Trending
WARREN -- City Council discussed Tuesday the potential realigning of the city's wards.
Cheryl Saffold, D-6th Ward, legislative committee chairwoman, headed the meeting.
Council members, city safety-service director Eddie Colbert and law director Enzo Cantalamessa saw a presentation from John Bralich of Youngstown State University that showed that according to 2020 U.S. census data, only the 5th Ward is within the permitted range of residents, according to the Ohio Revised Code. Bralich displayed maps detailing how the city could realign its wards to be, once again, within compliance.
ORC section 731.06 states that the legislative authority of a city shall subdivide the city into wards, equal in number to the members of the legislative authority to be elected from wards, within 90 days after the first day of October of the year following the decennial census year.
Warren City ordinance 105.1 states that the city is subdivided into seven wards, which shall contain nearly an equal number of inhabitants.
According to Bralich, the 2020 census showed the population of Warren was 39,201. If equal, as is necessary based on state and city laws, the total population of each ward would be approximately 5,600. Bralich said a 10 percent variance in the exact population number is allowed based on a 1983 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Brown v. Thomson.
According to 2020 census population data, the city's 3rd Ward has the most residents, with 6,540, which is 16.8 percent over the target. The city's 6th Ward has the fewest residents with 4,254, which is 24 percent under the target. The only ward that falls within the permitted range is the 5th Ward, which has 6,114 residents and is less than 10 percent within the permitted range.
Bralich presented four maps to officials of potential ward realignment strategies that would put all seven wards within the permitted range.
"When I start the process, I go into this unbiased," Bralich said. "I try to do three things. I don't want to draw anybody out of their ward, so I'm not going to do that. Number two, I try to make the wards as equal as possible in population. And number three, I want to have as little change as possibly. I don't want to completely blow this up."
Bralich said the second map, called Map V2, did not include the incarcerated population within the wards.
The last time the city realigned the wards was in 1991, when the eighth ward was broken apart. At-Large Councilwoman Helen Rucker said the last time the city ward's went through realignment, it was political.
"In that (realignment), both parties were trying to hold onto their voting blocks," Rucker said.
Rucker said she wanted any discussion of ward realignment to start with the largest ward, the 3rd, which is headed by Greg Greathouse.
"The 3rd Ward is where we should go back to if we're going to make any change," Rucker said. "Because the third was untouched. And no matter how you redraw these boundaries, the third will stay intact. To me, to go forward with this without touching the third ward, causes the rest of us to be gerrymandered.
"It's harsh to say, but it's the absolute truth. It's hard to say, but I'm one to say we should just leave it like it is."
Rucker also suggested that council could make no changes to its current ward alignment, a point that Cantalamessa countered.
"Doing this is mandated by state code," he said. "To not do it creates exposure for the city in the form of the attorney general forcing it, in the form of taxpayer lawsuits, whatever the mechanism or means to force it is, not doing it creates the exposure to the city for that."
Saffold said she is in support of realigning the wards to draw the populations closer to equal, as was council President John Brown. Councilman Ron White had concerns as to how the incarcerated population would impact ward numbers.
Council will schedule another meeting with Bralich to discuss the potential maps, as well as whether to count the incarcerated population.