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