Ward 3 ANC Redistricting Task Force Meeting - Shared screen with speaker view
Who can see your viewing activity?
Abigail McLean (CM Cheh's Office)
Opening RemarksTask Force Map presentationsMary Alice Levinepublic commentsProposed MotionTroy Kravitz and other Task force membersPublic commentsProposed MotionFuture schedule and plans for Report
Leigh Ann Evanson
@patrick The NV map was last updated on Monday at 5pm
Westover Place would certainly be welcomed back to ANC3D01 where they have been for the last 10 years. It is true that they relate significantly to Wesley Heights, to which they would be joined, if they were allowed to remain in ANC3D 01
Thank you Chuck
Westover Place: If I understand correctly, the move could be handled if a very slight excess of 2100 limit were allowed. Not clear what the impact would be on 3A, however which would be losing Westover Place.
So no public comment on this map?
If the map is incomplete (Westover unresolved), then how can the TF vote on it?
@WClarkson, map isn't incomplete, it's just not possible to break blocks in the tool, so looking to TF for assistance
@Barr Weiner Understood. Just wanted to know whether the TF was going to take a vote on the NV map before resolving the Westover issue.
I completely support the map presented by Mary Alice Levine/ Neighborhood Voice Map this evening. I know the Task Force has been working project on this for 57 days and the April 1 deadline looms large. That said, new proposals should be given appropriate weight before votes are taken on them.
Janet Adams Nash
I support the Neighborhood Voice Map presented by Mary Alice Levine.
Westover Place asked to be joined again into ANC 3D where we have been represented for decades. Westover Place is in the legal subdivision of Wesley Heights, our children go to Horace Mann School, this is our neighborhood, it is where we live, it is where our lives are centered. We wish to be joined again with Wesley Heights and Spring Valley. In addition, AU should be in ANC 3D as it is currently.
Regardless of whether AU is moved to 3E or 3A, ANC3D would still receive automatic party status as an "affected" ANC in future zoning cases.
I lived on the 3500 block of Woodley Rd. for 10 years. I felt no common interest with Massachusetts Heights. Cleveland Park was my neighborhood.
Spring Valley and Wesley Heights and Westover Place are affected by a wide range of issues tied to the presence of AU in their neighborhoods that require engagement with multiple DC agencies, including, but not limited to, Zoning, DCRA, DDOT and DDOE. Precisely because DC agencies can give great weight to the ANCs, neighbors that are most directly impacted by these institutions should not be in an ANC separate from the institutions. The DC Ward 3 Redistricting Task Force should make it a priority to do no harm and ensure – at a minimum – that institutions and the neighborhoods that are most directly impacted fall within the same ANC designation.
@Benjamin -- Your ANC would still have automatic party status.
I support Benjamin Tessler's comments regarding Westover Place.
It's unfortunate for 3/4G that we have to lose the blocks south of Chevy Chase Parkway; they are part of our community.
Janet Adams Nash
The SMDs 06 and 07 in 3D designated by the Voice Map are more consistent with neighborhood cohesiveness than those as drawn by the TF.
Janet Adams Nash
Also the Voice Map plan for 3D 06 and 07 recognizes the historical connections in lower Palisades and Foxhall Village.
I also wish to express my preference for the Neighborhood map over the TF map. It keeps neighborhoods better togetnre
Thank you Janet Adams Nash. I do not believe the Task Force can assess the presentation made this evening by Mary Alice Levine/Neighborhood Voice tonight. Time is needed to consider it. A week?
Gonzaga #1? That's a travesty!
I also prefer the Neighborhood map over the TF map.
We strongly support the Neighborhood Voice map, which keeps established neighborhoods cohesive and together, a redistricting principle that Councilmember Silverman emphasized this evening.The Task Force has tried to accommodate the concerns expressed by a number of neighborhoods, with the notable exception of Cleveland Park, which the Task Force plans to divide. As a result, the west side of Cleveland Park, moved to a new ANC, will have a say in matters that extend north to Tenley Circle and southeast to Whitehaven Street. Yet we will no longer have a direct voice in most matters that concern Cleveland Park.
Our ANC representative Chuck Elkins stated that they would welcome Westover Place back into ANC 3D. As Troy Kravitz stated that 3D has several split census blocks. Westover could easily be included back into 3D which it has been part of for decades.
I appreciate the hard work and long hours of the Task Force. You have made some changes, reflecting concerns of certain communities. Yet, there has been no response to the strong objections of many, many people from Cleveland Park that strongly want and need to stay together as a neighborhood. I strongly support the Neighborhood Voice proposal as it preserves and focuses on established neighborhood.
Thank you for your valid comments Shelly Repp.
but neighborhoods elect their SMD commissioners
I agree with the testimony and comments made by Bonnie LePard, Rick Nash, and Barr Weiner about Cleveland Park
@Patrick Thank you for also posting this map and the accompanying memo on the Palisades listserv.
I appreciate the work of the members of the Neighborhood Voice and the Task Force in preparing maps that aim to keep McLean Gardens together. I prefer the Task Force map, because it does not separate the Vaughan Place high rise building from the rest of the complex. Also, the Task Force map includes the Newark St. Gardens and Playground, and the Brooks, while the Neighborhood Voice map does not. Thanks to all for the work done in listening to the voices of McLean Gardens. As mentioned, I request that consideration be given to moving Upton Place (currently with zero population) into a different SMD, given the large population increase expected with that development and City Ridge in the coming year.
I would also like to express support for the task force and its process. As everyone has stated, they have worked hard and incorporated feedback. Their process is more inclusive of the community than the alternative map, that was not inclusive at all in its development. A select group of residents privately developing a map should not get preference over an open process of the task force.
Copying oral comments into the chat:Thank you to Mary Alice for proposing consideration of our map and stepping in at the last minute to present on it when we learned we would not be allowed to present after all, great work.Appreciate this effort by the Task Force to walk through their thinking on why their map makes sense, it would have been great to have this before the night the vote is planned.The Neighborhood Voice coalition appreciates the efforts of the TF in this last iteration to address community concerns. Ward residents and organizations identified neighborhoods split across ANCs over the last several weeks. In the current TF proposed map, the Task Force has now addressed every one of them, except Cleveland Park.Issues that remain are pretty straightforward.- Fix ANC boundary between 3A and 3C to (1) keep Cleveland Park intact within 3C, with right to be heard on Wisconsin Ave matters as it always has on this established neighborhood boundary, an avenue important to the community
part 2 of oral comments
In the Task Force plan, people who live on the west side of Cleveland Park would have a voice in matters that concern the Wisconsin Ave corridor, the area that's closest to where they live. That's been the goal from the start.
- Instead the map, would include a few CP residents in an ANC that extends from Tenley Circle to the north all the way south to the British embassy, rather than being heard on matters for their own neighborhood- (2) bring back into 3C communities that share interests with 3C communities rather than moving them to the new 3A in an SMD with communities far to their north with which they have no shared interests- Adopt few adjustments to SMDs to keep communities intact/associated with uses/issues of interest- Add two census block splits to keep neighborhoods intact in same ANC
Part 3 of comments:
- As reflected tonight, there seems to be confusion. TF members such as TF member Dubois have asserted that certain residents in current 3C are not being heard, specifically people living in apartments, a demonstrably false premise for our ANC. Based on this premise they have argued that some residents voices should be protected by excluding other residents from the ANC, rather than embracing the mission of ensuring the voices of all residents of a neighborhood can be heard- Community input was presented repeatedly and ignored, until a coalition came together to take the extraordinary step of generating a complete map, save asking the TF to resolve the SMD drawing challenges posed by the 3A ANC they had proposed- Now we’ve addressed ANC 3A too so that it doesn’t force neighborhood splitsChallenges arose form starting with intellectual constructs developed by the TF rather than the established principles of redistricting, proportionality and keeping neigborhoods intact, and focusing on community input
- With regard to 3C, TF member Dubois’ comment kind of says it all, supporting limiting who can participate when full participation can readily be achieved for neighborhood residents. This is not the TF’s job. Rather, it should be striving to further the purpose of the ANC system and why it was established—to enable neighborhoods and their residents to be heard. I’d also note that, while the relative # of SMDs in a neighborhood are a matter of fact, not choice or bias; nonetheless, CP has 4 SMDs while the southern half of 3C under our map has 5.- We’re really close now. We urge the TF to embrace the solution being presented in the Neighborhood Voice Map; adopting the recommended adjustments to the TF proposed map.
Sorry, I meant to send out my map to Everyone >> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1TpAlPea71TJWtvYZI8Pc3EKG_OQI2S8v/view?usp=sharing
Again, I think the Task Force needs to reflect on the presentation and comments made this evening before any vote should be taken. Cleveland Park, Westover etc. issues for neighborhoods should be considered.
To Task Force: Issue isn't destroying neighborhoods, it's about keeping neighborhoods in tact so they and their residents can be heard on their collective interests, which in CP include issues relating to Connecticut Avenue, Wisconsin and throughout the rest of the neighborhood. That's how it's supposed to work.
how about drawing SMDs around neighborhoods---?
First, I would like to thank the TF for their many hours of work on developing this proposal. 1500 hours is an incredible number, and there is no doubt of your dedication to this effort. I also would like to thank those neighbors who have devoted time to the development of Neighborhood Voices map. This is a huge effort to provide a viable alternative under a short turnaround. I am a longtime Glover Park resident and parent of Stoddert students. I appreciate that our ANC boundaries in 3B follow natural features that conform to our school community and neighborhood. I am grateful that the TF map no longer includes Foxhall Village in 3B., an addition that would not have respected natural geographic boundaries or common interests. Thank you for making that change since the last meeting. And it is great that there is less daylight between the TF map and the NV map. It would be wonderful to allow a week to consider some of the additional points raised in tonight’s presentations.
How, if at all, would moving Westover back to 3D impact the maps' other boundary lines?
But the Neighborhood voice map does create an new ANC for middle Wisconsin
to William: we can make it work
@ J Dubois, I didn't say what you said, and you didn't say what you just said. People are entitled to their opinions, but you have claimed that, in fact, people living in apartment buildings aren't heard. And they are, by our ANC, by our association, and they should continue to be, as should everyone in the ANC. Please speak to the issue and address what you actually have said. Thank you
Just to clarify, AU stated to the TF that it wants to be in 3E, not 3D?
Task Force: Please consider why AU wants to be in 3E.
@ S Siddiqui, it would be helpful if you could offer your views on why the Neighborhood Voice Map does not do a better job of keeping neighborhoods intact.
Barr, I won't comment on any map. But the neighborhood voice map was not developed by neighborhood input.
The process was not inclusive.
The neighborhood voice map was presented on many neighborhood listservs, and garnered support from many people.
C The vast majority (far more than 80%) of Cleveland Park Historic District has been in one ANC. We would be very happy to the small remaining part of the CP historic district back in ANC3C. Neighborhood Voices presented a plan for that. It’s not difficult to keep the historic district intact. No one has asked or wanted neighborhood to be divided.
Lastly, my personal reflection: I appreciate that the SMD noted on the TF map - 3B06 - shares a high density population with some other parts of Glover Park in 3B. But as was noted in other parts of the TF presentation, population density is but one factor to consider, along with common interests, business strip, community center, schools, natural geographic borders, etc. 3B06 in the TF map transects the park, connecting neighborhoods that are not walkable (which is a defining feature of the rest of 3B) and seems to prioritize population density over these other factors. If those other factors were considered, from my vantage point, it would not result in that SMD being included in 3B. Again, I very much respect the many elements being considered as these maps are drawn. But I would urge a re-examination of the addition of this neighborhood to 3B.
@Commissioner Siddiqui, please explain how a process was “inclusive” when all three of the task force members appointed from the ANC 3C area have ties to one advocacy group, “Cleveland Park Smart Growth.”
Janet Adams Nash
The Neighborhood Voice Map is more sympathetic to the concerns of Cleveland Park residents.
I disagree totally disagree with Troy Kravitz
None of you are "elected"
I cannot understand this splitting up of neighborhoods. I hang out with my neighbors that live in different SMDs in my neighborhood and because we are all part of the neighborhood we are neighbors.
@ S Siddiqui, your comment reflects the problem we've been facing all along. Rather than address the merits of the issue, particularly the principles for redistricting, folks challenge the source of the input. A lot of people and a lot of organizations have come together to do our best to help the process.
Look at the CP meeting on the comp Plan several months ago. Several ANC Commissioners said that a majority of their constituents wanted them to vote a certain way, so that's how they voted. So how will people that are in another ANC have any voice in how a different ANC votes? You all are assuming that the people who you are moving into the new Wisconsin Ave. ANC should be more concerned with Wisconsin Ave., but they are telling you that they don't feel that way.
Leigh Ann - YES!!!! 100%
@katherine During the 2011 redistricting process, were task force members "elected" or appointed by the Council?
to William clarkson:> no they were not elected but there were a lot more members representing more local communitiies
did Mary cheh tell the task force to listen to the neighborhood voice map?
@Katherine: Mary Cheh "I can confirm that my office had nothing to do with your map, and that we didn’t direct the task force to draw a new map. As you said, the taskforce is independent. The only communications from my office to the chair were to relate the high number of comments my office was receiving, and to advise as to the importance of thoroughly hearing all public comments so that the task force’s recommendation would be well received at the Council. I was glad to see the task force take an additional week to allow the public to review the various proposed maps and to hear public comment."
Have any neighborhood groups lobbied Mary Cheh (or her staff) to support or oppose a particular map?
No thanks to the Task Force for their extended consideration of the Neighborhood Voice map.
Thanks to all the hard work of this Task Force. It's been a hard slog, but you have done a good job.
Thank you for all the work!