By Jason Gerson (Georgetown 2014)
Last night’s ANC 2E was a marquee night in local politics. The evening began smoothly enough, with the standard public safety update delivered, an update given regarding Hurricane Irene-related debris on sidewalks, and an announcement of changes to the implementation of a local roads project.
And after local businesses announced their upcoming fashion event, a few feet did shuffle out of the door. But then things got interesting.
With a significant plurality of student voices present, Chairman Lewis moved onto the ANC 2E Redistricting portion of the agenda. Chairman Lewis said that the entire Ward 2 process was chaired by ANC 2E member Tom Birch and that 16 members had been involved in the redistricting panel. Of those 16, 11 were what Lewis called “long-term residents” while 5 were students, apparently a different type of resident. Lewis said that the committee met only twice, and while they unanimously agreed to maintaining the external borders of the ANC and to adding an additional commissioner to ANC 2E, the board, in a 10-6 vote passed the plan Chairman Lewis presented.
Chairman Lewis stated that their instructions were to create a district for roughly every 2,000 residents and as such all members of the committee agreed to add one district. According to Chairman Lewis, with 5,000 students on-campus present, the committee had the choice to “round down” student representation on the ANC to 2 commissioners or “round up” to 3. They chose the former.
Though he conceded that these districts were not close to the 2,000 resident-per-district guideline, he argued that, in his interpretation of D.C. Statute, the panel was permitted to prioritize keeping students in separate districts from residents over drawing each district to have exactly or nearly 2,000 residents.
He asked for a show of hands for those opposed to the plan, and those in favor. Students began to look at one another quizzically wondering what this might mean, and the Treasurer of the Graduate Student Association, Paul Musgrave, voiced his concern at this question aloud. When Chairman Lewis stated that he would apportion speaking time to each side relative to the number of hands raised for each position, Musgrave and Chairman Lewis engaged in a prolonged back-and-forth, in which the Musgrave questioned how such a practice could occur when it had not been put on the agenda.
Chairman Lewis, in a divided vote among the commissioners, determined to allot each side of this issue 10 minutes, and two representatives of each side chose to speak for 5 of those ten minutes. Commissioner Jake Sticka, in opposition to this move, stated that on such a divisive and consequential matter more voices should be included. Chairman Lewis, with support from a majority of the ANC, proceeded with his stated plan, however.
GUSA President Mike Meaney spoke first, and chose to emphasize the lack of fairness in this proposed redistricting map. President Meaney spoke at length about his convictions that such a map were statutorily incompatible with the D.C. Bill of Rights, which bans discrimination on the basis of matriculation status. Further, President Meaney spoke to the significant time that student-residents spend in DC as well as the significant sales and other taxes they pay to the D.C. government in residing here for much of the year.
Musgrave spoke next, and he proceeded to wonder aloud about the logic Chairman Lewis offered. If community cohesion means ensuring adult-neighbors don’t have to be represented by students, why are graduate students, who will likely be living in these non-student districts, be forced to be represented by non-student commissioners? Perhaps his most compelling moment was his attempt to elevate competitive districts as something cherished as a key democratic value, as opposed to a nuisance to sidestep.
As discouraging as the imposed format was, both Musgrave and Meaney received loud applause from not just students, but adults as well. Following their statements, representatives from the Burlieth and Hillandale Citizens Associations read short, prepared statements on their support for the co-chair’s redistricting plan.
Afterward, individuals were able to speak. Students focused on their desire to be able to be engaged with the community. One student also spoke about how Councilmember Mendelson had stated he opposed this plan.
Individuals in support of the co-chair’s plan also spoke. Ed Russel, a Georgetown resident since 1952, angered many when he said that “I think that homeowners do have an entitlement to more rights.” Another individual speaking for the co-chair’s plan said that student residents were “transitional,” underscoring the attitude that many in the community have toward students.
Chairman Lewis capped this proportion of the meeting by saying that the committee might reconsider their position if a majority of the committee’s members supported doing so. If they did not, the plan would be forwarded to the City Council as is.
If you are concerned about the current plan, please contact Jack Evans (jackevans@dccouncil.us, 202-724-8058) or Michael Brown (mbrown@dccouncil.us, 202-724-8105), the co-chairs of the redistricting committee on the Council.
Following this part of the meeting, ANC 2E continued with a very long agenda. Of greatest interest to students was a proposal by MRP Realty to add a seasonal ice skating rink to the Washington Harbour development. Arthur Cotton Moore, the original architect of the project, spoke before the ANC about his opposition to several elements of the re-design (although he did support the ice skating rink). The difference in style between MRP and ACM could not have been more clear.
The ANC ultimately praised MRP for trying to update the area, but did not take a firm position on a number of the elements, including the ice skating rink.
