Charter Review Board - Regular Meeting

Okay. Calling to order the June 2nd, 2026 redistricting board meeting. Will the board clerk please call the roll?

Chair Scoriazzo. Present. Vice Chair Valbo. Here. Board Member Gravick.

Here.

Board Member Mintz. Here. Board Member Smith. Here. Deputy Superintendent Mahaffey. Here. Thank you. We'd like to remind everyone to please speak clearly, like I'm doing right now, and directly into your microphone, and please silence your mobile devices. Thank you.

This meeting is being conducted live with a quorum physically present. The material for today's meeting is available online at www.coconutcreek.gov. Anyone wishing to appeal any decision will need a record of the proceedings, and for such purpose may need to ensure that a verbatim recording of the proceedings is made, including the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. The audio of this meeting may be requested from the city clerk or may be heard online at www.coconutcreek.gov. We will now hear Agenda Item 3, a review of the alternative scenarios.

good afternoon everybody it's good to see you all again here's our agenda for today we will uh review what was the direction that was given to us at the last meeting we're going to touch very briefly this time on our planning for future growth and the 2032 and then we'll move on to the next steps so our last meeting you all will recall that you rejected alternatives 1 3 3 and 3 B you also requested us to explore variations on alternative 3 C specifically you are seeking to unify the township currency and the various hammocks communities in their respective districts in response we've created two alternatives for and for a Alternatives 1A and 3C also remain available for your consideration as we move forward today. So, I don't want to go into this in too much detail. We've kind of beaten this horse with this whole Just as a reminder, there are two tests that we strive for when we're creating these alternatives. One, the maps had to work in 2039, the year these new districts are going to come into effect. The second threshold, though, is that we promised the Commission when we were hired that we would take into consideration the Main Street development. So the second threshold that had to be satisfied was that these maps would also work in 2032. And so for that reason, when we were doing our work, we had to work on a 2032 population outlook. And when we met last time, we gave you a little disclaimer about that 2032 population outlook. And we basically were saying, look, when you project that fine to the future, there's a lot of uncertainty involved, and so you should not consider this 2032 outlook as being sacrosanct by any stretch of the imagination. We just want you to use it as a planning tool. So let's review. alternatives before that are in front of you today. We still have Alternative 1A. Alternative 1A has compact districts. It uses the major roads as its borders almost exclusively with the exception for the district border between District 4 and 2 where that border moves away from Coconut Creek Parkway to between the Hammocks Estates and Hammocks communities. In 2029, the numbers are good. The mean deviation is just 1.7%, and the spread between the smallest and largest districts is 4.3%. What we've seen so far in this project is that all of the maps that we've provided for you and the ones that you've asked from us work under 2029. The issue becomes what happens in 2032 when Main Street is fully developed, if Main Street becomes fully developed. In this case, the mean deviation is 2.7%, and the spread between the smallest and largest districts is 9%. It's worth noting that of the four alternatives that remain available for your consideration, only this alternative comes below that 10% goal. Alternative 3C was created in response to the direction that you gave us at the second meeting. Specifically, it achieved the board's goal of unifying the single-family homes of Banyan Trails, which you can see up here. There's a blue portion of the map here. It also leaves the Banyan Point Apartments in District 3. That's the green notch here, just above Wiles Road, sitting on the southwest corner of Wiles and Turn right there. And of course, this alternative improved on population equity that we saw from Alternatives 3A and 3B. Specifically, it did this by adjusting the District 4 border again up from Coconut Creek Parkway up to between the Hammocks and the Hammocks mistakes communities. So in 2039, the numbers are very good. The mean deviation is 1.1%, and the spread between the largest and smallest districts is 3.1%, so well below that 10% threshold. But it's in 2032 where things start to get interesting. Here, the mean deviation is 3.3%, and the spread is brought down to 10.1%, brought down from 3A and 3B, that is. And so this is marginally exceeding the goal of no more than 10% deviation between the districts. At our last meeting, you asked us to create an alternative four, at a minimum. Specifically, your goal was to unify the townships communities under a single district, in this case District 3, and to also unify the various Hammocks communities under a single district. That became District 4. As you can see in this map, Inset here, that's achieved. We have the township all found within District 3. And in District 4, you can see the Hammersett communities. Of course, Hammersett State is found to the south of this map here. But that's all found in District 4. So we've achieved the stated goal of the board. If we look at the 2039 data, the numbers are pretty good. The mean deviation is 2.5%. And the spread between the largest and smallest districts is 7.1%. The problem occurs in 2032. You can see in this case, the mean deviation is fine, it's 3.6%, but the spread between the largest and smallest districts is 12.8%. So that's exceeding the goal of no more than 10% deviation between the districts. Now, we promised at the last meeting that if these numbers didn't work, we would create another alternative to try to improve on them. and that's what gave rise to Alternative 4A. We see that here. So we're still achieving the goals that we created for us, unifying the Township community under single district, District 3, unifying the various Hammocks communities under single district, District 4, but we are getting an improvement of population equity. And specifically, this is achieved by moving the Lyons West community from District 4 into District 3. So you can see this green wedge here, a green appendage is lines of West hanging down here into District 4. So what does that do for our numbers? Well in 2029 our mean deviation is just 1.3% and the spread between the largest and smallest districts is 3.1%. When we go out to 2032, on the other hand, now we have a mean deviation of 3.3%, and the spread between the largest and smallest districts is 10.5%. So again, we're still exceeding that goal of 10% deviation, but we're only doing so marginally. So to summarize, alternative 1A is the only map that meets the goal of no more than 10% deviation between the districts. This alternative is compact and uses the major road grades for the boundaries with one small exception. Alternative 3C unifies the single family homes and banning trails. It marginally exceeds the goal of no more than 10% deviation between the districts at 10.1%. Alternative four unifies the towns and the Hammocks communities under their respective districts. However, by 2032, it will exceed the goal of no more than 10% deviation between the districts at 12.8%. And alternative four A addresses this concern by improving population equity between districts three and four, resulting in an alternative that marginally exceeds the goal of no more than 10% deviation between the districts at 10.5%. So with that said, Your next steps are to do the following. Review each of these four MAP alternatives. Potentially choose to eliminate some of them that you might even fear if that helps you come to a decision. But ultimately, we hope that you'll be able to choose one of these MAP alternatives today and recommend it to the Commission for adoption. With that, we'll be happy to answer any questions that you have.

Because it's not.

I mean, as a cartographer, I like neat lines. They're all my children, and I love them equally.

How critical is the 10% of ADHD? I mean, are we talking statutory or are we saying the ideal would be 10%, that goal? That's not a statutory goal, correct?

That is correct. These are guidelines that have been used not only by us but by others as well.

And truth is used in the courts. So when you've gone too far away from them, it's been a penalty of sorts. The map may not have held up to the same standards. But having every district exactly equal, it's not possible.

It's also on the section of the table that we're emphasizing, don't put a whole lot of weight into it. It's 2032. It's a lot of what it is. Now it's going to shake out. That is correct.

So just as a point of reference, the further you are away from the ideal, The second component that comes out of this is what happens next time. To make the numbers work the next time, do we have to make even more dramatic changes? Obviously, this is a dramatic change going from five to four districts, right? So that's the other goal when you try to keep those numbers as close as possible because it minimizes the degree of change. But that's, again, the board has set some goals. We've heard you talk about, we'd like to have the communities together. You've laid some foundation on that. So you've weighed that up in terms of how you wanted those options to be created. So you've played a push-pull game, right? What do we sacrifice to make those things work? And that's, by the way, that's within your prerogative to make those recommendations. I will say this, in my experience, the further you deviate weight from that 10%, it gets dramatically harder on the next committee to make the maps the next time. And that's not a, but again, we don't know how fast, as you just articulated, we don't know how fast the main street's gonna build.

I did do some research on wondering where that 10% came from. At a federal level, it's like zero. Then you go to a state level and a county level and a city level, and from everything I read about it, you do wanna keep around that 10%. I did look at these with straight lines I was favoring alternative four, but that's clearly out of the range, a safe range. So I felt that 4A would work best, but I'm not that familiar with the hammocks and Cocoa Park, that one section there. So if anybody... I agree with you.

I think... Which one is it? The 4A. 4A? 4A. 4A. SEEMS TO, YEAH. 1A AND 4A SEEM TO BE THE TWO THAT I'M TEETERING BETWEEN. I DON'T KNOW. AM I ALLOWED TO SAY THAT?

I'M SORRY TO GO BACK TO 1A BECAUSE IN MY MIND I JUST KIND OF ELIMINATED THAT. SO WE'LL GO BACK TO THAT ON THEIR ISSUE.

AND I LOOKED AT MY PERSONAL GOAL WAS TO KEEP THE COMMUNITIES TOGETHER. AND IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A HALF A PERCENT, This is not proportional representation. It's not as if District 4 is going to have fewer representatives than District 3 and District 2. And when you come down to a vote and that large vote from there, again, it's not going to matter. But it just, I lean towards 4A for that reason. It's a little bit over that goal, half a percent, and yet I think the cohesiveness of those communities is important. I mean, when more, selfishly, when we're staying, but together anyway. But when I look at the other communities, I know how important that would be to win more.

It's got to be just as important for the other communities as well. Yeah, 1A divides up the township. Yeah. So that's why I kind of eliminated that in my mind.

One day's benefit is straight lines.

Do we need to motion to get rid of more, or can we just... We can do it.

We can whittle it down. I'm leaning towards 4A, I think. I put a little more weight in the community cohesion. And I think the idea... And I think... THAT'S AMONG THE BEST OPTIONS FOR THE 2029 POPULATION PROJECTIONS. IT DOES RESONATE WITH ME A LITTLE BIT ABOUT LEAVING WHAT WE LEAVE FOR THE NEXT BOARD TO CONVENE ON THIS. HOWEVER, BECAUSE OF THE NATURE OF THE MAIN STREET PROJECT, THE NEXT BOARD IS GOING TO HAVE TO DO SOME SIGNIFICANT MANEUVERING OF LINES. WE KNOW THAT POPULATION IS GOING TO SWELL AND CAUSE A CHANGE. they're probably not going to be able to keep communities intact this way. I would imagine, because none of the other communities are changing, and that one area in the city, I won't call it a community so much, but that one is going to go up. So the lines are going to have to move significantly just by virtue of the fact that that's growing. the 2032 projection numbers are the least important numbers, and it is exceeding by half a percent, I guess, the projections, but...

I'll make a motion then to go with 4A.

Hold on. So let's... We've now commenced Agenda Item 4 discussion on the possible districts. Well done, Mr. Chair. So now the floor is open for discussion.

I'll make the motion. I'll second it.

What exactly is the motion?

Do you have any comments on which you're most aware of?

I was going to say for clarity, would it be better to reject the other options and then discuss that?

No, I'm fine with as long as we have a clear motion for approval. We don't need to reject. I'm fine with that.

So I'm making a motion to approve 4A. I second it.

So the motion is to eliminate every other one and 4A.

Do the motion maker and the second agree that that's the full statement of the motion? Yes. To eliminate all but 4A. Eliminate 1A, 3C, and 4, and recommend approval of 4A.

to make a comment while the motion is open i would before voting i would i would only be interested in seeing if uh chair escoria has any comments on anything you shared i don't think he shared and you don't have to that's no pressure just uh yeah i lean into the 2029 numbers uh and 3c and 4a by the spread and the deviation

very much numbers driven and sorry for the lines but those would be my top choices so i'm fine with the motion as is i guess uh claire can you call the role yes chair scoriazzo all right yes vice chair yes

Okay.

We will now hear agenda item five. discussion and possible vote on the consultant report.

That was a little anticlimactic, sorry. So while James is passing that out, what we drafted was a, lack of a better term, a transmission report. So it kind of summarizes your actions as a board and your adoption of option 4A. It presents the map, it presents the table, kind of in a nice little clean package. A delivery package. A delivery package. It kind of tells the story of how you went through this process. It's like you printed the championship shirts before you went on.

We're going to be in China tomorrow.

They printed all of them. We prepared for all four. And they were there yesterday also. Exactly.

They're already wearing them. That was impressive. But the idea was that there was a clean option because you went through this process. You all performed a lot of work. We thought it was a clean way for you to transmit the item. Maybe help the city clerk and the city attorney for the process.

Would you guys like to take a minute or two to go through it?

There's nothing new in there.

It's just... Has the map been taken? No.

IN THERE EXCEPT, OKAY, THE FINAL COUPLE PARAGRAPHS. YEAH.

JUST MAKE SURE THAT IT'S ACTUALLY 4A. GO, SID.

YEP, 4A.

OKAY. IF THERE ARE NO FURTHER COMMENTS, I'LL TAKE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE THE CONSULTANT REPORT DATED JUNE 2, 2026, AS PRESENTED. SO MOVED. OKAY. I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. We will now hear agenda item six, a discussion on possible approval of the rigid redistricting board report.

So this is a very short report, which is a formal transmittal from you as board members. You all sign it individually. It's about half a paragraph, paragraph long. It will be here momentarily. So we would ask for your patience as that is completed and walked over right now. In the meantime, I want to thank you all for your service. And you put a lot of time and a lot of thought into it. And thank you very much to the consultants. They literally just an hour ago made sure that we had all alternatives ready here for their consultant report. And we really, really appreciate that. So thank you all very, very much. Thank you.

I apologize.

No problem.

I can tell stories. Okay, I've been doing this a long time.

It's pretty clean. Like, if you look at it, it's kind of...

I think it's cleaner than the existing map. Yeah. Yes.

Yeah, definitely. I think it represents the city very well. I was curious.

Are there any other areas just for discussion? No. open areas where we could have more development and growth. Not much.

Just the parks, I think, right?

So I know the city attorney has a planning background. I have a planning background also. I think cities will start to see a trend where certain uses may change. we'll start building in parking lots where we may add some density if that's the will of the city. So for example, if a shopping center's age, you might see it get replaced with an apartment building or the one that I think is probably going to be most impactful. I work for the city of Hummer Pines. We have a lot of car dealerships. You guys have a lot of car dealerships. Car dealerships have a lot of surface parking. So one of the things I see long term is do they try to sell those service lots off to the garage and maximize some capital? By the way, your deputy city manager here, Scott and I, we've talked about this many times as we go to events and we look at redevelopment. So when you ask that question, it's a really good question. It all comes down to the policy that the commission sets and where the developers see certain things go as they're moving through that process. The true test will be whether or not that happens before the next census or not and how soon that impacts your maps.

And also what's going on with the world and the retail world.

There was a story today that malls are coming back. I don't know if you all saw that. That was the most fascinating thing. Apparently, whatever the generation is now, They're actually going back to malls. And we just heard two years ago that malls were dying. It was literally on five channels this morning that malls are coming back because they like the place. And they're not as sold on Amazon. What will happen to Amazon? Who knows?

They'll have a store at the mall. The moon. Well, Wayfair is going into Galleria.

Really? Yeah.

I just drove down 95 and maybe 80 miles north of here, big mall under construction on the east side.

And the malls are changing more. Lifestyle centers like the Promenade, Humber Gardens in my city, where you're going to have live, work, play. That's what Main Street is.

At least a decade. At least a decade.

So the memorandum reads that the fourth and final meeting of the redistricting board held on June 2nd, 2026 upon motion duly made and seconded, we, the members of the 2026 redistricting board voted by a unanimous vote to recommend that the city commission adopt alternative 4A as the new district boundaries. In order to finalize the redistricting, the city commission was passed an ordinance to effectuate said district boundaries that will be used for the march 2029 municipal election pursuant to the city charter the consultant report city of coconut creek fourth uh meeting of the redistricting board submitted by ronald r schultz phd james gannett gama clark ma and michael stam jr murp dated June 2, 2026, Attached Tier 2, demonstrates the need for redistricting to balance the population data among board districts as part of the redistricting board's recommendation. The redistricting board hereby submits the proposed new district boundaries as depicted in Alternative 4A to the City Commission for its consideration and approval. Respectfully submitted, members of the redistricting board. 2026 alex escoriaza brandy dravick martin aline smith craig valdo david minces at this point you can uh a motion and second to vote if you're willing to accept that any comments on that if there are no comments i'll take a motion and second to approve the british review board report second

Chair Escoria-Alva? Yes. Vice Chair Galva? Yes. Board Member Dreibach? Yes. Board Member Mintz? Yes. Board Member Smith?

Yes. Okay. And you can go ahead and close up the meeting. We'll just have you sign that as soon as Daniel comes back. So you can move forward as we just ask that you stay after the meeting long enough to sign it.

Okay. I'll take a motion and second to adjourn the meeting.