Kansas City Council Business Session: Redistricting Commission Presentation and Map Debate - December 9, 2021
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Kansas City Council Business Session: Redistricting Commission Presentation and Map Debate - December 9, 2021
The Kansas City Council held a business session on December 9, 2021, primarily dedicated to receiving the final report and recommendation from the city's redistricting task force. The commission, after a compressed nine-to-thirteen-week process due to COVID-19 delays, presented a proposed map (identified as 8.4.3) which was approved by a supermajority of the commission (6-3). The presentation included detailed explanations of guiding principles, population changes, and the rationale behind the new boundaries, followed by a minority report from commissioners who dissented. Council members then debated the map, with some supporting it and others opposing it, particularly regarding the proposed horizontal split in the Northland along Barry Road. The map is scheduled for a council vote the following week.
Consent Calendar
- Approval of minutes: The council approved the minutes from the business session of December 2, 2021, by voice vote.
Public Comments & Testimony
- The redistricting commission reported receiving over 204 comments through the online chat portal and testimony at multiple public hearings (Mohart Center, Northland Neighborhood Inc. Center, Southeast, Baptist Educational Center, and Greg Kleiss Community Center). The commission noted that input was received from all across the city. Specific statistics: 50+ comments favored a vertical Northland split, while 30+ favored a horizontal split, with 13 of the 17 pro-horizontal comments coming from a single zip code (64151).
- Residents who testified expressed desires for better representation, especially in older neighborhoods, and concerns about economic and racial segregation. Some Northland residents argued that the southern part of the Northland has been neglected in terms of infrastructure and investment.
Discussion Items
- Redistricting Commission Presentation: Chair Stephen E. Smith opened with gratitude and noted the process was guided by equity, compromise, and both qualitative/quantitative data. Commissioner Rucker outlined legal requirements: districts must be roughly equal in population (ideal size ~84,600), compact and contiguous, and comply with the Voting Rights Act. The commission also prioritized increasing Latinx representation on the council (not present for about two decades). Kyle Elliott (City Planning) presented population growth data: Kansas City grew 10.5% since 2011, reaching ~508,000. Current districts ranged from 76,000 to 92,000; the target is ~84,600.
- Commissioner Zamora highlighted the compressed timeline (12 meetings from Sept 8 to Dec 22) and that 41 maps were developed before selecting map 8.4.3. He expressed offense at a statement comparing Barry Road to Troost Avenue, calling it unfair and noting the commission acted with integrity.
- Dr. Koquethia Hill (former councilwoman) emphasized the commission's intentionality, data-rich process, and the difficulty of drawing six districts within a 10% population variance while respecting legal parameters and community priorities. She noted that districts 3, 4, 5, and 6 also disliked their new boundaries but acquiesced for the good of the city. She requested that if the council rejects the map, they consider a charter review.
- Commissioner Victoria Notice explained that the 4th District is the most eclectic, including downtown, the West Side, and parts of the Northland. The district grew by 16%, and the final recommendation has the 4th as the heaviest district. She noted that the economic corridor from downtown to the Plaza has 200,000 jobs and older infrastructure. The challenge of the Northland: the first and second districts both grew and needed to shed population, leading to the horizontal split. The map places the Plaza and UMKC into the 6th District, which now stretches to Martin City.
- Minority Report: Commissioner Rucker presented the minority view (dissenting votes from two of three Northland commissioners). Key objections: 1) The horizontal split will cause the 1st District to violate the 10% rule by 2023 (projected 20% out of compliance by 2026, 34% by 2030); a vertical split would delay that to 2025 (20% out by 2030). 2) School districts (e.g., Hickman Mills) would be split. 3) The horizontal split mirrors the Troost divide, creating socioeconomic and racial segregation. 4) Most pro-horizontal comments came from one zip code (13 of 17). He argued that a vertical configuration maintains diversity and allows council members to use different funding tools (TIF, PIAC, Geobond) across the district.
- Commissioner Reed Day supported the majority map, stating the changes were carefully considered. He noted that the 6th District has never had the Plaza, and that while the Northland change is significant, the map respects natural features and representation. The map achieves 54% African American in District 3, 57% in District 5, and 22% Hispanic in District 4. The population variance is only 3.545%, well under 10%. He argued that poor infrastructure, not poor people, creates poor districts.
- Chair Smith and Dr. Hill refuted comparisons to Troost, emphasizing that Troost's divide resulted from systemic racism and disinvestment, whereas the Barry Road line can be managed through equitable policies. Hill noted that 178,000 people south of 152 Highway currently lack a proximate elected official. She stressed that if the council does not want another Troost, they should approve the horizontal map.
- Council Comments: Councilwoman Hall provided data: since 2015, the 1st and 2nd Districts have invested millions south of Barry Road—$17 million in the second district alone—and argued that claims of neglect are false. She displayed emails: many more favored the vertical map. Councilwoman Lorn said she was offended by remarks from
Meeting Transcript
Welcome to today's business session. Our first item is approval of minutes for business session of December 2nd, 2021. Is there a motion? Second. It's been moved and seconded. All in favor of approving the minutes. Aye. All opposed. The uh motion passes. Um the request of our guests with redistricting will start on that topic since we'll have quite a I think a potentially extensive discussion. I'll ask our redistricting task force, however, you would like to come on up and present. It's okay. All right, good afternoon, everyone. I'll go ahead and get started as Melisa uh gets us all uh technologically uh scheduled. My name is Stephen E. Smith, and I have uh the privilege of being able to chair this redistricting um commission, in addition to serving as the first district at large uh representative. And I'll start off my comments with um really gratitude. Um gratitude to all who have participated, especially our neighbors that have shared their own personal accounts to our neighbors who have shared their um ideas, their dissents, their challenges, and their hopes for this map. So thank um thank you to each of you for trusting us and being a part of and promoting and participating in this process. Um I'd also like to acknowledge that what guided us as a commission in this process really stands on the shoulder of all the work and the advocacy and the commitment that this city has continuously um I guess deepened our commitment to of equity, realizing that different people need different things and wanting to recognize the voices of those who historically have not had their voices honored. And so I really want to um recognize that this is what this work stands upon. I'd also like to acknowledge uh that this uh process has been a process of compromise, uh and it has been driven by both qualitative and quantitative data, much of which will be able to um showcase in the midst of our presentations. Um I'd also um just like to remind us that you know we believe um that this uh map provides an opportunity for the council to work together to evaluate and recognize the value of all parts of our city, that this map should inspire smart and strategic targeting of growth, redevelopment, and stabilization, and we we recognize that it would require um cooperation and collaboration across the city, as it should, as we're one Kansas City. Um we also like to recognize that every district in this reconfiguration has potential for growth and renewal, and that was definitely part of the brain trust as we presented this. And and with that, we recognize that all parts of the city, both urban and suburban, regardless of age, income, race, or resources contribute to the set success of Kansas City, which means that we cannot um overlook uh the voices of those that we historically have not um been able to pay attention to or chose not to pay attention to. So we believe that all deserve representation that enables um those uh contributions to this map. And so with that, I'd like to um recognize and you go ahead and go to the first um slide. I'd like to recognize um who we recognize as part of being the this redistricting team, which has been the engaged public. Thank you to the leaders that have invited the commissioners out to help tell the story and to uh bring um thoughts on the redistricting process. I also like to thank every single commissioner who has dedicated um a lot of time um and brain trust to this. The commissioners met every single week uh for uh for from four to six plus um hours, in addition to all of the work of meeting for um various um community meetings and home associations. Um and then, of course, this work cannot happen without the dutiful work of the city staff, and so thank you again to the city staff. And I'll also like to acknowledge to our council persons that having to represent uh whether it's 85,000 or our total of 58,000 is not easy. So thank you all um for the work that you have been doing that guided this process. So um, with that, we'll invite um Commissioner Rucker to come up. We've been doing our work to make sure that we did demystify this process so that our community members understand what to expect, and so um he'll guide us in our guiding principles. Thank you very much. Thank you all for being here. It's great to see a lot of you, um, or all of you, I should say. Tell us how you really feel. Um so this process is a process. Yeah, I was talking about Dan just. No, so this is a process that our city has to go through every 10 years when we get new census data. It's a process that usually uh we get about nine months to do. And due to the delay in the census data being returned to us due to COVID 19, we had about roughly nine to 13-ish weeks to complete this entire process. And there are a couple of things that guide this process for us. One of them being creating ideal districts, meaning that every every district is roughly the same size, in this instance being about 84,000. There is a 10% rule that allows us to uh that will not allow us to create a district that is larger or smaller than 10% from the largest or smallest district. So they all have to be relatively close in size. Uh another one is the districts have to be compact and contiguous, so they have to be as compact as we can get them, and they cannot start in one place, jump over another district and pick themselves up again.
openpublica.com