COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC HEARING COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - - - Room 401, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Wednesday, Sept. 12, 2001 6:50 p.m. - - - BILL 010523 - An Ordinance amending Chapter 20-500 of the Philadelphia Code entitled "Councilmanic Districts," by revising the boundaries of the councilmanic Districts... BILL 010529 - An Ordinance amending Chapter 20-501 of the Philadelphia Code relating to boundaries of Councilmanic Districts, by revising the boundaries of Councilmanic Districts... - - - PRESENT: COUNCIL PRESIDENT ANNA C. VERNA COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE BLACKWELL COUNCILWOMAN BLONDELL REYNOLDS BROWN COUNCILMAN DARRELL L. CLARKE COUNCILMAN DAVID COHEN COUNCILMAN FRANK J. DI CICCO COUNCILMAN WILSON W. GOODE, JR. COUNCILMAN JAMES F. KENNEY COUNCILWOMAN JOAN L. KRAJEWSKI COUNCILMAN W. THACHER LONGSTRETH COUNCILMAN RICHARD T. MARIANO COUNCILWOMAN DONNA REED MILLER COUNCILMAN MICHAEL A. NUTTER COUNCILMAN BRIAN J. O'NEILL COUNCILMAN ANGEL L. ORTIZ COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO COUNCILWOMAN MARIAN B. TASCO - - - VINCENT VARALLO ASSOCIATES, INC. Registered Professional Reporters Eleven Penn Center 1835 Market Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 (215) 561-2220 I N D E X BILL 010523 PAGE VICTOR VAZQUEZ, Latino Voting Rights Committee ------------------------------ MARIA QUINONEZ-SANCHEZ, Latino Voting Rights Committee ------------------------------ RAFAEL COLLAZO, Latino Committee for Fair Redistricting in Pa. ------------------- WILFREDO ROJAS, Delaware Valley Voter Registration Education Project --------- 3 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523
This is the Committee of the Whole. I would ask Mr. Auerbach to please read the title of Bill No. 010523 and 010529.
Bill No. 010523, an Ordinance amending Chapter 20-500 of the Philadelphia Code entitled "Councilmanic Districts," by revising the boundaries of the councilmanic Districts, under certain terms and conditions. Bill No. 010529, an Ordinance amending Chapter 20-501 of the Philadelphia Code relating to boundaries of Councilmanic Districts, by revising the boundaries of Councilmanic Districts, under certain terms and conditions.
Good evening. Kindly identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Good evening, Madam President, Members of City Council. My name is Victor Vazquez. I am spokesperson for the Latino Voting Rights Committee of Philadelphia. With me is Maria Quinonez-Sanchez, another member of the committee. Let me preface my presentation by saying that I am here tonight under a fair amount of 4 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 duress, as are most Americans. I didn't hear from my daughters yesterday until last night. Both of them live in New York. One of them travels to Manhattan every day. I'm not even dressed appropriately for this hearing because I left this morning from my house to take my wife to work and I thought we probably were not going to be having this meeting today.
They're fine. Thank you. We had to cancel meetings yesterday with several Councilmembers. We were unable to meet with our attorneys with whom we were going to confer because they're located six blocks away from the World Trade Center. They're okay. So my testimony tonight is rather incomplete in that regard. We're very concerned about the process that's been followed here, the shortness of time. We asked to participate in this process several months ago and we're concerned about the lack of public participation here today. We put together a map and a proposal in response to the bills that were introduced last 5 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 week. We looked at three factors in putting our plan together. One, we looked at political incumbents; two, we looked at the natural population growths; and we also looked at community contiguity and compactness. We know, because we've been here all day, that there have been several discussions back and forth. And it appears, Madam President and Members of Council, that once again the district in which the largest number of Latinos live in the City of Philadelphia, the 7th Councilmanic District, is going to look very different than the rest of the districts in Council. Since 1961, the 7th Councilmanic District has begun to look less and less compact. We've had these struggles before in City Council. And by the way, Madam President, as far as the process that is followed in this Council, we don't blame you personally nor do we blame the Members of City Council. We understand that this is the process that's been followed for the last 50 years, but it is wrong. There's no possibility for adequate public discussion here. Our proposal places 45 percent of the 6 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 Latino population into one district, the City Council 7th Councilmanic District. It is a proposal that's been shared with all of you, and we thank you for being able to meet you with you last Friday. We also met with Councilman Mariano, Councilwoman Tasco, and a few others. We understand the pressure that you've been under to get everyone to agree to maps. But once again, we feel like the community that's being asked to give up the most and not really in line with the population changes and shifts in this City. This is now a majority minority city and these maps do not account for that. We don't know what amendments are going to be presented. Certainly, the bill that was presented last week which reduces the current 38 percent population in the Latino population in the 7th Councilmanic District is unacceptable, reducing it to 34 percent. We understand that there's an amendment being presented tonight that's going to be a little different, but we did not see it. I would like to give the balance of my time to Maria Quinonez-Sanchez.
Thank you. 7 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523
Basically, I wanted to explain the map that we put before you. In fact, we had some maps and they're loss in the conversations here. We wanted to show the 61 map and also the 67 map and the 81 map because clearly if you look at the design of those maps -- and we'll make those available once we find them, somebody in this room has them -- one of the things that it shows is, that the political will of this body for the last 40 years has been it has taken our growth and our compactness and created districts resembling snakes. What we're asking for is, given the population shifts, understanding our growth -- and let's point out our growth because it is ironic that when the Hispanic growth is needed as is the case in this redistricting process as it relates to congressional districts, the fact that we experience a 45 percent growth is going to allow the City of Philadelphia to maintain three congressional districts. That's power, power that is obtained through our growth and numbers. And I say that because that's very important because in that redistricting process, our numbers are looked at and are applauded. In the redistricting process and the 8 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 proposal that's presented by this legislative body, that is totally discounted. The other point I'd like to make with that is --- the other point that I think is important to make is in the '91 struggle, the compromise was 28, but it was a compromise that took into consideration our population shifts and our growth. The proposal before us contains that. And in fact, we believe the proposal, the amendments that will be presented today further limits our growth. What a 28 percent map that we compromised with in '91 and the fact that we now represent 38 percent of the population was proof that, one, we were willing to compromise; and two, that compromise consisted of allowing our community and our population growths to be recognized. We are now 38 percent of the population. Given our growth, we know that if we allow a district that does not take into consideration the gains that we've had since 1981 until now, we will lose further. Anything, anything that is presented by this legislative body that does not recognize those struggles, to us, says that we are not one of the political factors that is being taken into consideration in the development of 9 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 these maps. I think what we present to Council in this map of 45 percent takes into account incumbency, it takes into account some compactness, and it takes into account the growth and the population shifts that the city is going to experience in the next years. 8 Like Victor says, unfortunately, we are 9 not as prepared as we would have like to have been 10 because our attorneys are in New York City. We, unfortunately, did not receive a map or a proposed plan until Thursday morning. And we have tried to reach out to Councilmembers both individually and as a group and to work with them in the limited time available to us to try and come up with a compromise that is something that protects the integrity of what we've gained to date. The time is limited because this body has chosen to limit it. I do not believe that this legislative body wants to go on the record as a body that refuses to give itself the time, given the importance and the significance of what we are debating today to say that October 1st is the drop dead deadline. I think we need to hear that there is a political will in this room that says that we 10 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 will and are willing to try to create a map that protects the integrity of all of the incumbents and the districts that we are trying to all protect and defend. Thank you.
Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Goode.
Thank you, Madam President. Good evening. My question is, in coming with your proposal, which I did read Sunday morning at some point, did you look at each individual district or did you start out with the 7th District?
No. And in fact if I show you the theme map, if that was the premise by which we started, which was not the case, we would be proposing 50 percent. If you look at our population, it's very compact.
That answers the first question. The second question is, did you look at minority populations in all 10 districts?
Did you seek to increase minority population in all 10 districts? 11 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523
Well, we didn't want to, in the creation of this district --
I was asking you to explain district by district what you did in terms of minority population.
Well, here's the thing. We don't want to get caught up with drawing everybody's districts because there are political nuances that exist. What we tried to do, because we knew that this legislative body was going ask us to draw a map, was to try to protect the percentage of the population demographics. So, yes, we took that as a factor.
But did you make a decision district by district what the minority population should be?
Did you look at the African-American population district by district?
Did you in any district dilute minority population or African-American population?
Yes. The 2nd Councilmanic District I believe experiences a 5 percent loss.
That's an 80 percent loss under your plan. Thank you very much.
Any there any other questions from members of the committee?
Do you have any understanding of what the proposals are before the Council at the current time? Are you aware of the proposals at the present time and can you tell us what your analysis of them as compared to what you achieved last time?
There have been discussions. There are a lot of political nuances that while are important factors we cannot be -- we are considerate of the plans that are being presented or the last ones we saw that looped 13 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 Councilman Clarke and has him over here is unacceptable because while it may give us a 40 percent district, it gives us a district that, again, restricts our growth in this area.
Because what you do is you create a map this way and this way. It doesn't take into account communities and population shifts and growths.
Can a microphone be made available to the speaker so as she points out on the map we can hear her?
When you look at the growth that's been experienced in the northeast, if you look at that growth, most of it will be minority growth. So when you take Councilman Clarke and you loop him in here and literally connect the lower part of this district with the upper part by a division ratio, it doesn't take into account that there are communities that are forming in and along 14 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 Oxford Circle and so forth.
Do I get that you mean that it defines communities political expression is a very narrow --
Right. It's politically expedient that instead of -- you have 40 percent, but it's narrow in its thinking that it doesn't allow -- it doesn't keep communities of interest intact. For instance, it disrupts lower northeast.
And you're saying that the number is not the sole figure to determine fairness?
For us is population, parity, a district. Obviously, we're starting with a 45 percent mark. Again, we can be at 50 percent.
If the Latino 15 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 community were our sole interest, this the map we would be drawing. This is not what we started. For us, it is important to recognize the communities of Hunting Park, Feltonville, Juniata, and all this growth.
Again, this is not our ideal. Our ideal would be this. But when you take into consideration some of the political nuances with some of the other Councilpeople, we tried to create a map that was more intact.
Incidentally, if I may, you said in your regular discussion that you felt Council was unfair for pressing to for immediate decision. Can you explain why you feel that way?
Well, first -- and Victor mentioned this -- we started this process five months. Four months ago we wrote Madam President requesting some input. Obviously, there 16 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 is discussion about when the numbers were official, what the Census Bureau put out, the compilation of the numbers. So apparently, the process of City Council is a lot. And we did not have privy to any plans until Thursday, September 6th, just like everybody else did. So if you note, by 7th we were already prepared to respond to the plan and propose our one plan literally hours later. 10
You understand why 11 Council is taking this position? 12
Well, because our pay 14 gets stopped. We don't lose any money, but it gets 15 delayed, at least that was experienced 10 years ago. 16 You're saying that you think it's more important to 17 get this right and get fair representation than for 18 us to be concerned about the timing of our pay? 19
What we learned 20 in 1991 was that this process was not a process that 21 could be handled in three months. For the last two 22 years we have actively been supporting the census 23 process in the City, both locally and statewide 24 through our relationship with the Puerto Rican Legal Defense Fund, even some of the independent efforts 17 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 that existed in the City of Philadelphia. We've been talking about this for a long time. I understand the legislative restraints that exist in this body. Part of those restrictions were established by this body. I'm not saying that we can't agree on something before October 1st, but the political will is on this body. We're willing.
Well, I take your position that it's better to do it right than just to get it done.
Absolutely. It's too important. You're drawing up lines that we have to live with for 10 years. We cannot go through this process again until 2011.
What did you mean by your testimony when you said the growth in the Hispanic population made it possible for Philadelphia to retain three Congressional seats?
When you look at our growth in numbers, we in terms of community compared the various demographic community from the City, we grew .5 percent; 3 percent under count. Those numbers allowed this city to be able to defend three congressional districts in this City. 18 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523
Thank you. Are there any other questions or comments from any members of the committee of the two witnesses? Do we have any other witnesses that wish to testify? Please approach the witness table. Thank you very much. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Good evening, Madam President. My name is Rafael Collazo from Philadelphia. My last name is spelled C-o-l-l-a-z-o. Good evening, Madam President Verna, the Honorable Members of Philadelphia City Council and the ladies and gentlemen in attendance today. My name is Rafael Collazo, a proud lifetime Philadelphian and a current resident of Juniata Park. I am here today representing the Latino Committee on Fair Redistricting for Pennsylvania. This committee is an ad hoc group of citizens that want to insure that no community of interest's voting strength is diluted in redistricting process. 19 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 This committee is supported by the United States Hispanic Leadership Institute as well as the Delaware Valley Voter Registration Education Project in Philadelphia. The committee, for the record, first wants to express their indignation at the redistricting bills that have been submitted by Philadelphia City Council, those being the two bills that were submitted last Thursday. We have not had an opportunity to see the new amendments. Simply, these proposals would dilute Latino voting strength. This weakening of the community of interest's rightful opportunity to elect representation of their choice goes against the spirit of the democracy that this body has sworn to protect. This proposed regression seems even more questionable when you consider the extraordinary growth of Latinos in Philadelphia. Indeed, the 2000 U.S. Census reports a 40 percent increase in the Hispanic population. Those numbers suggest a community that should not be politically cracked but is indeed a community of interest that should be welcomed to the integral part to the future of this city. Now that our objection has been noted, 20 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 the committee would like to formally submit a proposal for the 7th Councilmanic District. In developing our plan, the committee followed standard redistricting principles. That's important. Those standards include observing a one person-one vote principle, maintaining a district's compactness and contiguity as well as respecting political subdivisions, communities of interest, and incumbency. Numerically, the committee's proposal is less than half of 1 percent from being an ideal council district. Many of you already have given out the numbers. I will give you more copies of it. This proposal would be less than half of 1 percent of an ideal district numerically. As you can see, the district would have a definite compact. See the dark blue outline, it's very compact.
Yes. I'll ask Mr. Rojas to pass out small copies. We have copies right here.
It would be very good if he could point it out as you talked so we can see 21 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 what you mean by reference to the map.
The first piece I discussed, Councilman, was the compactness of the proposed map. The dark blue outline that Mr. Rojas is pointing out is very compact geographically. The next point being neighborhood integrity. On that map you have neighborhoods such Fair Hill, North Square, West Kensington, Franklinville. As you go further north, Hunting Park. Go a little further east, Feltonville, Harrowgate, Juniata Park, and Oxford Circle. They would more or less remain intact, and that was something that the committee took special interest in. The lighter black outline are ward maps, which you'll certainly recognize. And wards like the 7th and 19th in the lower half as well as further northeast, the 33rd Ward are completely intact. And traditional wards such as the 43rd and 42nd and going further northeast would also remain for the most part in those districts. And that's something that the committee took special interest in. Also, as well to our knowledge Council Mariano will still that live in this district, to our knowledge he was a resident of Juniata Park and 22 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 under this plan, his home would be in the district, so that's something that we looked at as well. Under this plan, the 7th District would maintain a 48.27 percent Latino population. This percentage reflects a byproduct of the redistricting principles we discussed just now as well as the fair representation of a community of interest. I want to point out that this committee did not pack Latinos within this district. According the U.S. Census about a little more than 55 percent, 56 percent of the Latinos in town would live in this proposed district, so we're certainly not packing the vast majority of Hispanics into this district. In closing, the Latino Committee for Fair Redistricting thanks the Members of Philadelphia City Council for the opportunity to be members of this very important process. And I thank many of you met with us informally earlier today. And I would just like to close by saying that yesterday's tragic event in New York and Washington show us even more than ever we need to work together in the city of brotherly love as a true family behind the principles of democracy and just as importantly fairness. Really, what this proposal 23 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 and what we were talking about today really goes back to fairness. Thank you.
Tell me in broad conclusion, are you familiar at all with the proposal that's being presented today to City Council with respect to how the Latino community will be represented? I would like a comparison. In your view, what is the comparison of that, not with respect to numbers, but with respect to the other factors.
Well, one of the first factors you look at is the current shape of this councilmanic, which this certainly would be a little more compact and we understand there's many political considerations, but it would be hard to argue that this isn't more compact. That's one of the factor. Deviation, and as far as my understanding, the 7th District is over plus would have to lose population, so this district would numerically be an ideal district, would be within 24 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 deviation. The idea of not cutting up a bunch of different wards, trying to keep wards as compact -- maintaining them within the district as possible. Neighborhood integrity, like I said, there's about eight or nine kind of core neighborhoods there that we looked at we wanted to keep as much possible in the same district. Mr. DeCarlo and Mr. Will Gonzalez, who had to leave believe for personal reasons have been there all day, were going to speak more on that in terms of the idea of community development is much easier when the entire community or neighborhood is represented by the same representatives. And that consistency we would like to see as much as possible, not only in Council, but it's better for our neighborhood to have the same rep, have the same state senator, have the same congressperson, have the same District Councilperson for that sort of political integrity. And, of course, looking at the growth of hispanic and minority populations in that part of the city, all those things were considered. And the geography, I think if you look at it, you see Kensington Avenue there on the 25 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 southeast corner, that's kind of a standard dividing line there. I mean, we know that as with El-train and everything, it's kind of like a geographic border that we look at. Castor Avenue in the northeast; on the west side, Ninth Street. Those are the things we look at as kind of standard or geographical boundaries in the City.
Have you a map that shows the entire city, how the districts would be drawn if you overimposed your district? Certainly the council district councilpeople would like to know how it impacts our district and what it looks like over all.
We did not submit the entire map of all 10 district councils today. Obviously, we would be more than happy to work with people, City Councilpeople and the City on developing something that would be fair for everyone. One of the principles the committee stands behind is that no group, whether it be a minority group or any other special interest group in the City, voting strengths would be diluted in 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 this process. But honestly, we wanted to focus on this particular part of the city because, honestly, it was a major issue in 1991, as you remember, Councilwoman. And from the proposals that were submitting Thursday, we had a very serious concern about that because we did not want to regress from the hard work that had been done by this Council in negotiating something that was relatively fair last time around, so we wanted to focus on this district. We understand that it has to fit into a larger puzzle and we're certainly willing to -- as we talked earlier, we had a lot of informal conversations today -- work with people and the rest of the City on developing something that's fair for everyone.
Wilfredo Rojas. I'm the president of the Delaware Valley Voter Registration Education Project, Philadelphia. And I come before 27 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 you this evening. I want to thank City Councilmembers, council staff, and those who care enough about our democracy, here the greatest country in the world, to come up to public hearings to offer testimony in such an important issue. I would be really remiss if I didn't voice my frustrations at the process that we encountered here today. I understand that Council is very preoccupied with a lot of the different issues, but we have been here since 10 o'clock. My colleagues who were going to present testimony, I want to be the voice on their behalf and mine also that they're really frustrated because if it would have been average people that are criticized for not participating in the democratic process in voting, you can see one of the reasons why, because we've been frustrated. Had we come here with a group of people that had kids and had to run out and go back to work, it would have been really difficult for them to participate in this democratic process. With that said, I come before you on behalf the Delaware Valley Voter Registration Education Project. We are a project that was formed in 1995 dedicated to increasing the number of 28 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 registered voters, all voters, not only Latino voters, but communities of interest, people that have the same interest in mind, and educating anyone interested in participating in our country's democratic process. We do not conduct selective voter registration education. But we are guided by the principle that a well-informed voter makes a good citizen. We are presently confronted with a situation in this country that will totally demonstrate that when it comes to patriotism, we indeed are one big melding pot. But I'm not here to speak about the great tragedy beseeching our country today, but rather about the opportunity to replenish that salad bowl of cultures which is America and which has become Philadelphia. I appear here not to philosophically try to convince you that there is a growing community of interest on Philadelphia that is clamoring for political representation. I am not appearing before to argue for a particular ethnic minority district, but rather to enlighten you about the common bond that unites a certain geographic community. I should note for the record, however, that 29 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 philosophically speaking, that the guiding principles of a City Council in drawing up political boundaries should not favor a party or person nor dilute racial or ethnic voting strength. But I'm also not naive enough to understand this is precisely what would drive this process. In the map presented by Mr. Frank Collazo of the United States Hispanic Leadership Institute, there is an compact and contiguous community of interest, a community that is rapidly changing to embrace people from all cultures within its political boundaries. What was once a strong and vibrant ethic enclave of working-class people in important manufacturing industry, is now today a diversified population working in all types of jobs. With strong bipartisan support, the Congress of the United States and our state government passed legislation known as the Welfare Reform Act. That act removed barriers to work for heads of many families that presently resided in 7th Councilmanic District and proposed by Mr. Collazo. Many families who relied on assistance from our government, have today joined those residents who were fortunate enough to purchase their homes in healthier economic 30 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 times in the proposed 7th District. Today, many new families are purchasing homes in the proposed district and forming a bond with the old-time residents.
These families are united by the common interests in home ownership, employment, better education for their children, and the hope realizing the American dream. Looking at Mr. Collazo's proposal redistricting map for the 7th Councilmanic District, one will see that it is not a majority community of any certain racial or ethnic group, but rather a community of interest of different groups with roughly the same income, the same aspirations, and the same desire to forge a community tolerant of different cultures. If you look to the proposed southwestern part of Mr. Collazo's proposed district, one could see a community once occupied by present long-term residents of the proposed upper and western part of the 7th District. The working residents of the southern part of the proposed district up until Dauphin Street are relocating to purchase homes in the northern part of the proposed district. This is a demographic pattern of upward mobility to what is 31 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 considered a better neighborhood. Over the years, however, neighborhood improvement efforts stirred by members of this City Council, the mayor, and other officials start to revitalize and restore the southern end of the district to what it once was for the northern residential district. Philadelphia, the city of neighborhoods, needs to promote keeping community of interests together, particularly political subdivision. This City Council should not view the different democratic changes in the City, particularly the 7th Councilmanic District, as a threat to the political stability of the City or to any individual political power base. Rather, you should view this change as healthy to the future of our city and our entire families. Thank you.
Thank you very much. The Chair recognizes Council Ortiz.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr. Collazo, we have over 34, 40 percent. However, in terms of community of interest as was framed in 1991, that spoke about that community of interest has been the one that gives us 40.3. And I 32 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 have said to my colleagues that at the beginning point is where we are right now, this 38.8. But that 38.8 does not satisfy the aspects of growth in the Latino community in the City of Philadelphia, especially in the northeast in terms of how that should be reflected. 40 percent, although it shows some growth, it does not keep within the precepts and principle of maintaining that community of interest. Is that acceptable to your organization?
Well, I think if you look at where we currently stand at 38.9 percent, I believe you said, and you look what the proposal is at 48 percent, again, not gerrymandering, making a very compact district affecting all the redistricting considerations that you need to do in this process. Even if we're looking at a political compromise, we're still not in the middle there. If you look at 48 minus 38, right, the committee stands by our map. The committee stands by the idea that no community should be diluted in this process. And speaking on behalf of the committee, we still would have issues with 40 percent considering the growth, considering also the idea that one thing that also should be considered is when you look at a community 33 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 politically, you not only look at its total population, you also look at the population that's and above. So you look at the voting age 5 population. So let's say, for example, we're at 6 looking at 40 percent in a district such as this, 7 that may sound reasonably reasonable, right? But 8 you take into account that as a voting age 9 population, you're probably looking at for everyone 10 18 and above, Latinos will still be in the mid-30 11 percentile. That makes it look differently. We 12 stand by our map. 13
Mr. Collazo, would 14 you compare the current map that you presented with 15 the map that is under discussion? Could you just go 16 up and look at it. 17
I haven't had a chance to 18 really examine it and look at numbers or anything.
What would you like me comment on, just on the shade or -- I don't have any numbers.
This proposal I think the 34 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 committee would argue is more compact. And this district is traditionally been found the district that has been least compact of all the districts in the City.
Would you express yourself as to the compactness of the district?
I think it's self-explanatory. You just look at it. Arguably most reasonable people I think would say it's least compact of all the districts and has been for sometime. This is more compact.
Thank you. Do you see where it divides certain of the communities that you were talking about, growth of Latino community, there's continued growth during the last 10 years ?
That's something that should be looked at. From what I've been told, that was something people looked at --
I'm sorry. That's something that should be looked at as well as in terms of the growth of the city going into the 35 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 northeast, moving into those areas. From what I understand, that was an issue in '91 so that should be looked at.
Is it your contention that the growth in the northeast, mainly the growth that the City of Philadelphia had during the last 8 years, is that a Latino growth? 9
I'm not a demographer, but 10 I will say that if you look at census blocks and divisions throughout the lower northeast and going into the northeast, we can say the great northeast even above Cottman Avenue, you have districts that are anywhere from 10 to 25 percent of Hispanics so, yeah, I would have to say that.
Not only that, Councilman, but the growth of the northern part of the northeast has been people that have become professional workers and have joined other communities that have been in that area as professional workers. Are they Latino? Yes, they are, but they're Philadelphians first and they are also professional workers like the community that already live there.
I'm not disputing that. I just want to establish from your 36 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 professional and expert opinion that the growth that has been created in Philadelphia has been Latino growth in the lower northeast and part of the northeast corridor.
Just to add to that, with the extraordinary growth we're fining that the Latino community is no longer in the traditional Latino areas. It spreads to all those areas, primarily in the lower northeast, absolutely.
The area that was traditional Latino was Fifth Street, 43rd and Ward and so on. It is no longer. We have moved up, as they say in the TV show.
Thank you. Any other questions or comments from members of the committee of the two witnesses at the table? Do we have anyone else to testify? The Chair recognizes Councilman Clarke.
Thank you, Madam President. Madam President, I have a few questions of -- and I don't know who I would ask this of -- the plan that was submitted by the Council. 37 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523
I'm sorry. Just a point of information. I know there was an original plan that's going to be offered and amendments are going to be offered. Are we talking about the original plan, Councilman?
I'm talking more specifically, the plan that was offered by the Council President.
The ordinance that was introduced by the Council President or actually by Councilwoman Blackwell on your half.
But that's the original one, right? And that's going to change --
My question was whether it's the amended bill or the original bill?
It can be the 38 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 amended bill. I was going to ask is more in terms of process. It doesn't really matter.
I think that every district Councilperson was involved with this.
Well, I think we'll be here until midnight. That's all right with me.
What is your question? I have to get somebody from staff who's been working on this to address it.
I would have to get someone from staff to address it.
Can you briefly talk to me about the process as it relates to District Councilmembers, At-Large Councilmembers, the timing 39 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 of the notification of Councilmembers, what there interaction was Councilmembers as it related to their wants and needs on the various Council districts.
To the best of my knowledge, a memorandum went out before summer recess advising all of the Councilmembers who had any questions or wanted to talk about redistricting to get in touch with me or technical staff.
And were technical staff members dispatched to Council offices to discuss their various districts, particularly the District Councilperson.
I think many of the Councilmembers got in touch with technical staff and sat with them to talk about the districts.
Was is there any order in terms of what districts were resolved first?
As Councilmembers called, that's the way the districts were discussed.
When a technical staff member talked to the Councilperson, did the -- 40 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 I mean, was there a time frame to determine when that information came back in response to the request of the Councilperson?
When the Councilperson, particular the District Councilperson made their preference know to the tech staff, was there a time frame in terms of when that response came back to that Councilperson?
To the best of my, Councilman, we were working on that as late as yesterday.
Okay. Let me be more specific. When I had a conversation with a member of the tech staff this summer and I did not have a response essentially until I guess last week when I was told what my district was going to be and did not reflect what I had asked to any degree. Is that the traditional process? I mean, is there --
Councilman, I can answer that maybe more clearer than the president.
After the memo went out 41 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 to the district Councilpeople, we had to really basically request two things, a wish list as to what divisions they would want to shed and or pick up; and secondly, for a member of staff or themselves to be a point person. And as late as I guess probably the third week of August, we had not yet received everyone's wish list. And it was kind of difficult to put things together until we had all that.
With respect to those request -- and you indicated that you didn't get that information back in a timely manner. Is that my understanding then tech staff kind of went out and talked to Councilmembers and asked them what it was that they wanted to see have happen in their districts?
At that point I spoke in person by phone or sometimes I believe e-mail to each District Councilperson.
When Mr. Auerbach met with me and I indicated what my preference was, was that factored into the process of determining what the districts were going to be or was there some level priority in terms --
Point of order. 42 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523
The Chair recognizes Councilman Kenney for a point of order.
I apologize to the Councilmember for the interruption. While I recognizes the right of any Councilmember to ask any line of question he would like, is this something that perhaps should be discussed individually with tech staff in president's office as opposed to here? I apologize to the Councilman, but I just believe it seems the line of questioning, in my opinion, with all due respect to District Councilperson, Councilperson is Clarke is kind of personal inquiry between Council President and Council President staff.
The question is, is this appropriate discussion for this particular venue or is it something that should be discussed privately?
I have made 43 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 myself available to everybody that wanted to talk about this. And we're here at the 11th hour and I just note that we have to move forward. I mean, this is --
As to the same question, is there something that the Councilman believes that in this case that was not a appropriate response or some other councilpeople were given preferential treatment? Because I can tell you, all of my wishes were basically tossed out of the window more or less and I was stuck with things I never wanted in the first place. I went through that process anyway. And I'm wondering, because I know I've been through the process for a number of weeks now as recent as maybe yesterday or today and I'm confused myself as to where we're going with this questioning, with all due respect. I'm not clear why we're even in this discussion at this time.
Is that a question 44 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 asked of me?
Is there something that the Councilman is suggesting that -- it seems that, maybe I'm hearing it wrong -- that there was some manner in which the tech staff handled the Councilman's requests differently than the other District Councilpeople.
I don't know that. All I'm saying, and I guess I should be specific, is that there was a verbal request and I did not get a response until last week. It was my understanding that there was substantial discussion with other Councilmembers particularly about a portion of the 8th Ward which I currently represent and other parts of the northern part of the ward which I represented and now there's a proposal --
I was not a part of those discussions, and I'm just asking what the 45 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 process was when it involved my Councilmanic district. And it is the process that traditionally that the Councilmember's district that is being discussed, particularly in the case where there's drastic movement in terms of population, I'm just asking is it the norm that that Councilperson is not involved in the process?
Councilman, if you have questions about this, I would suggest to you come into office and we can discuss it. I don't know that this is the forum for such a discussion.
It would appear that every District Councilperson is in favor of what has been proposed. Is everyone a hundred percent happy? I don't think so.
When would you suggest I have this discussion with you.
I was supposed to be at a meeting at 7 o'clock. I said I would try to get there right after we conclude our hearings this evening. It would have to be tomorrow.
After the hearing? 46 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523
Well, frankly speaking, I don't think that makes sense to ask questions after the hearing. I just had a couple other follow-up questions. On the southern portion of the City of Philadelphia, there are currently two districts that are substantially under in terms of population which is, I believe, the 5th and the 2nd.
The 5th District and the 2nd are substantially underpopulated. I think the 5th is some 16,000 plus and, Council President, your district was 8,000?
Was it under 9? And then there was another district that was substantially over, which was the 1st District. Understanding the need to get votes from whereever, I'm trying to understanding what the process was in determining that to take votes from those two districts that were substantially under and not from the district that was substantially over. Was there a process determining in terms of what way to go? 47 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523
Council President, clearly I'm not a District Councilperson, I'm an at-large and I'm months old, and the one 5 thing I have learned here is the value and 6 importance of process. So for my own knowledge, I 7 too want to know the process. You began to speak on 8 that. You started out with a memo that was sent 9 back in the spring. Could I hear for my own 10 knowledge base as we move to ultimate closure on 11 this matter? 12
What is it 13 that you want to hear? Councilmembers received 14 notification that we had technical staff working on 15 redistricting and that they were to get in touch 16 with members of the technical staff so that we could 17 start this process. It is my understanding that 18 just about every District Councilperson was in touch 19 with technical staff so that we could come to some 20 closure on this redistricting.
Every District Councilperson including Councilman Clarke?
Councilman Clarke received that same memorandum that everybody else did. And we did have a couple meetings in my 48 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 office and he wanted what he wanted and that was it and decided that he was going to walk out.
Council President, I beg differ with you, not to be argumentative with you, but I put a proposal on the table at that particular time and there was no response to that proposal. But that wasn't my question. The question was, with three districts on the southern end, two substantially under, one substantially over --
Councilman, I didn't know that we're going to be negotiating redistricting at this hearing. The lines are drawn.
Well, Council President, I'm asking a question about process. If you're telling me I can't ask the question as a Councilmember, then you just need to say that.
Point of order. I make a suggestion that while you can continue this conversation, that we move the proposed amendment to 49 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 Bill No. 010523, vote it out, and then continue the discussion as long anyone wants to. But I think other people, myself included, have meetings that we've delayed this evening and are disappointing people by not showing up, so if we can do the vote, I'm sure after the vote you can have all the discussion you want.
My comment to that, Madam President, is stadiums were given ultimate consideration, priority and time. It appears to me that there's no more important matter than the issue we're discussing now. And I feel fairly confident that the constituents that we representing surely understand the very important decision we're making for the next 10 years.
Point of order, Madam President. I will argue that this issue is solely an issue internal for this Council and if 9 out of 10 -- perhaps 9 out of 10 District Councilpersons are happy with the proposal, I see no 22 reason why we should belabor it any further.
Well, Council President, I beg to differ. This is not simply a matter that relates only to 17 Councilmembers. This 50 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 is an issue that talks about representations of the City of Philadelphia.
Every person who lives in the City of Philadelphia, regardless of who their Councilperson will be, will have representation in this Council. The issue, I think, is an internal issue of Council. It should be decided by Councilmembers themselves. That's what the majority of redistricting line is all about.
Well, Councilman, respectfully, the basis for having a public hearing is just that, allowing the public to have an opportunity, which we have had. So to suggest somehow that this is simply an internal matter where the public should not participate I think is, frankly speaking, wrong.
Right. And I'm asking questions on behalf of the 150,000 citizens that I currently represent. And I think that's within my right as a Councilperson to do that.
Councilman Nutter. 51 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523
Madam President, just as more officially point of order. Listening to the discussion back and forth, I don't remember all the various dates and memos and the like that came out. I know I got information. I know that there were a variety of meetings and discussions. There wasn't that much going on in the 4th District in the first place, so I knew I was not going to have many meetings with anyone else. Having said that, my concern in this particular part of the discussion is Councilman has a variety of questions that he feels compelled to ask. It may, for some, continue to delay this process. If there are members who are not as either clear about the process as they would like to be or if the Councilman has specific questions about the process which in this forum maybe somewhat painful to go through and may even seem at some level of an interrogation nature, not speaking to the Councilman's demeanor or just the series of questions. What I'd like to suggest is that we try to get through that, answer whatever questions may 52 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 need to be answered, and continue to try to move this process along. It is very serious. It can be very painful. There have been a variety of other discussions here and other places. And I think if we can get just get through it, then at least in a more compact way respect the rights of all of us to pretty much talk about whatever it is that we want to talk about. At some point, there will be a conclusion and we will just go from there. And I would only make that request. If Councilman has 5 questions, if it's 50, I'm going to sit and listen to them. If I have something to say, I'm going to say it. If I don't, I'm just going to sit here and be quiet and listen to the discussion.
I just had a question on the floor about the three southern most districts, two under population, the one over, and I wanted to find out what the decision-making process was to take numbers away from those two that are under while not taking them away from the district that was over? What was the thinking as it related to that?
Councilman, I'm not sure 53 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 there was a thought process as to who was losing what and whether or not someone was losing 16,000 or someone was gaining 8,000 or had 8,000 to shed that you would add or subtract to that number. We received, basically, the wish list from everyone. We received the finalized numbers, I believe, in the first week of August to this date, which up to that point had changed. And then we began the process of putting something together based on that wish list and then letting everyone else see it.
So you're saying that there was no thought process as it related to who was under and who was over, but yet you just submitted information to every Councilperson that said who was over and who was under, that was not in your thought process?
There are numbers, so obviously there is a thought process as to who needs what. I don't believe, though, we thought because the 5th Councilmanic District needed 16,000 that, you know, you can't go over 16,000 or you can't add more in. Or that the 1st district had to shed 6,000, that the 6,000 should be shed in a way that it benefits the 5th District. 54 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523
So your decision-making process had nothing to do with who was over and who was under, it was simply based on wish lists?
Well, it has to do with the number who's over and who's under, but that doesn't depend on who gets what.
But you just said that it did not enter into your thought process.
The question that I understood you to ask was did I take into consideration or the staff take into consideration when putting the proposed plan together that the 5th Councilmanic District had 16,000 to gain -- excuse me. The 5th being the lowest, and that we shouldn't look at giving the 5th Councilmanic District --
I didn't say that. I said there were two, the 2nd and 5th were substantially under.