Correspondence
1 Juanita Davalos
From: Juanita Davalos
Sent: Monday, May 8, 2023 10:34 AM
To: Councilmember Allen Vinson; Councilmember Sue Noack; Councilmember Zac Shess; Mayor Tim Flaherty; Vice Mayor Matt Rinn
Cc: June Catalano; Geoff Gillette; Janet Coleson
Subject: FW: district-based elections - Doug Serpa
Mayor Flaherty and Councilmembers:
The correspondence below will be included with the May 22, 2023 public hearing agenda item regarding district based elections.
Juanita
From: DOUG SERPA <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, May 5, 2023 4:47 PM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: district-based elections
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender.
We just received our Pleasant Hill Outlook today via email and noticed the City "Transitioning to district-based elections on Page 2. The Outlook mentions "Pre-map Public Hearing sates (assume dates)" in March and April. Having just received this Outlook today makes this district-based elections effort moving forward as inappropriate for the lack or and inappropriate public notice for public participation. As such, Adoption of city maps in the May 22, 2023 City Council meeting is premature.
Please reset this effort to allow for "full city participation in the important and probably unneeded activity with full written notice to Pleasant Hill residents of planned actions. With as much discussion as there is regarding election integrity across the country this initiative as it is being moved forward appears to lack due course and lack of integrity.
Sincerely, Doug Serpa
1 Juanita Davalos
From: Juanita Davalos
Sent: Monday, May 8, 2023 12:14 PM
To: Councilmember Allen Vinson; Councilmember Sue Noack; Councilmember Zac Shess; Mayor Tim Flaherty; Vice Mayor Matt Rinn
Cc: June Catalano; Geoff Gillette; Janet Coleson
Subject: May 1 meeting feedback - Susan Hedgpeth
Mayor Flaherty and Councilmembers:
The correspondence below will be included with the May 22, 2023 public hearing agenda item regarding district based elections.
Juanita
From: Susan HEDGPETH <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, May 5, 2023 9:27 PM
To: City Council <[email protected]>
Subject: May 1 meeting feedback
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender.
Dear Mr. Mayor and Councilmembers,
I attended last week's meeting on May 1. Today I watched the video. I was particularly interested in your responses at the end of the meeting to the community comments. A few questions come to mind. These are my thoughts and may or may not be shared by other community members.
1. Why didn't the demographer take into account the other information about neighborhoods and communities of interest? Why was his ONLY goal to create a district with as close to majority minority as possible? Wasn't he listening to the public comment? I assumed he was aware of what people were writing and speaking about, and that was what guided him in preparing his maps. How else did he know what to do?
2. Why didn't the demographer come up with a few other map options? Instead we got two. One terrible 5- district map, and one 4-district map that no one wants except maybe the Council. If there had been one or two more options, you might not have gotten the strong response you did.
3. The only reason this seems adversarial is NOT because it began with a threat of a lawsuit. It's because it took concerted community pressure for you to take it seriously. For one (major) example, we had to push you to send out notices to all PH residents -- way too late to really be effective. At every step it seemed we had to push you.
4. When I first saw the demographer's maps I was shocked! And when I saw a version with Councilmembers' homes marked, I was even more shocked. As I said in my comments the other night, looking at that map it is 2 impossible not to conclude that the demographer took your residences into account. Whether or not you participated by giving him information is beside the point.
5. I'm pleased to hear that you (or some of you) do not like the demographer's maps. Great! I am hopeful we can leave those maps behind and choose one of the ones the community submitted.
6. I feel a little sympathetic that the meeting was difficult for you and you felt attacked and unappreciated and whatever else you were feeling. But you could have responded differently. Instead of getting defensive at the end of the meeting, I think it would have been much more useful and appropriate for you to simply listen and acknowledge that folks are upset. I'm happy to hear you feel we are all on the same page. I await some more evidence of that, hopefully at tomorrow's meeting.
I do appreciate that you will have large maps, posted on the wall, that you'll open early so folks can examine them, that you are having the meeting in a less formal room, and that you scheduled a Saturday afternoon meeting. Thank you for listening to our ideas and responding to them.
Susan Hedgpeth
2212 Lisa Lane
1 Juanita Davalos
From: Juanita Davalos
Sent: Monday, May 8, 2023 12:22 PM
To: Councilmember Allen Vinson; Councilmember Sue Noack; Councilmember Zac Shess; Mayor Tim Flaherty; Vice Mayor Matt Rinn
Cc: June Catalano; Geoff Gillette; Janet Coleson
Subject: California Voters Rights Act (CVRA) - Tom Thornton Mayor Flaherty and Councilmembers:
The correspondence below will be included with the May 22, 2023 public hearing agenda item regarding district based elections.
Juanita
-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Thornton <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, May 7, 2023 8:21 AM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: California Voters Rights Act (CVRA)
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender.
I am extremely angry and concerned regarding the CVRA. I feel this is, yet another plan to gerrymander my vote into oblivion by unelected bureaucrats. The last U.S. House election my vote meant nothing because I had only two choices, a Democrat (DeSaulnier) and a Green Party worthless candidate. The Republicans didn’t even field a candidate, feeling this district has been so gerrymandered it was unwindable.
Now, once again, the Democrats are fine tuning their ability to limit my right to choose a candidate that represents my views and values. It’s no wonder people are leaving this very expensive and not very representative state.
I strongly urge the City to refuse to comply with the CVRA and the further erosion of our voting rights. I feel that I’m being encouraged to leave California for a state that’s freer with less taxation.
Please share this email with the Mayor.
Frustratedly yours,
Thomas Thornton
170 Pleasant View Drive
Pleasant Hill CA
925 383-5149 cell
Sent from my iPad
1 Juanita Davalos
From: Juanita Davalos
Sent: Monday, May 8, 2023 12:27 PM
To: Councilmember Allen Vinson; Councilmember Sue Noack; Councilmember Zac Shess; Mayor Tim Flaherty; Vice Mayor Matt Rinn
Cc: June Catalano; Geoff Gillette; Janet Coleson
Subject: I strongly prefer district map #5 - Anne Greenblatt Mayor Flaherty and Councilmembers:
The correspondence below will be included with the May 22, 2023 public hearing agenda item regarding district based elections.
Juanita
-----Original Message-----
From: Anne Greenblatt <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, May 7, 2023 10:08 AM
To: City Council <[email protected]>
Subject: I strongly prefer district map #5
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender.
Thank you for opening this process up to your constituents! Anne Greenblatt
2236 Lisa Lane
Pleasant ill
1 Juanita Davalos
From: Juanita Davalos
Sent: Monday, May 8, 2023 1:16 PM
To: Councilmember Allen Vinson; Councilmember Sue Noack; Councilmember Zac Shess; Mayor Tim Flaherty; Vice Mayor Matt Rinn
Cc: June Catalano; Geoff Gillette; Janet Coleson
Subject: Map preference - Dana Goldstein
Mayor Flaherty and Councilmembers:
The correspondence below will be included with the May 22, 2023 public hearing agenda item regarding district based elections.
Juanita
-----Original Message-----
From: Dana Goldstein <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, May 7, 2023 10:20 AM
To: City Council <[email protected]>
Subject: Map preference
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender.
Hello,
I’m a Pleasant Hill resident and prefer map #5.
Thank you!
Dana Goldstein
2248 Lisa Lane, Pleasant Hill, CA
Sent from my iPhone
1 Juanita Davalos
From: Juanita Davalos
Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2023 2:57 PM
To: Councilmember Allen Vinson; Councilmember Sue Noack; Councilmember Zac Shess; Mayor Tim Flaherty; Vice Mayor Matt Rinn
Cc: June Catalano; Geoff Gillette; Janet Coleson; Ethan Bindernagel Subject: FW: PH District Map Preference - Jim Whitsett
Mayor Flaherty and Councilmembers:
The correspondence below will be included with the May 22, 2023 public hearing agenda item regarding district based elections.
Juanita
From: Carol Wu <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2023 2:54 PM
To: Juanita Davalos <[email protected]>
Subject: Fwd: PH District Map Preference
Hi Juanita,
Here is an email from a member of the public about the district maps.
Carol
Carol W. Wu
Clerk Recorder
City of Pleasant Hill
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: Jim Whitsett <[email protected]>
Date: May 17, 2023 at 2:49:24 PM PDT
To: Carol Wu <[email protected]>
Subject: PH District Map Preference
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender.
Our vote is for Map #5.
2 Jim & Sally Whitsett
598 Maureen Ln, Pleasant Hill, CA 94523
1 Juanita Davalos
From: Michelle Simone <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2023 9:18 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Public Comment: Districting Hearing May 22
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender.
Councilmembers,
I am writing in support of all the Pleasant Hill residents who spoke up on Saturday, May 6th in favor of continuing the current process of mayoral appointment by sitting councilmembers and a 5-district map. In case you didn’t take detailed notes of the public comment, below are the eleven reasons Pleasant Hill residents made in support of a 5-district map with a rotating mayor.
1. 2.
3. 5-Districts increase the chance of electing
4. a minority candidate. There are two areas in the City that could have districts with majority minority residents;
5. if there is a 4-District map then
6. there is only one majority minority resident district.
7. 8.
9. 10. 5-Districts would reduce the cost of running
11. a campaign by reducing the number of residents candidates need to reach in their district. One of the goals of the California Voting Rights Act is to reduce the barriers of running an election.
12. 13.
14. 15. Moving to district elections should be a simple
16. conversion of the existing 5 seats to districts. Do
17. not make any other governance changes which should arguably be decided by the voters.
18. Significant changes to city governance should be made after an extended discussion and by vote of residents, not by the council under what should be an entirely separate topic. In addition, residents should decide the term of the Mayor 2 and 4 year options
19. should be discussed. When redistricting happens in 2030, Pleasant Hill is projected to be a majorityminority City, and by then, three elections would have occurred under a 5-district system. If demographics support it, the residents at that time can decide
20. by vote if they like the 5-district system or change it to a 4 district system.
21. 22.
23. 24. Changing to an at-large, directly elected mayor
25. is the solution to a problem which doesn't exist. Reducing the number of council seats to 4 looks like an incumbent protection gerrymandering plan, not a basis on which to draw districts which reflect "communities of interest.”
2 26. It looks like an attempt to keep four seats on the council leaving only one district open for a diverse candidate
27. when there could be two.
28. 29.
30. 31. 4-Districts with a rotating mayor was presented
32. by Council because of the hypothetical problem of district representatives concerning themselves only with the needs of their district, not the "best interests" of the city as a whole. Our school district MDUSD has district elections yet they represent the
33. whole school district not only schools in their area. City
34. Councilmembers represent the whole city and are elected by district.
35. 36.
37. 38. If there is need for a councilmember to recuse
39. themselves due to an issue that could affect their property value (See
40. page 8) it is a larger issue now
41. that 3 of the 5 councilmembers live within 550 ft of one another. In
42. the event a councilmember needed to recuse themselves, the rotating mayor and any other councilmember could step in to support- this does not require an at-large elected mayor solution.
43. 44.
45. 46. Being mayor is more work at the City and has
47. more responsibility outside the City therefore the position should be compensated differently. Any chance in elected office compensation should be approved by voters.
48. 49.
50. 51. It is not feasible to ask anyone running for
52. mayor to hold a campaign every two years. Running an election is expensive and takes time.
53. Having a two year mayor elected at-large would deter those without personal funds or independent backing from running.
54. It would also take time away from the mayor conducting City business more often than necessary.
55. 56.
57. 58. In theory, it may seem like a 4-district map
59. would reduce polarization in the community, however in practice when looking at other cities this is not the case.
60. An at-large mayor with district
61. elected city councilmembers creates two classes of elected officials resulting in unequal power dynamics.
62. Since the mayor is the most influential politician in the city, rotating keeps councilmembers the most equal, preventing a mayor from running the city for decades creating a fractious board. It is much better to have equality between councilmembers so you
63. discuss things as equals and not in hierarchical relationships.
64. 65.
66. 67. An at-large mayor would make the city more adversarial
68. because districts would have to fight for representation on the agenda. Allowing
69. each district elected representative to lead the conversation would diminish community fighting.
70. 71.
3 72.
73. Additional
74. election options create ballot confusion and dissuade the public from voting.
75. Having to elect a mayor and councilmembers adds to the length of the ballot and increases the likelihood the public won’t vote. Continue to have councilmember elections without an at-large mayor option.
76. These eleven reasons highlight the benefits of having a rotating mayor over having an elected at-large mayor.
By adopting a 5-district map, we can foster more inclusive and participatory governance, ensure equal representation among districts, and reduce the risks associated with concentrated power.
Sincerely,
Michelle Simone
1 Juanita Davalos
From: Jack Prosek <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2023 3:58 PM
To: City Council
Subject: Fwd: Minor Tweaks to Election District Maps
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender.
Mayor & CouncilMembers -
Resending this email to be included in your discussions at your City Council meeting on May 22nd for fine tuning of Map # 5 for District Elections.
Jack Prosek
PH Resident / Homeowner / Voter
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Jack Prosek <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, May 2, 2023 at 8:10 AM
Subject: Minor Tweaks to Election District Maps
To: tim flaherty <[email protected]>
Cc: matt rinn <[email protected]>, Sue Noack <[email protected]>, zac shess <[email protected]>, Al Vinson <[email protected]> Mayor Flaherty -
It has been noted that while the Maps produced by the districtR website are 98% of what is desired, the question arises as to whether the City Council has to accept one of the Maps EXACTLY as drawn or whether you will be able to make minor changes to achieve more logical boundaries.
The problem appears to arise from the limitations of the program regarding exact streets & property lines which may cross the boundaries of census tracts. Here are two examples where minor changes would be appropriate:
Boundary between NE & NW Districts:
The disrictR program did allow the homes on Vili Way, Eric Court & the west end of Odin Drive to be included in the NE District. However, it did not appear to allow the homes on Aleta Place, the west end of Kiki Drive, Greyfell Place, Halten Court, Tonstad Place, Paso Nogal Court & the homes on the west side of Morello to be included as well. Paso Nogal Park provides a huge barrier between these homes & the ones further west. One might also include the four homes on Morello Court in the NE District.
Boundary between the NW & SW Districts:
Looking at a more detailed map of the City, a reasonable division between these two Districts would be down the centerline of Boyd Road west to Pleasant Hill Road, south down the centerline & then west along the southernmost property lines of the homes on Atrice Lane, Croyden Drive, Kinder Lane & Twinview Place out to Taylor Blvd.
2 Both of these suggested tweaks would provide more rational boundaries for the Election Districts !! Please have the City Attorney address this issue during their presentations at the May 6th and May 22nd Public Hearings on the Election District Maps.
Jack Prosek
PH Resident / Homeowner / Voter
zz
1 Juanita Davalos
From: Kyle Livie <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, May 19, 2023 12:26 PM
To: City Council
Subject: District Maps
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender.
Dear City Council Members,
My name is Kyle Livie and I am a resident of Pleasant Hill, living on Banbridge Place in the Shannon Hills neighborhood. I am writing to urge you to approve a five-district map. While the myriad arguments for a fivedistrict map have been made to you already, I want to hammer home the importance of creating a more equitable playing field that might facilitate minority representation in our local government in the future, an area where we as a community can grow. Five districts, especially when drawn in a fair manner, afford such an opportunity. When my husband and I purchased our home here, we never expected the rich community that we have found in our neighborhood. We hope that in part this comes from the careful, fair stewardship of city government in the past, with individuals acting without respect for political gain or self-interest. I hope that continues with this decision.
Best regards,
Kyle Livie