Public Mapping Project - Chapter 1
For each meeting of our Redistricting Book Club, we’re posting highlights of the conversation and generalized responses to the questions and prompts for that meeting/chapter.
A free, downloadable digital copy of the Public Mapping Project is available from Cornell University here. You can also download it for free from Amazon for your kindle if you have one. It is also available for purchase for around $5.00 from Amazon and a number of other online stores.
Major consensus & takeaways:
Lexington needs to be clear in defining its intentions with its redistricting process. Does the city want to ensure representation on council from specific communities or geographies? Should it be focused on providing equal representation or equitable representation?
Lexington’s redistricting committee process (as we understand it) leaves too much room open for conflicts of interest from Council Members.
Since it is unclear when the redistricting process will begin, it’s going to be difficult to bring residents into the process now.
Question 1: Is this your first introduction to redistricting? If not, what’s your experience?
Most of our book club participants had some experience with at leas understanding Redistricting, but few had direct experience with the process. This is no surprise as it only comes around once a decade.
Question 2: Do you know how redistricting works in Lexington?
The redistricting process in Lexington largely follows the example of Minneapolis as laid out in the book. Each council member appoints a resident of their choosing from their district to a central redistricting committee. This committee works with the city administration to redraw district boundaries.
Readers also wanted to clearly understand the goal of redistricting in Lexington - are we trying to protect certain groups, etc.
Question 3: What did you find to be the most informative/important part of the first chapter?
Minneapolis’ charter commission that was created to create an independent redistricting process was a point of much conversation. Many asked how we could build a similar structure here - do state laws allow it?
Question 4: Is this a good introduction to redistricting? Why or why not?
Everyone seemed to think that this chapter served as a good introduction to redistricting and gerrymandering, even if it was a little bit academic. Readers also wanted the book to go a bit more into the history of redistricting beyond the brief overview provided.
There was also a lot of discussion around what “communities of interest” meant, and how that could be applied in Lexington.
Question 5: When looking at Arizona and California’s reform model, on pg. 6, can you think of a fifth characteristic? Do you feel like one of the 4 are superfluous?
The consensus seemed to be that each of these four characteristics were important. The only thing that was recommended as a good addition was an “accountability” or review process.