Map A, Map 5 and Map 4 were the final maps up for the council to vote on at the council meeting Monday, Sept. 19.
Councilor Tammy Fiebelkorn (District 7) said she wanted to propose and discuss Map 5 as it would give an entirely new district for a majority-minority area to be represented by one councilor, but Map A was the most agreed upon with the public. The majority of public comment, as well as neighborhood association representatives who spoke, supported Map A, and one person agreed with Fiebelkorn to enact Map 5.
Map A has the least amount of people moved into a different district with 5.8% difference in population for Districts 7, 8, 5 and 1.
The map has no incumbent pairings, and Districts 3, 4 and 9 remain identical to the current map. However, District 5 lost population, and the map moves its boundary with District 1 north to the bluff south of Petroglyph Estates. Additionally, District 2 crosses the river between Central and I-40 to Coors, taking the West Mesa and Pat Hurley neighborhoods from District 1. District 6 moves west into District 2 from Buena Vista to I-25 between Gibson and Lomas and also takes the University West area from District 2. Other changes noted by the committee state that District 7 moves south into District 2 from I-40 to Lomas between I-25 and Carlisle, not including the University West area; and District 8 moves into District 7 from Montgomery to Comanche between Wyoming and Eubank.
The council passed to enact and amend Map A on a 6-3 vote. Committee representatives said the new district mapping will go into effect sometime next month, within five days of publication in the next three weeks.
Other maps considered
Councilor Pat Davis (District 6) said with Map 5 he would be covering more than 30 neighborhood associations and HOAs as his district is one of the most compact parts in the city. As a result, he did not support changing to Map 5 but did support Map 4, which would give a major part of his district entirely new representation.
Council President Isaac Benton (District 2) also spoke about not supporting Map 5, and Councilor Louie Sanchez (District 1) said part of his district would get split into two different other districts with Map 5. He also noted that the council needs to take into consideration that Map A was overwhelmingly supported over all other maps, and that Map 5 was the least supported, according the redistricting committee information provided.
“I think it is important to take into consideration all the hard work the committee did and make sure that we are not letting our voters down … that our voters are choosing us and that we’re not choosing our voters,” Sanchez said.
Councilor Klarissa Peña (District 3) also did not support Map 5, but Fiebelkorn explained it was a good idea to add a fourth majority-minority district and that she believes this map would have given the most equitable solution.
The vote to not amend or enact Map 5 was passed 8-1.
Davis said he worked on Map 4 and would essentially eliminate the International District being in three separate districts. It would also create a new majority-minority district. Because so many communities are disenfranchised and don’t participate with the political process of local government, he said, that disinvestment happens because the area is split among three districts with limited funds and virtually no representation.
“This change would give those neighborhoods a new minority councilor and consolidate their opportunity to participate in the process and hopefully encourage new voices that want a seat,” Davis said.
The vote to not amend or enact Map 4 was passed 7-2.