Redistricting at the Local Level: Perspectives, Challenges, and Opportunities

Walter R. Huber [email protected] & James E. Hockaday [email protected] Department of Political Science Muskingum College New Concord, OH 43762

Prepared for delivery at the Southern Political Science Association’s Annual Meeting (Marriott Riverfront Hotel, Savannah, GA) November 7-9, 2002.

Abstract

This paper provides unique insights into the redistricting of cities. The literature on redistricting and reapportionment, while rich, is lacking in practical advice, especially at the metropolitan level. In part, this is a function of timing. Baker v. Carr was decided in 1962. Subsequent research has primarily focused on senior level governments and only recently begun to trickle down to the local level. Completion of a practical research project (redrawing the district lines for the city of Zanesville, Ohio) resulted in a plethora of insights into the politics of redistricting at the local level. Involvement in this process gave new perspective on the various inputs that affect the redistricting process as well as how cities apply Supreme Court rulings to their local redistricting efforts. Methodologically qualitative, this paper examines the effects consultants had on the process and offers four hypotheses for further quantitative testing. Additionally, this paper offers evidence to support the contention that outside consultants are likely to add value to the process of redistricting at the local level

1

Perhaps the surest way to lose an appetite for either sausage or politics is to see either made. Conventional wisdom holds that this is especially true when it comes to redistricting. Ever since Governor Elbridge Gerry created a district in 1812 so oddly shaped that, a newspaper columnist opined that it resembled a new species of animal; the gerrymander, observers of government have been aware of the political nature of redistricting. Unfortunately, except when the new district boundaries end up in court, any analysis of specific instances of redistricting is usually ignored. This creates a situation where the exception proves the rule. Since students of government are, in the main, only aware of redistricting plans where one party accuses the other of gerrymandering, many assume that the majority of redistricting plans will create gerrymander to protect incumbents or to favor one political party over another. Consultants can bring a level of professionalism and expertise to the process. Outsiders bring technical expertise, reassurance to officials that problems can in fact be solved, and a less parochial view than elected officials. In addition, consultants can take the heat for unpopular decisions; provide prestige and legitimacy to the process of redistricting. Consultants do not provide solutions to all problems though and in some cases may detract from the process. Personal agendas, acting against the wishes of the client, ignoring the unique nature of a location, or not understanding the issues involved with redistricting are all potential problems that can arise when hiring a consultant to assist in redistricting. (Scher, Mills, and Hotaling; 1997, 257258) Testing the extent to which gerrymandering occurs and the degree to which consultants add to the process is challenging because much of what occurs goes on behind closed doors. The authors of this paper were fortunate enough to participate in the redistricting of the city of Zanesville, Ohio. Personal observations, interviews before and after the fact with city officials

2

and elected leaders allowed us to test many of the assumptions political scientists hold about the redistricting process at the local level and provide insights into the motives of elected officials faced with the challenge of redrawing ward boundaries. By examining the elements of reapportionment of small cities and towns, highlighting the challenges cities face, and providing advice on how consultants can make redistricting a more equitable and expeditious process, this paper provides methods to improve the redistricting process small cities undergo. In many ways, redistricting has become easier for cities. Results from the census are available on-line, most states require one or more agencies to make the data available to municipalities, and ward maps can be quickly generated using ArcView or another program that supports Geographical Information Systems (GIS) data. Cities however, often lack adequate technical expertise, equipment, staff, and resources to redraw ward boundaries in a timely and efficient manner. City council representatives in small and medium sized cities often suffer from poor pay and may not have the requisite technical expertise to redraw district lines. Moreover, even if some members of council are aware of how to complete the process, those without the knowledge may be reluctant to trust other elected officials to fairly redraw the lines. A final problem city council may face is a lack of understanding of the law. The authors recently became aware of one Ohio city that has not redrawn its ward boundary lines in over thirty years. When asked why they had not completed this process every ten years, they explained that they were unaware that it was necessary if city council members were satisfied with the current arrangement. City council may bring expertise to the process using resources already in-house. However, doing more work with fewer resources is the burden of all levels of government. Cities are often unwilling or unable to dedicate adequate resources to the process of redistricting.

3

Additionally, cities occasionally need to reinvent the wheel each time they redraw ward boundaries. Changes in city personal can result in no one working for the city that was involved in the last redistricting process. Although making the data available in GIS format has made the process easier, many smaller communities do not have access to this system and even those that do may not have sufficient training to manipulate the database. The authors do not mean to suggest that cities are falling down on the job. There is a gap in the local redistricting literature. Cities generally complete redistricting as best they can, often lacking guidance from the state government and the academic community. The bulk of the literature concerning reapportionment examines legislative districts at the national and state level. Cities and citizen activists within the city are generally not overly concerned with the redistricting process because to most, it seems to have little impact on city itself. The issue of reapportionment usually takes a back seat to other, immediate issues. An Examination of the Literature

The majority of the literature concerning reapportionment addresses redistricting issues at the national and state level. A few major issues such as majority minority congressional districts (Rush, p. 14) occupy an inordinate amount of attention in the literature. Issues such as these have remained at the forefront of legislative politics and judicial decisions relating to districting since the Supreme Court rulings on the subject in the early 1960’s, most notably, Baker v. Carr (1962). Hanna Pitkin argues in her seminal work, The Concept of Representation, that much of the problem surrounding the idea of representation is that “there has been surprisingly little discussion or analysis of its meaning” (p.3). She goes on to state that “the literature is full of obvious disagreements over its meaning. Some theorists offer definitions that contradict those

4

offered by others or (even worse) bear no relationship to them” (p. 4). Without a firm understanding of what representation should mean, meaningful application of this important idea to redistricting will be limited. Debate within the academic and political community is not limited to definitions. Since Baker v. Carr (1962) established the principle of one person, one vote and Reynolds v. Simms (1964) extended Baker’s ruling to the state level, the debate over redistricting has moved from apportionment to representation. Continued concern over such issues as minority/majority districts, cracking, and packing illustrates this point. More recently, cases have focused on racial inequities or the legislature’s attempt to compensate for them. Unfortunately, the Court has not always been clear as to what is acceptable. For example, the central finding in Shaw v. Reno (1993) did not make clear what is an acceptable district and what is not. This problem intensifies when redrawing lines at the local level. It is necessary to not only understand the factors that need to be considered to create an acceptable plan for reapportionment but to find out how, if at all, the standards set forth by the Court apply to localities. Although the Court has not specifically ruled on this issue, the Court has consistently maintained that cities are creatures of the state. As such, the best evidence suggests that the same standards that apply to states also apply to cities. The bulk of redistricting cases that the Supreme Court has granted certiorari to involve malfeasance on the part of the legislature by creating districts that favor either a political party, voting district, or an ethnic or racial grouping. Consequently, the literature on redistricting has focused on the implications of these Supreme Court cases and rulings. The available literature does not offer much help as to what one needs to consider when redistricting a relatively ethnically homogenous community of 27,000 people. The most appropriate insights come from

5

a comprehensive work entitled Voting Rights and Democracy: the Law and Politics of Districting. However, even though this book does an excellent job of explaining the current state of redistricting it only briefly addresses the needs of local redistricting and requires those faced with the task of redistricting to adapt the principles set forth for national and state redistricting to their own unique needs. The lack of literature on the subject may relate to a bias against academic institutions involving themselves as consultants in the process of redistricting. There is a legitimate concern that academic involvement in policy development may affect policy outcomes. Moreover, some would argue that student participation in local policy is not appropriate, useful, or meaningful for students, faculty, or the institution. Some scholars maintain that collaboration between universities and local government involving policy and projects that are political in nature are not appropriate. Irwin Feller author of Universities & State Governments: a Study in Policy Analysis argues that a project is inappropriate “unless they (the project) contained a substantial conundrum whose resolution would add to the state of scientific knowledge, which could be demonstrated by submission to peer-reviewed outlets” (Feller, p. xi). With little doubt, the paucity of literature, the inexperience of cities, the silence of the Court as to clear guidelines, and the need for generalizable advice for municipalities has created a need for involvement by the academic community. The authors do not imagine their collaboration with local government is unique. We speculate that much of what has occurred remains unpublished because of the inability to generalize results from a single unique historical experience. This is unfortunate. While case studies tend to be more methodologically primitive than Meta analyses, they still provide

6

important insights. Given the unique constraints each city faces when redistricting, case studies may provide the best chance at understanding the process.

Methodology

The authors support the qualitative assessment of local redistricting processes and how interaction with consultants influences the outcome by relying on interviews conducted with Zanesville’s Public Service Director and four Zanesville City Council members. The small number of participants involved in the redistricting process and the desire to build mid-level theory made the use of qualitative measures necessary and appropriate. Interviews, in-person and by phone, were conducted before and after the redistricting. The authors invited City Council members to participate in this study at a September 23 city council meeting. City councilperson’s identities are anonymous; transcripts exclude identification by name, sex, ward, or other identifying characteristics. This preserves the accuracy of the interviews and shields participating members from any political fallout. The authors have recorded and transcribed all interviews. Interviews with the Public Service Director and members of the city council were conducted to assess the utility of using consultants in the redistricting process. The Public Service Director and four members of council were involved in the study. Two of the council members represent wards and two are at-large representatives for the city. These interviews offer insight into their perspective on reapportionment. In the State of Ohio, according to Ohio

7

Revised Code the legislative authority to redistrict lasts for ninety days after the release of the decennial census data. If by the end of that ninety-day period, the city’s’ political wards have not be redistricted the task of reapportionment then devolves to the city’s public service director. Ohio Revised Code stipulates that after that 90-day period the city legislature has relinquished their right to be involved in the creation of the ward boundaries. The ORC is however silent on whether city council can be involved if the public service director solicits their opinions. The Case Study The City of Zanesville is a small rural city of approximately 27,000 inhabitants located about one hour east of Columbus in rural Appalachian Ohio. In the spring of 2002, the Public Service Director for the city of Zanesville contacted the author to request help in redrawing the ward boundaries. Providing technical expertise to the city became part of a required service component in an advanced urban politics course. In the past, this class has completed projects for the city of Zanesville, including a 16,000-piece mail survey on downtown redevelopment. City officials requested assistance from the College primarily because they lacked the staff, resources, and technical expertise to complete the redistricting in a timely manner without diverting resources away from other programs. Zanesville was especially interested in receiving help since there were no city officials who had any prior experience redrawing ward boundaries for Zanesville or any other city. A consulting team of five students and one professor first met with the Zanesville’s Public Service Director to discuss how the maps were going to be made. Despite the many Supreme Court rulings and a host of established legal considerations, each legal standard assumes that localities are unique and each redistricting plan should consider unique local attributes. The urban politics class held a work session with city council to identify special

8

concerns in the City of Zanesville, such as historical overlay districts and low/middle income (LMI) neighborhoods. Since the criteria have a tendency to conflict with one another when drawing maps, it was thought that identifying the most important criteria for city council and the public service director would allow the creation of a number of different maps, each emphasizing a different criteria. See Appendix A for a list of the criteria city council ranked in importance. By working with a faculty member in the Geology Department and using ArcView GIS 3.2A by ERSI, the team was able to produce an original map, and five proposed maps, each emphasizing a different combination of criteria (see Appendix B). In addition, the team created a detailed outline of the laws concerning redistricting and the procedure followed when creating the maps in order to simplify the next redistricting. Prior to conducting interviews, we assumed that academics need to play a larger role in local redistricting process, a base of redistricting literature needs to be developed for cities, and cities need to be aware of the implications redistricting can have for both citizens and community. Work with City Council centered on a work session held in the spring of 2002. The Public Service Director and the Mayor of Zanesville suggested the work session so we could gather the input of the members of city council. The work session lasted approximately two hours. Information from the work session was used to develop a set of criteria to serve as a means to develop a new ward map. After meeting with council, four different sets of criteria that could not be resolved with one map were developed. Each set of criteria highlighted a different goal and resulted in a map. During the work session, several requests of a political nature were made. At the request of the mayor and the director of public service, several of the political criteria were incorporated into several of the maps. Since political criteria were purposely juxtaposed with other criteria such as preserving LMI housing districts, no one map was purely

9

political in orientation. In addition to the four maps based on Council’s criteria, the public service director requested a map that did not recognize any political or historical criteria as a basis for comparison.

Results

The authors conducted five interviews over a three-week period. All interviews were taped and later transcribed for analysis. All members of council were asked the same questions in the same order. The Director of Public Service answered a slightly different set of questions. Appendix C contains the interview questions. Each interviewee offers a unique perspective on redistricting from their perspective. The Public Service Director The Public Service Director for the City of Zanesville is required to possess a wide range of skill sets. The tasks assigned to this office deal with the “sticks and bricks” that make up the city. The public service department handles all new buildings, roads, highways, and other items relating to the city infrastructure. One of the less well-known tasks that can fall to a public service director in the state of Ohio is redistricting. The Ohio Revised Code stipulates that the legislative authority for a municipality to redraw its district boundaries expires ninety days after the release of census data to cities. In the last decennial census, city councils had until February 1, 2002 to complete the process. If by the end of that ninety-day period redistricting of the city’s political wards was not complete, the responsibility to reapportion devolved to the city’s public service department. Reapportionment is one of the less common tasks of the public service

10

director. At most, it occurs once every ten years. If the legislative authority of the city manages to complete the process themselves within three months, it may never occur. Given the unique nature of the task, the City’s Public Service Director sought help from an outside consultant. Asked why he sought help in the redistricting process from consultants, the Public Service Director cited several reasons. The City viewed outside consultants as having expertise in the legal issues surrounding redistricting. Relatedly, city employees lacked the technical expertise necessary to complete the process. The City of Zanesville has recently installed the computer software ArcView GIS 3.2A but at the time, no one in the city was familiar enough with it to make full use of the program. Additionally, past positive collaborations with the College and an active internship program provided the Public Service Director with a high comfort level that the project would be carried out in a professional manner. Most surprising from the author’s perspective was the view a consultant helped de-politicize the project. The Public Service Director said, “I think the best aspect (of using an outside consultant) is the unbiased opinion generated by people not necessarily from the municipality and not taking into to consideration any of the political nuances.” When first approached by the city to complete this process, the major concern voiced by the participants was a fear that they would be viewed as interfering with a political issue. The Public Service Director however, held the opposite view. By involving a neutral third party in the process, he felt that the results were more readily accepted as nonpolitical. He confirmed this was what happened. There was little if any political infighting over the final map chosen. All parties accepted it as the most appropriate solution. The Public Service Director also stated that he felt the municipality is more likely to turn to consultants in the future considering this experience.

11

The authors also asked how if at all consultants affected the outcome of the redistricting process. He stated, “I think from a consultant standpoint having the ability to use mapping software not only to generate equal voting representation in each ward, but also somewhat realistically keep all the areas in general geographic perspective is important. I do not believe City Council would have that ability. But also, politically in keeping Council out of it makes a better map.” Creating voting districts of roughly equal geographic areas was an objective for all maps. Zanesville’s distributive and allocational policies rely on wards. For example, Zanesville distributes the monies allocated for paving and road improvements equally by ward. Each of the six political wards receives an equal amount of money for road improvements, regardless of the geographic size of the district or the total miles of roads within a district. The policy of dividing road repair money equally by ward makes it imperative that geographic area, total miles of roads, and the like important considerations when redistricting. This policy extends beyond roads to most other distributive and allocational goods and services including park improvements and sewer and waterworks improvements. Although the geographic size of a district does not necessarily equate to the number of road miles, sewer lines or parks in a district, it does serve as a general indicator. The city, in consultation with the College, is currently beginning a project that will map all water lines, sewer lines, and gas lines within the municipality. This will allow for more accurate and measurable information the next time redistricting is undertaken, but will further increase the need for expertise in the process. City Council Representatives The authors interviewed four members of city council. Two represented a specific ward within the city and two were at-large representatives, elected by the entire city. Responses to the interview questions varied considerably among members of council. One glaring difference

12

between the council members was their understanding of the redistricting process. As expected, members elected at-large did not have as high of a level of knowledge about the process of redistricting. However, all members of council interviewed expressed satisfaction, both with the results of the redistricting and with the role the consultants played. This finding may however mask an underlying issue: during the course of the interviews, it became apparent that council members were not fully aware of how (and in some cases why) the redistricting process occurs. Despite interaction with council in a two-hour work session, the majority of council members interviewed remained unaware that there are other criteria that need to be considered in a new ward map besides an equal population in each ward. Initially, the authors expected that the interviews would provide rich data on how members viewed redistricting. Unfortunately, interviews provided little in the way of analysis of redistricting largely because most members of council possessed only a vague familiarity with reapportionment. While initially surprising, this finding fits well with what is known about the process of redistricting at the local level. It is technical in nature, occurs infrequently, lacks an in-depth literature, and is not a priority for all members of council (e.g., those elected at large). A decision to focus attention on areas more likely to yield dividends for the member of council is in line with established literature on the motivations of elected officials. At-large representatives tended to view themselves as having less of a stake in the process. All members of council were invited to the work session but at-large members, while agreeing to be interviewed, declined to participate in the work session. All members of council that were interviewed did however support the idea of employing consultants to reapportion the city districts. One member of council expressed his doubts about council being able to reapportion their city without the help of a consultant in the following way: “For one, I don’t

13

think we are qualified to do it and I don’t think we could.” All members of council interviewed stated that they would be more inclined to advocate the use of a consultant in the future. One member stated, “I think it takes and outside source to take in all the possibilities and take into consideration anything that may be affected by redistricting.” Although all supported using consultants, those elected at-large were more reserved in their enthusiasm. One at-large member allowed that consultants might be useful but expressed disappointment that the city council did not take up the matter. This member was however unaware of how districts needed to be drawn and confused as to the legal standards the Supreme Court has put in place regarding redistricting. All members of council did however express that they felt consultants saved time, added expertise, and helped de-politicize the process for them. These sentiments mirror those of the Director of Public Service. Conclusions The power to reapportion initially rests with the legislative authority of a city. However, in this case, the city council was unaware that reapportionment within a certain period was necessary according to the Ohio Revised Code. Part of the explanation for this lies in the system. Ohio’s laws on redistricting may unwittingly have the effect of encouraging members of city council to not become involved in the process. The ninety-day window forces a city council to curtail work on other matters to take up redistricting within the limited time allowed. Moreover, even if a city council can overcome the choppy political waters often encountered in the process and reapportion the city within the ninety-day window of opportunity allowed, they must keep in mind that the mayor of the city can veto the plan. If council is unable to override the veto within the ninety-day period, the responsibility still devolves to the public service director. One member of council, when asked about whether council should redraw the lines

14

said, “I think it shifts our focus from what we should be doing, especially if someone else can do it more efficiently.” Given that the public service director is an at-will employee of the mayor, some might speculate that this system would have the effect of shifting the power to redistrict away from the legislative branch toward the executive. This does not appear to be the case. The mayor needs to work with council on a regular basis and the distributive and allocational nature of the many policies small cities routinely deal with create a situation where the system encourages the executive to work with the legislative authority to craft a solution amenable to all. The authors have seen this pattern repeated in a second city and are currently helping redraw their district lines. Given the small size of both cities we cannot begin to speculate on how this arrangement affects larger municipalities. As noted above, when the legislative authority for smaller cities lack the time and inclination to involve them in redistricting the responsibility falls to public service directors. Problems persist at this level. In many cases, the public service director may not have the staff, time, or resources – either technical or monetary, available to complete redistricting. A less obvious problem with tasking the public service director with redistricting a city’s ward boundaries is a political one. In order for the administration to pass an ordinance, council must approve it. If the administration does not protect the political futures and incumbency of council members, it may seriously hinder an administration’s ability to pass future ordinances. Faced with the above, small cities may seek outside help so that an independent thirdparty can take part in the reapportionment of the city’s political wards. Cities however, often do not know whom to turn to for help. In Ohio, the Department of Development provides information for cities on redistricting but does not advertise this fact. In this case, the city had a

15

prior working relationship with a nearby college and turned to them for assistance. The Department of Political Science at Muskingum College has had a working relationship with the city and council for three years and an excellent record of accomplishment for completing large technical projects. The authors were fortunate to have an opportunity to gain insight into a subject that generally occurs behind closed doors. Qualitative work cannot offer generalizations. It is however, highly appropriate for theory building. The authors’ experience in Zanesville and subsequent interviews has allowed us to develop four testable hypotheses. First, small cities legislative authorities are unlikely to complete the redistricting of political boundaries in the allotted ninety-day period allowed by the Ohio Revised Code. There are barriers city councils face when attempting to redraw lines themselves: lack of expertise concerning reapportionment, lack of technical expertise, competing political aspirations, and time considerations. Any one of these barriers will lower the chances of a city council successfully creating an acceptable map within the ninety-days allotted. Some cities face more than one of these challenges at the same time; further reducing the chances, they will be able to successfully redraw their lines alone while avoiding an obvious political gerrymander. Second, when the duty of reapportionment falls to the public service manager, she or he is often unprepared to redistrict a small city. The public service director often lacks: resources – financial and technical, staff with the time to devoted towards redistricting, and expertise both in GIS software and legal considerations. As is the case with city council, lacking any one of these can impede the process and in some cases, there are multiple barriers in place at once. Third, consultants can improve the process. Outside consultants can add expertise – technical and legal, they can save the city time, and they can de-politicize reapportionment,

16

redirecting the focus of the new wards from protecting incumbency to more objective considerations. Clearly, not all consultants will accomplish these lofty goals. However, properly trained and motivated, consultants can improve the process and help protect the intent of the redistricting process. Fourth, the need for academics to play an active role in local redistricting issues is real. Currently, too little research concerning local reapportionment issues is completed. Cities need guidance in these matters. None of the people involved in the process we interviewed desired anything other than what they perceived to be in the best interests of the city. Cities are actively seeking guidance in this process along with other matters. Since helping to redraw the lines for one city, another has asked for assistance. The authors do imagine their experience is unique. However, without additional research on the matter, the community of scholars involved in this process will operate in isolation, each unable to offer help and guidance to others. While this paper serves to begin an investigation into the problems small cities face in the reapportionment process, it by no means provides definitive answers. Instead, it is meant to open the door for future quantitative analysis of redistricting. Since the redistricting of Zanesville, Ohio, another small city near the College has requested assistance with reapportionment. Upon inspection of their most current ward maps, (some dating back to the Carter Administration) it was found that one of the most basic requirements of ward maps, contiguous districts, was violated. This has suggested a related line of research the authors are currently pursuing: assessing exactly how many small cities in the State of Ohio do not possess an accurate ward map and how, if at all, reapportionment, when completed, affects distributive policies within cities.

17

References Ball, Howard. The Warren Court’s Conceptions of Democracy: An Evaluation of the Supreme Court’s Apportionment Opinions. Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, Cranbury, New Jersey, 1971. Buchanan, Scott and Craig Williams. 2001. “Redistricting in the Partisan Era: State Games and Federal Implications.” Presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, San Francisco. Council of State Governments, Reapportionment Information Service. 1981.State Profiles. CSG, Lexington, Kentucky. Feller, Irwin. Universities and State Governments: A Study in Policy Analysis. Praeger, New York, NY, 1986. Goldinger, Carolyn, Ed. Jigsaw Politics: Shaping the House after the 1990 Census. Congressional Quarterly, Inc. Washington DC, 1990. Jewell, M.E., Ed. The Politics of Reapportionment. Atherton Press, New York, New York, 1962. Martinez, Tricia Ann.1994. “When Appearances Matter: Reapportionment under the Voting Rights Act and Shaw v. Reno.” Louisiana Law Review 54 (May): x-x. Pitkin, Hanna. The Concept of Representation. Berkeley, University of California Press, 1967. Rush, Mark. Does Redistricting Make a Difference? Partisan Electoral Behavior. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland, 1993. Scott, Keesha Middlemass. 2001. “The Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the Implementation of Section Five: Are the States Treated Differently?” Presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, San Francisco. Scher, Richard, J. L. Mills & J. J. Hotaling. Voting Rights and Democracy: The Law and Politics of Redistricting. Nelson Hall Publishers, Chicago, 1996. Tarr, Alan. Understanding State Constitutions. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 1998 Vogel, R.K., H.V. Savitch, Eds. Regional Politics, American in a Post-City Age. SAGE Publications, Inc. Thousand Oaks, California, 1996.

18

APPENDIX A – LIST OF CRITERIA CITY COUNCIL RANKED IN IMPORTANCE To:

Members of City Council

From:

Walter R. Huber, Ph.D.

Re:

Redrawing Ward Boundaries

Date:

March 13 2002

Redrawing Ward boundaries is both a technical and a political question. The technical issues can be resolved by looking to data available from the Census bureau. Public Law 94-171 enacted in 1975 “directs the Census Bureau to provide redistricting data needed by the 50 states for their use in redrawing districts of the United States Congress and state legislatures.” The Census bureau provides this information in the form of Excel files, Tiger Maps, and GIS data. This data can then be manipulated to form appropriate districts, or in the case of a city, wards. Although different configurations of district lines have political consequences, the redistricting itself should not be politically motivated. This goal of redrawing lines based on nonpartisan and non-political criteria however does nothing to limit the political importance of this process. The number of possible ways to draw lines is limited solely by one’s imagination (and the constitutions and laws of the United States and Ohio) and each potential configuration of political boundaries has societal (and political) implications. In a similar vein, there are a multitude of ways one can decide how to determine what the “best” or “most appropriate” ways to determine how to draw the new boundaries for the wards. Ward lines can potentially move in any number of different combinations to achieve the result - an equal number of persons in each ward. Based on a firm commitment to provide technical expertise without partisan entanglements, I would like to propose the following to Council: 1. Council establishes a set of broad “guiding principles” to limit the number of possible options for redistricting with the following limiting conditions: A. The rationale for drawing lines is not partisan or political. B. Council shall agree on how to accept “guiding principles” (e.g. consensus, 2/3 majority, simple majority, Boorda Count, etc.) C. Council shall (by either plurality or consensus) whenever possible, stipulate which “guiding principle” shall prevail if two or more principles come into conflict. 2. I, along with my team will have no less than two and no more than six alternatives for redrawing district lines prepared for review by City Council within three weeks. Assuming the above is satisfactory, I have prepared the following list of possible guiding principles in conjunction with the Mayor, city employees, and members of my team:

19

POTENTIAL GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR THE REDRAWING OF DISTRICT LINES 1. The entirety of each historical district within the city shall, whenever possible, be kept within one ward. _____Yes _____No 2. Rivers and other natural (non-manmade) boundaries shall, whenever possible, act as barriers to separate wards. _____Yes _____No 3. I-70, US 40 and other major roadways shall, whenever possible, act as barriers to separate wards. _____Yes _____No 4. The downtown (as designated by the zoning maps) shall be kept within one ward. _____Yes _____No 5. Wards that are closest to their target population (4293/4294) shall experience the smallest possible shifting of boundaries. They will lose/gain only enough population to make them equal in size. (For example, if there are two contiguous wards and ward “A” needs 40 people, and ward “B” needs 200 people, 40 people would be taken from ward “B” before 200 people were taken from ward “A”.) _____Yes _____No 6. Districts shall, as much as possible, be equal in geographic size. _____Yes _____No 7. The entirety of each industrial park within the city shall, whenever possible, be kept within one ward. _____Yes _____No 8. Wards will be drawn to anticipate future population growth. (For example, if areas of the city have recently been annexed and there is a strong potential for growth in them within the next ten years, lines will be drawn to split that likely growth among multiple districts.) _____Yes _____No

20

9. Each ward will be as compact (or square) as possible. _____Yes _____No 10. Current ward boundaries will serve as the starting positions for any attempt to redraw ward boundaries. _____Yes _____No 11. Other criteria not listed: A. ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ B. ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ C. ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ Rank ordering of each criteria (from highest to lowest rank): Guiding Principle _______ should be ranked first. Guiding Principle _______ should be ranked second. Guiding Principle _______ should be ranked third. Guiding Principle _______ should be ranked fourth. Guiding Principle _______ should be ranked fifth. Guiding Principle _______ should be ranked sixth. Guiding Principle _______ should be ranked seventh. Guiding Principle _______ should be ranked eighth. Guiding Principle _______ should be ranked ninth. Guiding Principle _______ should be ranked tenth.

21

INFORMATION ON THE CURRENT COMPOSITION OF THE WARDS: Currently: 25,762 individuals reside within the city limits of Zanesville, OH There are six Wards If the wards are divided equally: Two wards will have 4,293 persons Four wards will have 4,294 persons Currently the disparities in populations from the target population of 4293/4294 are: Ward 1 – (4001) Ward 2 – (4201) Ward 3 – (4251) Ward 4 – (4103) Ward 5 – (4040) Ward 6 – (5166)

(Ideally, Ward 1 will gain 292/293 individuals) (Ideally, Ward 2 will gain 92/93 individuals) (Ideally, Ward 3 will gain 42/43 individuals) (Ideally, Ward 4 will gain 190/191 individuals) (Ideally, Ward 5 will gain 253/254 individuals) (Ideally, Ward 6 will lose 872/873 individuals)

22

APPENDIX B – WARD MAPS Note – Maps files are too large to transmit via e-mail. Hard copies will be available at SPSA.

23

APPENDIX C – INTERVIEW QUESTIONS Interview Questions for the Public Service Director 1. Have you ever assisted with the redistricting of Zanesville’s Political wards in the past? 2. In your experience as Public Service Director, what made you decide to work with a consultant? 3. From the perspective of Public Service Director, what factors need to be present in order for the redistricting to be successful? 4. Has the City of Zanesville ever used consultants before in the redistricting process? 5. In your experience as Public Service Director, are there any challenges, drawbacks or negative aspects to using a consultant in the redistricting process 6. In your experience as Public Service Director, what benefits or positive aspects, if any, are there to using a consultant to assist in the redistricting process? 7. Are there any specific requirements that a consultant needs to meet before they are considered for the job (Legal expertise, expedience, technical expertise, etc. etc.)? 8. In the perspective of the Public Service Director, based on the results of previous projects do you think the City is more or less likely to deal with consultants in the future? 9. From the perspective of Public Service Director, how might the redistricting process differ in terms of legal expertise if a consultant reapportioned the city instead of City Council? 10. From the perspective of Public Service Director, how might the redistricting process differ in terms of rapidity if a consultant reapportioned the city instead of City Council? 11. In your experience as Public Service Director, has Zanesville ever sought assistance from the Ohio Department of Development (ODOD) at any point during the redistricting process (e.g. requesting Census data for the City of Zanesville)? Alternatively, has the ODOD ever offered assistance, at any point during the redistricting process? 12. How, if at all, has using a consultant changed redistricting policy in Zanesville? In other words, has the current shift in wards affected the mayor or council’s policies? 13. Are their other distributive policies allocated ward?

24

Interview Questions for Zanesville City Council Members 1. Have you ever assisted with the redistricting of Zanesville’s Political wards in the past? If you have, did council do the redistricting or did the city use an outside consultant? 2. From the perspective of City Council member, are there any advantages or benefits to using an outside consultant? (e.g., time consumption, level of legal expertise regarding redistricting, level of technical or computer expertise regarding redistricting, resources, etc.) 3. From the perspective of City Council member, are there any challenges or drawbacks to using an outside consultant? 4. From your perspective as City Council member, are there any advantages or benefits if city council completes reapportionment? 5. From your perspective as City Council member, are there any challenges or drawbacks if city council completes reapportionment? 6. From the perspective of City Council member, what factors need to be present in order for the redistricting to be successful? 7. Considering the last reapportionment that took place in 2002, would you, as a City Council Member, be more or less inclined to use an outside consultant to complete the next decennial reapportionment? 8. Do you feel in the last reapportionment that used outside consultants, weighed, and used councils input effectively? 9. Did you find the work session in which the council and the consultants discussed the reapportionment plan to be helpful? 10. Is there anyway in which a consultant could improve the redistricting process? If so, how? 11. During the work session council was asked if there what in the city was most important to protect by keeping it in the same district or what should be put in separate districts. What were your biggest concerns during the redistricting process? 12. What, if any, affects do you see redistricting having on distributive policies in Zanesville (For example, Zanesville distributes repaving by the tonnage divided evenly amongst the 6 wards)?

25