My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CC MIN 02242022
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
2020 - PRESENT
>
2022
>
CC MIN 02242022
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/7/2022 3:37:57 PM
Creation date
9/7/2022 3:37:49 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
2/24/2022
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
In response to Councilmember Arkin's inquiries, Mr. Wagaman confirmed all of the plans he presented <br />are legally compliant. He added people can file a lawsuit for many reasons and he cannot theorize what <br />a judge would rule. He stated he was always looking to ensure he did not present a plan out of <br />compliance with State and federal laws. Olson Remcho LLP attorney Tom Willis added the City does <br />not have the racial issues that generally bring challenging litigation. He added courts generally give <br />great deference to a City Council on judgement issues. He agreed with Mr. Wagaman's comments <br />about the legality of the maps. <br />In response to Councilmember Testa's inquiry, Mr. Wagaman clarified there are some specific <br />prohibitions about gerrymandering relative to maps being drawn to favor a political party. He reported <br />there was no direction from the Council to consider incumbency. He reported differences between <br />some of the maps are simply based on competing directions from Council at public hearings. He <br />reported he did not receive any direction from Council outside of the public hearings. He added some of <br />the weirder lines on some maps are due to census geography in areas such as Bondi Ranch. He <br />confirmed the issues leading to a gerrymandering determination were not part of this process. <br />Councilmember Testa expressed her appreciation to Mr. Wagaman for explaining how the Currant Plan <br />derived from the Combs Map following a ripple effect of changes. <br />In response to Councilmember Balch's inquiries, Mr. Wagaman confirmed that on the Cherry Plan the <br />boundary between Districts 2 and 3 follows Hopyard Road until it reaches the Arroyo Valle which it then <br />follows until it reaches Main Street. He confirmed the intersection of Hopyard Road and Del Valle <br />Parkway is where the boundary begins following the Arroyo Valle. <br />In response to Councilmember Balch's inquiry, Mr. Wagaman confirmed the Currant Plan uses <br />Sycamore Road to divide Districts 3 and 4, just like on the Lime Plan. <br />In response to Mayor Brown's inquiries, Mr. Wagaman clarified the Yellow Map extended District 4 <br />through downtown to the Alameda County Fairgrounds using Pleasanton Avenue and Division Street <br />as dividing lines. He confirmed on the Yellow Map each side of Division Street is in a different district <br />but added this happens on any street used as a boundary. <br />In response to Mayor Brown's inquiries, Mr. Wagaman stated race and ethnicity is always the most <br />confusing part of the districting process. He confirmed the City is being compelled to switch to districts <br />under the CVRA because of race and ethnicity, speaking to whether or not to have districts. He added <br />the CVRA does not speak to how districts are drawn for protected classes. He stated the federal Voting <br />Rights Act will often favor drawing a district to keep a protected class whole. He reported Pleasanton's <br />API community is relatively evenly distributed so the City does not meet the federal markers for drawing <br />the entire community into a single district. He added State law does apply within the matter of <br />sequencing to provide the protected class the best opportunity to elect a member of its protected class. <br />Mayor Brown noted the Lime Plan's District 2 is the one instance where there is a substantially higher <br />API population district at 37%. <br />In response to Mayor Brown's inquiry, Mr. Wagaman clarified he does not have a sequencing -specific <br />presentation. He noted the Council has received public feedback. He added as plans are discussed he <br />can encourage which districts should be set for 2024 based on demographics. He clarified that all races <br />and ethnicities vote at a higher rate in a Presidential election year but added the gap between the API <br />voting turnout and the non -API voting turnout is smaller in a Presidential election year. He confirmed <br />this is a fact -based analysis. <br />In response to Mayor Brown's inquiries, Mr. Wagaman confirmed he is not aware of where the <br />Councilmembers live. He clarified State law dictates if they were elected in 2020 a Councilmember <br />would finish their term regardless of where the district lines are. He reported that in a different <br />City Council Minutes Page 4 of 14 February 24, 2022 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.