HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995 Ordinance No. 007•
•
•
CROfllAl,,CE NO . .2_
SERIES OF 1995
BY AUTHORITY
COUNCIL BILL NO . 7
INTRODUCED BY COL.Nell
MEMBER HABENICHT
AN ORDINANCE CONFIRMING THAT TITLE 1, CHAf>TER 5, SECTION 1, OF THE ENGLEWOOD
MUNICIPAL COOE 1985, IS UNCHANGED RELATING TO COUNCIL DISTRICTS WITHIN THE
CITY OF ENGl£WOOD , COLORADO.
WHEREAS, pursuanl lo Article Ill, Secllon 20, of the Englewood Home Rule Charter, the
four Council Districts established shall be cont iguous and compact and have approx imately
the same number of reg istered voters and every four years r.r,oncil shall make such
div isions, changes and consolidations necessary to carrr out the intent of Article Ill ol the
Home Rule Charter; and
WHEREAS, current districting nieets the registered elector criteria as , calculated
highest to lowest, there Is a 13.55% differential ; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to popu lation requirements established by Colorado Revised
.,IaIutes, Constitution of Colorado Artlcla V, Section 46, and case law , the current
districting rneets th e population criteria as closely as circumstances will permit (District
I is .87% over the maximum and Dis trict IV is .44% unde r the minimum); and
WHEREAS, the Election Comm ission of the City of Englewood recommends that no
change be made lo the Dislrict boundaries as th e current districting , sub5tantialiy, meet s
both the popula tio n and registered elector crileria; and
WHEREAS , the Englewood City Council hereby confirms that Title 1, Chapter 5 , Section
1, of the Englewood Municipal Code 1985 shall remain unchanged;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD ,
COLORADO. AS FOLLOWS :
~-The City Council of the City ol Englewood , Colorado hereby affirms that Title
1, Chapte r 5, Section 1, Englewood Munic ipal Code 1985, is her eby confi rmed to remain
the same as loliows :
1-5-1: COUNCIL DISTRICTS:
A. Districts Described. Each district is located in the State of Coloraco and the County
of Arapahoe .
Co,,nc il District No . 1: Council Distr ict No. 1 sha ll incllld& and be comprised of all
that portion of th e City lying nc-rtherly ol the following
described line : Beginning at th€ inter section of the cent er
line of West Hampden Avenue and the westerly City limit line
of Englewood; thence easterly along sa id center line of West
Ham pden Avenue to the Intersection at South Broadway ;
thence northerly along the cent er line ol South Broadway to
the intersectio n at East Floyd Avenue ; th ence ea sterly along
the center line of East Floyd Avenue to th e int ersection at
South Gilpin Street; thence nonherly along the center line ol
Council District ~:.:. 2:
Council District No. 3:
South GIipin Street to its Intersection with the northerly
City limit line .
Council District No. 2 shall Include and be comprised of all
that portion of the City bounded by the following de scribed
line : Beginning at the intersection of the centerline of Little
Dry Creek and the easterly City limit line of Englewood ;
thence northwesterly along said cen ter line to the
intersection at East Kenyon Avenue ; thence westerly along
th e center line of East Kenyon Avenu e to the intersection at
South Broadway; thence southerly along the cent er line of
South Broadway lo the intersection at West Lehigh Avenue;
thence westerly along the centerline of West Lehigh Avenue
to the intersection with the westerly City limit line of
Englewood; thence northeasterly along said westerly City
limit line to Its intersection with the center li ne at West
Hampden Avenue ; thence easterly along said center line of
West Hampden Avenue to the intersection at South Broadway ;
the nce · nMherly along the cent er line of South Broadway to
the inte rs ection at East Floyd Avenue ; thence easterly along
the center line of East Floyd Avenue to the intersection of
South Gilpin Street ; thence northerly along the ce nter line of
South Gilpin Street to its intersection with the northerly
City limit line ; thence easterly , souther ly , and wes terly
along sa id City limit lin e to th e intersection with the center
li ne of Little Dry Creek , sa id point also be in9 the point of
beginning .
Council District No . 3 shall include and be comprised of all
that portion of the Cit y bounded by the following described
line : Beginning at the intersection of the cen ter line of Little
Dry Creek and the easterly City limit line of Englewood :
thence northwesterly along said ce nter line to the
intersection at East Kenyon Avenue ; thijnce we sterly along
the center line of East Keny on Avenue to the intersection at
South Broadway ; thence south erly along the ce nter line of
South Broadway to the intersection al West Lehigh Av enue;
the nr;e westerly along the center line of Wes t Lehigh Avenue
to the intersection with the westerly City limit line of
Englewood , thence soulhwesteriy· along said westerly City
limit line to its intersection with the cente r li ne at West
Oxford Avenue; thence easterly along said center line of West
Oxford Av en ue to the intersection al South Delaware Street ;
the nce southerly along the center line of South Delaware
Stre et to the intersection at West Stanford Avenue ; th en ce
east erly along the center line of West Stanford Ave nue to the
intersection at South Broadway ; thenc e southerly along the
center line of South Broadway to the intersection at Ea st
Bell eview Avenue ; thence easterly along the center lin e of
Ea st Bellev iew Avenue to its inters ection with the so utherly
Cit y limit line ; thence easterly and northerly along said City
limit line to th e intersection with the center line of Lillie
Dry Creek , said point also being the point of beg inning .
2
•
•
•
\
•
•
•
Co~nc il Dlstri•~t No . 4: Council Dist ri ct No . 4 shall include and be comprised of all
thnt portion of the City lying southerly and westerly of the
follow ing descr ibed line : Beg inn ing at th e intersection of the
center line of West Oxford Avenue and the westerly City
li mit line of Englewood; thence easterly along said center
line of West Oxford Avenue to the intersection at South
De laware Stre e1; lh ence southerly along the center line of
South Delaware Stre et to the Inters ect ion at West Stanford
Avenue : the nce easte rly along the cen te r line of West
Stanford Avenue to th e intersection at South Broadway ;
thence south erly along the center line of South Broadway t(l
the in tersection at East Bellev iew Av en ue : the nc e easte rly
along the cent erline of Eas t Bellevi ew Av en ue to Its
inters ecti on with the southerl y City limit line.
r' B. Equ iva lent Size. The City Council finds, deter mines and decla res that the four (4)
distric ts, as hereinabove established , conta in an approximately si milar number of
,egiste,e e ,eI e,s CITIZENS as 'determin ed by the nijmee r ef reg is te ree ,eters at the
last general J'4ijn iei pal eleetien ans thal 1990 CENSUS FI GURES (DIS TRICT I IS .87%
OVER THE MAXIMUM AND DISTRICT IV IS .44 % UNDER THE MINIMUM). THE
DISTRICTS CONTAIN A SIM ILAR NUMBER OF REGISTERED VOTERS AS DETERMINED BY
TH E NUM BER OF REGISTERE D VOTERS AT THE LAST GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION
AND the Variance Between the DISTRICT WITH TH F. HIGHEST number of REGISTERED
VOTER S AND THE DISTRICT WITH THE LOWEST NUMBER OF REGISTERED VOTERS-saie
.,eters in an y twe (2) eist,iet s is not in excess of fii ~een percent (15 %).
C. Annexa tions . All territory ann exed to lh e Ci ty shal l be and beco mes a pa rt of the
Council district to wh ich the said dist rict is contig uou s, until suc h time as lh e
Council sha ll redistrict th e City. (Ord . 6, Series 1993 )
Introdu ced , read in full , and passed on first readin g on th e 27th day of February , 1995 .
Pub lishe d as a Bill for an Ord inan ce on thE , 2nd day of March , 1995.
Read by titl e and passed on final reading 0 ~ lhe 20th day of Ma rch , 1995 .
Publ ished by title as Ordinance No . .1_, Series of 1995 . on the 23rd da y ol March,
1995. ,
I
A :~d(fl
oucrishiaA.Bis: City Cl erk
I, Lo ucri shia A. Ellis , City Clerk of the City of Englewood , Colorado , hereby ce rtify
l~at the above and forego ing is a true_ry of the Ordinance pa sse n fi~a l reading and
pub li shed by titl e as Ordinan ce No. , Series of 1995 . ~~~· tf'. ~
Loucrishia A. Ellis
3
•
•
•
Data
February 27, 1995
INITIATED BY
Election Commission
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
Agenda Item
10 a-1
Subject
Reapportionment of
City Council Districts
STAFF SOURCE
Louaishia A Ellis, City Cleril/Election
Commission Member
COUNCIL GOAL AND PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION
Resolution No . 20, Series of 1991, was adopted by City Council on February 19, 1991 . This
resolution officially postponed Council reapportionment until 1990 census data was available
and redistricting by State and County was comple te .
Ordinance No . 6, Series of 1993 was adopted by Coundl on February 1, 1993 which
established the current District boundaries .
RECOMMENDED ACTION
The Englewood Charter requires that population and number of registered voters be reviewed
every four years in an effort to equalize each of Englewood's Council Districts. Addressing
redistricting in 1995 puts redistricting back on schedule per Charter. TI1e Colorado Revised
Statutes has a population provision that case law supports, even though the provision is not
made specifically applicable to municipalities. The guidelines stipulate that population should
not vary in each district more that 5% from the total population divided by the number of
districts. ,ne Englewood Charter requires that the number of registered voters should vary no
more than 15% between thd highest and lowest Council District .
The Election Commission is c/;arged with reviewing and recommending r1:1apportionment to
City Council. The Charter require:; that reapportionment be in place six months prior to the
November 7, 1995 Gener ·JI Municipal Election .
The Election Commission recommends that no change be made to the District bo\.lndaries as
the current districti ng meets both the population and registered elector criteria as closely as
circumstancds will permit. The City Attorney's office concurs .
BACKGROUND, ANALYSIS, AND ALT. ERNA TIVES IDENTIFIED
POPUI..A TIQfi Bj;gllTERED liL,EI.TORI
{Based on 11190 Census -(Baled on Ar..,.i-County Figures for
29,3117) November a, 11114 Election)
21,317 + 4 • 7,347 TOTAL NUMBER OF REGISTERED
7,34711 THE IDEAL ELECTORS: 11,531
POPULATION FIGURF.
VARIANCE c,J.CULATED DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
FROM HIGHEST TD LOWEST DISTRICT:
~ IDEAL 1UI%
DISTRICT
I 7771 ♦ 1.17% 4124
II 7.311 + 0.41% 4121
Ill 7.211 -G.10% 4,30I
IV IM7 -U4% 4113
Population -District I is .87% over maximum (approximately 64 voters)
"';strict IV is .44% under minimum (approximately 33 voters)
The only way to modify the District lines to meet the population criteria exactly would be to
split a County precinct line between City Districts whjch will prove to be detrimental to both the
City and County . •
Registered Electors -meets the criteria.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
The re is no financial impact foreseen as a resu lt of this recommondation.
UST OF ATTACHMENTS
Memorandum dated February 14 , 1995 from Community Development Planning Administrator
St itt .
•
•
•
A
•
•
•
M™ORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Lou Ellis , City Clerk,
Harold J. Stin, Planning Administrat~
February 14, 1995
1995 Redistricting
I have completed my review of the population counts of each of the City's twelve election
precincts based on the final 1990 Census information. W nen compared with the information that
you provided me for the I 993 redistricting there are some discrepancies . It is my understanding
that these differences may be due to the County redistricting that took place several years ago . In
any event, I feel comfortable recommending that the current precinct and district boundaries not
be changed even though the lener of the law may not be met in tenns of the five percent variance
from the ideal district size . I recommend not changing district boundaries for the foUowing
reasons :
I. The number of persons needed to balance Districts I and IV are so
small ,64 and 33 persons respectively, and the precinct size so comparatively large,
that simply shifting precincts from one district to another woul d likely result in an
imbalance in the other districts .
2. The districts could be brought into conformance if the precincts were split
ratr.er than shifted. This, however, creates the potential for confusion for the
voters if they are required vote at more than one location when County and City
issues are on the ballot .
In conclusion, I belie•:e that a strong case can be made that the current precinct and district
boundaries meet the spirit of the law and changing the districts creates no real benefit and may, in
fact , complicate the voting procedure for many citizens .
Attached to this memorandum is a summary of the precinct and district population counts
including an analysis of the variance of each of the districts from the five percent threshold .
Diltric:t
I
n
m
IV
Citv Total
City of En&Iewood Election Precincts
County
Pltclncts
101
104, 105, 109
106, 107, 110
108, 114
111 , 113,401
112
115, 117
402,403
407,408
116, 118, 121
122, 123 ,411
120, 124
City Preciact District Variance rrom
Precincts Po ulatloa Po nlatloa Ideal District •
·-I 1,290 !
2 3,367
3 3,121
7 778 +-0.87%
4 2,7 :" t
5 338 5
6 1,242
7 381 0 .0%
7 2,377
8 2,505
9 2,399
7,281 0 .0%
10 2,876
11 2,214
12 1,857
6 947 -0.44%
29387
• The Ideal District population is defined as that number derived by dividing the total City
population by the number of election districts. Each district may vary no more that +/-5% from
• the ideal . Based on the 1990 population of29,387, the ideal district would be 7,347 ar.d the 5%
variance would result in a district range of no less than 6,980 persons nor more than 7,714
pen;ons per district.
•
•