The only way to create a student super-majority city council district, which would theoretically allow for the easy election of a student council member, is to amend Berkeley’s city charter, according to city staff.
At a small, student-oriented meeting on Thursday night, staff informed those in attendance that the redistricting process must follow three basic rules: No change in boundaries shall oust an elected council member, districts shall continue to be nearly equal in size and they shall preserve, to the extent possible, the original boundaries established when the Berkeley City Council districts were formed in 1986.
Because the creation of a student super-majority district would likely entail a major shift in the boundaries of Districts 7 and 8, located just south of the UC Berkeley campus where many students live, an amendment to the charter would have to appear before Berkeley voters on the November 2012 ballot.
But the district lines are slated to be readjusted before then, in time for voters to be placed in the updated districts when they head to the polls.
In the election, Districts 2, 3, 5 and 6 will hold city council races. Those districts are also scheduled to gain a total of 4,295 voters as a result of redistricting, which aims to adjust the boundaries such that each district contains about 14,073 people.
“These 4,295 residents have a right to participate in the 2012 election,” said Councilmember Kriss Worthington at the meeting.
The city’s redistricting is being conducted to reflect data gathered in the 2010 census. Proposals must be submitted to the city clerk by Sept. 16 in order to have new boundary lines and maps submitted in time for the April 1 deadline mandated by the Alameda County Registrar of Voters if the adjusted districts are to be in effect for the election.
ASUC External Affairs Vice President Joey Freeman has encouraged the council to support Councilmember Gordon Wozniak’s motion to extend the deadline to Nov. 1, alleging that the current date does not provide enough time for a proposal to be drafted by students who will just be returning to the city. However, Deputy City Manager Christine Daniel said at the meeting that a November deadline would not give staff enough time to have the boundaries ready by April 1.
At the meeting, Worthington said it is possible for redistricting proposals to be drafted for the election in accordance with the city charter while a charter amendment is also proposed. In effect, this would result in redistricting occurring twice, should the charter amendment be approved.
“Those two things are in no way in conflict with each other,” Worthington said.
Complete redistricting packets containing further information such as public hearing dates, timelines, maps and data will be publicly available at the City Clerk Department and on the city’s website July 11.
J.D. Morris is an assistant news editor.
Comment Policy
Comments should remain on topic, concerning the article or blog post to which they are connected. Brevity is encouraged. Posting under a pseudonym is discouraged, but permitted. The Daily Cal encourages readers to voice their opinions respectfully in regard to the readers, writers and contributors of The Daily Californian. Comments are not pre-moderated, but may be removed if deemed to be in violation of this policy. Click here to read the full comment policy.

“which would theoretically allow for the easy election of a
student council member”‘Theoretically’. But how many students can really afford the time spent being a city councillor? Maybe after they graduate, but we already have had UC alumni elected to Council. Also, what’s the point of concentrating students in only one district having one token student rep on council? At least now students are significant constituencies in about 3 districts. The fact that Wozniak is pushing for this suggests that him (and others) would be glad to push all the student issues on just one councilmember and not worry about them.
Actually, right now students are spread over four to five districts, in effect spreading our voice so thin that no Council Member is able to represent students. Having a concentrated student district would make it far easier for student input on critical city council issues, as we would not be gerrymandered across different representatives. For example, Right now, students share districts with retired homeowners, and other constituencies that do not fall in line with any of our interests. Consequently, the council member elected to represent said district is not able to balance student representation with that of the other segments in the districts. Because older citizens tend to contribute more (monetarily, and politically) to a council member’s campaign, student’s are effectively silenced. That’s why thousands of students, scholars, and Berkeley citizens are in support of a student district. As 25% of the population of Berkeley, being spread so thin is a clear form of disenfranchisement.