all of them will have this Atlas format. Additionally, for community of interest maps, they also have a breakdown of those that were provided.

each public submission also has a web map which allows you to zoom in to street level and you can see more specific detail on the map I was talking with Daisy because we did get some asks from council to see if we can have additional overlays and because the software that we have is a redistricting software and is not the Esri suite that you as at the city may have a GIS staff we we are happy to work with the GIF staff to give them all of the shape files so that they can create a web mapping application, but we don't have the capacity or the software that we have isn't able to do that.

So that is something that we can work with staff because we did hear that uplifted with council comments. This is the zoom level of the web map that we provide. Again, you can see some street levels so you can look more closer at all of the Atlas pans and draft maps.

For public submissions, we broke down the district or submissions into themes. So we reviewed all 27 plans. So that's 25 district or plans that were submitted by December 2nd. And then again, there were two plans submitted by the organization VietRise. There were plan one and plan two, and we drew those in our internal software and created atlases for them. so that we could run the data. We've created these themes just by reviewing all of the maps. And some of the themes that we've seen are maps that are non-compliant. And they're non-compliant due to being non-contiguous. And then also having population imbalances,

which means their total plan deviation was over 10%. And a plan that is over 10% is not allowable for the council to pass as a final plan. There were also some maps that followed major streets, some maps that followed that were really compact,

a group of maps that had multiple central wards, a group of maps that followed McFadden and the Southern for their Southern wards. And then another group of maps that had major changes to the current plan. Again, we just, we decided to put these into buckets If the council would like us to uplift a specific plan, we're happy to do that, but we wanted the direction to modify a public plan to come from council. We're also gonna see that due to the amendments that council asked for redistricting partners to do last time, specifically to have a plurality Asian district,

and then also to have the Northern neighborhoods and Southern neighborhoods together. And we also saw a lot of public testimony about the Sullivan community. So with those four amendments, there's not as much adjustments that we can do if we wanna have all four of those be a part of the plan. And so we're gonna keep that in mind. And we'll talk about those as we go through the draft maps. But again, due to those four specific stones that we've been given direction for, there's a couple of movement, but we can do. But again, if we're gonna keep those four as amendments from the council, there's gonna be some small adjustments.

So we had three plans that we identified as being non-compliant. Again, these are due because they were non-contiguous and a plan had a total plan deviation that is over 10%. So when we talk about a total plan deviation, that is when we take the ward that is the least populated and the ward that is the most populated and we add the difference between the two. And the council, they have to have a plan that is under that 10% total plan deviation. And so we have the district or IDs on the right hand side for all the maps in their groupings. We had two maps that followed major streets

and we can see for the ward one here, it also doesn't have the construction that has an Asian plurality district. Due to the high Latino population, there's not a lot of construction that we can do to create an Asian plurality district. In fact, the one that is gonna be Asian plurality is gonna be a really similar construction to the current district that is Asian plurality. So again, if we're gonna think about modifying plans, we have to kind of keep in mind what are the council wants to move forward with and the amendments that you wanna continue to uplift. We had two maps that were compact,

that they focused on compactness. And again, we're gonna see one of these plans, which is 87836, which doesn't have that Asian plurality construction. The 76576 is a plan that we could potentially modify, we could modify to meet those amendments.

We have three plans. And again, as you go through districtor, there were a number of specific maps that had very similar constructions. So we had members of the public submit these three maps that we titled were multiple central wards had really similar construction.

We also had five maps submitted by the public that looked really similar as well. And we titled these themes as following McFadden for the Southern wards. And again, we're gonna see here that the construction of the Asian plurality district, we'd have to make major changes to this specific plan in order to meet the amendments that the council wanted to uplift last time. The following four didn't really have a theme together. So we grouped them as other major changes to current plans. Again, all of these district or plans we've ran atlases for. So those are the data tables and they have the ward specific breakdown.

And they're also on the city of Santa Ana website where members of the public can look at them more in depth. We also again created and drew these the Viet Rise maps internally. We've received them from DAISY and staff that were submitted by members of the public. And again, these also have the data tables attached. And just as a reminder to the council, again, if you would, as a council, like to uplift any of these maps and ask us to modify, we can do that. But just because of the number of the district or maps, and we wanted that direction to uplift and highlight a map or modify it to come from the council

we are working on completing a COI map report for you to make sure that we have the correct data table so we'll get that to staff and council later this week we also had 18 placemats that were submitted that are on the website and that have screenshots or images of the placemats of the 18 placemats, 16 of them highlighted what they self-titled as the Sullivan community. The other two, one highlighted Temple, McFadden and Minnie Street. And the other one was Cham, the speaking community. So we did look at the placemats as well

as we were drafting the maps. And the Sullivan community was also uplifted by the council last time. So that was another again stone that we looked at as we were constructing the new maps. There was also 31 community of interest comments that we've reviewed. And again, because it was such a large volume and such a different amount of testimony, those are online for the public and the council to review. But we did look at all 31 comments.

For council amendments during the November 15 meeting, redistricting partners received the following requests and amendments from the city council to create a ward that had an Asian plurality ward. And then to look at the following neighborhoods as we are constructing the new drafts. Two of the, or three of the neighborhoods that were uplifted by multiple of the council members was the Southern Neighborhood South Coast Alliance. and then also the the northern neighborhoods and as well the Sullivan community so again as we're

going through the draft maps of four of the major stones that we looked at was to create one Asian plurality ward to create a ward that kept the northern neighborhoods together to create a ward that kept the southern neighborhoods together and then to also create a ward that kept the Sullivan community together we also looked at all of the other or neighborhoods that are mentioned in the council amendments.

So we're gonna review the draft maps now. So we have an atlas that shows what the current lines look like. And again, as Paul mentioned, these lines were created and adopted in 2018 using the 2010 data set and the 2013 to 2017 ACS data. We have the data table breakdown of the current lines. And what we're gonna focus on here is the total plan deviation. And looking at the current lines using the 2020 data, the total plan deviation is 13.4%. So regardless of whatever final map is approved by this council,

there will need to be a slight adjustment due to the total plan deviation currently being over 10%.

For draft plans this evening, we have A, A2, D and E. We're not presenting draft maps B and C due to the council on November 15th, not uplifting those. And so we are not presenting those tonight. Those plans are still available on the website and in the presentation that we gave last time. So B and C, we still have the data there, but due to the council wanting to look at new maps and again wanting to have all the maps have the Asian plurality district, we're not presenting that this evening. But we can bring it back if council would like us to. So council members were provided a packet

with four consultant created plans that are based on traditional redistricting criteria, community of interest testimony, and amendments from the council. These maps were posted to the city website for the public prior to the draft map hearing. Wards are also lettered, not numbered throughout these draft plans. And this is a temporary structure that we use for identifying seats. As the final plan, the council will go through the sequencing formula, but in order to not confuse the public and to also not have it be seen if that the consultant is the one who are assigning what the final wards will look like,

we are going to do a lettering system for all of the draft maps. Each plan was also created with a less than 10% total plan deviation.

Draft plan A meets the traditional redistricting criteria and also achieves the following. It has a deviation of 8.5%. It creates four awards that are 50% Latino CVAP. and it also creates an Asian influence district, which is district A at 42.4%. And we're gonna see a really similar construction to district A in all of the plans. Again, due to the high Latino population and compact Asian population, in order to again meet that amendment from the council, we're gonna see a very similar construction of our ward A.

Plan A also uses the existing lines as a base and it adjusts for population growth and also follows major streets. So in this overlay I know it's a little difficult to see because of the pastel color but here the black lines are what the draft plan lines are and underneath the pastel color is where the adjustments are made and because it is a minimal change plan we're not going to see a lot of differences. Where the adjustments were made if we look at the southern portion of B and F,

we see a portion of what used to be a Ward F move into Ward B. We can also look at the northern portion of Ward F and we see a portion of what used to be Ward C into Ward F and so So that's what the overlay of the existing lines will look like. We also have an overlay of the neighborhoods. So we do to some of these neighborhoods being really small. Oh, we didn't title the overlay page, but when you have the atlases, there are specific ward breakdowns, and then you're gonna be able to see

what the neighborhood names are on those wards. And again, we're happy to work with your GIS staff at the city to give them the shape files to create a web application but just due to the the software that we use for redistricting we're not able to add or if we added more overlays it would just look really cluttered and difficult to read draft plan a2 also meets traditional redistricting criteria and achieves the following it has a deviation of 7.4 percent it creates four awards that are 50 2% Latino CVAP and has a Asian plurality ward in Ward A.

It uses draft plan A as a base, adjusts for population growth and follows major streets. We created draft plan A2 in order to strengthen slightly the Asian plurality district from draft plan A. So that is the major change that we're gonna see from A to A2.

In terms of neighborhoods, again, and it's just gonna be the color of the neighborhoods. And if you look at the data packet with the Atlas, you're gonna be able to see the names as you flip through the ward specific page. It moves the district A boundary to first and the Santa Ana river to South Harbor Boulevard and McFadden. It moves the district A boundary from Fairview to South Sullivan street and moves downtown from just ward E to ward D.

Draft plan D meets the traditional redistricting criteria and achieves the following. It has a deviation of 9.1%, creates four awards that are 50% Latino CVAC, and also creates an Asian plurality award in Ward A. We're gonna see some different deviations. And just because you have a plan that has a lower deviation versus a plan that has a higher deviation, that deviation number in itself doesn't necessarily mean that a plan is better or one is not as good. Again, as long as we're under that 10%, the council has some room to adjust. So we are going to see some different deviations, but

the deviation in itself doesn't necessarily mean it's a better plan. Here's the city overlay for draft plan D. And again, we're going to see this more of a of a difference from the current lines. So again, the black lines are what the draft plan D is and the colors underneath are what the current lines look like. Draft plan D follows neighborhood lines. It also keeps the northern neighborhoods together. So the northern neighborhoods of West Floral Park, Floral Park, Fisher Park, Morrison Eldridge Park, and Park Santiago together. And it keeps the southern neighborhoods together

as well of Sandpoint, Republic Homes, Metro Classic, Thornton Park and South Coast. Additionally, it keeps the Sullivan community together, also keeps the Henninger Park, Wilshire Square and Downtown together. So that's draft plan D. The final plan, draft plan E, has a deviation of 8.6%, creates four awards that are 50% plus Latino CBAP, and also has the Asian Plurality Ward and Ward A. Again, a very similar construction as we're going to see throughout all of the draft plans for our Ward A.

It meets traditional redistricting criteria and achieves the following. It follows neighborhood lines similar to draft plan D but with a different construction. This also keeps the Northern communities whole. Those communities are West Floral Park. floral park fisher park morrison eldridge park and park santiago it also keeps the southern communities whole which we have as sandpoint republic homes metro classic thornton park and south coast additionally it also keeps the sullivan community together and keeps the henninger park wilshire square and downtown together

So those are the draft plans that we have for consideration. But again, there are draft plans and are here and open to any amendments. So if there are changes to any plans, again, we're going to have to remember that there are going to be some trade-offs at this point, because we do have draft plans, any movement of award will result in another award having to be moved as well. So some of the changes we can look at are, if there's any changes that the council would like to see in terms of deviation. So if there's some plans to find a plan that we can lower the deviation, that's something we can look at.

If there's some plans where we want to swap what's in one ward for another ward, or if there's major changes that we want to see between any plans that would be called, what we call like a rotation, where we would have to move, make minor changes to every ward, which will make the draft plan look a little bit different. And additional amendments that we can talk about or that the council can give to redistricting partners, again, is to uplift any of the district based plans on districter, but again, if there's, or if there's an additional, what we call stones that the council would like us to look at,

as of now, the stones are major themes that we have throughout the plans is to again create an Asian plurality district to keep the northern neighborhoods together keep the southern neighborhoods together and also to keep the Sullivan community together so again if there's any change to those amendments that we were given last time that's the direction that we're looking for for this particular meeting and again if if there's any individual amendments, we can go back and look at those. If the council would also like us to do any live line drawing during any of the meetings, it's actually a little bit easier if we're at home

because then we can use our computers, or again, we can have someone virtually and then someone here in person. So that is an option as well. If the council would like us to do that in any of the future meetings. So again, what's next? So we're here to hear feedback from the council and the public on any future draft maps. And again, just as a reminder, the numbering will be done at the end of the process during the meeting. And as Paul mentioned, the deadline for the city of Santa Ana is April 17th. So you do have more room, whereas a lot of other cities and jurisdictions

will be having a deadline that is coming up. So I know that our Paul and folks on our end would potentially, if there's gonna be an additional meeting would prefer that it'd be sometime in January as we have other clients that are, have their final deadlines be in the next two weeks. So just to kind of keep that into consideration in terms of our time. And then also so that we can meet with your staff, your GIS staff, just to make any additional amendments and make sure that we're ready for the next hearing. So that's the end of the presentation and I can hand it back to the mayor.

Mayor Redekop, M.D.: Great. Thank you for that presentation, Sophia.

You know, I don't think we'll be making some comments. We won't be taking any final action tonight. Obviously this is one of several public hearings that we've had and that we will probably have in the future as well. So this is more for input from members of the public as well as members of the city council. So let me go ahead and-

Council member Hernandez has his hand.

Does he? Let me go ahead and call on him. Go ahead and council member Hernandez.

Johnathan Ryan HernandezItem 2

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And thank you to redistricting partners for your thorough presentation for bringing back a variety of different options. I just want to start by commenting that I am not supportive of math proposal D and math proposal E. I think it's important to keep the Articia Pilar at Santa Anita neighborhoods as close to each other as possible. They have very similar demographics and very similar challenges and they're separated by a bridge.

Johnathan Ryan HernandezItem 2

but most children that do live in the Santa Anita community or in the artisap community do attend school in garden grove unified school district. Some attend school in Santa Ana. So I think it would be most beneficial to keep those two neighborhoods together. I'm happy to see the efforts to keep the Sullivan neighborhood together. I think that that looks great. Thus far, I really liked the direction of map a. I think there's some improvements to be done with that map A2, but nonetheless those are two maps that I have that I think are starting to go the right direction and that would conclude my final

comments. Thank you, council member. Let me go ahead and see if there's anybody here. I see Councilmember Becerra. Go ahead, Councilmember. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I kind of feel like we're

Phil BacerraItem 2

at a loss tonight because of the issue in regards to the data sets. Another thing I'd want to to highlight for everybody is that in other neighboring jurisdictions, while the consultants have done a great job of putting all this together and setting this up to hopefully select a map at some point in the near future, a lot of times, and this is not going to be a shocker to anybody, the community knows the community. And a lot of the maps that are being submitted by the community, I think for me, are more attractive and actually achieve what we are trying to set out to do here.

Phil BacerraItem 2

So there are a couple maps that I saw, but I'm reluctant to start paring down because I think it's not fair tonight to not have the full analysis or as the consultant said, putting it into that Atlas format. So I feel like what I would like to see is in addition to the maps that the consultant has presented to us, I'd like to see all the community maps that have been submitted all assessed in the same data set so that we get a better idea as to what we're looking at. Because I'll just be so bold to say right now, I would be willing to bet that at some point we end up with a map that comes from the community

Phil BacerraItem 2

because, again, a lot of what I've seen coming out of the community maps look more reflective of keeping most of the neighborhoods together. I mean, some of the ones that I'm looking at, I mean, maybe split three neighborhoods at most, which is remarkable. And they achieve a lot of the things that myself and my colleagues have asked, whether it's the Asian Plurality Ward or keeping certain communities of interest together, like the neighborhoods on the north end or the neighborhoods on the south end. So at this point in time, I don't know if I'm really ready to pare down.

Phil BacerraItem 2

In fact, what I'd like to do is have these maps all come back to us at a meeting in the very near future, but with enough time for us on the council and the community to be able to look at it with the same data set applied across all of the maps, both consultant driven and community submitted. Thank you.

Thank you for those comments. Councilmember Phan.

Thai Viet PhanItem 2

Thank you, Mayor. So I do think we can cull the herd as we, you know, I guess my metaphor is kind of sad, but I think we can get rid of some of these maps that are clearly not compliant with the Fair Maps Act. So for example, the ones with awards looking like bars, right? I think those are ones we can clearly remove. I think that we can also, I guess, maybe find a way to list the ones that do comply. Well, because right now we have the atlas information for the communities of interest.

Thai Viet PhanItem 2

I don't really think that's necessary after this to say, oh, this is another map we have to look at. Because when I'm going through this list, I'm kind of, okay, that's a map, but this is a community of interest, and it's kind of hard to parse through. So I think maybe for the next set, we just look at maps that do comply with the Fair Maps Act, whether it's from the community or from our consultant with the Atlas information that uses all the same data set, whether it's, well, I actually do prefer whatever district is using, just because that's what our community submitted.

Thai Viet PhanItem 2

and that's what we've promoted so it's consistent I do also want to just point out that I understand while both the state data and the you know census data are minor in deviation we know the history here in Orange County and Santa Ana is that elections are very close and so the 200 people in that apartment building really matter and so I do think that is really important to recognize when we decide on a data set that it is consistent. The other thing I do want to

Thai Viet PhanItem 2

say is I guess when we're looking at the maps I'm really interested I do agree with having these communities of interest together and it's really important I think also to recognize that it's not going to be perfect. I think there's always going to be something that we can pick on that is that somebody's not gonna like but I think we're gonna have to do the best that we can especially I know in the Western you know Asian plurality district or whatever it's not going to be the most compact district we're ever gonna see because of the way that the community is set up but for example you know Morning

Thai Viet PhanItem 2

Sunwood is very Asian very Vietnamese and that is a big part of being a part the asian plurality district for the record i don't live in morning sunwood so in case anybody thought so um that will conclude my comments for right now thank you thank you council member uh

council member lopez and then mayor pro tem thank you mayor sarmento um well thank you for the

Jessie LopezItem 2

presentation it's very thorough um and i have a big powerpoint in front of me um yeah it's on

Jessie LopezItem 2

Is that better? Yes. I agree with County Member Fanny for the next time we can just see the maps that qualify. I don't need to necessarily see all of the maps that have been submitted. I'm really only interested in seeing what's going to qualify legally. And so I think that's going to be very important. And also using the consistent database. But I guess for me, I'm just not today. I don't think I'm ready to make a decision on a map that's being presented. Thank you.

Thank you. Councilmember, Mayor Pro Tem.

David PenalozaItem 2

Thank you, Mayor Sarmiento. I am very happy to announce that I agree with Councilmember Becerra, Fan, Lopez, and Hernandez of what's been said so far tonight with regards to these maps. definitely not to that I don't think map D&E really does what what what you know to keep majority of these these neighborhoods together but I also feel like we're doing a disservice to our city when we have these two different sets of data that we're working with so I would rather see these maps that do

David PenalozaItem 2

qualify come back to the Santa Ana City Council using the same data that our residents were using the last three months to draw their own maps which is redistrict or whatever it's called but that would be ideal for me to see so we could get a clear view of what all of these maps represent and I want to thank I think it's also unfortunate that only three residents spoke today. Thank you to you three. But those are my comments.

David PenalozaItem 2

I want to see that same data used across the board versus just both of them because that's just extremely confusing for everybody. So thank you. Great. Thanks for those comments. Councilmember Mendoza.

Thank you, Mayor Sarmiento. Thank you, Marco. Similarly to my colleagues, I agree that we need to look at the data that is similar for all the awards. And it is very confusing if we start changing or using different data for different maps. And so we need to select a map that's going to be equitable and transparent and has similar amounts of population for the entire city.

And so I agree that we need to move this to another time so that we can get data and maps that are more in alignment to something that is going to be equitable. because we're going to be using these district maps for another 10 years and so we need to ensure that what we have is going to be correct and that we don't discriminate as far as using data for one ward and different data for another ward.

So I am in agreement to having this continued to a later date so that we can get some true facts and true data for this very important decision.

Thank you for those comments. I think everybody had a chance to speak. So hopefully, Sophia, you can go ahead and gather what the Council is saying. I agree with bringing back now, narrowing it down by those maps that are compliant. I think our map in 2018, to the extent it was defensible when it was made, even though it drew from two different sources of data, to the extent that it was, it did achieve I think what the goal was, which was to create an API district. And eventually we did have somebody voted in from that district that represented the goal of what we wanted. I think that was important for us to do.

That was one to me probably the most important amendment or direction that we could give is to make sure that that isn't

Modified to the extent that we lose that plurality there. So to me that would probably be the most important Change the rest of it. I think is fluid right we want to you know see how this Evolves with more public input, but I do I do agree preliminarily with councilmember Hernandez's comments. I'm a little confused by the maps D and E. I think there's some ability to modify where we are with map A and iterations of that. But what I really did want to focus on was I think you had mentioned and I think Paul had referenced as well when he was speaking to us

just the amount and volume of work that you all have. And I know I think we have right now public hearings scheduled for the next meeting before the City Council on the 21st of the month that's going to be on a regularly scheduled you know time you know I don't know if we'll be able to do some of the things that you know we all spoke about which was drawing from one data set and narrowing everything down to that data set and having things consistent you know I again I think that a lot of people aren't paying attention on the 21st of December when the The election isn't until a year almost from that date.

So I'd like to have maybe some time for people to assess. But to the extent that you all are compressed for time because you have statutory deadlines that you have to meet for other clients, I'm not sure how much you're paying attention to this one because this is further out. But look, I just think even if we were to have a public hearing there, I think it just won't be as helpful as it would be to have folks that are able to focus in on this. I know I need some time to certainly see what's been submitted, talk with some of the groups.

And I think when we talk about communities of interest, I guess it's a term of art, we know, in redistricting. but can you remind us again sort of what I mean because that term gets thrown around and I just don't want it to be sort of boy I don't want to use the adjective I'm thinking of but distorted

right yes and I also want to but I think before I do that I wanted to address something that you said mayor about using two different data sets throughout the process we are going to use two different data sets regardless one to meet that first criteria of creating districts of relatively of the equal size is that point in time, 2020 decennial census data. So that has not been changed at all. The other data set they were talking about is the prison re-importionment data set, which is new as Paul mentioned for the 2021 cycle. And that is the one where we get more information about our people of your city. And that was the difference.

So the statewide database made some minor changes and did different math, but regardless, we're going to use the prison population data set when we look at the CVAP and then the decennial census file when we look at total population just so the public and so we're all on the same page. We will be using two but moving forward we'll just look at the prison reapportionment data set for the CVAP. So I wanted to mention that before we move forward. In terms of communities of interest

Thai Viet PhanItem 2

Go ahead. I think there's a question on yeah so I actually am a little confused now because Because with Districter, right, I don't think it uses the prison data set when looking at the CVAP information.

Districter, again, because it's out of Tufts University, it uses the 2020 data. And so we'll have to look back, and I'll talk to the data team, but it may not have the PPA data for you all on Districter. But we have the PPA data, which we're bound to use by state law. So there may be some slight discrepancies, but I'll get back to you on the data team. And if we can update that with district, we will do our best to make that request. District has been having a lot of turnover lately, but again, if we have more time for our next meeting, we could try to ensure that we have that correct

PPA data in there. So it has taken them a little bit of time to get that data in there just because of their number of clients. And then again, because of the pushback of when the data came out.

Thai Viet PhanItem 2

Okay, because I thought what Paul said was that they could use all the U.S. Census data, whether it's for the total population or CVAP, in preparing the maps and creating the atlas tables. That's what I thought I heard. I could be wrong, but, you know, when you can figure out what exactly can happen, I think that would be very useful. just again because what we're putting out there the tools that we're asking our residents to use is based on one data set and if we are going to analyze it I think we should also analyze those

maps in the same data set and and we're bound because of that new law to use the prison reapportionment data set so that's what we have to use for your city so again that will be different from that decennial census file what happens is there was a law passed I don't remember the number by our state legislatives that take the decennial census file look at our state and federal prisons in our incarcerated population and move the incarcerated population out of where they are incarcerated and into their last known address and so if you don't if you are in an area or a county

or city where you have a state or federal prison you're going to see a major shift but throughout the state it's going to just make minor changes to again bring those incarcerated population and put them back at their last known address so that's what we mean by ppa data and again that's a new that's just one of the reasons why this cycle is different from any other due to that ppa data that we're bound to use and due to the fair maps act which we have to abide by well just then for

Thai Viet PhanItem 2

clarification you know the counting of res the residency of a prisoner is counted at their actual residency and not the location of the prison under state law. But if that number doesn't change, for example, the 50% Section 2 numbers or it doesn't change the total population numbers for the city as a whole, I guess I don't see the value of using that when it would create more confusion.

It will make minor changes. So this so the again why we took so much time for us to get that data. It's because we had to wait for the census to release the data set. And then we had to wait two to three weeks for the statewide database, which is out of UC Berkeley, to take that data set and then move that incarcerated population out of the physical address and move them back into their last note address. And so again, we're bound by a new law to utilize that new data set, which makes minor changes to the total population and minor changes to the CVAP. And so again, we can come back at the next

meeting, maybe bring more information on it, maybe submit some more inspiration or written stuff to staff. We do have it in our redistricting manual, which is a long over like about 70 or 80 pages, WHICH TALKS ABOUT THIS WHOLE PROCESS MORE IN DEPTH. BUT AGAIN, WE UNDERSTAND THAT THERE MIGHT BE SOME CONFUSION, BUT THAT'S WHAT WE MEAN BY PPA. SO I THINK THE REQUEST IS TO TALK WITH DISTRICTOR AND SEE IF WE CAN ENSURE THAT WE'RE UTILIZING THAT PPA DATA ON DISTRICTOR BECAUSE WE HAVE TO USE IT FOR YOU AS A CITY FOR THE FINAL DATA.

Thai Viet PhanItem 2

OR MAYBE IF YOU'RE TRULY BOUND TO USE THAT STATEWAY DATA FOR THE CVAP INFORMATION, THEN at least provide the corresponding CVAP data from Districtr. So at least people know what it was. I guess at least that's for me. I'm still confused as to why the prison population data would only be used for CVAP and not for the total population, if that's the case. It's used for both.

So it's used for both. but the differences that we saw is because we have the statewide database as Paul mentioned a little bit but there's multiple ways that you can disaggregate or move around a population and the state decided to do a different way with their math in order to move the the CVAC numbers around so as he said both of the data sets are correct the PPA that they originally sent out and then a a new data set that they're utilizing for the California Independent Redistricting Commission as they're going through their process. So it's the same data, but again,

we're talking about estimated population. So again, we're talking about about 3.5% of the American public being surveyed, doing a long form survey, which is the survey that has like 200 questions over a five year period. So we are gonna see some minor changes throughout as we move forward in the decade. And we still, again, the CVAP is an estimated data set. So they're both correct. They're just minor changes. So I think we heard the request to use the PPA that the state originally put out. The other option is to use the statewide database data that they just released a month ago.

So those are the two kind of data sets that are up for, to utilize. And I think we've heard to use the PPA one, the original one.

Thai Viet PhanItem 2

I think I've gotten more confused. So I'm going to go ahead and let someone else ask questions.

Jessie LopezItem 2

I do.

Thai Viet PhanItem 2

I do.

I guess I didn't even finish my comments.

Jessie LopezItem 2

I think Safiya is actually addressing the…

Hopefully everybody is okay with me just wanting to… No, no, no worries. I think that was sort of the same question. I guess what I was going to say is that because we have a state mandate, we have to comply with that, and that's not really up for debate because we have to include that PPA information. I think because we're confused by how we can try to use one source as much as possible, that I think is going to take a little bit more discussion just for clarity amongst the council and for clarity by the consultant to the members of the public as well.

So that kind of begs the question of coming back in two weeks, will we have that clear? as we're going through a whole general agenda that we need to address as well on the 21st. So, you know, my suggestion is that we push it over to the first meeting or sometime in January of 2022 so we can have you do a deep dive in making sure that you are able to accomplish at least as legally possible to comply with the state mandate to make sure that the data that we're all using and discussing

is as close to one source as possible, given what you said. And I know that the deltas between those are very nominal, I guess, but to the extent we can almost eliminate those, that would be, I think, what I'm hearing from the Council, if that makes sense.

I did want to address your community of interest. Yes, yes, go ahead. Sorry. And this is in the community presentation that Daisy gives. She goes really in depth on this topic of communities of interest. But communities of interest is a redistricting term. And I think we heard it from the council and from the public tonight, but at its core is that we understand that residents of this community, so residents of the city of Santa Ana, you as council are experts of your community. you know which what pockets or neighborhoods go to certain schools or which parks have this cultural

event or just the nuances of your specific community throughout the years what it also means for communities of interest is that you don't need specific data in order to come forward and describe your community you don't need to use census data you don't need ACS data you just need to come forward and it could be your narrative it could be what bonds your community together again if it's a specific school that you attend a cultural event that you attend an organization that you're a part of and so in the presentation that daisy talks about we kind of

highlight three different things in order to think about as you're coming forward with your specific community of interest testimony the first one is to think about what bonds your community what commonalities do you have with your community the second one is to come forward and talk about its geography so again you don't need specific census data but if you're coming forward with verbal or written testimony it's really helpful to mention specific streets specific neighborhoods a specific location so that we can keep that in mind as we're drafting maps if some member of the

public comes forward and says that park that target over there that park over there or without without any specific geographies, that's gonna be difficult for us to capture. So as much of talking about geography as possible is helpful. And then the third thing to think about is how your community relates to the city council. So we are talking about redistricting. We are talking about representation. So how does your community, are you currently split? Are you currently together? Does that impact you negatively? Does that impact you positively? So those are the three kinds of things that we're looking forward for that community

of interest testimony and again Daisy has that presentation has given that at all the community meetings and continues to do that but that's kind of the basis so we understand that the the term may be a little bit confusing but at its core is you all here tonight know your community better than we at redistricting partners ever will none of us are from this area or live here and so we're listening to that testimony. Again, we have to consider that in addition to the data, in addition to the state law. So it is a big balancing act.

Got it. Yeah, and it's a very subjective term as well. So some of us may disagree on what a community of interest is. I know probably Council Member Fan can relate to this when you talk about not really a community of interest, but certain communities that receive certain protections, right? Absolutely. So communities of color. which are very different from communities of interest. Communities of color, obviously, have almost a three-part scrutiny, right? So those, I think, black and brown communities receive heightened scrutiny. API and other communities receive mid-level or mid-tier scrutiny and so on.

But that almost is a little clearer than this because this seems very sort of ambiguous, right? We can label something as a community of interest, but you know we may perceive it differently right and that's it I think an excellent point to point

out is that it's the job of the council to then determine if we have competing communities of interest I was here during one of your council meetings for the renters and homeowners though and that lasted like nine hours and that's a wonderful example of competing communities of interest we heard passionate testimony on both sides we heard passionate uh comments from the Council and so that in itself is a wonderful competing community of interest and then then it would go back to the Council for the policy decision on how we do want to keep a community

together or split it um so again we're going to hear testimony from lots of folks hopefully we hear more throughout this process but it will be the job of the Council to give us direction on

where to move great thank you we did that for your benefit by the way just that was great it was a

Wonderful learning experience. Yeah, I enjoyed that. Mayor Pro Tem and then Councilmember Lopez. Oh, Councilmember Lopez. Thank you

Jessie LopezItem 2

Well going back to the data, I think it is a very conversation a different conversation now knowing that we have to use The PPA set so I'm fine with that and I do think that we need to push back our 21st Tentatively scheduled or our scheduled meeting on the 21st. I don't think any of us are really going to be ready to have that conversation and I definitely want to give you more folks more time to come back and be prepared and give us all the information on the data sets and the different maps that we're requesting. So Clark please let us know if that needs to be a motion that we need to address or if you're going to work with our

Jessie LopezItem 2

secretaries and also you know thank you for the I guess the clarification on you know the community of interest because sometimes you know we hear terms like equity too and I think that can also be something that is used loosely. So those

are my comments, my two. If I may, Mayor and members of the Council, I did want to mention that we actually don't have anything scheduled for December 21st. Our next meeting that we have scheduled that was approved by Council is January 18th.

All right, so we're dark on the 21st?

Correct. We are not scheduled to meet on the 21st on redistricting. The next time that we're meeting on redistricting is January 18th.

All right, my bad. I thought we had a public hearing scheduled for the 21st, and I just thought, boy, that's a short period of time, and we're going to be very, I mean, the public's going to be very distracted, and that's not a benefit to them. But, okay, good. Thank you for that clarification. Mayor Pro Tem.

David PenalozaItem 2

Thank you, Mayor Sarmiento. I just I am also very confused at what's how this conversation has played out I want to make sure that none of us out here are saying that this is a state mandate because we've only heard that from your opinion Sophia with all due respect or a member of the City Council's opinion that this is a state mandate because in I've heard conflicting statements from Paul and yourself Sophia, when it comes to what database to use, Paul had stated earlier in the conversation that we could decide which data we want to use one or the other.

David PenalozaItem 2

And in an email to us today, he states it isn't totally clear that cities have to use or see that data, but since it was produced by the state and is available, we are generally using it unless there is some very specific problem with that data in the jurisdiction. So that's also conflicting to what you just stated, that this is a mandate by law that we have to use, because that's not what Paul stated in his email from earlier today to all of us on the city council that we saw.

David PenalozaItem 2

So I think it would be to our best benefit to sit down with legal to really get down to what exactly this law is, you know, or the mandate that we're talking about, because I don't, it's just confusing for the public. All of us up here are confused, and I can only imagine how confused our public is when looking at these different numbers, differentiating numbers, when it comes to all of these maps.

David PenalozaItem 2

And one other thing, and just a general comment with the drafts that were presented, in A, The difference from draft A to A2 splits our downtown, not the merchant's area, but it splits it down Flower and generally the side of where I think I personally feel that that block should remain together. the Civic Center along with the County Jail and the Santa Ana Police Department and the Santa stadium is all kind of one should remain together and it is that's what I noticed is different from 8 to 8 2 is that it breaks that apart down

David PenalozaItem 2

flower so I want to make sure we avoid that moving forward and I just wanted to see if I guess now my question is are we continuing this is you know is the pleasure of all of us here to continue this this public hearing for another meeting a week from now to see how all these numbers reflect with all the qualifying maps or are we coming back next month I mean I would I would rather we come back in a week if we can continue this public hearing tonight to a week from now to see how those numbers are reflected without with using the

David PenalozaItem 2

same data that redistrict our redistrictor is is using because i just i'm still not quite understanding the the different numbers here that are being used i'll reference paul's email

so there's the ppa data which we've been using as the base data for your whole process for draft maps and then the statewide database they decided to disaggregate the cvap data and have that follow the prison reapportionment population as well so the two different CVAP data sets that are up for you to choose is the one that the statewide database took the prison reapportionment population out and moved them back to their last known address or what we have from the ACS which we received in February which is that data set that Paul was talking about whereas from 2015 to 2019.

So again, when he said it's up for debate, we haven't received clarity from the state on if cities or counties have to use the disaggregated PPA data for CVAP. But in terms of the total population, we are using PPA, but we're happy to have a conversation with legal for direction or have legal come forward with their comments. I think that's a great way to move forward on this particular process. And so I think that's a wonderful comment.

David PenalozaItem 2

Yeah, the wishy-washy opinion from redistricting partners is a little troubling and confusing to me. So I would like to possibly maybe in a memo working with our legal department to get that, I guess, section and law that we're referencing to what this is to see what our city attorney thinks maybe about this. because I I'm everything from what Paul stated earlier today in the presentation to what you're saying now to the email from earlier today is just very vague and conflicting uh in my opinion so um

that's that's all Mr. Mayor yeah the memo would come from your legal we're not here to give you um yeah your that memo would would come from that not from us right no I understand that but your

David PenalozaItem 2

the email that Paul sent today

David PenalozaItem 2

specifically calls out law. So I wanted to see if that was, where exactly was that, I mean, where is that section of the law is what I'm trying to see.

So I know we have one more comment and I think maybe it would be a good idea to follow it up with something in writing, a written communication. You know, you can work with our city attorney's office. I think what I understood is that there was some data from February that was, you know, that was, you know, what maybe some of the maps used, and then there was, you know, data that was just, you know, that removed the PPA from a month ago or something, or, you know, they were different sources. There were some, you know, some differences in those two data sets. they didn't appear to be super nominal or super large,

but there were changes. There were obviously differences in those. So that's what I think we're trying to reconcile. But I think what I hear is that what you were saying is on the prison population addition, that's something that is state mandated, right? And if we can find that source, you could go ahead and document it to us. But I think you know being able to just reconcile the two and figure out you know how we go forward is Is really what's important. So anyways that yeah, I'd agree maybe something to follow up with in writing. That would be great Go ahead councilmember Bessara. Thank you, Mr. Mayor

Phil BacerraItem 2

Just kind of piggybacking off of what my colleagues have said. Yes, I'd like absolute Clarification as to what data we are using, but my frustration also stems from the fact that it appeared in looking at some of the maps online that there might have been different data sets used to analyze the different maps. At least that's the way it appeared. Whether that's the case or not, my big emphasis tonight is that whatever we arrive on as the data set that we're using, we need to apply that to all the maps. As far as timing goes, I'll defer to you, redistricting partners, as far as how long it will take you to put

Phil BacerraItem 2

all these maps into this Atlas format, but what I would like to have happen is I don't I don't feel like we need to rush to have some sort of meeting next week or in two weeks and I agree that hopefully most people will take a break and relax and not worry about this, but I would like to have those maps with the Atlas format available. So even if we don't have a meeting, I would like for you to work with our clerk. And so when that is available, I would like an announcement to go out to the community to say they're available and that people can look at them. And if we maintain our

Phil BacerraItem 2

current schedule and have our hearing in January, I don't think hopefully nobody will have a problem with that. But the more time that our community can take a look at the maps with the same consistent data applied across all of them, I think is better. So that's really where I'm at is let's just get something consistent across the board and let's get that out to the community as soon as possible regardless of when we have our next hearing. Great. I agree

with that as well. I think that I re-ran those tonight and sent them to Daisy about 30 minutes before the hearing. I do want to mention though because I think we're really focused on the distrctor data. A distrctor does not give you a total plan deviation. It would only give you the highest deviation. So that will be something that you will see a difference on the atlas format and so what do i mean by that when it on district or it'll just give you the percentage number that shows the ward sorry i go between district and ward uh apologies i know you are wards not districts um it gives you the ward

with the highest deviation and the atlas will give you the total plan deviation and the deviation of all the words so that will be something that district will not show in the atlas will show but again I sent all those to Daisy and will continue to run any atlas as we receive them from district or we we look at your site constantly and continue to

to make those outlases for you thanks for that clarification so I want to have one more public comment before I close the public hearing oh so I'm perfectly

Thai Viet PhanItem 2

fine with actually having maps to review in January all that stuff and hopefully having it I would like for it to be publicized as soon as possible so that we can have more time frankly I spent this weekend and I was like emailing our city clerk why are these numbers different what's going on and you know I hope we don't have to be back there the only question I have maybe from Adam clerk or you know there are these two data sets that are being used for the CVAP data, right? The ACS data that is the five-year average and the CVAP data

Thai Viet PhanItem 2

that has the prison data also from December, let's just say. You know, we have to decide which one we want to use. So that would be the only thing I think maybe we can look at in this the next the 21st to say look we want to go with the ACS average or we want to go with the December data. I think we have to decide that before you can really put out action to decide which draft maps. We don't want you to make that decision. We should be making that decision based on legal opinion provided by a city attorney's office. So that would be the only item maybe that I would say. How about an update from the clerk? Is that

okay? Yeah, yeah. So she can tell me. Do it that way? Let's do it. Sounds great. All right, let me go ahead and close the public hearing and seeing no further comments or hearing no further comments. I guess we are adjourned till tomorrow at at 6, actually at 5 for a special closed session. Thank you.

MR.

Johnathan Ryan HernandezItem 2

Thank you, everybody. Take care.

Thank you.