Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout(P1) IA Presentation Port Arthur -Council PresentationBICKERSTAFF HEATH DELGADO ACOSTA LLP 3711 S. MoPac ExpresswayBuilding One, Suite 300Austin, Texas 78746(512) 472-8021 www.bickerstaff.com www.votinglaw.com ©2021 REDISTRICTINGApplicable Law Three Principles, plus “One person –one vote” (equal population)Voting Rights Act §2 (nondiscrimination) Shaw v. Reno(limits use of race) Plus, as diagnostic tool:Voting Rights Act §5 (retrogression) ©2021 Redistricting One Person -One Vote U.S. Constitution –single-member districts must have approximately equal populations Rule of thumb: total deviation < 10% Compare most populous and least populous districts to “ideal”–sized district Add both departures from ideal together ©2021 Example Deviation Calculation District Ideal district District total pop. Difference Deviation A 10,000 11,000 1000 + 10.0 percent B 10,000 10,750 750 + 7.5 percent C 10,000 10,250 250 + 2.5 percent D 10,000 8,000 - 2000 - 20.0 percent Totals: 40,000 40,000 net= 0 net= 0 percent Total maximum deviation = difference between most populous and least populous districts = 10 percent + 20 percent = 30 percent. ©2021 What Population Do You Use? Total Population •To determine one person -one vote VAP (Voting Age Population) •To measure voting rights issues ©2021 Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act •No discrimination on basis of race or language minority status •Generally, avoid cracking or packing •Cracking or fracturing is dividing minority voters to fragment their voting power. •Packing is concentrating minority voters when dividing them would permit the group to elect their candidates of choice in more than one district •Other practices can also violate Section 2 ©2021 14th Amendment (Shaw v. Reno) Limits race-based decision making, including redistricting Was race the predominant consideration in drawing a redistricting plan? If so, is the plan a narrowly tailored means of addressing a compelling governmental interest? ©2021 Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act Preclearance no longer required (Shelby County v. Holder (2013)) Section 5 standard is “retrogression” Are minorities worse off under the new system? No discriminatory purpose or effect Still a useful diagnostic tool to identify potential Section 2 issues ©2021 Adopt Criteria Identifiable boundaries Maintaining communities of interest & neighborhoods Using whole voting precincts, if possible Basing plan on existing districts Adopting districts of relatively equal size Drawing districts that are compact and contiguous Keeping existing incumbents in their districts Narrowly tailoring plan to comply with the VRA ©2021 Plan Development Elements Initial Assessment Adopt plan criteria, guidelines Develop illustrative plan(s) Public comment / hearing Analyze comments Adopt final plan Implementation Reconfigure election precincts ©2021 Proposed Redistricting Time Line 2/1 at 9:30 a.m. Present Initial Assessment TBD First Drawing Workshop TBD Second Drawing Workshop TBD Final Adoption Port Arthur, Texas 2011 Benchmark with 2020 Census Data ©2021 Current Districts Current Districts Current Districts Current Districts Current Districts Current Districts Current Districts City of Port Arthur Overall Deviation For Current Districts Using 2020 Census Data City of Port Arthur Overall Deviation For Current Districts Using 2020 Census Data City of Port Arthur Overall Deviation For Current Districts Using 2020 Census Data City of Port Arthur Overall Deviation For Current Districts Using 2020 Census Data Hispanic Thematic Map Black Thematic Map BICKERSTAFF HEATH DELGADO ACOSTA LLP 3711 S. MoPac ExpresswayBuilding One, Suite 300Austin, Texas 78746(512) 472-8021 www.bickerstaff.com www.votinglaw.com ©2021