Ward One Redistricting Update: The Chairman’s Mark

Last night the Ward One Task Force met to discuss the Chairman’s Mark, which included 2 versions — A map with 5 ANCs and a map with 4 ANCs. This meeting was primarily an opportunity to hear from each task force member not only what they thought of the two maps, but also what they had been hearing from the community and where they were each coming from in general.

The two maps have been posted at Shutterfly, which does require you to create an account to view the files. The chairman spent some time walking through each map, and I’ll admit I was late to the meeting, so I didn’t hear his full descriptions. The essence, which you can see from reviewing the maps, is that the 5-ANC map creates a Georgia Avenue ANC, and downsizes 1B to 7 SMDs. It actually leaves LeDroit Park in 1B, with the explanation that it identifies more with U Street than Georgia Ave. In this map there are two versions of 1D, both with 5 Commissioners but using two different formulas to divide up the total population. The 4-ANC map moves away from having 16th street as the boundary between the east and west sides of the ward and tinkers with census tracts on that border. I’ll add my thoughts on these maps at the end.

The Chairman asked for comments from the ANC Chairs. Bill Brown from 1A was not present. Juan Lopez of 1B indicated briefly that 1B wishes to retain its boundaries. My understanding of this posture from what I heard about the public meeting of ANC1B is that the commission is concerned about having too few monetary resources to manage the business of the ANC, should they be reduced to 7 commissioners. The thinking here is that they’d be losing per capita funding, but retaining all of the businesses and liquor licenses they manage in the U Street corridor, which is what takes up most of the Commissioners’ time and paid staff time.There is also a concern from 1B commissioners that should their territory be broken up, they will lose the synergy and momentum that has allowed them to become a highly functioning ANC with committees that engage the public in the review process.

I sort of zoned out for this next part (sorry Wilson), but I gather that 1C is not particularly up in arms about either proposal. This makes sense considering its boundaries are not likely to change much in either iteration. Gregg had much to say about wanting a larger 1D, with an argument similar to the one I outlined for 1B above. He also maintains his interest in boundaries that bring the latino community together in one commission. This idea has alternately raised eyebrows and outright rage in public meetings so far.

I found the comments from the at-large task force members to be the most insightful and interesting. Thomas Boisvert was the first to make the point that most members of our community don’t identify by or care about ANC boundaries. In fact, the boundary lines will mainly impact ANC Commissioners, and those who come before the ANCs for business. He would like to see the decision-making process focused around commercial corridors.

Shelore Williams said she believes the best plan is the one with the least disruption to the community. But, since there will be some disruption, if nobody’s happy, then they’ve done their job. She indicated she could be convinced that a 5th ANC is okay, but if the task force is going to mess with one ANC boundary, they ought to mess with them all to share the pain. She said she’d have no patience with those who thought they could get through this process with no changes to their own ANCs if others were accepting changes.

Beverly Wheeler said she shared Thomas’ views on neighborhood identity. She also believes this process is an opportunity to come together as a ward. She is leaning towards the 5-ANC plan because it gives us an opportunity to talk about neighborhoods. She said she could be convinced to go with the 4-ANC plan, but we really need to look at the population shifts. 1B probably has to change. We need cohesive neighborhoods, not gerry-mandering. The size is not what should guide us, and is not part of the mandate. If you lose a seat, she said, too bad!

Tony Norman, who I noted in my tweet earlier was FIRED UP, laid out his main concerns as equity and fairness. Some sacrifice may have to be made, but it needs to be fair. He said he could support either plan, but prefers as little intrusion as possible. He added, we already have a 4-ANC map that puts us within the legal limit. He then indicated he likes the 5-ANC map, but that to have a meaningful Georgia Ave ANC you need to go all the way down to the southern boundary of Ward One and include LeDroit Park. He said LeDroit has always been associated with Howard University (which is a counterpoint to something the Chairman said in his opening remarks) and that all the new development happening down there should be an anchor for a Georgia Ave ANC. He concluded by saying we need to listen to the neighborhoods about who they say they are.

Dottie Love Wade also thought the focus should be on the neighborhoods. But then she seemed to contradict herself. She talked about having grown up in Ward One, and believes that some of the neighborhoods being discussed are fabrications by realtors. There is no such thing as South Columbia Heights and North Columbia Heights, she said. She continued on by listing all the neighborhoods that existed historically, Pleasant Plains, Mount Pleasant, Columbia Heights, Shaw, LeDroit…. (editor’s note — which is it? Do the people decide what neighborhood they live in, or do we have to go by what existed in the past? Did she inadvertently leave out U Street, or does she believe that’s just part of Shaw?) She believes the task force should keep the ANC boundaries as close as possible to what they are now. She is strongly opposed to a boundary that crosses back and forth over 16th street and talked about a strong history along 14th and 16th street rooted in socioeconomics and race. She then said that we have moved beyond that to a degree, but economics will always play a part, and she doesn’t want certain parts of our ward grouped away from more prosperous areas. She is concerned that a Georgia Avenue ANC would do that because the area east of Georgia Ave does not have the same strength as the area to the west. This at first confused me, and then annoyed me. She seemed to be saying that because one area wasn’t prosperous, rather than reallocating or refocusing resources, we should do what we can to maintain the prosperity where it is. She noted that the population in 1A hadn’t changed much and she’d like the boundaries to remain. She prefers the 4-ANC configuration.

The Chairman then opened it up for comments from the community.

1A Commissioner Kent Boese, who has sent out various maps on the community list serves indicated that upon further discussion with his constituents he prefers the 4 ANC configuration. He indicated his constituents in the NE corner of 1A associate more with Columbia Heights than Georgia Ave.

Sylvia Robinson spoke in favor of a Georgia Ave ANC, noting that vision, attention, and focus are needed with the new developments coming to the Georgia Ave corridor. Right now, issues here are addressed mainly by ANC1B, whose focus tends to get monopolized by the U Street and 14th Street commercial corridors. She also noted that Pleasant Plains is currently divided between 1A and 1B and the 5-ANC map would resolve this.

Patrick Nelson gave some background on Howard University’s plan to relocate all the students in satellite dorms back to the main campus. This was a counterpoint to something the Chairman mentioned in his explanation of why he kept the 16th Street Howard Dorm in 1B in both iterations of the map.

The Chairman concluded by asking the task force whether they should begin working from these two maps or if they wished to submit other versions, in preparation for the September 27th meeting intended mainly for public input. Thomas indicated they needed to get more work done as a task force before that meeting when surely there would not be enough time to work with all the comments. Wilson suggested that all members of the task force and the community bring their versions of maps to that meeting. Tony suggested they be circulated in the interim. Shelore then requested that the task force meet in person again before that meeting and after some back and forth they settled on September 22.

It went on for a few more minutes, but I got antsy and had to get out of there at that point. For those who wish to attend a meeting and offer comments the best opportunity is September 27th, 6:30 pm at the Columbia Heights Community Center, 1480 Girard Street, NW. That’s right on the border of North Columbia Heights and South Columbia Heights, if you’ve never been there.

My Thoughts

On the maps: I really really prefer a 5-ANC configuration because I believe Georgia Ave deserves the focus and resources that will help it to thrive. Not doing this is a majorly missed opportunity, and if the task force had the guts to do this 10 years ago, chances are this corridor would already be well on its way to a bustling commercial district (with smart growth and balance of course). If we end up with the 4-ANC configuration, the world will not end. But we will have missed a chance to do something very important for the future of the ward.

At a more micro level, the 4-ANC map actually puts a part of 1B into 1C that I personally feel identifies with U Street more than Adams Morgan, and also includes my old apartment so I’m a little sensitive about it. “It” being the idea that if it were 2 years ago I would have been drawn into 1C when I strongly consider myself to be a U Street girl. The 5-ANC configuration extends 1B further west into territory I’ve always thought could easily be considered part of the U Street Corridor. Both maps keep Meridian Hill Park in 1B, which I believe is important to the neighbors along 15th street who live on its border and have been involved its development and maintenance. The Meridian Hill Neighborhood Association has worked hard to forge a relationship with NPS and the Park Police and keeping it all together in 1B is a good idea.

What wasn’t discussed at this meeting, and hopefully will be at future meetings, is how the SMDs are drawn in the commercial districts. For example, 1B02 grew immensely and needs to be divided up. We can’t just look at population in this case. We need to review where the liquor establishments are, and which streets might  make better boundaries than others. The majority of licenses now are all in one SMD, which is not only an incredible burden for that Commissioner, it’s a raw deal for those being served by that Commissioner. I don’t have the answer to where those lines should be, and unfortunately when 1B Chairman Juan Lopez tried to hold a meeting about this with U Street stakeholders, nobody showed up. But that conversation, and similar ones in the other commericial districts need to be had. And the feedback needs to be taken very seriously.

Regarding the size of each ANC, I hear the concerns about financial resources. The ability to have a paid staff person and office space is what has allowed ANC1B to get itself to back in good standing with the auditor, and to organize highly functioning committees that engage community members in leadership roles. These are things I worked hard for as ANC1B Chairperson. It’s unclear if the budget for a 7-person commission would allow them to continue paying staff and renting office space in the Reeves Center. That said, one might consider this process an opportunity to bring all the ANCs together in a way that puts them on a path toward pooling their resources. Shared office space and shared staff would lead to economies of scale and better collaboration. Wouldn’t that also be a positive thing for Ward One?

on the process: I believe these lines need to be drawn as if they are a blueprint for the development of Ward One over the next ten years. This is a real opportunity to make sure proper attention and resources are allocated throughout each commercial corridor. I mentioned Georgia Ave as a commercial corridor that needs a vision, but it’s not only there. U Street is approaching a tipping point that requires community collaboration and focus to help its commercial district continue to grow in a positive way. Columbia Heights is exploding with growth and there is a lot of work ahead to make sure its growth balances the needs of the commercial and residential neighbors. And of course, Adams Morgan, which has become the boogeyman of commercial districts (if we do THAT, we’ll turn into Adams Morgan!) needs the resources to resolve its ongoing issues in the commercial district and return the focus there to its rich cultural history and strong residential community. I’m still learning about the challenges that face Mount Pleasant, but I know that there is change happening in that commercial corridor now that requires determination and would be best accomplished without the distractions of serving a population that doesn’t associate itself with Mount Pleasant. This is not a commentary on the local leadership in these areas, which I believe does very well with the resources available. What I’m saying here is that if we can draw these boundaries to focus on each of the 5 distinct commercial districts then we will better serve our neighborhoods in the short term and the long term.

This should not be just a process mandated by law to make sure our population is even throughout the ward. Sadly, right now there isn’t anyone in Ward One with a larger vision — a 10-year plan for the ward or for each community. Maybe what I’m asking for here is beyond the scope of this task force. Maybe this is too tall of an order for a short turnaround and from people with day jobs. But is definitely something we need in Ward One, and its an incredible opportunity that we should not let pass us by.