HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-09-10; City Council; 11343; COUNTY SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENTSrr ~
COUNTY SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT 1 ~~#-113y*3, TITLE:
w MTG. 9A10-?l BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENTS
DEPT. l?M
DEPT. I
CITY A’
CITY M
N &
P
w 0
U
(d a E
s u
*rl a,
b 0 w
a
c)
$4 5
LC( a
a,
a, b a
k .rl a, 5
a a, 4-l cd c) .rl a c -4
4 .d c) G 3 0 u
4 0
0 rl
\ a
2 1
0
4 4 0 z 3 0 0
6
F ‘1 CAHLSUAU - AUtNUWILL
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Direct staff to prepare a letter to the San Diego County Board of Supervisors expressing Support for a District 5 Supervisorial District that would be comprised primarily of North Coi
cities.
ITEM EXPLANATION:
The City Council at their July 9, 1991 meeting received a presentation from County of Sar
on alternative supervisorial district boundary adjustments. At this meeting, the City Counc
that County staff prepare a District 5 map that would be comprised primarily of North Coi
cities. A modification of that map became one of the alternatives prepared by County
Board of Supervisors. (Previously known as Maps A and A-I)
On September 3, 1991 City staff received revised redistricting plans from the County. A
County staff report, along with the maps, is attached for the Council’s information. Of tk
maps, Plan A-2 and Plan C-A both create a North County Coastal District. These maps
previously proposed maps known as A and A-1 . The remaining maps place Carlsbad in C
District 3.
The Board of Supervisors, at their meeting of September 10, 1991, will receive thes
redistricting plans along with those submitted by various community organizations. Tt
Supervisors may at that time direct County staff to make final modifications to a final redis
The Board of Supervisors will then consider a redistricting ordinance for introduc
September 17, 1991 Board of Supervisors meeting.
Fiscal Impact: None
Exhibits: 1. County of San Diego staff report and maps on Supervisorial Redistricting.
BOARD OF SUPE c 0 Ll el Y 0 F S A N D i@G 0 BRIAN FIRST DISTRICT p. BlLE
GEORGE F. EA CHIEF AD M IN ISTRATIVE OFF ICE SECOND DISTRI<
SUSAN GOLD1 rnmo DISTRICT
LEON L. WILL
JOHN MACDOI
AGENDA ITEM
FOURTH OISTRI<
FIFTH DlSTRlCT
DATE : September 10, 1991
TO : Board of Supewkors
SUBJECT: Supervisorial Redistricting After 1990 Census: Proposed Plans A-2, A-2.1, B-2, C-A, and C-B
SUPV. DIST: All
SUMMARY:
REFERENCE
On August 6, 1991, the Board of Supervisors received proposed
redistricting Plans A-1 and B-1 prepared by the Chief Administrative Officer for consideration in adjusting supervisorial district boundaries and directed that modifications to these plans be evaluated and reported back to your Board.
REGOMMENDATION (8) :
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER:
1. Receive the Chief Administrative Officer f s proposed redistricthg Plans A-2, A-2.1, B-2, C-A, and C-5 and proposed redistricting plans submitted by community organizations.
Direct the Chief Administrative Officer to return to the Board of Supervisors with final modifications, if any,
to a final plan for the adjustment of supervisorial
district boundaries.
3. Direct County Counsel to prepare the redistricting ordinance for introduction at the September 17, 1991 Board of Supervisors meeting.
2.
Fiscal Impact The adjustment of supervisorial district boundaries in accordance with the decennial U.S. Census has no fiscal impact
for the County.
e 0
SUBJECT: Supervisorial Redistricting After 1990 Census: Proposed Plans A-2, A-2.1, B-2, C-A, and C-B
BACKGROUND:
At the regularly scheduled Board of Supervisors meeting on August
6, 1991 (60) , your Board received the two proposed redistricting
Plans A-1 and €3-1 prepared by the Chief Administrative Officer, reviewed the proposals submitted by individuals and organizations and heard testimony from 3 individuals regarding the adjustment of the County's supervisorial district boundaries.
Your Board then directed the Chief Administrative Officer to make
certain modifications to Plans A-1 and B-l and return on September
10, 1991, for additional public discussion and consideration by the Board. In addition, the Chief Administrative Officer was directed to meet with interested individuals and groups to discuss their proposed redistricting plans and provide for a public review of the Chief Administrative Officer's modified plans prior to the Board meeting on September 10, 1991.
The Chief Administrative Officer made modifications to Plans A-:
and B-1 as directed by your Board at the August 6, 1991 meeting, resulting in five revised proposed redistricting plans which arc
presented for your Board's consideration. Any changes requestec
that were not able to be accommodated in the plans are noted ir the description of the geographic changes and general comments.
The requested meetings with interested community organizations ani individuals took place during the weeks of August 12th and 19th
The proposals submitted by these community organizations ar
identified later in this Board letter.
Copies of the new proposed redistricting plans were placed o
display at the three County Regional Centers and the Count
Administration Center. Copies ofthe proposed plans also were sen
to the City Manager's office in each of the eighteen cities in th
County. Letters were sent to more than 800 members of the publi
informing them where the proposed plans could be viewed.
PLAN A-2
GeoqraDhic Chancres (The followincr represent modifications t
the prior Plan A-1) . The North County area reflects no change from the P1(
A-1 where Escondido and the San Dieguito unincorporatl area are included in District 3.
2
Q e
SUBJECT: Supervisorial Redistricting After 1990 Census: Propost
BACKGROUND: (Continued)
Plans A-2, A-2.1, B-2, C-A, and C-B
0 The Ocean Beach area of the City of San Diego
The Loma Portal area of the City of San Diego is movt
The Paradise Hills area is consolidated into District
is movt from District 3 to District 1.
from District 1 to District 4,
by moving two census tracts from District 1 to Distric
4. In order to balance population and demographic:
three census tracts (52.00, 53.00 and 35.00) were movc
from District 4 to District 1.
tract 213.01 were moved from District 2 to District : An enlargement of this area is attached to the A-2 plai
from District 4 to District 3. This was necessary 1 maintain the ethnic/race population percentages from Pli
A-1, Staff was unable to consolidate Clairemont ai maintain these balances in Plan A-2.
District 1.
0 In the South County area, blocks 42611 and 426B of censi
e In the Clairemont area, several census tracts were mow
0 The Bonita-Sunnyside area is moved from District 2 1
Census tract 96.03 (Mission San Diego de Alcala) is mow from District 3 to District 4,
Population Chanaes
Plan A-2 Current
District 1 476,252 452 I 979 District 2 524 l 449 486 , 071 District 3 515 , 019 487 I 245
District 5 498,723 597,167
District 4 483,573 474 1 554
3
0 e
SUBJECT: Supervisorial Redistricting After 1990 Census: Proposed
BACKGROUND: (Continued)
Plans A-2, A-2.1, B-2, C-A, and C-B
Racial and Ethnic Composition (%)
Asian Black I slander White
(Non- (Non- (Non- Hispanic Hispanic) Hispanic \ Himanic 1
Dist. 1 Plan A-2 40.4 6.9 8.3 43.6
Current 35.3 6.5 10.7 46.8
Dist, 2 Plan A-2 10.8 2.3 3.0 83.0
Current 12.0 2.9 3.1 81.1
Dist. 3 Plan A-2 11.5 2.0 9.3 76.7
Current 8.4 2.3 9.9 78.9
Dist. 4 Plan A-2 21.0 15.1 13.3 49.9 Current 2 6 e 8 15.4 10.9 46.2
Dist. 5 Plan A-2 20.2 4.3 3.6 71.0 Current 20.9 3.8 3.6 70.9
PLAN 24-2.1
Geoqraphic Chancres
the Prior Plan A-1)
(The followinq retxesent modifications t
Districts 1, 2, and 4 renain the same as shown in Pla
In the North County area, Escondido Tc.oves from Distric
3. This is the configuration shown for the North Count
A-2.
3 to District 5, and the cities of Del Mar, Solana Bead Enchitas, and Carlsbad move from District 5 to Distric
area on Plan B-1.
4
m 0
SUBJECT: Supervisorial Redistricting After 1990 Census: Propose
Plans A-2, A-2.1, B-2, C-A, and C-B
BACKGROUND: (Continued)
Population Chancres
Plan A-2.1 Current
District 1 476,252 452 , 979 District 2 524 , 449 486,071 District 3 524 I 931 487,245
District 5 488 I 811 597 , 167
District 4 483 , 573 474,554
Racial and Ethnic Composition (%)
Asian/Pac-
Black Islander White (Non- (Non- (Non- Hispanic Hisganic Hisganic Hispanic
Dist. 1
Plan A-2.1 40.4 6.9 8.3 43.6
Current 35.3 6.5 10.7 46.8
Dist. 2
Plan A-2.1 10.8 2.3 3.0 83.0 Current 12.0 2.9 3.1 81.1
Dist. 3
Plan A-2.1 9.7 1.9 9.1 78.8 Current 8.4 2.3 9.9 78.9
Disk. 4
Plan A-2.1 21.0 15.1 13.3 49.9 Current 26.8 15.4 10.9 46.2
Dist. 5
Plan A-2.1 22.3 4.5 3.7 68.6 Current 20.9 3.8 3.6 70.9
PLAN B-2
Geosraphic Chancres (The followins represent modifications t the prior Plan B-1)
The North County area and Districts 2 and 3 remain th
same as Plan B-1.
5
e
SUBJECT: Supervisorial Redistricting After 1990 Census: Propose
Plans A-2, A-2.1, B-2, C-A, and C-B
BACKGROUND: (Continued) . Paradise Hills is consolidated in District 4 by movin
Two census tracts (53.00 and 52.00) in District 4 ar
two census tracts from District 1 to District 4.
moved to District 1 to maintain the ethnic/rac
papulation percentages from Plan B-1-
In the South County, e blocks 426A and 426B of census trac
213.01 were moved from District 2 to District 1, simila to the modification in Plan A-2.
Population Chanses
Current
District 1 491,383 452 , 979 District 2 500,797 486,071 District 3 510,576 487 , 245
District 5 488 , 808 597 , 167
Racial and Ethnic Composition (%I
Plan B-2
District 4 506,452 474 ,554
Asian/Pac.
Black islander White (Non- (Non- (Non- Hispanic Hispanic) Hispanic) Hispanic)
Dist. 1
Plan B-2 43.2 10.2 10.1 35.9 Current 35.3 6.5 10.7 46.8
Dist. 2
Plan B-2 12.3 2.8 3.4 80.7 Current 12.0 2.9 3.1 81.1
Dist. 3
Plan B-2 9.4 2.1 9.0 79.0
Current 8.4 2.3 9.9 78.9
Dist. 4
Plan B-2 15.8 10.6 10.8 62.0 Current 2 6.8 15.4 10.9 46.2
Dist. 5
Plan B-2 22.3 4.5 3.7 68.6 Current 20.9 3.8 3.6 70.9
6
e e
SUBJECT: Supervisorial Redistricting After 1990 Census: Proposed Plans A-2, A-2.1, B-2, C-A, and C-B
BACKGROUND: (Continued)
PLAN C-A
Geoqraphic Chanqes (The followinq represent modifications to
Plan A-2)
0 This plan modifies Plan A-2 to maintain the current
boundaries of Supervisorial District 2, with the exception that three census tracts from the Roland0 area of the City of San Diego are included in District 2 and
the unincorporated area of Spring Valley 1s COnSOlidateC
in District 2.
Census tracts 45.00 and 46.00 are moved from District 1
to District 4 to maintain two majority non-white
districts, but with the consequence of decreasing thc Hispanic population percentage in District 1 from 40.44 to 38.3%. . The Lorna Portal area remains in District 1 to rnaintair
All of the Navajo Planning Area of the City of San Diegc
two majority non-white districts from Plan A-2.
0
is moved from District 2 to District 3. Several censu: tracts in the Clairemont area of the City of San Dies are added to District 4, and the Mission Beach area o the City of San Diego is added to District 1 to reduc the resultant population increase in District 3.
to District 3 from District 4 to maintain two majorit non-white districts from Plan A-2.
Census tract 96.03 (Mission San Diego de Alcala) is move
The North County area remains the same as Plan A-2.
Population Chanqes
Plan C-A Current
District 1 494,597 452 , 979 District 2 509 , 028 486,071 District 3 522 , 621 487,245
District 5 498,723 597 , 167
District 4 473 , 047 474 , 554
7
I 0 a
SUBJECT: Supervisorial Redistricting After 1990 Census: Propose
BACKGROUND: (Continued)
Plans A-2, A-2.1, B-2, C-A, and C-B
Racial and Ethnic Composition (%)
Asian/Pac. Black Islander White (Non- (Non- (Non-
Hispanic HisDanic) Hispanic) Hispanic)
Dist. 1
Plan C-A 38.3 6.7 8.1 46.2
Current 35.3 6.5 10.7 46.8
Dist. 2
Plan C-A 12.0 2.8 3.4 80.9
Current 12.0 2.9 3.1 81.1
Dist. 3
Plan C-A 11.2 2.1 9.2 77.0 Current 8.4 2.3 9.9 78.9
Dist. 4
Plan C-A 21.4 14.7 13.2 49.9
Current 2 6.8 15.4 10.9 46.2
Dist. 5
Plan C-A 20.2 4.3 3.6 71.0
Current 20.9 3.8 3.6 70.9
PLAN C-B
Geoqraphic Chancres (The followins represent modifications t
Plan B-2)
0 Plan B-2 was modified to maintain the current boundarie
0 The North County area remains the same as Plan B-2.
0 The Sunnyside/Bonita area moves from District 2 t
. The Otay Planning area moves from District 1 frc
of District 2.
District 4.
District 2.
8
0 e
SUBJECT: Supervisorial Redistricting After 1990 Census: Proposed Plans A-2, A-2.1, B-2, C-A, and C-B
BACKGROUND! (Continued)
Population Chanqes
Plan C-B Current
District 1 491,080 452 , 979
490,319 486 , 071 District 2 District 3 510,576 487,245
District 5 488 , 808 597 , 167
Racial and Ethnic Composition (%I
District 4 517 , 233 474 , 554
Asian/Pac. Black Islander White (Non- (Nan- (Non- Hispanic Hispanic) Hispanic) Hispanic)
Dist. 1 Plan C-B 43.2 10.2 10.1 35.8
Current 3 5.3 6.5 10.7 46.8
Dist. 2 Plan C-B 12.1 2.8 3.3 81.0 Current 12.0 2.9 3.1 81.1
Dist. 3 Plan C-B 9.4 2.1 9.0 79.0
Current 8.4 2.3 9.9 78.9
Dist. 4 Plan C-B 16.0 10.4 10.7 62.1
Current 26.8 15.4 10.9 46.2
Dist. 5 Plan C-B 22.3 4.5 3.7 68.6 Current 20.9 3.8 3.6 70.9
General Comments
Staff reviewed the request to use the boundaries of the Escondid Elementary School District and the Carlsbad Unified School Distric boundaries to delineate supewisorial districts. Staff found thz the Escondido Elementary School District boundaries largely follc
the Escondido City boundaries. However, in several areas tk school district boundaries exclude portions of the City c Escondido which are served by the San Marcos Unified Schoc District. In other areas, school district lines split sever?
9
a 8
SUBJECT: Supervisorial Redistricting After 1990 Census: Proposed Plans A-2, A-2.1, B-2, C-A, and C-B
BACKGROUND: (Continued)
census blocks.
In the Carlsbad area, approximately 25% of the City of Carlsbad, primarily the La Costa area, is served by the San Marcos Unified
School District. In addition, a small portion of the City of Oceanside is included in the Carlsbad Unified School District boundaries.
Utilizing school district boundaries would not maintain the
criterion to avoid dividing cities. School districts boundaries are also dynamic and often change annually to reflect new school construction or new housing developments. Splitting blocks alsc creates problems with compiling and maintaining demographic data. For these reasons supervisorial district boundaries were not adjusted to follow school district boundaries.
The unincorporated communities of Harmony Grove and Elfin Forest
are in the same supervisorial district in each of the Chiel Administrative Officer's proposed plans,
The Tierrasanta Community planning area of the City of San Diegc is consolidated in all of the plans presented.
In Plan B-2, the community of Clairemont is undivided; however, ii
the A-2 and A-2.1, Clairemont is divided in order to maintail
population and demographic balances in the A series plans.
Staff is prepared to review these proposed plans to adjust thc
County's supervisorial district boundaries.
Community Proposals
The Chief Administrative Officer and staff met with and receive1 three redistricting plans from representatives of the followin1 community organizations. These plans are presented for you Board's consideration:
Asian Business Association (ABA)
Asian American Political Coalition (AAPC) Camino Real Group (CRG) Harborview Community Council (HCC) . Chicano Federation
. San Diego Black Political Action Committee
10
0 0
I SU3JECT: Supervisorial Redistricting After I990 Census: Proposc
Plans A-2, A-2.1, B-2, C-A, and C-B
BACKGROUND: (continued)
Members of the organizations who submitted these proposals ai
expected to address your Board on behalf of their proposed plar
at the September 10, 1991 meeting.
correspondence Received by the Chief Administrative Officer
1. July 25, 1991 Letter from Mr. and Mrs. Willard M. Edwards
2. August 9, 1991 Letter from Supervisor Susan Golding
3. August 9, 1991 Letter from Supervisor Susan Golding
4. August 14, 1991 Letter from Brad Mills, President of the Cas
5.
de Oro Business Association
August 20, 1991 Letter from the City of Solana Beach
Staff will be prepared to review the plans with your Board c September 10, 1991, and to receive further direction leading t the final adoption of a redistricting plan by your Board no late
than October 1, 1991.
Respectfully, $ii!LfKP&j- Chief Administrat ve Officer
11
o BOARD OF SUPERVISORS a
AGENDA ITEM
INFORMATION SHEET
SUBJECT: Supervisorial Redistricting After the 1990 Census
Proposed Plans A-2, A-2.1, B-2, C-A, and C-B
SUPV. DIST.: All
COUNTY COUNSEL APPROVAL: Form and Legality ( ) Yes (X) N/A
( ) Standard Form ( ) Ordinance ( ) Resolution
AUDITOR APPROVAL: (X) N/A ( ) Yes 4 VOTES: ( ) Yes ( ) No
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT REVIEW: ( 1 Yes (X) No
CONTRACT REVIEW PANEL: ( ) Approved (X) N/
CONTRACT NUMBER (SI : hT/A
PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOARD ACTION: 2/19/91 (29,30) Directed th CAO to begin redistricting process and hold public meetings t receive public comment: 4/30/91 (29) Adopted redistrictin criteria/guidelines and work plan; 5/28/91 (73) Accepted CA proposal alternative plans, directed public meetings be held an
return with a report in 60 days; 7/31/91 (1) Board hela redistricting workshop; reviewed alternative plans and requeste additional information on CAO proposals A and B; 8/6/91 (60) Boar
directed additional refinements to CAO proposed redistrictin plans.
BOARD POLICIES APPLICABLE: None
CITIZEN COMMITTEE STATEMENT: Not Applicable
CONCURRENCE(S): Not Applicable
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: Chief Administrative Office
CONTACT PERSON: June Komar 73 0/5 3 1-62 8 8 A-6
SeDtember 10, 1991
DEP R ENT AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE MEETING DATE m
12
a e LC7 r'
-* R
July 25,1991
Norman W. Hickey, Chief Administrative Officer
1600 Pacific Highway,
San Dieg0,Cali.f. 92101-2472
Dear Mr. Hickey :
Thank you for providing workshops that provided for public participation.
When my wife and I attended the workshop in Chula Vista, we were impressed by the significance and clarity of the data
and by the maps presented and by the respect and encouragement given public speakers.
Several speakers recommended districts determined by common environmental and economic development, but one speaker recommended a district determined by race and national origin. My wife and I strongly oppose the latter criteria.
Such criteria directly opposes anti-discrimination
federal law. It also opposethe school integration policy for whih millions of dollars are spent bussing. Further such criteria suggests interests other than the common good.
and IsrstaLli areas, Croatian and Slovenian areas, Kurdish and Arabic areas and Quebec and other Canadian provinces is no time to plant dragon teeth.
At a time when blood is being shed between Palistinian
6! gA&fA
0. Christina Edwards
1163 Louden Lane Imperial Beach,CA 91932
0 SC 8 T HARVEY & ASSOCIATE§
GOVERNMENT AND CORPORATE RELATIONS
August 2, 1991
k@ Q 6 vj9'
Ms. June Komar Deputy Chief Administ,rativs Officer
County of San Diego
1600 Pacific Highway, Room 201
San Diego, CA 92101
Dear Ms, Komar:
Realtors to endorse any re-districting proposal that places the cities of Encinitas, Del Mar and Solana Beach in the same
supervisorial district. In fact, we believe a strong case can b
made for a re-districting alternative like IC which creates a coastal district extending from Carlsbad in the north to Coronad in the south, including the Point'Loma area of the City of San Diego. While not including San Diego County's entire coastline, an alternative like this does create a natural community of interest that shares many similar environmental issues.
important re-districting process.
I am writing on behalf of the San Diepito Association of
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this very
Si& c
Sc Harvey
Governmental Affairs Director
cc: Supervisor Susan Golding Susan Edwards
900006 lija
945 FOURTH AVENUE SAN DIEGO, CALiFORNIA 92101
(619) 233-1260 FAX (619) 696-9476
d' 0 0
SUSAN GOLDING
SUPERVISOR. THIRD DISTRICT
SAN DIEGO COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
MEMORANDUM
TO: NORMAN HICKEY
FROM: SUSAN SUPERVISOR, GOLDING DISTRICT THREE A&
DATE: AUGUST 9,1991
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
RE: REDISTRICTING - TI ERRASANTA COMMUNI7Y
****************************************************7~***********************
1 have received a number of phone calls from members of the Tierrasanta Commun
Council regarding the proposed redistricting maps. Unfortunately, Tierrasanta remai
divided on all the map proposals.
Please use the attached map when redrawing the boundaries in the Tierrasar
Community. Also, please note the La Mirage Apartments are part of the Tierrasar
Community.
Thank you for your assistance.
COUNTY ADMlNlSTRATlON CENTER 1600 PACIFIC HIGHWAY ROOM 335 SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA 92101-2470 (619) 531-5533
@ Printed on recycled paper
TIERRASANTA
COMMUNITY COUMCi
T, ,/ . !l..t.- ...
0 0-
SUSAN GOLIDING
SUPERVISOR, THIRD DISTRICT
SAN DIEGO COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
MEMORANDUM
TO: NORMAN HICKEY CHIEF ADM I N ISTRATIVE OFFICER
FROM: SUSAN GOLDING SUPERVISOR, DISTRICT THREE
DATE: AUGUST 9, 1991
RE: REDISTRICTING - CLAIREMONT COMMUNITY
.............................................................................
I have received a number of phone calls from members of the Clairemont Town Counc
and the Clairemont Mesa Planning Committee regarding the proposed redistricting map:
Unfortunately, during the last redistricting process the community of Clairemont w:
divided.
Please include the areas of South Clairemont and Bay Park when redrawing tt
boundaries in the Clairemont community.
Thank you for your assistance.
COUNN ADMINISTRATON CENTER 1600 PACIFIC HIGHWAY ROOM 335 SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA 92101-2470 (619) 533-5533
@ Printed on recycled paper
-I -! -Ccr/cr de'bro -
- Butineu flttociation
POIT OFFICE BOX I28
IPRICIG VflLLEY, CCI 92077
August 14, 1991
Mr. Norm Hickey Chief Administrative Officer County Administration Center
1600 Pacific Highway
San Diego CA 92101-2470
Re: redistricting
Dear Mr. Hickey
As President and spokesperson of the association, the
membership has directed me to communicate the folloning to
you :
We reiterate and vigorously agree with what every speaker at
every public hearing to date has said, that is;
1. we consider the Casa de Oro community a part of
Spring Valley, 2. traditionally and historically Spring Valley has
been and continues to be an East County community,
3. the people of Spring Valley are best served and
represented by a supervisor of East County.
Most important, the Spring Valley area must not be divided,
have the area governed by two supervisors.
For the record, the Casa de Oro Business Association vehemently opposes any redistricting plan that will divide the Spring Valley community.
CASA de OR0 BUSINESS ASSOCIATION
as we strongly believe it is impractical and unworkable to
Brad &J&- Mills
President
(619) 660-1057
August 20, 1991
Mr. Norman Hickey
Chief Administrative Officer
County of San Diego 1600 Pacific Highway San Diego, CA 92101
Attn: Kathy Warburton
Dear Norm:
At its meeting on August 19, 1991, the Solana Beach City Counci discussed various alternatives relating to the reconfiyuration o
of drawing precise boundaries, the Council supported the creatio of a district that would include all North County coastal citie
(Del Mar, Solana Beach, Enchitas, Carlsbad, and Oceanside).
The Council further stated that all property belonging to the 22n
District Agricultural Association should be included in the new1
configured supervisorial district.
In terms of which district should the new alignment of cities b placed in, the Council felt that the 5th District was mos
appropriate as it has historically been the North County District
Thank you for considering our position on this important matter an please call if you have any questions
sincerely,
supervisorial districts in San Diego County. While stoppiny shor
Michael W. Huse City Manager
cc: Mayor and City Council
Chairman John MacDonald Supervisor Susan Golding Supervisor George Bailey
Supervisor Brian Bilbray
Supervisor Leon Williams Mayor Claude Lewis
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
4 l-l m8g v)8g *gg cfJg8 *88 d) -44 -4" OONN p-t+
04 0: 6 z-22 moo moo 0-00 \odd
Oo$€$ "gg N8g cc,8$ 08% E 4qy NO" Fcq mqq oq\q z .i! .2 a r( e Q
b 5q Z$ Ngg wgg as@ m88 p-88
2 z< 0 4?$3$. +gg a8g mws p-ws 3 acnm wqo\ mom Ft* aqcoq 2 m_4\d D-NN -pjCj a-u3G -_*cc, a% 4 P F
p) wgg F8g -@g m8€$ r-488 * *\qq cot xcr-q mhN ZZ.2 95 .* $ g** InCoCx: Y5-r-t- 4d-* m-FP
.H $$
.5 r, 0gg &?g -8g -88 Q8$ v)vm COG00 am* G0qoq \o?? -06 m-0C.j =-A& --,w g-gg 2; E?, -83
c- != 2 ezcs 2- c :- c v) G Co ._ ah P 2 r-4 .- 0- .e On.~m
d v-2 --+ *+; m-2 a- m- ssz a4 -CiJ ." c 22
Sa 5% %& 4
I-+
M a 4
tj 2 pz ptfi ?a0 A-mo *mm
a qs Fmv) 4PCo Z-q? ma'? aa?coq $ gE r-4 m m- r-4 e
5
N
e44 r-- r- ri
N-00 m*oo -30 a-6a oico
4 v m44 4 r-4 d Fil
qm c* ,za &*
Comw *-m4 m\dx "-66
s\ d v) c-4 TI- m N m m
N-*m arid a* 4mN 53 ezl D
& 9 c
5 0, In v)
cc, cc, P m m - CA d-
d3
0
m- -3 +3 +3
cro 93 9Q 93 cu
fig wr-4 Oo-0 cc,
*€$ *T
Ir, +!P
08 z-0
a8
=5
48
co 4
v)q
4
mo
m 00-6
a? -v)
?. 2"
4
4g 037
ZN
3
b-0
v,
e-- Nz 0
0
* cu
o,, st3 rc
W"
\o "00 z o\
t3s cn
+-e
Lpco uh)
p"4
" P
o\ w my
SF
P P \o
om P"'b0
8m
P"0
w cn
p
P E
8*
4 "w bP
w 0"w p
+d%
3 0 3 "w s "A s ..
&+ 3- E3- %- 2s 8- Eo- LC
s2 DE D2 $E sE E% Dl-
gg "2 kl [
cn p L-Pp cn wAp z ~1 k
P+-+ 5. g g. p r. s 2. cc
cn \o P P t3 cn \ !x 3
E a t3 z 4
d w
""% A 3 ram+ P C pp-1 p\y"w X9"i p,pw UOf \ow4 rn0E P4-1 Cww bb.0" a$= 88 88Q $$P 88 z
43.y PP"+ 44.y xxy PP"S < .(
iDba OXd -p!a+ WQD\S b&,w X33a Cbo +up &&& O\W~ r -- I/:
i$3gm Saf sam 884 $38 +c
wp; cncnc py.L ppb Po\; ; c E >z !x
w - 5s 5 PCL cg"g P3"W pp"\o ZE"?. t E$ t a$u $$= $8m $$a $$N c p3 ;
w z. 2. 2 F w :d "D p .w w -a .a "f *w y "4 p p "m &.Jz aww a+$ I-oz 4wI- 8$ 88w $8 88 8800 - t i c.L I-0 lz ppa 0P"O ppf ppvl pp"0 s T
WFCiO "g ++2 FP? "E $ c U 884 ss 88 88 88
> 7-
.(
0;
6 C
tr 7;: <
P P 13 P w w t3 'd P
Y w w w P 4 3 t3 - rr"w
Comm PW-\2! wap aws W\oE x agf 88 88% $8 88
P t3 w
ma- PbP CO4P
ci m P L-
c
uwa zo x FP"P 4
%
g-
"Z
+
P c1"
z m
cn F
h)"C 04
8 A$
" P m w a"! 9-
P
$E
gg
p
P \o P"kc
F cn P'b
P 00 VI
-Iu-
8 iq
w 0"m sw Wm
23 2% -wz wsk 7% M 22 -e. zs 22 - 4b E-8 +a+ E4 2 Z.--$ g.53 =E c. VI Qat. sNggg
CC
mPL
23-
#
"$ M g
TIg 0
VI h) \o
: "m $ "W 3 "! 3 " 4 0 Q\ C
3 % 4 2 cc -4 P
P
z z P
fdl 4
Y P 3 C VI o\ WZ"3 h)N"P -"00 PP"z wwy P-m PYP XCr'P ppQ ypn
83 88 38 88 88 cbg GoAg AtdE 00s WWS Y.
z 2
d w w g
g
P E3 N w h, E+ E
u,m3 N tJ >$ 3 3 G 4 r 6 DO 3
t3 c, e ki P w wl 44-w PP"c\ 44"W mm"N PP"00 g PTC0 P9h) ggz i-PC p\p\u, z Pas mtdg 0" 88W $?sa $?s= 88 88
.Yf"a ?+4 !+.-"A pp"w p\p\"h) g
$384 88 s8a 88 gip % CCWh P4E WPP \oms
093 00"Ll 00"o po-\s 00"W
w c
>z fd
\sswl t4=4
d P ww 0 !2 t-P"\s
COX= VIVI4 PPVI ~~\c $84 $?s= $8- $$a 88
m33 mt4g at40 LAW& 4wm $80 s8 $?sa $8 88O
2 s w rO c P?Q\ 00°C 3cm 00vl 00°C 9 T
$$?+ 88 88- 8$P 88m L 9 P
w-4 Wh)$ LCu, rrCO Wh)O
c--' E. 2. o\ U 4 rruN Y?"m opw *s"kl wy"0 Opo"0 2 2
m
- e
g"N 2
g "00 0 m c,
13"O 94
VI w
$e
c, " E
Eg v
P
$2
2°K
m.Y
w P m ?'bo
r m P"0
w co cn
$A
w *"xJ bm am
5 x< 22 E; - ,% %I-+ g-..
"0 5 " w =.jz
0 tn 4 a 00 2; 54
""00 w 0 N-"o co
mu4 Cccoh) PPSQ owtn :gg zs
884 88- $$A s$P $?8* zg
5 tzg 4m-U Ph"P 44.p coco_K Jlw2 < $ Qag Na4 Gsa r4-P XQUl ; $Is ssA SSQ $$a $?$la 0 - s
?+"4 994 pp"U .t3p"a FO'bO g - <
E 88- as0 s$?4 saw $pQ
t3 EF 5 PP"u 0p"m ?"a PP'a 90"- 2.g 0 cnmg E,, cncnP g$F 88 $84 3?gg $8- >2 G g w VI P w P E. e. Eo i;j co rr_P h m Uc,"U ww-0 ppm 99"; .W.W"m pop c4e mcos mas +PC& 4rN ;a 4 88 88 88 88 8gP u
tCm t3tq WYW rrco Nww g
&$I4 $8 $$SF $$Iu $84 v F
mdcc
PI- -I-
c G Eg n- c- - z>
me +a+ - n-
5. c& gg Zg'"'" 8 ;* "$ 1 EC
x P rp- m wP"E ri Eg
3 " 3" co -P- cn 4
co E3 ;cc >E nc
PY4 P9t.a X$"o pp"- (=G
1 QCI
c, <2
m 4 w
Z0.G
<
w w P w w 3
PPw G\pr *.am yo3 F-l"w 3
F r P p3 cn Y + F-"w 3 w r\O w
%
>z 3
r
coulcn PhU w-t3 mcom tnN4
P t3 w w
N
+o r c T ooa PPm 93- porn po"w
\c
* rc 2 E-!
-0
P \o
+ m
VI
04 4s
ge
- +
o\ w m-W c"N 3ie
r P \o
0- P-03
Srn
0-0
r cn
m- a0
z
8*
+
J2-P 9--
w 0"bQ !P
8 2% 2% pY 7% 7%
r==: I Gg E2 zg ms E- -3- ms
KE 2 DY
+5z m=
DE SHg
TIi 2. z
g. 6 g.- cn g. cn -g.$;g. ow0 00s- 3 -4 3 "0 3 -C' r "
&$ 28 cn (*> 4 I-& a U) 0 a 8 co 0 00 w >
w
00 P VI NN"Z Nrh) x -+a WP-N 0P4 p\p\-w pop-= pp-+, wl*" -wq COO$ PPcn C)rW bp"w' $84 88 $?$?A $$a
4a.9 Pay 44-j 0300-4 PW"2 g PXI- PPP po\oa yc'c pyla ,s: \Dm- NI-0 -03 -0% m00g 88w 88P $38- 88 88
Wfj yl00 pp-, Np'j p\om g
88- $800 $384 $80 g$$s E
ma," PWa m03g cnmr $3 ?fwd 8s 88-@ $p
88 z 9 ;d
P w w 4
\c w 4
h
w w w N
8 2 s 76 c !3 >z n
w - Pro s r 09-w 00-CO 00-a oo-- 00-w c-(, E$ tJ
>% E
P E. 2. 2
?I
-0 r r=
+ P w L
h r 9 cn = rr-P Y
C0-w PPN WrN b00t-l
P N u
w P c H
00 rr-cn a - rrm DO .Ww-0 a4E ppcn -4N p9-u -0s zyg P qrf3 P -.. % $8 88O 88 88 as0 c-(
9Pa 0000 PPcn zzs 00"- 5 rrco Nbg +A+i+A 884 88 88- 88- 8gP -I - p3
op Nww 0 \o
a IO
A
4 c
t
RESULTS OF SEPTEMBER IO, 1991 COUNTY
SUPERVISOR’S HEARING ON REDISTRICTING
County Supervisor’s heard public testimony c
Redistricting proposals at their meeting today but r
decision was made. The Supervisors have asked
coalition of minority groups to come up with a plan *
address minority concerns and will meet again c
Monday to discuss the coalition’s plan. The Supervisal
may direct staff to draft an ordinance to implement thl
or another version of the proposal at the Mond: meeting.
* e
?
t.
1 CduNW SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENTS
July 9, 1991 Carlsbad City Council receives presentation from County c
San Diego staff on alternative supervisorial districts. The
City Council requests that County staff develop a Fifth
District configuration that would include primarily North
County coastal cities.
July 15, 1991 County forwards a potential configuration for Supervisorial
District 5 which includes the coastal cities of Del Mar,
Solana Beach, Encinitas, Carlsbad and Oceanside. Also
included are the cities of San Marcos and Vista, and the
unincorporated communities of Bonsall, Fallbrook and
Rainbow, and Camp Pendleton.
July 31, 1991 County holds a Redistricting Workshop to discuss
proposed maps. One series of maps builds on Carisbad's
request for a North County Coastal District. Supervisor
Golding requests County staff to configure a District 3 that
would incorporate more coastal area rather than inland
areas. This "coastal" District 3 includes Carlsbad. This
became one of the recommended alternatives.
August 9,1991 Mayor Lewis meets with North County Mayors to discuss
the redistricting process.
August 22,1991 Mayor Lewis meets with Supervisor MacDonald to express
the City's desire to remain in District 5. The Chicano
Federation has indicated their support for an initiative to be
placed on the ballot in 1991 that would expand from 5 to 7
the number of supervisorial districts effective in 1994.
September 4,1991 City staff receives the latest set of redistricting maps from
the County. Maps "A-2" and 'IC-A" create a District 5 of
North County coastal cities.
I ow 0 .\
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
OFFICE OF THE ASSESSOR GREGORY -J. I7 !
1600 PACIFIC HIGHWAY, ROOM 103
SAN DIEGO, CA 92101-2480
(619) 236-3771
DATE: August 7, 199
.. TO : Manager, Rancho Santa Fe Community Services Distri .
FROM : County Assessor
RE: BC 91-12 PROPOSED "Richard Dentt Annexation" to
Attn: John-Pastore ci
Rancho Santa Fe Community Services District - sewer Imprc ment District No. I
You filed the subject proposal with the County Assessor on
July 30, 1991 . Pursuant to Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 58850) of Division 1, Title 6, of the Government Code of
the State of California, the Assessor makes the following report
and recommendation:
1. The territory to be included within the proposal comprises approximately 3.07 acres, located in whole or in part withj the following cities or districts:
This proposal is located within three miles of the following additional cities: City of Carlsbad
(See attached list)
City of Encinitas City of San Diego
By copy of this report, all of the cities and districts listed
herein are being notified of the filing of this proposal, in
accordance with Section 58855 of the Government Code,
2.' The description of the proposed boundaries is not definite and certain, unless corrected as shown on the attached Exhibit B The Assessor recommends that the description be corrected in t
manner ,
The proposed boundaries do not conform to existing lines of as ment, documents of record and ownership. 3.
GREGORY J. SMITH
County Assessor
&v)taA \I' u l3y i-J$
BERNARD V, SIEHERT
Chief, Mapping Division
(619) 531-6469
Attachments
cc: Board of Supervisors Property Tax Services - Auditor's Office
Local agencies listed herein (without Exhibit A)
M-7A
W w
PSC! 3. M'3 1.0 .](..>i:.j(.+(..W f=!]".4'l^t" OF' 'Z$,f.J JJ -JEGI:\ .f(.+(.%.S.K I"!%
7-KcI]: bF<<]L,;SE E;'( -('I:. L. I- ^I 0"i' ()$3,'05>/P'1.
.x..EN'r'[;;:; I-Rg, N'df.$E;\,T.;< z 371 305 fqJt.L y;=Ali : -!.c32 ffJ.Jl:l r''\'pE ; _- &SSE$pJ-JR V'I
"f'F<h DIKSC: : l?l~l~4cl"io SANTA 1-E
F!Jf4D FILE:: fisc
r. bEil NI.!PlEEl? TYPE CF(A F;:E:1J FUNIS IfEE;ZI<IF'TT.C!N
1. 29$2--0C 01. SA~.! XIIEGU (:~\jpJ~y :;-rRK:Eaj- !.-:[i:tiTINr.< D]:s~'F'<~(;-T
3 27'83.-QO 01 COUNTY SE3'JICE AREA NO 83 SAP4 DIEGUX'T'C! L-OCRI
4 2:310-00 0:i. slqt\l 11 I E Gc) cz:..; "T'Y 1- L. 0 SD c [I t.47'17 DL- 11 I ST'F'C 3: f: r'
L- .-l Y. \:> 1. q.1. .~3-*'f:J0 0 j. R,$NCI.fO SAt.f7'fi 1°F.:: F:f.gE: ("'R!:jT!,[-I'T:~!JN IiI[;'T' e OF." $1)
& -?.3.76--01 01 ::: EEN EL-EM R,?,?+Ct-.iQ Sl$pJTfi T.-E:
I ?L\.Jb.! 03. 0:t.
8 4451:---03. 01 x M IF<& COSTP~ c:c~~twtu-r\r' CO~...I-EGE
9 &:5~3-*00 01. SANT A FE I RR 1 GhTION
2 2";'1;~....00 0.j. C;K~UJN-~~ pp- akl.<..STCE: -.I AIiEA NT? :I.";' CjAl.? I:l:{:Ei:C?Lf1:"rCl
X i-lIG1-l SAt4 111fGUI"l'rZ [.IN1;CjN 7 i+ *leTE'.."
li) &'72:";..-06 Q2 X r-"r'uJTi Li/S F<fifi&3f.IDER TJF zxtf,W& 3. :
1;. &,-,?~>+.".~~~ 09 CWt5, S$$"T$, FE :[:Rf.1::[:C3g)1' I <:p.! 11 I ST
:k 2 &.:qy'<)--i>{> i) i. i.liY,tfNfT?' SER'J3.CES 'l.:I:i.STRIc-r
1 3 ~~~70.-20 rz!. i:i -. L.AN~!SCAF'E:I MA1N'I' TiYF' ... Dl
..
..
.. . . . ..
8-7- 9 1 MAPPING OlVlSlON DATE :
SCALE:
TRA. PAGE:
DRAWN BY:
12200'
62 E
BERGGREN