Chicago Ward Redrawing Part VI - Black Caucus/Rules Committee Proposal

Dec 21, 2011 03:25

Part I: Introduction and Overview
Part II: The Strange Case of the 19th Ward
Part III: The Black Caucus Proposal
Part IV: The Latino Caucus Responds
Part V: The Lines Are Drawn

When the Latino Caucus and their allies filed an alternative to the Rules Committee ward redrawing proposal, the Black Caucus announced that they'll file their own proposal. Originally, I assumed that it would be something Black Caucus came up with. But when the map was filed on Friday, December 16, it became clear that it was actually the Rules Committee proposal that had Black Caucus support.

This map - officially known as the Map for the Better Chicago - has the support of most of the Black Caucus, most of the Old Guard and most of the Reform Caucus members that weren't part of the Coalition. That's 32 aldermen in total. Alderman Toni Folkes (15th), who sits on the Black Caucus and the Reform Caucus, didn't sign it. Neither did Ald. Nicholas Sposato (36th). Ald. Michael Zalewski (23rd), a member of the Old Guard whose ward would become majority Hispanic under the Coalition plan, didn't sign it either. But most fascinatingly, Ald. James Cappleman (46th) signed on to both maps. More on that later.

Overview

The map calls for 18 Black Wards, 13 Hispanic wards and four wards with no clear majority. For the sake of the proposal, the Black Caucus agreed to give up the 15th ward, allowing it to become majority Hispanic. Under the MBC proposal, Folkes gets to keep more of her current ward than under TPM proposal, but she would still lose most of her current costituents. This certainly explains why Folkes didn't sign on. MBC proposal calls for the same majority-Hispanic wards as the TPM proposal. But, as we will see later, the devil is in the detials.

Once again, I owe my thanks to Nate Lynch, who created a street map version of the MBC. You can access it using the direct link or click on the thumbnail below.



The More Things Change...

One of the most interesting aspects of this proposal is how much it resembles the TPM proposal. It's an interesting contrast to the original Black Caucus proposal, which was blatant in favoring the Black Caucus aldermen at the expense of everyone else. Out of the wards represented by the Coalition members, 1st, 13th and 45th wards are virtually identical. Looking at the aldermen who signed on to the MBC proposal, 33rd, 38th and 41st are virtually identical, while 4th and 39th wards are largely similar. It seems that for those aldermen, at least, maintaining their constituents isn't an issue. This suggests that their support is based on something else.

Another thing that's virtually identical between proposals is the 36th Ward. That certainly explains why Sposato didn't sign on to either proposal.

The Migrating Wards

In the previous entry, I wrote about the TPM proposal calls for the 20th ward to be moved to the North Side. The MBC proposal keeps the 20th ward on the South Side, keeping most of it in place while beefing up the "Long trail" and generally expanding it further into Englewood and Back of the Yards. But the MBC proposal features another migrating ward - the 2nd Ward. It would moved to a similar position as the TPM 20th Ward. It would not move quite as far north, stopping just short of North Center neighborhood. On the other hand, it would move further southeast, moving into Lakeview and Lincoln Park community areas in a jagged diagonal line. Moving it like that is tricky - if any part of it gets into Boystown, the City Council would face a potential lawsuits for splintering representation among the minority group. Fortunately for everyone involved, the MBC map keeps Boystown in the same ward.

Under MBC proposal, the current 2nd Ward would be split between six wards. The South Loop portion would be split between Black Caucus' 3rd and  4th wards. Ald. Solis' 25nd Ward would absorb the Lower West Side, particularly Little Italy and portions of what used to be ABLA public housing mega-complex. The West Loop, Henry Horner Homes and the Illinois Medical District would be split between 27th and 28th wards. 42nd Ward would absorb the Fulton River District and West Loop Gate portion.

All of those wards are near the current 22nd Ward. The same can't be said about 11th Ward, the traditional Old Guard stronghold with extensive ties to Daley political dynasty. Under current boundaries, 25th Ward lies between 2nd and 11th wards. But, in one of the most puzzling case of gerrymandering in either proposal, the MBC proposal extends 11th ward along Clark Street and pushes it into University of Illinois at Chicago's East and South campuses and part of West Loop.

When I read that Ald. Fioretti (2nd) companied that the Daleys were trying to push his home into the 11th Ward, I thought he was exaggerating. Clearly, I underestimated the Chicago politics.

Under those circumstances, it's clear why Fioretti would support the TPM proposal. As far as he is concerned, it really is the lesser of two evils.

As a side note, I can't help but notice that the MBC proposal would put Maxwell Street Market into 11th Ward. When he was a mayor, Richard M. Daley never hid his distate for this century-old Chicago insitution. If it weren't for vocal opposition, he probably would have shut it down. Since the aldermen traditionally have the final say over anything that gets organized within their ward... Maybe Daley would finally have a chance to do what he wanted.

The Black Caucus and the Fate of 6th Ward

Note: Since it was originally posted, the following section has been extensively edited in response to reader feedback.

Under the MBC proposal, most of the 15th ward would be extended into  McKinley Park neighborhood by a moderately thick strip of land that runs through parts of Brighton Park and Gage Park. Folkes would get to keep the western portion of Marquette Park section of the ward, but most of her current African-American costituents would be shuffled off into 16th Ward. Most of the new 15th Ward would be part of either Old Guard or Latino Caucus wards.

By conceding the 15th ward and refusing to move the 20th, the Black Caucus probably did the the best they could to protect their members in the process - at least, given the circumstances. But they may soon face pushback from their own costituents - namely, the residents of the 6th Ward.

Under the current map, the 6th Ward includes southeastern corner of Englewood, Grand Crossing, Chatham, West Chesterfield, western Burnside and Rosemoor neighborhoods. While Englewood is notorious for its problems and Grand Crossing is only somewhat better, the rest of the ward is noticably better off. Chatham is one of Chicago's oldest African-American middle-class neighborhoods. While the Great Recession caused increase in crime rates and decline in retail, it still has great homes, busy shopping corridors and community groups committed to helping the neighborhood recover. West Chesterfield, Burnside and Rosemoor are working-class neighborhoods. While they are not without problems, they have lower crime rates and better commercial corridors than many neighborhoods to the south and west of them.

The TPM proposal keeps most of the 6th Ward intact - it would lose the Rosemoor section and not much else. But the MBC proposal slices off everything south of 87th street, putting West Chesterfield and the Burnside portion of 6th Ward into 9th Ward, even as it pulls the 6th Ward deeper into Englewood.

It is an alarming prospect for residents of of West Chesterfield and Burnside, who worry that their property values would decline and the qualify of city services would decrease. Some Chatham residents are worried about what the new boundaries would do for their ward's reputation. With more of Englewood added to the 6th ward, the ward crime and poverty rates would increase. As Concerned Citizens of Chatham blogger Worlee Glover put it, they would not want 6th Ward to become "The Englewood Ward." Those concerns existed when the original Black Caucus proposal was unveiled. The MBC proposal only intensified them.

There have been indications that some 6th Ward residents are considering lending their support to the Coalition. While they are not completely happy with the TMP proposal, it is increasingly seen as the lesser of two evils.

Englewood residents have their own reasons to support the TMP proposal. As mentioned in the previous post, it would split Englewood into three wards. 17th Ward would cover most of Englewood, with 6th Ward portion largely remaining the same and 16th Ward covering the northwestern section of the neighborhood wards. For the first time in memory, Englewood would have majority of the neighborhood fall under a single ward, ensuring that they have at least one alderman who would not be able to take their vote for granted. MBC map, by contrast, divides the neighborhood into four slices, with none of the slices having enough votes to meaningfully influence elections.

Would the 6th Ward residents actually be willing to buck traditon and lend their support to the Coaltion? Will the Black Caucus take notice and change its strategy? And, when the dust settles and the new ward map is ratified, how will the fallout from the controversy influence the 2015 City Council elections?

Only time will tell.

Latino Caucus

As mentioned ealier, the MBC proposal calls for 13 wards - just like the TPM proposal. So why did the Latino Caucus vote for TPM proposal?

Looking at the numbers, the devil may be in the details.

Under both proposals, the 23rd Ward would become a majority Hispanic ward. But while the TPM version of the 23rd Ward would be 66 percent, the MBC version of the proposal puts that number at 54 percent. The white residents make up a larger percentage - 41 to TMP's 30. That means that while TPM proposal establishes a clear Hispanic majority, the MBC proposal slims it down, making elections less predicable. Under Latino Cacus standards, the MBC version of the 23rd Ward would be considered an influence ward rather than a majority Hispanic ward (the difference lies in a single percentage point, but still...)

Another likely sticking point has to do with the 22nd Ward. It is a Latino Caucus ward, and the TPM proposal keeps it largely intact. However, the MBC proposal transfers much of the southern section of the ward to 15th ward while stretching 22nd Ward along the Illinois Canal coastline, putting it partially into the western edge of the current 11th Ward. While that would not necessarily hurt Latino Caucus as a whole, it would impact Ald. Richardo Munoz's (22nd) ability to get re-elected.

Old Guard

The MBC Proposal has the support of most of the Old Guard. But most importantly, it has the support of the Old Guard aldermen with power. Both Ald. Ed Burke (14th), the chairman of the Budget Commitee, and Ald. Richard Mell (33rd), chairman of the Rules Committee, signed on to the proposal. Ald. Patrick O'Connor (40th), Mayor Emanual's floor leader (a floor leader is an alderman unofficially appointed to push the mayor's agenda through the City Council), signed off on it as well.

It is worth noting that, under MBC proposal, 33rd ward gain less Hispanic residents than under TMP proposal. The TMP proposal calls for 53 percent, creating a slim majority. MBC proposal calls for 47 percent, which, while still a majority, makes it impossible for them to elect a candidate without forcing a run-off  (in order to avoid a run-off, a candate must gain over 50 percent of the vote). It also empowers the area's Korean-American residents, who, at 10 percent, get enough of a voice swing elections in either side's favor.

Now that it's clear which proposal the Chicago City Council's most powerful aldermen will support, Ald. Quinn's (13th) becomes even more puzzling. WIth Mike Madigan as his patron, he does not have to rely on the rest of the Old Guard for support as much as, say, Ald. Pope (10th). But, at the same time, Madigan never had a reason to pick a fight with the Old Guard. I can't even begin to guess what he might be planning.

The Strange Case of the 19th Ward Rises Again

For the past few months, I assumed that the conflict over the 19th Ward boundaries was a dead issue. The original Black Caucus proposal kept the borders intact, and neither version of the Latino Caucus proposal mentioned it. But a closer look at the MBC proposal reveals that, it would take a small portion of the Morgan Park section of the 19th Ward (between Vincennes Avenue and Longwood Drive) and add it to the nearby 34th Ward.

That this change is part of a Black Caucus proposal is not suprising - after all, the whole conflict started with a Black Caucus suggestion. But what is surprising is that Ald. Matt O'Shea (19th) signed onto this map. This after he promised his constituents that he would fight to keep the ward intact. Which, it should be noted, is something that TPM proposal very much does.

I can't belp but wonder if 19th Ward community organizations will notice this - and whether or not O'Shea will suffer any political backlash. Or maybe they will be content to lose what, in the grand scheme of things, isn't that big of a piece of territory. Only time will tell.

Reform Caucus

For many Reform Caucus members, choosing which remap proposal was probably the matter of simple election tactics. For example, TPM proposal kept most of 43rd Ward intact, while MBC proposal cut off part of the 43rd Ward to create the new 2nd Ward, so it shouldn't be surpising that Ald. Michelle Smith (43rd) joined the Coaltion. Other cases are more ambigous. Ald. John Arena (45th) and Ald. Debra Silverstein (50th) represent wards that maintain very similar borders under both proposals, yet former signed on to TPM proposal, while the later signed on to MBC proposal.

Interestingly, Ald Cappleman's ward would remain much closer to its current borders under MBC proposal than under TPM proposal. Yet he chose to sign on to both. Perhaps he's simply hedging his bets.

Under TPM proposal, Reform Caucus co-chairman Ald. Joe Moore (49th) would affectively consolidate control over the most of Rogers Park the neighborhood, and the Old Guard 40th Ward would effectively be pushed out of Rogers Park altogether. The MBC proposal doesn't quite go that far, leaving a small portion of the 40th Ward's northeastern section in Rogers Park, but the trend is still there. Neither map is likely to hurt Moore's re-election prospects. While some races have been tighter than others, Moore can usually count on support from Rogers Park's highly diverse working-class population.

So what made Moore want to support MBC proposal over TPM proposal? I couldn't even begin to guess.

One thing that is certain about this is that Moore's promise that he would try to help Reform Caucus members retain their seats only goes so far. During the entire process, only Ald. Foulkes and Ald. Sposato vocally complained about being redistricted out of their wards, and they were left to to fend for themselves. Then again, Reform Caucus as a whole doesn't come off all that well, either. The ward redrawing left two co-chairmen supporting TPM proposal while two other co-chairmen supported to MBC proposal. TMP.  The rest of the membership split between the two proposals.

I used to hope that the Reform Caucus would be able to act as a mediator and work toward a solution that would benefit everyone. So far, that does not seem to be the case. Maybe in the future, this might change, but I'm not holding my breath.

What Happens Next

With two remap proposals out in the open, the aldermen are no closer to reconciling their differences - of anything, the Coalition seems to have become even more determined to stick to its map.

On Monday, the Latino Caucus announced that if the referendum does happen, it would accept the results and asked MBC supporters to promise to do the same. Ald. O'Connor balked. Speaking on behalf of Mayor Emanuel, warned the Council that, if the referendum happens, the mayor would  organize a referendum of his own - one that would ask the voters if they want to cut the number of wards in a half. However, that threat doesn't really carry much weight. Changing the number of wards would require a change in state law, and, as the Chicago Sun-Times article pointed out, the referendum would be non-binding.

And so, the negotiations - and the bickering - continue.

For More Information:

MBC Proposal - Full Text
Chicago Sun-Times  - "Remap Referendum Faces Tight Deadline"

chicago ward remap, politics, social justice, chicago, chicago city council

Previous post Next post
Up
[]