Reply to Cheh's Ward 3 ANC Gerrymandering

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "Cheh's Ward 3 ANC Gerrymandering"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]NP: What is this really about? What are the issues that some in CP feel like they wouldn't be able to get their way on if they were put in one ANC versus another?[/quote]
It started with Cheh working through a process many considered rigged where the outcome was designed to limit representation of SF homeowners.

The people who politically benefit and their ideological comrades are now crying foul that those who would have had their representation dimished have been successfully able to restore some of it through a compromise.

This is how politics works and it people don’t understand it and it makes them upset. [/quote]

I disagree with this characterization.

In the 2012 cycle, the Ward 3 Task Force was charged with more of a focus on the corridors. It did what it could at the time, but there were structural issues with census tracts preventing doing more than what was done.

In this cycle, without having self-interested ANC Commissioenrs on the Task Force, as they were in 2012, the Task Force was able to create the ANC 3A and re-focus more appropriately was had been started in 2012.

The ONLY people complaining about the map ultimately proposed by the three At-Large Councilmembers who are charged with impartially overseeing this process, are from the Cleveland Park NIMBYs and Mendelson, whose political career was spawned from that ilk, catered to them wholly.

The new map proposed by Mendelson has illegal outsized Single Member Districts, and splits neighborhoods more egregiously than any map proposed by the Task Force.

I guess it is okay to split neighborhoods as long as it isn't Cleveland Park.[/quote]
“without having self-interested ANC Commissioners” just explained everything that was wrong with the process and why it was necessary for a final compromise to be brokered.

If it started with an inclusive process from the beginning it would have resulted in an outcome with legitimacy.

If you believe that the compromise is illegal then I hope that you sue. That’s what courts are for. [/quote]

Silverman offered a compromise. Mendelson's isn't a compromise.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics