Please consider this a discussion in hope of a resolution. The ANC President was invited to present to the ICRC (Independent Citizen Redistricting Council), which included maps. At least two of their member organizations have also provided verbal input on maps, it should be assumed written input also. Together, this seemingly represents input from “the neighborhoods”. I ask that FAN consider adding to that neighborhoods insight.
1 Like
Relevant FAN goals include but may be not limited by:
4. In addition to addressing the unique goals of our individual neighborhoods, we as citizens must never place the needs of individual neighborhoods above those of the city-wide community.
5. Austin neighborhoods must continually evolve with the changing needs of the City, and we recognize such natural change presents opportunities to improve our neighborhoods. Accordingly, we support the kinds of changes that will enhance the affordability, inclusivity, connectivity, mobility, and quality of life in our neighborhoods…
Relevant FAN visions include but may not be limited by:
4. The community needs a neighborhoods-based voice that is inclusive, innovative, and supportive of neighborhood improvement rather than the unsustainable status quo; and
5. A neighborhood voice is best structured around individual city council districts
I believe we (FAN) will be in agreement that the city- wide community goal of having strong minority districts is vastly more important than being blindly consistent with self defined neighborhood boundaries., especially knowing how some are established. An ANC member organization asked that their district boundaries be reset to match their ANC sector boundaries, extending into a minority district today that continues to have a minority population in the 2020 census - as an example of a difference in FAN’s ask.
Another for consideration would be “inclusivity” including noticeable efforts to group high density Asian precincts together. Whether they are formally recognized as a protect minority or not, the % of Austin population grew fastest by far and to the point where it is higher than the protected Black minority. They too deserve recognition and the respect of higher potential for representation on Council.
The kinds of changes, in Council, that will enhance the affordability, inclusivity, connectivity, and mobility - is having a more diverse Council that includes more proportionate representation by renters, by apartment and condominium residents. The unsustainable status quo is single family orientation on Council perpetuated by maps that did not emphasize socio economic grouping. Grouping diverse socio economic groups together, as we have today, leads to the wealthier groups dominating. Here is the related charter language: the geographic integrity of any local neighborhood or local community of interest shall be respected in a manner that minimizes their division to the extent possible without violating the requirements of any of the preceding subsections. A community of interest is a contiguous population that shares common social and economic interests that should be included within a single district for purposes of its effective and fair representation. Communities of interest shall not include relationships with political parties, incumbents, or political candidates.
You know I agree with you!
Philip, thanks for bringing this discussion on redistricting here to the FAN forum. Let me try to condense some of your thoughts into a simple framework, e.g.:
FAN champions the needs of the citywide community and representation of the full diversity of neighborhood stakeholders - not just the vocal minority of incumbent homeowners that sometimes dominate neighborhood conversations. Accordingly, FAN calls for redistricting that enables neighbors belonging to the following groups to have fair and effective representation in city government:
- Historically marginalized ethnic groups, including Hispanics and African-Americans.
- Fast-growing Asian communities.
- Overlooked socioeconomic groups such as renters, residents of multi-family homes, and students.
FAN believes that drawing district boundaries to support better representation for these groups is far more important than blind consistency with self-defined neighborhood boundaries.
We could perhaps follow that high-level ask with some specific redistricting changes to consider.
Thoughts?
Roger
Nice summary! Thanks! I"m open to moving on that as a potential resolution, am open to wording or even messaging changes. But given where ICRC is in their time crunched 2021 process, encourage the FAN Board consider moving the faster the better.
I think that’s a great resolution! Maybe we could add the following? And I’ve included two recommendations to be considered below the statement.
FAN represents about 3,000 neighbors (homeowners, renters, and small business owners) among its 16 member neighborhood associations and individual members living in 184 other neighborhoods throughout the city. A complete list of member neighborhood associations and individual members is on the FAN website.
FAN champions the needs of the citywide community and representation of the full diversity of neighborhood stakeholders - not just the vocal minority of incumbent homeowners that sometimes dominate neighborhood conversations. Accordingly, FAN calls for redistricting that enables neighbors belonging to the following groups to have fair and effective representation in city government:
- Historically marginalized ethnic groups, including Hispanics and African-Americans.
- Fast-growing Asian communities.
- Overlooked socioeconomic groups such as renters, residents of multi-family homes, and students.
FAN believes that drawing district boundaries to support better representation for these groups is far more important than blind consistency with self-defined neighborhood boundaries.
-
Move North Hyde Park from District 9 into District 4
The Hyde Park neighborhood and the North Hyde Park neighborhood are split at 45th St between Guadalupe St and Red River St. North Hyde Park is a completely separate neighborhood with different housing types, a different history, and a different diversity of people than the original Hyde Park neighborhood that’s south of 45th St. The North Hyde Park neighborhood is more similar to the North Loop and Highland neighborhoods that are part of District 4 than other central Austin neighborhoods that are included in District 9, like the Hyde Park neighborhood that’s to the south. North Hyde Park is made up of approximately 70% renters with a diverse background, including a large number of students that attend the University of Texas. North Hyde Park is represented by Census Tract 3.05 and Census Tract 3.04. Hyde Park is represented by Census Tract 3.02, so there’s a natural split in the census tracts for this division. The majority of residents that live in the North Hyde Park neighborhood have had almost no say in their own neighborhood for decades because that’s been dictated by a small minority of largely white and wealthier homeowners that live in the Hyde Park neighborhood. Splitting the boundary between District 9 and District 4 at 45th St would allow the North Hyde Park neighborhood to finally have a voice and a representative that’s more in line with them and listens to their concerns.
-
Move the lower part of District 7 into District 9
District 7 extends all the way down into central Austin and has had representation that’s largely ignored the majority of the district in favor of interests from central Austin. This lower part of District 7 is not similar to the rest of District 7 and instead is more representative of the District 9. Moving this section of District 7 into District 9 would allow for better representation for both District 9 and District 7.
I appreciate there could be many good specific suggestions, but it is probably best, at this point, to do those as individuals or member NA"s. Trying to solicit and distil input from individuals and NA’s into an agreed upon set is something we unfortunately do not have time for this round imo But if we go to 12 -1 that’s a work effort definitely worth looking at
@Pete_Gilcrease could we agree on an approach of getting the high level message out on what FAN advocates for in the process, then look at what is proposed and have a workgroup explore feedback on specifics in early October? Which means a second communication that month? I’m happy to discuss on the phone - typing only gets you so far.
That sounds fine to me, if the board is able to come up with the recommendations without having to do another vote. Otherwise, we’re just tying our hands to do anything when the ANC feels comfortable advocating for their membership as quickly as they need to. That’s the main reason why I stopped being involved in FAN as much because FAN just isn’t able to compete with the ANC when it comes to quickly and effectively advocating for their membership and usually it just takes too long for FAN and then it’s just too late and a waste of time. I’m sure the ANC has already been advocating for their members and probably did so almost immediately, which is something that FAN has never been able to do.