Final Ward 6 Redistricting Report

The task force sent the final Ward 6 Redistricting Report to CM Tommy Wells on September 28, 2011.  The report can be found here.  This report can also be found in the Filing Cabinet section of this blog.  The work of the task force has been completed.  One of the final decisions of the task force was to keep this blog open for further posts and comments.  In keeping with the spirit of this blog, please view this as a neutral electronic space to continue the discussions regarding Ward 6 redistricting. 

Regards, Joe Fengler

W6TF - Final Maps / Next Meeting

On September 22, the W6TF approved the final boundaries for the Ward 6 ANCs and associated SMDs. These final maps will be incorporated into the Ward 6 Redistricting Report which will be submitted to CM Tommy Wells on Wednesday, September 28. This is two days later than originally scheduled.

The W6TF will meet once again on Monday, 6:30pm on September 26 at 1100 Fourth Street, SW - DCRA Hearing Room, 2nd floor - to approve the redistricting report that will include the narrative to explain the recommendations as well as the required text description of the ANC/SMD boundaries. This is a new meeting that was not included in the initial W6TF schedule.

Ward 6 ANC Map

6A, shown in orange = 16,390 (8 Commissioners)

6B, shown in light blue = 18,942 (10 Commissioners)

6C, shown in green = 13,154 (7 Commissioners)

6D, shown in dark blue = 14,359 (7 Commissioners)

6E, shown in red = 13,393 (7 Commissioners)

Total Ward 6 = 76,238

Kingman Park, shown in gray = 1774 residents (1 Commissioner)

ANC 6A

Total ANC 6A = 16,390

ANC 6B

6B01, shown in red = 1913

6B02, shown in orange = 1849

6B03, shown in green = 1874

6B04, shown in light blue = 1926

6B05, shown in dark blue = 1936

6B06, shown in purple = 1638

6B07, shown in magenta = 1896

6B08, shown in grey = 1893

6B09, shown in brown = 1893

6B10, shown in yellow = 2124

Total ANC 6B = 18,942

Fengler Note: There will be a technical correction offered at the meeting on Monday. This map reflects a minor change that doesn't alter the intent of the ANC 6B SMD decisions made by the task force. However, upon completing the text description, it was discovered that three blocs between 6B08, 6B09 and 6B10 were not correctly hand drawn by putting the boundary line on 16th Street instead of 15th Street. The census count approved for those SMDs were based on 15th Street boundary line. This map reflects the census count decision made by the task force and uses 15th Street as the boundary line - pending approval at Monday's meeting.

ANC 6C

Total ANC 6C = 13,154

ANC 6D

6D01, shown in red = 2057

6D02, shown in green = 1992

6D03, shown in purple = 2023

6D04, shown in light blue = 2115

6D05, shown in dark blue = 1975

6D06, shown in yellow = 2106

6D07, shown in magenta = 2091

Total ANC 6D = 14,359

ANC 6E

6E01, shown in red = 1963

6E02, shown in orange = 1895

6E03, shown in green = 1927

6E04, shown in light blue = 1820

6E05, shown in dark blue = 1988

6E06, shown in purple = 1916

6E07, shown in yellow = 1884

Total ANC 6E = 13,393

SMD Proposal from 6B Commissioners

In the interest of having a full set of maps available on the blog, here is the proposal that 6B Commissioners provided for W6TF consideration at the September 22, 2011 public meeting. This is a proposal that assumes that W6TF recommends an Independence Avenue boundary for ANC 6B.



Note: This post has been backdated in an attempt to communicate the order in which map proposals were considered.

SMD proposal for 6C

Posted at the request of Commissioner Bill Crews, 6C07

·         This revised map better integrates the new-to-ANC 6C residents south of East Capitol Street. Creating two SMDs along the southern boundary joins together both current and new residents in each SMD.

·         This also allows 6C to have two Commissioners to work with our 6B colleagues on Penn Ave SE and Eastern Market issues.

·         In addition to integrating the new blocks into 6C and providing two Commissioners for work with 6B, the revised map has all SMD bordering other ANC’s fostering better joint efforts.

·         This revised map has:

·         2 SMDs to work with the Architect of the Capitol;

·         3 SMDs for Stanton Park and the National Park Service;

·         2 SMDs for Burnham Place;

·         3 SMDs for NoMa; and

·         3 SMDs for H St.

Kingman Park Letter

Dear Joe Fengler and the W6TF:
 

Congratulations on coming to an end of the W6TF process.  Thank your for your service and for doing a great job of managing this process in a very open, transparent and participatory process.   Sorry to see the process ending with such vociferous opposition regarding the 6B and 6C issues. I suspect it was inevitable and wish you good luck. I hope the debate remains civil.

I went to the W6TF files and I did not see an August 1st letter that the Rosedale Citizen's Alliance sent to the W6TF and which I verbally presented to the Taks Force at your July meeting in St Colletta.  To that end, please find attached the letter which I hope you will add to the formal files.

I am deeply disappointed that Kingman Park is not part of ANC 6A though my understanding is that it is out of your hands. My only request is whether the formal report could include a more emphatic statement that there was unanimous or near unanimous support in Ward 6 and Kingman Park to include Kingman Park in 6A by all citizens and by all, or nearly all, W6TF members.  My hope is that the final report will include a clearer and more forceful statement on how disappointed Kingman Park and Ward 6 residents are that the only reason why Kingman Park is not part of ANC 6A is because of opposition from Council Member Alexander.  Her opposition again underscores how Ward 7 political fights are prioritized over the interests and desires of Kingman Park residents who clearly want to have their ANC related debates and decisions be made in collaboration with their immediate neighbors in Ward 6 instead of with Ward 7 residents who live more than 1 mile and a huge river away. The inclusion of Kingman Park in ANC 6A would not change the fact that Kingman Park is represented in the Council by Alexander, it simply would mean Kingman Park and Rosedale neighbors would have an easier time working together in one ANC to address local issues. I hope the formal report will include a forceful request that Alexander reconsider her opposition and to urge her to do so ASAP in consultation with Council Member Wells.
 

Thanks
Rob Stephens
Rosedale Resident

(Fengler comment:  Letter posted under Filing Cabinet).

Re-consider Independence Avenue Decision

Ward 6 Redistricting Task Force members,

I'm writing to urge you to re-consider the major change you made to the redistricting plan on Monday, Sept. 19 and to support the status quo plan you unanimously approved in August. Unfortunately, I'm out of town for work this week and will be unable to attend tonight's meeting.

Before I outline my concerns about your new plan, I do want to thank you for agreeing to serve on the task force and for the thoughtfulness you've brought to a difficult process. Serving on this task force is a thankless task...but I want to thank you for stepping up to serve and for the time and effort each of you have put in.

I am disappointed that a majority of the task force has put "numbers" before "neighborhoods" by moving 1275 residents from ANC 6B to ANC 6C in the new plan. The arguments for why this change is needed remind me of the arguments we in Hill East heard from the ward redistricting task force earlier this year, such as "we need to equalize the size of the wards" and "it doesn't matter which ward you are in." I strongly disagreed with these arguments during the ward redistricting process, and I strongly disagree with them now in the ANC redistricting process.

ANC 6C supported adding their three westernmost SMDs to 2C "because of constituents’ similar interests and issues as NoMa and North Capitol corridor development continue to move through their neighborhood." I'm glad that 6C and the task force listened to residents who agreed that this change made sense.

However, ANC 6C's argument in favor of adding a portion of 6B goes against the same argument they made for attaching their 3 westernmost SMDs to 2C. The 1275 residents who live south of East Capitol Street have much more in common with rest of the constituents in 6B and issues related to Eastern Market and the Hine development that directly affect their neighborhood. As I've said over and over again, where possible, residents should be in ANCs with their primary commercial corridors. NoMa is not the primary commerical corridor of the affected residents. 

I respectfully, but strongly, disagree with Task Force Chair Fengler's belief that residents should not be in the same ANC as their commerical corridors. If this is the case, why do ANC's matter at all? The primary powers of ANCs relate to liquor license requests, voluntary agreements and zoning cases. The 1,275 residents who are moved from 6B to 6C will have not have a voice in the liquor license requests or zoning cases around Eastern Market and Hine, though they will be directly affected by those developments.

And the historic district argument is also a weak argument. About 1/2 of ANC 6B is in the Capitol Hill Historic District. What value do the affected residents receive for being grouped with another portion of the same historic district? No value, in my opinion.

The only rationale for moving 1275 from 6B to 6C is to make the "numbers work" and to de-prioritize the views and best interest of the affected residents. This is a bad idea...and an idea I thought was dismissed when the Rice/Fengler plan failed to gain any traction with the task force in August.

One final point: we also argued during ward redistricting that it was unwise to move large numbers of people and disrupt their representation when it was totally unnecessary. The same can be said of the ANC redistricting process. The task force's new plan not only moves 1275 unnecessarily, it also means a massive redrawing of ANC 6B SMDs with little time to gauge community input or thoughts about the new district lines. Why disrupt so many residents when you have a stronger "status quo" plan that keeps neighborhoods grouped in the same commission areas?

Again, I encourage you to re-consider your new plan and to return to the status quo plan.

Thanks again for your time and consideration,

Brian

Brian Flahaven

Commissioner, ANC 6B09

W6TF Agenda for September 22 Meeting

6:30pm   Call to order

6:32pm   Review and approve agenda – to include motions to change or add items to agenda

6:42pm   Review and approve meeting process – to include motions to change process

6:52pm   Review ANC recommendations that alter initially approved W6TF Maps for SMD boundaries

               Please refer to September 19 agenda for back-up information regarding below

1.     ANC 6A

1.1.   Adopt 6A alternative proposed SMD MAP (pending outcome of Item #2 and #5)

1.2.   Consideration of Cody Rice, W6TF Member, alternative

2.     ANC 6B

2.1.   Adopt Initially Recommended Task Force Map (pending outcomes of items #1, #5 and #6)

2.2.   Adopt ANC 6B requests for:

2.2.1.   Eastern Market Metro Plaza should have one commissioner.

2.2.2.   Seward Square should have one commissioner.

2.2.3.   Barracks Row can be well served by two commissioners.

2.2.4.   The boundary along Mass Ave between 6B09/6B10 should be a straight line.

2.3.   Adopt ANC 6C “conditional” SMD recommendation for ANC 6B (pending outcome of item #1)

3.     ANC 6C

3.1.   Adopt alternative proposed SMD Map (pending outcomes on items #1, #2, #3 and #4).

4.     ANC 6D

4.1.   Adopt alternative proposed SMD Map (pending outcomes on items #3 and #4)

5.     ANC 6E

5.1.   Adopt alternative proposed SMD Map by ANC 2C

5.2.   Consideration of alternative Map by Mr. Rickey Williams

7:52pm   Discuss and approve process to complete Ward 6 Redistricting report

8:12pm   Discuss objectives/agenda of next meeting on September 26, 2011 at 6:30pm, location TBD

8:22pm   Community Comments (time providing)

9:00pm Adjourn

Task Force decision on 6B/6C boundary makes sense

Posted at the request of Bill Crews, Commissioner, ANC6C07

Ward 6 Task Force decision makes sense,
knits neighborhoods together, &
increases citizens’ voices both individually & collectively.

Ward 6 Task Force decision makes sense:

Redistricting by its nature must involve changes. Redistricting adjusts political boundaries in response to population shifts as enumerated by the 2010 census. The City Council adjusted Ward boundaries and the Ward 6 Task Force is responding to that.

The Task Force is recommending creation of a whole new ANC this time to incorporate the 7,000+ residents in the current ANC 2C now in Ward 6. (Ten years ago ANC 6C was created after Ward boundaries changed & some residents howled). The proposed ANC 6E takes 3 6C Single Member Districts (SMD) west of North Capitol to combine with the current 4 2C SMDs.

ANC 6C did not gleefully, nor without thought, recommend having 6C01, 6C02, & 6C03 join with the 4 2C SMDs.

“We recognize the opportunity to bring together the northwest communities from the current ANC 2C to our north with the northernmost ANC 6C communities because of constituents’ similar interests and issues as NoMa and North Capitol corridor development continue to move through their neighborhood. We believe that ANC experience in dealing with developers in ANC 6C01, 02, and 03 will provide guidance as this development proceeds. Thus we recommend that 6C01, 02, and 03 join with the four current 2C SMDs to form a new ANC 6E” (ANC 6C Official Comments)

6C Commissioners recognize the tradeoff is that we lose two great Commissioners, which saddens us, but we know they and the 2C Commissioners will form a strong, effective ANC for these NW neighborhoods.

In addition this gives these neighborhoods a larger ANC with 7 Commissioners.

It is appropriate under Guideline #3 to create ANCs with a ‘critical mass’ of 7-9 Commissioners. Not only does this help with workloads and resources as stated by the Task Force, but it gives the ANCs the necessary ‘clout’ of having enough voters to make the Council, the Mayor, and District departments, boards and commissions pay attention to the ANC’s advice.

This same principle applies to the Task Force’s decision to extend 6C’s boundaries west to the freeway, and south to Independence Ave – in order to give 6C the necessary population to have 7 Commissioners.

Keeping the residents south of Massachusetts Ave. NW and west of North Capitol St. and adding 1200+ residents south of East Capitol St. to 6C helps make 6C a viable ANC under Guideline #3. It gives 6C similar ‘critical mass.’

It’s unreasonable to argue that in redistricting there will be no changes. And it’s unfair for one ANC to have a position that change must occur elsewhere and not in its ANC. One ANC, no matter how powerful its political connections are, should not be able to isolate themselves from changes to the detriment of other ANCs.

Knits neighborhoods together:

The Task Force’s recommendation knits neighborhoods together, fostering better mutual aid and representation.

In the new 6E recommendation, neighbors in near NW and Shaw face neighborhood development and livability issues together bound through the H St, K ST & New York Ave. corridors. 6C has also been willing to support 6E’s desire to be involved in the I-395 air rights project. While the Task Force did not approve 6E’s proposal strengthening 6E’s standing, 6E is still adjacent to the project with its Massachusetts Ave. NW southern boundary. The Task Force might consider dropping the boundary down the G ST west of New Jersey Ave NW to further assure 6E representation without affecting population numbers.

Likewise the Task Forces decision to extend 6C boundaries south knits the neighborhoods north of Eastern market together. Residents north of E. Capitol are equally concerned about the ‘center’ of Capitol Hill. Residents north of E. Capitol are a part of the ‘commons’ and the ‘core’ that draws us together. Eastern Market gives us a sense of identity and community, too! We deserve to be part of representational democracy that allows us to be represented in the decision making process that defines how the Eastern Market neighborhood is shaped and governed.. We share the similar if not the same concerns about parks, parking, our daily routines, and the institutions that create our neighborhoods.

Since the Task Force’s July 14 6C listening session, we have expressed our desire to have a greater say in Eastern Market, related development and the core of the Capitol Hill Historic District. That’s hardly unreasonable in that the current 6C has over 2,600 residents closer to Eastern Market (within the oval on the accompanying map) than over 10,000 6B residents.

The TF map has many opportunities for ANCs to better work together in knitting communities together. It is necessary to draw lines on maps to delineate representation, but that is all they need to be – lines on a map. The reality is that we can and must work across those lines. There is no need to demonize people on the other side or hurl unsubstantiated ad hominem attacks on others. It is not helpful.

Increases citizens’ voices both individually and collectively:

The Task Force’s recommendation doubles the ANCs with ability to provide advice on Eastern Market and related development. It provides an opportunity for increasing the number of voters speaking to the Mayor, District departments, boards and commissions, and the Council on these central neighborhood issues. And it gives thousands more residents a collective voice in the Hill’s premier asset.

The revised 6C SMD map better integrates the new blocks into 6C and provides two SMDs to boarder on Independence Ave. helping knit north and south together. This allows 6C to have two Commissioners to work with our 6B colleagues on Penn Ave SE and Eastern Market issues.

As our neighbors north of Independence look towards Eastern Market and worry about the future, we have your back. Literally we stand behind you, metaphorically and in reality, looking towards Eastern Market. Standing together to protect what is good and work together to address all issues for improvement. I and/or my successor will work hard to ensure all voices are heard and issues addressed.

The discussion on Lincoln Park at Monday’s meeting indicates a need for ANCs to work closer together on greater issues and special important locations that affect more than 1 ANC. ANCs 6C and 6A held the first joint ANCs meeting to effectively work on H Street development and the zoning overlay district.

6C’s intent is not to move what 6B apparently considers it’s ‘E. Capitol St. wall’ down to Independence, 6C’s intent is to tear down that wall and ensure all Eastern Market neighbors have the opportunity to advise on the critical issues before our community.

The Task Force’s recommendations on redistricting can bind us together on the Hill and foster connections throughout our Ward. One City is not just a slogan, it is what we need to achieve for all of us and the city to thrive.

The proposed new ANC boundaries will strengthen efforts to realize our communal Goal – a healthy, walkable, sustainable neighborhood – the greatest neighborhood in the country.
Again, my thanks to all the folks involved in this and especially the Task Force members.

Bill Crews, Commissioner, ANC 6C07

Underlying Agenda In Play (?)

Fengler:  I am posting this email exchange between Commissioner Pate and myself.

On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 10:55 PM, Brian Pate <patebc@gmail.com> wrote:

Joe,

I know you had a full agenda last night, but I was seriously disappointed with the lack of an opportunity for public comment on the most recently adopted plan, BEFORE the plan was voted on by the Task Force.  Will this be rectified on Thursday? 

I also have a simple question.  Why did ANC6C blithely give away 3 SMDs to an ANC that very vocally stated that they did not need or want them, then turn around and vociferously lobby for an additional SMD to their south?  It does not make any sense to me, unless there is an underlying agenda in play.  Please help me clear this up. 

Thanks, Brian

On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 5:55 PM, Joe Fengler <ward6rd@gmail.com> wrote:

  

Brian,

 

If time permits, at the end of the meeting, an opportunity for public comment will be provided.  The last two meetings (public meeting #9 and #10) are scheduled as public meetings for the task force to make decisions.  These are not hearings where we are soliciting additional information from the public.  We have completed that phase of our redistricting process.  However, if a task force member wishes to make a motion to open the meeting for public comment/participation/input on various proposals/recommendations, and that motion receives the appropriate second, as well majority of the task force voting in the affirmative, the meeting will be open to public input during the meeting.  I am being candid to manage expectations.  

 

I welcome the opportunity to address the two questions you asked me.  And thank you for asking them.  It is this type of exchange that will facilitate understanding.  And to be clear, for the rest of my comments below, I am speaking as Joe Fengler and not the W6TF Chair.   

 

1. Why did ANC6C blithely give away 3 SMDs to an ANC that very vocally stated that they did not need or want them? 

 

As you are asking my opinion on ANC 6C's recommendation to realigning 6C SMD in the NW to the new 6E, I believe the full rational for their request can be found in the recommendations they forwarded the task force on Friday, September 16, 2011 - which can be found here.   

 

It appears that 6C was providing solutions to address the integration of ANC 2C as well as meet the objectives listed in the Ward 6 Guidelines for ANC/SMD - which can be found here (as well as posted on the W6TF website, under Filing Cabinet).  These guidelines were also provided on page 30 of the W6TF Redistricting Report (issued August 18, 2011)  - which can be found here (as well as posted on the W6TF website, under Filing Cabinet).  

 

Specifically, the very first objective of the Ward 6 Redistricting Guidelines for ANC/SMD deal with striving for cohesive grouping of residents:  "Recognize neighborhood cohesiveness by grouping residents into ANCs where they are likely to have the most concern about issues that come before their own ANC, and have an affinity of interests and preferences with other residents in the same ANC."

 

To that point, ANC 6C's formal recommendation provided to the task force stated:  "We recognize the opportunity to bring together the northwest communities from the current ANC 2C to our north with the northernmost ANC 6C communities because of constituents’ similar interests and issues as NoMa and North Capitol corridor development continue to move through their neighborhood.  We believe that ANC experience in dealing with developers in ANC 6C01, 02, and 03 will provide guidance as this development proceeds.  Thus we recommend that 6C01, 02, and 03 join with the four current 2C SMDs to form a new ANC 6E."

 

From the ANC 6C Listening Session held on July 14,2011, the following statements where made:

 

(1) ANC 6C Chair Karen Wirt said that right now, ANC 6C has nine Single Member Districts, and with the addition of Shaw it could very well be 12, so one idea would be to break off 09--along with 01, 02 and 03—into a new ANC 6E. 

 

(2) Ms. Scheeder pointed out that the boundaries of 01, 02, 03 and 09 plus Shaw can be put together logically. 

 

(3) Ms. Wirt said 6C had nine, and Mr. Coburn said that seven is a logical number in terms of operations, etc., that seven provides more people to pitch in and get things done. 

 

(4) Ms. Scheeder pointed out that there’s a lot of development happening within the Ward and there should be consistency in developing the policy for the ANCs.  The Task Force should develop procedures that will equalize the workload among the Commissions.

 

You can read the entire ANC 6C Meeting Listening Summary on  the W6TF website - which can be found here.

 

To summarize these three data points, I can follow the development of the idea to realign ANC 6A NW SMDs from the early stages of the redistricting process all the way to ANC 6C sending that recommendation to the task force.  It appears to be based in sound public policy - that NW blocks in Ward 6 share more in common with ANC 2C than ANC 6C.  That ANC 6C and ANC 2C both recognize the neighborhood cohesiveness achieved by grouping these residents together as the share common issues.  

 

It is important to note that ANC 2C's position on this subject as evolved over the summer as they had a chance to really study the potential option of incorporating most of ANC 6C's NW SMD.  If you read the ANC 2C Listening Meeting Minutes (which can be found here), you will see very hesitant and skeptical comments from ANC 2C Commissioners.  Initially, ANC 2C wanted to remain a four SMD ANC.  By the time they voted on their official recommendations - they recommended adoption of the initially approved maps that had seven SMDs, to include other recommended changes.  I credit that to Chair Padro and Commissioner Nigro's willingness to work with the task force and understand the objectives of the Ward Six redistricting process.   

 

2.  Why did ANC6C...turn around and vociferously lobby for an additional SMD to their south? 

 

Again, it appears that ANC 6C is basing their recommendation in the following Ward 6 Redistricting Guidelines for ANC/SMD: 

 

Guideline #2. To the extent that current boundaries contribute to effective functioning of the ANCs, limit the scope of change to ANC and SMD boundaries.

 

From ANC 6C's formal recommendations:  "ANC 6C believes that seven is a logical number in terms of operations and provides a sufficient number to get things done.  Six SMDs can result in a tie vote, whereas seven does not, and this is particularly important as NoMa developers continue to come before ANC 6C as the area to our north grows."

 

Guideline #3. Balance workloads and resources of ANCs and pay attention to likely caseload based on development patterns, historic districts, etc.

 

From ANC 6C's formal recommendations: "A better balance would be created in Ward 6 and hence the workload better distributed if the number of SMDs in each Ward 6 ANC is more evenly divided:  6D and 6E each have seven SMDs; 6A has 8; 6B would have 9 if 6C were to have a seventh SMD.   Thus we recommend that for effective functioning of the workload both across Ward 6 and within 6C, a seventh SMD is needed in 6C."

 

Guideline #4.  Take advantage of natural or built features to the extent they make sense to residents in defining the boundaries of ANCs. 

 

From their formal recommendation: "Similarly, the extension of ANC 6C’s southern border to Independence Avenue also satisfies the criterion of grouping residents into ANCs where they are likely to have similar interests, concerns and preferences in the Capitol Hill historic district." 

 

So, while I understand that there is disagreement regarding ANC 6C's recommendations, as well as the subsequent W6TF adopting them, I don't see any hidden plan.  In my opinion, their recommendations are grounded in good public policy for Ward 6.  In addition, I supported this recommendation for the following additional reasons:

 

1.  In the Ward redistricting process, Ward 6 lost Chinatown and has significant adjustments to the western end of the Ward.  Initially, my objective was to effectively incorporate 2C into Ward 6 - which was accomplished.  In my opinion, it is not realistic to think that all the changes created by the DC Council on the western end of Ward 6 could be completely resolved/absorbed in the western end.  Initially, the task force proposed to do just that - by reducing ANC 6C to six SMDs.  Even to get to six SMDs required moving ANC 6C's eastern end to 8th Street - essentially taking census blocks for ANC 6A.  I was initially OK with that plan as it would be reviewed by all the ANCs to provide formal comments and recommendations.  However, upon reading ANC 6C's recommendations, it was clear to that trying to "contain" all the western end changes within their existing boundaries (along with the portion from ANC 6A) did not lead to an equitable redistricting process.  

 

2.  The redistribution between the NW SMDs and ANC 6A and 6C SMDs.  In my opinion, the differences between Ward 6 NW SMDs and Ward 6 NE SMDs are significant.  Noting that ANC 6C does still retain parts of NW below Massachusetts Avenue, I attribute that to an acceptable deviation to support the larger goal of building equitably-sized ANCs.  I will agree, it is not perfect solution.  That being said, shifting ANC 6C boundaries both east and south supports the guidelines adopted and is a much better policy option than having ANC 6C retain more of NW than they already have in the currently approved plan.  

 

3.  In my opinion, the redistricting process is recognize neighborhood cohesiveness, retain/build effective ANCs and balance workloads, resources and caseloads.  By adopting a final plan that has one ANC with 6 SMD and one ANC with 10 violates all three of these guidelines.  While it would be difficult to build all ANCs with the same number of SMDs - implementing a plan that has three ANCs with 7 SMDs, one with 8 SMDs and one with 9 SMDs is a worthy policy objective worth achieving as it supports all three of these objectives.  

 

4.  Accordingly, I disagree that those living between Independence and East Capitol will be "cut" adrift from Eastern Market/Barrack Row.  Eastern Market is a wonderful resources share by the entire Ward 6 community  as well as the city.  I don't agree with "where I shop" is "what ANC" I should be in.  While the line - "I can see ANC 6B from my window" does not hold logic with me.  The very nature of borders means that someone will see another ANC from one's front door.  I can think of MedLink, H Street Connection and RFK all as good examples of "recognized" features that are just across the street.  

 

In close, I hope this clears up how ANC 6C came to their recommendations.  I offered my additional points used in making my decision in an effort to provide the context of one vote - mine.  I respect that others have different rationale and don't agree with any of the points provided by ANC 6C or even my additional analysis.  But, I will say, from my opinion, this was not a hasty decision made without study or proper notice to the community.  In this case, well respected task force members, who are volunteering their time and great expertise, spent two months reviewing the same information and came to different conclusions.  Whether the decisions are "wrong" or "right" depends on the evaluation lens used to make a decision.   

 

Respectfully, Joe Fengler