Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Illinois > Chicago
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-29-2011, 07:31 PM
 
Location: Chicago - Ukrainian Village
367 posts, read 913,258 times
Reputation: 114

Advertisements

I am surprised there is no discussion here on this (yes, I did a search). I am interested to see where I am going to end up. I doubt too much would change but I'm full of anticipation to see how the new map will look. According to the article below I will not have to wait too long.


Facing deadline of sorts, Chicago aldermen rush to craft ward map | WBEZ
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-29-2011, 10:19 PM
 
Location: Chicago
38,707 posts, read 102,722,835 times
Reputation: 29967
I just think it's sad that in the 21st century, governance is still viewed as a racial and ethnic spoils system.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2011, 02:16 AM
 
Location: River North, Chicago, Illinois
4,620 posts, read 8,114,586 times
Reputation: 6321
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drover View Post
I just think it's sad that in the 21st century, governance is still viewed as a racial and ethnic spoils system.
That doesn't bother me nearly as much in theory as the asinine demand by the Black Caucus that they retain the same number of seats despite losing so many constituents. No matter how you view that, if you've done such a bad job representing your own racial constituents that 200,000 have left, somebody best be losing their aldermanic jobs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2011, 08:38 AM
 
28,455 posts, read 84,943,296 times
Reputation: 18725
Default Sorta amazing..

Imagine if the entire population of Aurora got up and left. Or every last person on Peoria AND Waukegan was gone.

That is exactly what has happening INSIDE Chicago yet the alderman want to retain their "authority". Shows whose concerns they put first...

Biggest Cities Illinois, United States

Quote:
Originally Posted by emathias View Post
That doesn't bother me nearly as much in theory as the asinine demand by the Black Caucus that they retain the same number of seats despite losing so many constituents. No matter how you view that, if you've done such a bad job representing your own racial constituents that 200,000 have left, somebody best be losing their aldermanic jobs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2011, 08:43 AM
 
14,802 posts, read 17,556,496 times
Reputation: 9244
Quote:
Originally Posted by chet everett View Post
Imagine if the entire population of Aurora got up and left. Or every last person on Peoria AND Waukegan was gone.

That is exactly what has happening INSIDE Chicago yet the alderman want to retain their "authority". Shows whose concerns they put first...

Biggest Cities Illinois, United States
I imagine that would be strange. 2.7MM didn't just pick up and leave Chicago though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2011, 09:04 AM
 
Location: Nort Seid
5,288 posts, read 8,826,215 times
Reputation: 2459
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drover View Post
I just think it's sad that in the 21st century, governance is still viewed as a racial and ethnic spoils system.
yep - I'd be in favor of 50 wards done with computer modeling to balance geographical size with population density.

or at the very least, a restriction on how many sides these wards can have.

asking for neat squares isn't reasonable, but dear god, a ward shouldn't have more border lines than you can count with your fingers and toes. Could we cap it at maybe 8? If there isn't a geometrical term you can use to describe a proposed ward, I say back to the drawing board.

alookatcook.com sez it all...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2011, 09:06 AM
 
Location: Nort Seid
5,288 posts, read 8,826,215 times
Reputation: 2459
Quote:
Originally Posted by emathias View Post
That doesn't bother me nearly as much in theory as the asinine demand by the Black Caucus that they retain the same number of seats despite losing so many constituents. No matter how you view that, if you've done such a bad job representing your own racial constituents that 200,000 have left, somebody best be losing their aldermanic jobs.
it also ties into the numerous conversations we have on segregation - the idea that only a person of color A can represent people in a district where color A has the majority is an anachronism.

I actually considered posting the proposed map the Black Caucus came up with, but it was so outrageous I figured it was just going to turn into a horribly racially-charged conversation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2011, 02:52 PM
 
1,478 posts, read 2,398,754 times
Reputation: 1602
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chi-town Native View Post
yep - I'd be in favor of 50 wards done with computer modeling to balance geographical size with population density.

or at the very least, a restriction on how many sides these wards can have.

asking for neat squares isn't reasonable, but dear god, a ward shouldn't have more border lines than you can count with your fingers and toes. Could we cap it at maybe 8? If there isn't a geometrical term you can use to describe a proposed ward, I say back to the drawing board.

alookatcook.com sez it all...
It would be easy just to make a rule that wards shouldn't double back, at least not more than a block or two here or there. In theory, it would be nice if you could walk the perimeter of a ward and just turn in one direction and end up back where you started from once you completed the circuit. It doesn't matter if it's 10 turns or 4, just the same direction in a way that generally respects traditional neighborhood and/or community area boundaries.

Grand/River north to Belmont, west to Kedzie, south to Grand, East back to the river. That's basically the gentrification line on the NW side and 3 wards worth of population. If it's not, stretch the northern portion of the western boundary to Kimball. Carve it up into three wards and move to the next area, etc.

Why these stunts are tolerated, I'll never know.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2011, 03:08 PM
 
Location: River North, Chicago, Illinois
4,620 posts, read 8,114,586 times
Reputation: 6321
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chi-town Native View Post
it also ties into the numerous conversations we have on segregation - the idea that only a person of color A can represent people in a district where color A has the majority is an anachronism.

I actually considered posting the proposed map the Black Caucus came up with, but it was so outrageous I figured it was just going to turn into a horribly racially-charged conversation.
I actually would support a complete overhaul of the entire aldermanic system, not just a remap.

1) Remove zoning participation from the alderman. Instead, leave all zoning decisions to the Planning Commission and create an ombudsman's office where citizens can petition to have projects placed under more stringent environmental review. The Commission and Ombudsman can create objective criteria to determine which projects should get additional scrutiny that are consistent, city-wide standards instead of a hodge-podge of aldermanic whims. This should both reduce corruption and improve planning results.

2) Designate 2 at-large Alderman for each of the North Side, West Side and South Side, plus 3 for the Central Area. Delinate the areas by by the Central Area Plan area, the Kennedy and the Stevenson, for a total of 9 regional aldermen. The "Sides" aldermen would be elected by residents in those districts.

3) Reduce the number of population-dependent Aldermanic districts to 15 with one alderman per district. The 15 districts would NOT overlap with the Central Area (this is to make up for the fact that the Central Area gets three regional aldermen).

4) If the mayor doesn't have the authority to grant a tie-breaking vote in Council matters, grant it to him.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-01-2011, 08:37 AM
 
Location: Nort Seid
5,288 posts, read 8,826,215 times
Reputation: 2459
Quote:
Originally Posted by emathias View Post
I actually would support a complete overhaul of the entire aldermanic system, not just a remap.

1) Remove zoning participation from the alderman. Instead, leave all zoning decisions to the Planning Commission and create an ombudsman's office where citizens can petition to have projects placed under more stringent environmental review. The Commission and Ombudsman can create objective criteria to determine which projects should get additional scrutiny that are consistent, city-wide standards instead of a hodge-podge of aldermanic whims. This should both reduce corruption and improve planning results.

2) Designate 2 at-large Alderman for each of the North Side, West Side and South Side, plus 3 for the Central Area. Delinate the areas by by the Central Area Plan area, the Kennedy and the Stevenson, for a total of 9 regional aldermen. The "Sides" aldermen would be elected by residents in those districts.

3) Reduce the number of population-dependent Aldermanic districts to 15 with one alderman per district. The 15 districts would NOT overlap with the Central Area (this is to make up for the fact that the Central Area gets three regional aldermen).

4) If the mayor doesn't have the authority to grant a tie-breaking vote in Council matters, grant it to him.
I think the single biggest problem with the Aldermanic system is that a Mayor has the right to appoint one if one leaves office during a term.

That's insane, and is exactly how Daley brought the Council slowly but surely under his thumb - Alderman tend to feel beholdened to the people who got their feet in the door, that should always be via an election. It's ridiculous to claim we can't have a special election in such cases, this is really where the big clout gets passed around, an old alderman cuts a back-room deal to retire mid-term, and this allows all kinds of monkey business and smoke-filled room wheelings and dealings. This is also how John Stroger, a decent enough guy, brought his halfwitted son into a position totally out of his depth.

Here's the latest:

New ward map could add three Latino seats, cut two black and one white seat - chicagotribune.com
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Illinois > Chicago
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top