Some observers and listmembers have in the past dismissed the citizen lawsuit (of which I am one of 16 plaintiffs) over the proposed redistricting plan for Minneapolis as somehow frivolous or without foundation, as if the lawsuit is based on "sour grapes" or unsubstantiated conspiracy theories. Occasionally we have calls for Don Samuels or Dean Zimmermann to announce whether they will be moving or what they plan to do about running again as they seem to have been redistricted out of the wards they now represent.
Such calls are premature. At this point I have a strong belief that the redistricting lawsuit will prevail--if the city even takes it all the way to trial. People have different interpretations of the intent of the Charter and Redistricting Commissions--concerning whether their actions represented a last vindictive gasp by the old-guard Minneapolis DFL designed to thwart the future of the Green Party and further the political ambitions of some key individuals, or, whether they were just well-intentioned efforts that couldn't please everybody. While parts of the lawsuit against the redistricting plan concern the intentions of the Redistricting Commission, other parts focus on the objective facts of what resulted from their actions. While I believe there are strong arguments in favor of all of the points in the lawsuit, some of the points concerning the objective results of the process are particularly easy to prove. The illegal shape of the new proposed Third Ward is the most obvious and in itself will be enough to get the redistricting plan thrown out. The Minneapolis City Charter (Chap.1,Section 3) reads, "each Ward shall consist of contiguous compact territory not more than twice as long as it is wide, provided that the existence of any lake within any Ward shall not be contrary to this provision." Earlier this summer the plaintiffs hired a professional survey firm to check and document what appears to be obvious from a look at the new ward map--that the Third Ward, and possibly two other wards, violate this requirement. The survey firm found that the proposed new Third Ward is exactly 2.7 times longer than it is wide. (at least one of the other wards appears to be in probable violation as well). This is a clear violation of the city charter and in itself will be enough to derail the whole plan, no matter what the merits of the other points in the lawsuit may be. This is not a small violation-it represents a serious mistake by the Redistricting Commission and has many implications regarding political organizing and the fair representation of people of color in the city of Minneapolis. I do not see any legitimate argument having been made so far that provides a reasonable case for the new proposed Third Ward to be in compliance with the city charter. Obviously, you can't just adjust the Third Ward without adjusting all the other wards so the current redistricting plan is going to have to be thrown out. The only question to me is how long the city is going to keep wasting money on a high-priced law firm way up in the Pillsbury Tower to defend the Redistricting Commission's flawed plan before they conclude they are fighting a losing battle. Bruce Shoemaker Holland Neighborhood Still in the Third Ward TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. 2. If you don't like what's being discussed here, don't complain - change the subject (Mpls-specific, of course.) ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
