Plan Number Date Name Comment
Plan 401 Drafted b y NDC 1/21/2022 Paula Johnson Where is the outline of each of the 4 Districts? Plan 401 Drafted by NDC 1/21/2022 Mark Preston So I can see that most maps are out of balance. I understand. But, maps 401 and 402 are utterly and completely incomprehensible. What are the districts proposed ??? My goodness, 4 districts with 2 north and 2 south makes sense.
Just tweak East/West. It should not be a Sudoku puzzle.
Plan 401 Drafted by NDC 1/23/2022 Niccola Camacho Gerrymandering at the local level, very cool. Why not one-person one-vote upon the law, like a shareholder meeting, but with constituents.
Plan 401 Drafted by NDC 1/24/2022 Niccola Camacho http://www.ncid.us/amendment Something like this could help solve the problem of monetary corruption in politics. The politicians are mostly bought, let the people vote on the law.
Plan 401 Drafted by NDC 1/24/2022 Ted Anagnnoson I think these are just neighborhoods. comparing this map with the ones below shows that this one doesn't have any district boundaries. it's a background map.
In this case the neighborhoods are pretty detailed. The other map has bigger groupings Plan 401 Drafted by NDC 1/24/2022 Anonymous You are correct, this is a Neighborhood Map meant to show those communties of interest. It was not submitted as a district ma
p.
Plan 401 Drafted b y NDC 1/25/2022 Claudia Dato The Old Town Neighborhood should include everything west of Ward Memorial Blvd/Hwy 217 over to Fairview.
Plan 401 Drafted by NDC 1/25/2022 CDG Question: Where’s the legend to this map? Since this is a component of the evaluation criteria (i.e., undivided neighborhoods and “communities of interest”), where’s the legend to this map listing each of the color coded Communities of Interest and Neighborhoods as prepared by NDC and adopted by the City Council on August 17, 2021 (see Pages 5 & 7 of Agenda Item A.1, Subj: Recommendations to the City Council regarding Draft Maps for City Council Voting Districts Boundaries for District Elections, meeting date January 26, 2022, Attachment 3 on Pages 69 - 71). As such, it would be helpful for reviewers, including myself, if either a link to this legend or a pdf was attached – thank you.
Plan 401 Drafted by NDC 2/2/2022 Aaron B Neither 401 or 402 appear legible in that you cannot see (clearly) any outline of the four districts.
Please revise the labeling or color scheme.
Plan 402 1/24/2022 Anonymous You are correct, this is a Neighborhood Map meant to show those communties of interest. It was not submitted as a district ma
p.
Plan 402 1/24/2022 Anonymous What is the purpose of all these divisions? You have already allowed the splitting of our individual very residential lots which will reduce the value of our homes. Why divide our areas also? Plan 402 1/21/2022 R Mc I prefer this map. It is more logically divided. Map 401 explicitly excludes my neighborhood from the same district as all the other surrounding neighborhoods.
Plan 402 1/21/2022 Paula Johnson Where is the outline of each of the 4 Districts? Neighborhood Maps (for Reference)
Drawgoleta.org Plan Comments
2/23/2022 4:00 PM
Plan 402 1/24/2022 Ted Anagnnoson this again is a neighborhood background map, with the smaller neighborhoods of the other map grouped together here Plan 402 1/25/2022 Claudia Dato This map makes much more sense than Map 401. Old Town boundaries are correct in my view as a 7 year resident of Old Town.
Plan 402 1/26/2022 Anonymous I think the City did not label this very well based on some of the comments. why call it PLAN 402 when it is not a plan at all? need to be clear.
Plan Number Date Name Comment
Plan 202 1/24/2022 Bruce Wilson Of the plans that meet the minimum My #1 preference is #202 first, and #702 second. So many of the other plans divide cohesive residential communities. While there are some small differences in these 2 plans, they both have a good distribution of various people and are in geographic areas that are mostly the same. They have schools that serve most of the residents of that district.
Plan 202 1/24/2022 Kalia I think this is a good plan for reasons mentioned above. It keeps neighborhoods cohesive. We need this to be able to have a sense of community and to work with our council member on any issues and improvements.
Plan 202 2/1/2022 Aaron B This one makes the most sense, -and though there are no perfect solutions the borders are at least mostly contiguous.
Plan 202 2/1/2022 Kelly Hildner I don't like that this one separates my neighborhood from our adjacent neighborhoods to the west and instead groups Storke Ranch with a bunch of commercial areas and Old Town.
Plan 203 1/24/2022 Anonymous This plan keeps neighborhoods cohesive, which is good.
Plan 203 1/27/2022 Anonymous This plan divides our neighborhood in a really odd way, it would be weird to have one block represented by a different council member.
Plan 203 2/4/2022 North Fairview Avenue
area resident
Supporting this plan currently however I believe the city of Goleta should move forward with incorporating areas north of La Goleta Road into District 3. I have concerns that this area will be developed to the detriment of the semi-rural character many Goleta residents cherish. Current residents will be negatively impacted by development in the wild-fire prone areas in the foothills. Organic farms and horse facilities are already at risk to development. Lot splits threaten this area. Goleta should be making zoning and land use policy in this area -- not the County. The Goleta foothills need protection as do the farms and orchards and natural open space that currently exists in the Goleta area.
Plan 204 1/24/2022 Kalia This map does not make sense because it divides the Berkeley neighborhood ! Please don’t choose a map that divides on Berkeley Road. It’s right in the middle of a neighborhood.
Plan 204 1/23/2022 Alejandra S. I am supportive of this map. It has one of the lowest population deviations of any of the maps. Probably is no perfect ma
p, but this one makes sense.
Plan 205
District Maps that Meet Minimum Legal Requirements
Drawgoleta.org Plan Comments
2/23/2022 4:00 PM
Plan 206 1/26/2022 Anonymous I like the concept to divide at 101 (except move the small pink #1 to #2 district) , like what I see to divide at Los Carneros and Storke along hollister to border district #3 and #4. >From a Parks an Open Space Perspective I strongly feel each distract >should include large parks Goleta is know for,
for example this plan:
A. This places Ellwood Mesa & Girsh Park in district #1.
B. Bishop Ranch in district #2, (will give incentive to make a big chunk of Bishop Ranch into a park in future) C. Lake Los Carneros & Stow Park in district #3.
D Old Town is completely in district #4 and includes Jonny Wallace Park & GV Community Center Plan 207 1/24/2022 Kalia Please don’t divide in Berkeley Road. This is right in the middle of a neighborhood.
Plan 207 1/24/2022 Kalia Again, please do not choose a map that divides districts along Berkeley Road. This is right in the middle of a neighborhood. Maybe Calle Real or even Encina Road.
Plan 207 1/26/2022
Anonymous US 101 is a natural divider, don't chop hoods up like this.
Plan 208 1/24/2022 Marsha I like bein g included with DPHS area Plan 208 1/26/2022 Anonymous Dont like this Old Town being part of Lake Los Carneros. Not a not wise or natural choice. Better for the residents who live and play adjacent to these large open space areas to be in the same district district as the park or open space.
Plan 208 1/27/2022 Anonymous Odd neighborhood division in Ellwood, half the neighborhood is represented by one council member and half would be represented by another.
Plan 209 1/24/2022 Anonymous This is very logical division of Goleta as folks will have common interests in their areas, NW, SW, NE, SE parts of Goleta Plan 209 1/25/2022 Anonymous This map includes communities of interest such as senior citizen complexes.
Plan 209 1/26/2022 Anonymous agree with comments above regarding natural boundaries for Goleta. Note this plan is same as 206.
Plan 209 1/25/2022 Anonymous Agree that this map looks like a natural division that is easy to understand and recognizes natural boundaries and demographic distribution. Not sure I understand what is happening near the 101 freeway between districts 3 ad 4. Maps 210F and 403 a closely related maps to this one.
Plan 210B
Plan 210C
Plan 210D
Plan 210F 1/25/2022 Anonymous This is my favorite map, though the lines along highway 101 are difficult to understand. This one looks very much like 403. A sim
ple and straightforward set of boundaries that are easy to see.
Plan 211 1/24/2022 Anonymous This plan splits a neighborhood along Kellogg Road, and splits a neighborhood arbitrarily— not good! Please don’t choose this plan.
Plan 211 1/26/2022 Anonymous Please stick with the first divide line as US101 , natural districts are NOT displayed in this plan, please resist to divide this way. plan no good reject this style.
Plan 212
Plan 213 1/24/2022 Kalia Dividing districts along Berkeley Road is not a good idea. This line would be right in the middle of a neighborhood and put me in a different district than my neighbors. We have good dialogue here about elections and it would be sad not to be able to continue that!
Plan 214
Plan 215
Drawgoleta.org Plan Comments
2/23/2022 4:00 PM
Plan 216
Plan 217
Plan 218 1/24/2022 Kalia This map puts just part of Somerset Lane in a different district! That will lead to all sorts of confusion and the people in those few houses will feel left out!
Plan 219B 1/24/2022
Anonymous please don’t divide along Berkeley Road, which is in the middle of a neighborhood Plan 220B
Plan 221 1/21/2022 Deborah Williams This is my favorite map/plan. It has the second least population deviation of any of the plans, and the best, most com
pact boundaries.
Plan 221 1/21/2022 Ken Tatro What I was lookg for turns out to be in full agreement with Deborah Williams above. the least populationn deviation and the most together boundaries. thus keep it straight forward and simple, right? Thanks for all the hard work putting this together.
Plan 221 1/25/2022 Anonymous Deborah, this plan spilts my neighborhood. I think this is not a good idea. Berkeley Road goes right through the middle and it just feels weird that my neighbors would have a different council member. We go to the same parks, have the same issues. We need to be in the same district. Please don’t split a district along Berkeley Road! Plan 221 1/24/2022 Kalia
Above comment from me. (Forgot to leave my name).
Plan 221 I would suggest not letting the population deviation value overshadow the discussion. In order to get that low value, a small "island" was created in district 4. I would be in favor of slightly higher population deviation to avoid strange boundaries and possibly disenfranchised segments. Plan 226 looks good, but suffers from the same issue.
Plan 222A 1/24/2022
Anonymous Same comment as other plans that split a neighborhood in two: please don’t divide along Berkeley Road.
Plan 222B 1/24/2022 Anonymous Please don’t split districts along Berkeley Road! Plan 223 1/24/2022 Anonymous For reasons mentioned earlier, please don’t split districts along Berkeley Road (shown top of district 4).
Plan 224 1/23/2022 Joseph Guron Looking at the demographics of this map, it makes sense. Other than District 3, it has close demographics between White vs Non-white (Hispanic) voters. It’s almost impossible to divide each group and population equally while as the same time havin
g neighborhoods stay continuous
Plan 224 1/24/2022 Steve Maas Please consider maps 224, 702, & 704. Thank you.
Plan 224 1/25/2022 CDG NDC’s review of Map 224 identifies this map as having “Three Districts Cross Substantially” and further states, “Splits the Mathilda neighborhood; technically contiguous but “iffy” (see Page 137 of Agenda Item A.1, Subj: Recommendations to the City Council regarding Draft Maps for City Council Voting Districts Boundaries for District Elections, meeting date January 26, 2022: hereinafter “Agenda Item A.1”). Additionally, NDC states on Page 70 of Agenda Item A.1 under the heading of Demographic Outliers: “Ellwood Beach/Mathilda (low income, high multi-family housing, high renter housing).” However, the percent Household Income difference between District 1 and District 2 appears to be negligible and is presented as follows (as extracted from the Demographics button at https://drawgoleta.org/plan-224/): A) 1 % difference for household income 0 – 25K, B) 1 % difference for household income 25K – 50K, C) 3 % difference for household income 50K – 75K, D) 8 % difference for household income 75K – 200K, and E) 3 % difference for household income 200K plus. Furthermore, the percent Housing Stats difference between District 1 and District 2 appears to be minor and is presented as follows (extracted from the same Demographics button as above): A) 8 % difference for single family, B) 8 % difference for multi-family, C) 12 % difference for rented, and D) 12 % difference for owned. Nonetheless, if the minor concerns identified above by NDC appear to be significant when evaluated by the PEC (Public Engagement Commission), then NDC’s Map Plan 704 (four districts cross; same splits of the Mathilda neighborhood) is my preferred option to Map Plan 224 followed by NDC’s Map Plan 702 as my third choice.
Drawgoleta.org Plan Comments
2/23/2022 4:00 PM
Plan 226 1/24/2022 Steve Nelson After doing my best to review these proposals I like this one the best. It respects neighborhoods and geographical and other physical boundaries (major roads, freeways, etc) pretty well with a pretty good population deviation number. I think this is the least forced, most natural, and best balanced of the plans.
Plan 226 1/25/2022 Anonymous On the whole, I would agree with this comment (above), but then if you look very carefully at District 4, there's a strange little island in the lower left part of District 4 which must be how the population deviation was reduced. Doesn't look good.
For the same reasons as stated above (respecting neighborhoods and natural boundaries), I'd go with 403 or 209 or 210F instead.
Plan 226 1/26/2022 Anonymous this could be a good plan if the district 1 and 3 Glen Anne Rd divider was moved to N Lake Los Carneros Rd. This way Bisho
p Ranch is in district 1 and Lake Los Careros in district 3.
Plan 226 1/28/2022 Steve Nelson This process is way too complicated for most civilians. There needs to be a better, more streamlined way of presenting this information to the public to elicit participation! Plan 226 2/1/2022 Anonymous This plan breaks up my neighborhood (Storke Ranch) in a weird way, so it doesn't make sense to me.
Plan 226 2/1/2022 Kell y Hildner This plan breaks up my neighborhood (Storke Ranch) in a weird way, so it doesn't make sense to me.
Plan 403 1/25/2022 Anonymous Second favorite map, though the lines along highway 101 are difficult to understand. This one looks very much like 210F (which also has the apparent 101 crossover?). Otherwise is a simple and straightforward set of boundaries that are easy to see.
Plan 403 1/26/2022 Anonymous Seems many of these plans put those Smart and Final or Hollister Village apts in DPHS district #1. like it or not we should NOT make districts cross US 101. So move these apartments to #2 or 4 and district #1 border with #3 to N Los Carneros.
Plan 701 Drafted by NDC 1/24/2022 Leslie Very good plan. Uses the natural divisions of Hwy 101 and Glen Annie the best, with the exception of the district 1 crossover to balance
population, which still feels natural to that neighborhood.
Plan 701 Drafted b y NDC 1/24/2022 Kalia This seems like a fair plan.
Plan 701 Drafted b y NDC 1/26/2022 Anonymous put Bishop Ranch in district #1 and this is a workable plan. in other words divide #1 and #3 at N Los Carneros.
Plan 701 Drafted by NDC 2/1/2022 Kelly Hildner Of the four maps recommended after the last meeting, this seems the most coherent. It uses natural breaks well (101, Hollister, Glen Annie) and keeps many common interests/needs within the same district. Regarding the note above (and on many other draft maps), putting Bishop Ranch in District 1 vs. 3 seems to be a specific interest which may need to be ex
plored.
Plan 701 Drafted by NDC 2/1/2022 Kelly Hildner Of the 4 recommended maps, I think this one or 703 make the most sense, with continuous borders and keeping neighborhoods cohesive.
Plan 701 Renumbered 2/4/2022 Ted Anagnnoson This is a good map in terms of following natural boundaries between neighborhoods. It's one of the ones I thought was best when I looked through all 50+ 2 weeks ago. I particularly like that the freeway is the boundary between district 1 and 2, and that the boundaries between 3 and 4 following well-known streets. you could do a lot worse than to use this map. I guess you can't avoid pairing two of the districts with the Mayor's election without giving the Mayor either a 2 year term (that the voters voted not to have recently) or giving the Mayor a six year term. I guess two of the districts will be
paired with the Mayor and 2 will never be.....
Plan 701 Renumbered 2/5/2022 Anonymous It is better to have Hollister village in district 4 rather than be the odd ball on this map Plan 701 Renumbered 2/6/2022 AB N Los Carneros could be the boundary b/w 1&3 vs Glenn Annie, and the Hollister Village could be in 4 with some of 4’s south-East area moved into 2.
Plan 702 Drafted by NDC 1/24/2022 Anne Rae My friends south of 101 are concerned about flooding and airplane noise. North of 101 areas do not have those concerns. Group areas so the city council member can focus on the specifics of the area they represent.
Drawgoleta.org Plan Comments
2/23/2022 4:00 PM
Plan 702 Drafted by NDC 1/24/2022 Bruce Wilson Of the plans that meet the minimum My #1 preference is #202 first, and #702 second. So many of the other plans divide cohesive residential communities. While there are some small differences in these 2 plans, they both have a good distribution of various people and are in geographic areas that are mostly the same. They have schools that serve most of the residents of that district.
Plan 702 Drafted b
y NDC 1/24/2022 Steve Maas Please consider maps 224, 702, & 704. Thank you.
Plan 702 Drafted by NDC 1/25/2022 CDG NDC’s review of NDC’s Map 702 identifies this map as having “One District Crosses Minimally” and further appears, of noteworthy importance, to have drawn districts without splitting any communities of interest or neighborhoods (see Page 114 of Agenda Item A.1, Subj: Recommendations to the City Council regarding Draft Maps for City Council Voting Districts Boundaries for District Elections, meeting date January 26, 2022: hereinafter “Agenda Item A.1”). Additionally,
“District 3 crosses over minimally, all other districts stay on one side of the freeway; Population deviation: 9.5%; District Latino CVAP: 29%, 25%, 17%, 31%; All four districts are contiguous; Does not split any neighborhoods; Closely adheres to general plan subareas as communities of interest and, to a lesser extent, elementary school attendance areas; Does not split the airport noise corridor or “demographic outliers;” District boundaries follow the railroad and major streets; District 3 may not be compact.”
On a related side note, I am a big proponent of offering each incumbent City Councilmember the opportunity to finish their elected four-year term in the newly formed district where they currently live. Page 5 of Agenda Item A.1 states, “Other traditional considerations that are permitted but not required include: Respect voters’ choices / continuity in office for incumbents and future population growth”Plan 703 Drafted by NDC 1/24/2022 Amante A Mangaser I glanced mostly at the NDC-generated maps along with the demographics data. I think this redistricting map is the most logical of all three.
Plan 703 Drafted by NDC 1/25/2022 Leslie I like plan 701 and I like this plan also, because they best use the natural division lines of Hwy 101 and Glen Annie Rd.
However, this plan might have more appeal to those in area 1.
I’d like to add that I think it’s important for area 3 residents to be grouped with the Fairview and Calle Real shopping areas, and also with the Cathedral Oaks corridor along La Patera Ranch. That encompasses “Goleta North” which is alread
y akin to a district or small town.
Plan 703 Drafted by NDC 1/26/2022 Anonymous no we should not make a district straddle US 101 so much like #1 in this plan. Goleta west and south of 101 should definitely include Ellwood Mesa. why would Ellwood as we know it be divided? Plan 704 Drafted b y NDC 1/24/2022 Steve Maas Please consider maps 224, 702, & 704. Thank you.
Drawgoleta.org Plan Comments
2/23/2022 4:00 PM
Plan 704 Drafted by NDC 1/25/2022 CDG NDC’s review of NDC’s Map 704 identifies this map as having “Four Districts Cross, District 3 Minimally” and further states, “Splits the Mathilda neighborhood” (see Page 142 of Agenda Item A.1, Subj: Recommendations to the City Council regarding Draft Maps for City Council Voting Districts Boundaries for District Elections, meeting date January 26, 2022: hereinafter “Agenda Item A.1”). Additionally, Page 148 of Agenda Item A.1 reads in relevant part as, “All four districts cross over the freeway; Population deviation: 5.7%, District Latino CVAP: 30%, 24%, 31%, 16%; All four districts are contiguous; Splits the Ellwood Beach / Mathilda neighborhood; Does not adhere as closely to general plan subareas as communities of interest, but splits them fairly significantly; Does not split the airport noise corridor, but does split one “demographic outlier” (Ellwood Beach / Mathilda); Only some district boundaries follow the railroad and major streets; District 4 may not be compact.”
On a related side note, I am a big proponent of offering each incumbent City Councilmember the opportunity to finish their elected four-year term in the newly formed district where they currently live. Page 5 of Agenda Item A.1 states, “Other traditional considerations that are permitted but not required include: Respect voters’ choices / continuity in office for incumbents, and future population growth.”
Plan 704 Drafted by NDC 1/26/2022 CDG Dear PEC: Please spend considerable time analyzing the demographics between each of the draft maps with public comments received including analyzing data such as percent minorities, percent renters, percent multi-family housing, percent with BA or higher education, etc., from the Interactive Review Map @ https://ndcresearch.maps.arcgis.com/apps/View/index.html?appid=8d7cbd5588914037bd8e46188cb905b6 in order to select a suitable theme in line with the public comments.
Thank you!
Plan Number Date Name Comment
Plan 101 Not Po pulation Balanced
Plan 102 Not Po pulation Balanced
Plan 103 Not Population Balanced 1/21/2022 Madlyn Monchamp I prefer plan 103 On this plan the land area in Number 4 remains continuous. It makes no sense to have an area divided in two by Santa Barbara airport/Santa Barbara City.
Plan 104 Not Po pulation Balanced
Plan 105 Not Po pulation Balanced
Plan 106 Not Po pulation Balanced
Plan 107 Not Po pulation Balanced
Plan 108 Not Po pulation Balanced
Plan 109 Not Po pulation Balanced
Plan 110 Not Po pulation Balanced
Plan 111 Not Po pulation Balanced
Plan 112 Not Po pulation Balanced
Plan 201 Not Conti guous
Plan 210A Not Po pulation Balanced
Plan 210E Not Po pulation Balanced
Plan 219A Not Po pulation Balanced
Plan 220A Not Po pulation Balanced
District Maps that Do Not Meet Minimum Legal Requirements Drawgoleta.org Plan Comments
2/23/2022 4:00 PM
Plan 225 Not Conti guous
Plan 301 Not Population Balanced 1/24/2022 Anne Rae Breck I think it is good to have 101 as a divide. South Goleta with more shopping and apartments may have a different set of concerns than mostly single family homes in the north. Also south more in the 80-100 year flood zone \ those residence will have different issues than residence north of 101. Anne Breck Plan 501 Not Po pulation Balanced
Plan 601 Not Po pulation Balanced
Drawgoleta.org Plan Comments
2/23/2022 4:00 PM