City of Hudson's weighed voting system under scrutiny

[jimrtex]

The license is free. But after I download it, the pro features don't work, because there is no license box to enter the license code - gepfree.

I wanted to draw ward lines, where their existing percentage of the total Hudson population and the percentage of land area that they take are equal.

Your map shoves the 2nd ward around, and is erose. As I said, least change that is also practicable change.

Is there a sign-in in the upper right corner?

I'd use QGIS to do what you are attempting to do.

My Ward 2 doesn't crack an apartment complex with a large minority population. If you wanted to do a walkabout, following the ward boundaries you could do it on my map. On yours, you have to go through a house, swim across a pond, and then go through a window in a nursing home.

If you want to maintain the primeval wards, divide Ward 5 on State Street and the RR tracks, and continue to use weighted voting.

Ward 1: 593
Ward 2: 1363
Ward 3: 1076
Ward 4: 815
Ward 5: 1517
Ward 6: 1037

The eastern portion of the city is not denied proper representation on committees, and you eliminate the problem of two aldermen exercising a large portion of the vote.

[Torie]

I used google maps that has an area utility, although it does not depict complete city boundaries alas.

[jimrtex]

I used google maps that has an area utility, although it does not depict complete city boundaries alas.

This illustrates that the reason for the 5th Ward having a large population is that more of its area is inhabitated.

Ward 1: South Bay
Ward 2: North Bay
Ward 3: Prison and Cemeteries.
Ward 4: Firemen's Home.
Ward 5: Underhill and Oakdale ponds.

On the true least change map, Ward 6 is the smallest.

Have you ever located the Redistricting Liaison for New York?

[Torie]

I have not dealt with the census block issue yet. I do have somebody to email though after having spoke with him.

[jimrtex]

You might want to do something like this.

Google Sheets - Hudson Streets

[jimrtex]

What if the boundary between wards 4 and 5 was shifted to 6th Street; between wards 2 and 4 to 4th  Street; and ward 1 and 3 to 5th Street; in addition the Columbia triangle was moved to 3rd ward. The result is that board of elections doesn't have to change its mistakes.

Ward 1: 888
Ward 2: 1557
Ward 3: 846
Ward 4: 1489
Ward 5: 1621

Reduce wards 1 and 3 to one alderman each, and sharing a supervisor.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I realize this would render all this mapmaking moot, but has any thout been given to merging Greenport back into Hudson?  If nothing else, it'll reduce the number of Greenprts in New York.

[jimrtex]

I realize this would render all this mapmaking moot, but has any thout been given to merging Greenport back into Hudson?  If nothing else, it'll reduce the number of Greenprts in New York.

Vaguely. But there is a cultural mismatch (suburbs v city); and also political (towns have a 3-member governing board, with the supervisor acting as an executive), Hudson is a city, which is actually quite rare in New York, and overgoverned with a large common council, and lots of boards; and perhaps financial (higher taxes in Hudson).

The underlying concern about the Ward 5 population being so much larger is only partially about two alderman having almost 40% of the vote. Much of Ward 5 is more like Greenport, and they dominate the portions of the ward that are in the gridded part of the city. If they merged, then you would have more areas like Ward 5. Greenport has about 4000 people, and Hudson 6400, so Greenport and Ward 5 would be politically dominant.

If there were a merger, a more logical solution might be to create a Town of Hudson, and then let the central part of Hudson form a village. In New York, counties, towns, and cities, are creations of the legislature; while villages can be formed by citizen initiative, and exist concurrently with towns (more like cities in most parts of the country). But Hudson would never go for that.

Because of the Greenport on Long Island, the Town of Greenport has Hudson street addresses.

The school district does cover both Hudson and Greenport, and parts of some other towns. In 1877, Columbia County had 180 school districts, most operating one room schools. Even Hudson had multiple school districts. Consolidation has reduced the county to seven districts. While the Hudson district is named Hudson City Schools, there is no relationship between the city and school district. The school buildings are fairly new, and out on Harry Howard where they are as convenient to Greenport as downtown Hudson.

[Torie]

We had a dry run of our campaign materials before about 30 trusted Hudsonions, and curiously enough, a lot of intelligent people were concerned about the geographic size differentials of the proposed wards. I guess they are concerned about the size differential between the CD in Alaska, and the one based in San Francisco. So gorgeous colorized maps are out (they are deemed to emphasize too much area size, rather than population numbers), with the near equal population figures writ large, and the ward number references de-emphased. So we have the maps below, which if given a "go" by the campaign committee, will be pasted together and laminated, with the proposed wards map on one side, and the least change map on the other side, to show voters when going door to door, or at tables, as we collect signatures.

We have a "soft launch" of the campaign on June 14, and a press conference on June 15, when we remove the curtain of confidentiality  and go public. We have plans afoot to try to get some statewide and national press attention. Getting a law passed by a voter petition getting a referendum on the ballot, and then passing it, will be a first in the state of New York, for the only city in the nation with a weighted voting system (but hopefully not after November). As usual, Hudson is at the cutting edge!

It's kind of a weird feeling realizing that the text of the petition that I pounded out, has the potential to actually have the force and effect of law. I had partner Dan read me the legal descriptions word for word, while I followed the map, and yes, I found an error. I skipped on block connection involving the run of the ward line from Green and Fairview to the city boundary. Ouch!

I also have the voter lists color and font style coded by propensity to vote, in two sets, one set organized alphabetically, and the other by first wards, and then street addresses, for use going door to door. It seems that probably a third or so of the names on the list are stale. The two sets, together wit the petition, and instructions that I have prepared, including talking points, voter registration forms, and  sheet to fill out the names of new residents, and of voters who have changed address in Hudson, will all be included in a pressboard folder, along with the laminated maps, for the petition carriers. One chap who was at the private meeting is a professional graphic designer, and well known artist, who is going to play with the maps, to use in other materials, to try to make them even more wonderful, and persuasive. In little Hudson, we have rounded up media experts, graphic artists, marketing moguls, you name it. It's great to meet new people as this all unfolds.

So, I have been very busy. But it's happening! It's really happening. And we aim to win. We have videos, door hangers, buttons (the design of which is still under discussion), banners, one of which will be huge and in the front yard of a residence on Worth Ave just as you enter the city, a website, with a money raising feature, a state registered campaign committee that I set up (Fair Vote 2016), and there is even talk of running ads on cable TV. This will be like no campaign that Hudson has ever seen before.

Oh yes, I signed myself up to work the 2nd and 4th wards. By the time I will done, I will have met most of the voters in those wards, and signed up a lot of new voters. Now why in the world would I pick those two wards I wonder?

In my spare time, I am trying to reform the ZBA. That is a work in progress. And then there is rewriting the zoning code on my to do list. And oh yes, trying to push the Hudson bed tax through the state legislature. At least bills are now pending in both houses, after I pushed our legislators to get moving on that, or well, face my displeasure. Better to move, then listening to me on the phone I guess they finally decided. I don't blame them!.

The moral of the story? A high energy relatively unemployed lawyer with too much time on his hands, is a very dangerous thing!  I wonder if this would have all happened if I never had discovered the Leips Atlas website. One will never know I guess. But getting to love census blocks is an acquired taste I think, sort of like learning to love to eat seaweed.

[jimrtex]

We had a dry run of our campaign materials before about 30 trusted Hudsonions, and curiously enough, a lot of intelligent people were concerned about the geographic size differentials of the proposed wards. I guess they are concerned about the size differential between the CD in Alaska, and the one based in San Francisco. So gorgeous colorized maps are out (they are deemed to emphasize too much area size, rather than population numbers), with the near equal population figures writ large, and the ward number references de-emphased. So we have the maps below, which if given a "go" by the campaign committee, will be pasted together and laminated, with the proposed wards map on one side, and the least change map on the other side, to show voters when going door to door, or at tables, as we collect signatures.

We have a "soft launch" of the campaign on June 14, and a press conference on June 15, when we remove the curtain of confidentiality  and go public. We have plans afoot to try to get some statewide and national press attention. Getting a law passed by a voter petition getting a referendum on the ballot, and then passing it, will be a first in the state of New York, for the only city in the nation with a weighted voting system (but hopefully not after November). As usual, Hudson is at the cutting edge!

It's kind of a weird feeling realizing that the text of the petition that I pounded out, has the potential to actually have the force and effect of law. I had partner Dan read me the legal descriptions word for word, while I followed the map, and yes, I found an error. I skipped on block connection involving the run of the ward line from Green and Fairview to the city boundary. Ouch!

I also have the voter lists color and font style coded by propensity to vote, in two sets, one set organized alphabetically, and the other by first wards, and then street addresses, for use going door to door. It seems that probably a third or so of the names on the list are stale. The two sets, together wit the petition, and instructions that I have prepared, including talking points, voter registration forms, and  sheet to fill out the names of new residents, and of voters who have changed address in Hudson, will all be included in a pressboard folder, along with the laminated maps, for the petition carriers. One chap who was at the private meeting is a professional graphic designer, and well known artist, who is going to play with the maps, to use in other materials, to try to make them even more wonderful, and persuasive. In little Hudson, we have rounded up media experts, graphic artists, marketing moguls, you name it. It's great to meet new people as this all unfolds.

So, I have been very busy. But it's happening! It's really happening. And we aim to win. We have videos, door hangers, buttons (the design of which is still under discussion), banners, one of which will be huge and in the front yard of a residence on Worth Ave just as you enter the city, a website, with a money raising feature, a state registered campaign committee that I set up (Fair Vote 2016), and there is even talk of running ads on cable TV. This will be like no campaign that Hudson has ever seen before.

Oh yes, I signed myself up to work the 2nd and 4th wards. By the time I will done, I will have met most of the voters in those wards, and signed up a lot of new voters. Now why in the world would I pick those two wards I wonder?

In my spare time, I am trying to reform the ZBA. That is a work in progress. And then there is rewriting the zoning code on my to do list. And oh yes, trying to push the Hudson bed tax through the state legislature. At least bills are now pending in both houses, after I pushed our legislators to get moving on that, or well, face my displeasure. Better to move, then listening to me on the phone I guess they finally decided. I don't blame them!.

The moral of the story? A high energy relatively unemployed lawyer with too much time on his hands, is a very dangerous thing!  I wonder if this would have all happened if I never had discovered the Leips Atlas website. One will never know I guess. But getting to love census blocks is an acquired taste I think, sort of like learning to love to eat seaweed.

Does your voter list include the prospective ward numbers? Which ward numbers are you using, those used by the CBOE, or those in the charter?

Does your proposed charter amendment address uses of wards for purposes other than election of aldermen?

I would describe the boundary between Wards 5 and 6 as going from Green Street and Fairview Avenue to Fairview Avenue and Graham Avenue, and then following the city limits.

Your map is particularly inaccurate with regard to the boundary along Fairview Avenue north of Oakwood Boulevard. The two residences facing Fairview Avenue north of Oakwood Boulevard are in the city of Hudson, and the city charter clearly specifies a straight line from Fairview Avenue to the original city limits.

The green cross-hatched line is misplaced. The current ward boundary crosses Public Square from Warren Street and 7th Street to Columbia Street and Park Place. It then follows Columbia Street to Columbia Turnpike. You have drawn it from Warren and 7th Street to somewhere Columbia Street and Green Street.

My understanding is that an initiative local law is subject to all the legal requirements that such a measure passed by the Common Council would need to meet. With regard to a redistricting measure this would require an accurate map and an attachment of any estimates used. Does your measure include a legally accurate map (your posters do not correctly show the correct city limits) and a detailed explanation of any estimates used.

Shouldn't voters be voting in their correct wards, before they approve a change to those wards?

The County Board of Elections disregards the current ward boundaries, what makes you think they will follow any changes passed by the city?

A House Divided



The Common Council spent $4000 to survey the ward boundary that runs through a house at 500 Clinton Street. It is unknown whether any inquiries were made as to where the residents spent most of their time, in the kitchen, the living room, the bedroom? And what if they get their election news in the living room, fill out an absentee ballot at the kitchen table, and lie awake at night while pondering who they should vote for alderman or supervisor? Which ward do they vote in?

In 1885, when Ward 4 was divided, the Firemen's Home did not exist. Only a couple of farms existed along the old road to Stottville and Stockport (now Harry Howard Avenue). There were just a couple of houses on Clinton Street, and Prospect Street and Washington Street were just being developed.

The 4th Ward went from 3rd Street to the eastern city limits, north of Warren Street. It was split in half - population wise at 5th Street. The line drawn to the northern city limits was a legal fiction, sort of like when New York, Pennsylvania, and Virginia laid claim to the Pacific Coast. North of State Street would have been considered as being on the outskirts.

The boundary between the 4th and 5th wards made sense then. 131 years later, it is insane to maintain that boundary, particularly when one is devising new boundaries that will likely be changed every 10 years. The County Board of Elections messed up that boundary. The Common Council messed up the voting weights because of that boundary. What does least change mean under those circumstances? Hudson to remain screwed up?

Will the Board of Supervisors adjust the voting weights? They haven't adjusted the voting weights based on the current erroneous population.

If you moved two people from Hudson Terrace Building 8 to Ward 1; 8 people on the north side of State Street west of N 3rd Street to Ward 4; 13 people on Harry Howard north of Underhill Pond to Ward 5; and 10 people east of Dodge Street between State Street and Rope Alley to Ward 4, the 5 wards would have identical populations (+ or -1).

[Torie]

Does your voter list include the prospective ward numbers? Which ward numbers are you using, those used by the CBOE, or those in the charter?

Those used by the CBOE of course. For a city wide election, it does not matter.I have the names organized by ward solely for door to door election workers and petition signature gatherers.  

Does your proposed charter amendment address uses of wards for purposes other than election of aldermen?

It changes the ward lines, and changes the votes needed on the common council to pass stuff, and other less important, and CYI, hazarai. Functionally it also changes the supervisor lines, which piggy back in the charter off the ward lines.

I would describe the boundary between Wards 5 and 6 as going from Green Street and Fairview Avenue to Fairview Avenue and Graham Avenue, and then following the city limits.

The city boundary as described in the charter says that it hews to the northern side of Farmers' Turnpike, aka Fairview Avenue. So when the city boundary crosses the center line of Fairview Avenue to the "northern" side, that is the intersection point of the jut from Green St and Fairview to the city boundary. I missed this leg in my prior legal description by the way and fixed that (see below). Graham avenue need not apply. You disagree? If you do, make your case, and well, today. The hard deadline for finalization is tomorrow AM.

Corrected legal description:

... and thence along the center line of Green Street in an easterly and then southeasterly direction to the center line of Fairview Avenue, and thence along the center line of Fairview Avenue in a northeasterly direction to where the center line of Fairview Avenue intersects the easterly bounds of the City, and thence along the easterly bounds of the City in a northerly direction to the place of beginning, shall be the Fifth Ward.



Your map is particularly inaccurate with regard to the boundary along Fairview Avenue north of Oakwood Boulevard. The two residences facing Fairview Avenue north of Oakwood Boulevard are in the city of Hudson, and the city charter clearly specifies a straight line from Fairview Avenue to the original city limits.

I don't really care if the city boundary is accurate. The map is not even a part of the proposed statute. Only the legal description is. The lines I used are what is on a city map, no doubt not perfect. Very little in the City with legal implications is perfect, and much a total cf. That is one reason that I find I have so much to do, honey!

The green cross-hatched line is misplaced. The current ward boundary crosses Public Square from Warren Street and 7th Street to Columbia Street and Park Place. It then follows Columbia Street to Columbia Turnpike. You have drawn it from Warren and 7th Street to somewhere Columbia Street and Green Street.

Show me the correct line and I will ponder how much the error is. The least change map is just intended to give an idea of the changes entailed. It is not a legal document.

My understanding is that an initiative local law is subject to all the legal requirements that such a measure passed by the Common Council would need to meet. With regard to a redistricting measure this would require an accurate map and an attachment of any estimates used. Does your measure include a legally accurate map (your posters do not correctly show the correct city limits) and a detailed explanation of any estimates used.

No. See above. A map is not a legal requirement. Only a legal description is.

Shouldn't voters be voting in their correct wards, before they approve a change to those wards?

No, it is a City wide initiative.

The County Board of Elections disregards the current ward boundaries, what makes you think they will follow any changes passed by the city?

That is why God created courts and lawsuits dear. We may have one to get this puppy on the ballot. The Pub BOE dude in Columbia finds following the law secondary to the caring and feeding of his pit bosses. Suing the SOB if need be is penciled into my time line. I will particularly enjoy suing him, because he is a cute gay man, and I enjoy his presence in that sense. He has a toy dog name "Kimmie" which he carries everywhere with him.

[jimrtex]

Does your proposed charter amendment address uses of wards for purposes other than election of aldermen?

It changes the ward lines, and changes the votes needed on the common council to pass stuff, and other less important, and CYI, hazarai. Functionally it also changes the supervisor lines, which piggy back in the charter off the ward lines.

No comprende 'CYI, hazarai'

Your map is particularly inaccurate with regard to the boundary along Fairview Avenue north of Oakwood Boulevard. The two residences facing Fairview Avenue north of Oakwood Boulevard are in the city of Hudson, and the city charter clearly specifies a straight line from Fairview Avenue to the original city limits.

I don't really care if the city boundary is accurate. The map is not even a part of the proposed statute. Only the legal description is. The lines I used are what is on a city map, no doubt not perfect. Very little in the City with legal implications is perfect, and much a total cf. That is one reason that I find I have so much to do, honey!

Where is this city map that you are using?  I thought the census had missed those residents which would be more likely if they consulted the same map you did

The green cross-hatched line is misplaced. The current ward boundary crosses Public Square from Warren Street and 7th Street to Columbia Street and Park Place. It then follows Columbia Street to Columbia Turnpike. You have drawn it from Warren and 7th Street to somewhere Columbia Street and Green Street.

Show me the correct line and I will ponder how much the error is. The least change map is just intended to give an idea of the changes entailed. It is not a legal document.

They have not changed since when Franklin Pierce was president (URL)

Why can't modern mapdrawers do as well? (URL)

My understanding is that an initiative local law is subject to all the legal requirements that such a measure passed by the Common Council would need to meet. With regard to a redistricting measure this would require an accurate map and an attachment of any estimates used. Does your measure include a legally accurate map (your posters do not correctly show the correct city limits) and a detailed explanation of any estimates used.

No. See above. A map is not a legal requirement. Only a legal description is.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Are you familiar with 'Saratoga Citizen v Franck'?

I don't see how you can comply with the timeline in MHR § 37 and get on the November 2016 ballot.

The County Board of Elections disregards the current ward boundaries, what makes you think they will follow any changes passed by the city?

That is why God created courts and lawsuits dear. We may have one to get this puppy on the ballot. The Pub BOE dude in Columbia finds following the law secondary to the caring and feeding of his pit bosses. Suing the SOB if need be is penciled into my time line. I will particularly enjoy suing him, because he is a cute gay man, and I enjoy his presence in that sense. He has a toy dog name "Kimmie" which he carries everywhere with him.

Who does the CBOE work for, the County Board of Supervisors, or are they independent?

[Torie]

CYI was meant to be CYA.  Hazarai is a Yiddish word meaning "junk." The CBOE is independent, although subject to direction from the NYCBOE.

Are you satisfied with my legal description language for the leg from Fairview and Green to the city boundary now?

You have a point about the population allocations alas. It does not require a map, but it does require perhaps an explanation. So I think I will add the chart below to the Petition, and explain  the census block split methodology for the asterisked numbers (involving two split census blocks), using the language word for word from the city clerk as to her methodology. Sound like a plan?

I will email you the petition for comment (I would need the comments ASAP), without this modification inserted yet, if you promise to keep it totally confidential until July 6.

[jimrtex]

CYI was meant to be CYA.  Hazarai is a Yiddish word meaning "junk." The CBOE is independent, although subject to direction from the NYCBOE.

Are you satisfied with my legal description language for the leg from Fairview and Green to the city boundary now?

You have a point about the population allocations alas. It does not require a map, but it does require perhaps an explanation. So I think I will add the chart below to the Petition, and explain  the census block split methodology for the asterisked numbers (involving two split census blocks), using the language word for word from the city clerk as to her methodology. Sound like a plan?

I will email you the petition for comment (I would need the comments ASAP), without this modification inserted yet, if you promise to keep it totally confidential until July 6.

Suggested Text:

Population data is from the New York Legislative Task Force on Demographic Research and Reapportionment (LATFOR).  URL:http://www.latfor.state.ny.us/data/2010files/amendpopfiles.zip

LATFOR removed the state and federal prison population from census blocks in the PL 94-171 data. They also reallocated state prisoners to their last known residence prior to incarceration. In Hudson, this caused the removal of the population incarcerated at the Hudson Correctional Facilty, as well as an allocation (increase) in the population for state prisoners whose last residence prior to incarceration was in Hudson, regardless where they were imprisoned within New York state.

The Hudson Correctional Facility is located on several census blocks, four of which had a non-zero population count: Census Tract 13, Blocks 2003, 2007, 2008, and 2009. Block 2003 also includes a significant population outside the Hudson Correctional Facility, primarily on the south side of Union Street, east of S 5th Street.

LATFOR was apparently unable to identify which census blocks prisoners were counted in, and aggregated the population of blocks 2003, 2007, 2008, and 2009 (486 total), and then removed 360 prisoners, resulting in a residual population of 126 non-prison population. This population was then allocated among the four block on a pro rata basis of the total population (prisoners and non-prisoners combined)

Block  Census  Share    LATFOR
2003   232      47.7%     60
2007     77      15.8%     20
2008   126      25.9%     33
2009     51      10.5%     13
Total     486    100%      126

The net effect of this was to move 66 persons from along Union Street into the Hudson Correctional Facility. To correct for this misallocation, the entire residual population of 126 has been assigned to Block 2003, and blocks 2007, 2008, and 2009 having a population of zero.

The proposed ward boundaries split four census blocks: Census Tract 12, Block 1012 east of Harry Howard Avenue, which is divided between Ward 4 and Ward 5 by an extension of N 5th Street from Clinton Street to Harry Howard Avenue; and Census Tracts 13, Blocks 1000, 1001, and 1002 west of Front Street, which are divided between Ward 1 and Ward 2 by an extension of Warren Street between Front Street and the city limits (middle of Hudson River). Blocks 1000 and 1001 are respectively in the Hudson River, and west of the railroad tracks along the river, and are unpopulated.

The population of the other two split blocks was estimated on the proportion of the housing units in each ward, specifically:

...


I would sort the blocks by census tract and block number, and also include the zero population blocks.


You might also include these with your allocation (including the division line, housing unit counts and population counts).






I'd also include the following for the benefit of the CBOE, who do not have the authority nor competency to interpret the city charter.

Legislative Intent:

It is the intent of the City of Hudson that:

(1) The even numbered addresses on the east and south side of Harry Howard Avenue from 2 through (86???) are in Ward 4; and that addresses on the east side of Harry Howard Avenue 100 and higher are in Ward 5.

(2) All units in the Crosswind Apartments, including addresses on Edmonds Ln, Hoysradt Ln, Rogers Ln, and Evans Ct are in Ward 5.

(3) 496 and 498 Clinton Street are in Ward 4; 500 Clinton Street and higher addresses are in Ward 5.

(4) Addresses on N Front Street, particularly 15 N Front Street including buildings 1 through 8 of Hudson Terrace Apartments are in Ward 2; Addresses on S Front Street, particularly 15 S Front Street including buildings 9 through 13 of the Hudson  Terrace Apartments are in  Ward 1.


The Saratoga Citizen decision related to an attempt by citizens in Saratoga Springs to amend the charter using Section 37 of the MHR law. The city fought the initiative, including on how the petition was put together and whether there was a budgeted expenditure. Make sure you have an elections law expert who can go over all aspects of the petition process. In Saratoga Springs, after a delay of several years, the referendum took place, and it lost.

So it is not true that a Section 37 initiative has never been attempted, but I don't know if there were other attempts.


Fairview Avenue is OK.


I promise on July 6


Had the Common Council seen the misallocation of split blocks when they set the current voting weights they might have caught the mistakes.

[Torie]

You are absolutely right, that if Hudson had followed the law about census block splits, the errors would have been caught. The former Common Council president told me that last night, when I showed him the additional text in the petition that your mischief making has wrought. But Hudson in this area of endeavor, as well as so many others, never has followed the law. That however is in the past. A new age in the Shining City on a Hill has arrived.

Thank you for reminding me of the prisoner thing. I forgot about that. So here is the subparagraph introducing the matrix chart:


Caught the typo from the screen shot about mentioning Ward ! twice as to the Warren street census block split.

Your prolixity would cause the petition, which is already the longest seemingly ever written in the history of man, would cause it to get yet longer (it has now due to your trouble making expanded from 8 legal sized pages to 10). The law requires that all of the copies of the petition be stapled together to be deemed one petition, when submitted to the City Clerk. That is going to take one humongous staple to accomplish!

Your next task, should you choose to accept it, is to try and find if any other citizen ballot proposition petition has ever been circulated in the State of New York, and if any have, whether or not it was successful. I have found no such instance, other than one, that I will unearth again (it is a case I found someplace), that the court tossed out, because the petitioners were clueless about what the law entailed. Imagine that! I ask, because we want to point out that what Hudson is doing, is a first in New York, to try to garner Albany and NYC press attention. Maybe I can get another story written about me in the WSJ.

[jimrtex]

Your next task, should you choose to accept it, is to try and find if any other citizen ballot proposition petition has ever been circulated in the State of New York, and if any have, whether or not it was successful. I have found no such instance, other than one, that I will unearth again (it is a case I found someplace), that the court tossed out, because the petitioners were clueless about what the law entailed. Imagine that! I ask, because we want to point out that what Hudson is doing, is a first in New York, to try to garner Albany and NYC press attention. Maybe I can get another story written about me in the WSJ.

Saratoga Citizen v Franck(PDF)

Notice the first reason for rejection was how the 87 petition sheets were bound together. Apparently the MHR requirements are more stringent than Election Law requirements with regard to nominating and designating petitions.

The petition was filed in summer of 2010, and the Supreme Court decision was in in 2011 (as you know a "supreme court" in New York is the equivalent to a district court in other places.

The law firm for the petitioners to the court (and also circulators of the initiative petition) is in Albany, and the individual petitioners are listed. Saratoga Springs is just north of Albany.

The decision was appealed, and affirmed in:

SARATOGA CITIZEN, INC. v JOHN P. FRANCK(PDF)

Looking at the decision cited of Matter of Adams v Cuevas, it appears that there have been quite a few initiatives proposed - to the extent that Section 37 (11) was added to the MHR.

The referendum was defeated in November 2012.

[Torie]

Great minds think alike. I found that case, and have hit up both attorneys, the Saratoga County BOE, and the Saratoga Springs City Clerk, for copies of the subject petition and abstract. If need be, I will visit the town in which I took the NY Bar exam on Friday, to get in their face. When the Torie man really wants something, he works very hard, and obsessively, to get it.

The trial court decision is a trip about binding, and I have now warned of the need for a massive staple. The signature page for each Petition has an sheet number blank to fill in, which will be filled in consecutively. Consecutively numbering each page in the entire petition, when it is multi page, is an impossibility.

[jimrtex]

Great minds think alike. I found that case, and have hit up both attorneys, the Saratoga County BOE, and the Saratoga Springs City Clerk, for copies of the subject petition and abstract. If need be, I will visit the town in which I took the NY Bar exam on Friday, to get in their face. When the Torie man really wants something, he works very hard, and obsessively, to get it.

The trial court decision is a trip about binding, and I have now warned of the need for a massive staple. The signature page for each Petition has an sheet number blank to fill in, which will be filled in consecutively. Consecutively numbering each page in the entire petition, when it is multi page, is an impossibility.

You might try to locate Patrick Kane. He appears to be the head of the group pushing the initiative.

Saratoga Springs has a commission form of government. In a commission form of government, a commissioner is the executive for different city functions. The police chief and fire chief might report to the Public Safety Commissioner. There might be a Public Works Commissioner in charge of streets, water, and sewer, etc. The commissioners also form the legislative body of the city.

The initiative proposed a switch to a city manager form of government, where the city commission  would be converted to a city council, and a city manager hired to formally administer the city.

You could see where such a proposal would draw the opposition of the elected city officials since it deprecates their role. The switch to a city manager form of government has been defeated in 2006 and 2012. I found an op-ed from a former mayor who says his view has changed, so the issue is still simmering in Saratoga Springs.

Just switching how aldermen are elected should not trigger Section 37(11) since there won't be any additional salaries, and they will be budgeted out of the normal budgeting process.

BTW, since Section 37 only applies to cities, and cities are so few in New York might be one reason that initiatives are rare.

One part I do like about the Saratoga Springs charter is that the two supervisors are ex officio, non-voting, members of the city commission. This requires them to attend the commission meetings.

Town supervisors are the executive official in their town, and head of the boards of selectmen, so there is a natural connection between town government and the county board of supervisors. But there is no formal connection between the Hudson City government and the five county supervisors. There is likely informal connection due to people moving back and forth between the two governments.

I think Columbia County should adopt the Saratoga County plan for the board of supervisors. They use simple weighting, and so there is no need to pass a law after the census. They assign an extra supervisor to the largest entities (the city of Saratoga Springs and town of Clifton Park) that address any issues with the Banzhaf Power Index. In Columbia County, this would mean that Kinderhook and Hudson would have a 2nd supervisor. Hudson might elect its supervisors at alternate elections for a four year term.

[Torie]

I found Pat Kane's phone number on the internet, and left a message yesterday.

Don't you still have the conundrum with the Saratoga plan, of assuming that the two supervisors from a single district vote randomly vis a vis each other, when calculating the voting power index?

Here are mappies which a professional graphic designer ginned up.

[jimrtex]

I found Pat Kane's phone number on the internet, and left a message yesterday.

Don't you still have the conundrum with the Saratoga plan, of assuming that the two supervisors from a single district vote randomly vis a vis each other, when calculating the voting power index?

Here are mappies which a professional graphic designer ginned up.

Established 1886 is a feature. Maybe you would want to de-emphasize that.

I like the presentation of the extensions better in the 1886 map. It is a plausible explanation that the streets were widened to permit them to be labeled.

The current ward boundary goes at a diagonal across Public Square from 7th Street and Warren Street to Park Place and Columbia Street.

The east-west boundary north of Oakwood Boulevard is a straight line. A plausible location is midway between Oakwood Boulevard and Charles Avenue in Greenport, and intersecting Fairview Avenue midway between the two streets.


According to the SCOTUS it satisfies OMOV when the total voting weight of an area is proportional to its population, regardless of how the votes are exercised.

The Banzhaf Power Index is theoretical. It is derived from extreme examples, where certain members were dictators, or other members had no effect under any circumstances - they were voting nulls.
In essence because it works for outlying cases, it is assumed that it works for ordinary situations.

It also had the advantage that it was impossible to calculate the BPI without a lot of computing power that was not commonly available in the late 1960s.

When counties started using weighted voting in response to lawsuits, the judges cited Banzhaf's paper and said the proposals violated OMOV because it could not be demonstrated that they satisfied the BPI criteria.

Dr. Papayanopoulos was with IBM at the time, and it was his job to find new applications for IBM's high-end computers. He calculated the BPI for one case, which led to a judge to overturn the simple voting weights. But in the remedial phase he calculated adjusted voting weights such that BPI was proportional to population. The judge ordered that the adjusted weights be used.

So the legal requirement in New York State is that the BPI be proportional to population. This is not the same as voting power proportional to population, because we don't know how to measure voting power.

Adjusted voting weights are constitutionally flawed since they ensure that there are voting coalitions which represent a majority of the population, that will lose a simple majority vote. Adjusting the voting weights converts winners to losers, and losers to winners. It can be argued that this is deliberated. Why are the voting weights of Ward 5 adjusted downward, because "they were winning too much of the time".

The SCOTUS says that Ward 5 voters are the injured party, and would have standing to challenge. They are also denied representation on Common Council committees. Hudson's only defense would be that the committees don't really have any power.

If you want a conundrum: Let's assume under your equal-population plan, the two aldermen from each ward always vote in lock step, voting their two votes for a motion, or two votes against, never splitting 1-1. The president will have one vote which he will exercise independently. What is the BPI for the council president?

So giving two positions to larger entities satisfies the New York courts since it can be shown that the BPI is within 5% of the population, and it clearly satisfies SCOTUS requirement of proportionality between voting weights and population, since there is 0% deviation. And it avoids the fatal flaw of adjusted weight voting.

[Torie]

"The current ward boundary goes at a diagonal across Public Square from 7th Street and Warren Street to Park Place and Columbia Street."

I am aware of that, but when you work in a group, you pick your shots (keeping everybody happy, when it will not materially degrade the chances of achieving the end result, and thus letting them feel important, even if you think their input worthless, is job one). In addition, as I was once told by the senior partner of the firm where I first got a job, long before most Atlasians were born, he told me, "Dunn, you dumb F (he taught me to swear like a sailor), a nickel's worth of accuracy is never worth a pound's worth of confusion." Not quite on point here, but learn to pick your shots baby.

I bolded the part above for the youngs around.

[jimrtex]

In calculating the Banzhaf Power Index, each representative is assumed to vote randomly and independently, as if they were flipping a coin. Since each representative can vote Aye or No, there are 2ⁿ combinations of representative, including the unanimous cases of everyone voting Aye or No.

A critical vote occurs when:
    (1) A representative votes Aye on a motion;
    (2) The combination of representatives voting Aye on a motion prevails (e.g. have a majority or
          supermajority of the votes);
    (3) If the representative alone changed his vote to No, the motion would fail.

The total number of critical votes for each representative for all possible combinations of representatives is calculated.

A representative's Banzhaf Power Index is the proportion of total critical votes for the representative divided by the total critical votes for all representatives.

Some persons claim that the Banzhaf Power Index measures voting power. We'll assume that this claim is true.

We are not actually concerned about the representatives voting power, but that of a voter. A voter may have multiple representatives and we need to combine the power exercised through multiple representatives.

We can calculate the representational interest per voter, by dividing the number of votes cast by a representative by the number of persons represented by the representative. If a representative has one vote, and represents 10,000 persions, then each person has ¹/₁₀₀₀₀ representative-votes. If a voter has multiple representative, we can sum the representative votes to determine the total representative-votes for the representative.

OMOV as defined by the SCOTUS is that the representative-votes is substantially equal for all persons.

Dr. Papayanopoulos has applied the same procedure when calculating voting power in Hudson, though he ignored the power exercises through the council president.

But if we look at how the Banzhaf Power Index is calculated there is a paradox. A voter is considered to exercise power when their representative votes the same way as they do, and the representative is a critical vote. When there are two aldermen per ward, a voter might say that they are exercising power and beat their chest if one alderman voted Aye and the other voted No. What's worse, in many cases if both voted together, they might not be critical (in essence just voting with the consensus) and the voter exercised no power, even if he had somehow convinced them both to vote Aye.

Whether it was a bribe, or his heartfelt and sincere argument that convinced them to vote Aye, it was not an exercise of power (as measured by Dr. Papayanopolous).

Torie apparently argues that when there are twin representatives, such as two alderman per ward, they should be treated as flipping a single coin and voting together. As such, Dr. Papayanopolous miscalculated the Banzhaf Power Index for Hudson.

The problem with Torie's argument is that it can also be applied to a Common Council elected from equal-population districts, with a president elected at large.

Under such a system, each ward casts two votes, and the president one.

We can Calculate the Banzhaf Power Index

Input 6 players, with a quota of 6 (of 11 total), and weights of: 2 2 2 2 2 1

Under such a scheme the Council President has no power.

[jimrtex]

Current Wards and Weights

The current voting weights were based on erroneous populations due to the combined incompetency of the Columbia County Board of Elections, the Hudson city clerk, and the Common Council. As a result there is a 30.9% relative deviation range between population and voting weights. This is a clear OMOV violation. The SCOTUS is unlikely to accept "we're just bunch of hillbilly bozos" as a justification.

Interactive Version

[jimrtex]

Current Wards with Weight Proportional to Population

There is no reason that the Common Council could not correct the ward populations, and adjust the voting weights. This example, assigns an alderman one vote for every five persons he represents. Vote weights are purely proportional to population (other than round off). The voting weight of the council president can be adjusted to provide better congruence with the Banzhaf Power Index.

If the president were assigned 238 votes for simple motions, and 256 for 2/3, then relative deviation range between the Banzhaf Power Index and population, would 6.93% and 1.64%, respectively.

Interactive Version

[jimrtex]

Current Wards With Apportioned Aldermen

The reason that the aldermen from Ward 5 have four times the voting weight of those from Ward 1 is that they represent four times as many people. If one wanted to make the weights more equal, then the solution is to apportion aldermen on the basis of population.

This would also ensure proper representation of eastern Hudson on council committees. Under the current system, committees may develop ideas and believe they have a consensus, only to have the idea beaten back when it was considered by the whole Common Council.

Interactive Version