The 1st was 55 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 substantially over.
I asked in the process did that factor into -- well, I guess I'm going to ask you why was the decision made the way it was made to not take from the 1st to any reasonable degree to add to those districts --
Well, as I said, there was a combination of the wish lists of the other Councilmembers as well as the Latinos and that the northwestern side of the City which was Councilman Nutter really wouldn't get changed, so that combination led us to doing what we did in the first proposal.
So let me ask you this: Were there any alternative proposals submitted that called for a strategy that allowed the 1st District to give population to the 2nd and subsequently the 5th in terms of lessening the reduction of population loss in the 5th, and then dealing with the issue with the Latino district subsequently?
I don't think so. Other than there was a proposal, I believe, at some point 56 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 put on the table by your office.
So what is this ordinance that's on here, what does that call for? The ordinance that was submitted by me, what does that call for?
I read it, but I don't have memory without it right in front of me.
So in your process, you arrived at a map we currently have today. You're saying that you didn't take into account what was being proposed by the ordinance that I introduced that painted a different scenario in terms of population disposition from the 1st that would subsequently go to the 2nd and then to the 5th, you're saying you didn't take that into account, you didn't read it?
No. I said I read your proposal. We actually at one point we plotted your proposal on the mapping software, and the amendments 57 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 were based on negotiations with the other Councilmembers.
So you plotted my proposal and you -- you just said that you took my ordinance and discussed amendments with my ordinance 7 with other Councilmembers?
No. I plotted it on our mapping software so I could see a map of what you had proposed.
It's still in the computer. I don't think we ever printed it.
All right. So you just discounted it on the face of it?
I wouldn't say discounted. I thought we were working with one proposal and the object was to sure up the votes against District Councilpeople what they needed.
When the Latino issue 58 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 came in simply because we were adding 34.3 number in the original proposal.
I just want to get for the record, first you said there were no 6 alternative proposals that allowed for population disposition to -- that's what you said on the record.
I don't believe I said that. You asked me if I had any other proposals and I said the only other proposal was by yourself and your staff that would give the 2nd District population, majority of the population from the 39th, and leaving the 5th District more intact than the 8th.
Okay. So did you in terms of -- okay, I think you're clear on that. You plotted of the alternative ordinance 59 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 on your computer and you didn't do anything from that point on?
Okay. Was there any thought in terms of the impaction issue when you sway districts dramatically one way or another, racially, when you did what you did when a district is potentially majority minority or when a district is partially minority and then you make it substantially minority? Was there any thoughts in that process in your redistricting process?
We had to get direction from the Law Department on how not to dilute any voting block in any district. And if you look at the numbers of the last proposal, I'm confident that we haven't done that.
I believe his name is Louis Rose, but I'm not sure. Rick Auerbach basically dealt with the Law Department.
Could it be Louis 60 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 Rossman?
It maybe. I met him a couple times, but Rick basically dealt with him.
And the impaction issue, when you take district that is majority minority but you impact with additional minorities to create almost predominately minority district?
I don't believe we did that in anyone's district, Councilman.
Point of information. Excuse me. Is my understanding that the issues relevant to the federal Voting Rights Act, the possible dilution of voting blocks has to do the dimension of minority representation, minority voters in a district, not the majority voters. That the federal law, it's my understanding does not apply to the diminishing non-minority voters in the district, but simply diminishing the numbers of minority voters?
To be honest, 61 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 Councilman, this is a very unsettled area of the law. I'm not an expert. I took our direction from the Law Department, and we don't believe our numbers do that. I don't think it's possible, though, to answer what I think your question is, I don't believe you could take 70 percent minority district and make it -- I don't believe on purpose to go to 90 either. Either way there's a swing and I think that was the most recent case in New Jersey.
The most recent amendments they haven't, but they have sent back the first introduction. But the amendments they have not given us an opinion. To answer your question, Councilman Clarke, there are no districts that I believe that we've done that to. It may swing a couple points, but nothing substantial.
I would have to check the computer, but off the top of my head, you're probably 68 percent African-American, 20 percent 62 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 white, maybe 21 percent white, and 14 percent Hispanic. Don't hold me to that.
I can tell you in a second if I look on the computer. But roughly, that's what you are.
Again, I don't know them off the top of my head. If you really want to know, I can get them, look on the computer.
Councilman, we'll get the computer. If you have any other questions, I'll be glad to entertainment them.
All right. As soon as we get them, I'll check. (Pause.) 63 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523
Councilman Clarke, you have questions for him to answer until he gets his laptop.
No, that was actually my last question. Councilman Kenney, did you have a question?
We will be at ease until the laptop computer comes. Does anyone else have a question? We will be at ease until the equipment comes back. Thank you. (Council at ease.)
The amendment that's been proposed and has been just circulated has the white population, 20.5; black population, 67.1; Asian population, 2.8; and Hispanic, 9.7.
Under the amendment, the 20 percent white population is where? What was the original? What's the current?
The 1991 number? 64 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523
Yes -- no, the number as a result of the recent census.
No. There was a Census report that just came out, right, which you're basing the district numbers on.
That's using the lines of the 1991 district. Your current district as it stands today.
Your population is 135,468. White population is 24.4; Black population is 27.5; Asian, 2.3.
I think you're mistaken. What was the African-American.
What is the proposed 65 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 map call for?
White population, 20.5; black population 67.1; Asian 2.8; and Hispanic is 11.7.
One last question. For the record, did you realize that now gives you leaders? Do you realize the difficulty dealing 12 with 15 ward leaders, me being one of them? That's 13 just a little -- thank you, Council President. 14
Thank you. 15 Are there any other questions or comments by members of the committee? The chair recognizes Councilwoman Blackwell for a motion.
Madam President, I have a proposed amendment to Bill No. 21 010523. Is that in order to present at this time?
Yes. I believe everybody has a copy. This will conclude our public hearing. - - - 66 9/12/01 - Comm. of Whole - Bill No. 010523 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC MEETING COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - - - Wednesday, September 12, 2001 - - - Public Meeting conducted by the Committee of the Whole, held in Room 401, City Hall, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, on the above date, to consider action on the following: BILLS 010523, 010529 (held) - - - 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 - - - 67
We will now go into our public meeting. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Blackwell for the purpose of adopting the amendment you just introduced.
Madam President, I move that the amendment to Bill No. 9 010523 be adopted. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and seconded that the amendments as proposed for Bill No. 010523 be adopted.
No. There has been a few changes to the map. It was printed at the last minute and had mistakes in it. The amendment that was circulated reflects the mistakes -- taking the mistakes out.
But it doesn't reflect the map. How do you vote on something you don't see? Really. If that is not the map that 68 09/12/01 - PUBLIC MEETING - BILL 010523 we're voting on --
Point of order. I don't think we're voting on the map, we're voting on the amendment.
Yeah, but the amendment was reflective of, I thought, that map; but it's not reflective of that map.
There were two typos in that map, Councilman. They were that 5th District got two divisions in the 38th and that's not correct. As well as that map reflects Councilwoman Krajewski in the 6th taking a division in the 56th. Again, that was not correct and they have been amended.
As amended, what would be the current amended district, what be the population of the Latino community?
I guess it depends how you're rounding, Councilman. 69 09/12/01 - PUBLIC MEETING - BILL 010523
It has been duly seconded that the amendment be adopted. All in favor will signify by saying aye. (Aye.) Those opposed? (Nay.)
Councilman Nutter. 70 09/12/01 - PUBLIC MEETING - BILL 010523
Aye. The ayes are 14, the nays are 2 and there is one abstention. Therefore, the amendment has been adopted. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman 71 09/12/01 - PUBLIC MEETING - BILL 010523 Blackwell.
Madam President, I move that the Bill No. 010523 be reported, as amended with a favorable recommendation. (Duly seconded.)
It has been moved and seconded that Bill No. 0100523 be reported out of committee with a favorable recommendation. All in favor? Roll call please.
Councilwoman Miller. 72 09/12/01 - PUBLIC MEETING - BILL 010523
Aye The ayes are 14, the nays are 1, and 2 abstentions. The bill passes. 73 09/12/01 - PUBLIC MEETING - BILL 010523 Councilman Clarke.
Very well. The record will reflect that Bill No. 010529 will be held in committee. Thank you all so very much for your patience. I know it's been a long day. As process we don't like, it was necessary. I thank you all very much. (Council adjourned at 8:34 p.m.) - - - 74 C E R T I F I C A T I O N I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing proceedings of the Council of the City of Philadelphia of September 12, 2001, were reported fully and accurately by me, and that this is a correct transcript of the same. RE: COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ___________________________ Lisa C. Bradley, RPR and Notary Public