Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 31 - City of Santa Ana Draft Maps JANUARY 18, 2021City of Santa Ana Draft Maps JANUARY 18, 2021 Agenda What we will cover • Traditional Redistricting Principles • Census Data • Public Submissions • Community of Interest Testimony • Current Lines • Draft Maps • Next Steps WIN 1� iAN17�5 �..Ai Traditional Redistricting Principles Complying with the Fair Maps Act The Fair Maps Act passed by the Legislature mandates a set of criteria we must follow when drawing ward plans. • Relatively equal size - people, not citizens • Contiguous —wards should not hop/jump • Maintain "communities of interest" • Follow city and census designated place boundaries • Keep wards compact — appearance/function r� 1 rNO The mechanics of Redistricting Census Data Census Files come in two parts: Geography— the underlying framework of the data Data —the counts of population and demographics And they can convey different information: Point in Time — Decennial Census Multi -year Averages — Trends/Estimates The mechanics of Redistricting Census Data The Geography is called the TIGER Files Topologically Integrated Geoff Encoding and Referencing - Nested geographic units „ A • Block Group • Tract The mechanics of Redistricting Census Data � A � L o R ❑fir= A �- .,... 6. +7 Census Blocks Census Block Groups MEN Census Tracts The mechanics of Redistricting Census Data Two different datasets most commonly used in redistricting: - PL 94-171 - the Decennial Census File - Census Block Geography - Total Population Counts for April 1, 2020, used to determine the size of each district - Required to be released before April 1, 2021, but was delayed until September 201", with a "legacy" dataset released on Aug. 12tn K-K-2-01, I The mechanics of Redistricting Census Data The census data file the city is required to use will be slightly different: - Statewide Prisoner Reallocation - California Statewide Database I UC Berkeley —adjusted population removing state prison population and reallocating them based on where they lived prior to being incarcerated. - This allows a more equitable redistricting. 1� iAN17�5 �..Ai The mechanics of Redistricting Census Darn Two different datasets most commonly used in redistricting: - American Community Survey (ACS) - Census Block Group and Census Tract or larger geographies - Results in estimated data that provides more context to the Census results with demographic and socioeconomic info. - Provides Citizen Voting Age Population (CVAP) ' �gm �u�lieoka,` From COI to Maps With the Fair Maps Act requiring cities to include the public input in the redistricting process, we move redistricting out into the public, with maps driven by Community of Interest testimony. Input from community drives process with multiple ways for the public to engage. Rules for process emphasize the importance of traditional criteria and minimizing divisions of neighborhoods. Releasing maps for feedback — today we will see plans to spark more public engagement. rESM, , I,, �e -2-Ski �a3 '9tkM Voting Age Population ICVAP) o®Aeoisraicnn[ s ®exeoisrt ®®Pta*xrE ®®A ®®P Public Submissions Gardenl The City of Santa Ana City Council obtained public map submissions • Use of the online mapping tool DistrictR to solicit input. • Hosted 6 Community Workshops + additiona community presentations • Online training of DistrictR at each Community Workshop. 19 full citywide Mans. 3 bartial Mans and 3 communii & Ins �1��1 u'491� Populat,on bats Lay( Population Balance u . ia]V D—W Census 51 51 51 �stln 57 UNASSIGNED POPULATION: MAX. POPULATION D[VIAli- Highlight Unassigned, Public Submissinnq We have converted all full and partial plans, received by January 111", to our "Atlas" format which includes: • Cover page with full districting plan overview. • Data table with population, deviation, ethnic population, Citizen Voting Age Population (CVAP)Ethnicity and breakdowns for each ward (numbered 1-6 for a complete plan) • Individual ward maps with street -details and data tables and charts. Public Submissinnq We have converted all full and partial plans, received by January 111", to our "Atlas" format which includes: • Cover page with full districting plan overview. • Data table with population, deviation, ethnic population, Citizen Voting Age Population (CVAP)Ethnicity and breakdowns for each (numbered 1-6 for a complete plan) ward • Individual ward maps with street -details and data tables and charts. rg ��5NO ag� 4 � 1���` Public Submissinnq We have converted all full and partial plans, received by January 111", to our "Atlas" format which includes: • Cover page with full districting plan overview. • Data table with population, deviation, ethnic population, Citizen Voting Age Population (CVAP)Ethnicity and breakdowns for each ward (numbered 1-6 for a complete plan) • Individual ward maps with street -details and data tables and charts. ru-st-, E ,� g . N.te t3 O,slnet2 W MIR...♦ memo-F 110,11, I 1 L - p :s1►s L s--g�-��►��►r�rSsl Bpi � ii�4�� m w., bQp14P Qb7Q � �' ©f#9ID 4RO4�A®6@ C9ffiu'Eu ° Cu a ©am 9@9IYnO Public Submissions r'ARDEN GROVE In addition to PDF maps of all submissions, there are also web maps provided. These allow the user to zoom in to street level for a closer inspection. LNg ORANGE Tustin Public .:r:IM•7i submissioi provided. 7T - - . In street IevE where wai Public Map Plan Submissions Placing Public Plans into Mapping Schools To date, there have been 31 public plan submissions and 10 COI submissions through DistrictR and through electronic submittal. These plans can be categorized as follows: • Cols • Noncontiguous or population -imbalance (total deviation above 10%) • Major Streets • Compact • Multiple Central Wards • Follow McFadden for Southern Wards • Other Major Changes to current plan • VietRISE Plans *Of the public plans submitted through DistrictR only one created an Asian plurality ward* r� 1� `i �pLA F Community of Interest rDistrictR IDs: i 89910, 90008, 90067, 92283 Noncontiguous or Population Imbalanced maps DistrictR IDs: 87849, 86638, 77239, 90181 I PEN Major Streets DistrictR IDs: 76209, 76306 Compact DistrictR IDs: 76576, 87836 6 J s Northern ,-Neighborhoods together DistrictR I Ds: 90353, 90378, 90447, 92322, 96223, 96937 Northern ,-Neighborhoods together DistrictR I Ds: 90353, 90378, 90447, 92322, 96223, 96937 \� L61 CZ � 12-21 Follow McFadden for Southern Wards DistrictR IDs: 70404, 70524, 70537, 80649180650, 90376 s r, NZ - r c � W Q d' d cm Z r P r W N � W 5 W Q = d ®® ®® MEN Other Major Changesto Current Plan DistrictR IDs: 76339, 77539, 77567, 86619, 89993 a MEN 7� I'M , UM VietRISE VietRise 1 and VietRISE 2 COI Map Report City of Santa Ana I Submitted Public Plans Report rti w,:.��°°r o�ercn 2d eoa�.e�a�.�d•e m.n n....o�e�w.°m"e.. 6..,.ew" w-as ur. 2P, .w o� 6w�.w,tl�ry a•.e,", 040{ Sub—". p° , 26, 2021 The Submitted COI Map Report provides COI and Draft Map public submissions, COI 1 7052a Wb-..d:Oceo6er 26. 2021 testimony from public workshops and themes - ;,. from publicly submitted maps with the 0 Plan Report following summary data: So0m6eeE O te0ee 26 20n1 Ono, 2.2�1 Moen Noe ncorwMo�c. AwN u<Yd Aw�nNrtlT ma,Ne • Submission date SubmtN: November 12. 1623 • Thumbnail image of plan Name and ID# of public submission • Public testimony for COI maps .emn vo-y. ce..a•". • Themes for submitted draft maps Placemats To date, there have been 18 Community of Interest placemats received by staff and are on the website. These plans can be categorized as follows: • Sullivan Community • Temple, McFadden and Mini St • Cham, speaking community r� •Mvp n Community of Interest Forms The Community of Interest forms filled out by the public and received by staff are on the website • The city received 31 Community of Interest responses fti� .ls.. Public Comment Form on Communities of Interest for Redistricting City of Santa Ana Redistricting Process Pubic Comment Farm on Communities al Interest wmw mo qa+[�n wG•mV �vwu en.nrac�v wa. na[ � _.. . .�.... gpnoa�V aP+4sw H.K.m. m 0rw N.Imn n o^.vro Tv wmM p/�wna. eo.na. cpT.nna.s. aV w Nw..: a.a.ugr•anM.wwcN WAu... eltiv.Iluae. atl4ropaa.wgn lTwu so:.v..rwdca�.�on.w�w..a �w mFM1 u�P�nv .a.o•pt cv'n.nM rp pv Od.�tlq e�Yc�r:4Y.uVup�CwaawaAiec�r �tlia.iw.Yr4Y.CJ.rv. m.a .yw r.«.rry�ce....uwrrngywyo�u�u�.avrua y:y^a�.c.:..n...ru.wy p..y.Wgwny�w.mpugw.r�vi.d d:ena W.pur�.cw nPa.��a �.Y.. u�bau e.WwP�<eww we Nn�aa.'Iun®nw�fi VmV'. �fe eam.Mwne Council Amendment During the November 151h Redistricting meeting Redistricting Partners received the following requests for amendments from the City Council • 1 Plurality Asian ward • To keep the following Neighborhoods together o North Park folks o Southern NH South Coast Alliance o New Horizon o Bella Vista o Not split Flower down the middle o NH East Side Delhi o Cambodian population on East side o Park and Washington NHs o Sullivan Community 1� iAN/7�5 �..dY ORANGE GARDEN GROVE..,.. 2020 Census 1 2 5 4 5 6 Population 51,983 SO,462 57,056 50,404 SZ698 50,1TI Deviation -136 - 657 4,9M -k;7k5 579 -2,009 Deviation % -03% -3.2% 9.5% -33% 1.1% -3.9% Oeh er 4,344 4,604 12 J29 3,509 3,675 4,079 Other % 8,4% -9.1% 213% 7.0% 7.0% 8.1% Latino 28,431 40,029 39,056 43,924 45,507 42,900 Latino % 547% 79.3% 684% 87.1% 86.096 85.6% Asian 10,813 5,264 5,213 2; Y k8 4161 2,749 Asian % 362% 10.4% 9.1% 5.4% 6.0% 55% _ c _, 395 56S 6'!8 255 SSS 383 3 L:' X 0.8% 1.1% 12% 0.5% 1.1% 0.8% Citizen Voting Age Population (CVAP) _ 3 4 S 6 24,738 33,290 26,660 23,076 23,497 Other CVAP 1, :U 3,860 12,062 3,801 2,952 3,450 Other CVAP % 135% 15.6% 36.2% 143% 12.8% 14.7% Latina CVAP 13,761 16,481 16,681 20,85/ 17,450 17,'755 Latina CVAP % 44.4% 66.6% 50.1% 76.2% 75.5% 75.6% Asian CVAP 12,845 3,842 3,658 1,760 2.424 2,IS1 Asian CVAP % 41.4% 15.5% 11,C% 66% 10.5% 92% Black CVAP 224 SSS 889 262 270 145 Black CVAP % C.7% 2.2% 2.7% 1.0% 12% 0.6% a�• 2020 Census 1 3 5 6 SI,985 50,462 S2,G98 SU,I Il Usher 4,344 3,675 4,079 Other % 8.1% Latino Total Deviation of 13.4% 42,900 Latino % a5.6% Asian 18,813 —_ _,_ _ _„ _ 3,161 2,749 Asian % 36.2% 10.4% 6.6% 55% _L_, 395 56S .,;L... _,_ SSS 383 3 L-, X. 0.8% 1.1% ._.. 0. s':. 1.1% 0.8% Citizen Voting Age Population (CVAP) _ 4 S 6 24,738 26,660 23.076 23.497 Other CVAP 1, iU 3.860 12.062 3,801 2.952 3.450 Other CVAP % 135% 15.6% 36.2% _ 12.8% 14.7% Latino CVAP 13,761 16.481 16,681 -0.8 :' 17,450 17,'753 Latino LVAP% 44.4% 66.6% 50.1% 782% 75.5% 75.6% Asian CVAP 12,845 3,842 3,658 1,760 2.424 2,IS1 Asian CVAP % 41.4% 15.5% 11,C% 6.6% 10S% 92% Black CVAP 224 SSS 889 262 770 145 Black CVAP % C.7% 2.2% 2.7% 1.0h 12% 0.6% Draft Plans A. A21 DI & E Commissioners were provided a packet with four consultant created plans based on traditional redistricting criteria, COI testimony and amendments from the council. These maps were posted to the commission website for the public prior to Draft Map hearing. • Wards are letters, not numbers. This is a temporary structure for identifying seats as the final draft plan is required to be numbered based on a formula in the charter. `� Citizen Voting Aga POPulai • Each draft has been created with a less than 10% total deviation. rasn'22.3%`�� ORANGE GARDEN GROVE, ru-04" re"'AMI, lrn 1,14 U Plan A Plan meets traditional redistricting criteria and also achieves the following: 0 Deviation of % 8.5 • Creates four wards that are 50%+ Latino Citizen Voting Age Population in "B", "D"I "Ell & 11P • Creates an Asian influence ward in Ward A at 42.4% ORANGE GARDEN G Plan A Plan meets traditional redistricting criteria and also achieves the following: • Uses existing lines as base • Adjusts for population growth Follows major streets ORANGE GARDEN G 0 O 0 Z Q M n V Plan A Plan meets traditional redistricting criteria and also achieves the following: GARDEN GROVE UAR-w-, - ORANGE PI-)n A2 Plan meets traditional redistricting criteria and also achieves the following: • Deviation of 7.4% • Creates four wards that are 50%+ Latino Citizen Voting Age Population in „B „D „E„ & „F„ • Creates an Asian plurality ward in Ward A at 42.9 GARDEN G PI-)n A2 Plan meets traditional redistricting criteria and also achieves the following: • Uses Draft Plan A as base • Adjusts for population growth • Follows major streets ORANGE GARDEN G PI-)n A2 Plan meets traditional redistricting criteria and also achieves the following: • Moves DA boundary from 1st and Santa Ana River to S Harbor Blvd and McFadden Ave • Move DA boundary from Fairview to S Sullivan St • Move Downtown from DE to DD Plan D GARDEN GROVE _.... Plan meets traditional redistricting criteria and also achieves the following: • Deviation of 9.1% E • Creates four wards that are 50%+ Latino Citizen Voting Age Population in "B", "D", "E" & "F" • Creates an Asian plurality ward in Ward A at 42.8% GARDEN G Plan D Plan meets traditional redistricting criteria and also achieves the following: • Follows Neighborhood lines • Keeps Northern Neighborhoods together: West Floral Park, Floral Park, Fisher Park, Morrison Eldridge Park and Park Santiago • Keeps Southern Neighborhoods together: Sandpointe, Republic Homes, Metro Classic, Thornton Park and South Coast ORANGE GARDEN G P'� n D Plan meets traditional redistricting criteria and also achieves the following: • Keeps the Sullivan Community together • Keeps Heninger Park, Wilshire Square and Downtown together ORANGE GARDEN GPOVE-- Plan I Plan meets traditional redistricting criteria and also achieves the following: 0 Deviation of 8.6% • Creates four wards that are 50%+ Latino Citizen Voting Age Population in "B", "D111 "Ell & "Fll • Creates an Asian plurality ward in Ward A at 42.8% J C N U J Plan I Plan meets traditional redistricting criteria and also achieves the following: • Follows Neighborhood lines • Keeps Northern Communities whole: West Floral Park, Floral Park, Fisher Park, Morrison Eldridge Park, and Park Santiago • Keeps Southern Communities whole: Sandpointe, Republic Homes, Metro Classic, Thornton Park and South Coast 0 0 0 z 0 Plan meets traditional redistricting criteria and also achieves the following: • Keeps the Sullivan Community together • Keeps Heninger Park, Wilshire Square and Downtown together Amendments to Plans Changes to plans may need balancing and understanding of tradeoffs. Three types of changes. 1) Keeps within deviation and doesn't necessitate other changes. 2) Identifying a change and a possible tradeoff with that same ward — a "one to one swap" 3) Identify a change and a set of wards that involves multiple wards — a "rotation" Amendments to Plans If there are proposed changes we can look at those individually and provide input on if they can be achieved easily or require more adjustments. What's Next • Official council drafts will be made public in advance of a citywide public draft feedback hearing. • All council draft plans will go to a final plan selection hearing. • Final Plan selection hearing will consider only draft plans that have been made public for seven days. • Numbering of wards is done at the end of the process R E D I S T R I C T I N G p O R T N E R S GARDEN GROVE Ml w A ORANGE Tustin (10 C J N i i V Q c • a 0 GARDEN G 2020 Census A U C 11 F Population 51,970 54.838 51,067 50,459 52,413 50.90-6 Devla ton 28 2,896 -87b t,483 47-1 -t.036 Deviation % 0.1% 5.646 -1.7% -2,9% 0.9% -20% Ocher 4,350 5.461 -11,976 3,517 S,fi.51 3,327 Other % 8.4% 10.0% 235% 7.0% 7.0% 6S% Latino 28.418 43.009 3S,724 43,961 45,053 44,903 Latino % 54.7% 78.4% 66.0% 87.1% 86.0% 882% Asian 18,808 S,Y 14 4,Y 19 2.728 3.154 2.361 Asian f 36,2% 10.4% 92% SA% 6:0% ;4" 3 c-K 394 6S4 648 2SS SSS 315 Black F U.81! 1.2% 1.3% 0.5% 1.1% 0.6% Citizen Voting Age Population (CVAP) I oral CVAP 31,U24 26,862 Other CVAP 4,333 5,289 Other CVAP % 14.0% 19.7% Latino CVAP 13,278 17,060 Latino CVAP % 428% 63.5% Asian CVAP IS, I6Y S.9S4 Asian CVAP% 42.4% 14.7% Black CVAP 246 559 Black CVAP % 0.8% 2.1% c o L 29.470 26,238 20,470 20.288 11280 S,9'Y4 2,999 2,728 38.3% 151% 14.7% 13.4% 14.219 19,755 14,978 IS,S'IS 48.2% 75.3% 73.2% 768% 3,48 2.061 2,247 1,826 11.0% 7.9% 11.0% 9.0% 722 449 248 IS9 15% 1.7% 1.2% 0.8% Ward A 2020 Census SANTA ANA 54% Other% Latino% Asian% Black% Citizen Votina Aae Population -------------------------- lII 13% Other% Latino% Fountain Valley •.anon n.«n�. nin.n n.o J Mo�nnn�. ei�.... 51,970 28 0.1% 4,350 8.4% 28,418 54.7% 18,808 36.2% 394 0.8% Total CVAP Other CVAP Other CVAP % Latino CVAP Latino CVAP % Asian CVAP Asian CVAP % Black CVAP Black CVAP % 30,998 4,173 13.5% 13,757 44.4% 12,845 41.4% 223 0.7% 41% Asian % 09(o Bl% Ward B 2020 Census NORTH ISLAND .... nun I'll All 4 Population Deviation Deviation % Other Other % Latino Latino % Asian Asian % Black Black % 54,838 Z896 5.6% 5,461 10.0% 43,009 78.4% 5,714 10.4% 654 1.2% Total CVAP Other CVAP Other CVAP % Latino CVAP Latino CVAP % Asian CVAP Asian CVAP % Black CVAP Black CVAP % 27298 4,716 17.3% 17,886 65.5% 4,101 15.0% 595 2.2% � m � Other% Latino% Asian% Black% Citizen Votinci Acie Population 65% Other Latino% Asian% Black I'll All 4 Population Deviation Deviation % Other Other % Latino Latino % Asian Asian % Black Black % 54,838 Z896 5.6% 5,461 10.0% 43,009 78.4% 5,714 10.4% 654 1.2% Total CVAP Other CVAP Other CVAP % Latino CVAP Latino CVAP % Asian CVAP Asian CVAP % Black CVAP Black CVAP % 27298 4,716 17.3% 17,886 65.5% 4,101 15.0% 595 2.2% � m � Other% Latino% Asian% Black% Citizen Votinci Acie Population 65% Other Latino% Asian% Black Ward C SANTA ANA 2020 Census ORANGE E 66% 23% 9% -_I 1% Other% Latino% Asian% Black% Citizen Voting Aae Population Population Deviation Deviation % Other Other % Latino Latino % Asian Asian % Black Black % 51,067 -875 -1.7% 11,976 23.5% 33,724 66.0% 4,719 9.2% 648 1.3% Total CVAP Other CVAP Other CVAP % Latino CVAP Latino CVAP % Asian CVAP Asian CVAP % Black CVAP Black CVAP % 31,119 11,773 37.8% 15,092 485% 3,387 10.9% 867 2.8% 48% Other% Latino% Asian% Black% Ward D 2020 Census SGARDENS I Wezt Wa,ner A, Z a Warner Avenge Ma<q�r el, Ma c Ar[hu, elvd 87% 0% Other% Latino% Asian% Black% Citizen Voting Age Population Edinger Avent n.- East Warner All DYER East pynl 0 Bd 0� eta �b> ' .r ll,ute `oe0 G Population Deviation Deviation % Other Other % Latino Latino % Asian Asian % Black Black % 50,459 -1,483 -2.9% 3517 7.0% 43,961 87.1% 2,728 5.4% 253 05% Total CVAP Other CVAP Other CVAP % Latino CVAP Latino CVAP % Asian CVAP Asian CVAP % Black CVAP Black CVAP % 26679 3,802 14.3% 20,849 78.1% 1,766 6.6% 262 1.0% 14% JM- Mj� 1% Other% Latino% Asian% Black% Ward E 2020 Census 86% 7% 6% Other % Latino % Asian % Black% Citizen voting Age Population Othar % Latino % Asian % RI.,k a Population Deviation Deviation % Other Other % Latino Latino % Asian Asian % Black Black% 52,413 471 0.9% 3,651 7.0% 45,053 86.0% 3,154 6.0% 555 13% Total CVAP Other CVAP Other CVAP % Latino CVAP Latino CVAP % Asian CVAP Asian CVAP % Black CVAP Black CVAP % 22,893 2,916 127% 17,289 75-5% 2,412 10-5% 276 1.2% Ward F 2020 Census SANTA ANA 0% euowwec Other% Latino % Asian % Black% Citizen Voting Age Population % J, 50,906 -1,036 -20% 3,327 6,5% 44,903 88.2% 2,361 4.6% 315 0.6% Total CVAP Other CVAP Other CVAP % Latino CVAP Latino CVAP % Asian CVAP Asian CVAP % Black CVAP Black CVAP % 22,659 2,834 12-5% 17,798 78.5% 1,908 8.4% 119 0.5% Other % Latino % Asian % Black% 5A ORANGE GARDEN GROVE -, ..-,.-.- ...... .... Tustin D GARDEN G U) N C J c- C- m n ORANGE 2020 Census A B C D E F Population 49,763 53,110 53,213 53,594 50,906 Deviation -2,179 1,168 -875 1.271 1.652 -1,036 Deviation % -4.2% 2.2% 2.4% 3.2% -2.0% Other 4,307 5,419 11,976 4,053 3,200 3,327 1 Other % 8.7% 10.2% 23.5% 7.6% 6.0% 6.5% Latino 26,584 41,568 33,724 45,656 46,633 44,903 Latino% 53.4% 78.3% 66.0% 85.8% 87.0% 88.2% Asian 18,488 5,473 4,719 3,164 3,279 2.361 Asian % 37.2% 10.3% 9.2% 5.9% 6.1% 4.6% Black 384 650 648 340 482 315 Black % 0.8% 1.2% 1.3% 0.6% 0.9% 0.6% Citizen Voting Age Population (CVAP) A B C D E F Total CVAP 30,076 26,197 29,470 26,977 21,345 20,288 Other CVAP 4.394 5,169 11,280 4.097 2.935 2,728 Other CVAP % 14.6% 19.7% 38.3% 15.2% 13.7% 13.4% Latino CVAP 12550 16,695 14,219 20,185 15,639 15,575 Latino CVAP % 41.7% 63.7% 48.2% 74.8% 73.3% 76.8% Asian CVAP 12,915 3,774 3,248 2,240 2500 1,826 Asian CVAP % 42.9% 14.4% 11.0% 8.3% 11.7% 9.0% Black CVAP 216 559 722 456 271 159 Black CVAP % 0.7% 2.1% 2.5% 1.7% 1.3% 0.8% District A SANTA ANA Fountain Valley 49,763 -2,179 -4.2% 4,307 8.7% 26,584 53.4% 18,488 37.2% 384 0.8% Total CVAP Other CVAP Other CVAP % Latino CVAP Latino CVAP % Asian CVAP Asian CVAP % Black CVAP Black CVAP % 30,076 4,394 14.6% 12,550 41.7% 12,915 42.9% 216 0.7% 2020 Census 53% Other % Latino % "an % Black % Citizen Voting Age Population 41% 42% Other % Latino% Asian % Black % District B NOI i a � 53,110 1,168 22% 5,419 10.2% 41,568 78.3% 5,473 10.3% 650 1.2% Total CVAP Other CVAP Other CVAP % Latino CVAP Latino CVAP % Asian CVAP Asian CVAP % Black CVAP Black CVAP % 26,197 5,169 19.7% 16,695 63.7% 3,774 14.4% 559 23% 2020 Census 1 1 Other% Latino% Ad- % Black% Citizen Voting Age Population 63% 2% Other% Latino% Asian% Black% District C ORANGE 2020 Census <=„r 66% Other% Latino% Asian% Black% Citizen Voting Age Population 48% Other % Tu Population Deviation Deviation% Other Other% Latino Latino% Asian Asian% Black Black% 51,067 -875 -1.7% 11,976 23.5% 33,724 66.0% 4,719 9.2% 648 1.3% Total CVAP Other CVAP Other CVAP % Latino CVAP Latino CVAP % Asian CVAP Asian CVAP % Black CVAP Black CVAP % 29,470 11,280 38.3% 14,219 48.2% 3,248 11.0% 722 25% Latino% Asian% Black% A&I District D Wes, War, East Warner 1 rner Ave n ovEa 4as ? Eas ,a s M 4 /5` hem .e/otl MacArthur ..M„<Ar ' 53,213 1,271 2.4% 4,053 7.6% 45 656 85.8% 3,164 5.9% 340 0.6% Total CVAP Other CVAP Other CVAP % Latino CVAP Latino CVAP % Asian CVAP Asian CVAP % Black CVAP Black CVAP % 26,977 4,097 15.2% 20,185 74.8% 2,240 83% 456 1.7% 2020 Census 85% - 0% Other % latino % Asian % Black % Citizen Voting Age Population 5 Other % Latino % Asian % Black % 4 District E Population Deviation Deviation% Other Other% Latino Latino% Asian Asian% Black Black% 53594 1,652 32% 3,200 6.0% 46,633 87.0% 3,279 6.1% 482 0.9% Total CVAP Other CVAP Other CVAP % Latino CVAP Latino CVAP % Asian CVAP Asian CVAP % Black CVAP Black CVAP % 21,345 2,935 13.7% 15,639 733% 2,500 11.7% 271 13% 2020 Census 87% - 0% Other% Latino% Asian% Black% Citizen Voting Age Population 73% Other% Latino% Asian% Black% kNIFIM District F SANTA ANA Tustin ...... ....... 50,906 -1,036 -2.0% 3,327 6.5% 44,903 88.2% 2,361 4.6% 315 0.6% Total CVAP Other CVAP Other CVAP % Latino CVAP Latino CVAP % Asian CVAP Asian CVAP % Black CVAP Black CVAP % 20,288 2,728 13.4% 15,575 76.8% 1,826 9.0% 159 0.8% 2020 Census 88% Other % Latino % Asian % Black % Citizen Voting Age Population —7 0% Other % Latino% Asian % Black % GARDEN G N C J C- n C- m n 4f ORANGE 2020 Census A B C D E F Population 50,150 53,099 49,972 54,507 54,178 49,747 Deviation -1,792 1.157 -1.970 2,565 2,236 -2.195 Deviation % -3.5% 2.2% -3.8% 4.9% 4.3% -4.2% Other 4,373 1,607 11,873 7,660 3,851 2,918 Other % 8.7% 3.0% 23.8% 14.1% 7.1% 5.9% Latino 26,675 47,404 32.747 39,589 47,941 44,712 Latino % 53.2% 89.3% 65.5% 72.6% 88.5% 89.9% Asian 18,694 3,644 4.712 6,648 1,905 1,881 Asian % 37.3% 6.9% 9.4% 12.2% 3.5% 3.8% Black 408 444 640 610 481 236 Black % 0.8% 0.8% 1.3% 1.1% 0.9% 0.5% Citizen Voting Age Population (CVAP) A B C D E F Total CVAP 30576 21,633 28,969 33,106 20,536 19,533 Other CVAP 4,355 1.271 11,207 8,019 3,341 2,412 Other CVAP % 14.2% 5.9% 38.7% 24.2% 16.3% 12.3% Latino CVAP 12,890 17,242 13,867 19,844 15,655 15,364 Latino CVAP % 42.2% 79.7% 47.9% 59.9% 76.2% 78.7% Asian CVAP 13,091 2,707 3,202 4,572 1,339 1,592 Asian CVAP % 42.8% 12.5% 11.1% 13.8% 6.5% 8.2% Black CVAP 241 414 693 671 201 164 Black CVAP % 0.8% 1.9% 2.4% 2.0% 1.0% 0.8% District A 2020 Census 53% SANTA AN, Other % Latino % "an % Black % Citizen Voting Age Population 42% 42% Other % Latino% Asian % Black % Fountain Valley 50350 -1,792 -3-5% 4,373 8.7% 26,675 53.2% 18,694 37.3% 408 0.8% Total CVAP Other CVAP Other CVAP % Latino CVAP Latino CVAP % ASian CVAP Asian CVAP % Black CVAP Black CVAP % 30576 4-355 14.2% 12,890 42.2% 13,091 42.8% 241 0.8% District B Population Deviation Deviation% Other Other% Latino Latino% Asian Asian% Black Black% 53,099 1,157 22% 1,607 3.0% 47,404 89.3% 3,644 6.9% 444 0.8% Total CVAP Other CVAP Other CVAP % Latino CVAP Latino CVAP % Asian CVAP Asian CVAP % Black CVAP Black CVAP % 21,633 1,271 5.9% 17,242 79.7% 2,707 125% 414 1.9% 2020 Census 89% 3% 6% Other% Latino% Asian% Black% Citizen Voting Age Population 79% 5% 1% Other% Latino% Asian% Black% District C ORANGE 2020 Census w „ 65% Other% Latino% Asian% Black% Citizen Voting Age Population 47% Other % Tu Population Deviation Deviation% Other Other% Latino Latino% Asian Asian% Black Black% 49,972 -1,970 -3.8% 11,873 23.8% 32,747 65S% 4,712 9.4% 640 1.3% Total CVAP Other CVAP Other CVAP % Latino CVAP Latino CVAP % Asian CVAP Asian CVAP % Black CVAP Black CVAP % 28,969 11,207 38.7% 13,867 47.9% 3,202 113% 693 2.4% Latino% Asian% Black% A&I District D 2020 Census 72% Ea31 W„ Other Latino% Asian% Black% Citizen Voting Age Population 24% 13% 2% Other % Latino % Asian % Black % 54,507 2,565 4.9% 7,660 14.1% 39589 72.6% 6,648 122% 610 13% Total CVAP Other CVAP Other CVAP % Latino CVAP Latino CVAP % Asian CVAP Asian CVAP % Black CVAP Black CVAP % 33,106 8,019 24.2% 19,844 59.9% 4,572 13.8% 671 2.0% District E Population Deviation Deviation% Other Other% Latino Latino% Asian Asian% Black Black% 54,178 2,236 43% 3,851 7.1% 47,941 885% 1,905 3.5% 481 0.9% Total CVAP Other CVAP Other CVAP % Latino CVAP Latino CVAP % Asian CVAP Asian CVAP % Black CVAP Black CVAP % 20,536 3,341 163% 15,655 762% 1,339 65% 201 1.0% 2020 Census 88% 7% - 3% 0% Other % Latino % Asian % Black % Citizen Voting Age Population 76% Other % Latino% Asian% Black% District F SANTA AN, Tustin 2020 Census 89% 5% 01 0% Th. .i. n -% Black % Citizen Voting Age Population 70% 0% Other % Latino% Asian % Black % -TPeak Deviation Deviation % Other Other% Latino Latino % Asian Asian % Black Black% 49,747 -2,195 -4.2% 2,918 5.9% 44,712 89.9% 1,881 3.8% 236 05% Total CVAP Other CVAP Other CVAP % Latino CVAP Latino CVAP % Asian CVAP Asian CVAP % Black CVAP Black CVAP % 19,533 2,412 123% 15,364 78.7% 1,592 8.2% 164 0.8% ORANGE GARDEN GROVE - ,..-,.-.- Tustin GARDEN G N C J C- n 4f ORANGE 2020 Census A B C D E F Population 50,150 53,554 53,390 52,172 49,110 53,277 Deviation -1,792 1,612 1,448 230 -2,832 1,335 Deviation % -3.5% 3.1% 2.8% 0.4% -5.5% 2.6% Other 4,373 2,315 11,101 8,110 1,791 4,592 Other % 8.7% 4.3% 20.8% 15.5% 3.6% 8.6% Latino 26,675 46,342 38,198 37,386 44.508 45,959 Latino % 53.2% 86.5% 71.5% 71.7% 90.6% 86.3% Asian 18,694 4,533 3,368 6,023 2,521 2,345 Asian % 37.3% 8.5% 6.3% 11.5% 5.1% 4.4% Black 408 364 723 653 290 381 Black % 0.8% 0.7% 1.4% 1.3% 0.6% 0.7% Citizen Voting Age Population (CVAP) A B C D E F Total CVAP 30576 22,738 26,797 30,510 22,850 20,882 Other CVAP 4,355 2,152 10,179 7,962 1,720 4,235 Other CVAP % 14.2% 9.5% 38.0% 26.1% 7.5% 20.3% Latino CVAP 12,890 16,808 13,716 17,900 18,967 14582 Latino CVAP % 42.2% 73.9% 51.2% 58.7% 83.0% 69.8% Asian CVAP 13,091 3,466 2,180 4,041 1,858 1,866 Asian CVAP % 42.8% 15.2% 8.1% 13.2% 8.1% 8.9% Black CVAP 241 311 721 607 305 199 Black CVAP % 0.8% 1.4% 2.7% 2.0% 1.3% 1.0% District A 2020 Census 53% SANTA AN, Other % Latino % "an % Black % Citizen Voting Age Population 42% 42% Other % Latino% Asian % Black % Fountain Valley 50350 -1,792 -3-5% 4,373 8.7% 26,675 53.2% 18,694 37.3% 408 0.8% Total CVAP Other CVAP Other CVAP % Latino CVAP Latino CVAP % ASian CVAP Asian CVAP % Black CVAP Black CVAP % 30576 4-355 14.2% 12,890 42.2% 13,091 42.8% 241 0.8% District B ;ROVE, waa nm s, SANTA ANA I ow Etlm�e, nvoone i E tl nger Avenue F. <I�nyer Avenue o Etlinger Avenue a NOFTH ISLAND, m v+ SAITAANA 53554 1,612 3.1% 2,315 43% 46,342 865% 4,533 85% 364 0.7% Total CVAP Other CVAP Other CVAP % Latino CVAP Latino CVAP % Asian CVAP Asian CVAP % Black CVAP Black CVAP % 22,738 2,152 95% 16,808 73.9% 3,466 15.2% 311 1.4% 2020 Census 86% 4% 0% 4 Other% Latino% Asian% Black% Citizen Voting Age Population 73% 996 4 Asian% Black% District C 53,390 1,448 2.8% 11,101 20.8% 38,198 71S% 31368 6.3% 723 1.4% Total CVAP Other CVAP Other CVAP % Latino CVAP Latino CVAP % Asian CVAP Asian CVAP % Black CVAP Black CVAP % 26,797 10,179 38.0% 13,716 51.2% 2,180 8.1% 721 2.7% 2020 Census 71% 20% 6% LatinoOther % Citizen Voting Age Population 51% Other % Latino% Asian% Black% to District D y m , IRVINE ,Fr� San Diego Ereaway San D�ogo Froeway BUSINESS COMRLEX 52,172 230 0.4% 8,110 15.5% 37,386 71.7% 6,023 11.5% 653 1.3% Total CVAP Other CVAP Other CVAP % Latino CVAP Latino CVAP % Asian CVAP Asian CVAP % Black CVAP Black CVAP % 30,510 7,962 26.1% 17,900 58.7% 4,041 13.2% 607 2.0% 2020 Census 71% 1% _ Other% Latino% Asian% Black% Citizen Voting Age Population 5fl% Em13% 2% Other % Latino % Asian % Black % SAO District E 49,110 -2,832 -55% 1,791 3.6% 44508 90.6% 2521 5.1% 290 0.6% Total CVAP Other CVAP Other CVAP % Latino CVAP Latino CVAP % Asian CVAP Asian CVAP % Black CVAP Black CVAP % 22,850 1,720 75% 18,967 83.0% 1,858 8.1% 305 1.3% 2020 Census 90% -._mm6fmm 0% Other% Latino% Asian% Black% Citizen Voting Age Population 83% Other% Latino% Asian% Black% District F 2020 Census 86% 8% 4% 0% Other % Latino % Asian % Black % Citizen Voting Age Population Tustin 69% 20%;j 8% % Other % Latino% Asian % Black % ..... .... .. ------- ---- Population Deviation DeViation% Other Other% Latino Latino, % Asian Asian % Black Black% 53,277 1-535 2.6% 4592 8.6% 45,959 86.3% 2,345 4.4% 381 0.7% Total CVAP Other CVAP Other CVAP % Latino CVAP Latino CVAP % Asian CVAP Asian (NAP % Black CVAP Black CVAP % 20,882 4,235 203% 14,582 69.8% 1,866 8.9% 199 1.0%