CITY OF SANTA ROSA
2025 Report of Diversity of City Council Appointees
Section 11 of the City of Santa Rosa’s Charter requires an annual report on the diversity of Council appointments for boards, commissions, and committees. Additionally, Section 11 states, “The report shall contain, but is not limited to, the total number of appointments in a given year, the total number of applications in a given year, and relevant diversity information including geographic and ethnic diversity. Further, the report will evaluate the progress and success of increasing the diversity of appointments.” I
n addition to the specified requirements, this report includes data on gender diversity1 and at the recommendation of the City Council, includes data on age range of appointees, and gender and ethnicity of appointees by City Council district and by appointing authority.
T
he table below shows the bodies included in the report, along with the number of applications received and appointments made in 2025. Applicant and appointee demographics are based on self-reported data from within the 2025 calendar year. 2025 Boards, Commissions, Committees Applications
Received
Appointments Made
Art in Public Places (APPC) 9 4
Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Board (BPAB) 12 3
Board of Building Regulation Appeals (BOBRA) 2 2
2Board of Parks and Recreation (BOPR) 15 5
Board of Public Utilities (BPU) 2 4
Community Advisory Board (CAB) 13 6
3Cultural Heritage Board (CHB) / Design Review Board (DRB) 3 1 Design Review and Preservation Board (DRPB) 16 6
Housing Authority (HA) 17 5
Personnel Board (PB) 6 3
Planning Commission (PC) 4 4
Public Safety and Prevention Oversight Committee (PSAP) 2 2 Waterways Advisory Committee (WAC) 5 0
Total 106 45
1 Gender options include Male, Female, Non-Binary/Third Gender, Prefer to self-describe, or Prefer not to Answer. 2 The Board of Community Services (BOCS) was retitled the Board of Parks and Recreation by Ordinance ORD-2025-008 effective May 14, 2025. 3 The duties and composition of the Cultural Heritage Board (CHB) and Design Review Board (DRB) were consolidated into the Design Review and Preservation Board (DRPB) by Ordinance ORD-2025-003 effective March 28, 2025.
Attachment 1
Applicants may submit multiple applications, therefore applications received are higher than the number of applicants.
Total applications received-reflected on lower bar chart (106), Total unique applicants-reflected on legend (81).
Applicants may submit multiple applications, therefore applications received are higher than the number of applicants.
Total applications received-reflected on lower bar chart (106), Total unique applicants-reflected on legend (81).
Applicants may submit multiple applications, therefore applications received are higher than the number of applicants.
Total applications received-reflected on lower bar chart (106), Total unique applicants-reflected on legend (81).
Applicants may submit multiple applications, therefore applications received are higher than the number of applicants.
Total applications received-reflected on lower bar chart (106), Total unique applicants-reflected on legend (81).
The following shows trends in Applicant gender diversity vs Appointee gender diversity from 2020 to 2025 (based on self-reports) collected through the Boards and Commissions on-line application portal.
The following shows trends in Applicant ethnicity diversity vs Appointee ethnicity diversity from 2020 to 2025 (based on self-reports) collected through the Boards and Commissions on-line application portal.
The following four Recruitment Response graphs present data from 81 unique applicants who provided responses to the question regarding recruitment.
Ethnicity
Applicants
(81)
Appointees
(45)
Community
(2020 U.S. Census
estimate for 2025)
Caucasian 69.1% 64.4% 48.7%
Hispanic 11.1% 15.6% 37.4%
African American 3.7% 4.4% 2.0%
Asian/Pacific Islander 4.9% 4.4% 6.9%
American Indian or
Alaskan Native 2.5% 2.2% 1.5%
Other 6.2% 8.9% 3.5%
1. Applicant & Appointee totals may not equal 100% due to non-disclosure
2. 2020 U.S. Census data may not total 100% due to unlisted or multiple ethnicities.
2025 Diversity Analysis & Conclusion:
1. Gender
• Applicants: 47% female | 49% male | 1% Nonbinary or third gender| 2.5% prefer-not to answer • Appointees: 51% female (23/45) | 49% male (22/45)
Women and men continue to apply in equal measure and in 2025 females received a 60% appointment rate compared to 2024 appointment rate data when women saw an appointment rate of just 19%, there is an indication of concerted effort to advance gender equity and representation in appointments.
2. Ethnicity
• Applicants vs. Appointees vs. Community
o Caucasian: 69% → 64% (49% of community)
52% appointment rate (percentage of applicants who were appointed.) o Hispanic: 11% → 15.6% (37.4% of community)
78% appointment rate (percentage of applicants who were appointed.) o African American: 4% → 4.5% (2% of community)
67% appointment rate (percentage of applicants who were appointed.) o American Indian or Alaskan Native: 2.5% → 2.2% (1.5% of community) 50% appointment rate (percentage of applicants who were appointed.) o Asian/Pacific Islander: 5% → 4.4% (6.9% of community) 50% appointment rate (percentage of applicants who were appointed.) o Other: 6% → 9% (combined 3.5% of community)
80% appointment rate (percentage of applicants who were appointed.)
Despite still being the largest group of applicants, Caucasian representation among appointees is now within 16 percentage points of the community representation. . Hispanic appointees (15% of total appointments) exceed their share of applicants (11%), reflecting strong outreach and inclusion efforts and are emphasized by the high (78%) appointment rate; however, Hispanic appointees remain under the 37% community representation. African American candidates received 2 appointments this cycle, addressing the gap presented in 2024 where zero African American candidates were appointed. Applicants who identified as Other saw an 80% appointment rate, which may reflect enhanced inclusion efforts.
3. District
District Breakdown (81 total applicants) (45 total appointments) o District 1: 8 applicants, 4 appointees (9% of total)
50% appointment rate (percentage of district’s applicants who were appointed.) o District 2: 9 applicants, 6 appointees (13% of total) 66% appointment rate (percentage of district’s applicants who were appointed.) o District 3: 12 applicants,11 appointees (24% of total) 92% appointment rate (percentage of district’s applicants who were appointed.) o District 4: 25 applicants, 14 appointees (31% of total) 56% appointment rate (percentage of district’s applicants who were appointed.) o District 5: 16 applicants, 5 appointees (11% of total) 31% appointment rate (percentage of district’s applicants who were appointed.) o District 6: 2 applicants, 2 appointees (4% of total)
100% appointment rate (percentage of district’s applicants who were appointed.) o District 7: 10 applicants, 3 appointees (6.25% of total) 60% appointment rate (percentage of district’s applicants who were appointed.)
In previous years, geographic data had been reported using the CAB Boundaries Map rather than by district. The decision to transition to district-based reporting will allow more focused and consistent analysis moving forward. The 2024 Annual Report identified districts 2 and 7 as being underrepresented with zero appointments made from either district that year. Both districts saw a substantial increase in representation with 70% of active members from the districts being appointed in 2025.
4. Age
Applicants vs. Appointees vs. Community
• Applicant Age Breakdown (81 total unique applicants)
o Age 56+: 44 applicants (54%)
Overrepresented compared to 32% of the community (2023 U.S. Census). o Age 36–55: 26 applicants (32%)
Slightly overrepresented compared to 26.5% of the community. o Age 18–35: 8 applicants (10%)
Underrepresented compared to 21.5% of the community.
o Undisclosed: 4 applicants (5%)
• Appointee Age Breakdown (45 total appointees)
o Age 56+: 14 appointees (31% of total)
32% of applicants in this group were appointed.
o Age 36–55: 17 appointees (38% of total)
65% of applicants in this group were appointed.
o Age 18–35: 9 appointees (20% of total)
113% of applicants in this group were appointed.*
o Undisclosed: 5 appointees (11% of total)*
The number of older applicants (56+) continues to lead, however the relatively low appointment rate (32%) suggests efforts to more accurately reflect the composition of the community. The 18–35 bracket saw a strong appointment rate relative to its applicant share, suggesting on-going efforts in youth representation, yet they still under-apply.
5. Conclusion
Reviewing the appointment rate helps assess how effectively applicants from each group or district are being selected. It may reveal whether certain demographics are fairly represented and highlights areas where efforts are needed to address inequities. A high appointment rate may indicate strong alignment with selection criteria or successful diversity outreach, while a low rate may suggest barriers or mismatches in the selection process.
Though there are indications of efforts to enhance diverse representation in Boards and Commissions overall, there are still signs where more focused efforts are needed on specific governing bodies. For example; • In 2025, the Board of Building Regulation Appeals is only comprised of Caucasian men, despite interest from female applicants. • The Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board consists of 80% Caucasian members, despite applications from varied groups.
The City may leverage the recruitment response data to better inform targeted outreach strategies, tailored to each group’s preferred communication style, to further enhance the diversity of The City of Santa Rosa’s Boards and Commissions.
Recruitment for these positions continues to be a challenge as the positions are volunteer-based and can require substantial time for meetings and preparation; however, the City remains committed to continued outreach to encourage a diverse applicant pool, while recognizing that younger residents and early-career professionals may be less able to participate because unpaid service can be difficult to balance with work, education, raising a family, and the rising cost of living.
Interactive Dashboard
The interactive dashboard allows the public to dynamically explore and compare the data presented in the report’s static graphs.
Council members can also use the dashboard to examine an active roster snapshot (as of March 2025) to identify diversity trends. The dashboard can be accessed via the link below.
City of Santa Rosa – 2025 Boards and Commissions Diversity Report