As directed in the Sacramento City Charter, the City of Sacramento must reapportion City Council District boundaries every ten years, following the U.S. Census. Council District boundaries must be redrawn so that the population in Sacramento's 8 Council Districts is as equal as possible. Since there are many possible configurations for these new districts, the City Council invited the citizens of Sacramento to participate in the process of deciding where the new boundaries should be by holding public meetings and by making a special CD available that citizens could use to draw their own proposed boundaries and submit them to the City Council.
The 2000 Census reported a total City population of 407,018 people; therefore, equal population distribution in the 2001 redistricting would result in 50,877 people per district. The 2001 Redistricting outreach and solicitation resulted in a total of 13 Redistricting Maps submitted by interested community groups and individuals. Staff categorized the 13 maps into different themes and requested specific council direction on modifications to a preferred theme. At it's June 19 meeting, Council provided an opportunity for map proponents and other interested community members to explain proposal preferences and discuss concepts and proposed boundary changes.
Based on discussion at the July 24th council meeting, Staff has created the following 4 maps:
These maps reflect alternatives for the areas in which there was not consensus during the discussion, these being the Robla/Hagginwood areas and the Tahoe Park area. Council will discuss these maps at the August 9th (Thursday night) Council meeting.
Prior to the July 24th meeting, Council had directed staff to analyze modifications to a "map theme" for further discussion. Council directed staff to use redistricting theme A, which provides modifications at the edges of existing districts, moves District 3 north, districts 4 and 5 south and Executive Airport and Golf Course Terrace into District 5. Council also directed staff to look at specific other changes. This direction resulted in four maps (attachments A, B, C, and D) with summaries below.
Map
A - Central City Theme (PDF
file)
Council directed staff to develop a map with the Central City (American and
Sacramento rivers, W/X and Business 80 freeways) all in one district. Staff
developed a map starting with the Central City in District 3, causing the existing
District 3 to become overpopulated. Efforts to reduce the District 3 population
and still keep the Central City in one district result in significant impacts
to communities in existing districts. The deviation between council districts
in this map is 5.29%.
Map
B - Central City Theme (PDF
file)
Map B places all of the central city in one district again - District 4. This
reduces the Central City population of districts 1 and 3 and requires them to
pick up population from other areas of the City. Efforts to balance district
populations result in dramatic changes to the south and southeast areas of the
city, creating geographically new districts 3,5,7 and 8. The deviation between
council districts in this map is 4.67%.
Map
C - Council Direction (PDF
file)
At the June 19, 2001 meeting, Council selected Theme A as the base map with
additional specific information to look at moving the districts 1 and 3 Central
City boundary from 16th Street to 12th Street, putting Tahoe Park all in one
district, the Sacramento City College area into District 4, and moving the district
4 and 7 boundary line to Havenside Drive. Staff selected the Sacramento-Sierra
Building and Construction Trades map as the base map from Theme A because it
has the lowest district deviation at 1.51%. Taking this as the base map and
making the Council-directed modifications, the deviation between council districts
is 21.93%.
Map
D - Staff Recommendation (PDF
file)
Utilizing Map C (Council Direction) as a base, staff analyzed ways to reduce
the deviation between districts and develop a population-balanced map based
on preferences heard at the community workshops and council meetings. Map D
is staff's recommendation; however, we will have the computer program available
at the July 24 Council meeting to manipulate boundaries to analyze potential
scenarios that Council might prefer. The deviation between council districts
in the Staff Recommendation map is 4.41%.
(NOTE: The original 13 proposals and various statistical information for them are still available for viewing.)
For
more information, please call Kirsten Garrard at (916) 264-2986
or send her an e-mail
message.