New York State Independent Redistricting Commission

Glenn
February 4, 2023
To the IRC - District 44 AD has been the same for over 30 years. I have never heard of anything different and I have lived here 60 years. If it ain’t broke don’t fix it! It has always been fine the way it is. I also feel that by putting these parts of Windsor Terrace, Kensington and Park Slope into District 51 AD which continues to grow at a rapid pace - that would make our neighborhood underserved. I would hate to loose that nexus of the split and be placed into the tip of the 51st AD and left underserved. I feel the 44 AD district has always been served well by Assemblyman Carroll and his predecessor Jim Brennan - they both always respond attentively to our neighborhood’s concerns. Glenn Tupper Windsor Terrace

John
February 4, 2023
View File

Robert R.
February 3, 2023
View File

Johnny
February 3, 2023
View File
We have always had an excellent working relationship with the Town of Clarkstown. We have shared many municipal services together. Some of these services are Police, Highway, recreation, paramedics, ambulance corps. and fire departments. Together our voice and representation of our shared Assembly person has brought much needed grants and programs to our residents. To undo this would significantly impact our minority population which depends upon these services that have been provided by our Assembly person. If the Commission cares about the representation of a community that is one of the most diverse in the State of New York, you will leave our Assembly District boundary lines intact. Sincerely, JOHNNY ORTIZ Councilman Town of Haverstraw

Grace
February 3, 2023
Dear Commissioners I am the Condominium Board President of The Fort Greene Partnership Homes Condominium ("FGPH") Association which is a series of 13 buildings (total of 98 units) located along Fulton between Gates and Carlton. They were built in the late 1980s as part of the City of New York's plan to encourage middle income subsidized home ownership in Fort Greene. Currently, FGPH has been split between AD 52 and AD 57 under the draft assembly plan. Currently under the draft assembly plan, our 5-15 Gates Avenue complex, located on Fulton and Gates has been divided in AD 57 while the rest of the buildings are in AD 52. We have gone to our electeds before in the past for local issues and it would be difficult for us to have to appeal to two sets of assembly members. I respectfully request that the FGPH be united under one assembly district. Traditionally we have been in AD 57 and have been aligned with the interests and issues of the Clinton Hill/Bed Stuy communities. We request that FGPH be united and placed in AD 57 or in the alternative AD 52. Thank you for the IRC"s consideration of my input,

Jean
February 2, 2023
Thoughts on redistricting: I have been an Ancram resident for 38 years. The NYIRC Proposed 107th AD would create a sprawling district separating us from the Mid Hudson Valley. We are not part of the Capitol Region, an urban/suburban area. We share agricultural economies, schools, businesses, medical providers, the Rail Trail, etc. .We do not want to be cut off from our local communities. The small towns of Ancram and Gallatin will lose their representation. This new redistricting will cause confusion like our last election (4 elections) and might suppress voting. Keep us with the Mid Hudson Valley.

Mark
February 2, 2023
The current proposed map from the IRC violates NY's constitution in splitting my county, Madison with a mere 68,000 residents, between 2 Assembly districts--even if this is better than the 5-way split in effect for the 2022 election. Before last year, Madison County was never split between Assembly districts since the county's founding in 1806. The plain language of NY's Constitution requires a minimum of 1 undivided Assembly district per county. But it makes clear that combining small counties, without splitting them, is a reasonable approach to equalizing Assembly district populations. Since 1846 the NY Constitution has specifically mandated such a combination for the Assembly District that contains Hamilton and Herkimer Counties. The Assembly redistricting map for Upstate that I submitted to the IRC December 2021 (https://districtr.org/plan/87313/89905) follows this approach. My map meshes perfectly, and still does, with the IRC's plans for Assembly districts in the seven large counties from Bronx southward, which I fully support. But to the north, there are 40 much smaller counties with populations under the average Assembly district, i.e. under 1/150 of the state total. My map divides none of these 40. The IRC's current map divides 22 out of the 40. Furthermore, in my map all but one of the 15 larger upstate counties have as many districts contained entirely within them, as they have whole-number multiples of the average district size. The exception is Dutchess County, which has a population a bit more than double the average. Constraints from neighboring counties meant I could give it only one unshared Assembly District of its own in my plan. That's better than the current IRC plan, which gives it none. My map has a maximum population deviation from the average district of 13.3%. This clearly satisfies the 1983 US Supreme Court decision of Brown v. Thomson. That case dealt with Wyoming's state constitution which, like New York's, required at least 1 representative in its lower house from each county of the state. Justice Powell's opinion upheld that giving 1 representative to Wyoming's smallest county, with a population only 40% of the average district, was NOT a violation of the equal-protection clause of the 14th Amendment, because it met a longstanding continuously observed state constitutional requirement, with no evidence of discriminatory intent. My proposed Assembly map, in which the smallest district has 87% of the average district population, is well within Justice Powell's limits. My map proves mathematically that anyone who claims it is Constitutionally impossible to keep all 40 of New York's smallest counties intact within Assembly districts is engaging in a bit of self-serving--albeit bipartisan--deception. Representation by county, city, and borough is not the only rational way to choose Assembly members in a democracy, but it is still the only Constitutional way in NY State. This has been true since the adoption of the first state Constitution in 1777; and even stretching back to the year 1295, when King Edward I began to call commoners to represent local government units in Parliament, even before its splitting into two separate houses. Nevertheless, as a member of the Libertarian Party’s National Platform Committee in 2022, I helped promulgate, and fully support, our Party's plank to explore proportional Party representation in legislatures, as an alternative to representation by geographic district. That way, members of a particular identity group could form their own statewide political party (e.g. the Black Lives Matter Party). Such a party could get representatives into the New York Assembly in proportion to votes that they receive not only within a few black-majority districts, but spread geographically throughout the state. However, the proper route to achieve this alternative kind of representation is by state Constitutional amendment, not by ad hoc unconstitutional gerrymandering by the IRC, to create as many weirdly shaped black-majority districts as possible. But the voters of New York will never trust the Legislature to act without immediate self-interest to Constitutionally provide for such an alternative form of representation, if the current Constitution is not respected by the IRC, the Legislature, and the courts. I myself voted for the 2014 state Constitutional amendment that created the IRC, believing that that this amendment would NOT undo the long-standing mandates to keep small counties intact within legislative districts wherever possible. When it became clear in 2021 that undoing these mandates was indeed the intent of many in the Legislature, I voted a firm “No” on that year’s proposed Constitutional amendment pertaining to redistricting, and lobbied my friends hard to help vote it down. In summary, if the IRC and the NY Courts want to leave a dialog open with voters for Constitutional reform in the future, it is crucial that they respect the current NY Constitution to the greatest extent possible.

Diana
February 2, 2023
I am writing to protest the proposed splitting of AD50 into two. I live on the Eastern side of Greenpoint and would be split off from my community of interest - every day I cross McGuiness Boulevard to take my kids to school, to grocery shop, to meet with friends, to go to the library. The same goes for all of my neighbors. We do not form a community of interest with Queens as the residential part of Queens is not accessible by foot from where we live - you really need a car (or you need to take a train). Please do not split us up. Thank you.

sean
February 2, 2023
The proposal of the Independent Redistricting Commission’s proposed map of the 52nd Assembly District, if enacted, would place much of Carroll Gardens in the 44th AD. Besides chopping up Carroll Gardens, it divides commercial corridors, severs the north side of President Street from the rest of the historic district (...and other things). This proposal would essentially divide the community of Carroll Gardens/Cobble Hill in Brooklyn between two Assembly Members. Looking at a map, these neighborhoods might not seem isolated, but living here it absolutely is. The community is bounded by NY Harbour to the west, the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway to the south, the Gowanus Canal to the East and Atlantic Avenue to the north. Carroll Gardens/Cobble Hill is served by a single subway line and very limited bus service, and most residents do not own cars. But that's okay, because we have everything we need right here. Chopping-up Carroll Gardens as proposed would double the work for everyone (state representatives, city representatives, businesses and residents) and as such serves to undermine our representation. -- Small commercial corridors should be represented by a single Assembly Member. Court and Smith Streets should be unified to support each other, not divided. -- A single Historic District should be represented by a single Assembly Member. -- Isolated, well-defined and cohesive communities such as Carroll Gardens should be represented by a single Assembly Member. As a resident of Carroll Gardens for many years, I ask you to please reconsider the proposal.

GERALD
February 1, 2023
View File
Redistricting Commission Testimony, 2/1/23 Thank you for the opportunity to comment. I am Gerald Delaney, Town Councilman in the Clinton County Town of Saranac. Also, the Executive Director of the Adirondack Park Local Government Review Board. I had planned to speak in person, as that gives one a chance for eye contact and humanize the speakers and the Commissioners. The process of getting signed up was far from perfect. The website would not allow me to sign up. I took the step to email one of the listed Employees and it was followed up by another employee. After a couple of emails, and the dead line approaching staff signed me up. Actually, this entire process seems a little disenfranchising for many of us in Northern New York. We really only had 2 choices for public hearing participation. Either a 2.5-hour drive to Albany, or a 4.5-hour drive to Syracuse. Is the message? If you do not live on or near the I 90 Corridor, in one of New York’s larger cities, or the New York City area or Westchester area, access to these hearings is less important? Then the winter storm came, better judgement told me to not try and drive over 5 hours during the peak of the storm. As a 9 to 10 hour round trip seems particularly burdensome, I am choosing to no longer plan in person testimony. I was offered a zoom link, after watching the Buffalo Hearing, where one zoom participant audio was broken up, zoom has its limits, and is far from perfect. The idea of testifying and technology breaking down is not appealing. As the Drama unfolded last year over redistricting, I looked at the assembly maps prior to your work. The gerrymandering was head scratching worthy. The Congressional and Senate maps were easy to figure out why there was a court challenge. However, the Assembly maps seemed to make sense. They mostly followed County lines. They were compact for Adirondack districts standards. You could drive 2 hours and get from one corner to another. Counties like St Lawrence that previously had 4 Assembly members was reduced to 2 Assembly members. Adirondack Counties are like a Town in larger urban areas. It is important to the Leaders and residents of Counties that they are represented by the same Assembly member. We have Counties that historically never been split, and Counties where people are never sure who represents them due to constantly shifting lines. Let us take the 115. Currently, it has all of Franklin and Clinton Counties, it also has for the first time all of the Village of Saranac Lake. The Village is in 3 Towns and 2 Counties. Traditionally that Village had 2 Assembly members. It is clearly a community of Interest. It is It is Economically tied with Tupper Lake and Lake Placid. Which for the first time in my knowledge is all in the same Assembly district. You have been hearing this already, many are happy with the current districts. What do I see wrong with your 115? It is no longer compact. You removed the northwest corner of Franklin County; you replaced it with the rest of Essex County and 2 Towns in Hamilton County. Your map reduces constituents’ ability to have access to their Assembly member. Instead of a roughly 2-hour drive from the furthest points of the district. With your suggested map, that drive will be around 3 hours. The added drive time will reduce the Events the Assembly member can attend, thus reduce access. The fact that the events will be 2 Counties away, it is unlikely many constituents would know about events where they could interact with their Assembly member. Historically the people of the Adirondacks feel marginalized in the political process due to low population. I ask you to not further marginalize the people of the Adirondacks with Assembly Districts that are not as compact as Possible. • 3rd bullet reads Districts must consist of contiguous territory and shall be as compact in form as practicable; • 5th bullet reads The maintenance of existing districts, pre-existing political subdivisions, including counties, cities, towns, and communities of interest. My ask of you? Emulate the current districts as much as possible. If I were to draw a map of the 115th as a suggestion to the Commission, it would look like the current district. It would be all of Clinton and Franklin Counties. It splits Essex, the Towns of St. Armand, North Elba, Wilmington, and Keene. The tri Lakes region, Tupper Lake, Saranac Lake, Lake placid, and the Essex Counties Towns north of the high peaks are intertwined as Communities of interest and economically. Many in the Adirondacks feel the same way about their Assembly districts. Thank you for your work on a thankless but important job.

Daniel
February 1, 2023
View File
Rabbi Daniel Reiser Temple Beth Shalom 740 N Broadway Hastings-on-Hudson, NY 10706 Dear members of the Independent Redistricting Commission, My name is Daniel Reiser, and I am a Rabbi at Temple Beth Shalom (constituting 400 households) in Hastings-on-Hudson, a village in the Town of Greenburgh. I am writing to the Commission regarding the decision to include part of Yonkers in Assembly District 92 in both the 2022 map and the IRC’s draft map. It is my understanding that due to population growth, the Commission must include part of Yonkers in an additional Assembly District. If this is necessary, I would advocate for keeping part of Yonkers south of Hastings in Assembly District 92. South Hastings and Northwest Yonkers have a long, connected history — that is why the Warburton Avenue Bridge was built in the 1890s, and North Broadway and Warburton Avenue continue to be primary thoroughfares in both communities. Today, the Greystone section of Northwest Yonkers is a popular destination for Hastings empty nesters who downsize, and folks from Yonkers often go to downtown Hastings to shop, dine, visit art galleries, and meet with old friends. In my own experience, residents from both Hastings and Yonkers attend services at Temple Beth Shalom. In fact, our very own synagogue president, along with many of the regulars in our adult educational offerings, live in North Yonkers (despite the synagogue’s being located in Hastings)! The Hudson River communities in Greenburgh share civic organizations with the City of Yonkers. Along with villages further north, these communities are often referred to jointly as the Rivertowns. For example, the League of Women Voters of the Rivertowns serves the City of Yonkers in addition to Tarrytown, Irvington, Dobbs Ferry, Ardsley, and Hastings-on-Hudson, and the Hudson River Audubon Society also draws membership from Yonkers in addition to Hastings, Dobbs Ferry, Ardsley, and Irvington. These communities also have shared State policy concerns. The Hudson Line on the Metro North Railroad, which relies on State funding, passes through both Yonkers and the Rivertowns, with four stations in Yonkers and four stations in the villages in Greenburgh. In addition, the New York State owned Saw Mill River Parkway, which passes through the center of the City of Yonkers, is used by residents in the Rivertowns and marks the eastern border of Hastings, Dobbs Ferry, and Irvington. The transportation infrastructure shared by these communities is vital to the residents of both Yonkers and the villages in Greenburgh. The communities along the Hudson River in Greenburgh, particularly the Village of Hastings-on-Hudson, share several connections and interests with the City of Yonkers. If the Commission must include a section of Yonkers in a neighboring Assembly District, it would make the most sense to keep part of Northwest Yonkers bordering Hastings in Assembly District 92. Sincerely -- Daniel Reiser

Itamar
February 1, 2023
View File
This map stays within the commission's AD 96, AD 97 and AD 98's lines and simply moves the parts of the Town of Haverstraw from AD 96 to AD 98. In exchange, it moves the parts of Clarkstown which are within AD 98 to AD 96, and moves parts of Ramapo from AD 98 to AD 97, keeping the districts within the the Town boundaries, with the exception of keeping the municipal boundaries of the Village of Pomona and Village of Spring Valley intact, within AD 97. This keeps the community of interest in Ramapo together and the community of interest in Orangetown and Clarkstown together.

Itamar
February 1, 2023
View File
This map stays within the commission's AD 96, AD 97 and AD 98's lines and simply moves the parts of the Town of Haverstraw from AD 96 to AD 98. In exchange, it moves the parts of Clarkstown which are within AD 98 to AD 96, and moves parts of Ramapo from AD 98 to AD 97, keeping the districts within the the Town boundaries, with the exception of keeping the municipal boundaries of the Village of Pomona intact, within AD 97. This keeps the community of interest in Ramapo together and the community of interest in Orangetown and Clarkstown together.

Michael
February 1, 2023
Dear New York State Independent Redistricting Commission, The Sweet Home Central School District is located in the Town of Amherst and the Town of Tonawanda. We are proud of our strong relationship with both towns and thankful for the work of our government officials on the local and state level that fight for the best interest of our students. As our mission states, we are one community, and we work diligently to partner with all key stakeholders to advance the interest of our students, and make our community stronger. A key component of our strong community is the partnerships we have with our local municipalities, government officials, law enforcement agencies, and especially our local representation in Albany. Our local State Senators and Legislators have worked side-by-side with Sweet Home to provide additional opportunities for children. Whether fighting for more aid to create an equitable experience for all of our students, or advocating for legislation that provides fairness and opportunity for all, our state representatives understand the importance of our mission and our purpose to build a better society. Through the toughest of times during the pandemic, to refocusing education to help produce a 21st century workforce, our legislative representatives have been attentive to our needs, willing to listen, and ready to take action if necessary in the best interest of our school community. At Sweet Home, we are concerned over proposed redistricting that would severely impact our representation in Albany. We enjoy a strong partnership with the Town of Amherst and are happy that one representative covers the issues that faces our town. Redistricting would split the town, causing multiple representatives to compete and debate for what might be in the best interest of District residents. We also believe the new lines causes an imbalance on the West side of our school District, where only one legislator would now serve the vast and diverse socio-economic needs of our families. Since we are united as a community, we see no need to create divisions these new legislative districts may cause. Sweet Home is in favor of leaving the legislative lines as they currently stand. We believe they represent our community as one, and they best serve the interests of our schools and the children we serve. We thank you for your time and for this opportunity to share our thoughts. Sincerely, Marianne Jasen, President of the Sweet Home Board of Education Scott Johnson, Sweet Home Board Member Josh Feldmann, Sweet Home Board Member Michael V. Ginestre -- Superintendent of Schools

Submissions

Public Comments Return to Archived Submissions Page