Special master: District map drawn with ‘population equality’

Written by James Passeri, Hersam Acorn Newspapers
Monday, 30 January 2012 13:00

A special master appointed by the state Supreme Court to resolve Connecticut’s redistricting stalemate submitted a final proposal Jan. 19 that will keep Bridgeport in the 4th District.

The plan also retains New Britain in the 5th and requires only minor changes to equalize district populations, a constitutional mandate following the 2010 federal census.

District 4, which was the most underpopulated in the existing plan, was redrawn to move 8,079 people in Shelton from District 3, which achieved “perfect population equality,” said Nathaniel Persily, the master.

District 3 was then moved further into District 1’s Middletown, gaining an additional 5,369 people.

After inviting interested parties to submit reports by Jan. 18, Mr. Persily concluded that the Draft Report and Plan are “in order” and require no revision.

The four parties who submitted comments to the clerk’s office on Jan. 18 included Republican members of the Reapportionment Commission, the Reapportionment Commission Democratic members, the Coalition for Minority Representation and Robert S. Poliner, town counsel to the Town of Durham.

Mr. Persily’s report comes after two completed plans — one from Republican members of the Reapportionment Commission and one from the Democratic members — were submitted before Jan. 9.

“The Republican proposal shifts more population, land and towns than is reasonably necessary to comply with one person, one vote,” Mr. Persily said in his report.

He said his proposal takes into account “all submitted proposals, historic redistricting maps, briefs submitted to [him] by this court and testimony received at the special master’s hearing on Jan. 9.”

According to Mr. Persily, the state district map was drawn first with respect to District 2.

The federal census revealed District 2 had an overpopulation of 14,952. “Perfect population equality can be achieved merely by adjusting the borders of [Durham and Glastonbury],” Mr. Persily said in his proposal.

Lastly, the proposal addressed the imbalance between District 1 and 5.

District 5 requires the “least alteration to comply with the law,” Mr. Persily said, and required only minor adjustments: 524 people were moved to District 1 from District 5.

The districts are now virtually identical in population size, with District 2, 3, 4 each comprised of 714,819 people, and District 1 and 5 each of 714,820.

Attorney David Rosen, representing the Coalition of Minority Voters, said he is pleased with the outcome, and the controversial Republican initiative to move Bridgeport and New Britain from the 4th and 5th respectively would have only diluted minority representation in the state.

The final report included the testimony of Mr. Rosen and members of the coalition.

“Our perspective was that the special master shouldn’t try to do anything more than necessary,” Mr. Rosen said. “What we were advocating was pretty clear cut.”

Concerned parties must submit objections to the court by Feb. 1. Oral argument will be held on Feb. 6, and the court will file its final plan with the secretary of the state on Feb. 15.

---

Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites