Your thoughts???


Ward watch
Wednesday, March 14, 2007 - Emily Jerman

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
While an Oklahoma City councilman says adding two wards could improve municipal representation for the growing metropolis, members of the council have differing opinions on what the repercussions of that action might be.

No official proposal to add wards is on the table. However, a black councilwoman fears ward fragmentation could dilute minority participation in city government.

In the shadow of recent city elections, in which three of four candidates ran unopposed, Ward 4 Councilman Pete White is hoping the council will decide to augment the now eight-ward, eight-member council to 10 by the next round of elections in two years.

“I think the result would be council members (who) were closer to their constituencies both geographically and numerically, and I think that’s what good municipal government’s made of,” he said.

2000 census numbers indicate about 60,000 people live in each of the city’s eight wards. In 1966, when the city moved to the eight-ward structure, each ward included about 20,000 people, according to a redistricting proposal map.

“We’re using a 40-year-old system for a city that has grown double in size,” White said. “The relationship between elected officials and their constituents, I think, is somewhat dependent on the size of your constituency, and it just seems to me that it’s time we took another look at that.”

The councilman posed the 10-ward idea at a council meeting last fall and said he has received primarily positive feedback. While he said he hasn’t pushed the issue because he’d like to better know public opinion, some people, including Mayor Mick Cornett and Ward 7 Councilwoman Willa Johnson, question changing a system that seems to be working.

“Our wards are about 60,000 people and … I think that’s manageable,” Cornett said. “It’s probably in line with most places in the rest of the country. … My impression, yes, (is) that the people are being represented well.”

Of the current council members, seven are Caucasian and two are women, representing a city that is, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, 68 percent white, 15 percent black, 10 percent Hispanic and almost evenly divided between men and women.

While Johnson said a “good representative is going to be a good representative, no matter what his or her ethnicity is,” when the city switched to the eight-ward system in the Sixties, an argument favoring the move was that it would assure places on the council for one or two minority members.

“The change from four to eight wards … means the city probably will always have a (black) councilman,” an Oct. 12, 1966, Daily Oklahoman story reported. Having black as well as female council members would help yield a “continuing awareness of the various groups and elements in our society,” said then City Manager Robert Tintsman, in the story.

Black representatives have played key roles on the council since the Sixties, particularly in representing Ward 7, which spans the northeast part of the city. Whether or not all communities are being represented is still a concern today, according to Cornett. If the city at some point seemed to not be representing residents, “then we need to figure out why,” he said.

But, he added, with only one of last week’s council races having more than one candidate, “I don’t think (one) could necessarily make the point that someone isn’t having an opportunity to serve, or a group isn’t being represented, when there (are) not even candidates out there.”

For Johnson, apparent disinterest or apathy among black voters is troubling — one in four voted in the last election when she was re-elected, she said. She intends her current term to be her last, but is concerned no one else in the black community will step up to replace her in 2009. The limited salary and the time commitment involved in being a council member might bar some people — of any ethnicity — from running for the office, she said.

All this makes her wary of dividing the city into additional wards, regardless that her ward — along with White’s — is among the largest, geographically. There are more important priorities, she said.

“In my ward, the majority of the folks who live here are African-American,” she said. “Now, if you cut that up, you see, how can you convince me that less African-Americans will call for more African-Americans to be on the council? … You simply can’t draw the lines like this where you can have a majority (of) minority, and once you dilute that minority, you’re going to decrease the chances of that minority participation.”

White said location of the two new wards is a decision for someone else or the council as a whole to make. He and Johnson both said they are willing to discuss the topic, and that they want what is best for Oklahoma City.

“I’m just trying to make it somewhat more reasonable than it is — kind of like eating a foot-long hot dog,” White said. “Every time you look at it, you want to take another bite rather than just trying to jam it all in your mouth at one time.”

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oklahoma Gazette
Oklahoma Gazette (http://www.okgazette.com/)

You can contact your city councilman/woman or Mayor Cornett at the following page. Just click your ward on the left it will take you to their info page.

City of Oklahoma City | Council Agenda (http://okc.gov/council/council_library/index.html)

I think the city should have ten wards. That would give each 53,000 residents which provides even more representation of minorities.

I think there needs to be a new ward in Central that includes the Asia District area and another new Central that includes the traditional hispanic area of the Southside. While the city does have 2 females and one minority; the city breakout as a whole shows there also needs to be a hispanic and an asian on the council as well.

I think a good representation would be 3 white males, 3 white females, 1 black female, 1 black or native american male, 1 asian male, 1 hispanic female. That breakout is MUCH closer to OKC's demographics and I think is probably what the council should shoot for.

Of course, its up to the voters to make it happen - but I think the wards should be redrawn so that inner city representation could occur; as that is where the growth will be and is what makes Oklahoma City the great urban city that it is becoming.

I think Dallas has ten wards and Seattle does also. We are similar in size to Seattle (531,000 vs. 573,000) so I think a 10 member (~53,000 per ward) layout would give additional inner city / minority representation opportunities. OKC is the most diverse and largest city in the state - so I think we should change the government for the people.

I was also thinking, maybe downtown could be left off the ward map and have AT LARGE representation or at least be represented by the Mayor.

That way, its relative lower population would not play into any political battles as we know we need downtown to be the nucleus of the city, metro, and state - for us to be successful.

I'm not comfortable with gerrymandering the wards to specifically cut out asian and hispanic districts. Besides, I doubt there are 53,000 Asians living in the Asian District. I would rather see a more generalized division. Perhaps with one covering the NW quadrant of the inner loop, which would cover the Asian District, Paseo, and 39th Street Enclave. That should allow for a diverse candidate choice.

and since there are not 53k asians living in the district, you could rest assured that whatever new ward would be created there might have representation other than asian - but there's a chance that it would.

My suggestion of the council breakout was a pie-in-the-sky "wish" based on OKC's demographics - if we wanted the council to match that, which I think is a good idea (and good for the Inner City). I never said we'd gerrymander the wards to come up with an Asian Ward. And actually jbrown, your layout of a new ward is exactly what I was thinking (not JUST carving out the Asia District as a ward)

in order to come up with 53,000 residents - you would need a ward that had the diverse communities of the Asia District, Paseo and 39th Street Enclave (half of them would be asian). The council member might be Asian, but could also be a starving artist, or even gay.

Talk about diversity, that would be just wonderful and really represent our diverse city!!!

I think it's long overdue our city adds more Wards and gets a better segment of our society. All, our city council is really trying to hide this issue and not push it through, especially the Mayor. Pete White is the only one trying to be open minded about this. I really encourage you to email not just your councilperson but all councilpersons. You can get their contact info at the link I posted above. Let them know they should at least discuss this issue more.

I guess we were thinking pretty much the same. It just sounded like you wanted to institute an affirmitive action quota for City Council. It obviously doesn't work that way.

I've written about this extensively at my own place, and actually hit Sam Bowman up with a question about it last time I saw him.

My own thinking runs this way:

"Ward 4, which occupies the southeastern part of the city, much of which is rural, is just too darn big. Wards 1, 3 and 7 are similarly huge. The problem, of course, is that cutting the population of those wards by twenty percent won't reduce their size by twenty percent. If we're going to expand the Council, we will get closer to the desired results if we go for twelve seats rather than ten. I think Pete White knows this, but figures he stands a better chance of selling a ten-ward Council."

dustbury.com: Downsizing wards (http://www.dustbury.com/backlog/2006/10/downsizing_wards.html)

I do think Hot Rod is right and the Asians and Hispanics need more of a voice in what is best for there community.

but the problem okclee is you can't force a certain race or gender to run. that is sheer luck of the draw, I think windowphobe has the best solution and I had similar thoughts prior to reading his post. 12 wards would truly better represent our city however that would really be a stretch to pull off. 10 seats could still allow us to totally redraw district lines. Perhaps a downtown and lower midtown ward, a uptown, rest of midtown and inner city ward, a NW side ward and a NE side ward, a NW OKC ward, N. Central Ward, South Central, SW, SE, etc.

Originally, I seem to remember an article or two on the possibility of 14 wards. Can we justify that? Questionable. 12, yes. That would limit each ward to about 50,000 constituants. Plus, I would be in favor of redistricting each ten years with an additional ward added for every 50,000 increase in population.

If it comes to a citywide vote to change the charter, I vote yes. Actually, HELL YES!

That's definitely something I can agree with you on mranderson!

That's a good way to approach it, mranderson. That way when the city comes up against this again, it'll be something that's mandated and not poltical (that is, in regards to the number of representatives. Drawing the lines is always political). Even if one views 60k/ward managable, it won't stay that way and so some long term solution like the one you laid out would maintain managability on an ongoing basis and not force someone to risk alienating oneself by suggesting to expand the council.

I concur also

But I think we need to draw wards that are urban and represent the inner city. How it is now, there are wards that have rural and inner city in their boundaries - in order to justify the population metric.

What I say - forget about population, so to say. We know OKC will have rural wards due to its city limits, so in those rural areas, the pop will NOT come to 50,000. To me, that's ok, it should still be a ward and have a council representative that is DIFFERENT from the smaller yet more densely populated wards of the inner city - whom might probably be represented by INNER CITY residents including those of colour.

And yes, I think Anderson has a point with 50,000 increase, add a ward. But think about that, once OKC reaches 700,000 residents, that would equate to 14 wards. Anything above that is probably too much representation.

What is everyone's thoughts about my WARD suggestion, where we'd have urban, suburban, and rural wards (where the rural wards would be larger and not abide by population) and a downtown ward (that also wouldn't abide by population).

I think having a Far West ward, a Far SE Ward, a Far NE Ward - all rural; a downtown Ward - these are significant enough given the particularities of those regions. For example, downtown may not have 50,000 residents yet but it IS the commercial, financial, economic, and geographic heart of the metro area - therefore IS important as any other populated ward. The downtown WARD would have the downtown OKC boundaries (plus downtown south and west for growth) and would have one representative.

thoughts?

Another idea is what we do here in Seattle, we have at-large representation even tho we have wards. In other words, Wards are drawn but anyone in the city could run/vote, you wouldnt necessarily have to live in that Ward just as long as you could represent that Ward's interests and you live somewhere in the city of Seattle. That also could work, since OKC has become more integrated - you could get minorities to run for an urban ward even tho they live in Far SW OKC, for example.

Any thoughts.

What I say - forget about population, so to say. We know OKC will have rural wards due to its city limits, so in those rural areas, the pop will NOT come to 50,000. To me, that's ok, it should still be a ward and have a council representative that is DIFFERENT from the smaller yet more densely populated wards of the inner city - whom might probably be represented by INNER CITY residents including those of colour.

But if you do that then you have given increased representation per person to the rural ward. I understand that you are trying to organize the representation based on interests, but I do think that it should be based on people and that each person should be represented equally. I think if you put too much emphasis on geopgraphy, then you get things like the electoral college where a persons vote is worth almost 4 times in Wyoming what it is in Texas.

So, if you had a rural ward of, say, 30k people, and an inner city ward of 60k, then a vote in the rural ward would be worth twice as much as in the inner city ward.

"What I say - forget about population, so to say. We know OKC will have rural wards due to its city limits, so in those rural areas, the pop will NOT come to 50,000. To me, that's ok, it should still be a ward and have a council representative that is DIFFERENT from the smaller yet more densely populated wards of the inner city - whom might probably be represented by INNER CITY residents including those of colour."

Some of the wards will be geoprahically larger than others, however, so are the state and U.S. legislatures, and those are comprised of areas somewwhat population based. If we go as close to an equal distribution of population as possible, then we get equal representation. That is the idea of ward addition and the idea behind my proposal.

^ spoken exactly as I intended, Anderson. .... :)

OKC WILL have rural wards, given its city limits, so have 3 rural wards, regardless of the population. And perhaps a downtown ward, that also is regardless of pop. Then have the remaining inner and outer core density be built on say 60K residents; with the lines drawn to encourage minority participation.

OR

Perhaps OKC could follow Seattle in having "at large" voting. It works for us in that we have minority and female participation. We also have 10 wards if Im not mistaken. Anybody can run for council and mayor just as long as they live in the city limits.

Nevertheless which method is used, I think we all agree that either we need to

1) De-annex the watershed and some of the rural areas
- the watershed can be run using either OK county or ACOG regional governance

2) If we want to keep the rural, then we need rural wards that are not bound for pop. That way, the density areas have more representation than having a ward running from downtown all the way to far SE rural OK county (ridiculous, nothing in common).