Ord 40-2011 8/16/2011ORDINANCE NO. 40 -2011
Ordinance Of The City Council Of The City Of Wichita Falls, Texas,
Adopting A Redistricting Plan To Change The Municipal Council
District Boundaries; Providing For Submission Of The Adopted
Redistricting Plan To The U.S. Department Of Justice; And Providing
For Incorporation Of The Redistricting Plan Map In Accordance With
Section 2 -26 Of The Code Of Ordinances Of The City Of Wichita Falls
WHEREAS, it is necessary for the City Council of the City of Wichita Falls to
reexamine and readjust the municipal council district boundaries based on the 2010
United States census reports on the population of the City of Wichita Falls, in order to
maintain as nearly as possible an equal population within each municipal council district;
WHEREAS, the City Council has given deliberate consideration to the legal issues
and governmental duties imposed by state and federal law. In addition, the City Council
has previously approved by resolution and entered in the minutes criteria by which any
redistricting plan would be considered, which is attached and incorporated herein as
Resolution initiating the Process of Redistricting;
WHEREAS, the City Council commissioned and received an Initial Assessment
by qualified professionals experienced in the field of redistricting law for the purpose of
making a preliminary determination of population distribution between the five city council
districts, and the obligation to comply with "one- person- one - vote" balance as required by
applicable state and federal law. This assessment has been filed in the minutes of this
City, and is incorporated herein;
WHEREAS, a finding in the Resolution initiating the Process of Redistricting,
based upon the Initial Assessment, recognized the legal duty to redraw political
boundaries to comply with applicable law, and a copy of this finding was entered into the
minutes of this city, by which reference this prior finding is incorporated into this
Resolution of the City Council;
WHEREAS, after convening in Public Hearing for comment upon any and all
proposed plans, and after meeting in open session for the purpose of considering
alternatives available to the City for modification of existing political boundaries in a
manner designed to achieve both acceptable levels of numerical balance between the five
city council districts, and to protect the voting rights of all residents of the City of Wichita
Falls, Texas, the City Council has determined to adopt the redistricting plan attached to
this Resolution in map and data form, which is labeled as Redistricting Plan.
WHEREAS, at a later date, this Council will receive a more complete description of
this plan, including a map depiction of all new political boundaries, polling places, and
election precinct boundaries. This supplemental item will be taken up and considered by
the Council after public notice as required by law.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS, THAT:
1. Pursuant to the powers conferred upon the City Council of the City of Wichita
Falls by Section 7 of the Home Rule Charter of the City of Wichita Falls, the City Council
does hereby adopt the attached Redistricting Plan to change the boundaries of the
municipal precincts, which is incorporated herein.
2. Upon final approval of the supplemental data to be provided at a later date, a
submission of this plan, along with supporting maps, charts and /or data, will be made to
the United States Department of Justice pursuant to Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of
1964, 42 U.S.0 §1973. This Redistricting Plan adopted by this Resolution shall be
effective, subject to the Department of Justice preclearance, on January 1, 2012, and for
all subsequent elections until changed or modified by later Resolution of this Council. It is
expressly understood that implementation of this plan shall not take place until the receipt
of preclearance approval by the United States Department of Justice.
3. The map contained in the Redistricting Plan is incorporated by reference
herein into Section 2 -26 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Wichita Falls to identify
and delineate the single- member City Council districts established in said Section. Field
notes of said map shall be prepared and be effective when placed on file in the Office of
the City Clerk in accordance with said Section, to the extent said field notes are in
accordance with the aforementioned map.
PASSED AND APPROVED this the 16th day of August, 2011.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Resolution initiating the Process of Redistricting
RESOLUTION 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:
Resolution initiating the Process of Redistricting
Resolution initiating the Process of Redistricting
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.
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,
Resolution initiating the Process of Redistricting
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.
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; state senatorial district;
justice precinct; City district;
congressional district; State Board of Education districts;
state representative district; other special election districts.
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.
Resolution initiating the Process of Redistricting
Resolution initiating the Process of Redistricting
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
www�
MAYOR
ATTEST:
otcityClerk
Resolution initiating the Process of Redistricting
INITIAL ASSESSMENT
OF THE CITY OF
WICHITA FALLS, TEXAS
FOR PURPOSES OF REDISTRICTING EVALUATION
Prepared by
ALLISON, BASS & ASSOCIATES, L.L.P.
Attonie s at Law
The A.O. Wat,a11 House
402 W,,t 12" Street
Austin. 'Ccx.0 '8701
(512) 482 -0701
(512) 480 -0902
Lawaallis on -bass. com
Should you determine that maps depicting various political
boundaries are incorrect, please advise u5 immediately.
Initial %mesment
Page 1 of 9
Initial Assessment
TAB 1
GENERAL OVERVIEW
The Initial Assessment is a narrative analysis of the data contained in the PL94-
171 files pion id:d ley 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 A er,c -..1 i ra .r +fw' Crty, 390 i', S. 474; 88 S.
Ct. 1114, 20 L. Ed. 2d 45 (190x), Texas City Councils have been required to make a
periodic assessment of their political boundaries to determine whether the boundarias retain
"one- person -one- vote" balance. This requirement is now carried forward b3 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.
Therelorc- following eat• }a t: decal census.. eaeh Texas, Court.- city. school distriet or
other political entity electing reprcccntativ, , olliccrs 11-om geographic regions of the sub-
division should conduct an asses nicnt Of existing political hoiuidaries. IL livuld be
carefully noted that simple comparisons between the 01v population ot' 2ODO and 2010, or
even a more sophisticated aiialv is o1 the urban and Icss populated areas ol' the CiLv might
notreflect the true eaUtrt of population "change° each C'it% has experienced m cr the last ten
years. "Change" may not directly correlate to "different" or "nee" population. For
example, existing populations i %itlam a City will, over time, nio e coimdcrabk %%ithin the
City, rendcring :dating political boundaries comtittifomlly questionahlc o� :r a ten -year
span. In small population jurisdictions, the mop cntcnt of a single large family from a one
area of ImNn to another across political boundaries may have a significant impact on the
ohbp,atinn ot'lbat Cit', to rcdistnct 1s a Ncr% „cncaal Talc ofthumh_ anystatigtical change
of population between the 2000 and 2010 census more thaut 39%, plus or minus, will indicate
a potential need for redistricting in order to retain numerical balance bcti% can the governing
bodv-s represcntativc districts- (Wv in rare - i=irr:tancos `Sill a City experiencing a
population change in excess of 3% avoid the need iur rather axlansiv” reapporlio nieut of
the City Council ward lines. However, any assumption that a population change of less than
3% will not require reapportionment is ill adviscd. Populntirms will slits within a City over
anie. i vary City, city, school district or olhrr political antic', electingrzprescntati,%c 01li0ers
from geographic regions of the sub- division, even those with a rather insignificant overall
population change, should carelitllv csamine actual population demographics relative to
their existin5 political lines to determine the aced for reappollioluucnl.
Demographic data is depicted in chart and graphic form for both total population as
well as voting ape population. While "tine- I'ers;nr- [)no-lbte" balance benceen the City
Council Wards is based upon the entir: City population, the availability of voting age
populations is also important in two respects.
Initial Asscmmd
Page 2 of 9
Initial Assessment
In Cities inhabited by a signiliemyt minority population, the need to create one or
more (';Iv Council Wirds that a ure minority represcnlation requires utilisation OfVotinn
age information. while tll4 actual political boundaries «ill be bayed upon total population,
the viability of the resulting Wa7 d in terms of tkic abilit% to ele,:t reciaires Mink sis of- � otin'
age Population.
With this general overview.. the following sections of this Initial Assessment will
evaluate the City' of Wichila Palls's political houndarice and attempt to delermine whether or
not the City Council s101.ild undertake rapponiownent. Out asses;nwnt will point out areas
of potential conflict with stale 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
formula. are deril cd from information taken directly from the Public Law 94 -171 files of
the [lnitcd States Ccnsns Biueau- Allison, Sass and Associates, LLP is not responsible for
errors that may occur in the PL94-171 data obtained from the United States Census Bureau.
Initial Asseasmem
Page 3 or 9
Initial Assessment
Bean S.ftt Rd Hnr,rcr. l {:�
e ♦_ �b E
5 rj Mae aRtl d3 C
II Ra `� W q5` � unm•
ryt f
l o� PucYenP7 o m
s Qaa
m LL rl eaenL¢
19e1 Rtl
� IsiA
�. z
Por�H Dr
0
I - IFwY - 72
F
n
54ia O [ka
I
Rw
Sk 2BTJSw , ; 5 Lor,g�iew Sl :. $ v `� pQ
P-. a 6
m � V Dr o
to Riv
M� = ataudne 5l � �a
� $ a
m U ¢
G I $
� FM 5fi7E � Gr �-/{J �,r �°- NM ` Harsh to nH .hRtl
� P-le N YM1 '�L i� uy waovds'91
�,^11j'
(�
rlha, �_' is SA�f a 2 E , 5[
Tlh Si 'r f)ak I Hamobn Rd
�6'
a J �� �A� 31 S N WE
i
tom 31 �2� Jalonk. ':: gsln Ave IQneNI Ra
Or q�✓ Ph Lucite AVe ��a` ¢ z
F i I•
23,d 54
cKe
50ry�rc
Koval Re corks[ - AveO Spxtlwa7 A.¢
Ste9r 1 w r 7p1., 51
�rRV �!- (S 8 Mawezrem Pkwy
d� m .Id,nsa, Rdlj EEllott8 P�Cn s g EHa1' Re `I
$ x r /_¢ lar9for Ln � W ��y Grwe[n �r � L
�yi,d9e
ta Karla 31 A -¢.} F4 d i_
Ralh9—� �
Lk ffi hfta by F
a IL_
_ _ I District 1
District City of Wichata Falls
District 3
_.: Existing Plan
District 4 Council Districts
i District 5
N
0 Q.5 1 2
I I I I I
Miles
Allison, Bass &Associates, LLP
Date:
Data Source:
Initial Assessment
TAB 2
INTIUL 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 heen
largely developed fit case law in the field of redistricting, together with generally
recognized methods of sociologi::al 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 I'elony convictions, or are
being held for deporlation for violation of immigration laws, these individuals are
typically not eligible t0 %ote under't c\.is law, and are most c0mrnonly registered 10 X 01e%
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 Citv facilitieG, are not generalh counted
in the determination of Total Maxmium Devialioit, or for outer oite- person -one -vote'
detenninalions for City redistricting. For purposes of the Initial Assessment, raw data
has been acquired from the City and/or the Department of Criminal Justice re�,,ardirg
prison populations. In subsequent census data relea,eq. group housing data may reveal
more specific information, but at this time, we are deducting prison populations from
Cily population totals in order to arrive at a true " one - parson- one - vote" analysis, and to
avoid potential imbalances in population that might result from inclusion of prison
population in �l'aid totals. Smaller facilities lioldinl; perso,is 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
Cit }, as reflected in lh:: c::nsAs data.
Please revic;N the information contained under Tab 2 carefully. Please pay
particuiar altenlior 10 the 1bl loin in
1. Please consider the Ahsohrto Deviation in terms of population betwo ii the
Actual Population of each [tin' Council Ward and the Ideal Population.
Remember that the idoA 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 helween the largest Ward and the
sniallc,t A\ and (ir toots o I'll upulati0n] !seeds 1011o.
Initial Aaseasmait
Page 4 or 9
Initial
Assessment
4. hhrrCtorr. carefully exarnirc the I OLII %1 ;17 imam l)L:cialinr calcul ill ioil. [I
that numbor i; more than 101o, the City of Wichita Fall; is legally obligated
to make churges in its pcliiioal boundaries to re- halanLo the papulation to
more equal. terms.
5. If the Total Maximum Deviation exceeds approximately 70/0, you may want
to con c.ider redistricting in order to re- balance your boundaries, although you
are not legally required to do so at this time. IIowever, with only a few
pen:eidage poiius separating the City of 1'! Whila Falls from the 10%
maximum standard, you would be prudent to consider redistricting at this
time. A suit can he filed at any time the statistical evidence suggests a City's
pol itical11 01111LIaT -IeN are no longer contilitulior; ilk halamced.
6. If the Total Maximum Deviation is b.:1cm 5 °o. -ou are generally safe from
legal challenge on a "one- person- one -vole " hasis for the next few years.
Initial Asseasmem
Page 5 or 9
Initial Assessment
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
- 12.429/.
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.
12.42% to Relative Range is the spread in relative deviation (%) from the smallest District
14.58% to the largest.
Absolute Mean Deviation isthe average deviation, which is calculated by
2150.2 adding d II 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.
sta ndard Deviation of Population is the square root of the sum of the squares
834.32 of all the absolute deviations divided by 5.
Standard Deviation of Relative Deviations is the square root of the sum of the
5.06% squares of all the relative ( %) deviations divided by S.
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).
Initial Assessment
TAE 3
NUNORITY VOTING RIGHTS
We have extracted from the Census data a summary of each City Ward. Prior to
the 1990 ensus. preriowdy existing election precinct boundaries were often described by
non- phNsiCal houndaries, sucli a survey lines, or `metcs and bounds" descriptions of real
property `;incc the computerized oensus first impl.mented in 1990 was ba.�cd upon
topola'iCal map;. it was neCessary to "approximate" tlio�c boundaries that wcrc not &fned
by a ph }lsicai boundary such as a road, eialcrcoutsa, or other physicai boundary, lhese
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 talc VTD utilize census blocks x its compoiwat parts.
Texas Counties are responsible for the structure of county election precincts. These
county election precincts should recognize city v and boundaries in cities having a
population of more than 10,000. In 19%. most counties adopted election hotmdarics based
on Lnsus blocks, but VTDs are still enCOamleicd. "fhe boundarieS utilized in this laaitial
Asscscment are derived from the Tex;LLs LC. illative Cotmeil, and have been, to the extort
possible, confirmed as accurate by local ofl icials. However, some counties cotninue to have
election precinct boundaries defined in a manner that is incompatible with census block
based mapping. Therefore, in some cases, you may fmd a discrepancy between the actual
boundary in use. and the census block based mapping boundaries used in this report. All
future elCOtion precincts should lic bawd upon ,:cnsus blocks to avoid ally discrepancy
bet': con the actual boundary in use and the official boundary description maintained by the
Texas Legisiative Council.
is a general rule, where fhe total minority perccntagc cxcccds 2�`� of the total
poprulation, there is ample Justiliaatiwi to create at least onC, or where the minority
population k mi'licient, more than one City Council Ward that contains a potential voting
wgiorit� ol'minorir+ residents. In conccntratiens greaterthan 40 °0. Consideration should be
given to creating at lcast ono City Council %kard with a potential votin,; majority of minority
residents, with the possibilith of any "excess population" being used to impact one or more
other Wards. Where 4,c total minority concentration exceed,, 4011 u. the Issue of "Packing"
becomes a consideration_ nrcanirnL,,, that ntlftoniv porulatiotts Cannol he "packed" into a
single Ward. but must TIC allrnccd to influence us many Ward,, as the total lnluontc
population `canarts without cfllnts 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 minoriy\ populations existing within a
reasonably Compact and contigttour geographic areal. In order to achieve the maximum
minority wpi °esentatiou tiilhiu 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 niinoiily'oicc in City government. To achieve
this goal, some attention must be paid to voting age minority residents. In order to create a
Initial Assessment
Page 6 or 9
Initial Assessment
viable voting majority of ethnic, race or language minority voters, it is necessary to attain a
voting age population within at }cast one City Council Ward of appro \imat27, "' ( n,
better. In order to accomplish this high number of voting age population, a total population
figure in excess of Gp °o is t,picalh required. This is due to the statistically �uungcr
populations inmost minnrilv categories, which yield lover numbers of volvic, 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 maeimize minorit". impact
upon elections is difficult to assess xvi6iout a more detailed e, alualion of historical , oting
patterns, 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 redrim ing 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, Arnen,:an Indian. Pacific Islander, Other or Multi -
raL�ial catcgoria in ul' 3° o ag�regatc will Aso be mapped.
Initial Asseasmem
Page 7 or 9
Initial Assessment
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 directed the 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 Assesandtl
Page 8 or 9
CONCLUSION
LUSION
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 ftrture
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 Asaesmew
Page 9 or 9
Initial Assessment
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
An810
Black
Amer.
Asian
Hispanic
Hawaii/
Other
Multi
Prec.
%cf
67.92%
Anglo
Black
2A7%
Asian
Hispanic
0.09%
Other
100.00%
D111trict2
34.6876
26.99%
096%
1.02%
Indian
0.09%
0.1396
Pac.Is.
100.00%
Race
Total
County
Dis6rick 1
13 ,236
1,03D
188
481
4,181
10
17
345
19,488
1931%
District
6,246
4,861
173
184
6,173
16
23
336
18,012
1725%
District
17,175
1,697
128
659
2,582
16
18
342
22,617
22A1%
Detrick 4
1 17,108
1,563
1 155
532
3,313
14
17
431
23,128
2292%
Districts
11,692
2,278
145
536
2,346
26
15
541
17,679
1752%
county
11,429
789
2,392
18,595
82
90
2,095
10D,924
100.00%
ta65,452
Tamil l
53,194
8,467
577
1,905
11,729
68
5D
1,157
77,147
100.08%
%
County
64.85%
11.32%
0.78%
2.37%
18.42%
0.08%
D.09%
2.08%
1D0.00%
Ethnic Background as a % of Total Population
Ethnic Background of Voting Age Population
An810
Black
Ames- Ind-
Asian
Hispanic
HawJPac
Other
Multi
% Total
D'etrict1
67.92%
5.29%
0.96%
2A7%
21.45%
0.05%
0.09%
1.77%
100.00%
D111trict2
34.6876
26.99%
096%
1.02%
34.27%
0.09%
0.1396
1.87%
100.00%
District 3
7594%
7.50%
0.57%
2.91%
11.42%
0.07%
008%
1.51%
100.0o v.
District4
7395%
6.76%
0.67%
2.30%
14.32%
0.06%
007%
1.86%
10010W.
D'etrict 5
I 66.13%
1 12.89%
1 am%
1 3.03%
1 13.27%
1 0.15%
1 D.08%
1 3.63%
1 100.0D%
Ethnic Background of Voting Age Population
Ethnic Background as a % of Voting Age Population
Angle
Bladt
Amer.
Asian
Hlsp anic
Hawaii/
Other
Multi
Prec.
%af
72212%
Anglo
Black
2A3%
Asian
Hispanic
D.05%
Other
MOOD%
District
40.0D%
26.87%
0.95%
1.19%
Indian
D.12%
0.08%
Pac.Is.
1DIOW.
Race
Total
County
District 1
10,854
753
143
362
2,603
6
7
177
14,9D5
1932%
District
5,164
3,469
123
153
3,788
16
1D
186
12,909
16.73%
D lstrlct3
13,945
1,386
94
536
1,659
14
14
186
17,834
23.12%
District
1 13,577
1,042
1 1D2
390
1 2,027
8
9
199
1 17,354
22A9%
District s
9,654
1,817
115
464
1,652
24
1D
409
14,145
1834%
County
Total
53,194
8,467
577
1,905
11,729
68
5D
1,157
77,147
100.08%
%of
County
68.95%
10.98%
0.75%
2A7%
15.2D%
0109%
D.D6%
1.50%
100.00%
Ethnic Background as a % of Voting Age Population
Angle
Bladt
Amer. kid.
Asian
Hlsp anic
Haw /Pac
Other
Munk
%Total
District
72212%
5.0%
0.969
2A3%
17.,16%
0.04%
D.05%
1.19%
MOOD%
District
40.0D%
26.87%
0.95%
1.19%
2934%
D.12%
0.08%
1.44%
1DIOW.
District
78.19%
7.77%
0153%
3.Dl%
9130%
0.08%
0.08%
1.D4%
100.00%
Diskrick4
78.24%
6.00%
059%
2.25%
12.68%
0.05%
D.D5%
1.15%
1D0.00%
DWI&5
1 68.2575
1 12.85%
1 0.21%
1 3.28%
1 11.68%
1 0.17%
1 D.D7%
I 2.8976
I 100.OD%
Initial Assessment
TAB 4
GENERAL HOUSEKEEPING
Softie attention should be given to "straightening" political I)OUndaries into more
uniform shape. In some casts. certain boundaries may be altered w use a more .:onnuunly
understood or recognized phlrlical boundary in lieu of a poorly identified or recognized
boundary. Public Law 94 -171, which directed the 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. 1n many cases, City
wards had b:-en pica iously damn in a manner that did not follow acensus block boundary.
This required the State of 'fexa:ti. acting in conjunction �titlr the State Data Center and the
Texas Legislative Council, to more 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 confonn the pseudo voting district to
actual political boundaries. However, due to the nature o l' t lie available data base, and the
requirements of Public Law 94 -171, there may be occasions in which the pseudo noting
districts, or the resulting lines bem-cen City Council Wards, are different from those that
acnrally exist. Again, the use of the pseudo voting district ,.� as for tabulation purposes only,
and wiv apparcill dltl'Oronce belu Con actual and appareul pollti�al Ilnas should be considered
as minimal. However, since all later census counts will be undertaken upon the census
h1nck: , there could be a valid argument that a nccc;sity to alter currctit cloction district
boundaries to match the census block formal exists. Under these circumstances, naw
political lines a ill be required to avoid conflict with census block lines that do not match
current political rues definitions. While matching census blocks to actual political lines
would not, in and of itself, generall, support a decision to reapportion under the
circumstances that exist in the City of W ichita 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 ac LW 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 Ameasmem
Page 8 or 9
Redistricting
Plan
District 1
j District 2
District 3
District 4
District 5
City of Wichita Falls
Proposed Plan 1
Council Districts
N
0 0.5 1 2
I 1 I 1 I
Miles
Allison. Bass & Associates, LLP
Date 8/01/11
Data Source 20110 Census
5
o Y
x aY
io \
Maeb Rn
Rally Rd
_ 1�(�t{ .�M nv:
GKFmq
$ 1
4 Hrol
RA
S Ed In �
t ge
D
Peam� cr F
��
.o
VUL.
5-
fpcd our "I
uskwY ?8)J
` Iaa4"°tl
$1
S
c3 9 • "-'� E111.
ew
F/orhp
s
5
�
pgnAr ��....,6pp
SYC
�
� P
�
_ Malielne SL g q A
PacvwM Dr
�dQ•Q
V
— r�a96�E �
= N
<n
{
I
FL g 967
�1 N9in -� Ammn9
F 1 � G 11erMln 77RarcFRO
S1 a
N 9ro st . _a$ 'i�,.
L J
\ 2 A I s 1owely
��A Rood SI � N�yr7 "st S
�e f ^a Aarei 9t
,Hw— RQ
_
6p s
�- •Q' SI `DS Y 9�
TmI St B ;9
nr sti .v` oek•sl Naeola Ra
M.o:ar� Fn
23ro SI
';uv. V -� A O USway Atin
r,ly�+
yf+N�.�
w1 p 3
�° ®Ucypb �
15
p:»
wbtlsi_ a°
E _
Qa d
D
Fletbn Rd
Loci In d6aPR Calli a
b a
lany}cvr1
4
Grove in ;yvt+�°°r a r
P
d
8
R1lgobor
�D u
�`t,
Lk ntchaa
District 1
j District 2
District 3
District 4
District 5
City of Wichita Falls
Proposed Plan 1
Council Districts
N
0 0.5 1 2
I 1 I 1 I
Miles
Allison. Bass & Associates, LLP
Date 8/01/11
Data Source 20110 Census
Redistricting Plan
Wichita Falls Council Districts
Proposed Plan 1
Statistical M@asures of Population Equality
Council
Districts
Actual
Population
Ideal
Population
Absolute
Deviation
Relative
Deviation
District 1
20,265
20,155
80
0.4Wo
District 2
20,645
20,185
460
2.28 °14
District 3
19,398
20,185
-187
- 0.939'O
District 4
20,432
20,155
247
1.22%
District 5
19,584
20,185
-601
-2.98
Total Population
140,324
Ideal Popubtion is defined as (total population divided l y 5). Absolute and Relative C%) Deviations are difference
in actual and ideal.
-601 to 460 Absolute Stange is the spread in absolute d eviation from the s m a IIest District to
the largest.
-2,98% to Relative mange is the spread in relative deviation (%) from the smallest District
2.289 to the largest.
Absolute Mean Deviation is the average deviation, which is calculated by
315 adding all the absolute deviations (ignoring " +" and " - ' signs) and dividing by 5.
Relative Mean Deviation is the average deviation, which is calculated by adding
1.56% 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
15:,74 of all the absolute deviations divided by 5.
Standard Deviation of Relative Deviations is the square root of the sum of the
0.81% squaruNs of all the relative (%) deviations divided by S.
Total Absolute Deviation is the sum of all relative deviations (ignoring " +" and
-7.80% " -" signs).
5.25% Total Maximum Deviation is the sum of the relative deviations (%)
of the smallest and largest Districts, (ignoring " +" and '' -" signs).
Redistricting Plan
Wichita Falls Council Districts
Proposed Plan 1
Analysis of Population in Council Districts based on 2010 Census data
Ethnic Background of Total Population
Ethnic Background as a % of Total Population
AFK&
Bla4e
Amer.
Asian
Hispanic
Hawaii)
Other
Multi
Prec,
% af
71.19%
Anglo
Black
2.399E
Asian
Hispanic
D-09%
Other
10040%
Distrk%2
3654%
25 -08%
0.92%
0.92%
Indian
04)7%
0 -11%
Pac, is.
100,00%
Race
Total
C�un
Dlitrlci l
NAM
902
138
484
3,$98
14
16
845
20,265
200874
Dlstrlt[2
7,544
5,139
190
190
7,146
is
23
359
20,615
20A6%
District 3
14,091
1 x,659
132
481
2,519
13
13
240
14,998
193196
District4
15,629
1,311
132
639
$,251
14
20
4216
24,432
20,2474
101MItt 5
1Zr864
2,379
156
598
2,790
26
29
675
19,584
19.409E
County
55,452
11,429
789
2,.392
18,945
82
90
2,445
10D,924
14 AO%
Total
% of
64,55%
11,3296
4,7894
2,97%
18.CA
0.4896
0,4996
2,07[96
100.4046
County
68,45%
10,9895
M?
2.47%
is LO%
4,{3996
0.46%
1.5496
100,40%
Ethnic Background as a % of Total Population
Ethnic Background of Voting Age Population
AFK&
Bla4e
Amer. W.
Asian
Hispanic
Haw/Vac
Other
Mum
% To#at
dldtrict 1
71.19%
4.45%
4.83%
2.399E
19.24%
0.07%
D-09%
1.7076
10040%
Distrk%2
3654%
25 -08%
0.92%
0.92%
34,51%
04)7%
0 -11%
1.74%
100,00%
Dis 69ta
74.46%
&8076
066%
241%
12.6016
0079
047%
1 -45%
1000075
Dlstrktd
76A9%
6.42%
0,69%
3,121%
11,07716
047%
0.10',5
2.06%
1404495
dlstrict5
66,2476
12,15%
0.8046
3,4544
U.1A%
4.13%
0A8%
3.45%
104k0%
Ethnic Background of Voting Age Population
Ethnic Background as a % of Voting Age Population
All&
IMM*
Artier.
Asian
F spanic
Hawaii]
other
Multi
Prec,
%of
7.5.69%
Anglo
Black
2,33%
Asian
Hispanic
0-06%
Other
100M
Distrin2
42.37%
24.91%
0.90%
1,077E
Indian
0.10%
D-06%
Pac. Is.
100.00%
Race
Total
County
U151it[ 1
11,752
650
134
352
2,437
$
9
177
15,529
20.139E
District 2
5,323
3,702
135
159
4,379
15
8
204
14,922
19,3476
District3
12 ,295
1 1,347
100
407
1,511
13
10
169
15,952
1 20.68%
01strlrt4
12x064
861
62
465
1398
8
11
in
15,449
19,519E
Districts
10,760
1,907
1215
512
1,924
24
11
431
15,655
20,34%
County
; 194
8467
1,905
11,729
68
50
#,157
77,147
140.00%
total
'A °#
County
68,45%
10,9895
M?
2.47%
is LO%
4,{3996
0.46%
1.5496
100,40%
Ethnic Background as a % of Voting Age Population
All&
IMM*
Amer_ 1ntL
Asian
F spanic
Haw /Pat
other
MUM
% Total
Districts
7.5.69%
4.19%
ME&
2,33%
15.69%
0k5%
0-06%
1.1476
100M
Distrin2
42.37%
24.91%
0.90%
1,077E
29.35%
0.10%
D-06%
1.34%
100.00%
dlstrict3
7f,479E
8.44%
0,621%
2.559E
14,10!6
0.02%
DA6%
1.05%
100.00%
District4
8016%
5172%
0.54%
3.09%
9,15%
0457.
0A7%
1- 24.%6
10000%
DistrictS
63,56%
12.1546
0.8096
2.26%
12.26%
0.15%
0-071%
2.75%
14044%