Dave Stack asks, "Could someone possibly post a very brief listing of the
primary reasons why a ward's boundary should be redrawn? And/or briefly list the
primary factors to be considered when drawing ward shapes?"
[BRM] The City Charter (ch. 1, sec. 3) sets out the criteria for ward
boundaries:
"1. A population quota for each Ward shall be determined by dividing the
total population of the City by 13. In no case shall any Ward, when readjusted, have a
population more than five percent over or under such population quota.
"2. 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. Wherever possible, Ward boundary lines shall
follow the centerline of streets, avenues, alleys and boulevards and as nearly as
practicable, shall run due East and West or North and South.
"3. To the extent possible, the Wards shall be numbered consecutively,
first on the East side of the Mississippi river and then on the West side and from
North to South. However, notwithstanding the foregoing, effective the date of this
amendment and thereafter, all newly drawn Wards shall retain the same numerical
designation as the then currently existing Ward from which the newly drawn ward
received the largest portion of its population.
"4. Population shall be determined by use of the official population, as
stated by census tracts and blocks in the official United States Census. Whenever it
is necessary to modify census data in fixing a Ward boundary, the Redistricting
Commission may compute the population of any part by use of other pertinent data or
may have a special enumeration made of any block or blocks using the standards of the
United States Census. If the population of any block or blocks is so determined, the
Redistricting Commission may assume that the remainder of the census tract has the
remaining population shown by the census. In every such case, the determination of the
Redistricting Commission as to population shall be conclusive, unless clearly contrary
to the census."
You can find that provision, as well as the (somewhat byzantine) process for
constituting the Redistricting Commission, online at
http://livepublish.municode.com/13/lpext.dll?f=templates&fn=main-j.htm&vid=11490.
Besides the criteria that the charter sets forth, the wards must comply with
federal and state constitutional requirements, including the one-person-one-vote rule
that derives from the Equal Protection Clause (U.S. Const., amend. XIV, sec. 1). Those
requirements have been the subject of numerous cases, articles, and books. For the
requirements that the Special Redistricting Panel followed in drawing congressional-
and legislative-district boundaries when the Legislature did not timely adopt a
redistricting plan after the 2000 Census, see Order Stating Redistricting Principles
and Requirements for Plan Submissions (Minn. Special Redistricting Panel Dec. 11,
2001), available online at
http://www.senate.mn/departments/scr/redist/redsum2000/zachman/c0-01-160_index.htm.
For an excellent overview of redistricting in general, see "Redistricting 2000,"
available online at http://www.leg.mn/lrl/issues/redist00.asp. For a link to statutes
and cases on redistricting at the local level in Minnesota, see "Redistricting Local
Governments," available online at http://www.gis.leg.mn/html/red-localindex.html.
Dave Stack again: "I would think it reasonalble that one criterion should be
that a ward's boundary should not be drawn so as to place the current council member
outside the district. This criterion seems to me to probably be just as important as
the other factors to keep in mind when redrawing. But, obviously, this is not part of
the current law. Maybe we should add this wording to the law, and save us all a lot of
bother."
[BRM] Drawing a district's boundaries so that the district advantages or
disadvantages a particular candidate, even an incumbent, is a form of gerrymandering.
Gerrymandering is not always unconstitutional, but courts have routinely rejected a
principle that favors protecting incumbents in court-drawn redistricting plans. (A
redistricting plan drawn by a political body is a different matter.) The Special
Redistricting Panel applied this rule: "Districts may not be drawn for the purpose of
protecting or defeating an incumbent. However, as a factor subordinate to all
redistricting criteria, the panel may view a proposed plan's effect on incumbents to
determine whether the plan results in either undue incumbent protection or excessive
incumbent conflicts."
BRM
Brian Melendez
Lowry Hill (Ward 7)
REMINDERS:
1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
before continuing it on the list.
2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html
For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract
________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
