Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-CC-2012-06-04COMMON COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK Special Meeting 7:00 p.m. June 4, 2012 PRESENT: Mayor Myrick Alderpersons (10) Brock, Dotson, Murtagh, Clairborne, McCollister, Fleming, Rooker, Kerslick, Proulx, Mohlenhoff OTHERS PRESENT: City Clerk – Conley Holcomb City Attorney – Lavine GIS Administrator - Aslanis SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS: 1.1 Discussion Regarding the 2012 Proposed City of Ithaca Redistricting Plan Mayor Myrick opened the discussion by explaining the process the redistricting legislation will follow. The topic will be assigned to the GPA Committee due to the potential Charter changes; however, for the purposes of group discussion and decision making, Special Council meetings will be convened so that all members of Council may participate equally. Mayor Myrick suggested that each Council member list their preferred scenario(s) as a means of narrowing down the selections. Scenarios 4-5a; 5-4; 4-6; and an At-large representation scenario were identified by Council members. Scenario 4-5a: Alderperson Fleming commented that this scenario best balances the population, preserves neighborhoods and historic districts, and demonstrates diversity within the wards. She noted that she regrets the reduction in the number of Council members but feels that this scenario is better for the election process. Alderperson Mohlenhoff noted that this is the preferred scenario of the independent, Redistricting Committee and she voiced her concern about Council undermining the work the committee conducted over a number of months. She further expressed her thoughts regarding fiscal responsibility including the potential reduction of the workforce and the cost of elections, good government practices, and the need for competition in races for Council seats. She stated that she finds the 2 representatives for each ward with staggered terms system very beneficial for constituents. Alderperson Kerslick stated that he supports ward scenarios with mixed populations. He noted that the Mayor and residents have asked the City to be more efficient, which does not mean there will be less representation. He further supports increased competition for local elections. Alderperson Clairborne commended the work of the Redistricting Committee, especially the care taken to keep the wards whole. He noted his concern regarding a reduction in the number of Council seats and the merging of Wards 1 & 2. He explained that the person who represented the Second Ward on the Redistricting Committee was not able to attend most of the meetings and he feels that the 2nd Ward has been lost in this scenario. He feels that the reduction of 2 Council members equals a loss of representation and will result in limiting the voices of many residents. He further noted that he supports the 2 representatives for each ward system as it provides for different perspectives and flexibility in skills. Scenario 5-4: Alderperson Brock stated that she appreciates the hard work of the Redistricting Committee. She commented that the City is working toward becoming a more inclusive and participatory government and that a move to consolidate wards will undo much of this work. She noted that most members of the working class live downtown and on West Hill, and believes that reducing 4 votes out of 10, to 2 votes out of 8, is a June 4, 2012 2 disservice to the community. She voiced her concern regarding the preservation of neighborhoods. Alderperson Murtagh stated that he understands the issues surrounding contested political races and expressed his belief that the 5-4 scenario preserves all of the voices in the community. He noted that he would hate to lose the diversity of Common Council, and commented that the City’s 5-4 ward scenario would line up best with the County’s 4-6 scenario. Discussion followed on the floor regarding the population differences between the wards in each scenario, and the potential changes to those numbers during the next census when current development projects have been completed. Scenario 4-6: Alderperson Rooker stated that he supports the 4-6 scenario because he believes that Collegetown has more in common with East Hill than South Hill. Mayor Myrick noted that this is his preferred scenario as he feels that South Hill and East Hill have many common interests. He believes that this scenario pairs areas with shared interests and also matches many of the constituent concerns he heard during his campaign. Alderpersons Murtagh and McCollister stated that they initially liked this scenario as well, acknowledging that the First Ward configuration could be difficult. Alderperson McCollister also expressed her concern about the potential workload for the Council members representing South Hill and East Hill. Alderperson Dotson noted that she can appreciate the benefits of each scenario but would like to consider the option of having 3-4 at-large seats. At-large Scenarios: Alderperson Proulx noted the challenges of having some members elected at-large while others are elected by ward (ie. “Super” Alderpersons vs. Ward Representatives). He stated that the differences could cause confusion for residents and result in a potential undermining of the Mayor. He also described the benefits of having a 2-3 Council members who had a more comprehensive perspective on the issues. He questioned how workloads would be impacted and shared a couple of potential scenarios. Discussion followed regarding how viable this option would be for 2013, and what the possible ratios would be (ie. 8 ward representatives / 2 at-large representatives). Alderperson McCollister inquired about the Re-districting Committee’s opinion of this issue. Chair Tom Frank noted that this was not a popular concept due to the “Super” Alderperson / “Deputy Mayor” concerns. Alderperson Brock voiced concern about the at-large concept noting that running for one of those seats would be similar to running a mayoral campaign. She suggested that the need to fundraise could lend itself to powerful interest groups. She also questioned the level of accountability for those Council members. Alderperson Clairborne noted the similarities between an at-large election and the School Board elections which are sometimes viewed as a popularity contest. He stated that ward representatives gain city-wide experience due to the issues that arise throughout their terms. Alderperson Fleming requested more information from the Board of Elections on the issues surrounding the 5 vs. 4 ward scenarios. Mr. Frank noted that there were three key issues: • Cost of running elections ($2,655 per election/per sliver district) • Locating polling sites in each district • Staffing the polling locations (ratio of workers to voter participation) June 4, 2012 3 The 5-4 Scenario paired with the County 4-6 Scenario would produce a minimum of 6 sliver districts which would cost approximately $15,000 per election Mayor Myrick requested that a straw vote be cast to narrow down the number of scenarios being discussed. He suggested that each Council member receive two votes to use on their preferred scenarios. The scenario with the most votes will be considered further. Due to confusion over the voting process and Council member’s reluctance to support certain scenarios, several straw votes were taken. Scenarios 5-4 and 4-6 received the most votes and will be considered at a Special meeting scheduled for June 13, 2012 at 5:30 pm. The at-large concept did not have enough support for consideration in 2013 but may be explored further in the future. ADJOURNMENT: On a motion the meeting adjourned at 9:10 p.m. ______________________________ _______________________________ Julie Conley Holcomb, CMC Svante L. Myrick City Clerk Mayor