The council had postponed the issue at its July 5 meeting, but not before unanimously agreeing to alter the timing of the boundary changes, which had originally been recommended by the city attorney’s office to come between the primary elections for city council, which were held Aug. 2, and the general election to be held Nov. 8.

While the minor changes to the boundaries themselves had not been met with strong objections, the timing had been controversial. So at their July 5 meeting, councilmembers agreed to change the effective date of the boundary changes to Dec. 1, 2011.

The staff-recommended tweaks approved at the Aug. 4 agenda showed minor differences from the changes recommended on July 5. All changes involve the way the tips of the pie-shaped wedges come together.

In the July 5 version, Ward 5 was bounded by Huron Street to the north and Madison Street to the south as it came towards the city center. In the Aug. 4 version, the Ward 5 northern boundary was dropped to Liberty Street, and to compensate the Ward 5 pie tip extended farther to the east.

In the July 5 version, the boundary between Wards 3 and 4 was aligned to Packard Street. But in the Aug. 4 version, the existing protrusion of Ward 4 across Packard, between Arch and Wells streets, was preserved. And to compensate, Ward 4 was pushed back from South University, with the result that Monroe Street, east of State Street, is a part of Ward 3. [.pdf of staff-recommended tweaks from Aug. 4] [.pdf of staff-recommended tweaks from July 5.]

This brief was filed from the city council’s chambers on the second floor of city hall, located at 301 E. Huron. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

Ultimately, the council decided to postpone the boundary changes. But before the postponement, the council amended the ordinance to make the changes that they eventually agree on effective on Dec. 1, after the Nov. 8 election.

All public commentary on the issue encouraged the city council not to enact the boundary changes between the primary and the general elections. Public commentary included remarks from John Shea – a representative of the Washtenaw branch of the lawyer’s committee for the American Civil Liberties Union – and local attorney Tom Wieder. County clerk Larry Kestenbaum attended the meeting, but did not sign up in time to be included among the first 10 reserved speaker slots. (Reserved commentary slots are reserved on a first-come-first-served basis.)

[Previous Chronicle coverage: "Column: Ann Arbor Ward Shifts Should Wait"]

By the numbers, if the 2010 census population were distributed perfectly evenly across the city’s five wards (pie-shaped, per the city’s charter), they would each have a population of 22,787 – the ideal number in redistricting terms. Without any redistricting, the imbalance among wards, due to relative population growth in Ward 1 since 2000, breaks down as follows: Ward 1 [24,616 population, +1,829 whole number deviation from ideal (+8.03%)]; Ward 2 [22,419, -368 (-1.61%)]; Ward 3 [22,206, -581 (-2.55%)]; Ward 4 [22,585, -202 (-0.89%)]; Ward 5 [22,108, -679 (-2.98%)].

In 2000, the variance from the ideal for each ward ranged between +1.5% and -1.5%.

As proposed, the city’s redistricting plan would yield the following breakdown: Ward 1 [22,795, +8 (+0.04%)]; Ward 2 [22,739, -48, (-0.21%)]; Ward 3 [22,919, +132 (+0.58%)]; Ward 4 [22,760, -27 (-0.12%)]; Ward 5 [22,721, -66, (-0.29%)]. To restore the balance in the wards, the redistricting proposal focuses on reassignment where the five wedges of the ward pie meet, in the center of the city near the downtown. [.pdf of City of Ann Arbor proposed ward boundary changes ] [.pdf of ward boundary changes proposed by councilmember Sabra Briere]

This brief was filed from the city council’s chambers on the second floor of city hall, located at 301 E. Huron. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

If the 2010 census population were distributed perfectly evenly across the city’s five wards (pie-shaped per the city’s charter), they would each have a population of 22,787 – the ideal number in redistricting terms. Without any redistricting, the imbalance among wards, due to relative population growth in Ward 1 since 2000, breaks down as follows: Ward 1 [24,616 population, +1,829 whole number deviation from ideal (+8.03%)]; Ward 2 [22,419, -368 (-1.61%)]; Ward 3 [22,206, -581 (-2.55%)]; Ward 4 [22,585, -202 (-0.89)]; Ward 5 [22,108, -679 (-2.98%)].

In 2000 the variance from the ideal for each ward ranged between +1.5% and -1.5%.

The proposed redistricting plan would yield the following breakdown: Ward 1 [22,795, +8 (+0.04%)]; Ward 2 [22,739, -48, (-0.21%)]; Ward 3 [22,919, +132 (+0.58%)]; Ward 4 [22,760, -27 (-0.12%)]; Ward 5 [22,721, -66, (-0.29%)].

To restore the balance in the wards, the redistricting proposal focuses on reassignment where the five wedges of the ward pie meet, in the center of the city near the downtown.

Part of a small wedge of the current Ward 1, between Geddes Avenue and South University, would be reassigned to Ward 2. A current Ward 1 area just south of South University Avenue between South Forest and South State would be reassigned to Ward 3 and Ward 4.

And the current area in Ward 1 bounded by East Huron, Division, Liberty and Main streets would become part of Ward 5. Also becoming a Ward 5 area would be the former Ward 1 area bounded by Liberty, Thompson, Madison and Division.

Ward 3 – which would, by a tiny fraction, wind up being the largest ward population-wise – would be reassigned some former Ward 4 areas, east of Packard, and north of Wells Street. That change would align the boundary between wards along Packard Street. [.pdf of city map showing redistricting]

This was the first public discussion of any redistricting proposal. The city’s election commission met last Friday, June 10, to go over the plan. To enact the plan, the city council will need to revise Chapter 17 of the city code, which lays out the ward boundaries. The two required readings and approvals by the council, together with a public hearing, could take place in July. Ward boundary changes would be effective before the Nov. 8, 2011 general election, but not before the Aug. 2, 2011 primary election.

The city election commission would need to approve changes to precinct boundaries that are required as a result of the redistricting.