Here’s the data dump for what the proposed HISD trustee districts look like, drilling down to the new numbers I have for Citizen Voting Age Population and also for Voter Registration …
TOTAL POPULATION
(2010 Census)
Pop. Anglo Hisp AfrAm Asian
---------------------------------------
1 153,789 26.5% 64.6% 7.2% 1.3%
2 155,562 8.5% 41.7% 48.9% 0.4%
3 146,509 7.3% 79.1% 10.4% 2.8%
4 156,281 20.1% 16.5% 55.2% 7.7%
5 149,488 51.3% 29.0% 7.2% 11.8%
6 149,999 34.0% 35.5% 19.6% 10.2%
7 156,191 51.2% 32.2% 7.9% 8.0%
8 148,057 18.9% 58.7% 19.6% 2.2%
9 149,658 8.3% 38.1% 49.6% 3.6%
VOTING AGE POPULATION
2010 Census
Pop. Anglo Hisp AfrAm Asian
---------------------------------------
1 113,386 31.7% 59.2% 7.1% 1.5%
2 111,438 10.3% 36.9% 51.9% 0.5%
3 101,791 9.4% 75.5% 11.4% 3.2%
4 124,836 23.2% 14.4% 53.3% 8.5%
5 113,236 54.1% 26.0% 7.3% 12.0%
6 115,702 38.2% 31.7% 18.7% 10.7%
7 129,826 54.8% 28.6% 7.8% 8.2%
8 113,927 23.0% 53.3% 20.4% 2.5%
9 104,863 10.0% 34.5% 51.0% 4.1%
CITIZEN VOTING AGE POPULATION
2008-12 American Community Survey
Pop. Anglo Hisp AfrAm Asian
----------------------------------------
1 83,880 41.9% 46.6% 9.0% 1.7%
2 91,325 13.0% 22.8% 63.3% 0.4%
3 66,710 15.0% 63.2% 18.1% 3.1%
4 102,285 24.9% 8.2% 61.9% 4.0%
5 85,865 69.1% 12.9% 8.3% 8.8%
6 83,005 47.0% 19.2% 24.6% 7.6%
7 93,125 68.7% 16.3% 8.1% 5.6%
8 85,855 30.0% 42.0% 25.0% 2.2%
9 87,390 13.1% 20.6% 61.9% 3.2%
VOTER REGISTRATION
2012 General Election
Total Non-Suspense
Reg Voters SSVR% Reg Voters SSVR% SSTO%
------------------------------------------------
1 69,296 40.7% 60,531 41.5% 33.2%
2 87,593 16.8% 76,850 17.3% 13.3%
3 49,644 59.1% 43,749 60.9% 55.6%
4 95,488 6.5% 77,510 6.5% 5.9%
5 80,246 9.8% 69,032 9.5% 8.7%
6 67,920 13.0% 55,841 12.6% 11.4%
7 78,866 10.2% 65,051 9.4% 8.9%
8 64,531 41.2% 54,933 43.2% 33.7%
9 74,370 15.0% 65,542 15.8% 12.2%
Recall that Districts 1, 3, and 8 are the Hispanic opportunity districts. It’s interesting to see how the population shares go as you move down from the most expansive (Total Population) down to the least (Share of Turnout). Here’s what that looks like, isolated by each of those three districts:
DISTRICT 1
Anglo Hisp AfrAm Asian
-----------------------------------------------
TOTAL POP 153,789 26.5% 64.6% 7.2% 1.3%
VAP 113,386 31.7% 59.2% 7.1% 1.5%
CVAP 83,880 41.9% 46.6% 9.0% 1.7%
VOTER REG 69,296 40.7%
TURNOUT 33.2%
DISTRICT 3
Anglo Hisp AfrAm Asian
-----------------------------------------------
TOTAL POP 146,509 7.3% 79.1% 10.4% 2.8%
VAP 101,791 9.4% 75.5% 11.4% 3.2%
CVAP 66,710 15.0% 63.2% 18.1% 3.1%
VOTER REG 49,644 59.1%
TURNOUT 55.6%
DISTRICT 8
Anglo Hisp AfrAm Asian
-----------------------------------------------
TOTAL POP 148,057 18.9% 58.7% 19.6% 2.2%
VAP 113,927 23.0% 53.3% 20.4% 2.5%
CVAP 85,855 30.0% 42.0% 25.0% 2.2%
VOTER REG 64,531 41.2%
TURNOUT 33.7%
One extra highlight on these shares that seems less obvious, but definitely interesting is how the Anglo and Afr-Am population shares break in District 1 and 8. I would guess that the turnout in District 1 in particular may be majority-Anglo (or, at least, pretty close to 50%). It’s conceivable that you could see an Anglo majority voting for a very different candidate than the Hispanic population and winning that district. Meanwhile, in District 8, the CVAP split is more evenly balanced between Anglos and Afr-Am population. Making that district more secure as a functioning Hispanic opportunity district is that Anglo and Afr-Am voters don’t typically vote alike. So there’s less chance of a coalescing majority to out-vote what may not even be a plurality of Hispanic voters in that district. Of course, as luck would have it, both of those districts have pretty good representatives that any voter would be proud to have on the Board.
It’s also worth remembering that it’s not just the population shares that influence whether a district is a true opportunity district. District 1, for instance, seems to have a decent split of Bubba voters and Inner-Loop liberal Anglo voters. But what the numbers suggest is that it may prove to be increasingly challenging to maintain three solid opportunity districts over time. Obviously, this map only has a life span of six years before it will need to be re-drawn again. It should be interesting to see how creative the map has to get to avoid retrogression next time around.