all right good afternoon welcome to the glendale city council workshop session of november 9 2021 this meeting is called to order uh the attendance roll call is not necessary everybody is in attendance mr power if you take note also would you introduce our one and only item redistricting discussion all right sorry marion council at the workshop on october 12th council reached consensus on draft a map and directed the city's consultant ndc to develop a second version of the map with minor changes ndc has developed draft a2 map which attempts to incorporate all of the minor changes council suggested at the october 12th workshop staff is requesting that council make any adjustments to the suggested boundaries that are necessary and reach consensus on a final map for adoption at the november 23rd voting meeting and with that i will turn it over to ivy good afternoon it's nice to see everybody oh the redistricting process we've been through this before so i'll just touch on some things very quickly today we are looking forward to council's deliberation with regards to the map options and we are looking to the near term future for adoption of a map the statutory deadline is february 2nd of next year so however it goes it goes except excuse me the county has requested that we have the map to them by december 15th yes the redistricting rules and the goals of course there's the federal statutes of equal population and the federal voting rights act and of course no racial gre meandering we've been through this a number of times there are also arizona statutes again they repeat nearly equal population and contiguous territory in as compact a form as possible there's traditional redistricting principles communities of interest or neighborhoods we seek to have districts compact and contiguous as much as possible we utilize visible geographic boundaries as much as possible we look for continuity in office planned future growth of which we have some numbers here from the planning department which i'll show you in a few moments we look to minimize voters shifted to different election areas and of course to try to preserve the core of existing election areas all districts have grown in population during the last decade with cholla district growing the least amount at almost 3 percent and cactus district increasing in its population by 13.6 yucca has also had a significant increase at 13.5 percent if you can make out the numbers um which i cannot do on my screen these are numbers that we have received from your planning department your planning department let me pull up my spreadsheet please who's looking can i ask a question thank you mayor um are these final plot numbers is that what these uh there are approved numbers and there are um numbers that are still in review okay but as my understanding that we we consider final plat numbers is that am i a mistake in there um traditionally we do look for properties that have been approved and and planning presented the data to us with approved or or under review okay but approved and final platter two different things so and i it's my understanding that it's final plot is am i mistaken you know i'm sorry councilwoman i don't know that offhand our city attorney just arrived he may know the answer very good do you know yeah come to my question what's the question okay do you want me to ask it again or did you hear me did you hear me mr metta council members yes i believe the question was is this only final plants uh it's definitely inclusive of all final plants but it might also include other projects which do not need a plant for example it could be have been in the process for multi-family and it could be at varying stages so sometimes you can get an entitlement through the planning process but they aren't ready to go through the building permit and we went back to that period just prior to the 2020 census it's got us some some aspects of the year 2019. if it if it wasn't the planning process there's no way it'll ever have any occupancy during the census period so we would make an assumption that between that late 2019 period and about now it's gone through several more iterations of planning reviews and and building safety related issues so it's a it's a combination it's definitely captured all the final plants because that'll be the exact number of lots but then there's so much else that's also adding up to it and there are quite a few uh multi-family in in in this calculation okay thank you um just quickly i did i had done some totals earlier and in a barrel district there were a 170 approved single-family dwellings to date in the cactus district there are 56 multi-family dwellings that have been approved in choya there are 418 multi-family units that have been approved akatillo has eight multi-family units that have been approved saguaro has 182 multi-family units and yucca has 384 approved multi-family units mayor go ahead thank you are those individual units or that number seems low for yucca doesn't it that's multi-family she said but individual multi-family units because the number for me would it would be dwelling so individual family dwellings okay which doesn't make sense for yucca yeah i'm confused okay thank you thank you i i think this kind of illustrates the difficulty of trying to shoot it shoot at a future target that maybe we should just go with the numbers of the census because i know even though there's 173 that you just mentioned single family dwellings online in the barrel district i'm pretty confident and maybe mr maida was pointing to this in his comments that i had there are subdivisions in the barrel district which weren't necessary weren't complete they'd had final plat approval prior to the census but had not that's plant approval that doesn't mean they're built but then since so they wouldn't have shown up in final plat approvals after the census because they were before the census but the people didn't move in to those neighborhoods until after the census perhaps and i'm not sure that those numbers are captured and and that this map here in the page five of the slideshow also shows another subdivision i think an apartment complex so and two other at least partial subdivisions are showing up in there so the number for barrel is a lot higher than the 173. that 173 rep only represents i would guess the subdivision going in at the former glen lakes golf course but there's quite a bit of other development that's happened just in my district or our district the one i share with my residents so i just we need to you know i think it's kind of difficult to aim at some squishy number in the future mayor yeah go ahead thank you is mine yeah i i think the purpose of this it demonstrates exactly what i've been saying all along the the numbers fluctuate troya for example i i assume that 533 number is an increase in population is that correct troya has had approved 418 multi-family units that that that isn't what i'm asking what does the 533 for cholla represent doug are you here yes yes thank you sorry sorry to be late but yeah i just just connected back in are you looking at the the growth chart yes or the or the development chart i believe it's residential units as i understand okay so that 533 represents residential units is that what i'm hearing i'm sorry councilwoman the f the number 533 yes you you have that in red on your expected growth areas map on slide five troy 533 saguaro 944 barrel 859 cactus 342 ocotillo 410 7840 eight eight hundred yucca i assume those are residential units uh i want clarification i understand i want clarification of what those numbers represent are they units or are they population they would be units okay so you could theoretically the national average is 2.3 persons per unit so you could multiply all those numbers by 2.3 but i think the purpose of this map goes to exactly what i have been saying all along is that there is an explosion of growth in yucca district 7 848 new units that's seven times the highest number of any other district and the reason why i point this out is i i expect these units to be completed within the next year or two which dilutes the vote of everyone in the yucca district because it will be overpopulated in comparison to the other five districts or six districts five districts whatever but it will be overpopulated in comparison to all the rest of them and when you have that extreme over a population you have a dilution of the voting strength of of individuals within various districts and i think that that is what the value of this map means to me at least that and i realize and i'm disappointed that it cannot happen but there is absolutely no way to compensate for those 7 848 units without going way over a 10 deviation i recognize that and i understand that but i also am dismayed that due to circumstances beyond no one's control yucca's the yucca the people the voters in the yucca district will have their votes deluded almost immediately thank you mayor thank you mayor i'm still a little bit confused on the numbers you gave a number of multifamily in yucca of 300 i think is what you said 418. let me pull that up i thought that was joya oh you're saying that yeah it was three something in riyaka from multi-family units that have been approved there were 380 okay so i'm still trying to understand how how you can get to 7 000 is that 778 48 in yucca with only 300 less than 400 of those being multi-family that means there's 6400 single-family homes and that just does that doesn't seem possible if i might follow up i'm going to ask everybody i'm going to ask everybody to go through the chair we're not going to let this get out of control mayor go ahead what we don't think about are things like allen ranches all the way out west i think they've got a couple hundred units there and i know there are a couple more but i agree with you i know there's more multi-family i can see them being built right now as cerro is another one for instance then there are two over in san hero so i know there are more multi-family units than than what are being given to us as councilman clark said you know these numbers are are really big and there's no way that we can accommodate them within the allowable margin of the law so for the purposes of this debate it doesn't really matter how many multi-family units there are or exactly how many single units there are we know there's a lot of growth in and yucca coming more than any other districts and so the the the question is is how comfortable are we pushing that maximum deviation or getting close to that deviation and what good does it do any good to have you know 200 fewer people so i would i would suggest this topic we're not really worried about x number of multifamily x number of signal families we just know there's a lot coming to deca and and we can just act based on that mr odama thank you mayor um don't know if i'm hearing what i think i'm hearing but it's relevant but it's irrelevant those in progress developments didn't occur in the point in time of the census count it didn't happen so we're counting what they provided us i'm not willing to change that i still agree that the original plan a with no changes brought forth by the consultants by the professionals is still the right plan i i get the district's growing it's going to be the district that grows but what's in the shoot now wasn't in the point of time count and i attested that's not what we should be doing so we need to take a consideration the point in time and that's draft day the original thank you mayor thank you good thank you mayor thank you mayor yeah i all along it the last time we discussed it was in favor of draft day i even like the title minimal changes it keeps the district as tightly as possible it meets all the requirements and that's the one i'm going to support thank you mayor thank you mayor i i could support draft a if independent sites were included in the yucca district as has been requested by residents who live in that area that is the only problem that i have with draft a is that it does not keep independent sites within the yucca district as requested by citizens so if if there could be some kind of minimal change to accommodate that issue i could probably support draft day with that change first independence mayor thank you mayor yeah i i couldn't support that uh if you look at draft day and i'm disappointed to lose a very significant historic piece in my district uh to the barrel district but i know that it'll be in good hands if this is the route we go i'm talking about sans estate i do not want to lose sansa states i don't want to lose any of my district in fact i'll take more but if i lose sansa state and lose independence heights that's not a win for the okatio district it absolutely is not i think it's actually unfair to suggest that councilmember clark mentioned the last meeting that we would be disenfranchising those folks i believe there were three and with all due respect i i thank you for writing your letters i have many people who have asked me to not allow sansa state to go i would be disenfranchising them so is it five of my constituents or three of yours i still attest that the plan a is the correct one and i'm going to lose sansa states that's huge it's significant to me councilmember turner will come all the way across northern to orangewood from grand avenue to 51st that's significant loss to me but like i said i know it'll be in good hands and gaining independence heights will will make that move equal and so i couldn't support that i i'm going to continue to support the original draft day as is brought by the consultant thank you mayor um i've never been through this process before but i'm looking at the rules and goals and i don't see anywhere on here where it says individual requests by residents so i don't know and i understand residents don't want to move but it's impossible to do redistricting without moving people and i i think i mean the map a does say minimum it really is the most minimal changes of of any of the maps um and i you know i feel bad for people that are getting moved into other districts but i mean that is is what we have to do it's it's a federal requirement that we that we redistrict so because we're a charter city so i just i i i mean is is that something that is is to be considered as somebody says i want to stay in the district i'm in or i mean based on these rules i i don't see that's something that is to be considered yes councilwoman we would consider it under the category of communities of interest that people that some of the residents voiced that this was their neighborhood that they had similar interests and that they would like to be where they would like to be or kept together mr miller uh thank you mayor um first i want to thank the the consultant for their work on getting this process completed um but i do believe there was a misunderstanding in uh from our last uh meeting to today when we approved kind of we we approved map a basically with possible some minor tweaks and i don't think it was there were a lot of things that were discussed during that meeting and i think what you did is you took everybody's comments before we approved map a and try to incorporate them incorporate them into map and that was not the intent that was not my intent nor some of the other council members i don't think um so what i did and i was expecting a conversation with the consultants uh about this i was a little disappointed that no one reached out to me uh to say well what kind of minor are you talking about because i specifically asked that and yet i saw none nobody ever contacted me and i was disappointed that i didn't get to have that opportunity so now we're having this conversation where that could have been already already resolved so i reached out to council members on my north as independently uh which our attorney said was okay for me to do and council member tom chof and i agreed the map a on our boundaries was good we want to keep it that way on the southern boundary you did provide a map a2 which again this only affects my district and and council member turner's district one of the concerns that we heard from residents was they didn't want to divide the copperwood neighborhoods and so we agreed that map a2 which would basically put the dividing line at 55th avenue both of these changes make very minimal changes to my district and even my councilmember turner's and councilmember thomas they're the most minimal by taking map a with this tweak between myself my district saguaro and the barrel district and that's what we had proposed to do is make that minor tweak leave the troya district and my district map a and change map between the saguaro and the barrel district move it to map a2 and i believe uh counter turner and i are both in agreement and councilman chomchoff would probably agree with that as well and i'd let them speak to that i do agree with that thank you mayor um i do have a question though on the in the independence heights issue is is that is dr draft map a dividing a neighborhood i don't based on the current district boundaries i don't see that it's dividing a neighborhood and when you said communities of interest neighborhoods don't want to be divided i don't see that that draft a is dividing that neighborhood it's basically the an established boundary so maybe i'm not understanding it but um it's my understanding that they just don't want to be moved into another district it's not necessarily dividing another neighborhood do i i'm whoever can answer that i think it does not and and councilmember what it does actually it gives back the ocotillo district what they lost in 2010 census uh it's it's an appropriate move uh it doesn't break anybody up most of those residents uh that are there have been in the okatiel district before so i hope that helps it does not divide it in half or anything like that so mayor i i find it amazing that we're willing to accommodate the copperwood neighborhood where one or two residents voiced their concern but yet when three residents of independence heights voiced their concern they are dismissed that is i i just throw that out there as as a little bit of irony that um and i do recognize that that this this does directly relate to communities of interest and this community of interest independence heights wishes to stay within the yucca district and that that was their request mayor um thank you mayor if i may um i agree i agree that we can't be making decisions based on areas that is why we allowed and we asked the professionals to to design a plan and while you met with us you brought plan a back i i don't know why we don't just take that one now it doesn't get influenced by anybody here other than the separate meetings we had individually plan a does that and i think the last meeting we had was the consensus was draft a minimal changes very minimal change that i don't know that minimal changes were made may sound like they're maybe a little larger than that but but draft a original with no changes as is i think meets all of our oh mayor i beg to differ i don't think it meets everyone's needs thank you mayor go ahead if i might thank you um you're right draft day has originally proposed doesn't i don't feel meets the best needs of the residents of my district the i do support the a2 boundary between the saguaro and the barrel districts which basically has the line come straight down 55th avenue between cactus and peoria the east side continues to move into the saguaro district just like about half of it did last go-round the rest of it then moves in this go round and the west side which includes the copperwood district remains with the barrel district i think that's a good change in in between the two drafts i'd like to remind everybody we asked for public input we told the public you can give us input online you can send us emails you can send a letter to the clerk you can attend any of the three public meetings we had we ask for public input it doesn't make sense and it's really detrimental to ask for public input and then ignore it so i'm pleased that the copperwood residents that ex that expressed that they wanted to remain intact in the district they're doing that i think that that's an excellent accommodation and and while i respect the hard work and the and the expertise of consultants um they themselves will admit they don't know our neighborhoods as well as we do and as well as the residents within the neighborhoods do so that's why our input as their representatives and their direct input is important to consider my understanding from the last workshop was that we were going to use draft a as the basis with adjustments to the boundary between saguaro and barrel and ocotillo and yucca and i'm satisfied with the adjustment between saguaro and beryl and i i'm disappointed that the independence heights neighborhood which is i understand and it hasn't the input hasn't been completely clear but as i understand it independence heights is currently in the yucca district having been in ocotillo 10 years ago and and their request to not flip back into a district i if there's a way to honor it i'd like to honor it i don't think it's necessarily good for public involvement and people understanding community to every 10 years be flipping a neighborhood from one side to the other just for the math okay if there's a really good reason for doing it fine but not just for the math and that's why i don't support flipping manistee the manistee ranch development from one district to another this go-round simply for the math because they were they were in ocotillo ten years ago they got moved to saguaro and now the ur to cactus and now the proposals to move them to barrel i don't think that that helps us build better communities and more connectivity between the population and their elected officials thank you all right so let me offer a suggestion here for everybody and and i'll probably not get any support on this but um we got to move on so if if if we start off with what we all agree to draft a and then we start up with chola choya and saguaro if there's an agreement between those two council members on those border changes that we accept it all and then we move on to saguaro to barrel if there's an agreement between those two council members we accept it if not then we just leave it as draft a same thing with cactus to swirl cactus to barrel occup like that okay does that sound okay to everybody that sounds fine if there's not an agreement then we're gonna stick with a with the changes that the two council members both agree to that have bordering districts does that sound fair say that again okay just that left starting off with a if council member from cholla and council member from saguaro agree on the changes in the b a2 a2 i'm sorry then that would be that would be the new the new lines good and then those those that council member from troy is out okay and then we go uh saguaro to barrel if those two agree on the new changes then we would accept that and then [Music] basically then it'll be cactus and saguaro have to agree beryl and cactus have to agree beryl and octeal have to agree and then yucca and okay have to agree if they agree we take it if they don't agree then it stays the way a is originally on those lines between those districts that make sense yep okay so let's let's start off with cholla and swirl do you both agree on map a as is no not a2 a map a map map a as is map a location okay so that's well we're getting somewhere right yep we're good okay saguaro to barrel do you agree with map a we would like map a2 a2 a2 okay so bordering that is cactus this cactus have an issue with a2 on that border between cactus and swirl and barrel no you have no issues no so a2 would be fine on that line for you correct with all three of you is that correct well that's way easier okay ocotillo to barrel do you agree on uh a i can live with uh map a original okay but not with a2 or what the hell is that called yeah it's a2 map a2 you do not agree with map a2 lines correct it's really the same for the continuous i i i could live with it so you have no problem with a2 on that okay and then what about the same there okay cactus okay so now we have ocotillo to cactus is there any issues there on on map a no okay all we have left is yucca and ocotillo oh sorry it's doug johns again there is a change in a2 on the barrel cactus okay so we're again we're starting off with draft a oh there it is on draft day you do not agree is that correct on yucca and ocotillo draft day i can live the way it is you like it the way it is and councilmember clark you do not agree with map a i do not i would prefer map a2 okay so we do not have an agreement on that so therefore it would stay as a correct no i'm not okay because that's all we got left if we can't get the two of you to agree on that then as a council we have to make a decision if it's a or a2 it's not right just for that order just for that one border because everything else has been agreed to well no troya saguaro map a swaron barrel map a2 barrel and cactus map a2 so it's not just one map that this council is approving it's a combination of the two maps yeah we're talking about the lines and i'm talking about the lines i prefer a2 boundary between acatio and yucca and i do understand that but if the other council member doesn't agree to that then it goes back to the original and i would like to see if if there could be some minimal change done by the consultant to accommodate that because otherwise you're ignoring a community of interest mayor yes i just want to clarify on cactus um what i agree with is draft a when um and not draft a2 on cactus the border between barrel and cactus yeah and i agree with um yeah as long as mine stays the same and it's not really affected at the top part what and councilmember malnour want to do but but you're calling it a two but no cactus i'm i want to stay as draft a which takes care of what your concern was and council member malnour a okay so is there an agreement between barrel and cactus on draft a lines between those two districts yes yes okay so again we're back to yucca and ocotillo what so let's ask you this councilmember clark what exact lines are you looking for change map a2 does exactly what i asked if you look at map a2 it keeps independent sites no it doesn't i take that back i had independence heights in the wrong place neither of these maps keeps independent sites within the yucca district and i don't understand why the consultant did that when the consultant knew that there had been emails from independent sites residents requesting that they remain within the yucca district and yet on both map a and a2 that request has been ignored and yet you talk about preserving communities of interest and you didn't do it on your map at this point i'm in the minority i know that the majority of council is going to support map a but i still feel it important to register publicly my objection and the reason for my objection mayor mayor yeah hold on good okay thank you uh councilman clark can you give me the boundaries for independence heights because i'm not sure i know exactly where it is uh yeah i have a map here let me find it if someone needs to ask i can answer that so maryland to ocotillo 71st to 75th that's the square that's correct that's what i have on my map it's directly across from independence high school and and that taking that away is 4 000 residents from me and then taking an additional 4 000 at sansa estates right here well it's not taking it away from you in that it hadn't been yours within your district for the past 10 years so it's not taking it away it is in fact adding it to your district okay that's member turner thank you mayor yes as i see it the difference be on the boundary between ocatillo and yucca the difference between map a and map a2 is the addition of the um that one arm at the top there just south of northern is at a square mile so a2 actually moves some population from yucca to ocotillo which addresses the concern of should we underpopulate yucca to accommodate future growth so a2 has it has that going for it but both of those maps have as i understand it have independence heights which is currently in yucca both of those drafts have it in ocotillo and now the initial map that was at council direction produced by the consultant prior to any public input so it's not their fault and so now we have the question of after public input having heard from some residents in independent heights that they prefer to remain in the district they're currently in rather than flipping back to a district that they were in before and again i really would like to urge us to not consider the individuals who hold the office representing those right now we weren't here when this was most of us weren't here when this was done last time we probably won't be here when this is done next time you know it's not about our offices it's about what's best for the neighbors that live there and the and their neighborhoods and that's what we should be trying to look at so mayor thank you yeah it looks you know in the in the public comments there were three individuals from the yucca district that asked to stay in the yucca district i have one that's concerned about losing sansa state so i mean what is it one to two three to one um mr cassadas if you don't mind mention your name he doesn't want to leave the district and i don't want to lose him but this is a decision we have to make and so what is it your three are more important than my one i had a significant amount of people who just didn't want to send emails but they verbally said i don't want to leave and so again i'm okay with map a and i'm willing to make have consensus called on it and and map two i'm not i'm not uh totally out of that one but i'd leave that to the barrow and to the cactus district uh councilmember aldamus so um i want to understand you're asking for consensus on half day with the agreed upon changes between the district council members yeah so i so just to be clear i'm 100 okay with map a the original as is i'm also okay with map a2 if vice mayor and the barrel district can make up that corner there in the on the north east so hope that helps mayor i have a question okay well i'm still trying to clarify so my question is what they've already agreed to as we sat here at the dias there has been some agreements between so our council members so i would ask then then did did that square over on the north i think it's um manistee ranch back to the cactus district then yeah i'm fine with map a two with the changes made uh for the cactus district go ahead yeah so what what it would be is um draft a cactus district would stay just exactly how draft they drew it up so that doesn't change anybody's districts what what is everybody saying now just that boundary barrel and saguaro right mayor i have a question okay so we'll get to you in a second so beryl and saguaro district there's an agreement between the council members correct okay between those two districts okay and troy and swirl is fine on a barrel and saguaro is fine on map a two a two no they want a barrel and saguaro a a no idea no barrel of saguaro is a2 barreling cactus is a all right well that's clear as mud okay so what is your question so my question is regarding the boundary between yucca and ocotillo the difference between map a and map a2 is that it moves one as i see it a quarter square mile up at the corner of 67th now at 71st and northern um 71st to 75th there it moves that square mile out of yucca and into ocotillo my question is is the council member from ocotillo okay with that so you're okay with map a2 for the boundary between yucca and ocotillo what i was saying is that a2 affects the cactus district because they lose manistee ranch so i said then those two counts members need to make that decision it's really the significant change is losing manatee ranch to the cactus district all right so let's go back to what councilmember turner just said so that little quarter square mile uh north of myrtle west of 71st avenue you're okay if that moves into your district that's this one here you're referring to yes okay councilmember clark are you okay with that quarter square mile moving into ocotillo i have no problem with that okay so we have an agreement on that okay uh so the part between cactus and barrel manistee where are you guys at on that draft day okay and you both agree to that yes okay so all we have left now is basically yucca and ocotillo agreeing on the remainder right so it sounds like you have maybe consensus for original map a as is nope not as is with the change that we've talked about mayor i have a question um how do we know what these numbers are based on the discussion that we're having right now don't we need to look at and i don't know the consultant are you able to make these we didn't get a tool where we could move anything in using draft a so i i mean we're looking to come to a consensus but we don't know what what the numbers are so how do how do we how do we do that that would be you you're on mute doug so i've been drawing these into a map as you've been discussing them so we have the numbers essentially it's just a matter of taking the different stat sheets from a and a2 and district by district but yes you are still population balanced and and the numbers still work it's close enough we're not going to blow anything up correct okay so is there a consensus on everything talked about mayor so i i'm very clear now i wasn't clear thank you council member malinar so draft a bringing this corner this arm here into the district yes i'm good and that's what was right yes okay so i'm asking for consensus on everything we talked about don't if it needs to be restated mayor point of order what can you restate for the record i don't think i could and that becomes a challenge we want to make sure we're clear on it so or or can somebody restate it for the record so that everybody that the public is clear on what these change okay so let me let me take a stab at this and see if we're right uh there is an agreement on map a2 between choya and saguaro those lines no no okay so there is an agreement on map a draft a minimal changes choya to swirl yes correct okay then we move down to saguaro to barrel that would be a a2 a2 a2 okay we good as gold so far yes okay then we go from cactus to saguaro that's a correct okay then we go from cactus to barrel that's also a correct correct okay then we go cactus to ocotillo that's also a correct all right okay now we have uh did we already do barrel on ocotillo no okay okay so that would be a two because that's adding that little corner in now that comes from yeah that's comes from the gun okay a and a two are the same right between broke okay and then and then uh the only thing with yucca and ocotillo is adding in that that little quarter 75 there was an agreement on that but there was an agreement between the two council members on the other but it looks like we have consensus to accept it as stated yes is that correct that's correct yes 75th avenue northern okay all right what else do you need from us i don't believe i think so okay so i and i want to make a quick statement i i've heard several people say that they don't people don't want to leave their district the houses are not moving uh and and i can say this uh because i in my legislative district in my congressional district uh i have been involved with uh incorporated incorporated not the right word my district was part of sun city and it was a a very heavily republican district where when it was redistricted then actually was a 300 i'm sorry 180 degree opposite we're not even close to sun city where it became a very heavily democratic district and right now in my legislative district it looks like it's even condensed more or it's even a heavier democratic district uh in my congressional district now it looks like i'm going to be in yuma so uh and my house isn't moving i i'm not overly happy with the legislative process but it is what it is people keep moving we keep building things keep changing my neighborhood isn't going to change my representation could change but it's up to me as a citizen as a voter if i don't have the representation i'm looking for then try to get them so i'll just ask all of you is you know your people aren't moving uh that doesn't mean that they lose representation it's just it's going to be different representation mayor i i want to throw one final comment out there please go ahead thank you this is attachment a of the public comments that was presented in our packet ocotillo district had one comment saguaro had one comment barrel had three out of those three comments one person asked to remain that copper would remain intact troya had one comment yucca had three comments all three of those people asked that independence heights remain all i'm pointing out is that you have acceded to the request from every request with the exception of independence heights and i think that is not right and not fair i i told you i could support draft map a if independence heights remained in the yucca district apparently no one is willing to do that so i am not in consensus with the rest of council on this thank you very much good thank you mayor i i will just say this um and this is premature but when we get to a vote and we vote on the consensus today i'll prematurely say to miss of the yucca district when the district turns in the ocotillo district i promise you and i'm looking right at you i will be the best representative that i can be for you and the ocotillo district as i have for every other constituent you are in good hands when you're with the alcatel district i promise to continue to be you have you in good hands so that to the three of you i value your comments this is a process i will be your ocatillo district and you'll be proud thank you mayor go ahead i just have one thing um because i actually did make a map and i just wanted for the residents who are not going to be happy for council member clark also is that down in that part of the city the population is so dense that it gets really complicated even moving boundaries a few blocks to make the numbers work so it's all i mean it really is tough to make the numbers work down in that part because there's some so much more dense population in that area where saguaro and choya it was relatively easy some of the boundaries are much easier to make changes because it didn't shift the population by three or four thousand people which when you get down into that part of the city that's what happens so i don't hope people don't feel disenfranchised but that we are doing our best to make the districts as equal as possible and trying not to separate uh neighborhoods and move people into a different election cycle so just so people understand it did get more complicated the further south and southwest sort of you got in the city to move boundaries because literally moving over a couple streets could change the population by a couple thousand residents so that's what the problem was in in trying to accommodate this thank you mayor okay city manager report good afternoon mayor members of the council just three items in my update as you are aware we have a an agreement with asm global who manages the gila river arena where we enter into a profit sharing arrangement once base costs are concluded i'm pleased that you know that even though we've come off of obviously a very challenging last year and a half in the arena business that we did notified by asm that our share of the distribution of profit sharing for the arena will be 1 million nine hundred and 136 dollars and we have received that check again this is uh i think is good news uh in light of the pandemic and all the things that have happened there so i i know speaking on your behalf uh we will make sure is knows how much we appreciate their partnership and the work they've done um those of you who've recently been to westgate if you have been noticing there's been work going on outside the main arena with the static billboards that are in place and they're replacing these in a partnership with westgate and asm to replace um all of the static displays to high definition digital boards they've got two of them operational the rest of them will be turned on here in the next week week and a half and it's going to add another layer of excitement and and kind of pizzazz to the the area but it's also just indication of the continued investment uh by yam properties into the westgate area finally november is employee gratitude month here for the city of glendale and our employee teams have been working really hard to create ways to really to help recognize and thank our amazing employees and i think we can use that word amazing when you think again that we did not miss a beat coming out of what you know just to really a once in a career type of pandemic that all of us had to face on leadership that they did a super job of keeping our core services moving forward um you know i also want to thank the council i know you all did some videos that we that we're driving out through our website uh thanking our employees so we i know that's very appreciated by our employees but again if you get a chance you pass employees to the hall again uh extending your gratitude towards them is uh would be fantastic and then i just personally want to thank our employees they they just every day do an amazing job we saw two weeks ago when we were talking about our our bull calling and our and our solid waste team just a single example of how good those employees are and what a great job they do and with that mr mayor that concludes my report thank you mr bailey nothing today thank you okay council item special interest agenda uh allows for the council to have such things each council will have the opportunity to indicate topics that they'd like to have discussed by this council at a future workshop mr aldama none at this time mac clerk no mayor thank you councilmember miller uh nothing at this time thank you councilmember thomas nothing today mayor councilmember turner nothing nothing today mayor nice mayor nothing mayor okay and uh the only thing i'm going to throw in is we do have a christmas parade coming up but coming up before that is veterans day at the brian brown library uh the invitations went out for anybody that would like to attend that it's not going to be a massive event because of uh again the the coveted issues we're trying to still be careful but there is room if people like to be uh be there at ceremony it starts at eight o'clock uh a.m uh brown library uh uh two days so day and a half from now you're certainly more than welcome and then with that it's my understanding sue you can correct me but i think what our city manager was referring to is the opportunity for all our council to do videos in between now and our meeting tonight is that correct between 3 30 and 5 30. there you go okay thank you okay uh can i get a motion to go into executive session i have a motion and a second to go into executive session any discussion hearing none all in favor would i hi any opposed vote in appears you guys have it do you have it we're recessed you