Gotcha. That makes sense. Thanks!
2 Likes
We need a downtown district!!!
8 Likes
Well then hope that we elect a city council that supports a new district being added this fall haha. I go back and forth on this. Currently, we have 3 district representative that represent downtown. If we get one true downtown representative, and all the downtown interests get packed, it could be worse for Downtown interest. In that situation, just the mayor, the two at large, and the downtown representative would have any reason to support downtown from a constituency perspective. There would be 9 people on council if a downtown district was added, which would make it 4-to-5 with a downtown constituency, not enough to pass. Currently, it’s 6-2 with a downtown constituency. I go back and forth on this…
8 Likes
I started thinking about it after I posted that and considered the same outcome. Might not be better after all.
After a while, when you’re the ONLY one voting “no” while everyone else is on board, gotta wonder who he even thinks he’s representing…
1 Like
That’s smart. The gerrymandering was coming from inside the downtown high rise!
1 Like
I find it very odd that Cox would vote in opposition when this seems to strengthen his exurban base in Wakefield and Falls River.
Hence my question above… who does he think he is representing? I truly believe he just votes in opposition just to be the opposition and play the “woe is me, I’m all alone here” victim card
1 Like
He’s not getting re-elected by accident, there’s got to be a constituency for his views somewhere in those areas.
1 Like
What he said his opposition was to Scenario 2 was that it moved 2 majority-minority precincts from District B (his) to District A (Buffkin) and 3 majority-minority precincts from District B (his) to District C (Branch)… thus, making his district have less minority population. However, his district did pick up 2 majority-minority precincts from District C. Shown below is the racial analysis of the previous districts and the newly enacted districts.
Previous:
New:
As you can see, District B went from 59% minority to 53% minority, whereas District A went from 29% minority to 35% minority. His issue is that he believes that with the reduction of minority voters in District B, they won’t be able to elect a minority representative (yes I understand the irony of him being white).
I do believe, although I can’t promise what’s in his head, that he just has to be the voice of the opposition to the council, and even if he’s actually fine with how his district is set up, there are a group of people opposed to this (individuals who spoke last night from the precincts that are being moved from District B to A - I believe primarily from the Brentwood neighborhood) and is representing them.
1 Like
I can believe him being upset about Brentwood being moved, given the neighborhood’s politics; but the other changes are almost certainly to his electoral benefit, so call me a bit skeptical of his sincerity.
1 Like
No kidding! It’s still split in two.
2 Likes
Apparently because some district affected is 55% minorities, changing it in any way is racist. Or so he implies. Let’s be honest, almost no one votes for City Council anyways, and I can’t see how any of this actually matters. It seems like another non-issue David Cox is trying to twist to look controversial, to undermine the current Council. Also, the council has 3 LGBT/Black members, 2 more are also women, and the few white men on there seem pretty liberal. I just don’t see this as some ultra-conservative, racist attempt to suppress voters of color.
5 Likes
Perhaps Cox is trying to use the “accusation is 75% of the game” rule where it doesn’t matter if it’s true or not? it only matters that you say it and get it out in the ether.
2 Likes
Yup - painting himself as the hero over a non-issue.
1 Like
I mean there is legitimately a drop of 6% minority population in his district. He’s not lying that there is an affect on the racial make-up of his district. I 100% do not believe that city staff did this with any racist intent, and the two Black councilors voted for this map… but he is not incorrect on the facts that his district has decreased its share of minority voters, to a point where one could argue that there aren’t enough minority voters to give them a fair chance of electing a representative of their choice.
59% minority voters, I would admit, have a decently better chance of electing a representative of their choice than 53% minority voters. Mainly due to the fact that minority voters turn out at a relatively less rate as white voters, meaning the actual voters in this new district could be even less than 53% minority, or perhaps even majority white.
I do think this is the best map they came up with, for many different reasons. But I don’t want to say that Cox is all wrong here…
2 Likes
INDY managed to hit all of the go-to complaints in their email newsletter today:
Raleigh’s City Council has made a number of undemocratic decisions with limited input from the city’s residents in the past couple of years: there was eliminating the CACs without public notice two years ago; there was moving the city’s municipal elections date in closed session, giving all the council members an additional year in office; and this week, there was a redistricting decision that moves some 55,000 residents living in District B—who are mostly (60 percent) minority, Black, or Hispanic— into the much whiter District A, a move that’s sure to dilute their vote and one that voting residents and groups that represent them emphatically opposed in a public hearing at the council’s meeting on Tuesday…
Council members, too, acknowledged that the redistricting breaks up minority communities, but seemed not care.
At worst, it’s an affront to these residents who want representation on the city council, a repudiation of all of the city’s claimed commitments to racial equity, and a farce if the council wants its claims that it is working toward better citizen engagement following the dissolution of the CACs to be taken seriously.
Raleigh’s city council members are all Democrats. When Republicans do things like this, people get up in arms. Redistricting, and particularly redistricting on the most local level, also just isn’t that interesting to a lot of people, I suppose. The Brentwood and Green Road residents are outraged and upset to be cut out of their districts. But we won’t see any lawsuits making their way up to the state Supreme Court over this—just a bunch of residents now in a district that will likely be represented by a white person beholden to special interests rather than to theirs.
I don’t know how these situations become so distorted. Is it just a desire to criticize and always assume the worst?
1 Like
The hell is that scaremongering nonsense? Even if we assume that this minority constituency has been intentionally broken up (they’re still the majority in it, but whatever) and more likely to be represented by a white person (well, it’s more likely, but still unlikely), what’s with the automatic assumption the new councilmember will be corrupt?
1 Like
INDY’s been peak left-NIMBY as of late, it seems.
10 Likes
Yeah I stopped getting their newsletter awhile ago. They’re just mad at everything now, and have the stupidest arguments why.
7 Likes