Applicant Review Panel Thursday, May 16, 2013 6pm City Hall, Boards & Commissions Room 1101 301 W. 2nd Street, Austin, TX 78701 Members: Michelle DeFrance Carol Feller Caroline Limaye CALL TO ORDER 1. CITIZEN COMMUNCIATION: GENERAL (Please limit to 3 minutes per speaker) 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – Approve minutes of April 19, 2013 regular meeting. 3. NEW BUSINESS The ARP may discuss and take action on the following agenda items A. Finalize the list of 60 applicants B. Finalize submission to City Council members C. Finalize letters to non-selected applicants D. Finalize panel members interpretive thoughts and recommendations 4. OLD BUSINESS A. Review ARP work plan ADJOURNMENT The City of Austin is committed to compliance with the American with Disabilities Act. Reasonable modifications and equal access to communications will be provided upon request. Meeting locations are planned with wheelchair access. If requiring Sign Language Interpreters or alternative formats, please give notice at least 4 days before the meeting date. Please call Jawana Gutierrez at 512-322-6596 for additional information. TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711. Questions regarding the Applicant Review Panel may be directed to Jawana Gutierrez at 512-322-6596.
APPLICANT REVIEW PANEL SUBMISSION 1O-0NE REDISTRICTING INITIATIVE Agenda Item Number: (20130516-3A): Selection of Pool of the 60 Most Qualified Applicants for the Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission WHEREAS, on November 6,2012, City of Austin voters approved a City Charter amendment which provides for the election of City Council Members from 10 geographical single-member districts; and WHEREAS, the amendment created a 14-member Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission which will establish the boundaries of the 10 new council districts; and WHEREAS, the amendment created a 3-member Applicant Review Panel, selected by random drawing, whose mission is to select a pool of the 60 most qualified applicants from which the Commission is created; and WHEREAS, the Office ofthe City Auditor has provided to the Applicant Review Panel the applications which meet the minimum requirements for service on the Commission; and WHEREAS, the Applicant Review Panel has evaluated each application according to the criteria at Article II, § 3 (A) (1)(6). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Applicant Review Panel hereby notifies the City Council of the pool of the 60 most qualified applicants. Within five days, each member of the City Council, acting as an individual, may strike up to one applicant and inform the Applicant Review Panel staff liaison in writing. On the Applicant Review Panel's behalf the Applicant Review Panel staff liaison will remove any timely applicant strike from the pool and will provide the list ofthe remaining applicants to the city auditor. The attachment lists the pool of applicants selected by the Applicant Review Panel to be the most qualified to serve on the Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission. Date of Approval: May 16, 2013 Record of the vote: Unanimous on Attest: _--J~8~~~~~~~::::~~;;:::;~::=:~----------- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 APPLICANT REVIEW PANEL SUBMISSION LIST OF MOST QUALIFIED APPLICANTS FOR ICRC Non-Students Non-Students (continued) J. -.. -~ '" ---._ .-. ··w. _.' .. ~ 'je"I0# App'li~a:nt_Narn~~'-. ._~;.~.~ _: f::.-2:.t~ ~ I!;Pp_ .. 10386 Aguirre, Ana Torrez 10316 Aleman, Steven R 10428 Ali, Thressa Lee 10529 Almanza, Librado Pablo 10348 Art, David T 10381 Blanco, Magdalena Patricia 10073 Bradford, Nathaniel 10420 Brisbin, Shelly D 10240 Callahan, Jason Todd 10334 Casarez, Ruth 10092 Christianson, James (Jim) 10191 Cocco, …
Applicant Review Panel Determination of the Most Qualified Applicants for Independent Citizens’ Redistricting Commission Interpretation of City Charter Article 11 (A) May 16, 2013 Background On November 16, 2012, City of Austin voters approved a city charter amendment which provides for the election of city council members from 10 geographical single-member districts, beginning with the election in November 2014. The boundaries of the 10 districts will be drawn by an Independent Citizens’ Redistricting Commission (ICRC). Applicants for a position on the ICRC must meet certain requirements, such as being a registered voter in the City of Austin for the previous five years and being free of conflicts of interest. Applicants for the ICRC were required to disclose their voting history (for non-students), current address, voter ID number, and any conflicts of interest. The city auditor reviewed the applications to validate minimum requirements. The charter amendment also created a 3-member Applicant Review Panel (ARP) to evaluate the applications and select the 60 most qualified applicants based on the following criteria: 1. Relevant analytical skills 2. Ability to be impartial 3. Residency in various parts of the City, and 4. Appreciation for the City of Austin’s diverse demographics and geography On March 11, 2013, the city auditor provided the ARP with 450 applications which met the minimum requirements. The applications included free-form questions so the candidates could describe how they meet the criteria in the city charter. This document describes how the ARP evaluated the applicants to determine the most qualified according to the criteria above. Relevant Analytical Skills Do the applicant’s background and/or experience show that they have used analytical skills in the past? This experience could be either in the workforce or in life. Applicants who gave direct examples scored higher in this area than people who gave general descriptions. An applicant does not rank high in this area by merely saying he or she has analytical skills. There must be an indication in his or her occupational, educational or other history which shows experience in using analytical skills. The experience may be gained by running a business, being in occupations which require data analysis or having hobbies which involve analytical skills. Applicants who have a background in analyzing census data, identifying groups with common interests or using mapping software have higher rankings in relevant analytical skills. Ability to be Impartial Does the application show that the applicant has and …
Page | 1 Applicant Review Panel Meeting Minutes Friday, May 10, 2013 The Applicant Review Panel convened in a regularly called meeting on Friday, May 10, 2013 6:00 p.m. at City Hall’s Board and Commissioner’s Room #1101, 301 W 2nd St, Austin, TX 78701 Meeting was called to order at 6:00 pm by Jawana JJ Gutierrez, ARP staff liaison. COMMITTEE MEMBERS IN ATTENDANCE: Michelle DeFrance Carol Feller Caroline Limaye 1. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION: Brad Parsons, Steve Bickerstaff, Edwin English 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The draft minutes for the regular ARP meeting on May 3rd were reviewed and approved. Member Limaye motioned to approve the minutes with the proposed amendments, member DeFrance seconded. Motion was passed on a vote of 3-0. 3. NEW BUSINESS: The ARP may discuss and take action on the following agenda items: A. Review list of applicants after strikes Upon review of the list of applicants that were removed, Liaison Gutierrez noted that one of the applicants that was on the removal list had withdrawn, thereby leaving panel members with the task of removing an additional applicant. Member Limaye motioned to remove application #115, member DeFrance seconded. Motion was passed on a vote of 3-0. The list is now down to 58 applicants, but the final list of 58 applicants will not be finalized until the next meeting on May 16th. B. Panel member’s interpretive writing regarding the selection process Panel members discussed and decided to work on a draft of their individual interpretive process regarding their selection process, including recommendations for process improvements and lessons learned. Drafts will be submitted to Liaison Gutierrez who will then combine their drafts into one final document; Liaison Page | 2 Gutierrez will try to get the document back to the panel members before the next meeting. 4. OLD BUSINESS A. Presentation of the recommended list to City Council Review of the recommendation letter to be sent to City Council. Liaison Gutierrez will check with the Legal team to see if the word ‘resolution” rather than “submission” can be used in the letter and will send an email to the panel members letting them know if it can be used and will check what the panel members preference will be. The panel members will vote and decide at the next meeting the terminology they wish to use. The panel members agreed to include the list of applicants in an attachment. This …
