Farmers Branch redistricting commission unanimously backs Map 7 after reviewing alternate plans

The Farmers Branch Redistricting Commission unanimously recommended Map 7 as its preferred redistricting plan following a Sept. 14, 2022 meeting in which members reviewed Maps 7, 8 and 9, conducted mapping exercises using GIS software and discussed public comments.

The commission’s recommendation matters because it is the formal advice the city council will use in preparing the ordinance or resolution that ultimately sets district lines for city elections. The commission also discussed timing: council must adopt a map at least 74 days before the May 2023 city election to meet election-deadline requirements.

Commission members and staff reviewed population and voting metrics tied to specific census blocks, including Spanish-surname registered-voter (SSRV) measures used to assess minority-majority status in District 1. During a live mapping exercise, members examined how adding a particular census block affected SSRV percentages — one block’s addition was described in the session as reducing an SSRV figure from roughly 43% to about 38.5% for the affected configuration. Bob, who participated in the meeting as the group’s map analyst, told commissioners that “Map 7, you know, from a minority perspective, 7 is the better plan than 8 or 9.”

Commission members spoke repeatedly in favor of Map 7. Kelsey (Redistricting Commission member) said, “I think that map 7 best serves the purpose that we do.” Nancy (Redistricting Commission member) summarized the commission’s deliberations by noting that members had worked from the census numbers presented to them and believed Map 7 most closely met the commission’s charge.

The group also discussed legal and practical constraints. The chair read into the record that the commission would convene in an executive session under Section 551.071 of the Texas Government Code to receive confidential legal advice about Maps 7, 8 and 9; the public portions of the meeting resumed for the mapping exercises and discussion. Commission members repeatedly cited litigation risk as a consideration when comparing maps, and some members said avoiding prolonged litigation and associated costs weighed in favor of the map they had previously developed.

On procedure, commissioners agreed they had thoroughly reviewed the alternatives and that no additional commission meeting was required unless the city council specifically requested further review. The commission voted — by a unanimous show of hands from members present — to keep its prior recommendation and forward Map 7 (the group counted seven affirmative votes in the room). Members asked staff to include a brief memo with the submission that notes the commission reviewed Maps 8 and 9 and considered public comments presented at the council meeting.

The commission’s recommendation is advisory; the city council retains authority to accept, modify or replace the plan. The commission noted the council will hold its own public hearings before any final council action and that the council’s timeline must comply with the statutory 74-day pre-election deadline for the May 2023 city election.

Votes at a glance: the commission recorded a unanimous recommendation for Map 7 (7 yes, 0 no, 0 abstain among members present).