Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 1a - Establishing By-District Elections DATE: October 3, 2017 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Stephen P. Deitsch, City Attorney SUBJECT: ORDINANCE NO. 2350 ADDING SECTION 1704 TO CHAPTER 7 OF ARTICLE I OF THE ARCADIA MUNICIPAL CODE ESTABLISHING BY- DISTRICT ELECTIONS, DEFINING DISTRICT BOUNDARIES, AND SCHEDULING ELECTIONS WITHIN THE DISTRICTS Recommendation: (1) Receive additional input regarding the proposed district maps and the sequence of elections; and (2) Introduce Ordinance No. 2350, read Ordinance by title, and waive further reading of the Ordinance SUMMARY On August 1 and August 9, 2017, the City Council held its first and second public hearings regarding the process of transitioning to district based elections. Six maps were created by the City’s demographer and 12 maps were proposed by members of the public. All maps were made available on the City’s website for public review on August 30, 2017. On September 7 and September 19, 2017, the City Council held its third and fourth public hearings, at which the public was invited to provide input regarding the content of the draft maps and the sequence of elections. The City Council reviewed the draft maps submitted by the public and the City’s demographer and provided additional guidance on proposed district boundaries. Following these public hearings, the City Council directed staff to return with a draft ordinance transitioning to a by-district election system, using the Purple Map as the district boundaries. These meetings are in response to threatened litigation regarding alleged non- compliance with the California Voting Rights Act (“CVRA”), and in furtherance of the City Council’s adopted resolution of intention to transition from at-large to district-based elections. It is recommended that the City Council receive any additional public input regarding the proposed Ordinance, introduce the Ordinance, read the Ordinance by title only, and waive further reading of the Ordinance. Introduce Ordinance 2350 – Transition to By-District Elections October 3, 2017 Page 2 of 10 BACKGROUND In 2003, the CVRA became law. The CVRA, in an attempt to prevent the disenfranchisement of protected classes of persons, establishes a low bar for attorneys seeking to force cities to convert from at-large to by-district elections. Numerous public agencies in California have been sued under the CVRA. Plaintiffs challenging at-large elections of legislative bodies such as city councils have typically prevailed in litigation (the City Attorney is unaware of any public entity prevailing). Several cities, school districts, and hospital districts have settled with challengers, either prior to or in the midst of litigation brought pursuant to the CVRA. Cities and other public entities have had a statutory obligation to reimburse successful challengers for their attorneys’ fees pursuant to the CVRA. For example, the City of Palmdale incurred $4.7 million in legal fees in unsuccessfully defending in court its at-large city council election system, and the Cities of Santa Barbara, Whittier, Anaheim, and Modesto incurred legal fees of between $600,000 and $3 million in settling such challenges after adopting by-district elections. At least 55 California cities have transitioned, or are in the process of transitioning, from at-large to by-district elections as a result of the CVRA. In addition, there are at least 146 school districts, 27 community college districts, and eight water or other special districts which have done or are doing so under the CVRA. Last year, the California legislature adopted AB 350 amending Elections Code Section 10010 to cap the attorneys’ fees a prospective plaintiff may recover if a public agency adopts a resolution of intention to change to a by-district system of elections within 45 days after the receipt of a letter from that prospective plaintiff alleging a CVRA violation. On June 6, 2017, the City received a letter from Kevin Shenkman, Esq., alleging that the City’s at-large City Council election system diluted the ability of certain protected classes of persons within the City to elect candidates of their choice and demanding the City notify him of its intent to change to a by-district election system by July 21, 2017, in accordance with AB 350. While the City Council did not in any way concede to Mr. Shenkman’s allegations, in an effort to avoid costly litigation, on July 21, 2017, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 7179, a resolution declaring the City’s intention to transition from at-large to district- based elections pursuant to Elections Code Section 10010. On August 1, 2017, the City held its first public hearing to obtain input on any proposed district boundaries. A summary of public comments provided is listed below. Introduce Ordinance 2350 – Transition to By-District Elections October 3, 2017 Page 3 of 10 Richard McDonald – Chinese American Equalization Association: Mr. McDonald recommended that the City obtain a minimum of three maps from the City’s demographer. Mr. McDonald recommended that the City Attorney be involved in the drawing of the maps to ensure acceptable legal criteria are considered in the drafting of district boundaries. Mr. McDonald recommended two options of which three Asian majority districts would be created. The first includes one south of Duarte Road, a second south of the 210 freeway, and another east of Santa Anita Racetrack using El Monte Boulevard as a dividing line in the south, Baldwin Avenue as the dividing line in the north, and Huntington Boulevard as the primary southern boundary for the two northern districts. The second option for consideration is to have five districts, one in the northeast, one in the northwest, one in the southeast, one in the southwest, and a horizontal central district connecting north and south. Paul Van Fleet: Mr. Van Fleet agreed with Council’s decision to avoid costly litigation by transitioning to district based elections. Mr. Van Fleet questioned how the district elections would be staggered under the upcoming election cycle. Mr. Van Fleet recommended that in addition to ethnicity, resident’s socioeconomic status be taken into consideration when drafting districts. Finally, Mr. Van Fleet questioned how the rotation of the Mayor position would be determined under the new district model and suggested that each Mayor be appointed for 9 months instead of a year. Roger Nemrava – Board Member of the Highland Oaks Homeowner Association: Mr. Nemrava was opposed to districting. Should the City move to district-based elections, Mr. Nemrava suggested that Santa Anita Boulevard be the dividing line between east and west Arcadia. Mr. Nemrava recommended that the Highlands Homeowners Association be one district as it represents a cohesive community of interest. Mr. Nemrava suggested that the Oaks and Upper and Lower Rancho Home Owners Associations be a separate district as they too represent separate communities of interest. Mr. Nemrava suggested that Camino Real be the dividing line between north and south Arcadia. Using Camino Real as the dividing line, the Village area should be combined with the area north of Camino Real and west of Santa Anita Boulevard. The fourth district would include east Arcadia with areas east of Santa Anita Boulevard and then south to Camino Real. All areas south of Camino Real would be the final district. Sheng Chang: Dr. Chang congratulated the City Council for changing the City’s voting system from at-large to district-based voting. Dr. Chang expressed his desire for straightforward, simple, and fair districts with emphasis placed on population and demographic considerations. Dr. Chang also requested that the City Council consider term limits as part of their deliberations. Introduce Ordinance 2350 – Transition to By-District Elections October 3, 2017 Page 4 of 10 Burton Brink: Mr. Brink was opposed to districting and is supportive of the City’s current voting system. Nevertheless, Mr. Brink recommended that the homeowners associations in the City be considered during the drafting of district maps as a cohesive community of interest. Gary Kovacic: Mr. Kovacic stated reasons for opposing going to district elections. Mr. Kovacic recommended that City Council carefully draft the district boundaries and should take into consideration communities of common interest within each district, including homeowners associations and other traditional neighborhoods that exist throughout the City. Mr. Kovacic cautioned the City Council to avoid gerrymandering in order to preserve a current Council Member’s seat. Mr. Kovacic posed several questions to the City Council which include how will the district-based system be implemented in the upcoming election? How will incumbency be factored in to the process? Mr. Kovacic recommended that an independent committee be created to study and recommend proposed district boundaries. Laurie Thompson: Ms. Thompson was not present but submitted an email to be included in the official record for the August 1, 2017, meeting. Ms. Thompson stated the Highlands is in a category by itself for many reasons. Also, the Village has had a different flavor and set of circumstances ever since its inception in 1937. The Village would be better represented in district with R-1 zoned homes. The Upper Rancho, Lower Rancho, and Oaks are zoned R-0. Overall, she stated her position of keeping the HOA’s intact and not clumping them into only one or two districts. On August 9, 2017, the City held its second public hearing to obtain input on any proposed district boundaries. A summary of public comments provided is listed below. Mike Vercillo: Mr. Vercillo applauded the City Council for moving toward district based elections instead of spending millions of dollars in litigation; he indicated that he was a little concerned with some of the comments made by the City Council about drawing up districts, and in particular, gerrymandering; he provided the City Council with his own map and a summary of those neighborhoods; he had several “what if” questions that he shared with the City Council; and thanked them for the public hearings and allowing the residents to share their comments and concerns. Richard McDonald – Chinese American Equalization Association: Mr. McDonald reiterated some of the same suggestions he provided at the August 1, 2017, City Council meeting regarding the creation of at least 3 Asian majority districts, and more simple districts such as north, northeast, northwest, south, southeast, southwest, and central; he presented 2 maps that he spoke about regarding his first and second suggestion (Submission A and Submission B); he suggested creating an independent task force; he indicated that in 2021 the district lines would have to be redone, because of new census data; he further indicated that there was discussion about the dates Introduce Ordinance 2350 – Transition to By-District Elections October 3, 2017 Page 5 of 10 regarding going to a June or November, and suggested keeping an eye on Senate Bill 568 (Lara) which the legislature is going to change the June primary to March, but was recently amended to allow the governor the discretion to go even earlier in the year. Caroline Blake: Ms. Blake indicated that her comments may change in the future because it is so early in the process, but that her neighborhood is made up of all ethnic groups that seem to get along, which she is pleased about; she is opposed to combining all the HOAs into one district; she proposed that the Village be combined with other R-1 single-story homes; she is in favor of making the population in each of the districts equal; she favors a City Council residency for those running for City Council at 5 years, one year seems short to her; and regarding the under representation of any one ethnic group, she feels that voter records could show the percentages of ethics groups, if there is a problem; she is not in favor of any one specific ethnic group living in any one district, and that she would not want to be represented by 98% of any one specific ethic group; that all neighborhoods in Arcadia have a variety of ethnic groups; and thanked the City Council for allowing her to provide comments. On September 7, 2017, the City held its third public hearing to obtain input on the draft maps submitted by the public and the City’s demographer for proposed district boundaries. A summary of public comments provided is listed below. Richard McDonald – Chinese American Equalization Association: Mr. McDonald spoke on his recommendations for Council criteria in determining which maps should be considered for a final map. He indicated that he supports maps A, B, and L, and demographer maps Teal and Maroon, and provided the reasons. Additional discussion ensued. Mike Vercillo: Mr. Vercillo stated that he supports the Green Map as it keeps most of the HOAs together and does an excellent job of maintaining the integrity of the remaining neighborhoods by using major thoroughfares in the City. The Green Map is also the only proposal that helps promote a new Asian candidate to run for City Council as it creates a new district (District #2) where no current City Council Member resides. Brett Mitulski: Mr. Mitulski spoke about neighborhood unity and indicated that he supports the Orange Map. He stated that the Orange Map does not gerrymander, it gives representation to parts of Arcadia with a high sense of unity, and it respects the City’s long-standing boundary of Santa Anita Ave. Sheng Chang: Mr. Chang thanked the City Council for coming up with proposed districts. Mr. Chang indicated that he supports Public Maps B and L. Peter Olson – Representative of the Santa Anita Oaks Homeowner Association: Mr. Olson indicated that he supports the Orange Map. He expressed concern with the Introduce Ordinance 2350 – Transition to By-District Elections October 3, 2017 Page 6 of 10 Green Map because it would combine all the HOAs north of the freeway into one district and eliminate one current Council Member that is currently representing north Arcadia. The Orange Map would provide two representatives to address the concerns on the HOAs on the City Council. Roger Nemrava – Board Member of the Highland Oaks Homeowner Association: Mr. Nemrava appeared and indicated that he supports the Orange Map because it ensures that the HOAs interests are maintained. Gary Kovacic: Mr. Kovacic shared his recommendations to the City Council about how to approach deciding district boundaries. These include incumbency, ensuring that communities of interests like HOAs and traditional neighborhoods are maintained, and selecting a proposal with demographics that would foster more Asian representation. Mr. Kovacic recommended that a proposal similar to Public Map K be considered where there are two districts in the north, two in the south, and a central district. Noreen McLennan: Ms. McLennan questioned which district her street represents as she lives on Orange Grove. She also asked about the process if no one is seeking the district seat. City Manager Lazzaretto provided a response on the process. Howard Ursetti: Mr. Ursetti indicated that he submitted a map and split it up based on school districts, but it didn’t qualify because of population. Mr. Ursetti indicated that he supports Map L, which was updated by Mr. McDonald and supports any map similar to L which is based around school district boundaries. Julie Lim: Ms. Lim indicated that she supports the Orange Map. The boundaries are simple and have the fewest issues related to gerrymandering. Ms. Lim discussed the other maps and expressed her concerns with the Green Map, Maroon Map, Purple Map, Teal Map, and Yellow Map. Tim Burch: Mr. Burch said he supported Mr. Mitulski’s and Ms. Lim’s comments, and urged the City Council to look at the whole picture. He indicated that he favored the Orange Map. On September 19, 2017, the City held its fourth public hearing to obtain input on the draft maps submitted by the public and the City’s demographer for proposed district boundaries. A summary of public comments provided is listed below. Richard McDonald, Esq., representing the Chinese American Equalization Association: Mr. McDonald commented on the proposed 7 maps; he recommended the City Council choose at least 3 maps tonight; he indicated that the Chinese American Equalization Association favors the modified Map K, but feels that it needs a little more tweaking; he indicated that Maps B and L remain viable maps, and recommended that Maps Green, Introduce Ordinance 2350 – Transition to By-District Elections October 3, 2017 Page 7 of 10 Purple, Orange and Map A be dropped; and indicated that if one map is selected tonight that they favor the modified Map K, because he feels it is a step in the right direction based on the criteria he previously mentioned. Roger Nemrava: Mr. Nemrava indicated that the revised Map K is a definite improvement from the original Map K, and indicated that he is in favor of the Orange Map, and provided his reasons. David Hokanson: Mr. Hokanson indicated that he supports the Green Map and provided his reasons. Marci Schultz: Mrs. Schultz indicated that she supports the Orange Map and provided her reasons. Tim Burch: Mr. Burch indicated that he supports the Orange Map, and indicated that the colored maps should be given deference; and provided his reasons. Gary Kovacic: Mr. Kovacic indicated that he supports Council Member Beck’s request to continue this public hearing due to his absence from the meeting; and indicated that his preference is the revised Map K. Olga Hasler: Ms. Hasler indicated that she supports the Orange Map, and provided her reasons. DISCUSSION Procedure Under AB 350 Elections Code Section 10010 provides a specific process for the adoption of an ordinance to transition to district-based elections. The process includes a series of public hearings at which the public is invited to provide input regarding the composition of the districts. The maps for Council districts have been drawn by a professional demographer with extensive experience in the CVRA and drafting Council districts. Before drawing a draft map or maps, the City held at least two public hearings over a period of no more than 30 days as required by the CVRA, at which the public was invited to provide input regarding the composition of the districts. The first hearing was on August 1, 2017, and the second hearing was held on August 9, 2017. Six maps were created by the City’s demographer and 12 maps were proposed by members of the public. All maps were made available on the City’s website for public review on August 30, 2017 per the CVRA requirement that after the draft maps are drawn, the City shall publish at least one draft map. The City also published the potential sequence of elections, if the City Introduce Ordinance 2350 – Transition to By-District Elections October 3, 2017 Page 8 of 10 Council Members will be elected at different times to provide for staggered terms of office on each map. In accordance with the CVRA, the City has held two additional public hearings, at which the public was invited to provide input regarding the content of the draft maps and the proposed sequence of elections. Those hearings were held on September 7 and 19, 2017. The anticipated schedule for the transition remains as follows: Aug. 1, 2017 Public Hearing No. 1 – Completed Aug. 9, 2017 Public Hearing No. 2 – Completed Aug. 30, 2017 Publication of Draft Map(s) – Completed Sep. 7, 2017 Public Hearing No. 3 – Completed Sep. 19, 2017 Public Hearing No. 4 - Completed Oct. 3, 2017 Introduction of Ordinance – This agenda item Oct. 17, 2017 Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance Public comments on the transition and the proposed district maps are very important and all residents within the City are encouraged to participate in these hearings. Criteria for Establishing Districts The drawing of City Council districts is regulated by both state and federal law, including the CVRA and the Federal Voting Rights Act. For example, under federal law, council districts may not be drawn with race as the predominate factor. (Shaw v. Reno (1993) 509 U.S. 630.) The professional demographer retained by the City to draw Council districts will ensure the districts are compliant with these standards. Under Elections Code Section 21620, districts must be drawn as nearly equal in population as may be according to the latest federal decennial census. In establishing the boundaries, the City Council may give consideration to the following factors: (1) Topography; (2) Geography; (3) Cohesiveness, Contiguity, Integrity, and Compactness of Territory; and (4) Community of Interest of the Districts. Introduce Ordinance 2350 – Transition to By-District Elections October 3, 2017 Page 9 of 10 Based on public input and City Council guidance received at the public hearings on August 1 and 9, 2017, the City’s demographer generated six maps. The public also submitted 12 maps. These maps were made available on the City’s website at www.ArcadiaCA.gov/districts for public review on August 30, 2017. On September 7, 2017, the City Council discussed the proposed maps submitted by the public and the demographer, and considered each as a possible final district boundary map or recommend further changes. While all the maps submitted by the demographer met the legal standards of the CVRA, it should be noted that of the public maps submitted, only maps A, B, and L comply with constitutional requirements relating to the population deviation between proposed districts. The remaining public maps are not legally defensible. At the September 7, 2017, meeting, the City Council directed staff to return at the next scheduled public hearing with seven (7) maps for consideration. These included public maps A, B, L, a revised map K, and demographer maps Green, Orange, and Purple, each of which were included as Attachments to the Staff Report. At the September 19, 2017 meeting, the City Council reviewed the remaining seven (7) maps in detail. After much deliberation between the Council Members regarding the merits of the Orange and Purple Maps, the City Council selected the Purple Map for inclusion in a draft Ordinance to transition to by-district elections. The proposed Ordinance using the Purple Map has been drafted by the City Attorney’s Office and is ready to be considered for introduction at this meeting. If introduced, it will be scheduled for adoption on October 17. The City has subsequently received additional feedback from Mr. Mitulski who suggested that a compromise map be drawn between the Purple Map and Orange Map and offered proposed boundaries demonstrating the potential compromise. That map has been included as Public Map M – Mitulski. Based on the feedback provided by Mr. Mitulski, the City’s demographer applied the appropriate criteria to make it legally defensible. Public Map M is attached to this Staff Report and posted on the City’s website. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS The transition from at-large to district-based elections is exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) (Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15000 et seq.) Sections 15061(b)(3), 15320, and 15378(b)(3). The transition process is an organizational and administrative activity of the City, does not have the potential to result in either a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, and is therefore not a project for purposes of CEQA. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15061(b)(3); 15378(b)(5).) In the event the transition process does Introduce Ordinance 2350 – Transition to By-District Elections October 3, 2017 Page 10 of 10 constitute a project, it is categorically exempt under the Class 20 (Changes in the Organization of Local Governments) categorical exemption. (State CEQA Guidelines, § 15320.) None of the exceptions to the exemptions found in State CEQA Guidelines section 15300.2 apply. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact associated with the public hearing. Transitioning to district based elections will have a negligible effect on elections costs. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council (1) receive additional input regarding the proposed district maps and the sequence of elections; and (2) introduce Ordinance No. 2350 adding Section 1704 to Chapter 7 of Article I of the Arcadia Municipal Code establishing by-district elections, defining district boundaries, and scheduling elections within the districts. Attachments: 1. Ordinance No. 2350 (including Purple Map) 2. September 19, 2017, City Council Staff Report and Maps 3. Public Map M (Mitulski) 4. Public Map M Demographics DATE: September 19, 2017 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Stephen P. Deitsch, City Attorney SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENTS ON THE TRANSITION TO DISTRICT BASED ELECTIONS AND PROVIDE DIRECTION ON A PROPOSED ORDINANCE Recommendation: Conduct a public hearing to receive public input and provide direction on a proposed ordinance SUMMARY On August 1, 2017, the City Council held its first public hearing regarding the process of transitioning to district based elections. On August 9, 2017, the City Council held its second public hearing regarding potential voting districts and the number of draft maps for the City’s demographer to prepare. Six maps were created by the City’s demographer and 12 maps were proposed by members of the public. All maps were made available on the City’s website for public review on August 30, 2017. On September 7, 2017, the City Council held its third public hearing, at which the public was invited to provide input regarding the content of the draft maps and the sequence of elections. The City Council reviewed the draft maps submitted by the public and the City’s demographer and provided additional guidance on proposed district boundaries. Following the public hearing, the City Council directed staff to return at the next scheduled public hearing with seven (7) maps for consideration. These include public maps A, B, L, and a revised map K, in addition to demographer maps Green, Orange, and Purple. These meetings are in response to threatened litigation regarding alleged non- compliance with the California Voting Rights Act (“CVRA”), and in furtherance of the City Council’s adopted resolution of intention to transition from at-large to district-based elections. Under Assembly Bill (“AB”) 350, the City now has 90 days to complete the transition process, during which time the public will have at least five opportunities to comment on the proposal and the draft maps that are created for the potential voting districts. This is the fourth opportunity for public comment. Public Hearing – Transition to By-District Elections September 19, 2017 Page 2 of 9 It is recommended that the City Council conduct a public hearing to receive input regarding the proposed district maps submitted by the public and the City’s demographer, and provide direction on a proposed ordinance to transition to district based elections. At the public hearing, all members of the public are invited and encouraged to provide input regarding the content of the draft maps and the sequence of elections. BACKGROUND In 2003, the CVRA became law. The CVRA, in an attempt to prevent the disenfranchisement of protected classes of persons, establishes a low bar for attorneys seeking to force cities to convert from at-large to by-district elections. Numerous public agencies in California have been sued under the CVRA. Plaintiffs challenging at-large elections of legislative bodies such as city councils have typically prevailed in litigation (the City Attorney is unaware of any public entity prevailing). Several cities, school districts, and hospital districts have settled with challengers, either prior to or in the midst of litigation brought pursuant to the CVRA. Cities and other public entities have had a statutory obligation to reimburse successful challengers for their attorneys’ fees pursuant to the CVRA. For example, the City of Palmdale incurred $4.7 million in legal fees in unsuccessfully defending in court its at- large city council election system, and the Cities of Santa Barbara, Whittier, Anaheim, and Modesto incurred legal fees of between $600,000 and $3 million in settling such challenges after adopting by-district elections. At least 55 California cities have transitioned, or are in the process of transitioning, from at-large to by-district elections as a result of the CVRA. In addition, there are at least 146 school districts, 27 community college districts, and eight water or other special districts which have done or are doing so under the CVRA. Last year, the California legislature adopted AB 350 amending Elections Code Section 10010 to cap the attorneys’ fees a prospective plaintiff may recover if a public agency adopts a resolution of intention to change to a by-district system of elections within 45 days after the receipt of a letter from that prospective plaintiff alleging a CVRA violation. On June 6, 2017, the City received a letter from Kevin Shenkman, Esq., alleging that the City’s at-large City Council election system diluted the ability of certain protected classes of persons within the City to elect candidates of their choice and demanding the City notify him of its intent to change to a by-district election system by July 21, 2017, in accordance with AB 350. While the City Council did not in any way concede to Mr. Shenkman’s allegations, in an effort to avoid costly litigation, on July 21, 2017, the City Council adopted Resolution Public Hearing – Transition to By-District Elections September 19, 2017 Page 3 of 9 No. 7179, a resolution declaring the City’s intention to transition from at-large to district-based elections pursuant to Elections Code Section 10010. On August 1, 2017, the City held its first public hearing to obtain input on any proposed district boundaries. A summary of public comments provided is listed below. Richard McDonald – Chinese American Equalization Association: Mr. McDonald recommended that the City obtain a minimum of three maps from the City’s demographer. Mr. McDonald recommended that the City Attorney be involved in the drawing of the maps to ensure acceptable legal criteria are considered in the drafting of district boundaries. Mr. McDonald recommended two options of which three Asian majority districts would be created. The first includes one south of Duarte Road, a second south of the 210 freeway, and another east of Santa Anita Racetrack using El Monte Boulevard as a dividing line in the south, Baldwin Avenue as the dividing line in the north, and Huntington Boulevard as the primary southern boundary for the two northern districts. The second option for consideration is to have five districts, one in the northeast, one in the northwest, one in the southeast, one in the southwest, and a horizontal central district connecting north and south. Paul Van Fleet: Mr. Van Fleet agreed with Council’s decision to avoid costly litigation by transitioning to district based elections. Mr. Van Fleet questioned how the district elections would be staggered under the upcoming election cycle. Mr Van Fleet recommended that in addition to ethnicity, resident’s socioeconomic status be taken into consideration when drafting districts. Finally, Mr. Van Fleet questioned how the rotation of the Mayor position would be determined under the new district model and suggested that each Mayor be appointed for 9 months instead of a year. Roger Nemrava – Board Member of the Highland Oaks Homeowner Association: Mr. Nemrava was opposed to districting. Should the City move to district-based elections, Mr. Nemrava suggested that Santa Anita Boulevard be the dividing line between east and west Arcadia. Mr. Nemrava recommended that the Highlands Homeowners Association be one district as it represents a cohesive community of interest. Mr. Nemrava suggested that the Oaks and Upper and Lower Rancho Home Owners Associations be a separate district as they too represent separate communities of interest. Mr. Nemrava suggested that Camino Real be the dividing line between north and south Arcadia. Using Camino Real as the dividing line, the Village area should be combined with the area north of Camino Real and west of Santa Anita Boulevard. The fourth district would include east Arcadia with areas east of Santa Anita Boulevard and then south to Camino Real. All areas south of Camino Real would be the final district. Sheng Chang: Dr. Chang congratulated the City Council for changing the City’s voting system from at-large to district-based voting. Dr. Chang expressed his desire for straightforward, simple, and fair districts with emphasis placed on population and Public Hearing – Transition to By-District Elections September 19, 2017 Page 4 of 9 demographic considerations. Dr. Chang also requested that the City Council consider term limits as part of their deliberations. Burton Brink: Mr. Brink was opposed to districting and is supportive of the City’s current voting system. Nevertheless, Mr. Brink recommended that the homeowners associations in the City be considered during the drafting of district maps as a cohesive community of interest. Gary Kovacic: Mr. Kovacic stated reasons for opposing going to district elections. Mr. Kovacic recommended that City Council carefully draft the district boundaries and should take into consideration communities of common interest within each district, including homeowners associations and other traditional neighborhoods that exist throughout the City. Mr. Kovacic cautioned the City Council to avoid gerrymandering in order to preserve a current Council Member’s seat. Mr. Kovacic posed several questions to the City Council which include how will the district-based system be implemented in the upcoming election? How will incumbency be factored in to the process? Mr. Kovacic recommended that an independent committee be created to study and recommend proposed district boundaries. Laurie Thompson: Ms. Thompson was not present but submitted an email to be included in the official record for the August 1, 2017, meeting. Ms. Thompson stated the Highlands is in a category by itself for many reasons. Also, the Village has had a different flavor and set of circumstances ever since its inception in 1937. The Village would be better represented in district with R-1 zoned homes. The Upper Rancho, Lower Rancho, and Oaks are zoned R-0. Overall, she stated her position of keeping the HOA’s intact and not clumping them into only one or two districts. On August 9, 2017, the City held its second public hearing to obtain input on any proposed district boundaries. A summary of public comments provided is listed below. Mike Vercillo: Mr. Vercillo applauded the City Council for moving toward district based elections instead of spending millions of dollars in litigation; he indicated that he was a little concerned with some of the comments made by the City Council about drawing up districts, and in particular, gerrymandering; he provided the City Council with his own map and a summary of those neighborhoods; he had several “what if” questions that he shared with the City Council; and thanked them for the public hearings and allowing the residents to share their comments and concerns. Richard McDonald – Chinese American Equalization Association: Mr. McDonald reiterated some of the same suggestions he provided at the August 1, 2017, City Council meeting regarding the creation of at least 3 Asian majority districts, and more simple districts such as north, northeast, northwest, south, southeast, southwest, and central; he presented 2 maps that he spoke about regarding his first and second suggestion (Submission A and Submission B); he suggested creating an independent Public Hearing – Transition to By-District Elections September 19, 2017 Page 5 of 9 task force; he indicated that in 2021 the district lines would have to be redone, because of new census data; he further indicated that there was discussion about the dates regarding going to a June or November, and suggested keeping an eye on Senate Bill 568 (Lara) which the legislature is going to change the June primary to March, but was recently amended to allow the governor the discretion to go even earlier in the year. Caroline Blake: Ms. Blake indicated that her comments may change in the future because it is so early in the process, but that her neighborhood is made up of all ethnic groups that seem to get along, which she is pleased about; she is opposed to combining all the HOAs into one district; she proposed that the Village be combined with other R-1 single-story homes; she is in favor of making the population in each of the districts equal; she favors a City Council residency for those running for City Council at 5 years, one year seems short to her; and regarding the under representation of any one ethnic group, she feels that voter records could show the percentages of ethics groups, if there is a problem; she is not in favor of any one specific ethnic group living in any one district, and that she would not want to be represented by 98% of any one specific ethic group; that all neighborhoods in Arcadia have a variety of ethnic groups; and thanked the City Council for allowing her to provide comments. On September 7, 2017, the City held its third public hearing to obtain input on the draft maps submitted by the public and the City’s demographer for proposed district boundaries. A summary of public comments provided is listed below. Richard McDonald – Chinese American Equalization Association: Mr. McDonald spoke on his recommendations for Council criteria in determining which maps should be considered for a final map. He indicated that he supports maps A, B, and L, and demographer maps Teal and Maroon, and provided the reasons. Additional discussion ensued. Mike Vercillo: Mr. Vercillo stated that he supports the Green Map as it keeps most of the HOAs together and does an excellent job of maintaining the integrity of the remaining neighborhoods by using major thoroughfares in the City. The Green Map is also the only proposal that helps promote a new Asian candidate to run for City Council as it creates a new district (District #2) where no current City Council Member resides. Brett Mitulski: Mr. Mitulski spoke about neighborhood unity and indicated that he supports the Orange Map. He stated that the Orange Map does not gerrymander, it gives representation to parts of Arcadia with a high sense of unity, and it respects the City’s long-standing boundary of Santa Anita Ave. Sheng Chang: Mr. Chang thanked the City Council for coming up with proposed districts. Mr. Chang indicated that he supports public maps B and L. Public Hearing – Transition to By-District Elections September 19, 2017 Page 6 of 9 Peter Olson – Representative of the Santa Anita Oaks Homeowner Association: Mr. Olson indicated that he supports the Orange Map. He expressed concern with the Green Map because it would combine all the HOAs north of the freeway into one district and eliminate one current Council Member that is currently representing north Arcadia. The Orange Map would provide two representatives to address the concerns on the HOAs on the City Council. Roger Nemrava – Board Member of the Highland Oaks Homeowner Association: Mr. Nemrava appeared and indicated that he supports the Orange Map because it ensures that the HOAs interests are maintained. Gary Kovacic: Mr. Kovacic shared his recommendations to the City Council about how to approach deciding district boundaries. These include incumbency, ensuring that communities of interests like HOAs and traditional neighborhoods are maintained, and selecting a proposal with demographics that would foster more Asian representation. Mr. Kovacic recommended that a proposal similar to Public Map K be considered where there are two districts in the north, two in the south, and a central district. Noreen McLennan: Ms. McLennan questioned which district her street represents as she lives on Orange Grove. She also asked about the process if no one is seeking the district seat. City Manager Lazzaretto provided a response on the process. Howard Ursetti: Mr. Ursetti indicated that he submitted a map and split it up based on school districts, but it didn’t qualify because of population. Mr. Ursetti indicated that he supports Map L, which was updated by Mr. McDonald and supports any map similar to L which is based around school district boundaries. Julie Lim: Ms. Lim indicated that she supports the Orange Map. The boundaries are simple and have the fewest issues related to gerrymandering. Ms. Lim discussed the other maps and expressed her concerns with the Green Map, Maroon Map, Purple Map, Teal Map, and Yellow Map. Tim Burch: Mr. Burch said he supported Mr. Mitulski’s and Ms. Lim’s comments, and urged the City Council to look at the whole picture. He indicated that he favored the Orange Map. DISCUSSION Procedure Under AB 350 Elections Code Section 10010 provides a specific process for the adoption of an ordinance to transition to district-based elections. The process includes a series of public hearings at which the public is invited to provide input regarding the composition of the districts. Public Hearing – Transition to By-District Elections September 19, 2017 Page 7 of 9 The maps for Council districts have been drawn by a professional demographer with extensive experience in the CVRA and drafting Council districts. Before drawing a draft map or maps, the City held at least two public hearings over a period of no more than 30 days as required by the CVRA, at which the public was invited to provide input regarding the composition of the districts. The first hearing was on August 1, 2017, and the second hearing was held on August 9, 2017. Six maps were created by the City’s demographer and 12 maps were proposed by members of the public. All maps were made available on the City’s website for public review on August 30, 2017 per the CVRA requirement that after the draft maps are drawn, the City shall publish at least one draft map. The City also published the potential sequence of elections, if the City Council Members will be elected at different times to provide for staggered terms of office on each map. In accordance with the CVRA, the City is now in the process of holding two additional public hearings, at which the public is invited to provide input regarding the content of the draft maps and the proposed sequence of elections. The first of those hearings was held on September 7. This is the second public hearing within the 45 day requirement and the fourth overall. The anticipated schedule for the transition is as follows: Aug. 1, 2017 Public Hearing No. 1 – Completed Aug. 9, 2017 Public Hearing No. 2 – Completed Aug. 30, 2017 Publication of Draft Map(s) – Completed Sep. 7, 2017 Public Hearing No. 3 – Completed Sep. 19, 2017 Public Hearing No. 4 – This agenda item Oct. 3, 2017 Introduction of Ordinance Oct. 17, 2017 Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance Public comments on the transition and the proposed district maps are very important and all residents within the City are encouraged to participate in these hearings. Criteria for Establishing Districts The drawing of City Council districts is regulated by both state and federal law, including the CVRA and the Federal Voting Rights Act. For example, under federal law, council districts may not be drawn with race as the predominate factor. (Shaw v. Reno (1993) 509 U.S. 630.) The professional demographer retained by the City to draw Council districts will ensure the districts are compliant with these standards. Under Elections Code Section 21620, districts must be drawn as nearly equal in population as may be Public Hearing – Transition to By-District Elections September 19, 2017 Page 8 of 9 according to the latest federal decennial census. In establishing the boundaries, the City Council may give consideration to the following factors: (1) Topography; (2) Geography; (3) Cohesiveness, Contiguity, Integrity, and Compactness of Territory; and (4) Community of Interest of the Districts. Based on public input and City Council guidance received at the public hearings on August 1 and 9, 2017, the City’s demographer generated six maps. The public also submitted 12 maps. These maps were made available on the City’s website at www.ArcadiaCA.gov/districts for public review on August 30, 2017. On September 7, 2017, the City Council discussed the proposed maps submitted by the public and the demographer, and considered each as a possible final district boundary map or recommend further changes. While all the maps submitted by the demographer met the legal standards of the CVRA, it should be noted that of the public maps submitted, only maps A, B, and L are comply with constitutional requirements relating to the population deviation between proposed districts. The remaining public maps are not legally defensible. At the September 7, 2017, the City Council directed staff to return at the next scheduled public hearing with seven (7) maps for consideration. These include public maps A, B, L, a revised map K, and demographer maps Green, Orange, and Purple, each of which are included as Attachments to the Staff Report. Following this public hearing is the time in the process to select a map for inclusion in an ordinance to transition to district based elections. The ordinance is anticipated to be considered for introduction on October 3 and adoption on October 17. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS The transition from at-large to district-based elections is exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) (Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15000 et seq.) Sections 15061(b)(3), 15320, and 15378(b)(3). The transition process is an organizational and administrative activity of the City, does not have the potential to result in either a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, and is therefore not a project for purposes of CEQA. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15061(b)(3); 15378(b)(5).) In the event the transition process does constitute a project, it is categorically exempt under the Class 20 (Changes in the Organization of Local Governments) categorical exemption. (State CEQA Guidelines, § Public Hearing – Transition to By-District Elections September 19, 2017 Page 9 of 9 15320.) None of the exceptions to the exemptions found in State CEQA Guidelines section 15300.2 apply. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact associated with the public hearing. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council conduct a public hearing to receive input regarding the proposed district maps and the sequence of elections, and provide direction on a proposed ordinance to transition to district based elections. Attachments: 1. Public Map A 2. Public Map B 3. Public Map L 4. Public Map K (Revised) 5. Green Map 6. Orange Map 7. Purple Map Sanita Anita Park (Racetrack) The Arboretum of Los Angeles County Santa Anita Golf Course Arcadia Co Park AdiP3GlfC Eisenhower Park Civic Center Athletic Field Rec Area Baldwin Stocker Park Santa Anita Park Tierra Verde Park Fairview Avenue Park Camino Grove Park Forest Ave Park Park Holly Avenue Park Methodist Hospital Southern California 210 Topaz Pl y o n R d Oaks PlElkins PlCarolwood DrHighland Oaks DrAlta Oaks DrHillcrest BlvdS 5th AveTorrey Pines DrOakhaven RdOakwood DrN 2nd AveN 1st AveLa Porte St Alta Vista AveMayflower AveLoganrita AveS 10th AveE Camino Rea Altern St Jeffries Ave E Boley StN 5th AveCalifornia St S 9th Ave8th AveEncino AveDiamond St S 6th AveS 4th AveS 2nd AveE Saint Joseph St S 3rd AveS 1st AveGreenfield AveLouise AveA l st e r A ve Coyle Ave Rodell Pl E Norman Ave E Pamela Rd Lee AveLas Flores Ave E Lemon Ave Peck RdE Sandra Ave L y n ro s e S tE L i v e O a k A v e E Woodruff AveN Santa Anita AveEl Vista CirStonehouse RdChantry DrAnita Crest DrClaridge StWo o d l a n d LnRamona RdRodeo RdW Floral Ave Colorado StRancho RdE Orange Grove Ave H a rv a r d Dr Foothill BlvdArbolada D r Gloria Rd Anoakia LnHampton Rd Oxford Dr Katherine Ln W Orange Grove Ave Si n gi ngw oo d Dr San Vicente Rd San Simeon Rd Murietta Dr Fallen Leaf Rd W Foothill Blvd Altura TerMonte Verde Dr Alta St Campus Dr W D u a r t e R dFairview Ave W Naomi Ave W Winnie Way W Longden AveW Arthur Ave Palm CirW Lemon Ave Walnut Ave W Palm Dr W Leroy Ave Sharon Rd Holly AveHugo Reid Dr W Huntington Dr N G o ld e n W es t Av e Kingsley Dr Cabrillo RdPalo Alto DrBalboa Dr Southview Rd Portola Dr W Camino Real Ave W Norman Ave Florence AveS Baldwin AveArcadia Ave Las Tunas DrW W o o dr uf f A v e Longley WayWorkman Ave L i ve O a k Av e La Rosa Rd Columbia RdOkoboji DrHuntington Dr E D u ar t e Rd City of Arcadia Districting 2017 Prepared by National Demographics, August 21, 2017 Suggested Election Sequence: 2018: 2, 3, & 5 2020: 1 & 4 or 2018: 1, 2, & 3 2020: 4 & 5 Other options possible Map layers Public Map A Water Area Streets Landmark Point Landmark Area Pipeline/Power Line Railroad River City of Arcadia Submitted by McDonald District 1 2345Total Total Pop 11,445 11,139 11,207 11,159 11,414 56,364 Deviation from ideal 172 -134 -66 -114 141 306 % Deviation 1.53% -1.19% -0.59% -1.01% 1.25% 2.71% % Hisp 10% 19% 12% 8% 11% 12% % NH White 39% 24% 19% 21% 25% 26% % NH Black 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% % Asian-American 49% 54% 66% 68% 63% 60% Total 8,738 8,768 8,603 8,935 9,030 44,074 % Hisp 9% 19% 12% 8% 10% 11% % NH White 42% 27% 22% 24% 27% 28% % NH Black 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% % Asian-American 48% 51% 65% 66% 61% 58% Total 7,856 6,725 7,361 7,112 7,966 37,021 % Hisp 13% 16% 11% 10% 12% 12% % NH White 45% 30% 26% 25% 31% 32% % NH Black 1% 3% 1% 2% 0% 2% % Asian/Pac.Isl.40% 50% 61% 62% 56% 54% Total 7,422 4,564 5,268 5,356 6,389 28,999 % Latino 9% 16% 12% 8% 10% 11% % Asian-Surnamed 31% 32% 44% 47% 45% 40% % Filipino-Surnamed 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% Total 2,948 1,408 1,486 1,514 2,126 9,482 % Latino 8% 15% 10% 9% 10% 10% % Asian-Surnamed 21% 21% 34% 31% 31% 27% % Filipino-Surnamed 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Total 5,254 2,668 3,090 3,161 4,072 18,246 % Latino 9% 15% 13% 10% 10% 11% % Asian-Surnamed 25% 27% 35% 37% 38% 32% % Filipino-Surnamed 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% ACS Pop. Est.Total 11,809 11,490 11,365 11,257 11,265 57,184 age0-19 26% 24% 23% 23% 20% 23% age20-60 51% 55% 60% 53% 53% 55% age60plus 23% 21% 17% 23% 27% 22% immigrants 34% 51% 53% 54% 48% 48% naturalized 70% 61% 67% 71% 76% 69% english 52% 36% 34% 32% 38% 38% spanish 7% 9%8%6%7%7% asian-lang 36% 48% 55% 57% 54% 50% other lang 5% 7% 4% 5% 1% 4% Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well"19% 31% 34% 37% 32% 30% hs-grad 38% 41% 39% 39% 38% 39% bachelor 32% 34% 31% 29% 35% 32% graduatedegree 25% 18% 21% 19% 18% 20% Child in Household child-under18 37% 36% 38% 35% 30% 35% employed 58% 60% 60% 54% 56% 57% Commute on Public Transit 3% 3% 4% 4% 3% 3% income 0-25k 10% 18% 17% 22% 17% 17% income 25-50k 16% 20% 16% 15% 14% 16% income 50-75k 8% 15% 19% 13% 14% 14% income 75-200k 38% 39% 42% 38% 41% 40% income 200k-plus 28% 8% 7% 11% 15% 13% single family 91% 43% 70% 71% 91% 72% multi-family 9% 57% 30% 29% 9% 28% vacant 5% 6% 4% 11% 6% 6% occupied 95% 94% 96% 89% 94% 94% rented 20% 58% 49% 39% 25% 39% owned 80% 42% 51% 61% 75% 61% Total and Voting Age population data from the 2010 Decennial Census. Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database. Work (percent of pop age 16+) Household Income Education (among those age 25+) Total Pop City of Arcadia - Public Map $ Language spoken at home Voting Age Pop Housing Stats Immigration Citizen Voting Age Pop., Age, Immigration, and other demographics from the 2010-2014 American Community Survey 5-year data. Citizen Voting Age Pop Voter Registration (Nov 2014) Age Voter Turnout (Nov 2012) Voter Turnout (Nov 2014) Sanita Anita Park (Racetrack) Santa Anita Race Track Arcadia Co Park AdiP3GlfC Eisenhower Park Civic Center Athletic Field Rec Area Tierra Verde Park Fairview Avenue Park Camino Grove Park Forest Ave Park Park Holly Avenue Park Methodist Hospital Southern California 210 Topaz Pl y o n R d Oaks PlElkins PlCarolwood DrHighland Oaks DrAlta Oaks DrHillcrest BlvdS 5th AveTorrey Pines DrOakhaven RdOakwood DrN 2nd AveN 1st AveLa Porte St Alta Vista AveMayflower AveLoganrita AveS 10th AveE Camino Rea Altern St Jeffries Ave E Boley StN 5th AveCalifornia St S 9th Ave8th AveEncino AveDiamond St S 6th AveS 4th AveS 2nd AveE Saint Joseph St S 3rd AveGenoa StAlice St S 1st AveLouise AvePeachtree Ln A l st e r A ve Coyle Ave Rodell Pl E Norman AveGreenfield AveLee AveLas Flores Ave Peck RdE Sandra Ave L y n ro s e S tE L i v e O a k A v e E Woodruff AveN Santa Anita AveEl Vista CirStonehouse RdChantry DrAnita Crest DrClaridge StWo o d l a n d LnRamona Rd W Floral Ave Colorado St Arbolada Dr E Orange Grove Ave Hacienda Dr H a rv a r d Dr Foothill Blvd Gloria Rd Anoakia LnHampton Rd Loma Lisa LnN Baldwin AveW Orange Grove Ave Si n gi ngw oo d Dr W Foothill Blvd San Vicente RdMurietta Dr Fallen Leaf Rd Valido RdN Altura RdMichillinda AveAlta St W D u a r t e R d Campus Dr W Santa Anita Ter W Le Roy Ave W Winnie Way W Lemon Ave W Wistaria Ave W Longden AveW Arthur Ave Palm CirSharon Rd W Palm Dr Walnut Ave W Naomi AveW Leroy Ave W Camino Real Ave W Norman Ave Holly AveRosemarie DrS Old Ranch RdW Huntington DrGolden West AveMagellan RdSouthview Rd Fairview Ave Terra LnS Baldwin AveCambury AveArcadia Ave Las Tunas Dr Longley Way W Woodruff AveLos Altos Ave Bradford AveWinthrop AveBaldwin AveRowland AveEncanto DrPanorama Dr Drake Rd Co rt e z Rd Okoboji Dr E D u ar t e Rd City of Arcadia Districting 2017 Prepared by National Demographics, August 21, 2017 Suggested Election Sequence: 2018: 2, 3, & 5 2020: 1 & 4 or 2018: 1, 2, & 3 2020: 4 & 5 Other options possible Map layers Public Map B Water Area Streets Landmark Point Landmark Area Pipeline/Power Line Railroad River City of Arcadia Submitted by McDonald District 1 2345Total Total Pop 10,821 11,111 11,721 11,238 11,473 56,364 Deviation from ideal -452 -162 448 -35 200 900 % Deviation -4.01% -1.44% 3.97% -0.31% 1.77% 7.98% % Hisp 16% 15% 10% 9% 10% 12% % NH White 36% 29% 19% 20% 25% 26% % NH Black 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% % Asian-American 46% 52% 69% 68% 63% 60% Total 8,404 8,579 9,090 9,003 8,998 44,074 % Hisp 16% 14% 9% 9% 9% 11% % NH White 38% 33% 21% 24% 28% 28% % NH Black 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% % Asian-American 44% 50% 68% 66% 61% 58% Total 7,049 7,189 7,234 7,232 8,316 37,021 % Hisp 15% 14% 11% 12% 9% 12% % NH White 44% 35% 24% 23% 33% 32% % NH Black 2% 3% 1% 2% 0% 2% % Asian/Pac.Isl.38% 48% 63% 62% 57% 54% Total 6,617 5,417 5,091 5,404 6,470 28,999 % Latino 10% 15% 11% 9% 10% 11% % Asian-Surnamed 31% 30% 46% 48% 44% 40% % Filipino-Surnamed 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Total 2,524 1,908 1,347 1,509 2,194 9,482 % Latino 8% 14% 10% 10% 9% 10% % Asian-Surnamed 20% 21% 33% 33% 31% 27% % Filipino-Surnamed 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Total 4,533 3,492 2,841 3,214 4,165 18,246 % Latino 9% 13% 13% 11% 10% 11% % Asian-Surnamed 26% 25% 37% 37% 36% 32% % Filipino-Surnamed 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% ACS Pop. Est.Total 10,909 11,553 11,996 11,395 11,331 57,184 age0-19 26% 24% 24% 22% 21% 23% age20-60 53% 53% 60% 53% 53% 55% age60plus 22% 22% 17% 25% 26% 22% immigrants 38% 45% 55% 54% 47% 48% naturalized 70% 62% 64% 71% 79% 69% english 47% 43% 30% 32% 41% 38% spanish 8% 8%9%6%6%7% asian-lang 39% 43% 56% 58% 52% 50% other lang 6% 6% 5% 4% 1% 4% Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well"22% 26% 36% 37% 29% 30% hs-grad 39% 40% 41% 39% 36% 39% bachelor 32% 34% 31% 31% 33% 32% graduatedegree 24% 20% 19% 18% 20% 20% Child in Household child-under18 39% 34% 38% 34% 30% 35% employed 57% 60% 60% 55% 55% 57% Commute on Public Transit 3% 3% 4% 5% 2% 3% income 0-25k 11% 16% 19% 21% 16% 17% income 25-50k 17% 19% 17% 16% 13% 16% income 50-75k 9% 14% 19% 12% 15% 14% income 75-200k 38% 39% 40% 39% 42% 40% income 200k-plus 25% 12% 6% 11% 15% 13% single family 88% 53% 60% 75% 92% 72% multi-family 12% 47% 40% 25% 8% 28% vacant 4% 6% 5% 10% 6% 6% occupied 96% 94% 95% 90% 94% 94% rented 22% 50% 55% 36% 25% 39% owned 78% 50% 45% 64% 75% 61% Total and Voting Age population data from the 2010 Decennial Census. Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database. Work (percent of pop age 16+) Household Income Education (among those age 25+) Total Pop City of Arcadia - Public Map B Language spoken at home Voting Age Pop Housing Stats Immigration Citizen Voting Age Pop., Age, Immigration, and other demographics from the 2010-2014 American Community Survey 5-year data. Citizen Voting Age Pop Voter Registration (Nov 2014) Age Voter Turnout (Nov 2012) Voter Turnout (Nov 2014) Sanita Anita Park (Racetrack) Santa Anita Race Track Santa Anita Golf Course Arcadia Co Park AdiP3GlfC Eisenhower Park Civic Center Athletic Field Rec Area Baldwin Stocker Park Santa Anita Park Tierra Verde Park Fairview Avenue Park Forest Ave Park Park Methodist Hospital Southern California 210 Topaz Pl y o n R d Oaks PlElkins PlCarolwood DrHighland Oaks DrAlta Oaks DrHillcrest BlvdS 5th AveTorrey Pines DrOakhaven RdOakwood DrN 2nd AveN 1st AveLa Porte St Alta Vista AveMayflower AveLoganrita AveS 10th AveShrode StE Camino Rea Altern St Jeffries Ave E Boley StN 5th AveCalifornia St S 9th Ave8th AveEncino AveDiamond St S 6th AveS 4th AveS 2nd AveE Saint Joseph St S 3rd AveS 1st AveGreenfield AveLouise AveLeda Ln A l st e r A v e Coyle Ave Rodell Pl E Norman Ave E Pamela Rd Lee AveLas Flores Ave E Lemon Ave Peck RdE Sandra Ave L y n r o s e S tE L i v e O a k A v e E Woodruff AveN Santa Anita AveEl Vista CirStonehouse RdChantry DrAnita Crest DrClaridge StWo o d l a n d Ln W Floral AveW Foothill Blvd Colorado St Arbolada Dr E Orange Grove Ave Hacienda Dr H a rv a r d D r Foothill Blvd Gloria Rd Anoakia LnHampton Rd Oxford Dr W Orange Grove Ave Si n gi ngw oo d Dr Old Ranch RdSan Vicente RdMurietta Dr Fallen Leaf Rd Valido RdN Altura RdMichillinda AveAlta St Campus Dr W D u a r t e R dPark AveF a ir v i e w Av e W Naomi Ave W Winnie Way W Longden AveW Arthur Ave Palm CirW Lemon Ave Walnut Ave W Pamela RdHolly AveW Norman AveSharon Rd Rosemarie DrS Old Ranch RdW Huntington Dr Encanto Dr Panorama Dr Coronado Dr Southview Rd Balboa Dr Lovell AveS Baldwin AveC a lli t a S tW C a mi n o Re a l Av e Arcadia Ave Paxson LnW Woodruff Ave Las Tunas Dr W Palm Dr Warren Way Bradford AveWinthrop AveBaldwin AveRowland AveCorto Rd Columbia RdCortez RdE D u a r t e R d City of Arcadia Districting 2017 Prepared by National Demographics, August 29, 2017 Suggested Election Sequence: 2018: 2, 3, & 5 2020: 1 & 4 or 2018: 1, 4, & 5 2020: 2 & 3 Other options Possible Map layers Public Map L Water Area Streets Landmark Point Landmark Area Pipeline/Power Line Railroad River City of Arcadia Submitted by McDonald District 1 2345Total Total Pop 11,220 11,474 11,297 11,086 11,287 56,364 Deviation from ideal -53 201 24 -187 14 388 % Deviation -0.47% 1.78% 0.21% -1.66% 0.12% 3.44% % Hisp 12% 15% 14% 10% 9% 12% % NH White 34% 29% 20% 23% 22% 26% % NH Black 1% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% % Asian-American 52% 52% 64% 65% 67% 60% Total 8,600 8,853 9,027 8,865 8,729 44,074 % Hisp 11% 14% 15% 9% 9% 11% % NH White 37% 33% 22% 26% 25% 28% % NH Black 1% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% % Asian-American 50% 50% 61% 63% 65% 58% Total 7,682 7,407 6,524 7,607 7,802 37,021 % Hisp 15% 14% 12% 10% 10% 12% % NH White 42% 35% 24% 29% 28% 32% % NH Black 1% 3% 3% 0% 0% 2% % Asian/Pac.Isl.40% 48% 60% 60% 62% 54% Total 6,791 5,635 4,559 6,039 5,975 28,999 % Latino 11% 14% 11% 9% 9% 11% % Asian-Surnamed 32% 30% 43% 48% 46% 40% % Filipino-Surnamed 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Total 2,488 2,009 1,192 1,876 1,917 9,482 % Latino 9% 13% 11% 9% 8% 10% % Asian-Surnamed 21% 21% 27% 34% 33% 27% % Filipino-Surnamed 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Total 4,564 3,643 2,620 3,708 3,711 18,246 % Latino 10% 13% 12% 10% 11% 11% % Asian-Surnamed 26% 25% 33% 40% 36% 32% % Filipino-Surnamed 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% ACS Pop. Est.Total 11,535 11,909 11,339 10,994 11,407 57,184 age0-19 26% 24% 23% 21% 22% 23% age20-60 55% 53% 56% 52% 57% 55% age60plus 20% 23% 21% 27% 21% 22% immigrants 40% 45% 55% 52% 49% 48% naturalized 68% 62% 65% 76% 73% 69% english 44% 43% 31% 34% 39% 38% spanish 8% 8%8%5%7%7% asian-lang 42% 43% 55% 59% 52% 50% other lang 5% 6% 7% 2% 2% 4% Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well"23% 26% 36% 35% 30% 30% hs-grad 39% 40% 41% 38% 37% 39% bachelor 31% 34% 31% 33% 31% 32% graduatedegree 24% 20% 18% 18% 21% 20% Child in Household child-under18 39% 34% 36% 32% 33% 35% employed 58% 60% 57% 54% 58% 57% Commute on Public Transit 3% 3% 4% 4% 3% 3% income 0-25k 12% 16% 21% 19% 16% 17% income 25-50k 17% 19% 18% 15% 13% 16% income 50-75k 11% 14% 15% 12% 18% 14% income 75-200k 38% 39% 38% 40% 42% 40% income 200k-plus 22% 12% 8% 14% 11% 13% single family 84% 54% 56% 89% 83% 72% multi-family 16% 46% 44% 11% 17% 28% vacant 4% 6% 9% 8% 4% 6% occupied 96% 94% 91% 92% 96% 94% rented 28% 50% 52% 25% 36% 39% owned 72% 50% 48% 75% 64% 61% Total and Voting Age population data from the 2010 Decennial Census. Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database. Housing Stats Immigration Citizen Voting Age Pop., Age, Immigration, and other demographics from the 2010-2014 American Community Survey 5-year data. Citizen Voting Age Pop Voter Registration (Nov 2014) Age Voter Turnout (Nov 2012) Voter Turnout (Nov 2014) Work (percent of pop age 16+) Household Income Education (among those age 25+) Total Pop City of Arcadia - Public Map L Language spoken at home Voting Age Pop Sanita Anita Park (Racetrack) Santa Anita Race Track Santa Anita Golf Course Arcadia Co Park Adi P 3 Glf C Eisenhower Park Civic Center Athletic Field Rec Area Baldwin Stocker Park Santa Anita Park Tierra Verde Park Forest Ave Park Park Tripdis Friendship Park Holly Avenue Park Methodist Hospital Southern California 210 Topaz Pl y o n R d Oaks PlElkins PlCarolwood DrHighland Oaks DrHillcrest BlvdS 5th AveTorrey Pines DrOakhaven RdOakwood DrN 2nd AveN 1st AveLa Porte St Alta Vista AveMayflower AveLoganrita AveS 10th AveShrode StE Camino Rea Altern St Jeffries Ave E Boley StN 5th AveCalifornia St S 9th Ave8th AveEncino AveDiamond St S 6th AveS 4th AveS 2nd AveE Saint Joseph St S 3rd AveS 1st AveGreenfield AveLouise AvePeachtree Ln A l st e r A v e Coyle Ave Rodell Pl E Norman Ave E Pamela Rd Lee AveLas Flores Ave E Lemon Ave Peck RdE Sandra Ave L y n ro s e S tE L i v e O a k A v e E Woodruff AveN Santa Anita AveEl Vista CirStonehouse RdChantry DrAnita Crest DrClaridge StWo o d l a n d LnRamona RdRode o RdW Floral Ave Colorado St Arbolada Dr E Orange Grove Ave Hacienda Dr W Foothill Blvd H a rv a r d D r Gloria Rd Anoakia LnHampton Rd Loma Lisa LnFoothill Blvd W Orange Grove Ave Si n gi ngw oo d Dr Old Ranch RdSan Vicente RdMurietta Dr Fallen Leaf Rd V olante D rMichillinda AveAlta St Campus Dr W D u a r t e R dFairview Ave W Naomi Ave W Winnie Way W Longden AveW Arthur Ave Palm CirW Lemon Ave W Palm Dr Walnut Ave W Pamela Rd W Leroy Ave Holly AveRosemarie DrS Old Ranch RdW Huntington DrGolden West AveN Golden West AveSouthview Rd Lovell AveMelanie LnS Baldwin AveCambury AveMcclean DrLas Tunas Dr Longley Way W Woodruff AveW inthrop AveBradford AveBaldwin AveRowland AveN Altura RdHugo Reid Dr Co rt e z RdN Suns e t Bl v dArcadia Ave E D u a r t e R d City of ArcadiaDistricting 2017 Prepared by National Demographics, September 10, 2017 Suggested Election Sequence: 2018: 2, 3, & 5 2020: 1 & 4 or 2018: 2, 4, & 5 2020: 1 & 3 Map layers Public Map K Revised Water Area Streets Landmark Point Landmark Area Pipeline/Power Line Railroad River City of Arcadia District 1 2345Total Total Pop 10,998 10,828 11,830 11,520 11,188 56,364 Deviation from ideal -275 -445 557 247 -85 1,002 % Deviation -2.44% -3.95% 4.94% 2.19% -0.75% 8.89% % Hisp 12% 18% 12% 9% 11% 12% % NH White 26% 35% 22% 22% 24% 26% % NH Black 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% % Asian-American 60% 45% 64% 67% 63% 60% Total 8,342 8,514 9,280 9,208 8,730 44,074 % Hisp 11% 18% 11% 8% 10% 11% % NH White 29% 37% 25% 25% 27% 28% % NH Black 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% % Asian-American 58% 43% 61% 65% 62% 58% Total 7,349 6,894 7,017 7,815 7,946 37,021 % Hisp 15% 13% 13% 10% 11% 12% % NH White 34% 43% 26% 28% 29% 32% % NH Black 1% 3% 3% 1% 0% 2% % Asian/Pac.Isl.49% 41% 57% 60% 60% 54% Total 5,807 6,747 4,231 6,043 6,171 28,999 % Latino 11% 12% 13% 8% 10% 11% % Asian-Surnamed 38% 30% 38% 49% 44% 40% % Filipino-Surnamed 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Total 1,913 2,529 1,199 1,797 2,044 9,482 % Latino 9% 11% 14% 8% 9% 10% % Asian-Surnamed 25% 20% 24% 34% 32% 27% % Filipino-Surnamed 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Total 3,711 4,566 2,400 3,660 3,910 18,246 % Latino 11% 12% 13% 10% 10% 11% % Asian-Surnamed 29% 24% 31% 39% 36% 32% % Filipino-Surnamed 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% ACS Pop. Est.Total 11,721 10,472 12,303 11,542 11,145 57,184 age0-19 25% 24% 24% 22% 21% 23% age20-60 59% 49% 58% 52% 54% 55% age60plus 16% 26% 19% 26% 24% 22% immigrants 46% 38% 56% 53% 47% 48% naturalized 64% 69% 60% 76% 77% 69% english 38% 51% 30% 33% 42% 38% spanish 9% 8%8%5%7%7% asian-lang 48% 36% 55% 59% 50% 50% other lang 5% 5% 7% 3% 1% 4% Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well"29% 20% 36% 36% 28% 30% hs-grad 41% 38% 41% 38% 37% 39% bachelor 31% 34% 33% 32% 32% 32% graduatedegree 22% 23% 17% 18% 20% 20% Child in Household child-under18 40% 33% 37% 33% 31% 35% employed 60% 57% 60% 53% 56% 57% Commute on Public Transit 4% 2% 5% 4% 2% 3% income 0-25k 14% 11% 21% 20% 16% 17% income 25-50k 16% 17% 20% 15% 12% 16% income 50-75k 15% 12% 15% 12% 16% 14% income 75-200k 40% 39% 38% 39% 42% 40% income 200k-plus 15% 20% 6% 13% 13% 13% single family 76% 79% 37% 88% 90% 72% multi-family 24% 21% 63% 12% 10% 28% vacant 3% 6% 8% 9% 4% 6% occupied 97% 94% 92% 91% 96% 94% rented 41% 31% 62% 25% 29% 39% owned 59% 69% 38% 75% 71% 61% Total and Voting Age population data from the 2010 Decennial Census. Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database. Work (percent of pop age 16+) Household Income Education (among those age 25+) Total Pop City of Arcadia - Public Map K Revised Language spoken at home Voting Age Pop Housing Stats Immigration Citizen Voting Age Pop., Age, Immigration, and other demographics from the 2010-2014 American Community Survey 5-year data. Citizen Voting Age Pop Voter Registration (Nov 2014) Age Voter Turnout (Nov 2012) Voter Turnout (Nov 2014) Sanita Anita Park (Racetrack) The Arboretum of Los Angeles County Santa Anita Race Track Santa Anita Golf Course AdiP3GlfC Eisenhower Park Bonita Park Santa Anita Park Tierra Verde Park Fairview Avenue Park Camino Grove Park Forest Ave Park Park Holly Avenue Park Methodist Hospital Southern California 210 Topaz Pl y o n R d Oaks PlElkins PlCarolwood DrHighland Oaks DrAlta Oaks DrHillcrest BlvdS 5th AveTorrey Pines DrOakhaven RdOakwood DrN 2nd AveN 1st AveLa Porte St Alta Vista AveMayflower AveLoganrita AveS 10th AveE Camino Rea Altern St Jeffries Ave E Boley StN 5th AveCalifornia St S 9th Ave8th AveEncino AveDiamond St S 6th AveS 4th AveE Saint Joseph StE Santa Clara St Wheeler Ave E Huntington Dr S 3rd AveS 2nd AveS 1st AveGreenfield AveLouise AveLeda Ln A l st e r A v e Coyle Ave Rodell Pl E Norman Ave E Pamela Rd Lee AveLas Flores Ave E Lemon Ave Peck RdE Sandra Ave L y n r o s e S tE L i v e O a k A v e E Woodruff AveN Santa Anita AveEl Vista CirStonehouse RdChantry DrAnita Crest DrClaridge StWo o d l a n d LnRamona RdRode o RdW Floral Ave Colorado StRancho RdE Orange Grove Ave H a rv a r d D r Foothill Blvd O ak la w n P lN Baldwin AveSanta Margarita DrOxford DrGlencoe DrSingingwood Dr San Vicente Rd San Simeon Rd Murietta Dr Fallen Leaf Rd W Foothill Blvd Altura TerMonte Verde Dr Campus Dr W D u a r t e R dFairview Ave W Naomi Ave W Winnie Way W Longden AveW Arthur Ave Palm CirW Palm Dr Walnut Ave W Pamela Rd W Leroy Ave Holly AveW Lemon Ave Rosemarie Dr Hugo Reid Dr W Huntington Dr N G o ld e n W es t Av e Kingsley Dr Palo Alto DrBalboa Dr Southview Rd Portola Dr W Camino Real Ave W Norman Ave W Las Flores Ave S Baldwin AveArcadia Ave V a l St Las Tunas Dr Longley Way W Woodruff AveW inthrop AveBradford AveBaldwin AvRowland AveLa Rosa Rd Columbia RdDr ak e RdOkoboji DrHuntington Dr E D u a r t e R d City of Arcadia Districting 2017 Prepared by National Demographics, August 17, 2017 Suggested Election Sequence: 2018: 2, 3, & 5 2020: 1 & 4 or 2018: 1, 3, & 5 2020: 2 & 4 Map layers Green Map Water Area Streets Landmark Point Landmark Area Pipeline/Power Line Railroad River City of Arcadia District 1 2345Total Total Pop 11,440 11,314 11,075 11,077 11,458 56,364 Deviation from ideal 167 41 -198 -196 185 383 % Deviation 1.48% 0.36% -1.76% -1.74% 1.64% 3.40% % Hisp 11% 18% 13% 9% 10% 12% % NH White 39% 21% 21% 23% 25% 26% % NH Black 1% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% % Asian-American 48% 59% 64% 66% 64% 60% Total 8,806 8,739 8,790 8,738 9,001 44,074 % Hisp 10% 18% 12% 8% 9% 11% % NH White 42% 22% 24% 27% 27% 28% % NH Black 1% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% % Asian-American 46% 57% 62% 63% 62% 58% Total 7,555 7,272 6,866 7,250 8,078 37,021 % Hisp 12% 17% 17% 7% 9% 12% % NH White 45% 29% 24% 31% 29% 32% % NH Black 2% 1% 2% 2% 0% 2% % Asian/Pac.Isl.40% 52% 56% 59% 61% 54% Total 7,681 5,272 4,587 4,975 6,484 28,999 % Latino 10% 14% 12% 10% 9% 11% % Asian-Surnamed 30% 39% 43% 44% 46% 40% % Filipino-Surnamed 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% Total 3,000 1,539 1,343 1,451 2,149 9,482 % Latino 9% 12% 13% 10% 9% 10% % Asian-Surnamed 20% 28% 30% 27% 32% 27% % Filipino-Surnamed 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Total 5,333 3,151 2,643 2,998 4,120 18,246 % Latino 10% 14% 13% 10% 10% 11% % Asian-Surnamed 24% 32% 34% 35% 37% 32% % Filipino-Surnamed 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% ACS Pop. Est.Total 11,638 11,541 11,595 11,071 11,339 57,184 age0-19 25% 24% 23% 23% 21% 23% age20-60 50% 60% 55% 55% 53% 55% age60plus 25% 16% 22% 23% 26% 22% immigrants 34% 51% 55% 54% 46% 48% naturalized 69% 63% 65% 69% 80% 69% english 53% 34% 31% 31% 42% 38% spanish 7% 10% 8% 6% 6% 7% asian-lang 35% 51% 55% 58% 51% 50% other lang 5% 5% 6% 5% 1% 4% Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well"18% 32% 36% 36% 29% 30% hs-grad 38% 41% 41% 39% 36% 39% bachelor 33% 31% 31% 34% 32% 32% graduatedegree 24% 21% 17% 18% 21% 20% Child in Household child-under18 35% 39% 36% 35% 31% 35% employed 58% 60% 57% 57% 55% 57% Commute on Public Transit 2% 4% 5% 4% 2% 3% income 0-25k 10% 16% 22% 20% 16% 17% income 25-50k 16% 17% 18% 18% 12% 16% income 50-75k 10% 18% 14% 14% 15% 14% income 75-200k 39% 39% 38% 39% 42% 40% income 200k-plus 24% 10% 8% 10% 15% 13% single family 86% 68% 58% 60% 92% 72% multi-family 14% 32% 42% 40% 8% 28% vacant 5% 4% 9% 9% 5% 6% occupied 95% 96% 91% 91% 95% 94% rented 25% 50% 49% 44% 25% 39% owned 75% 50% 51% 56% 75% 61% Total and Voting Age population data from the 2010 Decennial Census. Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database. Housing Stats Immigration Citizen Voting Age Pop., Age, Immigration, and other demographics from the 2010-2014 American Community Survey 5-year data. Citizen Voting Age Pop Voter Registration (Nov 2014) Age Voter Turnout (Nov 2012) Voter Turnout (Nov 2014) Work (percent of pop age 16+) Household Income Education (among those age 25+) Total Pop NDC Green Plan Language spoken at home Voting Age Pop Sanita Anita Park (Racetrack) Santa Anita Race Track Santa Anita Golf Course Arcadia Co Park AdiP3GlfC Eisenhower Park Civic Center Athletic Field Rec Area Santa Anita Park Tierra Verde Park Fairview Avenue Park Forest Ave Park Park Holly Avenue Park Methodist Hospital Southern California 210 Topaz Pl y o n R d Oaks PlElkins PlCarolwood DrHighland Oaks DrHillcrest BlvdS 5th AveTorrey Pines DrOakhaven RdOakwood DrN 2nd AveN 1st AveLa Porte St Alta Vista AveMayflower AveLoganrita AveS 10th AveShrode StE Camino Rea Altern St Jeffries Ave E Boley StN 5th AveCalifornia St S 9th Ave8th AveEncino AveDiamond St S 6th AveS 4th AveS 2nd AveE Saint Joseph St S 3rd AveS 1st AveGreenfield AveLouise AvePeachtree Ln A l st e r A v e Coyle Ave Rodell Pl E Norman Ave E Pamela Rd Lee AveLas Flores Ave E Lemon Ave Peck RdE Sandra Ave L y n r o s e S tE L i v e O a k A v e E Woodruff AveN Santa Anita AveEl Vista CirStonehouse RdChantry DrAnita Crest DrClaridge StWo o d l a n d LnRamona RdRode o RdW Floral Ave Colorado St Arbolada Dr E Orange Grove Ave Hacienda Dr W Foothill Blvd H a rv a r d D r Gloria Rd Anoakia LnHampton Rd Loma Lisa LnFoothill Blvd W Orange Grove Ave Si n gi ngw oo d Dr Old Ranch RdSan Vicente RdMurietta Dr Fallen Leaf Rd V olante D rMichillinda AveAlta St Campus Dr W D u a r t e R dFairview Ave W Naomi Ave W Winnie Way W Longden AveW Arthur Ave Palm CirW Lemon Ave W Palm Dr Walnut Ave W Pamela Rd W Leroy Ave Holly AveLeafwood LnS Old Ranch RdW Huntington DrGolden West AveN Golden West AveLovell AveMelanie LnBella Vista DrTerra LnEl Sereno AveS Baldwin AveCambury AveArcadia Ave Las Tunas Dr Longley Way W Woodruff AveW inthrop AveBradford AveBaldwin AveRowland AveN Altura RdHugo Reid Dr Co rt e z RdN Suns e t Bl v dE D u a r t e R d City of Arcadia Districting 2017 Prepared by National Demographics, August 17, 2017 Suggested Election Sequence: 2018: 2, 4, & 5 2020: 1 & 3 or 2018: 2, 3, & 4 2020: 1 & 5 Map layers Orange Map Water Area Streets Landmark Point Landmark Area Pipeline/Power Line Railroad River City of Arcadia District 1 2345Total Total Pop 10,998 11,470 11,235 11,188 11,473 56,364 Deviation from ideal -275 197 -38 -85 200 475 % Deviation -2.44% 1.75% -0.34% -0.75% 1.77% 4.21% % Hisp 12% 15% 15% 11% 8% 12% % NH White 26% 34% 22% 24% 22% 26% % NH Black 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% % Asian-American 60% 49% 59% 63% 68% 60% Total 8,342 9,034 8,783 8,730 9,185 44,074 % Hisp 11% 15% 14% 10% 7% 11% % NH White 29% 36% 25% 27% 25% 28% % NH Black 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% % Asian-American 58% 47% 57% 62% 66% 58% Total 7,349 7,059 6,956 7,946 7,712 37,021 % Hisp 15% 11% 17% 11% 8% 12% % NH White 34% 42% 27% 29% 27% 32% % NH Black 1% 2% 4% 0% 0% 2% % Asian/Pac.Isl.49% 44% 51% 60% 63% 54% Total 5,807 6,212 4,628 6,171 6,181 28,999 % Latino 11% 11% 16% 10% 7% 11% % Asian-Surnamed 38% 30% 34% 44% 51% 40% % Filipino-Surnamed 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Total 1,913 2,314 1,365 2,044 1,846 9,482 % Latino 9% 10% 16% 9% 8% 10% % Asian-Surnamed 25% 19% 23% 32% 35% 27% % Filipino-Surnamed 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Total 3,711 4,170 2,667 3,910 3,788 18,246 % Latino 11% 10% 16% 10% 9% 11% % Asian-Surnamed 29% 25% 27% 36% 40% 32% % Filipino-Surnamed 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% ACS Pop. Est.Total 11,721 11,062 11,876 11,145 11,380 57,184 age0-19 25% 24% 24% 21% 22% 23% age20-60 59% 52% 56% 54% 52% 55% age60plus 16% 24% 21% 24% 26% 22% immigrants 46% 43% 51% 47% 53% 48% naturalized 64% 68% 60% 77% 76% 69% english 38% 44% 36% 42% 32% 38% spanish 9% 8%8%7%4%7% asian-lang 48% 42% 48% 50% 62% 50% other lang 5% 6% 7% 1% 2% 4% Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well"29% 25% 32% 28% 37% 30% hs-grad 41% 39% 41% 37% 37% 39% bachelor 31% 33% 32% 32% 33% 32% graduatedegree 22% 21% 18% 20% 19% 20% Child in Household child-under18 40% 36% 35% 31% 32% 35% employed 60% 57% 60% 56% 53% 57% Commute on Public Transit 4% 3% 4% 2% 4% 3% income 0-25k 14% 14% 20% 16% 20% 17% income 25-50k 16% 18% 20% 12% 14% 16% income 50-75k 15% 13% 15% 16% 11% 14% income 75-200k 40% 37% 39% 42% 40% 40% income 200k-plus 15% 17% 7% 13% 14% 13% single family 76% 68% 45% 90% 89% 72% multi-family 24% 32% 55% 10% 11% 28% vacant 3% 7% 7% 4% 10% 6% occupied 97% 93% 93% 96% 90% 94% rented 41% 38% 58% 29% 24% 39% owned 59% 62% 42% 71% 76% 61% Total and Voting Age population data from the 2010 Decennial Census. Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database. Housing Stats Immigration Citizen Voting Age Pop., Age, Immigration, and other demographics from the 2010-2014 American Community Survey 5-year data. Citizen Voting Age Pop Voter Registration (Nov 2014) Age Voter Turnout (Nov 2012) Voter Turnout (Nov 2014) Work (percent of pop age 16+) Household Income Education (among those age 25+) Total Pop NDC Orange Plan Language spoken at home Voting Age Pop Sanita Anita Park (Racetrack) Santa Anita Race Track Santa Anita Golf Course Arcadia Co Park AdiP3GlfC Eisenhower Park Civic Center Athletic Field Rec Area Baldwin Stocker Park Santa Anita Park Tierra Verde Park Fairview Avenue Park Forest Ave Park Park Holly Avenue Park Methodist Hospital Southern California 210 Topaz Pl y o n R d Oaks PlElkins PlCarolwood DrHighland Oaks DrHillcrest BlvdS 5th AveTorrey Pines DrOakhaven RdOakwood DrN 2nd AveN 1st AveLa Porte St Alta Vista AveMayflower AveLoganrita AveS 10th AveShrode StE Camino Rea Altern St Jeffries Ave E Boley StN 5th AveCalifornia St S 9th Ave8th AveEncino AveDiamond St S 6th AveS 4th AveS 2nd AveE Saint Joseph St S 3rd AveS 1st AveGreenfield AveLouise AvePeachtree Ln A l st e r A v e Coyle Ave Rodell Pl E Norman Ave E Pamela Rd Lee AveLas Flores Ave E Lemon Ave Peck RdE Sandra Ave L y n r o s e S tE L i v e O a k A v e E Woodruff AveN Santa Anita AveEl Vista CirStonehouse RdChantry DrAnita Crest DrClaridge StWo o d l a n d LnRamona RdRode o RdW Floral Ave Colorado St Arbolada Dr E Orange Grove Ave Hacienda Dr W Foothill Blvd H a rv a r d D r Gloria Rd Anoakia LnHampton Rd Loma Lisa LnFoothill Blvd W Orange Grove Ave Si n gi ngw oo d Dr Old Ranch RdSan Vicente RdMurietta Dr Fallen Leaf Rd V olante D rMichillinda AveAlta St Campus Dr W D u a r t e R dFairview Ave W Naomi Ave W Winnie Way W Longden AveW Arthur Ave Palm CirW Palm Dr Walnut Ave W Pamela Rd W Leroy Ave Holly AveRosemarie DrS Old Ranch RdW Huntington DrGolden West AveN Golden West AveSouthview Rd Lovell AveMelanie LnS Baldwin AveCambury AveLas Tunas Dr Longley Way W Woodruff AveW inthrop AveBradford AveBaldwin AveRowland AveN Altura RdHugo Reid Dr Co rt e z RdN Suns e t Bl v dS Sunset BlvdN Oak AveCity of Arcadia Districting 2017 Prepared by National Demographics, August 17, 2017 Suggested Election Sequence: 2018: 2, 3, & 5 2020: 1 & 4 Map layers Purple Map Water Area Streets Landmark Point Landmark Area Pipeline/Power Line Railroad River City of Arcadia District 1 2345Total Total Pop 10,998 10,984 11,713 11,481 11,188 56,364 Deviation from ideal -275 -289 440 208 -85 729 % Deviation -2.44% -2.56% 3.90% 1.85% -0.75% 6.47% % Hisp 12% 18% 13% 7% 11% 12% % NH White 26% 35% 21% 22% 24% 26% % NH Black 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% % Asian-American 60% 45% 62% 68% 63% 60% Total 8,342 8,634 9,248 9,120 8,730 44,074 % Hisp 11% 17% 12% 7% 10% 11% % NH White 29% 37% 25% 25% 27% 28% % NH Black 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% % Asian-American 58% 43% 60% 66% 62% 58% Total 7,349 6,974 7,027 7,726 7,946 37,021 % Hisp 15% 13% 19% 5% 11% 12% % NH White 34% 43% 24% 29% 29% 32% % NH Black 1% 3% 3% 1% 0% 2% % Asian/Pac.Isl.49% 41% 53% 63% 60% 54% Total 5,807 6,846 4,450 5,725 6,171 28,999 % Latino 11% 12% 13% 8% 10% 11% % Asian-Surnamed 38% 30% 40% 48% 44% 40% % Filipino-Surnamed 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Total 1,913 2,562 1,281 1,681 2,044 9,482 % Latino 9% 11% 13% 9% 9% 10% % Asian-Surnamed 25% 20% 27% 31% 32% 27% % Filipino-Surnamed 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Total 3,711 4,618 2,540 3,468 3,910 18,246 % Latino 11% 12% 14% 9% 10% 11% % Asian-Surnamed 29% 25% 32% 38% 36% 32% % Filipino-Surnamed 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% ACS Pop. Est.Total 11,721 10,587 12,437 11,293 11,145 57,184 age0-19 25% 24% 23% 23% 21% 23% age20-60 59% 49% 57% 53% 54% 55% age60plus 16% 26% 20% 24% 24% 22% immigrants 46% 38% 55% 54% 47% 48% naturalized 64% 69% 62% 73% 77% 69% english 38% 51% 31% 31% 42% 38% spanish 9% 8%8%5%7%7% asian-lang 48% 36% 54% 60% 50% 50% other lang 5% 5% 7% 4% 1% 4% Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well"29% 20% 36% 37% 28% 30% hs-grad 41% 38% 42% 37% 37% 39% bachelor 31% 34% 32% 33% 32% 32% graduatedegree 22% 23% 16% 19% 20% 20% Child in Household child-under18 40% 33% 37% 33% 31% 35% employed 60% 57% 59% 54% 56% 57% Commute on Public Transit 4% 2% 5% 4% 2% 3% income 0-25k 14% 11% 22% 20% 16% 17% income 25-50k 16% 17% 20% 16% 12% 16% income 50-75k 15% 12% 15% 13% 16% 14% income 75-200k 40% 39% 38% 40% 42% 40% income 200k-plus 15% 20% 6% 12% 13% 13% single family 76% 79% 49% 73% 90% 72% multi-family 24% 21% 51% 27% 10% 28% vacant 3% 6% 8% 10% 4% 6% occupied 97% 94% 92% 90% 96% 94% rented 41% 31% 56% 34% 29% 39% owned 59% 69% 44% 66% 71% 61% Total and Voting Age population data from the 2010 Decennial Census. Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database. Housing Stats Immigration Citizen Voting Age Pop., Age, Immigration, and other demographics from the 2010-2014 American Community Survey 5-year data. Citizen Voting Age Pop Voter Registration (Nov 2014) Age Voter Turnout (Nov 2012) Voter Turnout (Nov 2014) Work (percent of pop age 16+) Household Income Education (among those age 25+) Total Pop NDC Purple Plan Language spoken at home Voting Age Pop Sanita Anita Park (Racetrack) Santa Anita Race Track Santa Anita Golf Course Arcadia Co Park Adi P 3 Glf C Eisenhower Park Civic Center Athletic Field Rec Area Baldwin Stocker Park Santa Anita Park Tierra Verde Park Fairview Avenue Park Forest Ave Park Park Holly Avenue Park Methodist Hospital Southern California 210 Topaz Pl y o n R d Oaks PlElkins PlCarolwood DrHighland Oaks DrHillcrest BlvdS 5th AveTorrey Pines DrOakhaven RdOakwood DrN 2nd AveN 1st AveLa Porte St Alta Vista AveMayflower AveLoganrita AveS 10th AveShrode StE Camino Rea Altern St Jeffries Ave E Boley StN 5th AveCalifornia St S 9th Ave8th AveEncino AveDiamond St S 6th AveS 4th AveS 2nd AveE Saint Joseph St S 3rd AveS 1st AveGreenfield AveLouise AvePeachtree Ln A l st e r A v e Coyle Ave Rodell Pl E Norman Ave E Pamela Rd Lee AveLas Flores Ave E Lemon Ave Peck RdE Sandra Ave L y n ro s e S tE L i v e O a k A v e E Woodruff AveN Santa Anita AveEl Vista CirStonehouse RdChantry DrAnita Crest DrClaridge StWo o d l a n d LnRamona RdRode o RdW Floral Ave Colorado St Arbolada Dr E Orange Grove Ave Hacienda Dr W Foothill Blvd H a rv a r d D r Gloria Rd Anoakia LnHampton Rd Loma Lisa LnFoothill Blvd W Orange Grove Ave Si n gi ngw oo d Dr Old Ranch RdSan Vicente RdMurietta Dr Fallen Leaf Rd V olante D rMichillinda AveAlta St Campus Dr W D u a r t e R dFairview Ave W Naomi Ave W Winnie Way W Longden AveW Arthur Ave Palm CirW Lemon Ave W Palm Dr Walnut Ave W Leroy Ave Holly AveRosemarie DrS Old Ranch RdW Huntington Dr Paloma Dr Encanto Dr Panorama Dr Balboa DrMagellan RdLovell AveMelanie LnS Baldwin AveCambury AveArcadia Ave Las Tunas Dr Longley Way W Woodruff AveW inthrop AveBradford AveBaldwin AveRowland AveColumbia RdOkoboji DrHuntington Dr E D u a r t e R d City of ArcadiaDistricting 2017 Prepared by National Demographics, September 27, 2017 Suggested Election Sequence: 2018: 2, 3, & 5 2020: 1 & 4 Map layers Public Map M Water Area Streets Landmark Point Landmark Area Pipeline/Power Line Railroad River City of Arcadia District 1 2345Total Total Pop 10,998 11,571 11,106 11,501 11,188 56,364 Deviation from ideal -275 298 -167 228 -85 573 % Deviation -2.44% 2.64% -1.48% 2.02% -0.75% 5.08% % Hisp 12% 15% 16% 8% 11% 12% % NH White 26% 33% 24% 22% 24% 26% % NH Black 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% % Asian-American 60% 50% 58% 69% 63% 60% Total 8,342 9,138 8,705 9,159 8,730 44,074 % Hisp 11% 15% 14% 7% 10% 11% % NH White 29% 35% 27% 24% 27% 28% % NH Black 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% % Asian-American 58% 47% 55% 67% 62% 58% Total 7,349 7,054 6,869 7,803 7,946 37,021 % Hisp 15% 12% 18% 7% 11% 12% % NH White 34% 41% 27% 28% 29% 32% % NH Black 1% 3% 3% 1% 0% 2% % Asian/Pac.Isl.49% 43% 51% 64% 60% 54% Total 5,807 6,166 4,740 6,115 6,171 28,999 % Latino 11% 11% 16% 7% 10% 11% % Asian-Surnamed 38% 31% 34% 51% 44% 40% % Filipino-Surnamed 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Total 1,913 2,271 1,445 1,809 2,044 9,482 % Latino 9% 10% 15% 8% 9% 10% % Asian-Surnamed 25% 19% 23% 35% 32% 27% % Filipino-Surnamed 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Total 3,711 4,127 2,776 3,721 3,910 18,246 % Latino 11% 11% 16% 9% 10% 11% % Asian-Surnamed 29% 24% 28% 40% 36% 32% % Filipino-Surnamed 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% ACS Pop. Est.Total 11,721 11,363 11,749 11,206 11,145 57,184 age0-19 25% 24% 24% 22% 21% 23% age20-60 59% 53% 55% 52% 54% 55% age60plus 16% 23% 21% 26% 24% 22% immigrants 46% 44% 50% 54% 47% 48% naturalized 64% 65% 63% 75% 77% 69% english 38% 43% 37% 32% 42% 38% spanish 9% 8%8%4%7%7% asian-lang 48% 43% 48% 62% 50% 50% other lang 5% 6% 7% 2% 1% 4% Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well"29% 26% 31% 37% 28% 30% hs-grad 41% 39% 41% 37% 37% 39% bachelor 31% 33% 32% 34% 32% 32% graduatedegree 22% 21% 18% 19% 20% 20% Child in Household child-under18 40% 35% 36% 32% 31% 35% employed 60% 58% 58% 54% 56% 57% Commute on Public Transit 4% 3% 4% 4% 2% 3% income 0-25k 14% 15% 19% 19% 16% 17% income 25-50k 16% 18% 20% 15% 12% 16% income 50-75k 15% 13% 15% 11% 16% 14% income 75-200k 40% 38% 38% 41% 42% 40% income 200k-plus 15% 16% 8% 14% 13% 13% single family 76% 64% 51% 84% 90% 72% multi-family 24% 36% 49% 16% 10% 28% vacant 3% 7% 7% 10% 4% 6% occupied 97% 93% 93% 90% 96% 94% rented 41% 42% 53% 27% 29% 39% owned 59% 58% 47% 73% 71% 61% Total and Voting Age population data from the 2010 Decennial Census. Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database. Housing Stats Immigration Citizen Voting Age Pop., Age, Immigration, and other demographics from the 2010-2014 American Community Survey 5-year data. Citizen Voting Age Pop Voter Registration (Nov 2014) Age Voter Turnout (Nov 2012) Voter Turnout (Nov 2014) Work (percent of pop age 16+) Household Income Education (among those age 25+) Total Pop City of Arcadia - Public Map M Language spoken at home Voting Age Pop