Res 062-2011 7/5/2011RESOLUTION NO. 62 -2011
Resolution Initiating The Process Of Redistricting City Council
Districts And Voting Precincts, Establishing Criteria For
Redistricting, And Appointing A Citizens Advisory Committee To
Provide Advice And Public Input With Respect To Said Redistricting
Process
WHEREAS, the City of Wichita Falls, City Council has previously retained the
firm of Allison, Bass & Associates, LLP, of Austin, Texas, to conduct an Initial
Assessment of existing political boundaries of the City of Wichita Falls, following the
issuance of census data by the United States Census Bureau. Attached to this Order,
and incorporated herein for all purposes by reference, is a copy of the Initial
Assessment conducted by Allison, Bass & Associates, LLP;
WHEREAS, the Initial Assessment was based upon PL94 -171 data, as required
by federal law, and is further based upon information provided to Allison, Bass &
Associates, LLP by the Texas Legislative Council, the Texas Association of Counties
and by the City of Wichita Falls, Texas;
WHEREAS, based upon this information, the City of Wichita Falls has a total
maximum deviation of 27.00 %;
WHEREAS, the "total maximum deviation" is determined by dividing the total
population of the City of Wichita Falls by the number of city districts to determine an
ideal district size. The actual population of each district was then determined, based
upon the official population data contained within the census count, as defined by
Public Law 94 -171;
WHEREAS, the actual population of each district was compared to the ideal
ward size and a range of deviation by percentage was determined;
WHEREAS, a total maximum deviation in excess of 10% is presumptively
unconstitutional under established federal law; therefore, the City of Wichita Falls,
Texas, has a constitutional duty to redistrict its political boundaries to achieve "One -
Person- One - Vote" numerical balance between the Council districts at a legally
acceptable margin of deviation, and to make such changes as are necessary to comply
with the U.S. Voting Rights Act and applicable state and federal law; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds the public interest will be served by redrawing
the existing political boundaries of the City of Wichita Falls in such a manner as to
comply with applicable state and federal law.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS, THAT:
1. The City will immediately undertake such necessary and appropriate action to
accomplish redistricting of existing city districts and any incidental modification of
existing, consolidated, or newly created election precincts as necessary to accomplish
such redistricting.
2. The City Council will convene in open meetings, duly posted in accordance
with the Texas Open Meetings Act, to take up and consider one or more alternative
plans for the legal redistricting of the City of Wichita Falls.
3. After due consideration of one or more alternative plans, the City of Wichita
Falls will adopt a plan deemed to satisfy legal requirements, and which best suits the
legitimate governmental needs of the City of Wichita Falls.
4. The redistricting plan ( "plan ") shall, after adoption, be submitted to the United
States Department of Justice for review as required by 42 U.S.C. §1973, otherwise
known as the Voting Rights Act.
5. Upon preclearance, such plan, or a plan subsequently modified to obtain
preclearance, will be implemented for elections in the year 2012 and thereafter or until
a suitable substitute has been lawfully adopted.
6. The plan should, to the maximum extent possible, conform to the following
criteria:
a. The plan should ensure that all applicable provisions of the U.S. and Texas
Constitutions, the Voting Rights Act, the Texas Election Code are honored.
b. The plan should address minority representation, and if at all possible in
conformity with constitutional standards, avoid retrogression in the
percentage of population and voting age demographics consistent with
existing minority representation.
c. The plan should preserve minority communities of interest. These
communities of interest should be recognized and retained intact where
possible. Only when the overall minority population of the City is sufficiently
large, should the City require more than one minority district, should minority
populations be divided and only then to the least degree possible.
d. The plan should not attempt to unreasonably join geographically remote
minority populations into a single precinct unless there are strong and
genuine connections between these communities as reflected by common
schools, churches, or cultural ties. For example, minority populations in two
separate towns, located miles apart, may not have sufficient links or common
political cohesion to justify joining these two minority population centers into a
single electoral group. Particularly when dealing with distinct minority groups,
a general assumption that separate minority populations will vote in a "block"
may be unsupportable in fact.
e. The plan should seek compact and contiguous political boundaries. Physical
boundaries which tend to divide populations in fundamental ways should be
recognized and communities of interest retained intact where possible. To the
maximum extent possible, clearly recognized boundaries should be used to
facilitate ease of voter identification of boundaries, as well as election
administration.
f. Where possible, well- recognized and long -used election precinct boundaries
should be retained intact (within the limitations imposed by state and federal
law) or with as little alteration as possible.
g. Election precincts in the plan should be sized in conformity with state law.
(For example, in cities that use traditional, hand - counted paper ballots, no
election precinct may contain more than 2,000 voters. In cities with voting
systems that allow for automated ballot counting, this number may be
increased to as many as 5,000 voters.)
h. The plan should afford incumbent office holders with the assurance that they
will continue to represent the majority of individuals who elected these
incumbents, and all incumbents' residential locations should be retained in
their reformed precincts to insure continuity in leadership during the
remaining term of incumbents.
i. The plan should address fundamental and necessary governmental
functions, and to the extent possible, ensure that these functions are
enhanced rather than impaired. Election administration should not be unduly
complex as a result of election boundaries.
j. The plan should ensure that election voting precincts under such plan do not
contain territory from more than one of the following to provide to the greatest
extent possible harmonious administration of various election jurisdictions:
commissioners precinct; City district;
justice precinct; State Board of Education
congressional district; districts;
state representative district; other special election districts.
state senatorial district;
k. The plan should attempt to locate polling places in convenient, well -known
locations that are accessible to disabled voters to the maximum extent
possible. Public buildings should be utilized to the maximum extent possible
as polling places. Where necessary, buildings routinely open to the public,
such as churches, retail businesses, or private buildings dedicated to public
activities, should be used as polling places.
The foregoing criteria are deemed to be illustrative, but not exclusive,
examples of fundamentally important issues, which should be considered in
any redistricting plan. Therefore, the City Council expresses its intent to
measure any plan submitted for consideration by this set of criteria, and to
base any eventual exercise of discretion upon the foregoing criteria.
7. The following persons are appointed to the Citizens Advisory Committee for
Redistricting:
Joel Jimenez
Mark Lam
Jim Newsom
Troy Farris
Robert Seabury
Ted Buss
June O'Hare
PASSED AND APPROVED this the 5th day of July, 2011
ATTEST:
City Clerk
MAYOR
INITIAL ASSESSMENT
OF THE CITY OF
WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS
FOR PURPOSES OF REDISTRIC'T'ING EVALUATION
Prepared by
ALLISON, BASS & ASSOCIATES, L.L.P.
Attorneys at Law
The A.O. Watson House
402 West 12s' Street
Austin, Texas 78701
(512) 482 -0701
(512) 480 -0902
Law(&allison -bass. com
Should you determine that mans depicting various political
boundaries are incorrem please advise us immediately.
mival Asseuman
Page 1 of 9
TAB 1
GENERAL OVERVIEW
The Initial Assessment is a narrative analysis of the data contained in the PL94-
171 files provided by the Census Bureau, together with an explanation of the impact such
data may have upon the City of Wichita Falls in light of state and federal law.
Following the Supreme Court decision in Avery v. Midland City, 390 U.S. 474; 88 S.
Ct. 1114, 20 L. Ed. 2d 45 (1968), Texas City Councils have been required to make a
periodic assessment of their political boundaries to determine whether the boundaries retain
"one- person -one- vote" balance. This requirement is now carried forward by statutory
requirement in Article 42.001 of the Texas Election Code, and has been extended in turn to
virtually all political bodies that elect representatives from special member districts, or
geographic regions of the political jurisdiction in which the candidates for representative
office must reside.
Therefore, following each federal census, each Texas County, city, school district or
other political entity electing representative officers from geographic regions of the sub-
division should conduct an assessment of existing political boundaries. It should be
carefully noted that simple comparisons between the City population of 2000 and 2010, or
even a more sophisticated analysis of the urban and less populated areas of the City might
not reflect the true extent of population "change" each City has experienced over the last ten
years. "Change" may not directly correlate to "different" or "new" population. For
example, existing populations within a City will, over time, move considerably within the
City, rendering existing political boundaries constitutionally questionable over a ten -year
span. In small population jurisdictions, the movement of a single large family from a one
area of town to another across political boundaries may have a significant impact on the
obligation of that City to redistrict_ As a very general rule of thumb, any statistical change
of population between the 2000 and 2010 census more than 3 %, plus or minus, will indicate
a potential need for redistricting in order to retain numerical balance between the governing
body's representative districts. Only in rare circumstances will a City experiencing a
population change in excess of 3% avoid the need for rather extensive reapportionment of
the City Council ward lines. However, any assumption that a population change of less than
3% will not require reapportionment is ill advised. Populations will shift within a City over
time. Every City, city, school district or other political entity electing representative officers
from geographic regions of the sub - division, even those with a rather insignificant overall
population change, should carefully examine actual population demographics relative to
their existing political lines to determine the need for reapportionment.
Demographic data is depicted in chart and graphic form for both total population as
well as voting age population. While "One- Person- One - Vote" balance between the City
Council Wards is based upon the entire City population, the availability of voting age
populations is also important in two respects.
Initial iusemnem
Page 2 of 9
In Cities inhabited by a significant minority population, the need to create one or
more City Council Wards that assure minority representation requires utilization of voting
age information. While the actual political boundaries will be based upon total population,
the viability of the resulting Ward in terns of the ability to elect requires analysis of voting
age population.
With this general overview, the following sections of this Initial Assessment will
evaluate the City of Wichita Falls's political boundaries and attempt to determine whether or
not the City Council should undertake reapportionment. Our assessment will point out areas
of potential conflict with state and federal law, and will also suggest areas that may be
considered for purposes of cost effectiveness and voter /resident convenience.
All computer generated matters contained in this report, including statistical ratios or
formulas, are derived from information taken directly from the Public Law 94 -171 files of
the United States Census Bureau. Allison, Bass and Associates, LLP is not responsible for
errors that may occur in the PL94 -171 data obtained from the United States Census Bureau.
Initial Assessnew
page 3 of 9
N
District 1
District City of Wichata Falls I °;� I , I
L —J Dlstrtct 3 Existing Plan Miles
District 4 Council Districts
Mi District s
Allison, Bass & Associates, LLP
Date
Data Source:
TAB 2
INITIAL SUMMARY FINDINGS REGARDING NUMERICAL BALANCE:
Definitions of the various ratios, formula and procedures utilized in the analysis
of City population are provided below. These ratios, formula and procedures have been
largely developed in case law in the field of redistricting, together with generally
recognized methods of sociological study.
NOTE: The Census Data contains Prison inmate populations, and while this
institutionalized population should be included in all gross population numbers used to
determine City eligibility for state or federal programs, grants or revenue sharing, there
are good reasons to exclude this population from "one- person- one - vote" calculations.
Because many institutionalized inmates are detained under felony convictions, or are
being held for deportation for violation of immigration laws, these individuals are
typically not eligible to vote under Texas law, and are most commonly registered to vote,
if at all, in the City of their true residence. As such, large populations of inmates held
within the state or federal prison systems physically located within the municipal
boundaries, or under public or private contract in City facilities, are not generally counted
in the determination of Total Maximum Deviation, or for other "one- person -one- vote"
determinations for City redistricting. For purposes of the Initial Assessment, raw data
has been acquired from the City and/or the Department of Criminal Justice regarding
prison populations. In subsequent census data releases, group housing data may reveal
more specific information, but at this time, we are deducting prison populations from
City population totals in order to arrive at a true "one- person - one - vote" analysis, and to
avoid potential imbalances in population that might result from inclusion of prison
population in Ward totals. Smaller facilities holding persons convicted of both felony
and misdemeanor offenses, juvenile facilities, or facilities holding individuals pending
resolution of pending criminal charges are included within the population counts for the
City, as reflected in the census data.
Please review the information contained under Tab 2 carefully. Please pay
particular attention to the following:
Please consider the Absolute Deviation in terms of population between the
Actual Population of each City Council Ward and the Ideal Population.
Remember that the ideal population of each ward is the total City population,
divided by the number of single member districts.
2. Next, consider the Relative Deviation, expressed as a percentage, of the
Actual Population of each Ward as compared to the Ideal Population of each
Ward.
3. Redistricting will be necessary to comply with 'One- Person -One -Vote'
standards if the Total Maximum Deviation between the largest Ward and the
smallest Ward (in terms of population) exceeds 10 %.
InitW As a men
Page 4 or 9
4. Therefore, carefully examine the Total Maximum Deviation calculation. If
that number is more than 100/a, the City of Wichita Falls is legally obligated
to make changes in its political boundaries to re- balance the population to
more equal terms.
5. If the Total Maximum Deviation exceeds approximately 70/6, you may want
to consider redistricting in order to re -balance your boundaries, although you
are not legally required to do so at this time. However, with only a few
percentage points separating the City of Wichita Falls from the 10;u
maximum standard, you would be prudent to consider redistricting at this
time. A suit can be filed at any time the statistical evidence suggests a City's
political boundaries are no longer constitutionally balanced.
6. If the Total Maximum Deviation is below 5 %, you are generally safe from
legal challenge on a "one - person- one - vote" basis for the next few years.
Initial AssemeK
Page 5 of
Wichita Falls Council Districts
Statistical Measures of Population Equality
Council
Districts
Actual
Population
Ideal
Population
Absolute
Deviation
Relative
Deviation
District 1
19,488
20,185
-697
-3.45%
District 2
18,012
20,185
-2,173
- 10.77%
District 3
22,617
20,185
2,432
12.05%
District 4
23,128
20,185
2,943
14.58%
District 5
17,679
20,185
-2,506
- 12.42%
Total Population
100,924
Ideal Population is defined as (total population divided by 5). Absolute and Relative (%) Deviations are difference
in actual and ideal.
-2,506 to Absolute Range is the spread in absolute deviation from the smallest District to
2,943 the largest.
-12A2% to Relative Range is the spread in relative deviation I%) from the smallest District
14.58% to the largest.
Absolute Mean Deviation is the average deviation, which is calculated by
2150.2 adding all the absolute deviations (ignoring " +" and " -" signs) and dividing by 5.
Relative Mean Deviation is the average deviation, which is calculated by adding
10.65% all the relative deviations (ignoring "+" and " -" signs) and dividing by 5.
Standard Deviation of Population is the square root of the sum of the squares
834.32 of all the absolute deviations divided by S.
Standard Deviation of Relative Deviations is the square root of the sum of the
5.06% squares of all the relative (%) deviations divided by 5.
Total Absolute Deviation is the sum of all relative deviations (ignoring " +" and
53.26% " -" signs).
27.00% Total Maximum Deviation is the sum of the relative deviations ( %)
of the smallest and largest Districts, (ignoring "+" and ` -" signs).
TAB 3
MINORITY VOTING RIGHTS
We have extracted from the Census data a summary of each City Ward. Prior to
the 1990 census, previously existing election precinct boundaries were often described by
non - physical boundaries, such a survey lines, or "metes and bounds" descriptions of real
property. Since the computerized census fast implemented in 1990 was based upon
topological maps, it was necessary to "approximate" those boundaries that were not defined
by a physical boundary such as a road, watercourse, or other physical boundary. These
approximations were described as Voter Tabulation Districts, or VTDs. It should be noted
that the VTD was only an approximation of the actual voting boundaries, since Public Law
94 -171 requires that the VTD utilize census blocks as its component parts.
Texas Counties are responsible for the structure of county election precincts. These
county election precincts should recognize city ward boundaries in cities having a
population of more than 10,000. In 1990, most counties adopted election boundaries based
on census blocks, but VTDs are still encountered. The boundaries utilized in this Initial
Assessment are derived from the Texas Legislative Council, and have been, to the extent
possible, confurned as accurate by local officials. However, some counties continue to have
election precinct boundaries defined in a manner that is incompatible with census block
based mapping. Therefore, in some cases, you may find a discrepancy between the actual
boundary in use, and the census block based mapping boundaries used in this report. All
future election precincts should be based upon census blocks to avoid any discrepancy
between the actual boundary in use and the official boundary description maintained by the
Texas Legislative Council.
As a general title, where the total minority percentage exceeds 25% of the total
population, there is ample justification to create at least one, or where the minority
population is sufficient, more than one City Council Ward that contains a potential voting
majority of minority residents. In concentrations greater than 40 %, consideration should be
given to creating at least one City Council Ward with a potential voting majority of minority
residents, with the possibility of any "excess population" being used to impact one or more
other Wards. Where the total minority concentration exceeds 40%, the issue of "Packing"
becomes a consideration, meaning that minority populations cannot be "packed" into a
single Ward, but must be allowed to influence as many Wards as the total minority
population warrants without efforts to fragment otherwise contiguous concentrations of
minority population.
Minority representation must not be diluted, and where possible, a voting majority of
minority residents should be created if sufficient minority populations existing within a
reasonably compact and contiguous geographic area. In order to achieve the maximum
minority representation within the demographic and geographic limitations in existence, it
will be necessary to determine which City Ward, and which census blocks within each
Ward, contain the highest percentage of minority population and to take such reasonable
measures as will insure the highest possible minority voice in City government. To achieve
this goal, some attention must be paid to voting age minority residents. In order to create a
initial Assemneen
Page 6 of 9
viable voting majority of ethnic, race or language minority voters, it is necessary to attain a
voting age population within at least one City Council Ward of approximately 55% or
better. In order to accomplish this high number of voting age population, a total population
figure in excess of 60% is typically required. This is due to the statistically younger
populations in most minority categories, which yield lower numbers of voting age residents,
and in historically lower voting age turnout in minority communities of interest.
A determination of whether or not the minority populations in these areas could be
joined in a single Ward, or perhaps concentrated in an effort to maximize minority impact
upon elections is difficult to assess without a more detailed evaluation of historical voting
patters, racial demographics, and the realities of political boundaries.
When taken with the numerical imbalances that must be addressed, it would appear
that if at all possible, minority populations might be concentrated in at least one City
Council Ward to the degree possible to achieve an acceptable potential minority
concentration. Typically, the City Council Ward with the largest minority concentration
prior to redrawing lines is the best candidate for any alternative plan, but other possible
constructions of Ward lines might well result in a favorable racial profile.
Fragmenting minority population concentrations must be avoided. Any
modification of political boundaries to accomplish compliance with the requirements of the
Voting Rights Act must be carefully considered.
Maps for Hispanic and Black populations are provided in this assessment. Other
Non -Anglo Populations, such as Asian, American Indian, Pacific Islander, Other or Multi-
racial categories in excess of 3% aggregate will also be mapped
Initial Assemmem
Page 7 or 9
Wichita Falls Council Districts
Analysis of Population in Council Districts based on 2010 Census data
Ethnic Background of Total Population
Ethnic Background as a % of Total Population
AnBb
Black
Amer.
Asian
Hispanic
Hawaii/
Other
Multi
Prec.
%of
6792%
Anglo
Black
2A7%
Asian
Hispanic
0.09%
Other
100.00%
District 2
34.68%
26.99%
096%
1.02%
Indian
0.09%
0.13%
Pac.Is.
100.D%
Race
Total
County
District 1
13,236
1,030
188
481
4,181
10
17
345
19,488
1931%
District 2
6,246
4,861
173
184
6,173
16
23
336
18,012
17A5%
District 3
17,175
1,697
128
659
2,582
16
18
342
22,617
22A1%
District
17,100
1,563
155
532
3,313
14
17
431
23,128
2292%
District 5
11,692
2,278
145
536
2,346
26
15
641
17,679
1752%
County
65,452
11,429
789
2,392
18,595
82
90
2,095
100,924
100.00%
Total
53,194
8,467
577
1,905
11,729
68
50
1,157
77,147
100.00%
%of
County
64,85%
11.32%
0.78%
2.37%
18.42%
0.08%
0.09%
2.08%
SOOAO%
Ethnic Background as a % of Total Population
Ethnic Background of Voting Age Population
AnBb
Black
Amer. Yid
Asian
Hispanic
Haw /Poc
Other
Multi
96 Total
District 1
6792%
5.29%
096%
2A7%
21.45%
0.05%
0.09%
1.77%
100.00%
District 2
34.68%
26.99%
096%
1.02%
34.27%
0.09%
0.13%
1.87%
100.D%
District
7594%
7.50%
057%
2.91%
11.42%
0.07%
0.08%
1.51%
100.0%
District
73.95%
6.76%
0.67%
2.30%
1432%
0,06%
0.07%
1.86%
100.0%
Districts
1 66.13%
1 12.89%
0A2%
3.03%
13.27%
0.15%
D.08%
3.63%
100.D%
Ethnic Background of Voting Age Population
Ethnic Background as a % of Voting Age Population
Anglo
Black
Amer.
Asian
Hispanic
Hawaii/
Other
Multi
Prec.
%of
7222%
AnglD
Black
2A3%
Asian
Hispanic
0.D5%
Other
100.0%
District2
4040%
26.87%
095%
1.19%
Indian
0.12%
0.08%
Pac.Is.
100.0%
Race
Total
County
District 1
10,854
753
143
362
2,603
6
7
177
14,905
1932%
Distrrct2
5,164
3,469
123
153
3,788
16
10
186
12,909
16.73%
District3
13,945
1,386
94
536
1,659
14
14
186
17,834
23.12%
District 4
13577
1,042
1 102
390
1 2,027
8
1 9
199
1 17,354
22A9%
District 5
9,654
1,817
115
464
1,652
24
30
409
14,145
18.34%
County
Total
53,194
8,467
577
1,905
11,729
68
50
1,157
77,147
100.00%
%of
County
68.95%
10.98%
0.75%
2A7%
15.20%
0.09%
0.06%
1.50%
100.00%
Ethnic Background as a % of Voting Age Population
Anglo
Black
Amer. Yrsl
Asian
Hispanic
Haw /Pac
Other
Multi
%Total
District
7222%
5.05%
096%
2A3%
17.46%
0.04%
0.D5%
1.19%
100.0%
District2
4040%
26.87%
095%
1.19%
29.34%
0.12%
0.08%
IA4%
100.0%
District 3
78.19%
7.77%
053%
3.01%
930%
0.08%
0.08%
1.04%
100.0%
D'strict4
7824%
6.00%
059%
2.25%
11.68%
0.05%
0.05%
1.15%
110040%
Districts
1 6825%
1 12.85%
1 091%
1 3.28%
1 11.63%
1 0.17%
1 O.D7%
1 2.89%
1 100.0%
TAB 4
GENERAL HOUSEKEEPING
Some attention should be given to "straightening" political boundaries into more
uniform shape. In some cases, certain boundaries may be altered to use a more commonly
understood or recognized physical boundary in lieu of a poorly identified or recognized
boundary. Public Law 94 -171, which direcWthe Census Bureau to develop a uniform
mapping and demographic profiling approach for use by small computers, required that all
voter tabulation districts (VTDs) follow census block boundaries. In many cases, City
wards had been previously drawn in a manner that did not follow a census block boundary.
This required the State of Texas, acting in conjunction with the State Data Center and the
Texas Legislative Council, to move the actual voting district boundary to coincide with a
nearby census block boundary for tabulation purposes only. The resulting VTD was no
longer "actual," but an approximation referred to as a "pseudo- voting district."
Every reasonable effort has been made to conform the pseudo voting district to
actual political boundaries. However, due to the nature of the available data base, and the
requirements of Public Law 94 -171, there may be occasions in which the pseudo voting
districts, or the resulting lines between City Council Wards, are different from those that
actually exist. Again, the use of the pseudo voting district was for tabulation purposes only,
and any apparent difference between actual and apparent political lines should be considered
as minimal. However, since all later census counts will be undertaken upon the census
blocks, there could be a valid argument that a necessity to alter current election district
boundaries to match the census block format exists. Under these circumstances, new
political lines will be required to avoid conflict with census block lines that do not match
current political area definitions. While matching census blocks to actual political lines
would not, in and of itself, generally support a decision to reapportion under the
circumstances that exist in the City of Wichita Falls, there is a justifiable combination of
factors that would support a reapportionment decision. These factors would include:
1. Redrawing election precincts to increase voter convenience.
2. Harmonizing actual political lines with pseudo voting districts based upon
census blocks.
3. Redrawing all lines to achieve "one- person- one - vote" deviations of the smallest
possible percentage.
Initial Asemnent
Page 8 or 9
CONCLUSION
Redistricting should be viewed as an opportunity for streamlining City
organization, and a chance to address as many issues as possible to achieve greater
participation and involvement in City government. This is the time to plan for future
growth, anticipate costs of government operations, and to involve the public in the process
of City government. We look forward to working with you in this exacting but rewarding
process.
Initial .?ssaoent
Page 9 of