Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013.02.25 Council Special Meeting PacketAGENDA PASCO CITY COUNCIL Special Meeting 7:00 p.m. February 25, 2013 CALL TO ORDER 2, ROLL CALL (a) Pledge of Allegiance. 3, BUSINESS ITEMS (a) City Council Districts. 1. Agenda Report from Stan Strebel, Deputy City Manager dated February 20, 2013. 2. Map of Current Council Districts. 3. Matrix, Population by Precinct / District, Current. 4. Map, 5- District Option. 5. Map, 3- District Option. 6. District Option Summary Table. 7. RCW 29A.76.010(4). CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING 4. ADJOURNMENT AGENDA REPORT FOR: City Council TO: Gary CrutchfI Manager FROM: Stan Strebel, De uty City Manager SUBJECT: Public Hearing on City Council Districts I. REFERENCE(S): 1. Map of Current Council Districts 2. Matrix, Population by Precinct / District, Current 3. Map, 5- District Option 4. Map, 3- District Option 5. District Option Summary Table 6. RCW 29A.76.010(4) February 20, 2013 Special Mtg.: 2/25/13 II. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL / STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: 2/25: CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING III. FISCAL IMPACT: N/A IV. HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF: A) PMC Chapter 1.10 currently provides that five of the seven City Council positions be elected by district (candidates residing in the respective district) with the other two positions elected "at large" (without regard to residence). Districts are formed based on population and pursuant to requirements of the PMC, must not be greater or smaller than any other district by more than 10 %; and pursuant to the requirements of the RCW, must be compact, contiguous; and to the extent possible, coincide with recognized natural boundaries and preserve existing communities of related and mutual interest (see reference #6). B) Current districts do not meet the 10% requirement. On previous occasions, Council has discussed alternatives of revising districts under the 5- District plan or the possibility of changing to a 3- District plan (with two Councilmembers elected from each of three districts and only one at -large position). Because the population of districts would be larger under the 3- District plan, it would more easily satisfy "equal" population requirements and require less maintenance over time. C) Staff has provided for notice of a public hearing on the alternate 5- District and 3- District plans to be held on February 25. Council should make a decision on the district plan at the meeting of March 4, as notice must be given to Franklin County Auditor to allow preparation for the 2013 municipal election cycle. 3(a) A u � M N N C V O N U 0 O v ++ d CL t o v U N M t} h V U = U U C O O O N g m g$ N J ° o s "s $ A u � M N N C V O N U 0 O v ++ d CL t o v U N M t} h V U = U U C O O O N m N J s "s $ � a ° o o ° � °a A u � M N N C V O N U 0 O v ++ d CL t o v U N M t} h V U = U U C O O O N m N J Council District Options 2013 City of Pasco Current Counril Precinct 1 2 3 4 5 001 5,150 002 3,080 003 1,768 004 2,163 005 - - - - -- 006 007 2,033 008 j 410 009 1,338 010 1,126 011 1,147 - - - -_ -- - _ -_. 012 - - - - - -1 -1,275 - 013 1,232 ! _ 014 015 1,151 016 1,525 017 1 1,908 018 1,113 019 988 020 1 396 021 121 022 816 023 1,015 024 407 025 270 026 - _ 438 _ 028 254 029 ± 275 030 — 238 -.__ — 136_._ 031 _ - —___. 032 1,722 033 598 034 035 538 306 036 896 037 1,694 038 887 039 871 040 1,515 041 393 042 1,027 043 973 044 i 965 045 ! 1,743 046 1,592 047 --too _580 048 _ 049 _ 57_3__ 050 1,154 051 - 1.188 052 _ 053 1,269 1,269 054 __ _ - 798 055 996 056 1,074 057 673 058 64 059 709 060 184 062 973 063 593 L.LOtal 13,393 12,045 11,464 13,934 13,401 Printed 2112/2013 Council District Options 2013 Page t of 1 at 3:59 PM �f ryy; W r 2 y J I m a w o s tJ TJ [J W a s" o g "s Q �0 U v Lm V _N IL LO w 0 U � J o a m a w o s tJ TJ [J W U s g "s Q �0 U v Lm V _N IL LO w 0 U J a f o � 0 o 0 m a w tJ TJ [J W U 0 _ Q �0 U v Lm V _N IL LO w 0 U tJ TJ [J U U �J J f WA 2 N w N M U U U i+ s s C _N O d Q 7 0 U v O J +`r V N_ R � IL Ckl w O U 8 8 S 8 0 S ° ° a "s WA 2 N w N M U U U i+ s s C _N O d Q 7 0 U v O J +`r V N_ R � IL Ckl w O U WA 2 N w N M U U U i+ N_ � C _N O d Q 7 0 U v O J +`r V N_ R � IL Ckl w O U N M U U U N_ O _N d J City of Pasco Council Districts 2013 District Option Summary Table District Option Minimum Legal Maximum Actual Maximum Disparity P y Percentage 10% Max Current Districts 11,4641 12,610 13,934 (1,324) 21.5% 5- District Option 12,1811 13,399 13,393 6 9.9% 3- DistrictOption 20,835 22,918, 22,38711 532 7.4% Copy of Council District Options 2013 Page 1 of 1 Printed 2/19/2013 at 11:25 AM RCW 29A.76.010: Counties, municipal corporations, and special purpose districts. RCW 29A.76.010 Counties, municipal corporations, and special purpose districts. Page I of I (1) It is the responsibility of each county, municipal corporation, and special purpose district with a governing body comprised of internal director, council, or commissioner districts not based on statutorily required land ownership criteria to periodically redistrict its governmental unit, based on population information from the most recent federal decennial census. (2) Within forty -five days after receipt of federal decennial census information applicable to a specific local area, the commission established in RCW 44.05.030 shall forward the census information to each municipal corporation, county, and district charged with redistricting under this section. (3) No later than eight months after its receipt of federal decennial census data, the governing body of the municipal corporation, county, or district shall prepare a plan for redistricting its internal or director districts. (4) The plan shall be consistent with the following criteria: (a) Each internal director, council, or commissioner district shall be as nearly equal in population as possible to each and every other such district comprising the municipal corporation, county, or special purpose district. (b) Each district shall be as compact as possible. (c) Each district shall consist of geographically contiguous area. (d) Population data may not be used for purposes of favoring or disfavoring any racial group or political party. (e) To the extent feasible and if not inconsistent with the basic enabling legislation for the municipal corporation, county, or district, the district ooundares shall coincide with existing recognized natural boundaries and shall, to the extent possible, preserve existing communities of related and mutual interest. (5) During the adoption of its plan, the municipal corporation, county, or district shall ensure that full and reasonable public notice of its actions is provided. The municipal corporation, county, or district shall hold at least one public hearing on the redistricting plan at least one week before adoption of the plan. (6)(a) Any registered voter residing in an area affected by the redistricting plan may request review of the adopted local plan by the superior court of the county in which he or she resides, within fifteen days of the plan's adoption. Any request for review must specify the reason or reasons alleged why the local plan is not consistent with the applicable redistricting criteria. The municipal corporation, county, or district may be oined as respondent. The superior court shall thereupon review the challenged plan for compliance with the applicable redistricting criteria set gut in subsection (4) of this section. (b) If the superior court finds the plan to be consistent with the requirements of this section, the plan shall take effect immediately. (c) If the superior court determines the plan does not meet the requirements of this section, in whole or in part, it shall remand the plan for `urther or corrective action within a specified and reasonable time period. (d) If the superior court finds that any request for review is frivolous or has been filed solely for purposes of harassment or delay, it may mpose appropriate sanctions on the party requesting review, including payment of attorneys' fees and costs to the respondent municipal corporation, county, or district. ;2011 c 349 § 26; 2003 c 111 § 1901. Prior: 1984 c 13 § 4; 1983 c 16 § 15; 1982 c 2 § 27. Formerly RCW 29.70.100.] Votes: Effective date -- 2011 c 349: See note following RCW 29A.04.255. Severability - -1984 c 13: See RCW 44.05.902. Contingent effective date -- Severability -- 1983 c 16: See RCW 44.05.900 and 44.05.901. ittp: // apps. leg. wa. gov /rcw /default.aspx ?cite= 29A.76.010 2/15/2013