Agenda packet, first session — Glendale City Council, October 10, 2023 (part 5 of 5)

PERFORMANCE BOND
Bond No.:

Premium Amount: $
Bond’s Effective Date:

RECITALS:

1. The City of Glendale, California (“City”), has awarded to (Name, address, and telephone of Contractor)
(“Principal”),
a Services Contract (the “Contract”) for the Work described as follows:

Specification No. : in Glendale, CA.

2. Principal is required under the terms of the Contract— and all contract documents referenced in it (“Contract Documents”)— to furnish a bond guaranteeing Principal’s faithful performance of the Work.

3. The Contract and Contract Documents, including all their amendments and supplements, are incorporated into this Bond and made a part of it by this reference.

OBLIGATION:

THEREFORE, for value received, We, Principal and
(Name, address, and telephone of Surety)
(“Surety”),
a duly admitted surety insurer under California’s laws, agree as follows:

By this Bond, We jointly and severally obligate and bind ourselves, and our respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns to pay City the penal sum of
Dollars ($ ) (“the Bonded Sum”),
this amount comprising not less than twenty-five percent (25%) of the estimated first year expense, in lawful money of the United States of America. The California Licensed Resident Agent for Surety is:
(Name, address, and telephone)
. Registered Agent’s California Department of Insurance License No. .

THE CONDITION OF THIS BOND’S OBLIGATION IS THAT, if Principal promptly and faithfully performs the undertakings, terms, covenants, conditions, and agreements in the Contract and Contract Documents (including all their amendments and supplements), all within the time and in the manner that those documents specify, then this obligation becomes null and void. Otherwise, this Bond remains in full force and effect, and the following terms and conditions apply to this Bond:

1. This Bond specifically guarantees Principal’s performance of each obligation and all obligations under the Contract and Contract Documents, as they may be amended and supplemented— including, but not limited to, Principal’s liability for liquidated damages, Warranties, Guarantees, Correction, and Maintenance obligations as specified in the Contract and Contract Documents— except that Surety’s total obligation, as described here, will not exceed the Bonded Sum.

2. For those obligations of Principal that survive Final Completion of the Work described in the Contract and Contract Documents, the guarantees in this Bond also survive Final Completion of the Work.

3. When City declares that Principal is in default under the Contract, or Contract Documents, or both, Surety shall promptly: (a) remedy the default; (b) complete the Project according to the Contract Documents’ terms and conditions then in effect; or (c) using a procurement methodology approved by City, select a contractor or contractors— acceptable to City— to complete all of the Work, and arrange for a contract between the contractor(s) and City. Surety shall make available, as the Work progresses, sufficient funds to pay the cost of completion less the balance of the Contract Sum for Year One, and to pay and perform all obligations of Principal under the Contract and Contract Documents— including other costs and damages for which Surety is liable under this Bond— except that Surety’s total obligation, as described here, will not exceed the Bonded Sum.

4. An alteration, modification, change, addition, deletion, omission, agreement, or supplement to the Contract, Contract Documents, or the nature of the Work performed under the Contract or Contract Documents— including, without limitation, an extension of time for performance— does not, in any way, affect Surety’s obligations under this Bond. Surety waives any notice of alteration, modification, change, addition, deletion, omission, agreement, supplement, or extension of time.

Exhibit 14
1078 of 1291
Performance Bond

Page 2 ends

5. Surety’s obligations under this Bond are separate, independent from, and not contingent upon any other surety’s guaranteeing Principal’s faithful performance of the Work.

6. No right of action accrues on this Bond to any entity other than City or its successors and assigns.

7. If an action at law or in equity is necessary to enforce or interpret this Bond’s terms, Surety must pay— in addition to the Bonded Sum— City’s reasonable attorneys’ fees and litigation costs, in an amount the court fixes. Principal and Surety agree that this Bond is not a part of the Contract, this Bond is a separate obligation of the Principal and its Surety, and any attorneys’ fee provision contained in this Bond does not apply to the Contract. If any litigation occurs between the parties arising from the breach of the Contract, each party will bear its own attorneys’ fees in the litigation.

8. Surety shall mail City written notice at least 90 days before: (a) the effective date on which the Surety will cancel, terminate non-renew, or withdraw from this Bond; or (b) this Bond becomes void or unenforceable for any reason.

9. This Bond is for a one year term beginning __________________ and ending _______________. The bond may be extended for additional terms by a continuation certificate executed by Surety or by issuing a new bond.

On the date set forth below, Principal and Surety duly executed this Bond, with the name of each party appearing below and signed by its representative(s) under the authority of its governing body.

Date:

PRINCIPAL: SURETY:

(Company Name) (Company Name)

(Signature) (Signature)
By: By:
(Name) (Name)
Its: Its:
(Title) (Title)
Address for Serving Notices or Other Documents: Address for Serving Notices or Other Documents:

 THIS BOND MUST BE EXECUTED IN TRIPLICATE.
 EVIDENCE MUST BE ATTACHED OF THE AUTHORITY OF ANY PERSON SIGNING AS ATTORNEY-IN-FACT.  THE PRINCIPAL’S AND ATTORNEY-IN-FACT’S SIGNATURE MUST BE NOTARIZED.  A CORPORATE SEAL MUST BE IMPRESSED ON THIS FORM WHEN THE PRINCIPAL, OR THE SURETY, OR BOTH, ARE A CORPORATION.

APPROVED AS TO SURETY AND APPROVED AS TO FORM:

AMOUNT OF BONDED SUM:

By By
Director of Public Works City Attorney

CORPORATE SEAL CORPORATE SEAL
1079 of 1291
Performance Bond

Page 3 ends

BOND ACKNOWLEDGMENT
FOR
SURETY’S ATTORNEY-IN-FACT

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) ss.

COUNTY OF )
On this day of , 20 ,
before me, (name), a Notary Public for said County, personally appeared (name), who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person whose name is subscribed to this instrument as the attorney in fact of , and acknowledged to me that he/she subscribed the name of thereto as principal, and his/her own name as attorney in fact.

Notary Public
SEAL
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.
1080 of 1291
FORM A

SUBMITTAL COVER PAGE
Response To Request For Proposals
Operation Of Glendale Fixed Route and Dial-A-Ride
Bidder’s Company Name ____________________________________ Legal Structure (corp./partner/proprietor) ____________________________________ Principal Office Address ____________________________________ City, ST, ZIP ____________________________________
Federal Employer Identification Number ____________________________________ I certify that this Proposer is sufficiently informed as to all matters affecting the performance of the work, and the furnishing of labor, supplies, material or equipment called for in this proposal; that the proposal has been checked for errors and omissions; and that the facts stated in the proposal are current and as intended and are a complete and correct statement of the facts stated therein for performing the work or furnishing the labor, supplies, materials or equipment required by the RFP. This Proposer waives any claim for the return of its proposal on account of errors or omissions claimed to have been made in its proposal or for any other reason.

I certify that this response fully complies with the requirements as defined in the RFP, and that I am an authorized representative of the company to bind the firm to this response to the RFP for a 120-day period.

I certify that this Proposer is NOT on the U.S. Comptroller General's list of ineligible firms for federally financed and assisted construction, materials, equipment contracts or services.

Name of Authorized Representative _______________________________________ Title _______________________________________
Signature of Authorized Representative ______________________________________ Date _________________________________
Exhibit 15
1081 of 1291
FORM B

PROPOSER CONTACT INFORMATION
Proposer
Firm Name: _________________________________________
Authorized Representative Name: ________________________________________ Authorized Representative Title: _________________________________________ Telephone Number: _________________________________________ Email Address: _________________________________________ Secondary Contact Name: _________________________________________ Secondary Contact Title: _________________________________________ Telephone Number: _________________________________________ Email Address: _________________________________________ Is firm a qualified DBE? ☐ No ☐ Yes, Qualifying Agency: _____________ Annual dollar value of participation: $______________________________________ Subcontractors to Proposer
Firm Name: _________________________________________
Address: _________________________________________
City, State, Zip _________________________________________ Authorized Representative Name: ________________________________________ Authorized Representative Title: _________________________________________ Telephone Number: _________________________________________ Email Address: _________________________________________ Work to be performed: _________________________________________ Is firm a qualified DBE? ☐ No ☐ Yes, Qualifying Agency: _____________ Annual dollar value of participation: $______________________________________ Firm Name: _________________________________________
Address: _________________________________________
City, State, Zip _________________________________________ Authorized Representative Name: ________________________________________ Authorized Representative Title: _________________________________________ Telephone Number: _________________________________________ Email Address: _________________________________________ Work to be performed: _________________________________________ Is firm a qualified DBE? ☐ No ☐ Yes, Qualifying Agency: _____________ Annual dollar value of participation: $______________________________________ Attach additional pages as necessary. 1082 of 1291
FORM C

BUY AMERICA CERTIFICATION
The contractor agrees to comply with 49 U.S.C. 5323(j) and 49 C.F.R. part 661, which provide that Federal funds may not be obligated unless all steel, iron, and manufactured products used in FTA funded projects are produced in the United States, unless a waiver has been granted by FTA or the product is subject to a general waiver. General waivers are listed in 49 C.F.R. § 661.7. Separate requirements for rolling stock are set out at 49 U.S.C. 5323(j)(2)(C) and 49 C.F.R. § 661.11.

The [bidder or offeror] must submit to [Recipient] the appropriate Buy America certification below with its [bid or offer]. Bids or offers that are not accompanied by a completed Buy America certification will be rejected as nonresponsive.

In accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 661.12, for the procurement of rolling stock (including train control, communication, and traction power equipment) use the following certifications:

Certificate of Compliance with Buy America Rolling Stock Requirements The bidder or offeror hereby certifies that it will comply with the requirements of 49 U.S.C. 5323(j), and the applicable regulations of 49 C.F.R. § 661.11.

Date: _________________________________________________________________ Signature: _____________________________________________________________ Company: _____________________________________________________________ Name: ________________________________________________________________ Title: _________________________________________________________________ Certificate of Non-Compliance with Buy America Rolling Stock Requirements The bidder or offeror hereby certifies that it cannot comply with the requirements of 49 U.S.C. 5323(j), but may qualify for an exception to the requirement consistent with 49 U.S.C. 5323(j)(2)(C), and the applicable regulations in 49 C.F.R. § 661.7.

RESTRICTIONS ON LOBBYING AND CONTACTS
By signing this certification the Proposer agrees to and certifies the following:
a. That during the period beginning on the date of the issuance of the RFP and ending on the date of award of contract, no person (or entity) submitting a proposal in response to this RFP, nor any officer, employee, representative, agent, or CONTRACTOR representing such a person (or entity) has not and shall not contact through any means or engage in any discussion concerning the award of the Contract with any member of the City Council of the City of Glendale or his or her personal staff, or any candidate for election to the City Council of the City of Glendale. Any such contact shall be grounds for the disqualification of the proposal.
b. That during the period beginning on the date of the issuance of this RFP and ending on the day after a contract is awarded, each person or entity described in the previous paragraph has and shall limit his or her communication with City staff and CONTRACTORs to the written clarification and amendment process described in Section C.28, and interviews or discussions pursuant to evaluation and selection process described in Section F.5. At no time has or shall this Proposer have any communication with a member of the City’s Evaluation Committee, other than communication initiated by such member during interviews.
c. No Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by on or behalf of the undersigned, to any person for influencing, or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any Federal agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the awarding of any Federal contract, the making of any Federal grant, the making of any Federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any Federal contract, grant, loan or cooperative agreement. d. If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any Federal agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement, the undersigned shall complete and submit Standard Form LLL “Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying”, in accordance with its instructions. e. The undersigned shall require that the language of this certification be included in the award documents for all sub awards at all tiers (including sub grants, loans, and cooperative agreements) which exceed $100,000, and that all such sub recipients shall certify and disclose accordingly.

This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was made, or entered into. Submission of this certification is a prerequisite for making or entering into this transaction imposed by Section 1352, Title 31, USC. Any person who fails to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure.

The Proposer certifies or affirms the truthfulness and accuracy of each statement of its certification and disclosure, if any. In addition, the Proposer understands and agrees that the provisions of 31 U.S.C. A 3801, et seq., apply to this certification and disclosure, if any.

Signature of Contractor's Authorized Official

Name and Title of Contractor's Authorized Official

Date
1084 of 1291
FORM E

CIVIL RIGHTS AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY
The AGENCY is an Equal Opportunity Employer. As such, the AGENCY agrees to comply with all applicable Federal civil rights laws and implementing regulations. Apart from inconsistent requirements imposed by Federal laws or regulations, the AGENCY agrees to comply with the requirements of 49 U.S.C. § 5323(h) (3) by not using any Federal assistance awarded by FTA to support procurements using exclusionary or discriminatory specifications.

Under this Agreement, the Contractor shall at all times comply with the following requirements and shall include these requirements in each subcontract entered into as part thereof.

1. Nondiscrimination. In accordance with Federal transit law at 49 U.S.C. § 5332, the Contractor agrees that it will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, disability, or age. In addition, the Contractor agrees to comply with applicable Federal implementing regulations and other implementing requirements FTA may issue.

2. Race, Color, Religion, National Origin, Sex. In accordance with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., and Federal transit laws at 49 U.S.C. § 5332, the Contractor agrees to comply with all applicable equal employment opportunity requirements of U.S. Department of Labor (U.S.

DOL) regulations, "Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, Equal Employment Opportunity, Department of Labor," 41 C.F.R. chapter 60, and Executive Order No. 11246, "Equal Employment Opportunity in Federal Employment," September 24, 1965, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e note, as amended by any later Executive Order that amends or supersedes it, referenced in 42 U.S.C. § 2000e note. The Contractor agrees to take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, color, religion, national origin, or sex (including sexual orientation and gender identity). Such action shall include, but not be limited to, the following: employment, promotion, demotion or transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination; rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship. In addition, the Contractor agrees to comply with any implementing requirements FTA may issue.

3. Age. In accordance with the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 621-634, U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (U.S. EEOC) regulations, “Age Discrimination in Employment Act,” 29 C.F.R. part 1625, the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 6101 et seq., U.S.

Health and Human Services regulations, “Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Age in Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance,” 45 C.F.R. part 90, and Federal transit law at 49 U.S.C. § 5332, the Contractor agrees to refrain from discrimination against present and prospective employees for reason of age. In addition, the Contractor agrees to comply with any implementing requirements FTA may issue.

4. Disabilities. In accordance with section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 794, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., the Architectural Barriers Act of 1968, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 4151 et seq., and Federal transit law at 49 U.S.C. § 5332, the Contractor agrees that it will not discriminate against individuals on the basis of disability. In addition, the Contractor agrees to comply with any implementing requirements FTA may issue.

Firm: ______________________________________
Signature: ____________________________________ (Name, Title) Date: ______________________________________
1085 of 1291
FORM F

CITY OF GLENDALE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
The following information must be disclosed:

1. List the names of all persons or legal entities having a financial interest in the Request for Proposal.
2a. If any party identified pursuant to No. 1 above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals owning more than ten percent of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in the partnership. 2b. If any party identified pursuant to No. 1 above is a nonprofit organization or a trust, list the names of any persons serving as a director of the nonprofit organization or as a trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust.

3. Has the Proposer had more than $250.00 worth of business transacted with any members of the City of Glendale staff, boards, commissions, committees, and Council within the past twelve months? If yes, please indicate the person(s) with whom you have conducted business.

Attach additional pages as necessary.

Signature of Authorized Representative _____________________________________ Date _________________________________
Name of Authorized Representative ________________________________________ Title _________________________________
1086 of 1291
FORM G

CITY OF GLENDALE
DISCLOSURE - CAMPAIGN FINANCE ORDINANCE – CONTRACTORS AND SUBCONTRACTORS The City Council adopted Ordinance No. 5744, “Campaign Finance Ordinance,” which became effective on September 9, 2011, and amended it with Ordinance No. 5768, which became effective on March 15, 2012 (“the Ordinance”). The Ordinance prohibits: (1) A contractor* (including a subcontractor**)― who has a contract with the City of Glendale (“City”), Glendale Successor Agency or Glendale Redevelopment Agency (“GSA”), or the Housing Authority of the City of Glendale (“HA”) and that contract is subject to approval by the City Council, GSA, or HA― from making a contribution to a City Council member, GSA member, HA member, City Clerk, or City Treasurer; and (2) Council members, GSA members, and HA members from voting on matters concerning a contract affecting a contractor or subcontractor who has provided a campaign contribution.

The provisions of the Ordinance restricting Council members from voting on matters affecting campaign contributors applies to a contractor whose contract requires the City Council’s, GSA’s, or HA’s approval, and specified subcontractors. A contract with the City, GSA, or HA is known as a “City Contract.” The Ordinance excludes a competitively bid contract awarded to the lowest responsible bidder.

To assist members of the City Council, GSA, and HA before they vote on a matter regarding a City Contract, the Ordinance requires City staff to prepare this report which discloses certain information about: the contractor receiving the City Contract, and specified subcontractor(s) working under the City Contract.

Information that must be disclosed: ● Name of the person, entity, or organization (i.e., the Contractor or Subcontractor) ● Name of the Chief Executive Officer/President
● Chief Operating Officer
● Chief Financial Officer
● Chairperson
● All members of the Board of Directors
● All persons who own more than 10% of the person, entity, or organization ● Name of any campaign committee owned or controlled by the person, entity, or organization Please complete the following disclosure form:

Contractor(s)*:

Name Address

Full Name Title Business Address City State Zip
Chairperson
Chief Executive Officer / President
Chief Operating Officer
Chief Financial Officer
Board of Directors
More than 10% interest owner
* “Contractor” is the person, entity, or organization that is the party, or prospective party, to the contract with the City, GSA, or HA. In addition to the name of the person, or entity, the Contractor must also disclose the name(s) of that person’s, entity’s, or organization’s Board of Directors, its Chairperson, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Operating Officer, any person with an ownership interest of more than ten percent (10%) in that person, entity, or organization, and any campaign committee that is owned or controlled by that person, entity, or organization. Please disclose these persons’ name and business address. 1087 of 1291
Subcontractor(s)**:

Name Address

Full Name Title Business Address City State Zip
Chairperson
Chief Executive Officer / President
Chief Operating Officer
Chief Financial Officer
Board of Directors
More than 10% interest owner
** “Subcontractor” is the person, entity, or organization that has entered into a contract for the performance of all or a portion of the work undertaken under an agreement with an architect, design professional, engineer, or general or prime contract, usually by a general or prime contractor. You must also disclose the names of the Subcontractor’s Board of Directors, its Chairperson, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Operating Officer, any person with an ownership interest of more than ten percent (10%) in that person, entity, or organization, and any campaign committee that is owned or controlled by that person, entity, or organization. Above please disclose these persons’ name and business address.

Campaign Committee owned or controlled by: _______________________________________________

Title Business Address City State Zip

CERTIFICATION
On behalf of the above-named ☐ Contractor ☐ Subcontractor:
• I acknowledge that I have a continuing obligation to update this disclosure form if I substitute― or if I select additional― architects, design professionals, contractors, or subcontractors within ten (10) days of the selection or change; and • I hereby certify that:
 I have identified all persons for which the Ordinance requires disclosure;  The information in this disclosure form (and any attachment to this form) is true, accurate, correct, and complete; and  I have been legally authorized to submit this disclosure form.

In total, this disclosure form (including attachments) is ___ pages.

Executed on: _________________, at: ____________________, California.

Signature: _________________________________________ Print Full Name: ____________________________________________ Address: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ Phone Number: ____________________________________ E-mail Address: ____________________________________________ 1088 of 1291
FORM H

ADDENDA ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
City Of Glendale
Operation Of Glendale Fixed Route and Dial-A-Ride Transit Service CONTRACTOR NAME: ______________________________________ CONTRACTOR hereby acknowledges that it has received and read the following Addenda:

Addendum # __ Signature __________________________
Addendum # __ Signature __________________________
Addendum # __ Signature __________________________
Addendum # __ Signature __________________________
Addendum # __ Signature __________________________
1089 of 1291
FORM I

NON-COLLUSION AFFIDAVIT FOR CONTRACTOR

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
_____________________ (Name) declares and says:

1. That he/she is the (owner, partner, representative, or agent) of __________ (Contractor Name), hereinafter referred to as (CONTRACTOR) or (subcontractor).

2. That he/she is fully informed regarding the preparation and contents of this proposal for certain work in the City of Glendale, State of California.

3. That his/her proposal is genuine, and is not collusive or a sham proposal.

4. That any of its officers, owners, agents, representatives, employees, or parties in interest, including this affiliate, has not in any way colluded, conspired, connived or agreed, directly or indirectly, with any other CONTRACTOR, firm, or person to submit a collusive or sham proposal in connection with such contract, or to refrain to submitting a proposal in connection with such contract, or has in any manner, directly or indirectly, sought by unlawful agreement or connivance with any other CONTRACTOR, firm, or person to fix the price or prices in said proposal, or to secure through collusion, conspiracy, connivance, or unlawful agreement any advantage against City, or any person interested in the proposed contract; and,

5. That the price or prices quoted in the proposal are fair and proper, and are not tainted by any collusion, conspiracy, connivance, or unlawful agreement on the part of the CONTRACTOR, or any of its agents, owners, representatives, employees, or parties in interest, including this affiliate.

I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing is true and correct.

CERTIFICATION OF PRIMARY PARTICIPANT REGARDING DEBARMENT,

SUSPENSION, AND OTHER RESPONSIBILITY MATTERS
The Primary Participant ____________________ (Name of CONTRACTOR) certified to the best of its knowledge and belief, that it and its principals:
a. Are not presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from covered transactions by any Federal department or agency; b. Have not, within a five year period preceding this proposal, been convicted, or had a civil judgment rendered against them for commission of fraud, or a criminal offense in connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain, or performing a public (Federal, State or local) transaction or contract under a public transaction; violation of Federal or State antitrust statutes, or commission of embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, making false Statements, or receiving stolen property;
c. Are not presently indicted for, or otherwise criminally or civilly charged by a governmental entity (Federal, State or local) with commission of any of the offenses enumerated in paragraph (b) of this certification; and
d. Have not within a five-year period preceding this proposal had one or more public transactions (Federal, State or local) terminated for default.

If the primary participant is unable to certify to any of the Statements in this certification, the participant shall attach an explanation to this certification.

THE PRIMARY PARTICIPANT, __________________ (Name of CONTRACTOR) CERTIFIES

OR AFFIRMS THE TRUTHFULNESS AND ACCURACY OF THE CONTENTS OF THE

STATEMENTS SUBMITTED ON OR WITH THIS CERTIFICATION AND UNDERSTANDS THAT THE PROVISIONS OF 31 USC SECTIONS 3801 ET SEQUA ARE APPLICABLE THERETO.

Signature of Authorized Representative ________________________________ Date ________________________________
Name of Authorized Representative ________________________________ Title ________________________________
The undersigned chief legal counsel (or corporate secretary) for the _____________ hereby certifies that the Authorized Representative above has authority under State and local law to comply with the subject assurances and that the certification above has been legally made.

Signature of Attorney/Secretary ________________________________ Date ________________________________
1091 of 1291
In addition, the Contractor shall comply and facilitate compliance with U.S. DOT regulations, “Nonprocurement Suspension and Debarment,” 2 C.F.R. part 1200, which adopts and supplements the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (U.S. OMB) “Guidelines to Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement),” 2 C.F.R. part 180. These provisions apply to each contract at any tier of $25,000 or more, and to each contract at any tier for a federally required audit (irrespective of the contract amount), and to each contract at any tier that must be approved by an FTA official irrespective of the contract amount. As such, the Contractor shall verify that its principals, affiliates, and subcontractors are eligible to participate in this federally funded contract and are not presently declared by any Federal department or agency to be:
a) Debarred from participation in any federally assisted Award; b) Suspended from participation in any federally assisted Award; c) Proposed for debarment from participation in any federally assisted Award; d) Declared ineligible to participate in any federally assisted Award; e) Voluntarily excluded from participation in any federally assisted Award; or f) Disqualified from participation in ay federally assisted Award.

By signing and submitting its bid or proposal, the bidder or proposer certifies as follows:

The certification in this clause is a material representation of fact relied upon by the AGENCY.

If it is later determined by the AGENCY that the bidder or proposer knowingly rendered an erroneous certification, in addition to remedies available to the AGENCY, the Federal Government may pursue available remedies, including but not limited to suspension and/or debarment. The bidder or proposer agrees to comply with the requirements of 2 C.F.R. part 180, subpart C, as supplemented by 2 C.F.R. part 1200, while this offer is valid and throughout the period of any contract that may arise from this offer. The bidder or proposer further agrees to include a provision requiring such compliance in its lower tier covered transactions.

Certificate of Compliance with 49 CFR Part 29.

The bidder or offeror hereby certifies that it will comply with the regulations at 49 CFR Part 29 and Executive Order 12549.

Date ___________________________________________
Signature _______________________________________
Name of Company ___________________________________
Title ____________________________________________
1092 of 1291
FORM K - REFERENCE # __

FIXED ROUTE AND DIAL-A-RIDE CLIENT REFERENCES
Copy this form for each of the 3 required references
CLIENT AGENCY NAME: __________________________________
SERVICE NAME: __________________________________
STREET ADDRESS: __________________________________
CITY, STATE, ZIP: __________________________________
CONTACT PERSON: __________________________________
EMAIL ADDRESS: __________________________________
PHONE NUMBER (_____) _____ - ______ ext. _______
CONTRACT STATUS:
☐ Contract current, Beginning Date: _____ End Date: _____ ☐ Contract Ended: _____ (give date)
Reason for contract termination: _______________
How long have/had you held this contract: ___ years
FY 2021 Total Amount of Liquidated Damages Assessed: $_____ FY 2022 Total Amount of Liquidated Damages Assessed: $_____ FY 2023 Total Amount of Liquidated Damages Assessed: $_____ TYPE OF TRANSIT SERVICES MANAGED (check all that apply):
☐ Fixed Route: Number of Peak Vehicles: ___ Total Vehicles: ___ ☐ Paratransit: Number of Peak Vehicles: ___ Total Vehicles: ___ ☐ Other (describe): _______________
PROVIDED BY CONTRACTOR (check all that apply):
☐ Revenue Vehicles ☐ Non-Service Vehicles ☐ Fuel
☐ Operating & Maint Facility ☐ Radio Comm. System
FIXED ROUTE PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (Use NTD Data Definitions):

FY 2023 Annual Vehicle Service Hours: _____
FY 2023 Total Vehicle Miles _____
FY 2023 Annual One-Way Passengers: _____
FY 2023 Annual Average On-Time Performance: _____%
FY 2023 Average Miles Between Major Mechanical System Failures:
_____
FY 2023 Average Miles Between All Roadcalls: _____
FY 2023 Total Number of Complaints: _____
CY 2021 Number of All Collisions: ___ # of Preventable Collisions: ___ CY 2022 Number of All Collisions: ___ # of Preventable Collisions: ___ CY 2023 Number of All Collisions: ___ # of Preventable Collisions: ___ 1093 of 1291
DIAL-A-RIDE PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (Use NTD Data Definitions):

PUBLIC RECORDS EXEMPT INFORMATION
Below identify (by a general description) all copyrighted material, trade secrets, or other proprietary information (“protectable documents”) that Proposer has included in this Proposal which Proposer believes should be exempt from disclosure under California’s Public Records Act, Government Code Section 6250, et seq. By listing the protectable documents below, Proposer agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City— including, its officers, agents, employees, and representatives— from and against any action, claim, lawsuit, or proceeding, including costs and expenses, arising out of or connected with the City’s refusal to disclose the protectable documents to any party making a request for those items. The City will treat any Proposer, who fails to identify below protectable documents that Proposer believes should be exempt from disclosure, as having waived its right to an exemption from disclosure, as the Public Records Act provides.
______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ 1095 of 1291
FORM M

TABLE OF EXCEPTIONS
Proposer must state whether its proposal does or does not fully comply with the requirements as defined in this RFP and will provide a detailed list of exceptions to the Scope of Services, Proposed Professional Services Agreement, or any other requirements of the RFP, including all exhibits, forms, and appendices. List of exceptions will be inserted in the table form below and identify the page, section number, provision and exception, non-conformance and/or substitute language proposed. Failure to identify any items of non-compliance will result in the City assuming compliance. Changes to the Proposed Professional Services Agreement may not be considered or negotiated if not submitted as part of the proposal. The City, at its sole discretion, may modify or reject any exception or proposed change. The exceptions listed will be taken into consideration when evaluating the section that is most applicable to the exception listed.

Page
Number
Section
Number
Provision/Exception-Nonconformance and/or
Subtitle Language
By signing below, I understand that the information above lists all exceptions expressed by this firm in response to the RFP issued by the City of Glendale for ______________.

Dated this day_____ of _______________, 20__
______________________________________________________________________ (Authorized Signature) (Title)
1096 of 1291

Position Type from RFP Contractor Position Title
Full Time
# of
persons
Part Time
# of
persons
FTE
Hours
(2080)
Average FT
Annual
Salary
FT %
Benefits
Average
PT Hourly
Rate
PT %
Benefits
General Manager $0 0.0%
Assistant General Manager $0 0.0%
Operations Manager $0 0.0%
Maintenance Manager $0 0.0%
Safety and Training Manager $0 0.0%
Road Supervisor $0 0.0% $0 0.0%
Dispatcher $0 0.0% $0 0.0%
Bus Operator (Fixed Route) $0 0.0% $0 0.0%
Vehicle Operator (DAR) $0 0.0% $0 0.0%
Reservationist (DAR) $0 0.0% $0 0.0%
Other (specify) $0 0.0% $0 0.0%
Other (specify) $0 0.0% $0 0.0%
Mechanic/Technician A $0 0.0% $0 0.0%
Mechanic/Technician B $0 0.0% $0 0.0%
Mechanic/Technician C $0 0.0% $0 0.0%
Service Worker/Fueler $0 0.0% $0 0.0%
Maintenance Clerk $0 0.0% $0 0.0%
Other (specify) $0 0.0% $0 0.0%
Other (specify) $0 0.0% $0 0.0%
Transit Analyst $0 0.0% $0 0.0%
Customer Service $0 0.0% $0 0.0%
Administrative Asst/Clerk $0 0.0% $0 0.0%
Other (specify) $0 0.0% $0 0.0%
Other (specify) $0 0.0% $0 0.0%
Form N

STAFFING PLAN
Exhibit 16
1097 of 1291
Firm Pricing for Each Year of Initial Term and all Options Total
Vehicle Vehicle Facility General Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4 Yr 5 Yr 6 Operations Maintenance Maintenance Administration FY 2025 FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 FY 2031 FY 2032 FY 2033 FY 2034 Labor
Operators' Salaries and Wages $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Other Salaries & Wages $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Health, Welfare, Leave $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Retirement $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Uniform $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Tool Allowance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Professional Services $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Contract Services $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Temporary Labor $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Materials & Supplies
Lubricants (excludes fuel) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Tires & Tubes $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Parts/Major Components $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Safety Expenses $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Training Expense $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Facility Expense $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Other Materials & Supplies $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Utilities
Casualty & Liability Costs $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 License Fees & Taxes $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Miscellaneous Expenses
Miscellaneous $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Letter of Credit $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Contract Overhead $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Profit $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Other Expenses: Please Specify
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Total Modal Expenses $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 100,500 100,500 100,500 100,500 100,500 100,500 100,500 100,500 100,500 100,500 100,500 100,500 100,500 100,500 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 One Time Expenses
$0
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Total One Time Expenses $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Other: _________________________
Other: _________________________
Annual Revenue Vehicle Hours
Modal/Base Rate Per Hour
Start- Up Expense
Additional Revenue Vehicle Hours
Modal/Marginal Rate Per Hour
Option 2
Form O

FIXED ROUTE BASE AND MARGINAL RATE PRICE PROPOSAL
Fringe Benefits
Services
Expenses Per Modal Category Per NTD Definition
Option 1
1098 of 1291
Firm Pricing for Each Year of Initial Term and all Options Total
Vehicle Vehicle Non-Vehicle General Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4 Yr 5 Yr 6 Operations Maintenance Maintenance Administration FY 2025 FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 FY 2031 FY 2032 FY 2033 FY 2034 Labor
Drivers' Salaries and Wages $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Other Salaries & Wages $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Health, Welfare, Leave $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Retirement $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Uniform $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Tool Allowance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Professional Services $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Contract Services $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Temporary Labor $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Materials & Supplies
Lubricants (excludes fuel) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Tires & Tubes $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Parts/Major Components $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Safety Expenses $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Training Expense $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Facility Expense $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Other Materials & Supplies $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Utilities
Casualty & Liability Costs $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 License Fees & Taxes $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Miscellaneous Expenses
Miscellaneous $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Letter of Credit/Bond $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Contract Overhead $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Profit $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Other Expenses: Please Specify
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Total Modal Expenses $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Estimated Annual Vehicle Revenue Hours 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Functional/Total Cost/Revenue Hour #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 21,000 21,000 21,000 21,000 21,000 21,000 21,000 21,000 21,000 21,000 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 One Time Expenses
$0
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Total One Time Expenses $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Other: _________________________
Form P

DIAL-A-RIDE BASE AND MARGINAL RATE PRICE PROPOSAL
Expenses Per Functional Category
Fringe Benefits
Services
Option 1 Option 2
Marginal Rate per Revenue
Annual Trips
Rate per Trip
Start- Up Expense
Other: _________________________
1099 of 1291
Transit Services Vendor List
Company Email Web/Web Form
MV Transportation business_development@mvtransit.
com
https://www.mvtransit.com/contact-us/rfp
National Express [email protected] https://www.nationalexpresstransit.com/upco ming-contracting-opportunities/
TransDev [email protected] https://transdevna.com/
Keolis [email protected] https://www.keolisna.com/
MTM Transit [email protected] https://mtmtransit.com/contact/ Southland Transit [email protected] https://www.southlandtransit.com/ Transportation
Concepts
[email protected] http://www.transportation-concepts.com/ Empire
Transportation
[email protected] http://emptransportation.com/ RATP Dev [email protected] https://www.ratpdevusa.com/ Exhibit 17
1100 of 1291
9a

CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL

AGENDA ITEM
Report: Fourth Public Hearing Regarding the Composition of Council Districts Related to the City's Proposed Transition to District-Based Councilmember Elections

1. Introduction of Ordinance Establishing Council District Boundaries and Scheduling Elections Within the Districts, Subject to Voter Approval of a Ballot Measure to Amend the City Charter to Change the City’s Electoral System from an At-Large System to a By-District System with a Directly Elected Mayor and Six Council Districts

2. Motion Directing Staff Regarding Preparation of Draft District Maps

COUNCIL ACTION
Item Type: Public Hearing
Approved for October 10, 2023 calendar

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Council has initiated the process to transition from its at-large council election system to council districts. This matter is the fourth public hearing to solicit public input on the council districts. In accordance with legal requirements, the City has also undertaken an extensive public outreach process, including public hearings, public workshops, pop-up events, press releases, social media and advertising.

Thirty-nine (39) draft maps have been submitted by members of the public or the City’s demographer; of those, four are not population balanced. The Council should take public input and discuss whether to identify a district map for adoption (subject to voter approval of the map and necessary charter amendments), identify two to three maps, if possible, for discussion at a future hearing, request the demographer to make modifications to one or more existing draft maps for future discussion, take an alternative action, or take no action. If the Council introduces the ordinance or provides direction regarding the narrowing or modification of maps, the City Attorney’s Office will also present the draft Charter amendments to implement the transition to a directly elected Mayor and Council district electoral system, along with other requested charter amendments including amendments relating to Council compensation, City contracts and other miscellaneous changes.
1101 of 1291
2 a 9

COUNCIL PRIORITIES
Improve Operations and Efficiency of City Government: Establishing City Council districts may improve operations and efficiencies by improving constituent services as councilmembers will have more day-to-day interaction with the residents and issues affecting particular neighborhoods.

RECOMMENDATION
That the Council conduct the fourth public hearing pertaining to the composition of council districts related to the City’s proposed transition to district-based elections and (i) identify a district map for adoption (subject to voter approval of the map and necessary charter amendments), (ii) identify a number of focus maps, such as two to three maps, for discussion at a future hearing, (iii) request the demographer to make modifications to one or more existing draft maps for future discussion, (iv) take an alternative action, or (v) take no action.

BACKGROUND
On May 2, 2023, the Council adopted Resolution No. 23-55 declaring its intent to initiate the process to transition from at-large to district-based councilmember elections pursuant to Elections Code section 10010. The Council directed staff to commence the process to transition to council districts by way of amendment to the City Charter, to include a proposal to transition to six council districts and a directly elected mayor who would be a voting member of the Council. The Council adopted Resolution No. 23-89 on June 13, 2023, revising the timeline set forth in Resolution No. 23-55. This hearing is the fourth public hearing the Council will hold regarding the composition of council districts.

ANALYSIS
Public Hearing
Pursuant to Elections Code section 10010, the Council is required to hold at least four public hearings The City held its first three public hearings on June 13, 2023, July 11, 2023 and August 15, 2023.

In addition to this public hearing, public hearings are scheduled for October 24, 2023 and, if necessary, November 7, 2023. The principal purpose of this fourth public hearing is for the City’s demographer, National Demographics Corporation (NDC), to provide an overview of the maps submitted by members of the public and those prepared by NDC, including those submitted by the second map submittal deadline of September 28, 2023.

District Criteria
In accordance with Elections Code section 21601, the Council must draw districts that satisfy the following criteria:
• Council districts must be substantially equal in population based on the total population of residents of the city as determined by the most recent census with adjustments mandated by the State of California.
1102 of 1291
3 a 9
• Council district boundaries must comply with the United States Constitution, the California Constitution, and the federal Voting Rights Act. • The Council shall adopt district boundaries using the following criteria as set forth in the following order of priority:
(i) To the extent practicable, council districts shall be geographically contiguous. (ii) To the extent practicable, the geographic integrity of any local neighborhood or local community of interest shall be respected in a manner that minimizes its division. A “community of interest” is a population that shares common social or economic interests that should be included within a single district for purposes of its effective and fair representation. Communities of interest do not include relationships with political parties, incumbents, or political candidates. (iii) Council district boundaries should be easily identifiable and understandable by residents. To the extent practicable, council districts shall be bounded by natural and artificial barriers, by streets, or by the boundaries of the city. (iv) To the extent practicable, and where it does not conflict with the preceding criteria, council districts shall be drawn to encourage geographical compactness in a manner that nearby areas of population are not bypassed in favor of more distant populations.
• The Council must not draw district boundaries for the purpose of favoring or discriminating against a political party.

Draft District Maps
There are currently 39 draft maps that have been submitted to the City or prepared by the City’s hired demographer. Of the 39 maps, four are not population-balanced. The draft maps are attached as Exhibit 1 and can also be viewed using an Interactive Review Map available at https://mapglendale.org/draft-maps/. NDC will provide a review during the public hearing.

Sequencing of Districting Elections
Elections Code § 10010 contains provisions governing the sequencing of elections in the new districts:
1) The draft districting plans made available during the second round of public hearings include a “potential” sequencing of elections for each draft plan as required by Elections Code section 10010(a)(2).
2) Elections Code section 10010(b) specifies two criteria for “consideration” in setting the sequencing. Those criteria are “consideration to the purposes of the California Voting Rights Act” and “tak[ing] into account the preferences expressed by members of the districts.” The sequencing of elections published with the draft plans, however, is only proposed sequencing. The sequencing of elections in the districts of the finally adopted new districting plan is at the discretion of the Council. In addition to the considerations required by Section 10010(b), cities commonly consider:
1103 of 1291
4 a 9
a. Completion of the terms of incumbents elected at-large. For example, a councilmember whose term ends in 2028 serves out the full four-year term even if that member resides in the same district as an incumbent whose term ends in 2026 and that district is placed on the 2026 ballot.
b. Scheduling elections in a particular district based on the expiration of the term of office of the incumbent who resides in the district. For example, a district in which an incumbent resides with a term ending in 2026 could be placed on the ballot in 2026. A district in which two incumbents reside with respective terms ending in 2026 and in 2028 could be placed on the ballot in 2026 or 2028. If in 2028, the incumbent with a term ending in 2026 would be out of office after the 2026 elections, but he or she could run again in 2028 for the district seat in which he or she resides.
c. If the district seat were placed on the ballot in 2026, an incumbent with the term ending in 2028 would serve out the full four-year at-large term to which elected, and then could seek election in 2028 for the district seat. Alternatively, that incumbent could run for the district seat in 2026 and, if elected, resign from the at-large seat on the City Council, creating a vacancy to be filled in accordance with the city’s laws. d. Scheduling elections in a district in which no current incumbent resides at the earlier election cycle consistent with maintaining the appropriate number of Council Members.

As noted in a prior report, these iterations aside, with an expanded Council, it would appear that three district seats for four-year terms would be up for election in 2026, along with a two-year seat. In 2028, three four-year district seats would be up for election, and then three four-year seats would be up for election every two years after that, assuming no vacancies.

STAKEHOLDERS/OUTREACH
The City has conducted an extensive public outreach process. In addition to five public hearings to date, the City has held 14 public workshops and six pop-ups. The City has utilized social media, advertising, and press releases. The outreach has been in multiple languages – English, Armenian, Spanish, Korean, and Tagalog. A website dedicated to the districting effort, which includes the draft maps and pertinent updates, has been established at https://mapglendale.org. Between June 1, 2023 and October 4, 2023, there have been 15,000 new users and 91,000 in event count. An event is a user's specific action on the site, such as clicking a button, playing a video, or submitting a form. The public comments received through the various fora, including comments provided at workshops and sent to the website, are included in Exhibit 2.

Although the deadline to submit draft maps has expired, residents and stakeholders are welcome to submit public comments on the process by sending a direct email to 1104 of 1291
5 a 9
[email protected], and/or submitting feedback through the contact form on MapGlendale.org.

Community Outreach Efforts Include:
• Digital and print materials translated English with Armenian, Korean, Spanish and Tagalog
• Five public hearings
• Fourteen community workshops (12 in-person, 2 virtual) • Six Pop up events
• Table at Council in Your Neighborhood, June 20
• Cruise Night, July 15
• Vardavar Festival, July 16
• National Night Out, August 1
• Summer Concerts, August 25
• Touch-a-Truck, September 16
• Glendale Youth Alliance to distribute outreach materials to over 120 Glendale bakeries and grocery stores
• Promoting workshops and outreach across 8 libraries/center and 6 parks • Public Works Banner on Verdugo Rd. Bridge (July –October 2023) • Direct phone calls to over 70 community benefit partners to provide input and uplift outreach efforts
Digital Outreach Efforts Include:
• Rollout of MapGlendale.org website (mobile and web accessibility available in language)
• Animated Explainer Video in English with Armenian, Korean, Spanish and Tagalog captions (6 Videos)
• Press Releases to local and regional media (4 sent)
• Outreach Newsletter Blast to 31,000 people (7 sent)
• Extensive social media engagement, posts, stories and event reminders across all platforms (45 posts)
• Targeted emails to community benefit partners to provide input, uplift outreach efforts
• Dedicated email address [email protected] with 24-48hr response rate • Created a social media toolkit
• (https://bit.ly/MapGlendaleToolkit)
• Digital ads on Google and Meta

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this report.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (CEQA/NEPA)
This activity involves organizational and administrative activities of the government 1105 of 1291
6 a 9
related to election procedures and eligibility requirements, and such internal procedural and eligibility changes have no potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. As such, this action is not a “project” subject to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) 14 Cal. Code Regs § 15378.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE
This item is exempt from campaign disclosure requirements.

ALTERNATIVES

1. The Council can conduct the public hearing, select a map and proposed election sequence and introduce the ordinance.

2. The Council can conduct the public hearing and provide direction to identify a subset of focus maps, such as 2 or 3 maps, for future discussion.

3. The Council can conduct the public hearing and provide direction to modify one or more of the existing draft maps for future consideration.

4. The Council can conduct the public hearing and direct staff with a combination of Alternatives 2 and 3 above.

5. The Council can decide to take no further action.

6. The Council can select an alternative not identified by staff.

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Prepared by:

Michael J. Garcia, City Attorney
Stephanie Mkhlian, Senior Administrative Analyst
Approved by:

Roubik R. Golanian, P.E., City Manager

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS

1. Draft Maps

2. Public Comments
1106 of 1291
ORDINANCE NO.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA ESTABLISHING COUNCIL

DISTRICT BOUNDARIES AND SCHEDULING ELECTIONS

WITHIN THE DISTRICTS, SUBJECT TO VOTER APPROVAL

OF A BALLOT MEASURE TO AMEND THE CITY CHARTER
TO CHANGE THE CITY’S ELECTORAL SYSTEM FROM AN

AT-LARGE SYSTEM TO A BY-DISTRICT SYSTEM WITH A

DIRECTLY ELECTED MAYOR AND SIX COUNCIL

DISTRICTS
WHEREAS, the City of Glendale, California (“City”) is a charter city, duly organized under the constitution and laws of the State of California; and WHEREAS, under Article IV, Section 2 of the City Charter, the five members of the Glendale City Council (“City Council”) are currently elected in at-large elections, in which each City Council member is elected by all registered voters of the entire City; and WHEREAS, Article V, Section 2 of the City Charter requires, “Unless otherwise provided by ordinance, all elections shall be held in accordance with the provisions of the Election Code of the State of California . . . ”; and WHEREAS, on May 2, 2023, the Council adopted Resolution No. 23-55, a Resolution of Intention outlining the City Council’s intention to transition from at-large to district-based elections, specific steps the City Council would undertake to facilitate this transition, and an estimated time frame for so doing; and WHEREAS, on June 13, 2023, the Council adopted Resolution No. 23-89, modifying the time frame established by Resolution No. 23-55; and WHEREAS, California Elections Code section 10010 establishes procedures for changing from an at-large to a by-district electoral system; and WHEREAS, under the provisions of California Election Code section 10010, a city that changes from an at-large method of election to a district-based election must do all of the following before a public hearing at which the City Council votes to approve or defeat an ordinance establishing district-based elections:
• Before drawing a draft map or maps of the proposed boundaries of the districts, the City must hold at least two public hearings over a period of no more than 30 days, at which the public is invited to provide input regarding the composition of the districts.
• After draft maps are drawn, the City must publish at least one draft map and the potential sequence of the elections in the proposed new districts. The first 1107 of 1291
version of a draft map must be published at least seven days before consideration at a public hearing.
• The City must hold at least two additional hearings over a period of no more than 45 days, at which the public is invited to provide input regarding the content of the draft map(s) and the proposed sequence of elections.; and WHEREAS, the City retained a well-qualified and experienced professional demographer to assist with the process of drawing draft district maps and a well-qualified and experienced public outreach consultant to engage the public in the districting process; and
WHEREAS, on June 13, 2023 and July 11, 2023, the Council conducted two (2) public hearings for the purpose of soliciting public input on the composition of the proposed election districts; and
WHEREAS, the City also established a website dedicated to information about the districting process, and conducted 14 public workshops/forums, at which the City received input and also provided information on the districting process and on opportunities for the public to become involved including providing facilities to allow members of the public to identify “communities of interest” by mapping their location and to draw draft districting maps, and instruction on the use of those facilities; and WHEREAS, 19 draft district maps were submitted to the City by members of the public by the first deadline set for draft map submission, and two (2) draft district maps were drawn by the City’s demographic consultant, all of which included a proposed sequencing of elections and were published on the City’s districting website on August 8, 2023; and
WHEREAS, on August 15, 2023, the Council conducted the third public hearing on districting; and
WHEREAS, 18 additional draft maps or map requests were submitted to the City by the second map-submission deadline, and these maps, including a sequencing of elections were published on the City’s districting website on October 3, 2023; and WHEREAS, on October 10, 2023, the Council held a fourth public hearing on the draft maps and identified Map ____ for selection and incorporation by reference into this Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, on October 24, 2023, the Council held a fifth public hearing on draft Map ____; and
WHEREAS, the Council took into consideration the public comment and the purposes identified in Elections Code section 10010;
WHEREAS, draft Map is population balanced, contains contiguous districts, 1108 of 1291
respects the communities of interest identified through the hearing process, uses recognizable natural and constructed boundaries, contains compact districts, and does not discriminate in favor of or against any political party; and WHEREAS, it is the intent of the Council to have this Ordinance only take effect if it and the Charter amendment placed on the ballot pursuant to Resolution No. ___ is approved by a majority of voters voting on the ballot measure, which Charter amendment will – if approved - expand the City Council to seven (7) members with six (6) members elected by-district and one (1) member directly elected as mayor by the voters of the entire City, and other amendments of the charter proposed as part of Resolution No. _____ to make the Charter consistent with a seven-member Council.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. District Maps and Election Sequencing. Following the certification of the March 5, 2024 general municipal election results certifying the voters’ approval of the Charter amendments placed on the ballot by Resolution No. ____, then:
(a) The boundaries and identifying number of each of the six (6) Council districts shall be as described on Council District Map ____ attached hereto as Exhibit “1” and incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Commencing with the general municipal election in 2026 and every four years thereafter, voters in Districts ____, _____ and ____ shall elect members of the Council by-district for full four-year terms. At the general municipal election in 2026, voters in District ___ shall elect a member of City Council by-district to a two-year term.

At the general municipal election in 2028 and every four years thereafter, the voters in Districts ___, ___ and shall elect members of the City Council by-district for full fouryear terms. (c) The processes for addressing adjustment of district boundaries, such as when required following each decennial federal census or annexation of territory, and for addressing vacancies shall be governed by the Charter, as such Charter provisions may be revised.

SECTION 2. Implementation. If necessary to facilitate the implementation of this Ordinance, the City Clerk is authorized to make technical adjustments to the district boundaries that do not substantively affect the populations in the districts, the eligibility of candidates, or the residence of elected officials within any district. The City Clerk shall consult with the City Manager and City Attorney concerning any technical adjustments deemed necessary and shall advise the City Council of any such adjustments required in the implementation of the districts.

SECTION 3. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective upon the 1109 of 1291
certification of the election results of the March 2024 general municipal election, certifying that the measure placed on the ballot pursuant to Resolution No. __________, which measure amends the Charter to transition the City from an at-large election system to a by-district election system with six (6) council districts and a directly elected mayor, has been approved by the voters.

SECTION 4. Interpretation. In interpreting this Ordinance or resolving any ambiguity, this Ordinance shall be interpreted in a manner that effectively accomplishes its stated purposes.

SECTION 5. CEQA. Pursuant to Section 15320 of the Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), further review under CEQA is not required because the City Council action in establishing district-based elections consists of a change in the organization or reorganization of a local governmental agency where the change does not change the geographical area in which previously existing powers are exercised. Therefore, the City Council finds that it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that this action will result in any environmental effect.

SECTION 6. Severability. If any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, then such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The Council of the City of Glendale hereby declares it would have adopted this Ordinance and each section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions thereof be declared invalid or unconstitutional.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2023.

Mayor
Attest:

City Clerk
1110 of 1291

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )
ss. CITY OF GLENDALE )
I, Suzie Abajian, Ph.D., City Clerk of the City of Glendale, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Glendale at its regular meeting held on the day of , 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
1111 of 1291
EXHIBIT 1
DISTRICT MAP ________

ATTACHED
1112 of 1291

M O T I O N
Moved by Council Member _________________________, seconded by Council Member ___________________________, that regarding the 4th public hearing for the transition to Council districts held on October 10, 2023, the Council directs staff and the City’s demographer to:

Vote as follows:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
1113 of 1291
2 1
4 3
5 6
Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
E Palmer Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
Sonora Ave
W Kenneth Rd
N
Glendale
Ave
N
C
e
ntral A
v
e
Western Ave
N
Pa
cific
Ave
N
Bra
n
d
Blv
d
Gra
ndview
Ave
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St Dunsmore Ave
5 210
Glendale Districting
Proposed Election Sequence:
2026: Any three of Districts 1 (vacant),
2 (vacant), 4 (vacant), 5 (vacant) or
6 (Asatryan, Brotman, Devine, & Najairan)
2028: District 3 (Kassakhian) and any two of
Districts 1 (vacant),
2 (vacant), 4 (vacant), 5 (vacant) or
6 (Asatryan, Brotman, Devine, & Najairan)
National Demographics Corporation, July 12, 2023
Not Population
Balanced
©2021 CALIPER
1114 of 1291
Map 101
District 1
Total Pop 33,116
Deviation from ideal 286
% Deviation 0.87%
% Hisp 22.6%
% NH White 53%
% NH Black 4%
% Asian-American 19%
Total 20,548
% Hisp 21%
% NH White 57%
% NH Black 5%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 16%
Total 16,979
% Latino est. 25%
% Spanish-Surnamed 22%
% Asian-Surnamed 6%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 63%
% NH Black 4%
Total 11,472
% Latino est. 26%
% Spanish-Surnamed 24%
% Asian-Surnamed 6%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 61%
% NH Black 4%
Total 6,235
% Latino est. 30%
% Spanish-Surnamed 28%
% Asian-Surnamed 5%
% Filipino-Surnamed 5%
% NH White est. 58%
% NH Black est. 3%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 33,952
age0-19 18%
age20-60 62%
age60plus 20%
immigrants 55%
naturalized 55%
english 27%
spanish 22%
asian-lang 11%
other lang 39%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 38%
hs-grad 47%
bachelor 27%
graduatedegree 10%
Child in Household child-under18 23%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 64%
income 0-25k 23%
income 25-50k 16%
income 50-75k 16%
income 75-200k 37%
income 200k-plus 7%
single family 15%
multi-family 85%
rented 87%
owned 13%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

Latino voter registration and turnout data are Spanish-surname counts adjusted using Census Population Department undercount estimates. NH White and NH Black registration and turnout counts estimated by NDC. Citizen Voting Age Pop., Age, Immigration, and other demographics from the 2015-2019 American Community Survey and Special Tabulation 5-year data. 2 30,041
-2,789
-8.50%
25%
57%
2%
15%
18,691
24%
59%
2%
14%
16,051
26%
23%
4%
4%
66%
2%
10,568
28%
25%
4%
5%
63%
2%
6,131
29%
27%
4%
5%
61%
2%
30,554
20%
55%
24%
60%
61%
22%
22%
11%
45%
41%
47%
25%
12%
27%
60%
28%
21%
14%
31%
5%
20%
80%
85%
15%
3 30,908
-1,922
-5.85%
17%
66%
2%
13%
20,988
18%
63%
4%
13%
17,760
18%
16%
5%
3%
71%
4%
12,217
19%
18%
5%
3%
69%
4%
7,085
21%
20%
5%
3%
66%
3%
31,276
19%
57%
24%
58%
68%
27%
14%
8%
50%
38%
52%
24%
11%
24%
64%
25%
20%
15%
33%
7%
25%
75%
81%
19%
4 32,969
139

0.42%
17%
63%
2%
16%
20,256
14%
68%
3%
15%
18,663
19%
18%
5%
3%
71%
3%
12,747
21%
19%
5%
4%
68%
3%
7,515
22%
20%
5%
4%
68%
2%
31,908
17%
57%
26%
61%
62%
27%
10%
8%
55%
40%
47%
27%
12%
23%
60%
27%
14%
14%
37%
7%
14%
86%
79%
21%
5 36,820
3,990

12.15%
13%
60%
1%
25%
25,697
13%
64%
2%
19%
25,609
11%
10%
11%
2%
75%
1%
20,172
11%
11%
11%
2%
75%
1%
13,985
11%
11%
9%
2%
77%
1%
36,286
25%
50%
24%
37%
80%
49%
8%
15%
27%
18%
38%
34%
23%
36%
65%
12%
10%
12%
43%
24%
69%
31%
35%
65%
6 33,126
296

0.90%
10%
75%
1%
12%
23,538
11%
77%
2%
10%
23,340
9%
8%
5%
1%
84%
1%
18,024
9%
9%
5%
2%
83%
1%
12,116
10%
10%
5%
2%
82%
1%
32,536
21%
50%
29%
44%
78%
42%
6%
5%
47%
21%
43%
30%
22%
27%
61%
13%
10%
13%
38%
26%
71%
29%
31%
69%
Total
196,980
6,779

20.65%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
08/08/2023 13:14 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1115 of 1291
2 1
3 4
5 6
Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
E Palmer Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
Sonora Ave
W Kenneth Rd
N
Glendale
Ave
N Central Ave
Western Ave
N
Pacific Ave
N Brand Blvd
Gra
ndview
Ave
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St
Dunsmore Ave
E Chevy Chase Dr
5 210
1116 of 1291 �2021 CALIPER National Demographics Corporation, July 26, 2023 Map 102
District 1
Total Pop 33,116
Deviation from ideal 286
% Deviation 0.87%
% Hisp 22.6%
% NH White 53%
% NH Black 4%
% Asian-American 19%
Total 20,548
% Hisp 21%
% NH White 57%
% NH Black 5%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 16%
Total 16,979
% Latino est. 25%
% Spanish-Surnamed 22%
% Asian-Surnamed 6%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 63%
% NH Black 4%
Total 11,472
% Latino est. 26%
% Spanish-Surnamed 24%
% Asian-Surnamed 6%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 61%
% NH Black 4%
Total 6,235
% Latino est. 30%
% Spanish-Surnamed 28%
% Asian-Surnamed 5%
% Filipino-Surnamed 5%
% NH White est. 58%
% NH Black est. 3%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 33,952
age0-19 18%
age20-60 62%
age60plus 20%
immigrants 55%
naturalized 55%
english 27%
spanish 22%
asian-lang 11%
other lang 39%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 38%
hs-grad 47%
bachelor 27%
graduatedegree 10%
Child in Household child-under18 23%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 64%
income 0-25k 23%
income 25-50k 16%
income 50-75k 16%
income 75-200k 37%
income 200k-plus 7%
single family 15%
multi-family 85%
rented 87%
owned 13%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

Latino voter registration and turnout data are Spanish-surname counts adjusted using Census Population Department undercount estimates. NH White and NH Black registration and turnout counts estimated by NDC. Citizen Voting Age Pop., Age, Immigration, and other demographics from the 2015-2019 American Community Survey and Special Tabulation 5-year data. 2 32,846
16 0.05%
24%
59%
2%
14%
20,518
23%
61%
2%
13%
17,600
24%
22%
3%
4%
68%
2%
11,526
26%
24%
4%
5%
65%
2%
6,589
28%
26%
4%
4%
63%
2%
33,067
19%
55%
25%
62%
62%
22%
20%
10%
48%
43%
46%
25%
12%
25%
58%
31%
20%
13%
31%
5%
19%
81%
86%
14%
3 31,914
-916
-2.79%
17%
66%
2%
13%
21,828
18%
63%
4%
13%
18,448
18%
16%
5%
2%
72%
3%
12,669
19%
18%
5%
3%
70%
3%
7,337
21%
20%
5%
3%
67%
3%
32,280
19%
57%
24%
57%
68%
27%
14%
8%
50%
38%
52%
24%
12%
24%
64%
25%
20%
14%
34%
7%
27%
73%
80%
20%
4 33,895
1,065

3.24%
17%
62%
2%
17%
21,404
15%
65%
4%
16%
19,533
19%
18%
5%
4%
71%
3%
13,624
21%
19%
5%
4%
69%
2%
8,235
21%
19%
5%
4%
68%
2%
33,409
20%
57%
24%
55%
63%
31%
10%
9%
50%
35%
47%
29%
12%
27%
64%
21%
14%
17%
40%
9%
18%
82%
76%
24%
5 33,089
259

0.79%
12%
59%
1%
26%
22,722
12%
65%
1%
20%
23,190
11%
10%
12%
2%
75%
1%
18,337
11%
10%
11%
2%
75%
1%
12,807
11%
10%
9%
2%
77%
1%
32,272
25%
50%
25%
38%
80%
48%
8%
16%
27%
18%
37%
32%
24%
36%
64%
12%
10%
10%
42%
25%
73%
27%
31%
69%
6 32,120
-710
-2.16%
10%
75%
1%
12%
22,698
11%
76%
2%
10%
22,652
9%
8%
5%
1%
83%
1%
17,572
9%
9%
5%
2%
83%
1%
11,864
10%
10%
5%
2%
82%
1%
31,532
21%
50%
30%
44%
77%
42%
6%
5%
47%
20%
43%
30%
22%
27%
61%
12%
10%
13%
38%
26%
70%
30%
32%
68%
Total
196,980
1,981

6.03%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
08/08/2023 13:16 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1117 of 1291
2 4 5
1 3
6 Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
E Palmer Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
Sonora Ave
S Chevy Chase Dr
W Kenneth Rd
N
Glendale
Ave
N Central Ave
Western Ave
N
Pacific Ave
N Brand Blvd
Gra
ndview
Ave
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St
Dunsmore Ave
E Chevy Chase Dr
5 210
Proposed Election Sequence:
2026, four-year term: Districts 6 (Brotman & Najarian) and any two of 1 (vacant), 3 (vacant) or 5 (vacant)
2026: two-year term: District 4 (Asatryan & Devine)
2028: Districts 2 (Kassakhian), District 4 (Asatryan & Devine) and any one of 1 (vacant), 3 (vacant) or 5 (vacant)
1118 of 1291 �2021 CALIPER National Demographics Corporation, July 25, 2023 Map 103
District 1
Total Pop 33,106
Deviation from ideal 276
% Deviation 0.84%
% Hisp 24.6%
% NH White 55%
% NH Black 2%
% Asian-American 17%
Total 20,960
% Hisp 23%
% NH White 59%
% NH Black 3%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 15%
Total 18,787
% Latino est. 25%
% Spanish-Surnamed 23%
% Asian-Surnamed 4%
% Filipino-Surnamed 5%
% NH White est. 65%
% NH Black 3%
Total 12,967
% Latino est. 27%
% Spanish-Surnamed 24%
% Asian-Surnamed 4%
% Filipino-Surnamed 5%
% NH White est. 63%
% NH Black 2%
Total 7,998
% Latino est. 27%
% Spanish-Surnamed 25%
% Asian-Surnamed 5%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 63%
% NH Black est. 2%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 32,898
age0-19 20%
age20-60 55%
age60plus 25%
immigrants 56%
naturalized 62%
english 27%
spanish 21%
asian-lang 11%
other lang 41%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 36%
hs-grad 47%
bachelor 25%
graduatedegree 14%
Child in Household child-under18 28%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 61%
income 0-25k 24%
income 25-50k 19%
income 50-75k 12%
income 75-200k 37%
income 200k-plus 9%
single family 27%
multi-family 73%
rented 77%
owned 23%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

1.82%
10%
76%
1%
11%
23,697
11%
78%
2%
8%
20,682
10%
10%
5%
1%
83%
1%
14,722
11%
10%
5%
1%
82%
1%
8,923
12%
12%
5%
2%
80%
1%
33,883
20%
53%
27%
55%
75%
29%
8%
5%
59%
33%
48%
25%
17%
28%
61%
19%
15%
16%
35%
16%
48%
52%
57%
43%
4 33,744
914

2.78%
14%
65%
3%
16%
22,474
15%
63%
5%
17%
20,043
15%
14%
6%
3%
75%
3%
14,684
16%
15%
6%
3%
73%
3%
8,976
17%
16%
5%
3%
73%
2%
33,738
20%
57%
24%
51%
64%
38%
8%
10%
44%
30%
46%
31%
17%
26%
65%
17%
14%
15%
40%
13%
23%
77%
70%
30%
5 32,302
-528
-1.61%
15%
64%
2%
17%
19,871
14%
67%
3%
15%
18,691
16%
15%
7%
3%
72%
3%
12,906
18%
16%
7%
3%
70%
2%
7,697
18%
17%
7%
3%
70%
2%
31,365
18%
56%
27%
60%
62%
26%
10%
9%
55%
41%
44%
29%
13%
22%
58%
29%
15%
15%
32%
10%
25%
75%
74%
26%
6 32,128
-702
-2.14%
13%
61%
1%
23%
21,888
14%
66%
1%
19%
22,290
10%
9%
10%
2%
77%
1%
17,595
10%
10%
10%
2%
77%
1%
12,237
10%
10%
8%
2%
80%
1%
30,985
25%
50%
25%
38%
82%
48%
8%
15%
28%
17%
40%
31%
24%
36%
65%
14%
9%
11%
43%
24%
71%
29%
33%
67%
Total
196,980
1,616

4.92%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
08/08/2023 13:16 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1119 of 1291
1 30.47%
4 42.11%
2 -14.93%
6 -25.88%
5 -46.29%
3 14.52%
Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
E Palmer Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
Sonora Ave
W Kenneth Rd
N
Glendale
Ave
Western Ave
N
Pacific Ave
N Brand Blvd
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St
Dunsmore Ave
5 210
1120 of 1291 �2021 CALIPER National Demographics Corporation, July 26, 2023 Map 104
District 1
Total Pop 42,833
Deviation from ideal 10,003
% Deviation 30.47%
% Hisp 21.4%
% NH White 60%
% NH Black 2%
% Asian-American 15%
Total 25,843
% Hisp 21%
% NH White 62%
% NH Black 2%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 14%
Total 22,861
% Latino est. 24%
% Spanish-Surnamed 22%
% Asian-Surnamed 4%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 67%
% NH Black 3%
Total 15,129
% Latino est. 26%
% Spanish-Surnamed 24%
% Asian-Surnamed 4%
% Filipino-Surnamed 5%
% NH White est. 64%
% NH Black 3%
Total 8,667
% Latino est. 28%
% Spanish-Surnamed 26%
% Asian-Surnamed 4%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 62%
% NH Black est. 3%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 41,664
age0-19 19%
age20-60 56%
age60plus 25%
immigrants 63%
naturalized 61%
english 22%
spanish 18%
asian-lang 10%
other lang 50%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 42%
hs-grad 48%
bachelor 25%
graduatedegree 11%
Child in Household child-under18 26%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 58%
income 0-25k 29%
income 25-50k 18%
income 50-75k 15%
income 75-200k 33%
income 200k-plus 5%
single family 17%
multi-family 83%
rented 85%
owned 15%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

14.52%
12%
71%
2%
14%
26,636
13%
69%
3%
14%
24,824
11%
10%
6%
2%
79%
3%
18,601
12%
11%
6%
2%
78%
3%
11,980
13%
12%
6%
2%
77%
2%
37,477
19%
53%
28%
49%
73%
37%
7%
8%
47%
27%
44%
30%
19%
25%
61%
16%
12%
14%
39%
19%
45%
55%
52%
48%
4 46,654
13,824

42.11%
22%
55%
3%
18%
29,313
19%
60%
4%
15%
24,563
23%
21%
5%
4%
66%
3%
16,547
24%
22%
6%
4%
64%
3%
9,189
27%
25%
5%
4%
61%
3%
47,853
17%
61%
22%
57%
58%
26%
20%
11%
43%
39%
48%
27%
11%
23%
64%
26%
16%
16%
35%
7%
12%
88%
86%
14%
5 17,633
-15,197
-46.29%
13%
63%
2%
21%
12,262
13%
62%
5%
19%
12,557
13%
12%
10%
3%
74%
1%
9,721
13%
12%
10%
3%
74%
1%
6,620
13%
13%
9%
3%
74%
1%
17,263
23%
52%
25%
35%
72%
48%
8%
9%
35%
19%
36%
37%
21%
30%
66%
10%
10%
11%
44%
25%
66%
34%
39%
61%
6 24,333
-8,497
-25.88%
14%
57%
1%
26%
16,890
14%
65%
1%
19%
16,498
11%
10%
11%
2%
75%
1%
12,996
11%
11%
10%
2%
76%
1%
9,045
11%
10%
8%
2%
78%
1%
24,414
26%
50%
23%
38%
81%
49%
9%
18%
24%
18%
39%
31%
23%
39%
66%
13%
10%
12%
43%
21%
66%
34%
38%
62%
Total
196,980
29,021

88.40%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
08/08/2023 13:16 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1121 of 1291
1 4
2 3
5 6
Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
E Palmer Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
Sonora Ave
W Kenneth Rd
N
Glendale
Ave
Western Ave
N
Pacific Ave
N Brand Blvd
Gra
ndview
Ave
W Broadway
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St
Dunsmore Ave
E Chevy Chase Dr
5 210
1122 of 1291 �2021 CALIPER National Demographics Corporation, July 27, 2023 Map 105
District 1
Total Pop 33,156
Deviation from ideal 326
% Deviation 0.99%
% Hisp 23.7%
% NH White 59%
% NH Black 2%
% Asian-American 15%
Total 20,418
% Hisp 23%
% NH White 61%
% NH Black 2%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 14%
Total 17,783
% Latino est. 25%
% Spanish-Surnamed 23%
% Asian-Surnamed 3%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 67%
% NH Black 2%
Total 11,704
% Latino est. 27%
% Spanish-Surnamed 25%
% Asian-Surnamed 3%
% Filipino-Surnamed 5%
% NH White est. 64%
% NH Black 2%
Total 6,752
% Latino est. 29%
% Spanish-Surnamed 27%
% Asian-Surnamed 4%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 62%
% NH Black est. 2%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 32,969
age0-19 20%
age20-60 56%
age60plus 24%
immigrants 61%
naturalized 61%
english 22%
spanish 20%
asian-lang 10%
other lang 48%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 42%
hs-grad 47%
bachelor 25%
graduatedegree 12%
Child in Household child-under18 27%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 59%
income 0-25k 28%
income 25-50k 20%
income 50-75k 14%
income 75-200k 32%
income 200k-plus 5%
single family 20%
multi-family 80%
rented 85%
owned 15%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

2.85%
23%
53%
3%
18%
21,445
22%
58%
5%
15%
17,806
24%
22%
5%
4%
64%
4%
12,004
26%
24%
5%
4%
62%
4%
6,627
29%
27%
5%
4%
58%
3%
35,260
17%
61%
22%
57%
55%
27%
22%
11%
40%
41%
46%
27%
10%
21%
63%
27%
17%
17%
33%
6%
12%
88%
88%
12%
3 32,172
-658
-2.00%
15%
71%
2%
11%
22,048
16%
73%
2%
7%
20,146
14%
13%
4%
2%
79%
1%
14,551
14%
13%
5%
2%
78%
1%
9,118
16%
15%
5%
2%
76%
1%
32,111
21%
53%
26%
53%
72%
31%
13%
5%
51%
31%
49%
24%
15%
27%
62%
21%
17%
14%
34%
15%
56%
44%
57%
43%
4 33,795
965

2.94%
13%
66%
3%
16%
22,956
13%
67%
4%
16%
19,636
15%
14%
6%
3%
73%
4%
13,754
17%
15%
6%
3%
71%
4%
8,089
18%
17%
5%
3%
70%
3%
34,247
17%
59%
24%
54%
67%
30%
8%
11%
51%
34%
48%
29%
15%
24%
64%
20%
14%
16%
39%
11%
17%
83%
74%
26%
5 32,588
-242
-0.74%
14%
64%
2%
19%
21,428
13%
65%
4%
17%
21,196
15%
13%
8%
3%
73%
2%
15,930
15%
14%
8%
3%
72%
2%
10,466
15%
14%
8%
3%
73%
1%
31,506
21%
52%
27%
48%
67%
40%
9%
9%
42%
27%
42%
31%
17%
29%
61%
17%
12%
13%
40%
18%
49%
51%
52%
48%
6 31,502
-1,328
-4.05%
13%
61%
1%
23%
21,423
14%
66%
1%
18%
21,835
10%
10%
10%
2%
77%
1%
17,257
10%
10%
9%
2%
78%
1%
12,015
10%
10%
7%
2%
80%
1%
30,419
25%
50%
24%
38%
82%
49%
9%
15%
28%
17%
40%
31%
24%
37%
65%
13%
9%
11%
43%
24%
71%
29%
33%
67%
Total
196,980
2,293

6.98%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
08/08/2023 13:17 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1123 of 1291
6 4
5 1
3 2
Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
E Palmer Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
Sonora Ave
S Chevy Chase Dr
W Kenneth Rd
N Central Ave
Western Ave
N
Pacific Ave
N Brand Blvd
W Broadway
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St
Dunsmore Ave
E Chevy Chase Dr
5 210
1124 of 1291 �2021 CALIPER National Demographics Corporation, August 7, 2023 Map 106
District 1
Total Pop 33,642
Deviation from ideal 812
% Deviation 2.47%
% Hisp 10.4%
% NH White 74%
% NH Black 2%
% Asian-American 12%
Total 23,822
% Hisp 12%
% NH White 73%
% NH Black 3%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 11%
Total 20,712
% Latino est. 10%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 5%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 80%
% NH Black 3%
Total 14,877
% Latino est. 11%
% Spanish-Surnamed 11%
% Asian-Surnamed 5%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 79%
% NH Black 3%
Total 9,015
% Latino est. 13%
% Spanish-Surnamed 12%
% Asian-Surnamed 5%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 78%
% NH Black est. 2%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 34,665
age0-19 19%
age20-60 56%
age60plus 25%
immigrants 54%
naturalized 72%
english 32%
spanish 6%
asian-lang 7%
other lang 54%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 33%
hs-grad 48%
bachelor 29%
graduatedegree 16%
Child in Household child-under18 26%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 63%
income 0-25k 18%
income 25-50k 16%
income 50-75k 17%
income 75-200k 34%
income 200k-plus 16%
single family 39%
multi-family 61%
rented 63%
owned 37%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

1.88%
14%
64%
2%
18%
21,869
13%
66%
4%
16%
22,682
14%
13%
8%
3%
75%
1%
17,442
15%
14%
8%
3%
74%
1%
11,655
14%
14%
7%
2%
75%
1%
32,280
22%
51%
26%
45%
67%
41%
8%
9%
42%
24%
39%
34%
21%
31%
63%
12%
11%
12%
42%
23%
56%
44%
44%
56%
4 31,907
-923
-2.81%
27%
54%
2%
16%
20,041
26%
57%
2%
14%
17,442
28%
26%
4%
4%
63%
3%
11,636
30%
27%
4%
5%
60%
3%
6,817
32%
29%
4%
5%
58%
3%
32,846
19%
58%
23%
58%
57%
24%
25%
11%
41%
41%
47%
24%
11%
26%
62%
26%
20%
12%
36%
6%
19%
81%
86%
14%
5 32,640
-190
-0.58%
21%
57%
3%
17%
21,002
20%
58%
5%
15%
17,953
22%
20%
6%
3%
66%
3%
12,411
24%
22%
6%
4%
64%
3%
7,129
26%
25%
5%
4%
61%
3%
32,189
18%
60%
22%
54%
63%
31%
20%
10%
39%
34%
51%
26%
11%
24%
66%
24%
19%
15%
34%
9%
23%
77%
80%
20%
6 32,859
29 0.09%
19%
61%
3%
16%
20,406
17%
66%
3%
14%
17,119
20%
18%
4%
4%
70%
3%
11,144
22%
20%
5%
4%
68%
2%
6,210
24%
23%
5%
4%
65%
2%
32,686
17%
57%
26%
62%
61%
22%
15%
10%
54%
44%
48%
26%
10%
21%
58%
33%
16%
17%
31%
3%
10%
90%
88%
12%
Total
196,980
1,735

5.28%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
08/08/2023 13:17 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1125 of 1291
4 1
2 3
5 6
Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
E Palmer Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
Sonora Ave
W Kenneth Rd
N
Glendale
Ave
Western Ave
N
Pacific Ave
N Brand Blvd
Gra
ndview
Ave
W Broadway
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St
Dunsmore Ave
E Chevy Chase Dr
5 210
1126 of 1291 �2021 CALIPER National Demographics Corporation, August 7, 2023 Map 107
District 1
Total Pop 33,156
Deviation from ideal 326
% Deviation 0.99%
% Hisp 23.7%
% NH White 59%
% NH Black 2%
% Asian-American 15%
Total 20,418
% Hisp 23%
% NH White 61%
% NH Black 2%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 14%
Total 17,783
% Latino est. 25%
% Spanish-Surnamed 23%
% Asian-Surnamed 3%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 67%
% NH Black 2%
Total 11,704
% Latino est. 27%
% Spanish-Surnamed 25%
% Asian-Surnamed 3%
% Filipino-Surnamed 5%
% NH White est. 64%
% NH Black 2%
Total 6,752
% Latino est. 29%
% Spanish-Surnamed 27%
% Asian-Surnamed 4%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 62%
% NH Black est. 2%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 32,969
age0-19 20%
age20-60 56%
age60plus 24%
immigrants 61%
naturalized 61%
english 22%
spanish 20%
asian-lang 10%
other lang 48%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 42%
hs-grad 47%
bachelor 25%
graduatedegree 12%
Child in Household child-under18 27%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 59%
income 0-25k 28%
income 25-50k 20%
income 50-75k 14%
income 75-200k 32%
income 200k-plus 5%
single family 20%
multi-family 80%
rented 85%
owned 15%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

0.52%
15%
71%
2%
11%
22,626
16%
73%
2%
7%
20,715
14%
13%
4%
2%
79%
1%
14,967
14%
13%
5%
2%
78%
1%
9,381
16%
15%
5%
2%
76%
1%
32,888
21%
53%
26%
53%
73%
31%
13%
5%
51%
31%
49%
24%
16%
27%
62%
20%
17%
14%
34%
15%
56%
44%
56%
44%
4 32,815
-15
-0.05%
13%
66%
3%
16%
22,138
13%
65%
4%
17%
18,864
15%
14%
6%
3%
73%
4%
13,134
17%
15%
6%
3%
71%
4%
7,631
18%
16%
6%
3%
70%
4%
32,814
17%
59%
24%
54%
67%
30%
9%
11%
50%
34%
48%
30%
15%
24%
64%
21%
14%
16%
39%
11%
16%
84%
75%
25%
5 32,203
-627
-1.91%
14%
63%
2%
19%
21,098
14%
64%
4%
17%
20,663
14%
13%
8%
3%
73%
2%
15,331
15%
14%
8%
3%
72%
2%
10,065
15%
14%
8%
3%
73%
2%
30,950
21%
53%
26%
46%
67%
40%
9%
10%
41%
27%
44%
31%
16%
28%
62%
17%
12%
13%
42%
16%
44%
56%
57%
43%
6 33,083
253

0.77%
13%
62%
1%
22%
22,853
13%
68%
1%
18%
23,131
11%
10%
10%
2%
77%
1%
18,428
11%
11%
9%
2%
77%
1%
12,792
11%
11%
8%
2%
79%
1%
32,710
25%
49%
25%
41%
79%
46%
9%
14%
31%
19%
39%
31%
24%
37%
64%
12%
10%
11%
41%
26%
73%
27%
30%
70%
Total
196,980
953

2.90%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
08/08/2023 13:18 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1127 of 1291
1 2
3 4
5 6
Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
E Palmer Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
Sonora Ave
W Kenneth Rd
N
Glendale
Ave
N Central Ave
Western Ave
N
Pacific Ave
N Brand Blvd
Gra
ndview
Ave
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St
Dunsmore Ave
E Chevy Chase Dr
5 210
1128 of 1291 �2021 CALIPER National Demographics Corporation, August 7, 2023 Map 108
District 1
Total Pop 33,156
Deviation from ideal 326
% Deviation 0.99%
% Hisp 23.7%
% NH White 59%
% NH Black 2%
% Asian-American 15%
Total 20,418
% Hisp 23%
% NH White 61%
% NH Black 2%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 14%
Total 17,783
% Latino est. 25%
% Spanish-Surnamed 23%
% Asian-Surnamed 3%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 67%
% NH Black 2%
Total 11,704
% Latino est. 27%
% Spanish-Surnamed 25%
% Asian-Surnamed 3%
% Filipino-Surnamed 5%
% NH White est. 64%
% NH Black 2%
Total 6,752
% Latino est. 29%
% Spanish-Surnamed 27%
% Asian-Surnamed 4%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 62%
% NH Black est. 2%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 32,969
age0-19 20%
age20-60 56%
age60plus 24%
immigrants 61%
naturalized 61%
english 22%
spanish 20%
asian-lang 10%
other lang 48%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 42%
hs-grad 47%
bachelor 25%
graduatedegree 12%
Child in Household child-under18 27%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 59%
income 0-25k 28%
income 25-50k 20%
income 50-75k 14%
income 75-200k 32%
income 200k-plus 5%
single family 20%
multi-family 80%
rented 85%
owned 15%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

0.94%
15%
70%
2%
11%
22,901
15%
72%
3%
8%
20,199
15%
14%
4%
2%
77%
2%
14,315
16%
15%
5%
2%
75%
2%
8,695
18%
17%
5%
2%
73%
2%
33,401
20%
55%
25%
54%
72%
29%
13%
6%
52%
34%
51%
24%
13%
27%
64%
22%
18%
14%
33%
13%
46%
54%
66%
34%
4 32,448
-382
-1.16%
13%
67%
3%
16%
21,653
13%
68%
3%
15%
19,449
13%
12%
6%
2%
76%
3%
13,943
14%
13%
6%
3%
74%
3%
8,505
15%
14%
5%
3%
74%
3%
32,114
18%
56%
25%
53%
67%
35%
8%
9%
48%
30%
46%
30%
17%
24%
62%
19%
13%
15%
40%
13%
26%
74%
64%
36%
5 32,310
-520
-1.58%
15%
63%
2%
19%
20,687
13%
67%
3%
16%
20,810
15%
14%
8%
3%
73%
2%
15,525
16%
15%
8%
3%
72%
2%
10,300
15%
15%
7%
3%
73%
2%
30,547
19%
53%
28%
48%
66%
38%
9%
10%
43%
29%
45%
28%
17%
27%
60%
18%
13%
12%
41%
16%
45%
55%
57%
43%
6 32,923
93 0.28%
13%
62%
1%
22%
23,029
15%
64%
2%
19%
22,738
10%
10%
10%
2%
77%
1%
17,984
11%
10%
9%
2%
77%
1%
12,351
11%
10%
8%
2%
79%
1%
32,649
26%
49%
24%
39%
82%
47%
9%
14%
30%
17%
38%
34%
22%
38%
67%
12%
8%
13%
42%
26%
70%
30%
33%
67%
Total
196,980
846

2.58%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
08/08/2023 13:18 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1129 of 1291
4 1
2 3
5 6
Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
E Palmer Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
Sonora Ave
W Kenneth Rd
N
Glendale
Ave
N Central Ave
Western Ave
N
Pacific Ave
Gra
ndview
Ave
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St
Dunsmore Ave
E Chevy Chase Dr
5 210
1130 of 1291 �2021 CALIPER National Demographics Corporation, August 7, 2023 Map 109
District 1
Total Pop 33,156
Deviation from ideal 326
% Deviation 0.99%
% Hisp 23.7%
% NH White 59%
% NH Black 2%
% Asian-American 15%
Total 20,418
% Hisp 23%
% NH White 61%
% NH Black 2%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 14%
Total 17,783
% Latino est. 25%
% Spanish-Surnamed 23%
% Asian-Surnamed 3%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 67%
% NH Black 2%
Total 11,704
% Latino est. 27%
% Spanish-Surnamed 25%
% Asian-Surnamed 3%
% Filipino-Surnamed 5%
% NH White est. 64%
% NH Black 2%
Total 6,752
% Latino est. 29%
% Spanish-Surnamed 27%
% Asian-Surnamed 4%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 62%
% NH Black est. 2%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 32,969
age0-19 20%
age20-60 56%
age60plus 24%
immigrants 61%
naturalized 61%
english 22%
spanish 20%
asian-lang 10%
other lang 48%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 42%
hs-grad 47%
bachelor 25%
graduatedegree 12%
Child in Household child-under18 27%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 59%
income 0-25k 28%
income 25-50k 20%
income 50-75k 14%
income 75-200k 32%
income 200k-plus 5%
single family 20%
multi-family 80%
rented 85%
owned 15%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

0.53%
23%
53%
4%
18%
21,030
21%
58%
5%
15%
17,423
24%
22%
5%
4%
64%
3%
11,729
26%
24%
5%
4%
62%
3%
6,464
29%
27%
5%
4%
59%
3%
34,832
17%
61%
22%
56%
55%
27%
23%
11%
40%
41%
46%
27%
10%
21%
63%
27%
17%
16%
34%
7%
12%
88%
88%
12%
3 32,246
-584
-1.78%
16%
69%
2%
11%
21,582
16%
71%
3%
9%
19,884
15%
14%
4%
2%
77%
1%
14,162
16%
15%
5%
2%
76%
1%
8,812
17%
17%
5%
2%
74%
1%
31,889
21%
55%
25%
54%
71%
31%
13%
6%
50%
33%
50%
25%
13%
27%
64%
22%
18%
15%
32%
14%
51%
49%
63%
37%
4 32,407
-423
-1.29%
13%
66%
3%
16%
21,937
13%
67%
4%
15%
18,782
15%
14%
6%
2%
74%
4%
13,322
16%
15%
6%
3%
72%
4%
7,878
17%
16%
5%
3%
71%
3%
32,500
18%
58%
24%
54%
67%
33%
8%
10%
50%
33%
48%
29%
15%
25%
63%
19%
15%
16%
39%
11%
17%
83%
73%
27%
5 32,882
52 0.16%
14%
64%
2%
19%
21,658
14%
65%
4%
17%
21,401
14%
13%
8%
3%
74%
2%
16,074
15%
14%
8%
3%
73%
2%
10,554
15%
14%
8%
3%
73%
1%
31,700
21%
52%
27%
47%
68%
38%
10%
9%
43%
27%
42%
32%
17%
29%
61%
17%
11%
13%
40%
19%
49%
51%
51%
49%
6 33,284
454

1.38%
12%
62%
1%
22%
23,093
13%
68%
1%
18%
23,129
10%
9%
10%
2%
78%
1%
18,209
10%
10%
9%
2%
78%
1%
12,607
10%
10%
7%
2%
80%
1%
32,622
25%
49%
26%
39%
83%
47%
9%
14%
30%
16%
40%
30%
24%
35%
64%
13%
9%
11%
45%
23%
71%
29%
32%
68%
Total
196,980
1,038

3.16%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
08/08/2023 13:19 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1131 of 1291
4 1
2 3
5 6
Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
E Palmer Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
Sonora Ave
W Kenneth Rd
N
Glendale
Ave
N Central Ave
Western Ave
N
Pacific Ave
Gra
ndview
Ave
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St
Dunsmore Ave
E Chevy Chase Dr
5 210
1132 of 1291 �2021 CALIPER National Demographics Corporation, August 7, 2023 Map 110
District 1
Total Pop 33,156
Deviation from ideal 326
% Deviation 0.99%
% Hisp 23.7%
% NH White 59%
% NH Black 2%
% Asian-American 15%
Total 20,418
% Hisp 23%
% NH White 61%
% NH Black 2%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 14%
Total 17,783
% Latino est. 25%
% Spanish-Surnamed 23%
% Asian-Surnamed 3%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 67%
% NH Black 2%
Total 11,704
% Latino est. 27%
% Spanish-Surnamed 25%
% Asian-Surnamed 3%
% Filipino-Surnamed 5%
% NH White est. 64%
% NH Black 2%
Total 6,752
% Latino est. 29%
% Spanish-Surnamed 27%
% Asian-Surnamed 4%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 62%
% NH Black est. 2%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 32,969
age0-19 20%
age20-60 56%
age60plus 24%
immigrants 61%
naturalized 61%
english 22%
spanish 20%
asian-lang 10%
other lang 48%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 42%
hs-grad 47%
bachelor 25%
graduatedegree 12%
Child in Household child-under18 27%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 59%
income 0-25k 28%
income 25-50k 20%
income 50-75k 14%
income 75-200k 32%
income 200k-plus 5%
single family 20%
multi-family 80%
rented 85%
owned 15%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

1.87%
16%
69%
2%
12%
23,088
15%
71%
3%
9%
20,267
16%
15%
5%
2%
76%
2%
14,151
17%
16%
5%
2%
74%
2%
8,386
19%
18%
5%
2%
72%
2%
33,885
20%
56%
24%
55%
72%
28%
13%
6%
53%
35%
51%
24%
12%
27%
64%
22%
18%
15%
33%
11%
44%
56%
69%
31%
4 32,574
-256
-0.78%
14%
66%
3%
16%
21,286
14%
66%
3%
16%
18,697
15%
14%
5%
2%
74%
4%
13,289
16%
15%
6%
3%
72%
3%
8,049
17%
16%
5%
3%
72%
3%
32,173
18%
57%
25%
55%
64%
34%
8%
10%
49%
34%
49%
28%
15%
24%
62%
21%
15%
16%
38%
10%
17%
83%
73%
27%
5 32,326
-504
-1.54%
14%
64%
2%
18%
21,298
13%
64%
4%
18%
21,741
14%
13%
8%
3%
74%
2%
16,581
15%
14%
8%
3%
74%
2%
11,031
15%
14%
8%
3%
74%
1%
30,788
21%
53%
26%
44%
70%
41%
9%
9%
40%
24%
41%
33%
18%
29%
64%
14%
10%
12%
41%
23%
56%
44%
46%
54%
6 32,475
-355
-1.08%
12%
62%
1%
22%
22,598
13%
69%
1%
16%
22,491
10%
9%
10%
2%
78%
1%
17,746
10%
10%
9%
2%
78%
1%
12,385
10%
9%
7%
2%
80%
1%
31,865
25%
48%
27%
39%
82%
46%
9%
14%
30%
17%
38%
31%
25%
35%
63%
12%
9%
11%
45%
23%
73%
27%
30%
70%
Total
196,980
1,118

3.41%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
08/08/2023 13:19 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1133 of 1291
5 4
3 2
1 Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
E Palmer Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
Sonora Ave
S Chevy Chase Dr
W Kenneth Rd
N Central Ave
Western Ave
N
Pacific Ave
N Brand Blvd
Gra
ndview
Ave
W Broadway
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St
Dunsmore Ave
E Chevy Chase Dr
5 210
1134 of 1291 �2021 CALIPER National Demographics Corporation, August 7, 2023 Map 111
District 1
Total Pop 28,193
Deviation from ideal -11,203
% Deviation -28.44%
% Hisp 10.3%
% NH White 75%
% NH Black 1%
% Asian-American 12%
Total 20,257
% Hisp 11%
% NH White 76%
% NH Black 2%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 10%
Total 19,988
% Latino est. 9%
% Spanish-Surnamed 8%
% Asian-Surnamed 5%
% Filipino-Surnamed 1%
% NH White est. 83%
% NH Black 1%
Total 15,615
% Latino est. 9%
% Spanish-Surnamed 9%
% Asian-Surnamed 5%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 83%
% NH Black 1%
Total 10,608
% Latino est. 10%
% Spanish-Surnamed 9%
% Asian-Surnamed 5%
% Filipino-Surnamed 1%
% NH White est. 82%
% NH Black est. 1%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 27,183
age0-19 21%
age20-60 49%
age60plus 30%
immigrants 43%
naturalized 82%
english 44%
spanish 6%
asian-lang 5%
other lang 46%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 18%
hs-grad 40%
bachelor 32%
graduatedegree 23%
Child in Household child-under18 29%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 61%
income 0-25k 11%
income 25-50k 9%
income 50-75k 12%
income 75-200k 39%
income 200k-plus 29%
single family 75%
multi-family 25%
rented 27%
owned 73%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

17.14%
20%
62%
2%
14%
30,297
20%
62%
4%
12%
25,960
21%
19%
5%
3%
69%
3%
17,543
22%
21%
5%
3%
67%
2%
9,997
26%
24%
5%
3%
63%
2%
47,980
20%
58%
23%
56%
64%
25%
20%
9%
45%
39%
50%
24%
10%
26%
63%
25%
19%
16%
33%
8%
29%
71%
81%
19%
4 43,638
4,242

10.77%
15%
63%
3%
17%
27,754
15%
64%
4%
17%
24,492
16%
15%
6%
3%
72%
4%
17,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
70%
3%
10,052
19%
17%
5%
3%
69%
3%
42,863
17%
58%
25%
56%
61%
31%
9%
10%
51%
36%
49%
28%
15%
22%
62%
24%
15%
15%
37%
8%
13%
87%
78%
22%
5 43,220
3,824

9.71%
24%
57%
2%
16%
26,660
22%
61%
3%
14%
22,939
26%
24%
4%
4%
65%
3%
15,231
28%
25%
4%
5%
63%
3%
8,673
29%
27%
4%
5%
60%
3%
43,317
19%
58%
23%
61%
59%
23%
20%
11%
46%
42%
47%
25%
11%
26%
60%
28%
19%
14%
35%
5%
17%
83%
87%
13%
Total
196,980
17,954

45.57%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
08/08/2023 13:19 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1135 of 1291
3 4
6 5
2 7
1 Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
E Palmer Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
Sonora Ave
S Chevy Chase Dr
W Kenneth Rd
Western Ave
N Brand Blvd
Gra
ndview
Ave
W Broadway
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St
E Chevy Chase Dr
5 210
1136 of 1291 �2021 CALIPER National Demographics Corporation, August 7, 2023 Map 112
District 1
Total Pop 23,028
Deviation from ideal -5,112
% Deviation -18.17%
% Hisp 10.3%
% NH White 76%
% NH Black 1%
% Asian-American 11%
Total 16,438
% Hisp 13%
% NH White 75%
% NH Black 2%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 10%
Total 16,675
% Latino est. 8%
% Spanish-Surnamed 8%
% Asian-Surnamed 5%
% Filipino-Surnamed 1%
% NH White est. 85%
% NH Black 1%
Total 13,208
% Latino est. 9%
% Spanish-Surnamed 8%
% Asian-Surnamed 5%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 84%
% NH Black 0%
Total 9,082
% Latino est. 9%
% Spanish-Surnamed 9%
% Asian-Surnamed 5%
% Filipino-Surnamed 1%
% NH White est. 84%
% NH Black est. 0%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 22,249
age0-19 24%
age20-60 48%
age60plus 28%
immigrants 39%
naturalized 84%
english 46%
spanish 7%
asian-lang 5%
other lang 43%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 13%
hs-grad 38%
bachelor 34%
graduatedegree 25%
Child in Household child-under18 31%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 63%
income 0-25k 9%
income 25-50k 8%
income 50-75k 12%
income 75-200k 41%
income 200k-plus 30%
single family 83%
multi-family 17%
rented 23%
owned 77%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

Latino voter registration and turnout data are Spanish-surname counts adjusted using Census Population Department undercount estimates. NH White and NH Black registration and turnout counts estimated by NDC. Citizen Voting Age Pop., Age, Immigration, and other demographics from the 2015-2019 American Community Survey and Special Tabulation 5-year data. 2 24,304
-3,836
-13.63%
14%
57%
1%
26%
16,873
14%
65%
1%
19%
16,469
11%
10%
11%
2%
75%
1%
12,972
11%
11%
10%
2%
76%
1%
9,032
11%
10%
8%
2%
78%
1%
24,386
26%
50%
23%
38%
81%
49%
9%
18%
24%
18%
39%
31%
23%
39%
66%
13%
10%
12%
43%
21%
66%
34%
38%
62%
3 25,475
-2,665
-9.47%
11%
72%
2%
13%
18,161
13%
70%
4%
13%
15,077
11%
10%
5%
2%
78%
4%
10,501
12%
12%
5%
2%
77%
3%
6,032
14%
13%
6%
2%
75%
3%
25,995
18%
57%
25%
59%
72%
28%
7%
8%
57%
38%
49%
27%
14%
25%
61%
21%
17%
17%
34%
11%
29%
71%
72%
28%
4 33,339
5,199

18.48%
20%
57%
3%
17%
20,859
21%
61%
4%
14%
17,416
23%
21%
5%
4%
66%
3%
11,483
25%
23%
5%
4%
64%
3%
6,484
28%
26%
5%
4%
60%
3%
33,861
17%
58%
25%
58%
59%
24%
19%
10%
48%
43%
48%
25%
10%
20%
59%
31%
16%
16%
33%
5%
12%
88%
88%
12%
5 35,033
6,893

24.50%
19%
61%
3%
16%
21,654
17%
63%
4%
14%
19,505
21%
19%
5%
3%
69%
3%
13,440
22%
21%
6%
4%
66%
3%
7,780
25%
23%
5%
4%
64%
3%
33,608
18%
58%
23%
58%
64%
29%
17%
10%
45%
36%
50%
25%
12%
25%
65%
23%
17%
14%
37%
9%
21%
79%
77%
23%
6 33,534
5,394

19.17%
26%
56%
2%
15%
21,158
23%
60%
2%
14%
17,921
26%
24%
4%
4%
65%
3%
11,889
28%
26%
4%
5%
63%
3%
6,808
29%
27%
4%
4%
60%
3%
34,148
19%
57%
23%
61%
59%
23%
21%
11%
45%
41%
48%
25%
11%
26%
61%
27%
20%
14%
34%
5%
18%
82%
86%
14%
7 22,267
-5,873
-20.87%
15%
62%
2%
20%
14,575
14%
64%
3%
18%
15,339
15%
14%
9%
3%
73%
1%
11,707
16%
14%
9%
3%
72%
1%
7,849
15%
14%
8%
3%
73%
1%
22,265
21%
53%
25%
40%
60%
43%
10%
9%
38%
25%
42%
32%
19%
29%
63%
14%
13%
11%
41%
21%
56%
44%
47%
53%
Total
196,980
12,766

45.37%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
08/08/2023 13:20 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1137 of 1291
4 1
2 3
5 6
Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
E Palmer Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
Sonora Ave
W Kenneth Rd
N
Glendale
Ave
Western Ave
N
Pacific Ave
N Brand Blvd
Gra
ndview
Ave
W Broadway
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St
Dunsmore Ave
E Chevy Chase Dr
5 210
1138 of 1291 �2021 CALIPER National Demographics Corporation, August 7, 2023 Map 113
District 1
Total Pop 33,156
Deviation from ideal 326
% Deviation 0.99%
% Hisp 23.7%
% NH White 59%
% NH Black 2%
% Asian-American 15%
Total 20,418
% Hisp 23%
% NH White 61%
% NH Black 2%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 14%
Total 17,783
% Latino est. 25%
% Spanish-Surnamed 23%
% Asian-Surnamed 3%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 67%
% NH Black 2%
Total 11,704
% Latino est. 27%
% Spanish-Surnamed 25%
% Asian-Surnamed 3%
% Filipino-Surnamed 5%
% NH White est. 64%
% NH Black 2%
Total 6,752
% Latino est. 29%
% Spanish-Surnamed 27%
% Asian-Surnamed 4%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 62%
% NH Black est. 2%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 32,969
age0-19 20%
age20-60 56%
age60plus 24%
immigrants 61%
naturalized 61%
english 22%
spanish 20%
asian-lang 10%
other lang 48%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 42%
hs-grad 47%
bachelor 25%
graduatedegree 12%
Child in Household child-under18 27%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 59%
income 0-25k 28%
income 25-50k 20%
income 50-75k 14%
income 75-200k 32%
income 200k-plus 5%
single family 20%
multi-family 80%
rented 85%
owned 15%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

2.90%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
08/08/2023 13:20 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1139 of 1291
2 1
4 3
5 6
Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
E Palmer Ave
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
Sonora Ave
W Kenneth Rd
N Central Ave
Western Ave
N
Pacific Ave
N Brand Blvd
W Broadway
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St
Dunsmore Ave
E Chevy Chase Dr
5 210
1140 of 1291 �2021 CALIPER National Demographics Corporation, August 7, 2023 Map 114
District 1
Total Pop 32,850
Deviation from ideal 20
% Deviation 0.06%
% Hisp 23.0%
% NH White 52%
% NH Black 4%
% Asian-American 19%
Total 20,193
% Hisp 22%
% NH White 57%
% NH Black 5%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 15%
Total 16,776
% Latino est. 25%
% Spanish-Surnamed 23%
% Asian-Surnamed 6%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 63%
% NH Black 4%
Total 11,309
% Latino est. 26%
% Spanish-Surnamed 24%
% Asian-Surnamed 6%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 61%
% NH Black 4%
Total 6,177
% Latino est. 30%
% Spanish-Surnamed 28%
% Asian-Surnamed 5%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 58%
% NH Black est. 3%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 33,827
age0-19 18%
age20-60 62%
age60plus 19%
immigrants 55%
naturalized 55%
english 28%
spanish 23%
asian-lang 10%
other lang 39%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 39%
hs-grad 48%
bachelor 26%
graduatedegree 10%
Child in Household child-under18 24%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 64%
income 0-25k 23%
income 25-50k 17%
income 50-75k 16%
income 75-200k 37%
income 200k-plus 7%
single family 14%
multi-family 86%
rented 88%
owned 12%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

1.38%
23%
59%
2%
15%
20,658
23%
61%
2%
13%
17,959
24%
22%
4%
4%
67%
2%
11,811
26%
24%
4%
5%
65%
2%
6,743
28%
26%
4%
4%
62%
2%
33,369
19%
55%
26%
62%
61%
22%
20%
11%
47%
43%
45%
26%
12%
25%
59%
31%
20%
14%
31%
5%
19%
81%
86%
14%
3 32,583
-247
-0.75%
14%
73%
1%
11%
22,611
14%
74%
3%
9%
19,785
13%
12%
4%
2%
80%
2%
14,060
14%
13%
5%
2%
79%
2%
8,554
15%
15%
5%
2%
77%
1%
33,052
21%
55%
25%
54%
73%
30%
11%
5%
54%
33%
49%
24%
15%
28%
63%
19%
18%
16%
32%
15%
44%
56%
63%
37%
4 32,685
-145
-0.44%
18%
61%
2%
17%
20,794
15%
65%
3%
16%
18,482
20%
19%
5%
4%
68%
3%
12,643
22%
21%
5%
4%
65%
3%
7,532
24%
22%
5%
4%
64%
3%
31,316
15%
58%
27%
62%
64%
26%
12%
11%
52%
40%
50%
26%
11%
22%
61%
27%
15%
15%
36%
7%
15%
85%
77%
23%
5 33,094
264

0.80%
13%
67%
2%
17%
22,884
14%
64%
5%
17%
22,906
12%
11%
8%
2%
76%
2%
17,687
13%
12%
8%
2%
76%
2%
11,820
13%
12%
8%
2%
76%
2%
33,102
22%
53%
25%
42%
68%
45%
8%
8%
39%
22%
40%
34%
21%
28%
64%
13%
12%
12%
40%
23%
56%
44%
47%
53%
6 32,484
-346
-1.05%
12%
62%
1%
22%
22,578
14%
68%
1%
17%
22,494
10%
9%
10%
2%
78%
1%
17,690
10%
10%
9%
2%
78%
1%
12,241
10%
10%
7%
2%
80%
1%
31,846
25%
49%
26%
39%
83%
48%
9%
14%
29%
17%
40%
30%
24%
35%
63%
13%
9%
11%
46%
22%
71%
29%
33%
67%
Total
196,980
800

2.44%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
08/08/2023 13:21 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1141 of 1291
3 2
6 5
1 4
Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
E Palmer Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
Sonora Ave
S Chevy Chase Dr
W Kenneth Rd
N
Glendale
Ave
N Central Ave
Western Ave
N
Pacific Ave
N Brand Blvd
Gra
ndview
Ave
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St
Dunsmore Ave
E Chevy Chase Dr
5 210
1142 of 1291 �2021 CALIPER National Demographics Corporation, August 7, 2023 Map 115
District 1
Total Pop 32,474
Deviation from ideal -356
% Deviation -1.08%
% Hisp 17.8%
% NH White 59%
% NH Black 2%
% Asian-American 20%
Total 20,791
% Hisp 16%
% NH White 61%
% NH Black 3%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 19%
Total 20,905
% Latino est. 19%
% Spanish-Surnamed 17%
% Asian-Surnamed 8%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 68%
% NH Black 3%
Total 15,416
% Latino est. 20%
% Spanish-Surnamed 18%
% Asian-Surnamed 8%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 68%
% NH Black 2%
Total 10,136
% Latino est. 19%
% Spanish-Surnamed 18%
% Asian-Surnamed 7%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 68%
% NH Black est. 2%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 31,468
age0-19 20%
age20-60 54%
age60plus 26%
immigrants 48%
naturalized 64%
english 35%
spanish 14%
asian-lang 12%
other lang 39%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 30%
hs-grad 41%
bachelor 31%
graduatedegree 17%
Child in Household child-under18 28%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 63%
income 0-25k 19%
income 25-50k 13%
income 50-75k 11%
income 75-200k 41%
income 200k-plus 16%
single family 44%
multi-family 56%
rented 58%
owned 42%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

0.87%
23%
53%
4%
19%
20,548
21%
57%
5%
16%
16,979
25%
22%
6%
4%
63%
4%
11,472
26%
24%
6%
4%
61%
4%
6,235
30%
28%
5%
5%
58%
3%
33,952
18%
62%
20%
55%
55%
27%
22%
11%
39%
38%
47%
27%
10%
23%
64%
23%
16%
16%
37%
7%
15%
85%
87%
13%
3 31,439
-1,391
-4.24%
22%
61%
2%
14%
18,350
22%
64%
2%
12%
15,961
23%
21%
3%
4%
69%
2%
10,128
25%
23%
4%
4%
66%
2%
5,412
28%
26%
4%
4%
63%
2%
30,247
18%
56%
26%
68%
60%
21%
17%
8%
54%
47%
50%
22%
10%
23%
57%
34%
20%
15%
28%
3%
12%
88%
91%
9%
4 34,393
1,563

4.76%
12%
63%
1%
22%
23,973
14%
68%
1%
17%
23,963
10%
9%
10%
2%
78%
1%
18,878
10%
10%
9%
2%
78%
1%
13,064
10%
9%
7%
2%
80%
1%
33,708
25%
50%
26%
38%
83%
47%
9%
14%
31%
16%
39%
31%
24%
35%
64%
13%
8%
10%
45%
24%
72%
28%
31%
69%
5 31,591
-1,239
-3.77%
13%
68%
2%
14%
22,577
13%
66%
5%
15%
19,826
13%
12%
5%
2%
77%
3%
14,575
14%
13%
6%
2%
75%
3%
9,262
15%
14%
5%
2%
75%
2%
32,959
19%
55%
26%
50%
67%
37%
7%
9%
47%
30%
44%
32%
17%
25%
63%
17%
15%
17%
37%
14%
25%
75%
64%
36%
6 33,967
1,137

3.46%
15%
70%
2%
11%
23,479
15%
72%
3%
8%
20,768
15%
14%
5%
2%
77%
2%
14,731
16%
15%
5%
2%
75%
2%
8,958
18%
17%
5%
2%
73%
2%
34,178
20%
55%
25%
54%
73%
29%
13%
6%
52%
33%
51%
24%
14%
28%
64%
21%
18%
15%
33%
13%
47%
53%
65%
35%
Total
196,980
2,954

9.00%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
08/08/2023 13:21 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1143 of 1291
1 Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
E Palmer Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
Sonora Ave
S Chevy Chase Dr
W Kenneth Rd
N
Glendale
Ave
N Central Ave
Western Ave
N
Pacific Ave
N Brand Blvd
Gra
ndview
Ave
W Broadway
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St
Dunsmore Ave
E Chevy Chase Dr
5 210
1144 of 1291 �2021 CALIPER National Demographics Corporation, August 7, 2023 Map 116
District 1
Total Pop 33,318
Deviation from ideal 488
% Deviation 1.49%
% Hisp 12.0%
% NH White 60%
% NH Black 1%
% Asian-American 25%
Total 22,173
% Hisp 13%
% NH White 66%
% NH Black 1%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 20%
Total 23,267
% Latino est. 10%
% Spanish-Surnamed 9%
% Asian-Surnamed 12%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 76%
% NH Black 1%
Total 18,346
% Latino est. 10%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 11%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 76%
% NH Black 1%
Total 12,677
% Latino est. 10%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 9%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 78%
% NH Black est. 1%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 31,448
age0-19 25%
age20-60 49%
age60plus 26%
immigrants 39%
naturalized 80%
english 47%
spanish 8%
asian-lang 16%
other lang 28%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 19%
hs-grad 38%
bachelor 32%
graduatedegree 24%
Child in Household child-under18 35%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 64%
income 0-25k 13%
income 25-50k 9%
income 50-75k 11%
income 75-200k 42%
income 200k-plus 24%
single family 74%
multi-family 26%
rented 30%
owned 70%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

Total
33,318
488

1.49%
12%
60%
1%
25%
22,173
13%
66%
1%
20%
23,267
10%
9%
12%
2%
76%
1%
18,346
10%
10%
11%
2%
76%
1%
12,677
10%
10%
9%
2%
78%
1%
31,448
25%
49%
26%
39%
80%
47%
8%
16%
28%
19%
38%
32%
24%
35%
64%
13%
9%
11%
42%
24%
74%
26%
30%
70%
08/08/2023 13:23 Page 1 of 2
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1145 of 1291
3 4
2 5
1 6
Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
E Palmer Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
Sonora Ave
S Chevy Chase Dr
W Kenneth Rd
N
Glendale
Ave
N Central Ave
Western Ave
N
Pacific Ave
N Brand Blvd
Gra
ndview
Ave
W Broadway
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St
Dunsmore Ave
E Chevy Chase Dr
5 210
1146 of 1291 �2021 CALIPER National Demographics Corporation, August 7, 2023 Map 117
District 1
Total Pop 32,769
Deviation from ideal -61
% Deviation -0.19%
% Hisp 11.5%
% NH White 71%
% NH Black 2%
% Asian-American 14%
Total 23,985
% Hisp 13%
% NH White 70%
% NH Black 4%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 12%
Total 21,105
% Latino est. 11%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 6%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 79%
% NH Black 3%
Total 15,779
% Latino est. 12%
% Spanish-Surnamed 11%
% Asian-Surnamed 6%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 78%
% NH Black 2%
Total 10,114
% Latino est. 13%
% Spanish-Surnamed 12%
% Asian-Surnamed 6%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 78%
% NH Black est. 2%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 34,220
age0-19 20%
age20-60 54%
age60plus 26%
immigrants 48%
naturalized 72%
english 38%
spanish 7%
asian-lang 8%
other lang 47%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 26%
hs-grad 41%
bachelor 34%
graduatedegree 19%
Child in Household child-under18 27%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 62%
income 0-25k 15%
income 25-50k 12%
income 50-75k 15%
income 75-200k 40%
income 200k-plus 18%
single family 40%
multi-family 60%
rented 54%
owned 46%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

0.44%
16%
61%
3%
18%
20,250
13%
68%
4%
14%
17,503
18%
16%
5%
3%
71%
3%
11,839
20%
18%
6%
3%
68%
3%
6,598
21%
20%
6%
3%
67%
3%
31,473
16%
59%
25%
62%
62%
26%
10%
9%
54%
42%
48%
26%
14%
21%
61%
29%
14%
16%
34%
7%
7%
93%
85%
15%
4 32,649
-181
-0.55%
28%
53%
3%
15%
20,323
27%
55%
3%
14%
16,576
29%
26%
4%
4%
62%
3%
10,852
31%
28%
4%
5%
59%
3%
6,096
35%
32%
4%
4%
55%
3%
34,463
19%
59%
22%
58%
56%
24%
28%
10%
38%
42%
49%
23%
8%
25%
61%
27%
20%
14%
33%
5%
17%
83%
89%
11%
5 33,389
559

1.70%
18%
58%
2%
20%
21,572
17%
61%
3%
18%
20,733
20%
18%
7%
4%
68%
2%
14,925
21%
19%
7%
4%
67%
2%
9,421
20%
19%
7%
4%
68%
2%
33,319
20%
55%
25%
50%
62%
32%
14%
11%
42%
32%
41%
30%
16%
28%
61%
19%
16%
12%
40%
13%
39%
61%
65%
35%
6 32,438
-392
-1.19%
13%
61%
1%
23%
21,808
13%
66%
1%
19%
22,508
10%
9%
10%
2%
77%
1%
17,763
10%
10%
10%
2%
77%
1%
12,368
10%
10%
8%
2%
79%
1%
30,923
25%
50%
25%
38%
82%
49%
8%
15%
27%
17%
40%
31%
23%
36%
65%
13%
9%
11%
43%
24%
71%
29%
33%
67%
Total
196,980
951

2.90%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
08/08/2023 13:23 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1147 of 1291
4 5
6 3
2 1
Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
E Palmer Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
Sonora Ave
S Chevy Chase Dr
W Kenneth Rd
N
Glendale
Ave
N Central Ave
Western Ave
N
Pacific Ave
N Brand Blvd
Gra
ndview
Ave
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St
Dunsmore Ave
E Chevy Chase Dr
5 210
1148 of 1291 �2021 CALIPER National Demographics Corporation, August 7, 2023 Map 118
District 1
Total Pop 32,688
Deviation from ideal -142
% Deviation -0.43%
% Hisp 12.9%
% NH White 61%
% NH Black 1%
% Asian-American 23%
Total 22,713
% Hisp 14%
% NH White 65%
% NH Black 2%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 18%
Total 22,380
% Latino est. 10%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 10%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 76%
% NH Black 1%
Total 17,598
% Latino est. 11%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 10%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 77%
% NH Black 1%
Total 12,148
% Latino est. 10%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 8%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 79%
% NH Black est. 1%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 31,939
age0-19 26%
age20-60 50%
age60plus 24%
immigrants 37%
naturalized 82%
english 49%
spanish 9%
asian-lang 15%
other lang 27%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 17%
hs-grad 40%
bachelor 32%
graduatedegree 22%
Child in Household child-under18 36%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 66%
income 0-25k 13%
income 25-50k 9%
income 50-75k 13%
income 75-200k 44%
income 200k-plus 21%
single family 65%
multi-family 35%
rented 39%
owned 61%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

1.25%
18%
58%
2%
20%
21,172
17%
61%
3%
18%
21,079
20%
18%
7%
4%
68%
2%
15,385
20%
19%
7%
4%
67%
2%
9,958
20%
19%
7%
4%
68%
2%
31,893
19%
54%
27%
50%
64%
33%
15%
12%
40%
31%
41%
30%
17%
27%
61%
19%
14%
11%
41%
15%
43%
57%
61%
39%
4 32,505
-325
-0.99%
22%
62%
2%
13%
20,689
19%
65%
2%
13%
16,858
21%
20%
4%
3%
70%
3%
10,800
24%
22%
4%
4%
67%
2%
5,950
25%
24%
4%
4%
65%
2%
33,239
18%
58%
25%
64%
61%
21%
16%
8%
55%
44%
50%
24%
10%
23%
59%
33%
19%
15%
29%
4%
10%
90%
88%
12%
5 32,995
165

0.50%
22%
53%
4%
19%
20,233
21%
56%
5%
17%
16,966
24%
22%
6%
4%
64%
3%
11,475
26%
24%
6%
5%
61%
3%
6,289
29%
27%
5%
5%
58%
3%
33,300
18%
62%
20%
55%
55%
29%
23%
11%
37%
38%
47%
27%
10%
23%
64%
23%
16%
17%
36%
7%
15%
85%
86%
14%
6 33,077
247

0.75%
16%
68%
2%
12%
22,560
16%
68%
3%
11%
19,626
16%
15%
5%
2%
74%
3%
13,619
17%
16%
5%
2%
72%
2%
7,991
20%
19%
5%
2%
70%
2%
33,146
19%
57%
24%
57%
70%
27%
13%
8%
52%
37%
52%
24%
11%
26%
63%
24%
18%
15%
33%
9%
36%
64%
74%
26%
Total
196,980
765

2.33%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
08/08/2023 13:24 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1149 of 1291
1 Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
E Palmer Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
S Chevy Chase Dr
W Kenneth Rd
N
Glendale
Ave
N Central Ave
Western Ave
N
Pacific Ave
N Brand Blvd
Gra
ndview
Ave
W Broadway
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St
Dunsmore Ave
E Chevy Chase Dr
210
5 1150 of 1291 �2021 CALIPER National Demographics Corporation, August 7, 2023 Map 119
District 1
Total Pop 33,027
Deviation from ideal 197
% Deviation 0.60%
% Hisp 26.4%
% NH White 52%
% NH Black 3%
% Asian-American 16%
Total 21,672
% Hisp 24%
% NH White 56%
% NH Black 4%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 14%
Total 18,387
% Latino est. 27%
% Spanish-Surnamed 25%
% Asian-Surnamed 5%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 62%
% NH Black 4%
Total 12,543
% Latino est. 28%
% Spanish-Surnamed 26%
% Asian-Surnamed 5%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 60%
% NH Black 4%
Total 7,340
% Latino est. 31%
% Spanish-Surnamed 29%
% Asian-Surnamed 5%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 56%
% NH Black est. 3%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 34,770
age0-19 19%
age20-60 60%
age60plus 21%
immigrants 54%
naturalized 57%
english 28%
spanish 25%
asian-lang 10%
other lang 36%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 37%
hs-grad 49%
bachelor 26%
graduatedegree 8%
Child in Household child-under18 24%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 64%
income 0-25k 24%
income 25-50k 18%
income 50-75k 15%
income 75-200k 36%
income 200k-plus 7%
single family 26%
multi-family 74%
rented 83%
owned 17%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

Total
33,027
197

0.60%
26%
52%
3%
16%
21,672
24%
56%
4%
14%
18,387
27%
25%
5%
4%
62%
4%
12,543
28%
26%
5%
4%
60%
4%
7,340
31%
29%
5%
4%
56%
3%
34,770
19%
60%
21%
54%
57%
28%
25%
10%
36%
37%
49%
26%
8%
24%
64%
24%
18%
15%
36%
7%
26%
74%
83%
17%
08/08/2023 13:24 Page 1 of 2
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1151 of 1291
5 3
2 6
4 1
Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
La Crescenta Ave
E Palmer Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
S Chevy Chase Dr
W Kenneth Rd
N
Glendale
Ave
N Central Ave
Western Ave
N
Pacific Ave
N Brand Blvd
Gra
ndview
Ave
W Broadway
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St
Dunsmore Ave
E Chevy Chase Dr
5 210
1152 of 1291 �2021 CALIPER National Demographics Corporation, August 7, 2023 Map 120
District 1
Total Pop 33,056
Deviation from ideal 226
% Deviation 0.69%
% Hisp 12.0%
% NH White 60%
% NH Black 1%
% Asian-American 25%
Total 22,049
% Hisp 13%
% NH White 66%
% NH Black 1%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 20%
Total 23,071
% Latino est. 10%
% Spanish-Surnamed 9%
% Asian-Surnamed 12%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 76%
% NH Black 1%
Total 18,184
% Latino est. 10%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 11%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 76%
% NH Black 1%
Total 12,563
% Latino est. 10%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 9%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 78%
% NH Black est. 1%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 31,261
age0-19 25%
age20-60 49%
age60plus 26%
immigrants 39%
naturalized 80%
english 47%
spanish 8%
asian-lang 16%
other lang 28%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 19%
hs-grad 38%
bachelor 32%
graduatedegree 24%
Child in Household child-under18 35%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 64%
income 0-25k 13%
income 25-50k 9%
income 50-75k 11%
income 75-200k 42%
income 200k-plus 24%
single family 73%
multi-family 27%
rented 30%
owned 70%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

3.50%
24%
56%
2%
17%
21,218
22%
59%
3%
15%
19,224
25%
23%
5%
5%
66%
2%
13,235
26%
24%
5%
5%
64%
2%
8,194
26%
24%
5%
5%
63%
2%
33,409
20%
55%
25%
56%
63%
27%
21%
12%
40%
36%
47%
25%
14%
28%
61%
24%
19%
12%
36%
8%
26%
74%
77%
23%
3 33,177
347

1.06%
26%
54%
3%
15%
21,284
25%
56%
4%
13%
18,297
27%
25%
4%
4%
62%
4%
12,385
28%
26%
5%
4%
60%
4%
7,173
31%
29%
4%
4%
57%
3%
34,858
19%
59%
22%
54%
58%
26%
27%
10%
37%
39%
50%
24%
7%
25%
64%
25%
19%
14%
35%
6%
26%
74%
85%
15%
4 33,123
293

0.89%
10%
74%
2%
12%
23,738
12%
74%
3%
11%
20,457
10%
9%
5%
2%
81%
3%
14,694
11%
10%
5%
2%
80%
3%
8,968
12%
12%
5%
2%
79%
2%
33,711
19%
55%
26%
54%
74%
31%
7%
7%
55%
32%
46%
28%
17%
26%
61%
18%
15%
16%
35%
16%
43%
57%
59%
41%
5 30,917
-1,913
-5.83%
17%
61%
3%
18%
19,014
16%
65%
4%
15%
15,955
19%
17%
5%
3%
71%
3%
10,651
20%
19%
6%
4%
68%
3%
5,712
22%
21%
6%
4%
65%
2%
30,107
16%
60%
23%
60%
61%
27%
12%
9%
52%
41%
47%
27%
13%
21%
61%
30%
16%
16%
32%
5%
9%
91%
87%
13%
6 32,729
-101
-0.31%
14%
69%
2%
14%
22,416
13%
69%
3%
14%
21,398
13%
12%
5%
2%
78%
2%
16,051
14%
13%
5%
2%
77%
2%
10,457
15%
14%
5%
2%
77%
2%
33,166
21%
54%
25%
48%
67%
39%
7%
7%
47%
25%
44%
32%
18%
29%
63%
16%
10%
15%
40%
19%
41%
59%
55%
45%
Total
196,980
3,061

9.32%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
08/08/2023 13:24 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1153 of 1291
5 3
4 6
2 1
Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
E Palmer Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
Sonora Ave
S Chevy Chase Dr
W Kenneth Rd
N
Glendale
Ave
N Central Ave
Western Ave
N
Pacific Ave
N Brand Blvd
Gra
ndview
Ave
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St
Dunsmore Ave
E Chevy Chase Dr
5 210
1154 of 1291 �2021 CALIPER National Demographics Corporation, August 7, 2023 Map 121
District 1
Total Pop 32,962
Deviation from ideal 132
% Deviation 0.40%
% Hisp 12.9%
% NH White 61%
% NH Black 1%
% Asian-American 22%
Total 22,764
% Hisp 14%
% NH White 66%
% NH Black 2%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 18%
Total 22,788
% Latino est. 10%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 10%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 77%
% NH Black 1%
Total 17,985
% Latino est. 10%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 9%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 78%
% NH Black 1%
Total 12,447
% Latino est. 10%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 7%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 80%
% NH Black est. 1%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 32,070
age0-19 26%
age20-60 50%
age60plus 24%
immigrants 37%
naturalized 83%
english 49%
spanish 9%
asian-lang 14%
other lang 28%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 16%
hs-grad 39%
bachelor 32%
graduatedegree 23%
Child in Household child-under18 37%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 66%
income 0-25k 12%
income 25-50k 9%
income 50-75k 12%
income 75-200k 43%
income 200k-plus 24%
single family 68%
multi-family 32%
rented 36%
owned 64%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

2.89%
23%
53%
4%
19%
20,931
21%
57%
5%
16%
17,237
25%
23%
5%
4%
63%
4%
11,598
26%
24%
6%
4%
61%
4%
6,315
30%
28%
5%
4%
58%
3%
34,643
18%
62%
20%
55%
55%
28%
23%
11%
39%
39%
47%
27%
10%
24%
64%
24%
16%
17%
36%
7%
15%
85%
88%
12%
4 33,141
311

0.95%
15%
70%
2%
11%
22,649
15%
72%
3%
8%
20,273
15%
14%
5%
2%
77%
2%
14,399
16%
15%
5%
2%
76%
2%
8,754
17%
16%
5%
2%
74%
2%
33,178
21%
55%
24%
54%
72%
30%
13%
5%
52%
33%
51%
24%
14%
28%
64%
21%
18%
15%
33%
13%
47%
53%
65%
35%
5 31,720
-1,110
-3.38%
24%
58%
2%
15%
19,678
23%
60%
2%
14%
17,267
24%
22%
4%
4%
67%
2%
11,408
26%
24%
4%
5%
65%
2%
6,586
27%
25%
4%
5%
63%
2%
31,766
19%
56%
25%
61%
61%
22%
20%
11%
47%
42%
47%
25%
12%
25%
60%
30%
20%
13%
31%
5%
18%
82%
85%
15%
6 33,482
652

1.99%
13%
69%
2%
14%
24,034
13%
68%
3%
14%
21,213
13%
12%
5%
2%
77%
3%
15,586
14%
13%
6%
2%
76%
3%
9,948
15%
14%
5%
2%
75%
3%
34,657
18%
54%
28%
52%
68%
35%
7%
9%
49%
30%
45%
30%
18%
23%
61%
18%
13%
15%
39%
15%
32%
68%
59%
41%
Total
196,980
2,059

6.27%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
08/08/2023 13:25 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1155 of 1291
2 1
3 4
5 6
Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
Sonora Ave
S
C
h
e
v
y
C
h
ase
Dr
W Kenneth Rd
N
C
e
ntral A
v
e
Western Ave
N
Bra
n
d
Blv
d
Gra
ndview
Ave
W Broadway
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St
D
u
nsm
ore
A
v
e
5 210
Glendale Districting
National Demographics Corporation, August 16, 2023
Proposed Election Sequence:
2026, four-year term: Districts 6 (Brotman &
Najarian) and any two of 1 (vacant), 2 (vacant)
or 5 (vacant)
2026: two-year term: District 4 (Asatryan & Devine)
2028: Districts 3 (Kassakhian), District 4 (Asatryan
& Devine) and any one of 1 (vacant), 2 (vacant) or
5 (vacant)
©2021 CALIPER
1156 of 1291
Map 122
District 1
Total Pop 32,340
Deviation from ideal -490
% Deviation -1.49%
% Hisp 26.6%
% NH White 54%
% NH Black 2%
% Asian-American 15%
Total 20,426
% Hisp 25%
% NH White 58%
% NH Black 2%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 15%
Total 17,467
% Latino est. 28%
% Spanish-Surnamed 25%
% Asian-Surnamed 4%
% Filipino-Surnamed 5%
% NH White est. 63%
% NH Black 3%
Total 11,608
% Latino est. 29%
% Spanish-Surnamed 27%
% Asian-Surnamed 4%
% Filipino-Surnamed 5%
% NH White est. 61%
% NH Black 3%
Total 6,784
% Latino est. 31%
% Spanish-Surnamed 29%
% Asian-Surnamed 4%
% Filipino-Surnamed 5%
% NH White est. 58%
% NH Black est. 3%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 33,211
age0-19 19%
age20-60 57%
age60plus 24%
immigrants 59%
naturalized 57%
english 24%
spanish 23%
asian-lang 11%
other lang 42%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 41%
hs-grad 47%
bachelor 24%
graduatedegree 11%
Child in Household child-under18 25%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 61%
income 0-25k 26%
income 25-50k 19%
income 50-75k 12%
income 75-200k 36%
income 200k-plus 6%
single family 19%
multi-family 81%
rented 86%
owned 14%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

3.80%
20%
59%
3%
17%
21,292
19%
59%
5%
15%
18,725
22%
20%
5%
3%
67%
3%
12,935
23%
21%
6%
4%
64%
3%
7,418
26%
24%
5%
4%
62%
3%
32,926
18%
59%
23%
55%
64%
31%
18%
10%
41%
35%
51%
26%
12%
24%
65%
24%
18%
15%
35%
9%
22%
78%
79%
21%
4 34,375
1,545

4.71%
10%
75%
2%
12%
24,842
12%
74%
3%
11%
21,452
10%
9%
5%
2%
81%
2%
15,453
11%
10%
5%
2%
80%
2%
9,444
12%
11%
5%
2%
79%
2%
35,136
19%
55%
26%
54%
74%
31%
7%
7%
56%
32%
46%
28%
17%
26%
61%
18%
15%
15%
36%
16%
45%
55%
57%
43%
5 31,877
-953
-2.90%
15%
64%
2%
18%
21,234
13%
66%
4%
16%
21,703
14%
13%
8%
3%
74%
2%
16,687
15%
14%
8%
3%
74%
1%
11,113
15%
14%
7%
2%
74%
1%
31,894
22%
52%
26%
44%
64%
43%
10%
9%
39%
25%
41%
33%
19%
31%
63%
13%
12%
14%
40%
21%
54%
46%
48%
52%
6 31,502
-1,328
-4.05%
13%
61%
1%
23%
21,423
14%
66%
1%
18%
21,835
10%
10%
10%
2%
77%
1%
17,257
10%
10%
9%
2%
78%
1%
12,015
10%
10%
7%
2%
80%
1%
30,419
25%
50%
24%
38%
82%
49%
9%
15%
28%
17%
40%
31%
24%
37%
65%
13%
9%
11%
43%
24%
71%
29%
33%
67%
Total
196,980
2,873

8.75%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
08/09/2023 15:31 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1157 of 1291
1 2
3 5
4 6
Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
Sonora Ave
S
C
h
e
v
y
C
h
ase
Dr
W Kenneth Rd
N
Glendale
Ave
N
C
e
ntral A
v
e
Western Ave
N
Pa
cific
Ave
N
Bra
n
d
Blv
d
Gra
ndview
Ave
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St
D
u
nsm
ore
A
v
e
5 210
Glendale Districting
National Demographics Corporation, August 16, 2023
Proposed Election Sequence:
2026, four-year term: Districts 5 (Asatryan,
Brotman & Najarian) and any two of
1 (vacant), 2 (vacant) or 4 (vacant)
2026: two-year term: the other one of 1 (vacant),
2 (vacant) or 4 (vacant)
2028: Districts 3 (Kassakhian), District 6 (Devine)
and the two-year term district
©2021 CALIPER
1158 of 1291
Map 123
District 1
Total Pop 31,722
Deviation from ideal -1,108
% Deviation -3.37%
% Hisp 19.8%
% NH White 55%
% NH Black 4%
% Asian-American 19%
Total 19,548
% Hisp 18%
% NH White 60%
% NH Black 5%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 16%
Total 16,389
% Latino est. 21%
% Spanish-Surnamed 19%
% Asian-Surnamed 6%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 67%
% NH Black 3%
Total 11,053
% Latino est. 23%
% Spanish-Surnamed 21%
% Asian-Surnamed 6%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 65%
% NH Black 3%
Total 6,041
% Latino est. 25%
% Spanish-Surnamed 23%
% Asian-Surnamed 6%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 63%
% NH Black est. 2%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 31,603
age0-19 18%
age20-60 60%
age60plus 22%
immigrants 56%
naturalized 60%
english 26%
spanish 19%
asian-lang 12%
other lang 42%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 38%
hs-grad 46%
bachelor 29%
graduatedegree 12%
Child in Household child-under18 23%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 63%
income 0-25k 28%
income 25-50k 16%
income 50-75k 17%
income 75-200k 31%
income 200k-plus 8%
single family 12%
multi-family 88%
rented 85%
owned 15%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

Latino voter registration and turnout data are Spanish-surname counts adjusted using Census Population Department undercount estimates. NH White and NH Black registration and turnout counts estimated by NDC. Citizen Voting Age Pop., Age, Immigration, and other demographics from the 2015-2019 American Community Survey and Special Tabulation 5-year data. 2 31,843
-987
-3.01%
26%
57%
2%
13%
20,264
24%
60%
3%
12%
16,935
26%
24%
3%
4%
65%
3%
11,088
28%
26%
3%
4%
63%
3%
6,350
31%
29%
4%
4%
60%
3%
33,656
19%
58%
23%
60%
57%
22%
23%
9%
46%
43%
47%
24%
10%
25%
59%
28%
20%
13%
34%
5%
18%
82%
88%
12%
3 32,636
-194
-0.59%
16%
66%
2%
15%
22,389
16%
64%
4%
15%
19,063
17%
16%
5%
3%
72%
3%
13,287
19%
18%
6%
3%
69%
3%
7,948
20%
19%
6%
3%
68%
3%
32,932
17%
58%
25%
57%
67%
29%
10%
10%
51%
36%
51%
27%
13%
23%
64%
22%
16%
15%
38%
8%
19%
81%
77%
23%
4 33,379
549

1.67%
16%
60%
2%
21%
21,832
16%
62%
3%
18%
21,265
17%
15%
8%
4%
71%
2%
15,653
17%
16%
8%
4%
70%
1%
10,153
17%
16%
8%
4%
71%
1%
31,939
20%
54%
25%
46%
67%
38%
12%
11%
38%
28%
42%
31%
16%
27%
63%
17%
13%
13%
41%
15%
45%
55%
59%
41%
5 34,134
1,304

3.97%
13%
67%
1%
17%
23,113
12%
71%
2%
14%
23,081
11%
11%
7%
2%
78%
2%
17,917
12%
11%
7%
2%
78%
2%
12,128
12%
12%
6%
2%
78%
2%
32,854
23%
51%
26%
46%
75%
45%
8%
9%
38%
22%
41%
31%
21%
32%
62%
15%
11%
13%
37%
24%
58%
42%
41%
59%
6 33,266
436

1.33%
13%
68%
1%
16%
22,572
14%
72%
1%
11%
21,669
11%
11%
7%
2%
80%
1%
16,202
12%
11%
7%
2%
79%
1%
10,447
12%
12%
7%
2%
79%
1%
33,528
24%
51%
25%
48%
75%
36%
11%
9%
44%
27%
45%
25%
19%
33%
62%
17%
13%
13%
39%
18%
67%
33%
43%
57%
Total
196,980
2,412

7.35%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
08/16/2023 11:10 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1159 of 1291
6 4
5 3
2 1
Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
E Palmer Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
W Kenneth Rd
N
C
e
ntral A
v
e
Western Ave
N
Pa
cific
Ave
N
Bra
n
d
Blv
d
Gra
ndview
Ave
W Broadway
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St
D
u
nsm
ore
A
v
e
5 210
Glendale Districting
National Demographics Corporation, August 16, 2023
Proposed Election Sequence:
2026, four-year term: Any three of 1 (vacant),
4 (vacant), 5 (vacant) or 6 (vacant)
2026: two-year term: District 2 (Asatryan, Brotman,
Devine & Najarian)
2028: Districts 3 (Kassakhian), District 2 (Asatryan,
Brotman, Devine & Najarian) and any one of
1 (vacant), 4 (vacant), 5 (vacant) or 6 (vacant)
©2021 CALIPER
1160 of 1291
Map 124
District 1
Total Pop 33,107
Deviation from ideal 277
% Deviation 0.84%
% Hisp 12.3%
% NH White 59%
% NH Black 1%
% Asian-American 26%
Total 22,517
% Hisp 13%
% NH White 66%
% NH Black 2%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 20%
Total 23,239
% Latino est. 11%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 12%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 75%
% NH Black 1%
Total 18,407
% Latino est. 11%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 11%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 75%
% NH Black 1%
Total 12,841
% Latino est. 11%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 9%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 77%
% NH Black est. 1%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 31,888
age0-19 25%
age20-60 49%
age60plus 26%
immigrants 38%
naturalized 80%
english 48%
spanish 8%
asian-lang 16%
other lang 27%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 19%
hs-grad 37%
bachelor 32%
graduatedegree 25%
Child in Household child-under18 35%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 64%
income 0-25k 12%
income 25-50k 10%
income 50-75k 10%
income 75-200k 43%
income 200k-plus 25%
single family 74%
multi-family 26%
rented 29%
owned 71%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

1.96%
16%
68%
2%
12%
22,567
18%
65%
4%
11%
19,369
16%
15%
5%
2%
74%
3%
13,314
18%
16%
5%
3%
72%
3%
7,664
20%
19%
5%
3%
69%
3%
34,442
19%
57%
24%
56%
67%
28%
13%
8%
52%
38%
52%
24%
12%
25%
63%
24%
20%
16%
34%
7%
27%
73%
80%
20%
4 32,409
-421
-1.28%
15%
62%
3%
18%
20,738
14%
65%
4%
17%
17,969
18%
16%
5%
3%
71%
3%
12,563
20%
18%
6%
3%
69%
3%
7,419
20%
19%
5%
3%
68%
3%
31,365
17%
60%
23%
57%
63%
32%
9%
9%
50%
35%
49%
28%
15%
23%
65%
22%
13%
16%
38%
10%
14%
86%
76%
24%
5 33,102
272

0.83%
27%
53%
3%
16%
21,672
24%
56%
4%
15%
17,430
27%
25%
4%
4%
63%
3%
11,678
29%
26%
5%
4%
61%
3%
6,784
32%
30%
4%
4%
58%
3%
35,759
19%
60%
21%
55%
56%
25%
25%
12%
37%
40%
46%
26%
9%
25%
62%
26%
17%
15%
36%
6%
21%
79%
86%
14%
6 33,177
347

1.06%
22%
58%
2%
17%
19,125
21%
62%
2%
14%
17,898
24%
22%
4%
5%
66%
3%
11,683
26%
24%
4%
5%
63%
3%
6,417
28%
26%
5%
5%
60%
3%
31,865
19%
55%
26%
64%
60%
20%
19%
10%
50%
44%
47%
25%
11%
25%
58%
30%
20%
14%
32%
4%
14%
86%
89%
11%
Total
196,980
1,763

5.37%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
08/16/2023 13:35 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1161 of 1291
6 4
5 1
3 2
Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
Sonora Ave
S
C
h
e
v
y
C
h
ase
Dr
W Kenneth Rd
N
C
e
ntral A
v
e
Western Ave
N
Pa
cific
Ave
N
Bran
d
Blv
d
Gra
ndview
Ave
W Broadway
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St
D
u
nsm
ore
A
v
e
5 210
Glendale Districting
National Demographics Corporation, August 16, 2023
Proposed Election Sequence:
2026, four-year term: Districts 1 (Asatryan),
2 (Brotman & Najarian), and either 4 (vacant)
or 6 (vacant)
2026: two-year term: Either 4 (vacant) or 6 (vacan
2028: Districts 3 (Devine), 5 (Kassakhian),
and the 2026 two-year term district
©2021 CALIPER
1162 of 1291
Map 106b
District 1
Total Pop 33,139
Deviation from ideal 309
% Deviation 0.94%
% Hisp 10.1%
% NH White 74%
% NH Black 2%
% Asian-American 12%
Total 23,755
% Hisp 12%
% NH White 74%
% NH Black 3%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 11%
Total 20,475
% Latino est. 10%
% Spanish-Surnamed 9%
% Asian-Surnamed 5%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 81%
% NH Black 3%
Total 14,707
% Latino est. 11%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 5%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 80%
% NH Black 3%
Total 8,981
% Latino est. 12%
% Spanish-Surnamed 12%
% Asian-Surnamed 5%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 79%
% NH Black est. 2%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 33,727
age0-19 19%
age20-60 55%
age60plus 26%
immigrants 54%
naturalized 74%
english 31%
spanish 7%
asian-lang 7%
other lang 56%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 32%
hs-grad 46%
bachelor 28%
graduatedegree 17%
Child in Household child-under18 26%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 61%
income 0-25k 18%
income 25-50k 15%
income 50-75k 16%
income 75-200k 35%
income 200k-plus 16%
single family 43%
multi-family 57%
rented 59%
owned 41%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

1.36%
13%
61%
1%
22%
23,046
14%
65%
2%
18%
22,992
10%
10%
10%
2%
77%
1%
18,149
11%
10%
9%
2%
78%
1%
12,569
10%
10%
7%
2%
80%
1%
32,430
26%
50%
24%
37%
83%
49%
9%
14%
28%
16%
39%
32%
23%
37%
66%
12%
9%
12%
43%
23%
68%
32%
36%
64%
3 33,158
328

1.00%
14%
65%
2%
18%
21,467
12%
68%
3%
16%
22,421
14%
13%
8%
3%
75%
1%
17,153
15%
14%
8%
3%
74%
1%
11,361
15%
14%
8%
3%
74%
1%
32,634
22%
52%
27%
46%
65%
41%
8%
9%
42%
25%
42%
32%
20%
29%
61%
14%
11%
12%
42%
21%
55%
45%
45%
55%
4 31,907
-923
-2.81%
27%
54%
2%
16%
20,041
26%
57%
2%
14%
17,442
28%
26%
4%
4%
63%
3%
11,636
30%
27%
4%
5%
60%
3%
6,817
32%
29%
4%
5%
58%
3%
32,846
19%
58%
23%
58%
57%
24%
25%
11%
41%
41%
47%
24%
11%
26%
62%
26%
20%
12%
36%
6%
19%
81%
86%
14%
5 32,640
-190
-0.58%
21%
57%
3%
17%
21,002
20%
58%
5%
15%
17,953
22%
20%
6%
3%
66%
3%
12,411
24%
22%
6%
4%
64%
3%
7,129
26%
25%
5%
4%
61%
3%
32,189
18%
60%
22%
54%
63%
31%
20%
10%
39%
34%
51%
26%
11%
24%
66%
24%
19%
15%
34%
9%
23%
77%
80%
20%
6 32,859
29 0.09%
19%
61%
3%
16%
20,406
17%
66%
3%
14%
17,119
20%
18%
4%
4%
70%
3%
11,144
22%
20%
5%
4%
68%
2%
6,210
24%
23%
5%
4%
65%
2%
32,686
17%
57%
26%
62%
61%
22%
15%
10%
54%
44%
48%
26%
10%
21%
58%
33%
16%
17%
31%
3%
10%
90%
88%
12%
Total
196,980
1,370

4.17%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
08/16/2023 8:00 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1163 of 1291
5 3
2 6
4 1
Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
E Palmer Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
Sonora Ave
S
C
h
e
v
y
C
h
ase
Dr
W Kenneth Rd
N
Glendale
Ave
N
C
e
ntral A
v
e
Western Ave
N
Pa
cific
Ave
N
Bra
n
d
Blv
d
Gra
ndview
Ave
W Broadway
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St
D
u
nsm
ore
A
v
e
5 210
Glendale Districting
National Demographics Corporation, August 16, 2023
Proposed Election Sequence:
2026, four-year term: Districts 4 (Asatryan),
and two of 1 (vacant), 2 (vacant) or 5 (vacant)
2026: two-year term: District 6 (Brotman,
Devine & Najarian)
2028: Districts 3 (Kassakhian), 6 (Brotman,
Devine & Najarian); and one of 1 (vacant),
2 (vacant) or 5 (vacant)
©2021 CALIPER
1164 of 1291
Map 120b
District 1
Total Pop 33,989
Deviation from ideal 1,159
% Deviation 3.53%
% Hisp 12.0%
% NH White 60%
% NH Black 1%
% Asian-American 25%
Total 22,767
% Hisp 13%
% NH White 66%
% NH Black 1%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 20%
Total 23,811
% Latino est. 10%
% Spanish-Surnamed 9%
% Asian-Surnamed 12%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 76%
% NH Black 1%
Total 18,799
% Latino est. 10%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 11%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 76%
% NH Black 1%
Total 13,018
% Latino est. 10%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 9%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 78%
% NH Black est. 1%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 32,264
age0-19 25%
age20-60 49%
age60plus 26%
immigrants 38%
naturalized 80%
english 48%
spanish 8%
asian-lang 16%
other lang 27%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 19%
hs-grad 38%
bachelor 32%
graduatedegree 24%
Child in Household child-under18 35%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 63%
income 0-25k 13%
income 25-50k 10%
income 50-75k 10%
income 75-200k 43%
income 200k-plus 24%
single family 73%
multi-family 27%
rented 31%
owned 69%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

2.41%
27%
55%
2%
15%
21,859
25%
56%
4%
13%
18,592
27%
25%
4%
4%
63%
4%
12,501
28%
26%
5%
4%
60%
4%
7,267
31%
29%
4%
4%
57%
3%
35,791
19%
59%
22%
54%
58%
26%
26%
9%
38%
39%
51%
23%
8%
25%
64%
25%
20%
14%
35%
6%
26%
74%
85%
15%
4 33,123
293

0.89%
10%
74%
2%
12%
23,738
12%
74%
3%
11%
20,457
10%
9%
5%
2%
81%
3%
14,694
11%
10%
5%
2%
80%
3%
8,968
12%
12%
5%
2%
79%
2%
33,711
19%
55%
26%
54%
74%
31%
7%
7%
55%
32%
46%
28%
17%
26%
61%
18%
15%
16%
35%
16%
43%
57%
59%
41%
5 31,191
-1,639
-4.99%
17%
60%
3%
18%
18,929
15%
64%
4%
15%
15,932
19%
17%
5%
4%
70%
3%
10,650
21%
19%
6%
4%
68%
3%
5,711
23%
21%
6%
4%
65%
2%
30,102
17%
60%
24%
60%
61%
26%
13%
10%
51%
42%
48%
27%
12%
21%
61%
30%
16%
17%
32%
5%
9%
91%
87%
13%
6 32,758
-72
-0.22%
14%
69%
2%
14%
22,433
13%
69%
3%
14%
21,427
13%
12%
5%
2%
78%
2%
16,075
14%
13%
5%
2%
77%
2%
10,470
15%
14%
5%
2%
77%
2%
33,194
21%
54%
25%
48%
67%
39%
7%
7%
47%
25%
44%
32%
18%
29%
63%
16%
10%
15%
40%
19%
41%
59%
55%
45%
Total
196,980
2,798

8.52%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
08/16/2023 8:40 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1165 of 1291
3 5
6 4
2 1
Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
E Palmer Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
Sonora Ave
S
C
h
e
v
y
C
h
ase
Dr
W Kenneth Rd
N
Glendale
Ave
N
C
e
ntral A
v
e
Western Ave
Gra
ndview
Ave
W Broadway
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St
D
u
nsm
ore
A
v
e
5 210
Glendale Districting
National Demographics Corporation, August 26, 2023
Proposed Election Sequence:
2026, four-year term: Districts 1 (Brotman &
Najarian) and any two of 2 (vacant), 3 (vacant)
or 5 (vacant)
2026: two-year term: District 4 (Asatryan &
Devine)
2028: Districts 6 (Kassakhian), District 4
(Asatryan & Devine) and any one of 2 (vacant),
3 (vacant) or 5 (vacant)
©2021 CALIPER
1166 of 1291
Map 125
District 1
Total Pop 33,008
Deviation from ideal 178
% Deviation 0.54%
% Hisp 12.7%
% NH White 62%
% NH Black 1%
% Asian-American 22%
Total 22,444
% Hisp 13%
% NH White 66%
% NH Black 1%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 19%
Total 23,032
% Latino est. 10%
% Spanish-Surnamed 9%
% Asian-Surnamed 10%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 78%
% NH Black 1%
Total 18,233
% Latino est. 10%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 9%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 78%
% NH Black 1%
Total 12,669
% Latino est. 10%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 8%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 80%
% NH Black est. 1%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 31,825
age0-19 25%
age20-60 50%
age60plus 25%
immigrants 38%
naturalized 83%
english 49%
spanish 8%
asian-lang 15%
other lang 28%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 17%
hs-grad 40%
bachelor 31%
graduatedegree 24%
Child in Household child-under18 36%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 65%
income 0-25k 12%
income 25-50k 9%
income 50-75k 11%
income 75-200k 43%
income 200k-plus 25%
single family 72%
multi-family 28%
rented 32%
owned 68%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

Latino voter registration and turnout data are Spanish-surname counts adjusted using Census Population Department undercount estimates. NH White and NH Black registration and turnout counts estimated by NDC. Citizen Voting Age Pop., Age, Immigration, and other demographics from the 2015-2019 American Community Survey and Special Tabulation 5-year data. 2 32,042
-788
-2.40%
14%
63%
2%
19%
20,952
13%
65%
4%
17%
20,649
15%
14%
8%
3%
73%
2%
15,492
16%
15%
8%
3%
72%
2%
10,154
16%
15%
8%
3%
73%
2%
31,129
21%
52%
27%
48%
65%
39%
9%
9%
42%
28%
43%
31%
16%
29%
61%
18%
12%
13%
40%
17%
47%
53%
54%
46%
3 32,368
-462
-1.41%
15%
61%
3%
18%
21,005
15%
66%
4%
15%
17,966
17%
15%
6%
3%
72%
3%
12,501
18%
17%
6%
3%
69%
3%
7,249
19%
18%
6%
4%
68%
3%
31,782
15%
61%
24%
55%
62%
32%
9%
10%
49%
35%
47%
29%
16%
20%
64%
24%
14%
17%
37%
9%
9%
91%
79%
21%
4 31,848
-982
-2.99%
10%
75%
2%
12%
23,069
11%
76%
3%
10%
20,003
10%
9%
5%
1%
83%
2%
14,455
10%
10%
5%
2%
82%
2%
8,846
11%
11%
5%
2%
80%
2%
32,515
20%
54%
26%
54%
75%
30%
7%
6%
57%
31%
46%
28%
17%
27%
60%
17%
15%
15%
36%
17%
49%
51%
55%
45%
5 34,537
1,707

5.20%
24%
58%
2%
15%
20,963
23%
60%
2%
14%
18,455
25%
23%
3%
4%
66%
2%
12,134
27%
25%
4%
5%
64%
2%
6,976
29%
27%
4%
5%
62%
2%
34,403
20%
56%
24%
62%
61%
22%
21%
11%
47%
43%
47%
25%
12%
27%
59%
29%
21%
14%
31%
5%
20%
80%
85%
15%
6 33,177
347

8.19%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
08/26/2023 20:33 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1167 of 1291
Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
E Palmer Ave
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
W Kenneth Rd
N
Glendale
Ave
Western Ave
N
Pa
cific
Ave
N
Bra
n
d
Blv
d
Gra
ndview Ave
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St Du
n
s
m
ore
A
v
e
210
5 Glendale Districting
National Demographics Corporation, September 11, 2023
Proposed Election Sequence:
2026, four-year term: Districts 6 (Brotman &
Najarian) and any two of 1 (vacant), 4 (vacant)
or 5 (vacant)
2026: two-year term: District 2 (Asatryan &
Devine)
2028: Districts 3 (Kassakhian), District 2
(Asatryan & Devine) and any one of 1 (vacant),
4 (vacant) or 5 (vacant)
©2021 CALIPER
1168 of 1291
Map 126
District 1
Total Pop 32,862
Deviation from ideal 32
% Deviation 0.10%
% Hisp 13.0%
% NH White 61%
% NH Black 1%
% Asian-American 22%
Total 22,763
% Hisp 14%
% NH White 65%
% NH Black 2%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 18%
Total 22,560
% Latino est. 10%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 10%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 77%
% NH Black 1%
Total 17,779
% Latino est. 11%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 9%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 77%
% NH Black 1%
Total 12,292
% Latino est. 11%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 7%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 79%
% NH Black est. 1%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 32,149
age0-19 26%
age20-60 50%
age60plus 24%
immigrants 37%
naturalized 83%
english 49%
spanish 9%
asian-lang 15%
other lang 27%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 16%
hs-grad 40%
bachelor 32%
graduatedegree 23%
Child in Household child-under18 37%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 67%
income 0-25k 12%
income 25-50k 9%
income 50-75k 13%
income 75-200k 44%
income 200k-plus 22%
single family 65%
multi-family 35%
rented 39%
owned 61%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

0.97%
18%
64%
3%
14%
20,957
18%
64%
3%
13%
18,444
19%
18%
5%
3%
71%
2%
12,569
21%
19%
5%
3%
68%
2%
7,200
23%
22%
5%
4%
66%
2%
32,117
19%
58%
23%
58%
65%
27%
15%
9%
50%
37%
52%
23%
12%
25%
65%
25%
17%
15%
36%
8%
23%
77%
79%
21%
4 32,739
-91
-0.28%
24%
53%
4%
18%
20,675
22%
58%
5%
14%
17,220
24%
22%
5%
4%
64%
3%
11,566
26%
24%
5%
4%
62%
3%
6,406
29%
27%
5%
4%
59%
3%
34,707
17%
61%
21%
56%
55%
27%
23%
10%
41%
41%
47%
26%
10%
22%
63%
27%
18%
16%
34%
6%
12%
88%
89%
11%
5 32,377
-453
-1.38%
23%
59%
2%
15%
19,913
23%
61%
2%
14%
17,426
25%
23%
3%
4%
67%
2%
11,499
27%
25%
3%
5%
64%
2%
6,629
29%
27%
4%
4%
62%
2%
32,015
20%
56%
25%
62%
61%
23%
20%
10%
47%
42%
46%
26%
12%
26%
59%
29%
20%
14%
32%
6%
20%
80%
84%
16%
6 33,186
356

1.08%
14%
64%
2%
18%
21,603
13%
67%
3%
17%
21,617
15%
14%
8%
3%
73%
2%
16,255
16%
15%
8%
3%
72%
2%
10,728
16%
15%
8%
3%
73%
2%
31,939
20%
52%
28%
50%
66%
37%
9%
9%
44%
29%
43%
30%
17%
28%
60%
18%
12%
12%
39%
20%
51%
49%
50%
50%
Total
196,980
809

2.46%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
09/11/2023 20:04 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1169 of 1291
Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
Sonora Ave
S
C
h
e
v
y
C
h
a
s
e
Dr
W Kenneth Rd
N
Glendale
Ave
N
C
e
ntral A
v
e
Western Ave
N
Bra
n
d
Blv
d
Gra
ndview Ave
W Broadway
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St Du
n
s
m
ore
A
v
e
5 210
Glendale Districting
National Demographics Corporation, September 11, 2023
Proposed Election Sequence:
2026: Districts 1 (Brotman & Najarian) and
District 2 (Asatryan & Devine)
2028: Districts 3 (Kassakhian) and 4 (vacant)
Alternative Election Sequence:
2026: Districts 1 (Brotman & Najarian) and
4 (vacant)
2028: Districts 3 (Kassakhian) and
District 2 (Asatryan & Devine)
©2021 CALIPER
1170 of 1291
Map 127
District 1
Total Pop 47,785
Deviation from ideal -1,460
% Deviation -2.96%
% Hisp 13.6%
% NH White 63%
% NH Black 1%
% Asian-American 20%
Total 32,383
% Hisp 13%
% NH White 68%
% NH Black 2%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 17%
Total 32,386
% Latino est. 12%
% Spanish-Surnamed 11%
% Asian-Surnamed 8%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 77%
% NH Black 1%
Total 25,105
% Latino est. 12%
% Spanish-Surnamed 11%
% Asian-Surnamed 8%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 77%
% NH Black 1%
Total 17,089
% Latino est. 12%
% Spanish-Surnamed 11%
% Asian-Surnamed 7%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 78%
% NH Black est. 1%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 46,491
age0-19 23%
age20-60 52%
age60plus 25%
immigrants 45%
naturalized 75%
english 44%
spanish 8%
asian-lang 12%
other lang 36%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 22%
hs-grad 42%
bachelor 30%
graduatedegree 21%
Child in Household child-under18 32%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 64%
income 0-25k 15%
income 25-50k 11%
income 50-75k 13%
income 75-200k 40%
income 200k-plus 21%
single family 57%
multi-family 43%
rented 42%
owned 58%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

3.16%
13%
71%
2%
12%
34,811
15%
71%
3%
10%
30,867
13%
12%
5%
2%
78%
2%
21,997
14%
13%
5%
2%
77%
2%
13,386
15%
15%
5%
2%
75%
2%
51,658
20%
55%
26%
53%
70%
31%
10%
7%
52%
33%
48%
27%
15%
26%
62%
20%
16%
15%
36%
13%
38%
62%
65%
35%
3 50,027
782

1.59%
24%
54%
3%
17%
32,245
22%
57%
4%
16%
26,594
25%
23%
5%
4%
63%
3%
18,126
27%
24%
6%
4%
61%
3%
10,508
29%
27%
5%
4%
59%
3%
51,695
19%
60%
22%
54%
59%
28%
23%
11%
39%
38%
48%
26%
11%
25%
63%
24%
17%
15%
36%
8%
19%
81%
84%
16%
4 48,365
-880
-1.79%
18%
61%
2%
18%
30,279
17%
64%
3%
16%
28,555
19%
17%
6%
4%
70%
2%
19,972
20%
18%
7%
4%
69%
2%
12,084
20%
19%
7%
4%
68%
1%
46,668
20%
54%
26%
56%
63%
29%
14%
10%
47%
37%
43%
29%
14%
26%
60%
25%
16%
13%
36%
10%
31%
69%
72%
28%
Total
196,980
3,018

6.13%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
09/11/2023 20:06 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1171 of 1291
Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
S Glenoaks Blvd
S
C
h
e
v
y
C
h
a
s
e
Dr
W Kenneth Rd
N
C
e
ntral A
v
e
Western Ave
N
Pa
cific
Ave
N
Bra
n
d
Blv
d
Gra
ndview Ave
W Broadway
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St Du
n
s
m
ore
A
v
e
5 210
Glendale Districting
National Demographics Corporation, September 11, 2023
Proposed Election Sequence:
2026, four-year term: Any three of 1 (vacant), 3
(vacant), 5 (vacant) or 6 (vacant)
2026: two-year term: District 2 (Asatryan, Brotman,
Devine & Najarian)
2028: Districts 4 (Kassakhian), 2 (Asatryan,
Brotman, Devine & Najarian) and any one of 1
(vacant), 3 (vacant), 5 (vacant) or 6 (vacant)
©2021 CALIPER
1172 of 1291
Map 128
District 1
Total Pop 32,688
Deviation from ideal -142
% Deviation -0.43%
% Hisp 12.9%
% NH White 61%
% NH Black 1%
% Asian-American 23%
Total 22,713
% Hisp 14%
% NH White 65%
% NH Black 2%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 18%
Total 22,380
% Latino est. 10%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 10%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 76%
% NH Black 1%
Total 17,598
% Latino est. 11%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 10%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 77%
% NH Black 1%
Total 12,148
% Latino est. 10%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 8%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 79%
% NH Black est. 1%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 31,939
age0-19 26%
age20-60 50%
age60plus 24%
immigrants 37%
naturalized 82%
english 49%
spanish 9%
asian-lang 15%
other lang 27%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 17%
hs-grad 40%
bachelor 32%
graduatedegree 22%
Child in Household child-under18 36%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 66%
income 0-25k 13%
income 25-50k 9%
income 50-75k 13%
income 75-200k 44%
income 200k-plus 21%
single family 65%
multi-family 35%
rented 39%
owned 61%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

Latino voter registration and turnout data are Spanish-surname counts adjusted using Census Population Department undercount estimates. NH White and NH Black registration and turnout counts estimated by NDC. Citizen Voting Age Pop., Age, Immigration, and other demographics from the 2015-2019 American Community Survey and Special Tabulation 5-year data. 2 32,511
-319
-0.97%
10%
75%
1%
12%
23,602
9%
78%
2%
11%
21,664
9%
8%
5%
1%
83%
1%
16,216
10%
9%
5%
1%
82%
1%
10,408
10%
10%
6%
1%
81%
1%
32,816
19%
53%
27%
49%
79%
35%
6%
6%
53%
26%
44%
30%
19%
28%
61%
14%
12%
15%
36%
24%
60%
40%
42%
58%
3 32,674
-156
-0.48%
27%
56%
2%
14%
20,642
25%
58%
2%
14%
17,630
27%
25%
4%
4%
64%
3%
11,655
29%
26%
4%
5%
62%
3%
6,756
31%
28%
4%
4%
59%
3%
34,143
19%
58%
23%
59%
57%
24%
23%
11%
43%
41%
47%
25%
11%
25%
61%
26%
20%
14%
35%
5%
19%
81%
86%
14%
4 33,254
424

1.29%
21%
60%
3%
15%
21,459
21%
60%
4%
12%
18,271
22%
21%
5%
3%
68%
2%
12,380
24%
22%
5%
4%
66%
2%
7,107
27%
25%
5%
4%
62%
2%
34,214
20%
57%
23%
55%
63%
25%
22%
10%
43%
39%
51%
24%
9%
26%
62%
27%
19%
16%
32%
7%
27%
73%
83%
17%
5 33,297
467

1.42%
15%
62%
3%
17%
21,893
14%
63%
5%
17%
19,133
17%
15%
6%
3%
71%
4%
13,699
18%
17%
6%
3%
70%
4%
8,282
19%
17%
5%
3%
70%
3%
33,056
18%
59%
23%
54%
61%
35%
9%
9%
46%
32%
45%
31%
17%
23%
65%
19%
14%
15%
40%
12%
18%
82%
71%
29%
6 32,556
-274
-0.83%
17%
61%
2%
19%
19,409
16%
65%
3%
16%
19,324
18%
17%
7%
4%
70%
2%
13,652
19%
18%
7%
4%
68%
2%
8,366
20%
18%
7%
4%
68%
1%
30,344
18%
54%
28%
58%
63%
30%
13%
10%
48%
38%
45%
25%
14%
24%
59%
28%
15%
13%
34%
10%
30%
70%
72%
28%
Total
196,980
786

2.39%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
09/11/2023 20:19 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1173 of 1291
2 1
3 5
4 6
Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
E Palmer Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
S Chevy Chase Dr
W Kenneth Rd
N
Glendale
Ave
N
Central Ave
Western Ave
N
Pacific Ave
N Brand Blvd
Gra
ndview
Ave
W Broadway
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St Dunsmore Ave
5 210
National Demographics Corporation, September 20, 2023 �2021 CALIPER 1174 of 1291
Map 129
District 1
Total Pop 33,462
Deviation from ideal 632
% Deviation 1.93%
% Hisp 24.1%
% NH White 56%
% NH Black 2%
% Asian-American 16%
Total 20,460
% Hisp 23%
% NH White 59%
% NH Black 2%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 15%
Total 17,981
% Latino est. 26%
% Spanish-Surnamed 24%
% Asian-Surnamed 4%
% Filipino-Surnamed 5%
% NH White est. 65%
% NH Black 3%
Total 11,989
% Latino est. 28%
% Spanish-Surnamed 26%
% Asian-Surnamed 4%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 62%
% NH Black 3%
Total 7,078
% Latino est. 61%
% Spanish-Surnamed 27%
% Asian-Surnamed 4%
% Filipino-Surnamed 5%
% NH White est. 60%
% NH Black est. 3%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 32,864
age0-19 19%
age20-60 56%
age60plus 25%
immigrants 60%
naturalized 62%
english 23%
spanish 21%
asian-lang 11%
other lang 44%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 41%
hs-grad 48%
bachelor 24%
graduatedegree 12%
Child in Household child-under18 27%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 60%
income 0-25k 28%
income 25-50k 19%
income 50-75k 12%
income 75-200k 35%
income 200k-plus 6%
single family 18%
multi-family 82%
rented 84%
owned 16%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

1.06%
26%
54%
3%
15%
21,284
25%
56%
4%
13%
18,297
27%
25%
4%
4%
62%
4%
12,385
28%
26%
5%
5%
60%
4%
7,173
62%
29%
4%
4%
57%
3%
34,858
19%
59%
22%
54%
58%
26%
27%
10%
37%
39%
50%
24%
7%
25%
64%
25%
19%
14%
35%
6%
26%
74%
85%
15%
4 32,762
-68
-0.21%
14%
64%
2%
18%
21,524
14%
64%
4%
17%
21,599
15%
13%
8%
3%
72%
3%
16,287
15%
14%
8%
8%
72%
3%
10,652
27%
15%
7%
3%
72%
3%
32,339
20%
55%
25%
48%
63%
42%
8%
9%
41%
28%
42%
32%
19%
26%
63%
15%
13%
12%
42%
18%
44%
56%
53%
47%
5 32,165
-665
-2.03%
9%
76%
1%
11%
23,072
10%
78%
2%
10%
20,658
9%
8%
5%
1%
84%
1%
15,096
10%
9%
5%
5%
83%
1%
9,433
18%
10%
6%
2%
82%
1%
32,650
20%
53%
27%
53%
77%
30%
6%
6%
57%
31%
46%
28%
18%
28%
60%
16%
14%
16%
34%
19%
56%
44%
49%
51%
6 33,971
1,141

3.48%
13%
62%
1%
22%
23,643
14%
65%
2%
18%
23,394
10%
10%
10%
2%
77%
1%
18,448
11%
10%
9%
9%
78%
1%
12,749
17%
10%
7%
2%
80%
1%
33,235
26%
50%
24%
37%
83%
49%
9%
14%
28%
16%
39%
32%
23%
37%
67%
12%
9%
13%
44%
23%
66%
34%
37%
63%
Total
196,980
2,528

7.70%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
6%
72%
2%
53,067
34%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
09/20/2023 13:32 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1175 of 1291
Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
E Palmer Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
Sonora Ave
S
C
h
e
v
y
C
h
a
s
e
Dr
W Kenneth Rd
N
Glendale
Ave
N
C
e
ntral A
v
e
Western Ave
N
Bra
n
d Bl
v
d
Gra
ndview
Ave
W Broadway
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St Dunsmore Ave
5 210
Glendale Districting
National Demographics Corporation, October 3, 2023
Proposed Election Sequence:
2026: Districts 1
(Brotman & Najarian) and 2 (Asatrian,
Devine & Kassakhian)
2028: Districts 3 (vacant) and 4 (vacant)
©2021 CALIPER
1176 of 1291
Map 130
District 1
Total Pop 49,173
Deviation from ideal -72
% Deviation -0.15%
% Hisp 12.7%
% NH White 62%
% NH Black 1%
% Asian-American 22%
Total 33,846
% Hisp 13%
% NH White 65%
% NH Black 2%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 19%
Total 34,583
% Latino est. 11%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 10%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 76%
% NH Black 1%
Total 27,201
% Latino est. 11%
% Spanish-Surnamed 11%
% Asian-Surnamed 10%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 76%
% NH Black 1%
Total 18,790
% Latino est. 11%
% Spanish-Surnamed 11%
% Asian-Surnamed 8%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 78%
% NH Black est. 1%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 47,645
age0-19 25%
age20-60 50%
age60plus 25%
immigrants 37%
naturalized 79%
english 48%
spanish 8%
asian-lang 13%
other lang 31%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 18%
hs-grad 38%
bachelor 33%
graduatedegree 23%
Child in Household child-under18 34%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 65%
income 0-25k 12%
income 25-50k 9%
income 50-75k 11%
income 75-200k 43%
income 200k-plus 25%
single family 70%
multi-family 30%
rented 34%
owned 66%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

3.24%
25%
55%
2%
16%
31,770
24%
58%
3%
14%
26,870
26%
24%
4%
4%
64%
3%
17,738
28%
26%
4%
5%
62%
3%
10,107
31%
28%
4%
5%
59%
3%
52,450
19%
58%
23%
59%
58%
23%
23%
11%
43%
42%
46%
25%
10%
25%
60%
29%
18%
14%
34%
5%
17%
83%
88%
12%
4 47,691
-1,554
-3.16%
16%
62%
3%
17%
29,665
15%
64%
4%
16%
26,425
18%
16%
5%
3%
71%
4%
18,451
20%
18%
5%
3%
69%
3%
10,815
21%
19%
5%
3%
68%
3%
46,412
17%
59%
24%
58%
60%
31%
10%
10%
49%
36%
50%
27%
14%
23%
62%
24%
15%
16%
36%
9%
13%
87%
79%
21%
Total
196,980
3,148

6.39%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
10/03/2023 17:08 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1177 of 1291
Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
E Palmer Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
Sonora Ave
W Kenneth Rd
N
Glendale
Ave
N
C
e
ntral A
v
e
Western Ave
N
Bra
n
d Bl
v
d
Gra
ndview
Ave
W Broadway
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St Dunsmore Ave
5 210
Glendale Districting
National Demographics Corporation, October 3, 2023
Proposed Election Sequence:
2026: Districts 2 (Asatrian, Devine) and 3
(Brotman & Najarian)
2028: Districts 1 (Kassakhian) and 4 (vacant)
©2021 CALIPER
1178 of 1291
Map 131
District 1
Total Pop 50,199
Deviation from ideal 954
% Deviation 1.94%
% Hisp 23.9%
% NH White 54%
% NH Black 3%
% Asian-American 17%
Total 31,596
% Hisp 22%
% NH White 57%
% NH Black 5%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 15%
Total 26,693
% Latino est. 25%
% Spanish-Surnamed 23%
% Asian-Surnamed 5%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 64%
% NH Black 3%
Total 18,118
% Latino est. 26%
% Spanish-Surnamed 24%
% Asian-Surnamed 6%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 61%
% NH Black 3%
Total 10,329
% Latino est. 29%
% Spanish-Surnamed 27%
% Asian-Surnamed 5%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 59%
% NH Black est. 3%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 51,173
age0-19 19%
age20-60 60%
age60plus 21%
immigrants 55%
naturalized 59%
english 28%
spanish 24%
asian-lang 10%
other lang 39%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 38%
hs-grad 50%
bachelor 24%
graduatedegree 9%
Child in Household child-under18 24%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 65%
income 0-25k 25%
income 25-50k 18%
income 50-75k 15%
income 75-200k 35%
income 200k-plus 7%
single family 19%
multi-family 81%
rented 85%
owned 15%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

3.15%
11%
73%
2%
13%
35,173
12%
74%
3%
11%
31,817
12%
11%
5%
2%
80%
2%
23,128
13%
12%
5%
2%
79%
2%
14,321
13%
13%
5%
2%
78%
2%
51,669
20%
55%
26%
55%
70%
33%
7%
7%
54%
31%
46%
29%
17%
27%
61%
17%
14%
15%
38%
16%
40%
60%
58%
42%
3 49,173
-72
-0.15%
13%
62%
1%
22%
33,846
13%
65%
2%
19%
34,583
11%
10%
10%
2%
76%
1%
27,201
11%
11%
10%
2%
76%
1%
18,790
11%
11%
8%
2%
78%
1%
47,645
25%
50%
25%
37%
79%
48%
8%
13%
31%
18%
38%
33%
23%
34%
65%
12%
9%
11%
43%
25%
70%
30%
34%
66%
4 46,810
-2,435
-4.94%
21%
60%
2%
15%
29,103
21%
63%
3%
14%
25,309
23%
21%
4%
4%
68%
3%
16,753
25%
23%
4%
5%
65%
3%
9,627
26%
24%
4%
4%
63%
3%
46,025
18%
56%
26%
62%
61%
23%
16%
10%
51%
42%
47%
26%
12%
23%
58%
31%
18%
15%
32%
5%
15%
85%
85%
15%
Total
196,980
3,988

8.10%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
10/03/2023 17:13 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1179 of 1291
Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
E Palmer Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
Sonora Ave
S
C
h
e
v
y
C
h
a
s
e
Dr
W Kenneth Rd
N
Glendale
Ave
Western Ave
N
Bra
n
d Bl
v
d
Gra
ndview
Ave
W Broadway
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St Dunsmore Ave
5 210
Glendale Districting
National Demographics Corporation, October 3, 2023
Proposed Election Sequence:
2026: Districts 1 (Najarian), 2 (Asatryan & Devine)
and 5 (Brotman)
2028: Districts 3 (Kassakhian) and 4 (vacant)
©2021 CALIPER
1180 of 1291
Map 132
District 1
Total Pop 39,262
Deviation from ideal -134
% Deviation -0.34%
% Hisp 12.0%
% NH White 61%
% NH Black 1%
% Asian-American 24%
Total 26,587
% Hisp 13%
% NH White 66%
% NH Black 1%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 19%
Total 27,878
% Latino est. 10%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 11%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 76%
% NH Black 1%
Total 22,083
% Latino est. 11%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 10%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 76%
% NH Black 1%
Total 15,421
% Latino est. 10%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 9%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 78%
% NH Black est. 1%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 37,315
age0-19 24%
age20-60 50%
age60plus 26%
immigrants 38%
naturalized 81%
english 48%
spanish 8%
asian-lang 15%
other lang 29%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 18%
hs-grad 38%
bachelor 32%
graduatedegree 25%
Child in Household child-under18 34%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 64%
income 0-25k 12%
income 25-50k 9%
income 50-75k 9%
income 75-200k 43%
income 200k-plus 26%
single family 76%
multi-family 24%
rented 29%
owned 71%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

1.00%
10%
74%
2%
12%
28,380
12%
74%
3%
11%
24,902
10%
9%
5%
2%
81%
2%
18,034
11%
10%
5%
2%
80%
2%
11,103
12%
11%
5%
2%
79%
2%
41,221
19%
55%
26%
52%
73%
33%
7%
7%
54%
31%
46%
29%
17%
26%
61%
17%
14%
16%
36%
16%
43%
57%
58%
42%
3 38,217
-1,179
-2.99%
26%
56%
2%
14%
25,430
24%
57%
4%
13%
21,485
26%
24%
4%
3%
64%
4%
14,667
27%
25%
5%
4%
62%
3%
8,789
30%
28%
4%
3%
60%
3%
40,697
19%
58%
23%
54%
59%
28%
25%
10%
38%
38%
49%
24%
9%
25%
63%
26%
19%
13%
35%
7%
27%
73%
82%
18%
4 40,415
1,019

2.59%
20%
58%
3%
17%
24,519
19%
63%
4%
15%
20,943
21%
19%
5%
4%
69%
2%
13,987
23%
21%
6%
4%
66%
2%
7,780
25%
23%
5%
4%
64%
2%
38,584
17%
59%
24%
61%
61%
25%
17%
10%
48%
40%
48%
27%
13%
22%
62%
28%
16%
16%
33%
7%
8%
92%
84%
16%
5 39,297
-99
-0.25%
18%
62%
2%
17%
24,801
16%
65%
4%
15%
23,194
19%
18%
5%
4%
71%
3%
16,429
20%
19%
5%
4%
69%
2%
9,974
21%
19%
5%
4%
69%
2%
38,695
21%
54%
25%
55%
62%
31%
12%
9%
47%
35%
46%
29%
13%
29%
61%
22%
15%
15%
38%
10%
29%
71%
73%
27%
Total
196,980
2,198

5.58%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
10/03/2023 17:21 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1181 of 1291
Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
E Palmer Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
Sonora Ave
W Kenneth Rd
N
Glendale
Ave
N
C
e
ntral A
v
e
Western Ave
N
Pa
cific
Ave
N
Bra
n
d Bl
v
d
Gra
ndview
Ave
W Broadway
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St Dunsmore Ave
5 210
Glendale Districting
National Demographics Corporation, October 3, 2023
Proposed Election Sequence:
2026: Districts 2 (Asatryan & Kassakhian),
4 (Najarian), and 5 (Brotman)
2028: Districts 3 (Devine) and 1 (vacant)
©2021 CALIPER
1182 of 1291
Map 133
District 1
Total Pop 38,617
Deviation from ideal -779
% Deviation -1.98%
% Hisp 26.8%
% NH White 54%
% NH Black 3%
% Asian-American 14%
Total 25,141
% Hisp 25%
% NH White 55%
% NH Black 4%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 14%
Total 21,143
% Latino est. 27%
% Spanish-Surnamed 25%
% Asian-Surnamed 4%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 63%
% NH Black 4%
Total 14,337
% Latino est. 28%
% Spanish-Surnamed 26%
% Asian-Surnamed 4%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 61%
% NH Black 4%
Total 8,497
% Latino est. 31%
% Spanish-Surnamed 29%
% Asian-Surnamed 4%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 58%
% NH Black est. 3%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 41,037
age0-19 19%
age20-60 58%
age60plus 22%
immigrants 54%
naturalized 58%
english 27%
spanish 26%
asian-lang 11%
other lang 36%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 38%
hs-grad 48%
bachelor 24%
graduatedegree 9%
Child in Household child-under18 25%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 63%
income 0-25k 26%
income 25-50k 19%
income 50-75k 14%
income 75-200k 34%
income 200k-plus 7%
single family 25%
multi-family 75%
rented 85%
owned 15%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

2.62%
12%
70%
2%
14%
27,822
13%
71%
3%
12%
24,102
12%
11%
5%
2%
78%
3%
17,199
13%
12%
6%
2%
77%
3%
10,375
14%
14%
5%
2%
76%
2%
39,701
19%
56%
25%
55%
72%
31%
8%
8%
53%
33%
48%
28%
15%
25%
63%
19%
17%
16%
35%
14%
36%
64%
64%
36%
3 39,379
-17
-0.04%
14%
66%
3%
16%
25,893
12%
71%
4%
13%
23,587
15%
13%
5%
2%
76%
2%
16,904
16%
15%
6%
3%
74%
2%
10,272
17%
16%
6%
3%
73%
2%
39,199
17%
56%
27%
57%
64%
32%
7%
8%
52%
34%
47%
28%
16%
23%
60%
24%
12%
15%
37%
12%
24%
76%
69%
31%
4 38,153
-1,243
-3.16%
12%
61%
1%
24%
25,823
13%
66%
1%
19%
27,025
10%
10%
11%
2%
76%
1%
21,388
11%
10%
10%
2%
76%
1%
14,940
10%
10%
9%
2%
78%
1%
36,236
24%
50%
26%
38%
81%
49%
8%
15%
28%
18%
38%
32%
25%
34%
63%
12%
9%
10%
43%
25%
75%
25%
30%
70%
5 40,402
1,006

2.55%
21%
60%
2%
16%
25,039
20%
61%
3%
15%
22,545
22%
20%
4%
4%
69%
2%
15,372
23%
21%
4%
5%
67%
2%
8,983
24%
22%
5%
4%
66%
2%
40,339
21%
56%
22%
55%
61%
26%
18%
9%
47%
38%
45%
28%
12%
29%
63%
23%
18%
15%
35%
9%
25%
75%
79%
21%
Total
196,980
2,276

5.78%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
10/03/2023 18:20 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1183 of 1291
Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
E Palmer Ave
W Colorado St
W Los Feliz Rd
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
Sonora Ave
W Kenneth Rd
N
Glendale
Ave
Western Ave
N
Pa
cific
Ave
N
Bra
n
d Bl
v
d
Gra
ndview
Ave
W Broadway
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St Dunsmore Ave
5 210
Glendale Districting
National Demographics Corporation, October 3, 2023
Proposed Election Sequence:
2026, four year terms: Districts 1 (Najarian &
Brotman), 3 (Asatryan) and either 2 (vacant)
or 4 (vacant)
2026, two year term: the other of 2 (vacant) or
4 (vacant)
2028: Districts 5 (Kassakhian), 6 (Devine) and
the 2026 two year term district
©2021 CALIPER
1184 of 1291
Map 134
District 1
Total Pop 32,128
Deviation from ideal -702
% Deviation -2.14%
% Hisp 12.8%
% NH White 61%
% NH Black 1%
% Asian-American 23%
Total 21,888
% Hisp 14%
% NH White 66%
% NH Black 1%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 19%
Total 22,290
% Latino est. 10%
% Spanish-Surnamed 9%
% Asian-Surnamed 10%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 77%
% NH Black 1%
Total 17,595
% Latino est. 10%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 10%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 77%
% NH Black 1%
Total 12,237
% Latino est. 10%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 8%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 80%
% NH Black est. 1%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 30,985
age0-19 25%
age20-60 50%
age60plus 25%
immigrants 38%
naturalized 82%
english 48%
spanish 8%
asian-lang 15%
other lang 28%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 17%
hs-grad 40%
bachelor 31%
graduatedegree 24%
Child in Household child-under18 36%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 65%
income 0-25k 14%
income 25-50k 9%
income 50-75k 11%
income 75-200k 43%
income 200k-plus 24%
single family 71%
multi-family 29%
rented 33%
owned 67%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

0.89%
14%
62%
4%
18%
21,788
14%
63%
5%
17%
18,133
16%
15%
6%
3%
71%
4%
12,646
18%
16%
6%
3%
69%
4%
7,315
19%
18%
6%
4%
68%
4%
31,783
15%
61%
25%
57%
65%
31%
9%
11%
49%
35%
47%
30%
15%
19%
64%
22%
15%
16%
37%
10%
8%
92%
77%
23%
4 33,837
1,007

3.07%
23%
59%
2%
15%
20,694
22%
62%
2%
13%
18,305
24%
22%
4%
4%
67%
2%
12,062
26%
24%
4%
5%
65%
2%
6,857
28%
26%
4%
5%
62%
2%
33,254
19%
55%
26%
63%
61%
22%
19%
11%
48%
43%
45%
26%
12%
25%
58%
31%
19%
14%
31%
5%
19%
81%
86%
14%
5 33,579
749

2.28%
27%
54%
3%
15%
21,363
25%
56%
4%
13%
18,170
27%
25%
4%
4%
63%
3%
12,186
28%
26%
5%
4%
60%
3%
7,013
32%
30%
4%
4%
57%
3%
35,621
19%
59%
21%
55%
57%
26%
27%
9%
38%
40%
51%
23%
7%
25%
63%
25%
20%
14%
34%
6%
25%
75%
86%
14%
6 32,289
-541
-1.65%
10%
76%
1%
11%
23,118
11%
77%
3%
9%
20,871
10%
10%
5%
1%
83%
1%
15,279
11%
10%
5%
2%
82%
1%
9,552
12%
11%
5%
2%
81%
1%
33,719
21%
53%
25%
50%
73%
34%
7%
6%
54%
28%
47%
28%
18%
30%
62%
17%
13%
16%
36%
17%
56%
44%
53%
47%
Total
196,980
1,812

5.52%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
10/03/2023 18:29 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1185 of 1291
Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
E Palmer Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
Sonora Ave
W Kenneth Rd
N
Glendale
Ave
Western Ave
N
Bra
n
d Bl
v
d
Gra
ndview
Ave
W Broadway
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St Dunsmore Ave
5 210
Glendale Districting
National Demographics Corporation, October 3, 2023
Proposed Election Sequence:
2026, four year terms: Districts 3 (Brotman),
4 (Najarian) and 6 (Asatryan)
2026, two year term: either 1 (vacant) or 2 (vacant)
2028: Districts 1, 2 and 5 (Devine & Kassakhian)
©2021 CALIPER
1186 of 1291
Map 135
District 1
Total Pop 32,380
Deviation from ideal -450
% Deviation -1.37%
% Hisp 28.7%
% NH White 52%
% NH Black 3%
% Asian-American 14%
Total 20,618
% Hisp 28%
% NH White 54%
% NH Black 4%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 13%
Total 16,976
% Latino est. 29%
% Spanish-Surnamed 27%
% Asian-Surnamed 4%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 61%
% NH Black 4%
Total 11,438
% Latino est. 30%
% Spanish-Surnamed 28%
% Asian-Surnamed 4%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 59%
% NH Black 4%
Total 6,661
% Latino est. 33%
% Spanish-Surnamed 31%
% Asian-Surnamed 4%
% Filipino-Surnamed 4%
% NH White est. 56%
% NH Black est. 4%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 34,103
age0-19 19%
age20-60 58%
age60plus 23%
immigrants 55%
naturalized 56%
english 27%
spanish 29%
asian-lang 9%
other lang 35%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 40%
hs-grad 49%
bachelor 22%
graduatedegree 8%
Child in Household child-under18 24%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 62%
income 0-25k 27%
income 25-50k 20%
income 50-75k 14%
income 75-200k 33%
income 200k-plus 6%
single family 22%
multi-family 78%
rented 87%
owned 13%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

1.59%
15%
63%
2%
19%
21,980
13%
66%
4%
16%
20,885
16%
15%
8%
3%
72%
2%
15,331
17%
16%
8%
3%
71%
2%
9,869
17%
16%
8%
3%
71%
2%
32,671
19%
54%
27%
50%
65%
34%
9%
10%
47%
31%
43%
31%
16%
26%
61%
20%
13%
14%
38%
15%
37%
63%
61%
39%
4 32,924
94 0.29%
13%
62%
1%
22%
22,254
13%
66%
1%
19%
22,971
10%
9%
10%
2%
78%
1%
18,155
10%
10%
9%
2%
78%
1%
12,628
10%
10%
8%
2%
80%
1%
31,670
25%
50%
25%
39%
83%
49%
8%
15%
28%
17%
40%
31%
24%
36%
65%
12%
9%
11%
43%
24%
72%
28%
33%
67%
5 32,862
32 0.10%
11%
74%
1%
11%
23,820
11%
77%
3%
9%
21,581
11%
10%
5%
2%
81%
1%
15,989
12%
11%
5%
2%
80%
1%
10,141
13%
12%
5%
2%
79%
1%
33,644
22%
53%
26%
51%
75%
35%
7%
5%
53%
27%
46%
28%
18%
31%
62%
17%
13%
14%
37%
19%
63%
37%
48%
52%
6 32,674
-156
-0.48%
14%
64%
3%
18%
21,145
14%
63%
4%
18%
18,138
15%
14%
6%
3%
73%
4%
12,527
17%
15%
6%
3%
71%
4%
7,149
18%
17%
6%
3%
69%
4%
32,126
16%
61%
23%
55%
63%
32%
9%
11%
48%
35%
49%
29%
15%
21%
65%
20%
16%
17%
38%
9%
12%
88%
78%
22%
Total
196,980
972

2.96%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
10/03/2023 18:43 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1187 of 1291
Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
W Kenneth Rd
N
Glendale
Ave
Western Ave
Gra
ndview
Ave
W Broadway
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St Dunsmore Ave
5 210
Glendale Districting
National Demographics Corporation, October 3, 2023
Proposed Election Sequence:
2026, four year terms: Districts 1 (Najarian)
2 (Brotman), 3 (Asatryan) and either 4 (vacant)
or 5 (vacant)
2026, two year terms: the other of 4 (vacant) and
5 (vacant)
2028: Districts 6 (Kassakhian), 7 (Devine) and the
two-year term district
©2021 CALIPER
1188 of 1291
Map 136
District 1
Total Pop 28,138
Deviation from ideal -2
% Deviation -0.01%
% Hisp 12.9%
% NH White 59%
% NH Black 1%
% Asian-American 24%
Total 19,139
% Hisp 14%
% NH White 66%
% NH Black 1%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 19%
Total 19,448
% Latino est. 10%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 11%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 76%
% NH Black 1%
Total 15,369
% Latino est. 11%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 10%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 77%
% NH Black 1%
Total 10,741
% Latino est. 10%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 8%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 79%
% NH Black est. 1%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 27,271
age0-19 26%
age20-60 49%
age60plus 25%
immigrants 38%
naturalized 82%
english 49%
spanish 9%
asian-lang 16%
other lang 26%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 17%
hs-grad 39%
bachelor 31%
graduatedegree 24%
Child in Household child-under18 37%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 65%
income 0-25k 13%
income 25-50k 10%
income 50-75k 11%
income 75-200k 44%
income 200k-plus 22%
single family 70%
multi-family 30%
rented 34%
owned 66%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

2.87%
14%
65%
3%
16%
19,049
14%
65%
3%
17%
16,533
15%
14%
5%
3%
74%
4%
11,607
16%
15%
6%
3%
71%
4%
6,918
17%
16%
5%
3%
71%
3%
28,747
16%
58%
26%
55%
65%
30%
8%
10%
51%
35%
48%
29%
16%
21%
62%
22%
16%
16%
37%
9%
12%
88%
74%
26%
4 28,950
810

2.88%
19%
61%
2%
16%
17,469
19%
65%
2%
14%
15,600
22%
20%
4%
4%
68%
3%
10,193
24%
22%
4%
5%
65%
3%
5,597
26%
24%
4%
5%
63%
3%
28,323
18%
55%
26%
63%
61%
22%
15%
10%
53%
45%
47%
25%
11%
24%
58%
31%
18%
16%
31%
4%
14%
86%
89%
11%
5 28,562
422

1.50%
29%
52%
2%
14%
17,870
28%
55%
2%
14%
14,743
29%
27%
4%
4%
62%
3%
9,707
31%
28%
4%
5%
60%
3%
5,700
34%
31%
4%
4%
57%
3%
29,969
19%
59%
22%
58%
56%
23%
28%
10%
39%
43%
48%
23%
9%
25%
61%
28%
19%
13%
35%
5%
19%
81%
88%
12%
6 28,208
68 0.24%
21%
58%
3%
16%
18,576
19%
59%
6%
13%
15,892
22%
20%
6%
3%
66%
3%
10,992
24%
22%
6%
4%
64%
3%
6,389
27%
25%
6%
4%
61%
3%
28,316
18%
59%
22%
54%
64%
30%
20%
10%
40%
35%
50%
26%
10%
23%
65%
24%
18%
14%
34%
9%
26%
74%
80%
20%
7 26,912
-1,228
-4.36%
9%
77%
1%
11%
19,359
10%
80%
2%
8%
17,338
9%
9%
5%
1%
84%
1%
12,703
10%
9%
5%
1%
83%
1%
7,908
11%
10%
5%
1%
82%
1%
27,685
21%
53%
25%
52%
77%
32%
6%
5%
57%
28%
45%
28%
19%
31%
62%
16%
13%
16%
35%
20%
63%
37%
48%
52%
Total
196,980
2,038

7.24%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
10/03/2023 18:53 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1189 of 1291
Foothill Blvd
Honolulu Ave
N Verdugo
Rd
E Glenoaks Blvd
La Crescenta Ave
E Palmer Ave
W Colorado St
W Maple St
W Los Feliz Rd
W Chevy Chase Dr
San Fernando Rd
S Glenoaks Blvd
S
C
h
e
v
y
C
h
a
s
e
Dr
W Kenneth Rd
N
C
e
ntral A
v
e
Western Ave
N
Pa
cific
Ave
N
Bra
n
d Bl
v
d
Gra
ndview
Ave
W Broadway
W Mountain St
Santa Carlotta St Dunsmore Ave
5 210
Glendale Districting
National Demographics Corporation, October 3, 2023
Proposed Election Sequence:
2026, four year terms: Districts 1 (Najarian)
7 (Brotman), 3 (Asatryan) and either 5 (vacant)
or 6 (vacant)
2026, two year terms: the other of 5 (vacant) and
6 (vacant)
2028: Districts 4 (Kassakhian), 2 (Devine) and the
two-year term district
©2021 CALIPER
1190 of 1291
Map 137
District 1
Total Pop 28,308
Deviation from ideal 168
% Deviation 0.60%
% Hisp 12.9%
% NH White 60%
% NH Black 1%
% Asian-American 24%
Total 19,093
% Hisp 14%
% NH White 67%
% NH Black 1%
% Asian/Pac.Isl. 19%
Total 19,517
% Latino est. 10%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 11%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 76%
% NH Black 1%
Total 15,467
% Latino est. 11%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 10%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 77%
% NH Black 1%
Total 10,765
% Latino est. 10%
% Spanish-Surnamed 10%
% Asian-Surnamed 8%
% Filipino-Surnamed 2%
% NH White est. 79%
% NH Black est. 1%
ACS Pop. Est. Total 27,277
age0-19 26%
age20-60 50%
age60plus 24%
immigrants 38%
naturalized 82%
english 48%
spanish 9%
asian-lang 16%
other lang 28%
Language Fluency Speaks Eng. "Less than Very Well" 18%
hs-grad 39%
bachelor 31%
graduatedegree 25%
Child in Household child-under18 37%
Pct of Pop. Age 16+ employed 66%
income 0-25k 13%
income 25-50k 9%
income 50-75k 11%
income 75-200k 44%
income 200k-plus 24%
single family 70%
multi-family 30%
rented 33%
owned 67%
Total population data from the 2020 Decennial Census.

Surname-based Voter Registration and Turnout data from the California Statewide Database.

0.52%
11%
70%
2%
15%
19,250
12%
71%
3%
14%
16,060
13%
12%
5%
2%
77%
2%
11,097
14%
13%
6%
2%
76%
2%
6,286
15%
15%
6%
2%
74%
2%
27,982
18%
58%
24%
58%
71%
27%
8%
9%
57%
37%
50%
26%
14%
26%
62%
21%
16%
18%
33%
11%
25%
75%
73%
27%
4 28,086
-54
-0.19%
25%
55%
3%
16%
17,766
23%
57%
5%
14%
15,526
25%
23%
5%
4%
64%
3%
10,574
26%
24%
5%
4%
62%
3%
6,200
29%
27%
5%
4%
59%
2%
28,435
20%
57%
23%
55%
63%
26%
26%
11%
37%
37%
50%
25%
8%
26%
64%
27%
20%
15%
32%
7%
27%
73%
81%
19%
5 28,833
693

2.46%
28%
54%
2%
14%
18,130
26%
57%
2%
14%
15,503
28%
25%
4%
4%
63%
3%
10,321
29%
27%
4%
5%
61%
3%
6,090
32%
29%
3%
4%
59%
3%
29,880
19%
58%
23%
58%
58%
24%
26%
10%
40%
41%
47%
24%
11%
25%
62%
26%
19%
12%
36%
6%
19%
81%
86%
14%
6 28,361
221

0.79%
16%
64%
2%
16%
17,805
15%
67%
5%
13%
14,900
17%
16%
5%
3%
72%
4%
9,815
20%
18%
5%
3%
69%
3%
5,364
22%
20%
5%
4%
66%
3%
28,126
15%
60%
25%
63%
61%
25%
9%
8%
57%
44%
48%
26%
11%
19%
59%
31%
15%
17%
31%
5%
9%
91%
87%
13%
7 27,293
-847
-3.01%
15%
61%
2%
21%
18,140
15%
62%
3%
18%
18,507
15%
14%
8%
4%
73%
1%
14,038
15%
14%
9%
4%
72%
1%
9,279
15%
14%
8%
3%
73%
1%
25,994
22%
52%
26%
42%
68%
42%
11%
11%
37%
24%
41%
33%
18%
30%
63%
14%
12%
13%
40%
21%
58%
42%
47%
53%
Total
196,980
1,540

5.47%
17%
62%
2%
17%
129,718
17%
65%
3%
15%
118,402
17%
15%
6%
3%
73%
2%
85,200
17%
16%
6%
3%
72%
2%
53,067
18%
17%
6%
3%
71%
2%
196,512
20%
55%
25%
52%
66%
33%
14%
10%
43%
32%
46%
28%
15%
27%
62%
21%
15%
14%
37%
13%
36%
64%
66%
34%
10/03/2023 19:51 Page 1 of 1
Total Pop
Citizen Voting Age Pop
Voter Registration
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2020)
Voter Turnout
(Nov 2018)
Age
Immigration
Language spoken at home
Education
(among those age 25+)
Household Income
Housing Stats
1191 of 1291
1192 of 1291
1193 of 1291
1194 of 1291
1195 of 1291
1196 of 1291
1197 of 1291
1198 of 1291
1199 of 1291
Communities of Interest Input
• Crescenta Highlands now includes the Far North (Far North no longer exists) • The Verdugo mountains may form a natural boundary for districts • Both GUSD and GCC districts include residents outside of Glendale 1200 of 1291
1201 of 1291
1202 of 1291
1203 of 1291
1204 of 1291
1205 of 1291
1206 of 1291
1207 of 1291
1208 of 1291
1209 of 1291
1210 of 1291
1211 of 1291
1212 of 1291
1213 of 1291
1214 of 1291
1215 of 1291
1216 of 1291
1217 of 1291
1218 of 1291
1219 of 1291
1220 of 1291
1221 of 1291
1222 of 1291
1223 of 1291
1224 of 1291
1225 of 1291
1226 of 1291
1227 of 1291
1228 of 1291
1229 of 1291
7/31/23, 9:00 AM Ndcresearch.com Mail - City of Glendale District Map - 7 districts Douglas Johnson <[email protected]>
City of Glendale District Map - 7 districts
1 message
Robert Taylor <[email protected]> Sun, Jul 30, 2023 at 8:22 PM To: [email protected]
CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.

The at-large system of council representation is obsolete. Representation in this age requires real and constant contact with their constituents either in person with groups or face-to-face with individuals. The days of Council members beholden to high-dollar campaign contributors like the Home-Owners Associations, Movie and Television Studios, Car dealerships and University affiliations are over…or at least will soon be with the district system.

The number of districts must be an “odd number” to avoid deadlocks during voting. I have submitted two maps, one with a five district plan and one seven district plan. A mayor should not be a voting council member but should be independently elected by the voters to enforce the council members accurate representation without collusion or overlap with other council district members, conflicts of interest, Quid pro Quo, preferential treatment to any one group, race, religion, education level, income level or number or quantity of campaign contributions.

Those areas of the city where incomes exceed $70,000 a year per household should be isolated or at very least be diluted with lower income voters and renters to balance the influence of the district. Those areas of the City where Media Studios and Car Dealerships should not be located within the same districts to avoid undue influence. Those areas of the city that are zoned for multi-family development can expect increases in their voter populations and therefore a relative increase in representation. At some point in the future these multi-family districts may “split” to provide the necessary representation for a larger district population.

I’ve lived in Glendale for more than 50 years in many different locations, from west Glendale, Montrose, North Glendale, Chevy
Chase Canyon, Somerset and now on Adams Hill. I’ve always felt welcomed wherever I’ve lived with this City.

Regards,
Robert Taylor
City of Glendale 7-district Map
davesredistricting.org
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=073bd3bf3e&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-f:1772904769934940193%7Cmsg-f:1772904769934940193&… 1/1 1230 of 1291
1231 of 1291
1232 of 1291
1233 of 1291
1234 of 1291
1235 of 1291
1236 of 1291
1237 of 1291
1238 of 1291
1239 of 1291
1240 of 1291
1241 of 1291
1242 of 1291
1243 of 1291
1244 of 1291
1245 of 1291
1246 of 1291
1247 of 1291
1248 of 1291
1249 of 1291
1250 of 1291
1251 of 1291
1252 of 1291
Madeline Wilson <[email protected]>
FW: Districting Map Proposal
5 messages
Mkhlian, Stephanie <[email protected]> Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 3:59 PM To : "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> With gratitude,
Stephanie Mkhlian | Sr. Administrative Analyst | City of Glendale 613 E Broadway, Suite 200| Glendale, CA |
[email protected] | www.glendaleca.gov | Follow us! From: Darren Kameya <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, July 6, 2023 1:43 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Districting Map Proposal
Some people who received this message don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.

Hello there,
Please see the attached draft district map (in DRA 2020 archive format) for your consideration. I believe that you can re-import the file after you've downloaded it.

Thank you,
Darren C. Kameya
[email protected]
1253 of 1291
213-814-8773 mobile
2 attachments
image001.png
25K
Kameya Draft District Proposal.json
32K
Mkhlian, Stephanie <[email protected]> Fri, Aug 11, 2023 at 2:20 PM To : Darren Kameya <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Hi Darren,
We have tried accessing your Json attached file a number of ways and were unable to do so.

Would it be possible to send the URL for your DRA map by copying and pasting the web address? Thank you!
[Quoted text hidden]
image001.png
25K
Douglas Johnson <[email protected]> Wed, Aug 16, 2023 at 11:17 AM To : "Mkhlian, Stephanie" <[email protected]>
Cc: Darren Kameya <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.

Mr. Kameya,
Just following up on Ms. Mkhlian's email to double-check if you can send the link for your proposed Glendale districts map? The JSON file you sent cannot be opened.

Thank you,
1254 of 1291
- Doug
Douglas Johnson
National Demographics Corporation
[email protected]
[Quoted text hidden]
Darren Kameya <[email protected]> Wed, Aug 16, 2023 at 1:33 PM Reply-To: Darren Kameya <[email protected]>
To : "Mkhlian, Stephanie" <[email protected]>, Douglas Johnson <[email protected]> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.

Hi Mr. Jones and Ms. Mkhilian,
Sorry for the delayed response. Here is a link to the map I submitted:

DRA 2020
DRA 2020
A free app to create, analyze and share redistricting maps for any state.

If there is something else you would like me to do to enable your access, please let me know.

Sincerely,
Darren Kameya
Darren C. Kameya
[email protected]
[Quoted text hidden]
Douglas Johnson <[email protected]> Wed, Aug 16, 2023 at 2:29 PM To : Darren Kameya <[email protected]>
Cc: "Mkhlian, Stephanie" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> 1255 of 1291
CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.

Received - thank you!
NDC will get this processed and you will see it on the website as Map 124 in the next day or two. - Doug
[Quoted text hidden]
--
[Quoted text hidden]
1256 of 1291
1257 of 1291
Madeline Wilson <[email protected]>
Glendale Districting - New submission from Submit Your Communities of Interest Here
[email protected] <[email protected]> Sun, Aug 13, 2023 at 1:11 AM To : [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.

Name
Ramella Eraghi
Email
[email protected]
Are you a resident of the City of Glendale?
Yes
Where is your community located?
south glendale
What are the geographic definers/boundaries of your neighborhood? highways
Why do you think/believe your community of interest should be grouped together for election purposes? As a renter who lives in the City of Glendale, I believe a renter should be on the City Council in order to protect the renter's interest.

What are issues you/your community care about?
Public Safety
Mobility, Pedestrian, and Traffic Safety
Arts & Culture
Community Services and Parks
Sustainability
Housing
Infrastructure
Why are these issues the you selected important to you/your community? HOUSING IS THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE IN MY COMMUNITY. HIGH RENTS, HOUSING SHORTAGE, AND

LANDLORDS' GREED MAKE OUR COMMUNITY WHICH HAS GREAT CULTURAL VALUES FACE THE RENTERS WHO STRUGGLE TO PAY THEIR RENT AND ARE ON THE VERGE OF EVICTION. 1258 of 1291
1259 of 1291
Madeline Wilson <[email protected]>
Glendale Districting - New submission from Submit Your Communities of Interest Here
[email protected] <[email protected]> Sun, Aug 13, 2023 at 1:11 AM To : [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.

LANDLORDS' GREED MAKE OUR COMMUNITY WHICH HAS GREAT CULTURAL VALUES FACE THE RENTERS WHO STRUGGLE TO PAY THEIR RENT AND ARE ON THE VERGE OF EVICTION. 1260 of 1291
Madeline Wilson <[email protected]>
District Maps (2 maps)
3 messages
G Moreno <[email protected]> Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 2:44 PM To : "[email protected]" <[email protected]> CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.

Hello,
Below are two maps. Let me know if there are any issues so that I may correct them. Please note I submitted one with only four districts since I think four districts is better suite for Glendale.

Thanks.

1. 6 Districts
Glendale (6 Districts)
Use this map to draw your proposed 6-district map of
Council election districts for the City of Glendale. When finished, please
davesredistricting.org

2. 4 Districts+Mayor
Glendale (4 Districts+Mayor)
Use this map to draw your proposed 6-district map of
Council election districts for the City of Glendale. When finished, please
davesredistricting.org
Madeline Pettit <[email protected]> Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 4:30 PM To : G Moreno <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Hello, 1261 of 1291
Madeline Wilson <[email protected]>
District Maps (2 maps)
Madeline Pettit <[email protected]> Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 4:30 PM To : G Moreno <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Hello,
Thank you for contacting us and participating in the City of Glendale’s potential move to district-based elections.

All maps compliant with districting criteria will be processed by the demographer and posted to the Draft Maps Page as part of the draft maps publication presented to the City Council during the next Public Hearing.

Please continue to visit MapGlendale.org for the most up-to-date news and information on the districting process.

Tripepi Smith is a marketing, technology and public affairs firm based in Orange County, CA. The Tripepi Smith team is working with the City of Glendale to provide outreach and communications services regarding the districting process. [Quoted text hidden]
--
Madeline Pettit
[email protected]
Website | Facebook | Twitter | YouTube | LinkedIn
1262 of 1291
Madeline Wilson <[email protected]>
A Glendale City Council Map
2 messages
Renee Brandt <[email protected]> Mon, Aug 14, 2023 at 8:59 PM To : "[email protected]" <[email protected]> CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.

Copy of Glendale City Council Map Template
Copy of Glendale City Council Map Template
Use this map to draw your proposed 6-district map of Council election districts for the City of Glendale. When...

Please let me know if this is a successful transmission.

Renee Brandt
Kevork Kurdoghlian <[email protected]>
To : Renee Brandt <[email protected]>
Mon, Aug 14, 2023 at 9:43 PM
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.

Hi Renee,
Thank you for contacting us and participating in the City of Glendale’s potential move to district-based elections.

Please continue to visit MapGlendale.org for the most up-to-date news and information on the districting process.

Tripepi Smith is a marketing, technology and public affairs firm based in Orange County, CA. The Tripepi Smith team is working with the City of Glendale to provide outreach and communications services regarding the districting process. 1263 of 1291
Madeline Wilson <[email protected]>
106 or 106b
2 messages
Paul Iannicelli <[email protected]> Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 5:21 PM To : "[email protected]" <[email protected]> CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.

To me, either 106 or 106(b) (no preference between the two) seem the most logical and coherent. These seem closest to capturing specific neighborhoods within the city, where you could easily explain why and where the borders were drawn, as compared to somewhat random borders. If I had the chance to vote, I would vote for one of these.

Thanks,
Paul I.

Madeline Pettit <[email protected]> Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 8:14 AM To : Paul Iannicelli <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Hi Paul,
Thank you for contacting us and participating in the City of Glendale’s potential move to district-based elections. Your comment will be posted to the Schedule Page as a public comment for the next Public Hearing.

Please continue to visit MapGlendale.org for the most up-to-date news and information on the districting process and to share your thoughts on specific neighborhoods and communities in the Jewel City.

Tripepi Smith is a marketing, technology and public affairs firm based in Orange County, CA. The Tripepi Smith team is working with the City of Glendale to provide outreach and communications services regarding the districting process. [Quoted text hidden]
--
Madeline Pettit
[email protected]
Website | Facebook | Twitter | YouTube | LinkedIn
1264 of 1291
Madeline Wilson <[email protected]>
Glendale Map
13 messages
G Moreno <[email protected]> Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 9:13 PM To : "[email protected]" <[email protected]> CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.

Hello,
Here is a link for a shared downtown district:

1. Shared Glendale business district
Glendale
Use this map to draw your proposed 6-district map of
Council election districts for the City of Glendale. When finished, please
davesredistricting.org
Thanks!
Madeline Pettit <[email protected]> Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 8:32 AM To : G Moreno <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Good morning,
Thank you for your additional map submission.

Please continue to visit MapGlendale.org for the most up-to-date news and information on the districting process.

Cc: [email protected] [Quoted text hidden]
--
MHealdloe,line Wilson
[email protected]
Your 3 maps are currently being processed by the City's demographer and will be posted next week. (714) 702-3742
8T4h4a-nTkSy- oCuO, M M - 1 x717
[Quoted text hidden]
Madeline Wilson <[email protected]>
To: G Moreno <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 9:26 AM
Good morning,
The maps have been posted to the website.

Best,
[Quoted text hidden]
--
Madeline Wilson
[email protected]
[Quoted text hidden]
Hi Madeline,
Thank you for the update.

Best,
GM
From: Madeline Wilson <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2023 8:26 AM
[Quoted text hidden]
ll set - here are the PDF files for the 3 maps plus the Armenian demographics spreadsheet and I am posting them to the interactive review map now.

Note that Map 127 is a 4-district map. 125 and 128 are 6-district maps. 1266 of 1291
Madeline Wilson <[email protected]>
District Map Feedback - - Map 111
2 messages
Jennifer Nguyen <[email protected]> Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 11:57 PM To : [email protected]
CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.

Hi,
I'm a resident in Glendale living on
I used the interactive map in regards to the draft of the districts.

The most accurate depiction of district that I resonate most with is in "Map 111 (Five district map. Not Population Balanced.)"
The highlighted areas in Map 111 is relatable because I frequently travel west for almost everything from work, groceries, shopping, post office, etc...I spend most of my time in the highlighted area in this map, and know many of my neighbors feel the same. We rarely venture beyond East of Glenoaks from where we live. And, if given the choice, I would have preferred my kids' local school to be assigned within this highlighted area as well. It's just the dynamic of living on the hill top — you feel connected to west of Glendale (Just think wherever there's a Trader Joes - we head that way, and not the east side, which would be Eagle Rock).

I hope this feedback will be taken into consideration.

Best regards,
Jennifer Nguyen
Madeline Pettit <[email protected]>
To : Jennifer Nguyen <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 8:33 AM
Hi Jennifer,
Thank you for contacting us and participating in the City of Glendale’s potential move to district-based elections. Your comment will be posted to the Schedule Page as a public comment for the next Public Hearing.

Tripepi Smith is a marketing, technology and public affairs firm based in Orange County, CA. The Tripepi Smith team is working with the City of Glendale to provide outreach and communications services regarding the districting process. [Quoted text hidden]
--
Madeline Pettit
[email protected]
1267 of 1291
Madeline Wilson <[email protected]>
Map Suggestion
Madeline Pettit <[email protected]>
To: Araik Sinanian <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 10:12 AM
Hi Araik,
Thank you for contacting us and participating in the City of Glendale’s potential move to district-based elections.

The demographer has processed your submission and it has been posted to the Draft Maps Page. This will be part of the draft maps publication presented to the City Council during the next Public Hearing.

Please continue to visit MapGlendale.org for the most up-to-date news and information on the districting process.

On Sat, Aug 26, 2023 at 7:46 PM Araik Sinanian <[email protected]> wrote:

CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.

Hello,
I wanted to share my suggestion:
https://davesredistricting.org/join/320faaa3-6be9-4ee0-88e3-fddeb268cc8c I also wanted to know when they will be reviewing or posting them? Thank you,
Araik
--
Madeline Pettit
[email protected]
Website | Facebook | Twitter | YouTube | LinkedIn
1268 of 1291
Thanks for that! When is the next public hearing and do they ever review them during city council meetings? Thank you,
Araik
[Quoted text hidden]
Madeline Pettit <[email protected]>
To: Araik Sinanian <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 3:40 PM
The next public hearing will be held on October 10 at 6 p.m. and the City Council will review all new draft maps submitted by the September 28 map submission deadline.

The City is also hosting workshops to gather resident input on draft district maps received prior to the August 15 public hearing. The next one is being held in-person on August 30 at 6:30 p.m. and another on Thursday, August 31 at the same time. A full schedule of workshops is available at MapGlendale.org/Schedule. [Quoted text hidden]
Araik Sinanian <[email protected]>
To : Madeline Pettit <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 7:01 PM
Great, thanks!
Araik
[Quoted text hidden]
1269 of 1291
Madeline Wilson <[email protected]>
Questions City Council should discuss before vote on districting 13 messages
Jayasri Hart <[email protected]> Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 4:58 PM To : [email protected]
CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.

As a Montrose resident, I would like to thank the administration for meeting our requests for information and clarification.

Three points need to be discussed by the City Council before the district system is voted on:

1. The citywide election of the Mayor is necessary since the Mayor has procedural responsibilities during Council meetings, on and off camera.

Judging by frayed nerves evident in council meetings of other cities, there has to be a peacekeeper, a compromiser, a keeper of protocol that council members will consider their peer. This can only be a person that every interest group in the city is free to vote for.

Also, the mayor cannot be a council member elected from one of the districts who is later chosen mayor by general consent in-council. That would make it difficult for the mayor to juggle his/her priorities for his/her district against the interest of the city as a whole and the interests of council members who may have opposed him/her being the mayor.

2. If all measures affecting the city is to be voted on in open council, it seems after the election, residents can cross district boundaries and appeal to a city council member elected from another district. For example, if I am represented by a council member who is not sympathetic to my needs, I (and others with similar interests) should be able to petition the council member from another district. Can we lay out how that scenario may or may not work? I can imagine interpretation and enforcement of building codes might be such an area of conflict.

3. If I am not mistaken, we now have a process of election by absolute majority where each of us selects one person among the slate of candidates. Would allowing us voters to rank order the mayoral slate enable the election of a mayor against whom the greatest number had the least objection? Might make for a peaceful transition of power.

Apart from the above, have we ever had a town hall meeting in South Glendale to ask residents why there has not been a candidate from that area? And if there has been, why did that person not get elected? --
Joyce Hart
Condominium owner
Sydni Overly <[email protected]> Tue, Aug 29, 2023 at 11:59 AM To : Jennifer Nentwig <[email protected]>, Madeline Pettit <[email protected]>, Kevork Kurdoghlian <[email protected]>
Hi team, do we need to rope in Mike to help answer these questions? 1270 of 1291
[Quoted text hidden]
--
Madeline Pettit
[email protected]
[Quoted text hidden]
Madeline Pettit <[email protected]>
To : Jayasri Hart <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 11:06 AM
Hi Joyce,
Thank you for contacting us and participating in the City of Glendale’s potential move to district-based elections. Answers to your questions are included below:

If all measures affecting the city is to be voted on in open council, it seems after the election, residents can cross district boundaries and appeal to a city council member elected from another district. For example, if I am represented by a council member who is not sympathetic to my needs, I (and others with similar interests) should be able to petition the council member from another district. Can we lay out how that scenario may or may not work? I can imagine interpretation and enforcement of building codes might be such an area of conflict.

With the current citywide election approach or with by-district elections, anyone may contact any Councilmember and it is up to that Councilmember to decide whether to engage on the issue or otherwise respond.

If I am not mistaken, we now have a process of election by absolute majority where each of us selects one person among the slate of candidates. Would allowing us voters to rank order the mayoral slate enable the election of a mayor against whom the greatest number had the least objection? Might make for a peaceful transition of power.

In the current citywide election system, if there are 3 council seats up in a given year each voter casts votes for their three favored candidates (or 2 when there are 2 seats up).

While the idea of using rank-order voting for Mayor is an interesting idea, the City's elections are run by the Los Angeles County Registrar of Voters and currently the Registrar's election systems cannot conduct a rank-order election.

Apart from the above, have we ever had a town hall meeting in South Glendale to ask residents why there has not been a candidate from that area? And if there has been, why did that person not get elected? While there currently are not any Councilmembers from South Glendale, there have been in the not-toodistant past, and at least one candidate in the 2022 Council election was from South Glendale.

I will share with my neighbors.

Joyce
1271 of 1291
[Quoted text hidden]
--
Jayasri Hart https://www.linkedin.com/in/hartfilms/
1272 of 1291
Madeline Wilson <[email protected]>
Re: There’s Still Time to Get Involved in the District Formation Process! Madeline Pettit <[email protected]>
To: Raffi Saroyan <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 1:04 PM
Hi Raffi,
Please watch the recording of City Council's discussion on May 2 for information on what prompted the resolution of intent. If you would like additional explanation you may contact the Councilmembers directly.

Thank you,
On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 7:33AM Raffi Saroyan <[email protected]> wrote:
hi madeline,
appreciate your responsiveness.
what prompted city of glendale's resolution of intent on may 2nd? best,
raffi
On Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 5:15 PM Madeline Pettit <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Raffi,
What prompted districting for Glendale?
The City of Glendale passed a resolution of intent on May 2, 2023 to change from citywide elections to district elections to elect its City Councilmembers. The proposed change will be put before voters on the March 2024 ballot. The City is considering a plan for six (6) separate council districts and a directly elected mayor. If this plan is approved by the voters, this would take effect beginning with Council elections starting in 2026. Voters would have the opportunity to elect one City Councilmember who lives in and is elected by voters in their district and all Glendale voters would vote to select their next Mayor. Pros and cons cited for transitioning to City Council districts can be found here.

Regarding the mapping tool, what attributes should residents consider when defining borders? The following criteria should be the main consideration for residents when defining borders:

Federal Laws
Equal Population (based on total population of residents as determined by the most recent Federal decennial Census and adjusted by the State to reassign incarcerated persons to the last known place of residence)
Federal Voting Rights Act
No Racial Gerrymandering
California Criteria for Cities (to the extent practicable and in the following order of priority) Geographically contiguous (areas that meet only at the points of adjoining corners are not contiguous. Areas that are separated by water and not connected by a bridge, tunnel, or ferry service are not contiguous.

Undivided neighborhoods and “communities of interest” (Socio-economic geographic areas that should be kept together for purposes of its effective and fair representation) Easily identifiable boundaries
Compact (Do not bypass one group of people to get to a more distant group of people) Prohibited: “Shall not favor or discriminate against a political party.” Other Traditional Districting Principles
Respect voters’ choices / continuity in office
1273 of 1291
Future population growth
Information about what to consider when defining borders can be found in the PowerPoint presentations from the first round of workshops. You can also watch this recorded virtual workshop to hear the City's demographer touch on these points more in-depth.

With or without feedback from residents, how will the final borders for the districts be defined initially and when can they be revised next?
The final borders for the districts will be defined by the City Council at one of the upcoming public hearings and the proposed change to district elections, including the proposed map selected by City Council, will be put before voters on the March 2024 ballot. If the City of Glendale moves to district elections, a redistricting process will occur after the 2030 census is released.

On Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 9:24AM Raffi Saroyan <[email protected]> wrote:
thank you madeline.
what prompted districting for glendale?
regarding the mapping tool, what attributes should residents consider when defining borders? with or without feedback from residents, how will the final borders for the districts be defined initially and when can they be revised next?
raffi
On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 8:44AM Madeline Pettit <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Raffi,
Thank you for your question. The City's districting website hosts information about the purpose of districting, specifically the homepage, Districting Pros and Cons page, and the FAQ page. You may also find it useful to watch the demographer's presentation to City Council at the first public hearing or to attend an upcoming community workshop where background information will be shared along with a discussion of maps submitted by the public.

On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 6:43 PM Raffi Saroyan <[email protected]> wrote:

CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.
hi,
what's the purpose for districting?
if you have a general q&a page, i can start there.
thank you
raffi
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: My Glendale <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 4:01 PM
Subject: There’s Still Time to Get Involved in the District Formation Process! To: <[email protected]> 1274 of 1291
There’s Still Time to Get Involved in
the District Formation Process!
Dear Glendale Community,
The City of Glendale is considering a shift to district elections, and the proposed change will be put before voters on the March 2024 ballot. If this plan is approved by the voters, this would take effect beginning with Council elections starting in 2026.

Following the August 15 public hearing on district formation held by the Glendale City Council, the City of Glendale commenced a second round of community workshops to allow the community to review draft district maps and provide feedback on those maps.

Only three of the seven planned second-round workshops remain! Find event details about these workshops, which wrap up on September 7, and prior workshops by clicking the button below:

Attend an Upcoming Workshop!
If you’re unable to attend one of these workshops, we encourage you to review the draft district maps on the interactive review map and provide feedback at [email protected] or by calling the City at 818-548-4844, ext. 1.

Interactive Review Map Screenshot
Toggle on and off any of the draft maps and layers representing demographic data and more to understand each draft map.

If you find these maps do not sufficiently represent the city, you can draw additional maps! Maps may be submitted until Thursday, September 28 for consideration at the fourth public hearing on Tuesday, October 10 at Glendale City Hall, 613 E Broadway.

Draw a Draft District Map!
This is the final opportunity to submit a map for City Council consideration. For more information on Glendale’s district formation process, such as arguments for and against district formation, and how you can participate in the process, visit MapGlendale.org.
1275 of 1291
City of Glendale
Public Information Office
613 E. Broadway Room 200, Glendale, CA 91206
(818) 548-4844
@MyGlendale
Update your subscriptions, modify your password or email address, or stop subscriptions at any time on your Subscriber Preferences Page. You will need to use your email address to log in. If you have questions or problems with the subscription service, please visit subscriberhelp.govdelivery.com.

This service is provided to you at no charge by Glendale, California.

This email was sent to [email protected] using govDelivery Communications Cloud on behalf of: Glendale, California · 613 E. Broadway · Glendale, CA 91206-4391
GovDelivery
logo
--
Madeline Pettit
[email protected]
Website | Facebook | Twitter | YouTube | LinkedIn
--
Madeline Pettit
[email protected]
Website | Facebook | Twitter | YouTube | LinkedIn
--
Madeline Pettit
[email protected]
1276 of 1291
Madeline Wilson <[email protected]>
District map
2 messages
MIMI MALKHASSIAN <[email protected]> Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 5:39 PM To : "[email protected]" <[email protected]> CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.

I like Glendale City elections to stay the way it has been. I do not want any changes.

Mimi Malkhassian
Madeline Pettit <[email protected]> Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 9:50 AM To : MIMI MALKHASSIAN <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Hi Mimi,
Thank you for contacting us and participating in the City of Glendale’s potential move to district-based elections. Your comment will be posted to the Schedule Page as a public comment for the next Public Hearing.

Tripepi Smith is a marketing, technology and public affairs firm based in Orange County, CA. The Tripepi Smith team is working with the City of Glendale to provide outreach and communications services regarding the districting process. [Quoted text hidden]
--
Madeline Pettit
[email protected]
Website | Facebook | Twitter | YouTube | LinkedIn
1277 of 1291
1278 of 1291
1279 of 1291
Madeline Wilson <[email protected]>
Feedback from Sparr Heights Community Center workshop
Madeline Pettit <[email protected]> Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 3:52 PM To : Mary-Lynne Fisher <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Hi Mary-Lynne,
Thank you for your feedback. Your comment will be posted to the Schedule Page as a public comment for the next Public Hearing.

On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 10:27AM Mary-Lynne Fisher <[email protected]> wrote:

CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.

Last evening was the third workshop I attended, two virtual and finally one live. This was by far the best.

I especially appreciated how Doug Johnson put several of the maps on the big screen and pointed out the similarities and differences among them.

I think the best one by far is Map 120b. As Doug said, it follows the single district maps from the Crescenta Highlands and Adams Hill neighborhood associations and does not divide any of the neighborhood associations. Another advantage of this map is that it puts several areas at higher than average wildfire risk in the same district--Crescenta Highlands, Whiting Woods, and Chevy Chase Estates.

Among those focused on the worst one is 108. It separates Crescenta Highlands from Sparr Heights and the portion of Montrose in the city. These adjacent neighborhoods share major streets and commercial areas. They are also all in the Crescenta Valley High School attendance zone.

The more I learn about this process the more complicated I realize it is.

Regards,
Mary-Lynne Fisher
--
Madeline Pettit
[email protected]
Website | Facebook | Twitter | YouTube | LinkedIn 1280 of 1291 Madeline Wilson <[email protected]>
Glendale Districting - New submission from Contact Us
4 messages
[email protected] <[email protected]> Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 5:34 PM To : [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.

Name
Ingrid Wilcox
Email
[email protected]
Message
Hello,
I am working on a second map on behalf of South Glendale/AHNA and am wondering if there is a way to view the statistics re: voter turnout, income etc. before publishing?
I can see all of that information on the 2nd page of the already published maps but cannot figure out how to view that information prior to publishing.

It would be of great help in finalizing this next map.

Thank you in advance for your assistance.

Best,
Ingrid Wilcox
Douglas Johnson <[email protected]> Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 5:51 PM To : "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.

Thank you for your interest!
Unfortunately the socio-economic data is not tabulated by the online mapping tool. The data are visible in the interactive review map (scroll down past the map numbers to get to the socio-economic layers), but the data can only be compiled district by district by our demographic team after a map is submitted. --
Douglas Johnson
National Demographics Corporation
[email protected]
[Quoted text hidden]
Madeline Pettit <[email protected]>
To : Douglas Johnson <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Fri, Sep 1, 2023 at 9:55 AM
Hi Doug,
I noticed that Ingrid's email wasn't included in your response. Can you respond to her at [email protected] and cc [email protected]?
1281 of 1291
Madeline Wilson <[email protected]>
Map 106B
2 messages
Arpine Shakhbandaryan <[email protected]> Fri, Sep 8, 2023 at 3:32 PM To : [email protected]
CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.

Hello,
I'd like to recommend Map 106B to include for voters in March 2024.

Please let me know if you need additional details.

Best,
Arpiné
Madeline Pettit <[email protected]>
To: Arpine Shakhbandaryan <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Fri, Sep 8, 2023 at 4:12 PM
Hi Arpiné,
Thank you for contacting us and participating in the City of Glendale’s potential move to district-based elections. Your comment will be posted to the Schedule Page as a public comment for the next Public Hearing.

Tripepi Smith is a marketing, technology and public affairs firm based in Orange County, CA. The Tripepi Smith team is working with the City of Glendale to provide outreach and communications services regarding the districting process. [Quoted text hidden]
--
Madeline Pettit
[email protected]
Website | Facebook | Twitter | YouTube | LinkedIn
1282 of 1291
Madeline Wilson <[email protected]>
Districts YES
1 message
M <[email protected]> Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 12:40 PM To : "[email protected]" <[email protected]> CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.

Thank you for the reminder regarding the districting of Glendale for fair representation for all residents.

Not withstanding the thoughtful research regarding demographics that some have mentioned, I still think that dividing the City from north to south by the proposed number of council seats (I favor an odd number: 5 or 7).. From the furthest south city line to the furthest north in essentially straight lines.

No gerrymandering.

The lines from east to west shall be sacrosanct with the idea that folks in every section will be represented by a council member who lives within that specific area. Residence! Not work / office .

Locals in Glendale for all the many years I have lived in Adams Hill (the furthest south district?) have dealt with mostly.. representatives living north of the 134. I have never felt fully represented , though some council members may be more
responsive than others.

The Mayor? Elected at Large! Please.

Sincerely,
Michael Sheehan
Adams Hill
1283 of 1291
Madeline Wilson <[email protected]>
Districting
Madeline Wilson <[email protected]>
To : Chris Zastrow <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 9:41 AM
Hi Chris,
Thank you for contacting us and participating in the City of Glendale’s potential move to district-based elections.

The issue of amending the City Charter to allow for a transition to Council districts was placed on the ballot in 2015 but rejected by the voters. Earlier this year, the City of Glendale passed a resolution of intent to change from citywide elections to district elections to elect its City Councilmembers. The proposed change will be put before voters on the March 2024 ballot. Cited pros and cons of this transition are available on the Pros and Cons page of Glendale's districting website.

Your comment will be posted to the Schedule Page as a public comment for the next Public Hearing.

On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 6:05 PM Chris Zastrow <[email protected]> wrote:

CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.

Correct me if I am wrong but didn't we already vote against this? I believe that districting will only further divide our city.

Regards,
Chris
Chris Zastrow
Realtor
Madeline Wilson
[email protected]
1284 of 1291
Madeline Wilson <[email protected]>
RE. Election map
1 message
Robert Harlow <[email protected]> Sat, Sep 16, 2023 at 6:13 PM To : "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, Robert Harlow <[email protected]> CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.

MY and others preference regarding Glendale city election maps, DO NOT need any changes.

Rather educate the public to the ulterior motives and past, present and long range view points.

This also needs to be considered with the education system .

No more smoke and mirrors.

Only leads to more complications.

Thank you for asking.

Robert Harlow
1285 of 1291
Madeline Wilson <[email protected]>
latest districting map submission link
3 messages
[email protected] <[email protected]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 2:28 PM
To : [email protected]
CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.
https://davesredistricting.org/join/a6619b36-a61c-4184-abc5-f12a300372e2 Madeline Wilson <[email protected]>
To : [email protected]
Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 2:57 PM
Cc: [email protected]
Good afternoon,
Thank you for contacting us and participating in the City of Glendale’s potential move to district-based elections.

Please continue to visit MapGlendale.org for the most up-to-date news and information on the districting process.

On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 2:28 PM <[email protected]> wrote:

CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.
https://davesredistricting.org/join/a6619b36-a61c-4184-abc5-f12a300372e2 --
Madeline Wilson
[email protected]
Website | Facebook | Twitter | YouTube | LinkedIn
[email protected] <[email protected]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 2:58 PM
To : Madeline Wilson <[email protected]>
I apologize for this automatic reply to your email.

To control spam, I now allow incoming messages only from senders I have approved beforehand. 1286 of 1291
Madeline Wilson <[email protected]>
General questions
Madeline Wilson <[email protected]>
To : Bill Lam <[email protected]>
Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 2:12 PM
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Hi Bill,
Thank you for your questions about Glendale's pursuit of district formation.

Anyone can draw maps throughout the process, regardless if they are residents or not. All maps are presented in the same way to Council for their consideration for adoption.

The final mapping deadline is tomorrow, September 28. All maps compliant with districting criteria will be processed by the demographer and posted to the Draft Maps Page as part of the draft maps publication presented to the City Council during the next Public Hearing.

On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 1:29 PM Bill Lam <[email protected]> wrote:

CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.

Hi so I have a question about the Districting, since the city of Glendale is in the process of creating council districts, do I need to be a Glendale resident in order to participate and submit the map drawing process? If I live outside of the city of Glendale, CA, does this have any effect on submitting the proposed district maps? And I also want to know whether the deadline of drawing and submitting proposed maps have already passed yet? Please respond as soon as possible
Thank you
Get Outlook for iOS
--
Madeline Wilson
[email protected]
Website | Facebook | Twitter | YouTube | LinkedIn 1287 of 1291 Madeline Wilson <[email protected]>
My own Proposed map for council districts in Glendale
3 messages
Bill Lam <[email protected]> Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 5:39 PM To : "[email protected]" <[email protected]> CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.

Hi so here are my own submissions regarding the city of Glendale's council districts that I made ranging from 4 to 7 districts and all of these maps have been attached into a single pdf file in this email message.

Also, I forgot to put my name on each of the maps and so if you have anything else to add regarding my own submission.
thank you
Get Outlook for iOS
Glendale 4,5,6,7 council districts map.pdf
16375K
Madeline Wilson <[email protected]>
To : Bill Lam <[email protected]>
Fri, Sep 29, 2023 at 8:56 AM
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Hi Bill,
Thank you for contacting us and participating in the City of Glendale’s potential move to district-based elections.

Please continue to visit MapGlendale.org for the most up-to-date news and information on the districting process.

Tripepi Smith is a marketing, technology and public affairs firm based in Orange County, CA. The Tripepi Smith team is working with the City of Glendale to provide outreach and communications services regarding the districting process. [Quoted text hidden]
--
Madeline Wilson
[email protected]
Website | Facebook | Twitter | YouTube | LinkedIn 1288 of 1291 Madeline Wilson <[email protected]>
Redistricting Map for Glendale
2 messages
Soul Knowing Energy Healing <[email protected]> Fri, Sep 29, 2023 at 3:36 PM To : [email protected]
CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.

To Whom it may concern:

I like the 4 district Map, Map 127.

When is the hearing?
Thank you.
warm regards,
Heather Parker
Intuitive Healer / Relationship Coach
SKEH website
Book a Session or Consultation:

Book a Session with me
Sign up for our monthly newsletter:

Subscribe
You can find me on the following Social Media platforms:

FACEBOOK

INSTAGRAM
Madeline Wilson <[email protected]>
To : Soul Knowing Energy Healing <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected]
Fri, Sep 29, 2023 at 4:17 PM
Hi Heather,
Thank you for contacting us and participating in the City of Glendale’s potential move to district-based elections. Your comment will be posted to the Schedule Page as a public comment for the next Public Hearing, on October 10.

Tripepi Smith is a marketing, technology and public affairs firm based in Orange County, CA. The Tripepi Smith team is working with the City of Glendale to provide outreach and communications services regarding the districting process. 1289 of 1291
Madeline Wilson <[email protected]>
Map 102 (Population Balanced update to Map 101)
1 message
Marina Mirea <[email protected]> Mon, Oct 2, 2023 at 8:50 PM To : "[email protected]" <[email protected]> CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links, open attachments, or reply if you are unsure as to the sender.

Map 102 (Population Balanced update to Map 101)
1290 of 1291
Public email comments on specific maps:

Email Commenter Comment
Julie Griffin Favors keeping “northern Glendale [in] one district (Crescenta Highlands, Montrose, Spar Heights, Whiting Woods, etc.)”, such as in 117.

Against 108 for dividing those areas.

Heather Parker
Arpine Shakhbandaryan
Morgan Ward Doran
Favors Map 127 (which is a 4 district map)
Favors 106b
Against maps 103, 120, 115, 117, 118 for dividing South Glendale too much
Mary Lynn-Fisher
KU400 email
Favors 120b (keeps neighborhoods together)
Against 108 (splits Sparr Heights from the north) and 102 (splits Whiting Woods from north Glendale).

Against 104 and 105 (divides community around San Fernando and the I-5 corridor)
Public Forum comments on specific maps:

Comment
Against 118: Adams Hill has more in common with neighboring Tropico than with the fartheraway canyons.

Against 103: dilutes renters’ voice
Against 117: seems to be gerrymandering and against the Fair Maps Act Against 108: divides contiguous neighborhoods of Crescenta Heights & Montrose & Sparr Heights
Against 107: northern district comes too far south
Favors 114: “not super clean” but makes sense
Favors 105: easy to understand
Favors 120b: fire danger is an issue that unites the north Public comments about general map characteristics from early forums and Council hearings (not specific to any one map):
• Kenneth Village and Northwest Hillsides should not be w/North Glendale. • There should be two districts entirely in south Glendale • Rancho should be with southwestern Glendale
• East Tropico should be with the area to the west of it, not with Adams Hill • General concern about keeping all or specific neighborhood associations united • Concern about majority-homeowner Adams Hill being with the majority-renter rest of south Glendale
1291 of 1291

Glendale City CouncilOctober 10, 2023

Glendale City Council
October 10, 2023