Submissions

Public Comments Return to Archived Submissions Page

• Louise
  January 19, 2023
  Dear Commissioners, I believe the proposed map lines do not serve my county well. I live in Columbia County, in the south next to Ancram and Gallatin. The proposal cuts these two towns out of my district and attaches them to a different county, Dutchess. If the commission wants to divide Columbia County, I think it should do so in a north-south split, so that the southern half is joined to AD 106 and the northern half is joined to AD 107. Copake and the surrounding towns are a better fit with northern Dutchess - rather than Rensselaer County, surely. We have much more in common with northern Dutchess. Or keep the county intact. What I don't want to see is bits chopped off or an east-west split, which we've had, but makes no sense. Thank you.
  
• Mark
  January 19, 2023
  I wish to express my disappointment with the Assembly district lines submitted by the NYIRC. As a resident of Columbia County, I am concerned with the decision to separate the towns of Ancram and Gallatin from the rest of the County. I fear these two small towns will not be adequately represented. We’ve experienced this before when the small towns of Stockport and Stuyvesant were included in the old 102nd AD. My neighbors in Stuyvesant have told me they never saw their Assemblyman and felt neglected. I understand that counties may need to be broken up; however, if you feel it necessary to break up Columbia County, I suggest that you not isolate two small towns, but divide the County into a northern component with connections to Albany and the Capital District and a southern component which has connections to Dutchess County and the mid-Hudson Valley. My town of Kinderhook has many state workers and others who commute to Albany and shop and receive their medical and dental care and other professional services in Albany and East Greenbush. The same can be said for residents of Stuyvesant and Chatham and other northern Columbia towns. Finally, I believe the current construction of the 107th district violates the goal of compactness. The 107th stretches from the Dutchess County border north to the Washington County border and from the Massachusetts border west to the Delaware County border. This is a large and sprawling district that includes urban and suburban areas with very rural areas. It is not compact and encompasses many different communities. Thank you Mark Leinung
  
• Kseniya
  January 18, 2023
  View File
  Opposition to the State proposal for Redistricting Roosevelt Island
  
• Kathleen
  January 18, 2023
  Dear Independent Redistricting Committee, The most recent draft of the Assembly district maps is deeply concerning for my home, Guilderland. Historically, Guilderland has been included as a part of an urban/suburban district. With redistricting this year, the town was split, with part being in a district with the city of Albany, and the other a suburban district with Colonie and Niskyuna. The newest map puts Guilderland with rural Montgomery and Schoharie counties, which makes little sense and effectively silences the needs of Guilderland residents. It is imperative that the commission considers communities of interest when drawing these lines. Guilderland has little or no common interests with the small rural towns and villages in Schoharie and Montgomery counties. At the same time, these rural communities are a majority of the district and the member that represents it would have to cater more to the needs and wants of those communities rather than the needs of Guilderland. Guilderland belongs in an Albany County centric district, whether that be with the city of Albany or with other suburban towns like Colonie. We share many services, like the CDTA, and major thoroughfares to get to and from work, like Route 20, Route 155, and Route 5, and it would make sense for our representative to be from this area that understands the needs and issues in our community. Most likely, with the draft map that is being proposed, our representative will be from Schoharie and have little understanding of our town. I urge you to reconsider your draft and bring Guilderland back into a district with either the City of Albany or a district that includes other suburban towns like Colonie. This will ensure that Guilderland has proper representation and remains with its communities of interest. Thank you for your consideration.
  
• David
  January 18, 2023
  Dear Commissioners Goodwin Raab, I write to express my strong opposition to the Commission’s draft plan that would move Sutton Place, Roosevelt Island and other parts of the east side into Assembly District 36 in Queens. The draft proposal clearly violates several New York State Constitutional districting requirements. Specifically, the draft (1) is not contiguous and compact; (2) fails to consider pre-existing political subdivisions and communities of interest; and (3) defies citizens’ reasonable expectations of rational line-drawing. The various communities of interest on both sides of the East River face different issues regarding housing, tax policy, transportation, open space and other matters. The draft proposal would create practical difficulties in the provision of governmental services. Even the location of an Assembly District Office is complicated by this irrational two-borough district plan. I and my neighbors successfully beat back a similar proposal involving City Council districts this past summer. While the law and the process may be different, the essential concepts of good government and rational line-drawing remain the same. I strongly urge you to scrap the draft plan and not create a two-borough district. Respectfully, David A. Hilton 2 Sutton Place South Apt 14F New York, New York 10022
  
• Justine
  January 18, 2023
  View File
  
  
• Ruben
  January 18, 2023
  View File
  
  
• Miriam
  January 18, 2023
  To: Members of the New York State Independent Redistricting Commission Thank you for considering Roosevelt Island’s needs when determining the redistricting map for New York State’s Assembly. I strongly oppose the current proposal which removes Roosevelt Island from Manhattan’s District 76 and places it in Queens District 36. New York State’s redistricting rules require: Districts must consist of contiguous territory and shall be as compact in form as possible. 1. Our Manhattan Island’s contiguous territory is Manhattan, not Queens. 2. The proposed change to our district is sprawling, not compact. The commission must take into account the maintenance of existing districts, pre-existing political subdivisions, including counties, cities, towns, and communities of interest. 1. Roosevelt Island is being severed from long established communities of interest. Our political subdivision is not being respected. 2. The City Charter of New York City recognizes Roosevelt Island as a Manhattan community. The Constitution of New York State specifically provides two State legislators for each district, a Senator and an Assembly Member. Roosevelt Island, a Manhattan community, has a unique form of local governance. We are governed by an unelected, State appointed Public Benefit Corporation, the Roosevelt Island Operating Corp (RIOC). All of our local services are administered by RIOC, not by New York City. The Board of Directors for RIOC is appointed by and serves at the pleasure of the Governor of NY. Because of this unique relationship with the State of NY, in which our residents do not have a voting voice in their local government, it is imperative that we, a Manhattan community, have the combined efforts of both of our Manhattan based representatives, working together on our behalf, to provide us with responsive and fair dealing by RIOC. Best, Miriam Baigorri
  
• Nikola
  January 17, 2023
  To: Members of the New York State Independent Redistricting Commission From: Nikola Durkovic, 625 Main Street, Apt. 738, Roosevelt Island, New York 10044 Thank you for considering Roosevelt Island’s needs when determining the redistricting map for New York State’s Assembly. I strongly oppose the current proposal which removes Roosevelt Island from Manhattan’s District 76 and places it in Queens District 36. New York State’s redistricting rules require: Districts must consist of contiguous territory and shall be as compact in form as possible. Our Manhattan Island’s contiguous territory is Manhattan, not Queens. The proposed change to our district is sprawling, not compact. The commission must take into account the maintenance of existing districts, pre-existing political subdivisions, including counties, cities, towns, and communities of interest. Roosevelt Island is being severed from long established communities of interest. Our political subdivision is not being respected. The City Charter of New York City recognizes Roosevelt Island as a Manhattan community. The Constitution of New York State specifically provides two State legislators for each district, a Senator and an Assembly Member. Roosevelt Island, a Manhattan community, has a unique form of local governance. We are governed by an unelected, State appointed Public Benefit Corporation, the Roosevelt Island Operating Corp (RIOC). All of our local services are administered by RIOC, not by New York City. The Board of Directors for RIOC is appointed by and serves at the pleasure of the Governor of NY. Because of this unique relationship with the State of NY, in which our residents do not have a voting voice in their local government, it is imperative that we, a Manhattan community, have the combined efforts of both of our Manhattan based representatives, working together on our behalf, to provide us with responsive and fair dealing by RIOC. Here is more: Since our inception almost 50 years ago, Roosevelt Islanders have established enduring relationships with many Manhattan based communities of interest. Due to our proximity to the United Nations, we have a large immigrant and non-resident population who retain close ties with the United Nations. We have many UN officials, UN staff, and their families living in our community. The housing quarters for the staff of Cornell Weill Hospital, in District 76, are located on Roosevelt Island. Also, a significant portion of our population work at other nearby Manhattan hospitals in District 76. Many of our residents are actively engaged with religious institutions in Manhattan. Most of our working population commute to Manhattan for employment every workday. Roosevelt Island is located in the Borough of Manhattan. We are an isolated island situated in the middle of the East River. Our transportation links, used daily by our working population and school children, directly connect us to 63rdStreet and 2nd Avenue, the next stop on the F train, and 60thStreet and 2nd Avenue, a 3.5 minute ride by tram. Both stops are in District 76, our most contiguous point of connection point. Many of our children go to public and private schools in Manhattan, not Queens. PS/IS 217, the only public school in our community, is only available on a limited basis to children through the 8th grade. Confirmed by the school’s principal, Mandana Beckman, the school can only accommodate 33 6th, 7th, and 8th graders. Therefore, the vast majority of our public, middle school children attend District 2 schools in Manhattan. The mandated DOE District 2 school, which has the highest volume of Roosevelt Island middle schoolers, is Robert S. Wagner Middle School, located in the 76th AD. In addition, PS/IS 217 can only accommodate 15 of our 3K children, and 36 PreK2 children. The majority of our early learners, who PS/IS 217 cannot accommodate, attend DOE District 2 schools in the 76th AD. Our District 76 Assembly Members have all had long, established relationships with schools in our required school district. We need to retain this invaluable Manhattan “community of interest.” Warm Regards, Nikola Durkovic
  
• Lori
  January 17, 2023
  Dear Commissioners, I am a long time resident of Sutton Place, an architect and I am writing to request that the revised district lines proposed to move Sutton Place into Queens Assembly District 36 not be adopted. I would like to state that the draft proposal violates the following criteria set forth in the New York State Constitutional districting requirements: • Communities of interest are not kept intact, and fails to consider pre-existing political subdivisions • The proposed district is not contiguous or compact, • The proposed district defies citizens’ reasonable expectation of rational line drawing. To elaborate on my concerns, the proposed districts located on opposite sides of the East River do not share common urban character based on zoning or land use, and therefore do not have common needs or interests. The Sutton Place neighborhood is primarily zoned for private midrise residential as are its adjacent Manhattan neighbors. Its streets are defined by an uninterrupted grid, consistent with the rest of the streets in East Midtown Manhattan, forming a cohesive urban fabric and shared municipal needs. Conversely the Queens neighborhoods are zoned largely for industrial use with some varied residential use. Each area of the Queens district has its own unique grid of streets with patches of varied residential density which are interrupted by the open rail yards, expressways, power plants, manufacturing warehouses, and the largest public housing complex in the United States. Sutton Place shares no urban scale, context, or character with the Queen’s areas. The municipal needs are therefore very different for the Queens neighborhoods and the East Side Manhattan neighborhoods because of their very different urban infrastructure. There will not be budgeting, capital investments or development concerns that East Side Manhattan and Queens will share. Sutton Place has a series of neighborhood parks and will be home to the new East Midtown Waterfront Esplanade running along the East River from 54th Street to 61st Street, part of the plan to connect all of Manhattan’s East waterfront for pedestrian and bike use thus furthering the connections of Sutton Place to its neighboring contiguous districts of Beekman Place and Turtle Bay to the South, Yorkville, and the Upper East Side to the North. Sutton Place has clear shared community interests with these neighborhoods regarding the public waterfront completion, continued maintenance, and safety of all the parks. The Queens neighborhoods will not share in any of these interests or the necessary continued financial investment. The proposed sprawling, extreme crossover district will severely limit the provision of municipal services and the political representation of thousands of Manhattan’s residents. I earnestly request that the Commissioners revise their re-districting plan and keep the compatible adjacent East Side Manhattan neighborhoods together within in district lines on one single side of the East River. Thank you for your consideration, Lori Kupfer Lori Kupfer Architect 60 Sutton Place South Suite 3GS New York, NY 10022 917.696.5015
  
• Julien
  January 17, 2023
  View File
  
  
• Emmett
  January 17, 2023
  View File
  I am strongly opposed to the redistricting of Roosevelt Island from Manhattan to Queens.
  
• Anthony
  January 17, 2023
  Dear Chairman Jenkins and Members of the New York Independent Redistricting Commission: As the Superintendent of the Amherst Central School District, I am writing to express my deep concern with the redistricting proposal that would split the Town of Amherst into two Assembly districts. The proposal directly impacts the school district’s ability for fair and effective representation. The proposed boundaries divide Snyder and Eggertsville into two separate Assembly districts placing Smallwood Drive Elementary School in Snyder into a different district than Amherst High School, Amherst Middle School and Windermere Boulevard Elementary School. Our school district has four schools and we need representation as a whole. Under the standards of the New York State Constitution, the Town of Amherst is a contiguous territory and is as compact as practically possible. As a result, we are entitled to have one Assembly member to advocate for our educational needs, as well as our needs as a municipality. By dividing our school district and expanding the boundaries to include rural municipalities and school districts that have different needs will be a detriment to our educational community. I respectfully submit this testimony for the record to the Members of the New York Independent Redistricting Commission regarding the importance of maintaining the Town of Amherst and the Amherst Central School District within a single Assembly district for effective and fair representation. Sincerely, Anthony J. Panella, Superintendent, Amherst Central School District, 55 Kings Highway, Amherst, NY 14226/
  
• Meryl
  January 17, 2023
  View File
  
  
• Florencia
  January 16, 2023
  Our current district, 125, should stay as is. The area's communication and interdependency in commerce, education and employment is very strong. Many people living in Virgil and neighboring areas (which would pass to 126) work in Ithaca or Cortland. It makes no sense to remove this area from district 125.