|
NEW YORK STATE
LEGISLATIVE TASK FORCE
ON DEMOGRAPHIC RESEARCH AND REAPPORTIONMENT
-------------------------------------------x
Suffolk Hearing :
-------------------------------------------x
Legislative Office Building Veteran's Memorial Highway Hauppauge, New York June 14, 2001 10:05 a.m. |
B e f o r e:
SENATOR DEAN G. SKELOS ASSEMBLYMAN WILLIAM L. PARMENT Co-Chairmen SENATOR RICHARD A. DOLLINGER ASSEMBLYMAN CHRIS ORTLOFF VINCENT P. BRUY ROMAN B. HEDGES Members A P P E A R A N C E S:For the Legislative Task Force: Debra A. Levine Lewis M. Hoppe Co-Executive Directors |
|
I N D E X O F S P E A K E R S
SPEAKER: Page
ROBERT BRASSELL, JR. Greenlawn Civic Association..................12 DORIS DUFFY On behalf of Baldwin Community Association -and- DR. THOMAS REILLY Adjunct Professor, Molloy College............21 ELLIOT AUERBACH Chairman of the Board Suffolk County Chapter New York City Civil Liberties Union..........31 JUDITH CRUZ Resident, Brentwood..........................41 PHIL GOLDSTEIN Co-Chair, Issues Committee Independent Party, State of New York.........42 I N D E X O F S P E A K E R S SPEAKER: Page DELANO STEWART Publisher, Point of View Newspaper Resident, Wyandanch..........................54 EUGENE BURNETT Chairman Suffolk County Black Caucus..................61 -and- DR. RANDOLPH TOBIAS Babylon Town Black Caucus....................63 -and- ROGER CORBIN Deputy Presiding Officer Nassau County Legislature....................71 NATHANIEL HAM Huntington Black Caucus Resident - Dix Hills.........................85 PATRICK YOUNG Central American Refugee Center.............102 MICHAEL DE CABINORE Assistant Business Manager and Political Coordinator Local 25, IBEW..............................116 ALEEN BARISH Resident, Long Island.......................123 I N D E X O F S P E A K E R S SPEAKER: Page GWENDLYN BROWN Resident, Long Island.......................124 DOROTHY GOOSBY Councilwoman, Town of Hempstead.............127 -and- WILLIAM RICHARDSON Executive Director Glen Cove Economic Opportunity Council's Family Development Center...................137 SERETTA McNIGHT Resident, Long Island.......................143 DIANA DOMINGUEZ WEIR Councilwoman Town of Easthampton.........................159 PHILIP GOGLAS Resident, Central Islip.....................163 * * * P R O C E E D I N G S SENATOR SKELOS: Good morning and welcome to the Legislative Task Force on Demographic Research and Reapportionment -- the eighth hearing, I think? -- the seventh or eighth hearing that we are conducting throughout the State. My name is State Senator Dean Skelos. I'm the Co-Chair of the Task Force. And with me today are fellow Task Force Members: My Co-Chair, Assemblyman William Parment; Senator Richard Dollinger; Vincent Bruy is not here yet, he will be here shortly; Assemblyman Chris Ortloff; and Mr. Roman Hedges. And really the purpose of these hearings is to receive input from the general public concerning the State's process of drawing Congressional, State Senate and State Assembly District boundaries. Part of this process involves obviously taking into consideration the Federal Constitution, One Person/One Vote, the State Constitution, court decisions, and I can go on and on, in the process of creating these Congressional, State Senate and Assembly Districts. What we are looking forward to today is hearing your testimony as to how we should proceed in the drafting of these lines, not so much geared towards incumbents - although I know people will be talking about incumbents and that is very important - but more in terms of how you think we, as a Task Force, should be drafting these lines to best represent the communities that you reside in. William. ASSEMBLYMAN PARMENT: Good morning. I'm Bill Parment. I'm the Assembly Co-Chair of the Task Force. And I won't have too much to add except to say that this Task Force is constituted pursuant to State law and we are charged with a responsibility of recommending to the State Legislature a plan to be consistent with the various Constitutional and case law requirements associated with redistricting. Our plan will be subject to vote by the State Legislature and the signature of the Governor. And so while this Task Force is charged with the process of making a recommendation, the final decision on this plan will be a decision made by the entire State Legislature and one subject to the signature of the Governor. Welcome. SENATOR SKELOS: Richard. SENATOR DOLLINGER: Thank you. It's great to be here in Suffolk County. And I just echo the sentiments of my colleagues and add one other thought. I think we did a very good thing earlier this week in a meeting Tuesday of this Task Force in Albany. We adopted a blueprint for enhancing public participation in this process which will permit the distribution of the demographic data that is in the possession of the Task Force as well as the political data that we possess and that we have compiled in the course of the last couple of years. So that the communities of interest throughout this State will have an opportunity to evaluate that data, look at our thinking as we begin, as we go through the process of drawing these lines, and ideally give everyone an opportunity to draw some lines themselves if they are so inclined. So I reiterate my words of praise on that day for both of the Co-Chairs of this Task Force in making that critical public participation step, as well as the Directors, the Co-Executive Directors of the Task Force, who put that package together and made that recommendation. As Senator Skelos has said, this is our eighth hearing. We are well down the road to getting public participation. We've got more to go. But I think the combination of listening to people talk about their communities and at the same time giving them the data necessary to understand our thinking as well as maybe do some thinking on their own will be beneficial to this process of the Task Force in producing lines for the next decade. So, again, I congratulate my colleagues for their work and I look forward to the testimony today. SENATOR SKELOS: Chris. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: My name is Assemblyman Chris Ortloff. I live in Plattsburgh and I represent the Assembly Republican Conference. This hearing today and the process that we are engaged in, as has been said by the Co-Chairs, is mandated both by the U.S. and New York State Constitutions and by our law. This Task Force is charged with the responsibility of drawing lines and making recommendations to the Legislature for creating new districts. But it isn't a process that we begin with a blank slate. We begin with districts that have already existed for ten years and many of them existed ten years before that and so on and so on. It's fundamentally a process by which and through which communities of people can work their will in our system. It may seem didactic to point it out but it's well worth remembering that we are not a direct democracy. We are a representative republic in which the only way that communities can work their will is through their representatives. And if a community is able to elect a representative of its choice and that representative is faithful to that trust, the system works fairly well. On the other hand, we all know of examples in which a community is for one reason or another divided in the drawing of legislative and congressional district lines. And in times like that, in cases like that, the system is in some fundamental way crippled because the community, as it knows and sees itself, is thwarted, if not prevented, from working its will. Hopefully the number of cases where that happens is a minimum. Ideally any case where that exists it happened because of a necessity: too many people to make one district. At any rate, our job here today is to hear you, the representatives of communities and neighborhoods. These communities aren't necessarily the traditional town or the metropolitan areas defined by the Census. They are communities as you see them. And it is important, indeed critical, to our work that we fully understand what you mean when you describe your community and its interests. If you and we have a constructive dialogue along those lines, then we will be able to do our job effectively. I would also say that it is my hope that when the initial plan for the State and Congressional Districts are drawn, that we will, as a Task Force, return here to subject our work to your critical review. So please regard today's hearing as the first of what I hope is at least a two-step process. And I invite your comments. Thank you. SENATOR SKELOS: Mr. Bruy. MR. BRUY: Good morning. MR. HEDGES: Good morning. It's nice to be here in Suffolk County. SENATOR SKELOS: All right. We will start the testimony. We would ask that each witness try to keep their comments to five minutes. We have a number of speakers and we hope to get everybody. The first speaker is Robert Brassell, Jr., Greenlawn Civic Association. MR. ROBERT BRASSELL: I've submitted my qualification sheet and also other information. So do I have to repeat some of it or can I just say that it's on the record? Because when I was outside, I had, you know, a packet, you know, about saying who I am, my background and such and such, unless I'm saying something that's -- MS. LEVINE: I think -- your documentation is part of the record. You can move forward anyway you would like. MR. ROBERT BRASSELL: Thank you. I'll just say this real quick, although not too quick. I live in a district where -- let me be plain about it -- my AD is pathetically ridiculous. It's small and it's very badly drawn, literally a wedge within a wedge. I have a Senatorial District where the vast majority of the constituents who are along the North Shore, just by the structure alone, have a lot of say. I'm not talking what I extrapolated, I mean what actually the experience has shown me. I'm in an area where literally it's a -- a Congressional District is across the street from me. And I'm told because it's one district -- literally across the street from me is a different one, and that area where it's across is directly affecting the neighborhood I'm in -- I have to literally, I can say through protocol, go from one Congressional member, who is possibly receptive, to another one who made it clear they don't care whether the sky's going to crack or not, they are not going to give a rat's. And because of all this, it will -- it may be -- it may be one time, it's just a one-time incident, one-time thing, it's going to change. Well, those are districts over and over again. I said: my goodness, I'm in a blind spot. Whether we're active or not, we're in a blind spot. We have to get, in my opinion, maybe forty percent of everybody together and literally say we are going to all act as one, maybe not for one purpose, but for just to do -- just to get the representatives we have to do the minimum job. So even if we were, as I say, active together and everything else, the structure of the boundaries we are in, the districts that are drawn for us, congressional and otherwise, makes it so that no matter what's what. If I go south where I am, a lot to say because there is a solid concentrated area, not so concentrated because it's only that area, but it accommodates everybody around it plus the area where the most -- because of population and activity. Where I'm at? No way in hell. North, the same thing. Northwest also in -- right now east where I live. Right? And I'm in the one area. If you look on the -- any map, whether large or small, you look at it, it's going to be obvious, the Congressional Districts and everything else. It's obvious. For me it really hit me home when there was construction being done -- I'll just say this -- at the corner of Lantern Street and Broadway, and it was directly affecting the property values and the homes that were there. And my mother and I said what's going on here. Well, can't we have somebody to at least check it out and see what not -- is not being said about what's being assessed. Because the way the districts were drawn, I was told, when I sought out former Congressman Lazio's office there was nothing they can do, even though I later on found out because of certain proto- -- procedures with the Congress -- I mean it's not an obscure route, but it's rarely spoken about, he doesn't even inquire, even if it's unofficial. He knew it and he made the excuse. Why? Because that district was there. Even that's an old excuse. It could be appointed one. The district is there. Therefore, he feels upon his protocol -- now I know it's not just his, everybody's in Congress, that because that boundary is there, he can't just simply, quote, inquire without going through procedure. He can use that for any excuse he wants. And it's not just him. It's other people that have been there before too. Now, I don't think it was always that way, but because it is that way, we are literally being strictured more and more and more until we are literally being strictured out. So the boundaries aren't working for us. Other persons, yes. And there probably will be others after me who will say, that's not true, they show the experience, showing this benefit and that benefit. I can only speak for my little corner of the corner of the corner of Huntington, Suffolk County, Long Island, New York, USA. That's all I can speak for. And a lot of persons who wouldn't come up here, who wouldn't even bother coming to any public hearing -- and I'm being honest -- will say the same thing. In other words, off the record they will say the same thing. Because of the way it is structured, it's not helping. Gerrymandering and all of that, I could care less about -- I'm being really honest -- if the structure is consistent with the situation and the actual head count and the actual agreed-upon concentration and sharing of authority and boundaries, if it's agreed, fine, if it accommodates everybody. Of course, there are going to be certain small areas that are going to be disadvantaged. That's true. But when every single major and minor area is structured so that you can't have any say unless you put everything in one - everything together for all the time, that's ridiculous, insane. And I hope, I pray to God, it doesn't happen again so that it is redrawn or even decided to not be redrawn so that it stays the same or gets worse. I say every day I get the bus. I got to sit on one side where whatever was directly affecting this area is helping the persons on that side, but on my side of the street, my side of the neighborhood, it's washing me out. And everybody else says, well, according to this boundary, we can't do this because the boundary says so. I said: wait a minute. You're telling me just because of that -- and I look it up. Surely enough, it says certain things you can and can't do unless you take it upon yourself to, as a representative, go to the next colleague who is, quote unquote, next to you and say, look, I want you to do a little checking up for me or could you have an inquiry, let's go for discussion. In my experience, as far as I'm concerned, it's limited. It told me a lot, quite a bit: no boundary flexibility, no boundary restructuring, no boundary redrawing, I'm stuck. And whether I did -- and I have inquired with my various legislators and Senators and other things, and they pretty much drag their feet. When I went to a Federal executive official, they gave me the rundown; said while they couldn't help, at least gave me a clear, straightforward response, I said which is typically not normal for any Federal bureaucrat to give a straight answer. I got it. I said: well, thank you very much. I even told the supervisor. I gave him a good recommendation for that. At least they had the decency to tell me I was stuck in the hole. All of us are stuck in a hole. So hopefully, hopefully, it will be done the way it is to be, not the way -- not the way we, quote, wanted it or need it done because anybody can say what they want meaning they need an excuse, the way it is to be done. And I know a lot of you folks right now, a lot of -- everyone in this room as well, is saying it, the way it is to be done, you're comfortable with it, you want to make it a little bit more comfortable, so you don't have strangers up again ten years from now or have situations going through. Making it clear, they're not going to tolerate just sitting there and let the process go on. So I'll be at every meeting. And if I can't get there, I send my letters like I did for other things that I do. I don't care. I want to make sure, even if I don't get part of what I want, that I have an option of seeing how it's going to be done. Because I know you people, like you -- as the Senator said -- incumbents want to see certain things that they like to see whether anybody else who wants to work with the incumbents or not also see what they want to see, something that they can use, that's useful, and that nobody will complain too much about because of what they can't do it. And that's it. SENATOR SKELOS: Thank you very much. Our next witness is Doris Duffy. MS. DORIS DUFFY: Good morning. My name is Doris Duffy. I'm an attorney. I'm speaking today on behalf of the Baldwin Community Association, which is located at 999 Church Street in Baldwin on Long Island. To my left is Dr. Thomas Reilly, who is Professor Emeritus of the City University of New York in Political Science, currently an Adjunct Professor at Molloy College, who has been advising us on constitutional questions in our preparation of our advocacy effort for our community. I had hoped, though I do not see him, that the President of the Baldwin Community Association, Diago Cruz would be here this morning but, unfortunately, it appears that his work commitments have prevented his appearance, although he wished to attend. Who are we? Baldwin, which includes Baldwin Harbor, is a community of approximately 32,000 residents located on the south shore of Long Island in Nassau County. A map of our community was included in the materials that I submitted to the Task Force this morning. Through our school district, fire district, library district and over seventy-five community organizations, we have managed to maintain a wonderful sense of community and feeling of civic pride. Our aim today is to convince you to place all of Baldwin and Baldwin Harbor in one congressional district, one state senate district and one assembly district. Baldwin is currently the partial responsibility of thirteen legislative representatives. We're fortunate enough to have Senator Skelos as one of those representatives, and, in addition, we are represented by: Hillary Clinton and Charles Schumer, as the rest of the State is, in the United States Senate; In the House of Representatives we are represented in the 3rd District by Peter King and in the 4th District by Carolyn McCarthy; In the State Senate, in the 9th by Senator Skelos, and his associate, Senator Charles Fuschillo in the 8th; In the Assembly we have three representatives: Earlene Hill Hopper in the 18th, Kathleen Murray in the 19th and Robert Barraga in the 21st. On a more local level, certainly not relevant to your inquiry except to understand our predicament, we are represented by three additional representatives in the County Legislature, the Nassau County Legislature: Joe Scannell in the 5th District, Robert Zapson in the 4th and Patrick Williams in the 1st, and also represented by Anthony Santino before the Hempstead Town Board. Coming to a grand total of thirteen representatives for one community. The representatives I've listed are all dedicated public servants, but too numerous to be effective in one community. The tables attached to the materials that I submitted to you set out in detail the percentage of Baldwin that each legislator represents. In some cases Baldwin's representatives are assigned to as few as six of the twenty-seven election districts that comprise our community. This is true in Carolyn McCarthy's district and also in the District by Earlene Hill Hopper. So that they only represent twenty-two percent of Baldwin. And this comprises a very small percentage of their total districts. This division of representation causes difficulty in our community for many reasons. No one has governmental authority for Baldwin as a whole on the legislative level except for Anthony Santino in the Hempstead Town Council. Each time an issue faces our community residents and community organizations have to write letters to get the attention of our many representatives. Since each representative often only responds to letters from their individual constituents, it often takes a great deal of time before particular legislators are informed of important issues in our town. As a practical matter, an issue concerning a small part of a legislative district, though a significant problem for Baldwin, is sometimes not addressed. It is respectfully requested then that all of Baldwin be included in one district on each legislative level. A suggested districting map has not been included in the materials presented. The BCA is not advocating the placement of Baldwin in a particular district. You choose the district; just all of us in one. Thank you very much. ASSEMBLYMAN PARMENT: I've received several letters from constituents of the Baldwin area who have basically stated this same desire. And one question I would have -- I could look this up, but you could tell me probably directly -- is Baldwin an incorporated place or is it a neighborhood? MS. DORIS DUFFY: Baldwin is an unincorporated area. ASSEMBLYMAN PARMENT: So equivalent to a neighborhood, the concept of a community? MS. DORIS DUFFY: Yes. I guess a hamlet. ASSEMBLYMAN PARMENT: Could you give me kind of a description of what you consider to be the community of Baldwin? MS. DORIS DUFFY: Yes. In the map and in the tables I listed out all the election districts that we consider to be part of Baldwin. But the zip code, 11510, the school district, the fire district, the library district and the twenty-seven -- which include the twenty-seven election districts that I've enumerated in the terminology set out by the Board of Elections and also a listing in the numbers which we received from the Census website, the mapping that I think that your Task Force will be using for even reference, but those are the districts that we would like included. ASSEMBLYMAN PARMENT: Okay. Thanks. That will be helpful to understanding the problem. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: Do we have that here today? MS. DORIS DUFFY: Yes. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: Do we have copies? MS. LEVINE: Do you want one now? SENATOR SKELOS: Richard? SENATOR DOLLINGER: Yes. I thought Chris had a question. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: Well, that was my question. Since you studied the census and the EDs that were provided, what was the population of that area? MS. DORIS DUFFY: Approximately 32,000. SENATOR DOLLINGER: Just so I make sure I understand. The data that you've given us today, does the census tract information track the community of Baldwin as you've described it? Are you confident that if we look at that census data, we will be able to tell where Baldwin is, -- MS. DORIS DUFFY: In some areas -- SENATOR DOLLINGER: -- the definition of the boundaries? MS. DORIS DUFFY: -- there is a distinction made between Baldwin and Baldwin Harbor. In our community we don't make that -- we're not making that distinction in our presentation because Baldwin and Baldwin Harbor are both included in our school district, our fire district and our library district and we consider it all to be part of one community. So on your part it does show Baldwin and Baldwin Harbor. So in that way those statistics may be a little different than the ones that we've relied upon. We would like the entire community to be included in one district. SENATOR DOLLINGER: Just a second question. Have you had an opportunity or do you have a comment about the political cohesiveness of that community with respect to its voting pattern? MS. DORIS DUFFY: We have not studied the voting patterns of the community. The BCA is a non-partisan organization and our aim is just to have the voice of our community be unified. But we are not advocating particular -- SENATOR DOLLINGER: I'm not suggesting that you do. I mean one of the things that we have to ask ourselves is to what extent people vote with some political cohesion. And that isn't necessarily a partisan exercise as much as it's simply a tabulation exercise in the sense that we're not necessarily trying to determine who they would vote for, but whether they would vote as a group or with some form of political cohesion. MS. DORIS DUFFY: It's not a question that I can answer. I'm not sure that they do. According to -- well, it has been changing over the last several years. It's not always consistent. SENATOR DOLLINGER: My final question is, I would hope when we get our website up and running and get other information that you will have an opportunity to go to that information. And I would just encourage you, especially for someone who is from Rochester, New York and not familiar with Suffolk and Nassau Counties, that you prepare a plan that would define exactly where Baldwin is, exactly what the boundaries are, and how you would prefer to see it as you've expressed here today in a single congressional, senate and assembly district. So I hope you will take that invitation as the next step in your advocacy for the community, and don't be afraid to bring it back to us. MS. DORIS DUFFY: Thank you very much. ASSEMBLYMAN PARMENT: Just another follow up. Is Baldwin all included in the Town of Hempstead? MS. DORIS DUFFY: Yes. SENATOR SKELOS: Thank you. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: Let me just compliment you on the work that you produced for us. It's comprehensible, it's very clearly defined and you make a compelling case for exactly what I was talking about before. And this is exactly the kind of testimony that I, as one member of the Task Force, appreciate receiving. Thank you. MS. DORIS DUFFY: Thank you very much. SENATOR SKELOS: Thank you. Elliot Auerbach, Chairman of the Board, NYCLU Suffolk County. MR. ELLIOT AUERBACH: Good morning, Members of the Task Force. My name is Elliot Auerbach. I'm the Chairman of the Board of the Suffolk County Chapter of the New York City Civil Liberties Union. Ordinarily, our Executive Director, Nanci - N-a-n-c-i she spells it - Weber, would be making the presentation, but she's at the national convention of the American Civil Liberties Union. The Civil Liberties Union has filed a school equity suit against the State of New York. And one of the plaintiff districts is Wyandanch, located in Suffolk County. And in the course of going through the various education funding questions, the issue comes up as to State aid as apportioned by the Legislature. And the districts that are located -- the school districts that are located in Suffolk County that have heavy minority populations have in the past reapportionments been divided among senate districts so that what is a geographically and in terms of community organization coherent districts have been -- communities, rather, have been put in different senate districts thereby reducing their power and the impact that they have on an individual senator. In fact, at this lower level each of the senators probably has an interest in the status quo. Now, if you look at the lines for the last two reapportionments, that is, the ones done based on the 1980 and the 1990 census, there is a line that divides Wyandanch and Wheatley Hills on the one hand from North Amityville on the other hand. Between those two censuses the outer parts of the particular senate districts involved changed their boundaries. Suffolk was a growing county at that time. But the line splitting those communities is almost identical. It may even be completely identical. At the scale that I can view the map I can only say that it's almost identical. The same is true in the Town of Islip with respect to the communities Brentwood/ Central Islip on the one hand and the northern part of Bayshore on the other hand, that is, the line remained the same. It was a line that shows a pattern and practice of breaking up these communities so as to dilute their power. It is the opinion of some of the attorneys in the New York Office that if this pattern is perpetuated for a third census, it would provide an Equal Protection argument for challenging. Rather than going to litigation, what we ask you to do is to do the right thing, that is, put communities that are geographically coherent, have joint community associations, together in the same district. What we are asking you to do is what was fairly normal before the one man/one vote - and I'm not knocking one man/one vote - where there was a requirement that you not cross certain lines defining political entities. Before that you weren't permitted to cross town lines, I believe county lines, et cetera. We are not asking you to go back to that because one man/one vote is clearly more important. But within the one man/one vote situation we ask that you draw the lines in such a way that coherent, geographically contiguous communities not be broken up in that particular way. I have a remark to make as an individual about another question of Suffolk County. So I would rather, if you have questions about the CLU position, that you ask them now. Is that all right with you, Mr. Chairman? SENATOR SKELOS: Yes. Any questions? (No response.) SENATOR SKELOS: Continue then. MR. ELLIOT AUERBACH: Okay. I've been a resident of Suffolk County for a long time. I've voted here for thirty-five years. And I noticed that in the last reapportionment when Suffolk County surpassed Nassau in population, the lines were still so drawn that Nassau had a majority of five of the nine senate districts and Suffolk only had four. It's easy to do this once you are not required to follow county lines. In the 2000 Census, Suffolk again has a larger population. I notice that there are two people from Nassau on this Board, but still I will say as a Suffolk resident I don't want to be robbed again. Thank you. SENATOR SKELOS: I should point out that the plan last year was -- ten years ago was affirmed by our highest court of the State, the Court of Appeals. MR. ELLIOT AUERBACH: I am aware of that. You can do it legally, but I believe that, given the current situation of the Nassau Republican machine, Suffolk Republicans will not be very happy with having to give away what is their due so-to-speak. SENATOR SKELOS: Now, are you -- the Nassau Republican organization, are you calling it a machine based upon your position with the New York Civil Liberties Union? MR. ELLIOT AUERBACH: No. I said -- I took the break. SENATOR SKELOS: Okay. MR. ELLIOT AUERBACH: I made it very clear that I wanted to take those questions first. I'm now saying this as a Suffolk resident, a thirty-five year Suffolk resident. I believe as a Suffolk resident and from what I've read about Nassau, I believe that the Suffolk Republican Party can do a better job in fielding a candidate that we would be interested in than the Nassau party. But I want to make it very clear that I did make that break and I did ask for the questions first so there would be no misunderstanding as to when I represented the CLU and when I represented myself. SENATOR SKELOS: That's fine. MR. ELLIOT AUERBACH: Okay. Thank you. SENATOR DOLLINGER: I just have one comment, Mr. Auerbach. We have heard this, I guess, in other parts of the State. We have heard a lot of discussion about incumbents. We've heard a lot of discussion appraising incumbents. And I would just add something that I think Senator Skelos and Assemblyman Parment and Assemblyman Ortloff have said this at a number of other hearings. We come in today to talk about concepts and law and communities and how we divide up the State. The existence of incumbents is really, although it can be a factor in our process because of the recognition of incumbency, but we don't really come to talk about machines, either good, bad, new, old, in need of rehabilitation or well-oiled. That issue is really one that we leave to the voters and that the voters decide instead of giving it to us because, as I think Assemblyman Parment and Senator Skelos described, this plan has to be approved by the Legislature, by people who are elected. MR. ELLIOT AUERBACH: That is correct. SENATOR DOLLINGER: So I just want everybody to understand that it's easy to look at this group or look at this process and say that is a political process. And I think all of us would deny that that's not -- that's clearly a factor, is always a factor when you have elected people sitting up here making decisions. But our goal in this reapportionment process is to try to handle this consistent with our legal challenges, our demographic responsibilities to come up with a plan that's fair, that -- as you described it earlier. Certainly we want to, if there is a presence of -- a geographic division that has been, as you described it I think, broken up, communities of interest that have been broken up for other reasons that may create legal problems, we have to address that, to the extent that we concur or disagree with your legal analysis. But this is really a process of combining politics and demography and the need to reapportion and come up with an answer. But I just want to make it clear that the political issue of machines and incumbents is not our focus. MR. ELLIOT AUERBACH: Well, I understand that protecting incumbents has always been "a" criteria, not necessarily the controlling criteria. And when you have shifts in population, protecting incumbents tends to protect older areas who are losing relative population. If we were to follow that kind of argument, we wouldn't do reapportionments at all. You know, we would leave New York with thirty-one representatives, talking on the House level, and not give Texas two more. But the populations have changed. SENATOR DOLLINGER: We all agree. We would -- MR. ELLIOT AUERBACH: And so -- SENATOR DOLLINGER: We would like -- MR. ELLIOT AUERBACH: We would like to have the thirty-one, I know. But we can't do that. And Suffolk is now the larger county. It was ten years ago. And okay. In the '90 Census you cut it five-to-four; for the 2000 Census cut it the other way, please. Thank you. SENATOR SKELOS: Any questions? (No response.) SENATOR SKELOS: Thank you. Judith Cruz; is Judith here? MS. JUDITH CRUZ: Yes, I am. My name is Judith Cruz. I live in Brentwood, New York, a hamlet of the Town of Islip. I'm here to testify that there has been clear, intentional discrimination based principally on race, which has been the predominant factor in determining the boundaries of the Long Island Senate Districts. The Senate Districts drawn by the Legislature for the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s show a consistent and unvarying pattern of splitting the black and Hispanic communities. The black and Hispanic populations in the Town of Islip have been split between the 3rd and 4th Senate Districts by lines dividing Brentwood and Bayshore. Systematically splitting the minority communities decade after decade undermines democracy. This practice promotes racial polarized and segregated politics which has a corrosive effect on democracy. The splitting of minority populations dilutes the voting power of the minority voter and forces candidates to win elections by responding to those voters who have a vested interest in the status quo, like school finances and other issues. The redrawing of Congressional, State Senate and State Assembly Districts must look to correct the obvious discriminatory practice which has tainted our voting process and disgusted voters. I am also requesting that the next round of hearings extend into the evening so that working people can have a chance to testify. Thank you. SENATOR SKELOS: Any questions? (No response.) SENATOR SKELOS: Thank you very much. MS. JUDITH CRUZ: You're welcome. SENATOR SKELOS: Phil Goldstein, Co-Chair, Issues Committee, Independent party of the State of New York. Welcome. MR. PHILIP GOLDSTEIN: Thank you, Members of the Committee. My name is Philip Goldstein. I reside at 10 Rodney Street, Port Jefferson Station. And I am here this morning to discomfort you. As you know, the Independence Party came into existence as a reform movement. We are fed up with the bipartisan politics that has enabled the two major parties to continue to divide and conquer. You each act as though you own the government. You make deals whereby the Republicans enjoy an ongoing majority in the Senate, the Democrats enjoy an ongoing majority in the Assembly. And despite your protestations to the contrary, incumbency assurance seems to be the primary function. Your predecessors I would equate to Adolf Eichmann. The back-office bureaucrats who use the computers are akin to Mr. Eichmann, the hollerith use of the IBM cards to do their dirty deeds with regard to genocide in World War II. And you are destroying democracy by the activities of your Committee. And I hope that, to the contrary, you will become profiles in courage and discontinue the abuses that have existed in the past. Contrary to the attitude that prevails, the political parties do not own the government of the State of New York. It belongs to the people of the State of New York. And your practices of drawing lines for the benefit of the two parties and the incumbents is despicable. I am a victim of that. I happen to live right on the boundary between the 1st and 2nd senatorial districts. And even paranoids have enemies. It seems that I was excluded from the 1st senatorial district in which I resided for many, many years, and though I live in the Connetquot School District, a handful of voters from my election district were severed and shifted over into the 2nd senatorial district, thus separating me from my base of support amongst the constituents that I believe I represented many years in my political activities. I urge you to stop playing games. You have the advantage by virtue of the fact, as was pointed out in the Baldwin case, that much of Long Island is hamlet, that it is unorganized in terms of its jurisdictional lines other than by school district, fire district, zip code and so on. I would urge you to respect those communities of interest and not slice them up as a matter of difference to benefit the incumbent and shift a handful of one party's voters into one district or out of another district. What you are doing is you are making a mockery of the electoral process. You do for a decade what was done to the black voters in Florida in this past presidential election. You disenfranchise people. If I am a Democrat in a Republican-dominated area, I might just as well stay home on election day because it's a foregone conclusion. And as the gentleman from the ACLU pointed out, I believe that there is legal grounds to bring a case before the Federal Courts because of this onerous practice. It makes voting meaningless. And this whole issue has come to the fore lately which is why I urge to engage in profiles of courage, to stop playing the kinds of games that you play and start at the east end of Long Island and draw the district lines regardless of how the chips may fall, but taking into concern the communities of interest so that people are not divided and conquered as happens with the minority communities. It is a shameful, shameful practice. And the Reform Party is determined to do something about it. We may not succeed in this round, but we will persevere. Thank you. SENATOR SKELOS: Any questions? ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: I have a question. Do you take questions, sir? MR. PHILIP GOLDSTEIN: Oh! Yes. Certainly. (Laughter.) ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: I would like to understand. You alluded to your being taken out of a district that you had represented. Did you once hold public office? MR. PHILIP GOLDSTEIN: No. I meant in terms of my political activities, that I was a thorn in the side of the powers that be and as a result of which they in a sense shifted me off so that I was now in an area under Senator Lack and that I had no community of interest because I had not been involved. I was the founding Vice President of the Affiliated Brookhaven Civic Organizations which is an umbrella group of civic organizations in the Town of Brookhaven. And I have always been a political activist. And what happens is in a sense I was suddenly -- I mean I realize I could still continue to show up, but I was no longer a constituent of Mr. LaValle. And in a sense it was a legal, it was de iure, you know. I really didn't allow it to interfere. But it makes a mockery, the fact that these people who are in the Connetquot School District and had a community of interest suddenly found themselves sliced off and put into a senatorial district where, you know, they had no sense of association. And this is a very common practice because hamlets are ill-defined which is why I urge you to, as you march westward from the eastern tip of Long Island, to give due consideration, as the Baldwin people pointed out, to the fact that there are school districts and fire districts that often almost coincide. They don't coincide because they -- there is a political aspect to this that the fire commissioners don't want to have their district lines coincide with the school district lines because there is a temptation then of creating some kind of political entity. We live on Long Island under a multiplicity of jurisdictions. So -- ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: I think I understand. My question was had you ever held public office. MR. PHILIP GOLDSTEIN: No. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: To help us, as long as you are at the table, I wonder if you could define the community that you are speaking about. MR. PHILIP GOLDSTEIN: Well, as far as my community, my personal community is concerned, I reside in what is called Port Jefferson Station, which is the wrong side of the tracks from Port Jefferson. And this is one of the things that you need to consider in terms of drawing the lines. There is a north shore of Long Island, there is a south shore of Long Island and perhaps in some areas of Long Island there is a central portion to Long Island. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: Port Jefferson Station is divided now? MR. PHILIP GOLDSTEIN: Well, no. As I said, the western fringe is where the dividing line exists between the 1st and 2nd senatorial districts and just a segment of the Connetquot School District was excised and put into the 2nd senatorial district. It's not of major concern, but it just points out the callousness and indifference of the Committee as is represented by the people who are here complaining about the fact that their communities are disrespected. The people who are doing this, the back-office bureaucrats, are drawing lines on a map with a greater concern for how to shift the voters in order to satisfy incumbency insurance rather than having a concern for the constituents who they represent. I mean look at the abomination called the -- ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: Do you have -- MR. PHILIP GOLDSTEIN: -- 5th Congressional District. How do you explain a Congressional District that extends through three counties, hop, step and jump? It's incomprehensible to me how this could be justified. I realize that you have the backing of the courts with regard to gerrymandering. But gerrymandering is an abominable practice. And believe me, the Independence Party will work long and hard to put an end to the gerrymandering practice. And one of our goals is proportional representation because it solves a lot of the problems including campaign finance reform because that way communities of interest can vote and be assured that they will have a representative sitting at the table regardless of how much money the opponents spend and regardless of how they gerrymander districts. And so to our mind proportional representation is one of the ultimate solutions. And, by the way, for those of you members of the two chambers, I would urge you to think about proportional representation as a third alternative to the election of town boards because that's another area of great concern. The fact that one party has total control in a town is also an abomination. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: Mr. Goldstein, -- MR. PHILIP GOLDSTEIN: It smacks of the Soviet Union or any of the totalitarian societies. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: Mr. Goldstein, could I ask you one more question. MR. PHILIP GOLDSTEIN: Yes. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: In deference to the other people who are waiting -- MR. PHILIP GOLDSTEIN: Yes. I'm sorry -- ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: -- to speak -- MR. PHILIP GOLDSTEIN: -- for taking up time. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: -- I would just ask you to try to confine your answer to my question. MR. PHILIP GOLDSTEIN: Okay. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: You used some rather harsh words: abomination, Eichmann and others to -- MR. PHILIP GOLDSTEIN: That's exactly how I feel. I'm very passionate. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: I understand you feel that way. I just wonder if you feel that it is also an abomination for a political party to select its candidates based on how much money they contribute before the selection process. MR. PHILIP GOLDSTEIN: Unfortunately, the way the game is played -- see, we don't write the rules. You guys write the rules -- ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: Your party is the only party that does that. MR. PHILIP GOLDSTEIN: -- and you write the rules for your advantage. And so sometimes you got to fight fire with fire. And so, therefore, -- I mean look at what happened across the River in the Jersey when you talk about, you know, millionaires buying office. Hey, if we need to use big money, heavy hitters, in order to get ourselves a place on the ballot and to advance our cause, we'll do what is necessary because we cannot put up with the destruction of democracy which seems to be the practice as is currently engaged in. And while I can condemn your predecessors, I hope that you will rise above it. Thank you. SENATOR SKELOS: Any other questions? (No response.) SENATOR SKELOS: Delano Stewart, Publisher, Point of View Newspaper. MR. DELANO STEWART: My name is Delano Stewart. I'm a resident of Wyandanch at 133 Commonwealth Drive. And I am the publisher of Point of View Newspaper. Mr. Chairman, Task Force Members: At the outset I would like to wish you the wisdom of Solomon in trying to reconcile the various competing interests and needs in communities and constituencies. I want to thank you for the opportunity to comment on an aspect of this process that is particularly troubling to me. It is my hope that once you are aware of the difficulties resulting from this aspect of your process, that you will assist us in securing some relief. When I was growing up, my father, a devout minister, instilled in me a deep respect for the practice of fairness. He was far from unique in his devotion to that fairness. The Founding Fathers of this country, despite some other shortcomings, also attempted to institutionalize fairness in this the greatest country in the history of mankind. They mandated equal representation through the use of representative districts that are to be adjusted to equalize population every ten years. They mandated a decennial census to identify shifts in population and serve as the basis of the equalization of districts. That practice and principle has been religiously adhered to in most of its aspects. However, there is one aspect of this practice that has remained wholly unfair. The concept of community integrity has been applied to many in the process of drawing representative district lines. However, for at least the last three decades, we find that on Long Island that concept has been studiously ignored in several minority communities. In each of the last three redistricting efforts, lines have undergone considerable, and at times, even radical changes. However, the lines in the minority communities that we object to have remained constant. In Nassau County, for example, Roosevelt continues to be separated into two districts, as is Uniondale. And in Suffolk County, the community of Wyandanch continues to be separated into two districts and separate from North Amityville, a community with which many interests are shared. Brentwood, a predominantly Hispanic and African American community, similarly is divided by Senate district lines that run through the middle of it, and so on. We recognize that it may not always be possible to preserve the integrity of every community in the process of drawing new district lines every ten years. But if we adhere to the principles of fairness, the harm wrought by rending asunder the representation of a community by district lines that divide it into two districts should at least be a shared evil that changes from each -- in each redistricting process. Over the last thirty years, this evil has been visited upon several predominantly minority communities. Despite the vagaries of the district lines, the lines dividing the above-mentioned minority communities have been the only constants in the process of redistricting. Over the last thirty years, the votes of these minority communities have been divided and diluted, reducing their impact on the political process and possibly serving as the cause of the failure of those communities to successfully eliminate many of the ills that plague them. Whatever the intent, this outcome of a process designed to provide fairness is inherently suspect. Representatives of communities decide State policies. Without a significant impact on the political process because of the dilution of their vote, minority communities suffer innumerable disadvantages, economic and social and otherwise. For example, funds provided to spur economic development of so-called distressed communities, a euphemism for minority communities, go to non-residents of those communities. Those non-residents further secure tax abatements at the expense of the so-called distressed community. They construct buildings, import their existing labor force, and take their profits out at five o'clock, and the community purported to be helped by the taxpayer-funded project is left with a concrete building they don't own, that pays no taxes, and that becomes empty once the tax abatement runs out. There is, therefore, absolutely no impact on the dire conditions this expenditure with distressed community's scarce tax dollars was intended to improve. For the last twenty-five years I have railed against this kind of economic raping of our communities' resources and many other injustices that the time restraints of this hearing do not permit me to go into. The effect so far of my railings can be compared to bird droppings on the Rock of Gibraltar that are simply washed away by the waves and rain. These entreaties for change essential to the growth and development and improvement of the quality of life in those communities will continue to be ineffective until the division and partial disenfranchisement of those communities come to an end. Our hope for enjoying the American dream in the same way that others do lies in the restoration of the principles of fairness imbedded in the Articles of the Constitution that created this process. If the evils of disenfranchisement through division of a community into two districts are unavoidable, at the very least they ought to be visited alternately on some others. We look to you, the Members of this Task Force, to help us to get a fair shake in our efforts to rise to the full potential of our communities in this great country. And in anticipation of that help, we extend to you our heartfelt and sincere gratitude. Again, thank you for the opportunity and the courtesies paid during this entreaty. Thank you. SENATOR SKELOS: Any questions? (No response.) SENATOR SKELOS: Thank you very much. MR. DELANO STEWART: Thank you. SENATOR SKELOS: Bridgehampton School. (No response.) SENATOR SKELOS: Martin Dense, D-e-n-s-e. (No response.) SENATOR SKELOS: Philip Goglas. (No response.) SENATOR SKELOS: Is Philip here? (No response.) SENATOR SKELOS: Michael Carroll. (No response.) SENATOR SKELOS: Eugene Burnett. MR. EUGENE BURNETT: May I invite Roger Corbin, legislator from the 1st Legislative District in Nassau County to join me, please. The previous speakers have certainly expressed our position -- SENATOR SKELOS: Could you speak into the mike so that -- MR. EUGENE BURNETT: The previous speakers have plainly expressed our position. And not to sound redundant, I prepared a written statement on our position that I would like to have this distributed to the Members of the Board. My name is Eugene Burnett. SENATOR SKELOS: Just a moment until we get that distributed. MR. EUGENE BURNETT: I think our written statement will clearly outline that there has been a pattern of discrimination, a pattern, an effort to separate the black community, therefore diluting the minority communities' vote in Suffolk and Nassau County. In going over this material that I have submitted, I just can't understand how this Board, after saying who you are and what you are about, how what has happened to minority voters on Long Island for the last three decades, how that could have occurred. I moved to Amityville in 1950 to the Ronette Park Housing Project because as a veteran, a returning veteran, we were rejected from living in Levittown. I was personally rejected there. And Ronette Park opened up to minorities and we moved there. And then Carver Park in Wyandanch. That's how these two communities evolved. We, to this day, fifty years later, these two communities, if you check the voting pattern, they are identical. To separate them into two separate senate districts makes no sense whatsoever. And I just don't understand that. I'm going to at this time ask Dr. Tobias to give you an overview of our position. And I've submitted the papers to you. Dr. Tobias. SENATOR SKELOS: Could you repeat your whole name, Dr. Tobias? DR. RANDOLPH TOBIAS: Randolph Tobias, and I represent the Babylon Town Black Caucus. I want to say good morning to the Members of the Task Force and thank you for the opportunity for the presentation. The New York State Senate redistricting of Nassau and Suffolk County is about intentional discrimination based principally on race. The Senate districts drawn by the Legislature for the past three decades, stating from the 1970s, shows a consistent pattern of splitting the black and Latino communities in Nassau and Suffolk Counties. Dividing large concentrations of black and Latino voters so as to dilute their voting power has been the only consistent principle in drawing and redrawing Senate districts. This is racial gerrymandering. In splitting these communities -- the splitting of these communities did not result from any effort to keep existing local government boundaries intact. Although it has been necessary to cut through county, town and village boundaries in Long Island in order to comply with the one person/one vote principle, the division of these local government units has been far more extensive than necessary. In 1992, for example, the Legislature created for the first time a pair of Nassau/Suffolk districts, one of which is the 8th Senate District, which splits the minority population in the Town of Babylon. If the Legislature had wished to keep local government units intact insofar as possible, it could have created a single Nassau/Suffolk District by including more of the Town of Huntington in the 5th Senatorial District and could have kept the Town of Babylon undivided. Now, let's get into some specifics. Nassau County. There are large and growing black and Latino populations in the communities comprising Freeport, Roosevelt, Uniondale, Hempstead, West Hempstead, Lakeview, South Hempstead and Baldwin. These populations have been repeatedly split between the 6th and 8th Senate Districts. The adjoining area of Westbury and Newcastle has meanwhile been placed in the 7th Senate District along with Elmont and South Floral Park. While North Valley Stream has been placed in the 9th Senate District, South Hempstead and Baldwin have been divided between the 8th and 9th Senatorial Districts. In Suffolk County, the same community population in the Town of Babylon was split between the 4th and the 5th Senatorial Districts in 1982 and between the 4th and 8th Senatorial Districts in 1992 by a line dividing Amityville, Copiague, North Lindenhurst, West Babylon and Wyandanch. The black and Latino populations in the Town of Islip have been split between the 3rd and 4th Senate Districts by lines dividing Brentwood and Bayshore. In conclusion, splitting the minority communities discourages interracial coalition building. What it does, however, it creates polarized and segregated politics which is corrosive to the democratic principle of this country. Splitting the minority communities cannot be justified as an attempt to achieve partisan ends or to protect incumbents. Partisanship and incumbent protection have been both recognized by the courts as legitimate purposes in redistricting, but it is, as my colleague said, a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to use racially discriminatory means to achieve those ends. Splitting the minority population denies representation to communities defined by actually shared interest, not just by race, and makes it difficult for their senators to respond to their needs. Now, as a Trustee on the Deer Park Board of School Education, education is the best example. Education is the largest single category of State and local government expenditures in New York State. Funding for local school districts is the largest single item in the State budget and the education aid formula is the most contentious issue in the Legislature addressed each year. In Nassau and Suffolk Counties, the school districts with large minority populations tend to be less affluent, less able to finance public education from their local tax base and less well financed than the districts with very small minority populations. Systematically splitting minority populations not only dilutes the voting power of minority voters as such, but also dilutes the power of voters who have shared interest in changing the State school aid formula to reduce the inequality in school financing. The Senators wishing to be reelected are then forced to respond to those voters who have a vested interest in the status quo. Last but not least, systematically splitting minority communities decade after decade after decade - and the analysis is there, the data is there - undermines the democratic principle of proportionate equality. Thank you very much. SENATOR SKELOS: Are there any questions? ASSEMBLYMAN PARMENT: I was just going to ask, does your organization plan to submit to this Task Force suggestions or plans for these district boundaries? MR. EUGENE BURNETT: Yes. And we are very happy to hear that you are going to make your database publicly available to us. But we will submit a plan that we think would be equitable. ASSEMBLYMAN PARMENT: Thank you. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: Dr. Tobias, since you read the statement, I assume that my question should be directed to you. DR. RANDOLPH TOBIAS: That's fine. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: This is your statement. I'm just struck by the fact that -- you talk about the division of boundaries, of neighborhoods into different districts. I'm in the Assembly and I'm concerned with the Assembly districts. And as I look at the Assembly lines, it appears to me that you have an issue as between Brentwood, North Bayshore and Bayshore, which are divided between the 5th, the 7th and the 8th Assembly Districts. Yet I'm struck as to why you make no mention of the Assembly Districts. Why is your testimony confined only to Senate Districts? DR. RANDOLPH TOBIAS: Because I think it brings home clearly and clearer racial gerrymandering. I think that this, of course, can apply to Assembly Districts, it can apply to other districts. But I chose to just speak about the senatorial redistricting because it just brings home more clearly in my mind what we need to do. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: As I look at that community, as I can see it, and you live in -- I'm sorry, you live in? DR. RANDOLPH TOBIAS: I live in Deer Park, which is in the Town of Babylon. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: Perhaps you are not as familiar with the Town of Islip, but I assume you are because you presented this testimony. As an outsider looking only at the demographics on the map -- and I know I take great risk in asking any question about such data, but that is the best I have and perhaps you can fill me in -- it appears as if the minority communities in Brentwood and Bayshore and North Bayshore are currently split between the 5th, the 7th and 8th Assembly Districts. And I note that the Assembly members representing those three districts are Mr. Levy, Mr. Boyle and Mr. Barraga who, with the exception of Mr. Barrage, who does have Spanish ancestry, are not minority representatives. And I wonder if you would address either now or in a subsequent filing to the Task Force your commentary on the concerns you may have with that condition as well. DR. RANDOLPH TOBIAS: We'll do that subsequently. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: Thank you. MR. EUGENE BURNETT: Legislator Corbin. MR. ROGER CORBIN: Yes. Thank you. Good morning. Legislator Roger Corbin. I'm the Deputy Presiding Officer in Nassau County. I live in Westbury. You know, it's amazing. I'd like to give an overall assessment of all of this. You know, we are in America. The year is 2001. And we are still in a divided society. Whether we agree with that or not, it is a fact. And the only place that it plays out so obviously is in the political arena. Living in Westbury, my senatorial district is the 7th Senatorial District. Our Senator is Michael Balboni, who is a lovely young man and very intelligent. But the fact remains is that the residents of Westbury/Newcastle are gerrymandered out of any possibility of any one of our members or our community residents running successfully for that office. And there's some examples. The example is last year, two years -- well, a year-and-a-half ago, the BOCES School District wanted to move their headquarters into the Westbury community. What it did it took out $380,000 of taxes out of our school district. And most of the minority, the seven minority school districts on Long Island are suffering because of the lack of resources. Our Assemblyman, I live in the 13th Assembly District, is David Sidikman and my State Senator is Michael Balboni. They drew up some legislation to make the school district whole. Now, being in the political arena I knew anyone from upstate, anyone from New York City, from Suffolk County could care less whether or not we lost $380,000 out of our school district. So the legislation that David Sidikman drew up, which passed the Assembly, and the legislation that Michael Balboni, which basically passed the Senate, was not going to be signed by the Governor. The bottomline was it wasn't signed by the Governor. So what do the residents do? In addition to that, being a Nassau County legislator, the majority side some three years ago decided to buy King Cullen property. The reason why I mention King Cullen because it's right across the street from where BOCES is. $420,000 out of the school district. We were just five Democrats on the County Legislature. We couldn't stop them. They had a supermajority. So it went through. And it went through and the school district just about lost $1 million in resources. Who cares? No one. And that's the way we look at it. No one really cares. When I look at our children in Roosevelt, the only one taking the heat is Assemblywoman Earlene Hill, not Kemp Hannon, who could care -- I can say it out front and I told him - could care less. Why? Because the community is gerrymandered out from having any kind of political impact. We cannot run a successful candidate against him. Maybe the minority community is registered Democrat. That's not our problem. That's a national problem. That's a perceptual problem. And you have to correct that. But just imagine if the Italian community was gerrymandered. They wouldn't stand for that. If the Jewish community was gerrymandered, they wouldn't stand for it. If the Irish community was gerrymandered, they wouldn't stand for that. And you wouldn't be sitting here not doing something about it. But our community on Long Island has been gerrymandered for the last, as Mr. Burnett said, fifty years. And what we need is to correct this. In this reapportionment we need to correct it. We need a senatorial district, a fair district that we can possibly win, talking about minorities. And when you talk in terms of minorities, I mean you look at the educational. Most of you, all of you basically what you deal with is the education, the funding or lack thereof of funding to all the school districts. I've always said that in Albany they think we all have polo ponies and we don't. We are suffering just like the inner cities and it's very, very difficult. SENATOR SKELOS: I would just point out to you that Mario Cuomo made that statement, not the legislature. MR. ROGER CORBIN: Well, you're right. And where is he today? (Laughter.) ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: Behind the scene somewhere. MR. ROGER CORBIN: But the point I'm getting to is that this whole educational thing, the national discussion, debate on education, for the first time our youngsters are hearing new vocabulary - vouchers and charter. And what are we doing? I mean think about it. You say you don't want to fund schools that are not functioning. But the thing that is interesting is that when you deal with the Roosevelt School District, in Roosevelt and the surrounding communities, the threat to close that school meant that these black kids would wind up in various other schools which are predominantly white. When many white residents realized that, all of a sudden let's figure out a solution. And Roosevelt has no tax base whatsoever. The homes have been overassessed and we are addressing that now as we speak. But the point is that as long as we put blinders on in terms of our society, as long as we say, well, they are in one political party and we don't want to correct the situation, we are going to continuously go through this in this country continuously. You are not going to finally put this to rest. Someone has to take the first step. I would ask the Senate to please take the first step, and the Assembly, because if you don't, our communities, all of our communities, are going to be affected by this. And you know it and I know it because you have to spend more money to keep people out than if you knock down the walls, the Berlin walls I call them, on Long Island and in New York State. Let New York State show this country that finally we are not going to have a divided society. I should be able to go into my good friend Dean Skelos' district when he retires and say I want to run for his seat. But I know the reality of that because we have racial block voting. And that's the reality. The test that they give certain individuals: do you like this, are you talking to this one, are you friends with that one. And it's a perception. And that's why we are where we are today because we're just talking about perception. I mean Levittown -- when my parents moved to Westbury, we moved from South Queens. We moved into Newcastle. And we heard Levit say: GIs apply, negroes don't bother. And we live with that today. We live with the Archie Bunkers of the world. And hopefully we can finally dilute this. Why? A black child and a white child together, what is wrong with that? What is wrong with our society? And I'm not here to just preach. But this is the overall picture of what's wrong. And when you grapple with drawing lines, you should just have the interest of the communities and those who can best give our society the best kind of representation because I believe that diversity is the best. When you have one class, one race, one religion, one economic status representing people, it's not the best for all of us. So I would urge this Committee to please, please look at the realities of life. And one last thing, just with education. I did a little experiment and I said what's wrong with education is that it's racially divided. And I was in Clark, South Westbury. And I said to the teaching staff and the PTA there, I said, let me ask a very quick question: what if -- let's play the "what if" game -- what if African Americans were your teachers and administrators - and let's not play games, they're all qualified, they're all Ph.D.s -- would you object to that? And I had a couple of hands. And I said: why? Why would you object to that? And they said: Well, because, you know, I want my kids to learn about their own. I'm glad you said that. Look in all your minority school districts and look who is teaching our children. And you want to know what's wrong? The perception of, well, you don't have no daddy, well, you can't put two words together. And these kids feel this. Ask our children. They feel this. They feel this negativity given to them. How do we break it? Well, we can break it as elected officials and not tolerate that kind of injustice to our kids. The only way all of us can win is we have to have a coalition of different ideas and different people. That's the only way we win in this country. You cannot win by dividing a society. And the Los Angeles mayoralty should tell us a story. You cannot be just Mexican American and say I want to be your mayor. You have to be a mayor for everybody. And that's the key to this. We have to have a Senate that is embracing everybody and the Assembly and the Congress and the Legislature. We cannot any longer afford to divide our society. And basically that's my statement. Thank you. MR. EUGENE BURNETT: Well, in closing, I would just like to say that we are a different community than we were in 1970. I dare say we are a different community and we are better organized than we were in 1992. And I want this Committee to clearly understand that we don't intend to drop the ball here. We are going to take this to the wall. And we want change. And I think the other thing that I would like to mention is that this community here needs some affirmative action. You only got one. And we don't feel impotent. We'll be there for the long run, wherever this goes. But we will not accept what has happened in the three decades. Thank you. SENATOR SKELOS: Are there any questions? SENATOR DOLLINGER: I just have one. As I counted, some real quick math - it wasn't my major -- there are approximately somewhere between 420,000 or 500,000 non-white residents in Suffolk and Nassau County. That includes a growing Hispanic population as well as an African American population and an Asian population. One of the tasks that we have, if we were inclined as you suggest to bring these communities together and give them a voice, is to figure out how to do that with our Constitutional compulsions to be compact and to be contiguous and other State Constitutional restrictions. And my question to you is do you think that's possible to meet our other -- and I understand your voice clearly today is that we have responsibilities to new voices and maybe even if not so new voices in Nassau County to make sure they are heard at the table, in the Senate and the Assembly. And my question is, (a) do you think that can be done if we were so inclined; and (2) there's a challenge -- you talked about not dropping the ball. I would hope that you pick up the pen and give us your guidance especially from someone from Rochester, New York, who represents a significant African American and Spanish community. I can tell you where the boundaries are in my district in my neck of the woods. I can't down here in Nassau County. My question to you is, is it possible, and two, if it is, that you accept the challenge and do it, show us. MR. EUGENE BURNETT: We clearly accept the challenge and we will be submitting drawings and so forth to you. SENATOR DOLLINGER: Thank you. MR. EUGENE BURNETT: And let me just say one thing, Senator. You're from Rochester. Just look at your colleague's, Michael Balboni's district and look at the Westbury/Newcastle community. There is no way that that community should be in the 7th Senatorial District. There is no way. It's just a clear gerrymandering of our residents. And we should not be in that district. If anything, we should be in the 7th Senatorial District, if anything. SENATOR DOLLINGER: Let me just ask. You're now in 7th. MR. EUGENE BURNETT: I'm now in the 7th Senatorial District. SENATOR DOLLINGER: Where would you go? If I said to you redraw that line, what other districts, what other portions of the districts would you put it in? MR. EUGENE BURNETT: I would -- Kemp Hannon's district which represents most of the minority communities, and to make Roosevelt and Uniondale whole in that district and give Mr. Balboni Garden City. SENATOR DOLLINGER: Again, I would just encourage you to help this map-challenged member of the Commission to figure this out and go to work on Long Island. And I would also suggest that there are lots of variations. I mean we don't necessarily, even to accommodate the particular new voices or middle-aged voices in Long Island, doesn't necessarily mean that they are all -- we have to create a district that is, as you probably know, a majority minority district. We could create several influence districts. And I would just encourage you to look at several permutations that might achieve the goal that you articulated. DR. RANDOLPH TOBIAS: You did pose a specific question can you do it. Yes, you can do it. I always say that there is a difference between a politician and a statesman or with Debra Levine a statesperson. Be statepersons. You will be given the data and you will see the consistency since the 1970s. And to echo a moviemaker, Spike Lee, do the right thing. Just do the right thing. SENATOR SKELOS: Any other questions? (No response.) SENATOR SKELOS: Thank you very much. MR. EUGENE BURNETT: Thank you. SENATOR SKELOS: Nathaniel Ham. MR. NATHANIEL HAM: Good morning. Thank you very much for allowing me the opportunity to speak before you this morning. My name is Nathaniel Ham. I represent the Huntington Black Caucus. I live at 29 Vanderbilt Parkway, Dix Hills, New York. Also, let me say from the outset we apologize if I sort of repeat some of the things that have already been echoed this morning. Being that we are all on the same topic and theme, a lot of things are repeated. The Senate Districts drawn by the Legislature in 1970, 1980 and 1990 show a consistent and unveering pattern of splitting the black and Hispanic community in Nassau County in the Town of Hempstead, North Hempstead. And the plans for 1980 and 1990 extend the patterns to Suffolk County for the Town of Babylon and Islip. Those three plans, 1972, 1982, with technical revisions in 1984, and 1992 represent every Senate District plan put in effect through legislation during the one person/one vote era. During the 1960 court-imposed plan, no legislation brought New York State into compliance with the original one person/one vote ruling. In 2002 if the legislators enact a Senate plan that continues for a fourth decade the systematic splitting of Long Island minority communities, it will be clear that the pattern shows intentional racial discrimination and that race is the predominant factor in determining the boundaries of the Long Island Senate Districts. The geographic patterns, contiguous, large and growing concentrations of black and Hispanic population have been systematically split so as to dilute the voting power of minority group voters. In Nassau County there are large and growing black and Hispanic populations in the compact, contiguous region comprising Freeport, Roosevelt, Hempstead, Uniondale, West Hempstead and South Hempstead and Baldwin. These minority populations have been repeatedly split between the 6th Senate District and the 8th Senate District. The adjoining area in Westbury and Newcastle has meanwhile been placed in the 7th Senate District along with Elmont and South Floral Park. And while North Valley Stream has been placed in the 9th Senate District, South Hempstead and Baldwin have been divided between the 8th and 9th Senate District. In Suffolk County, the large and growing black and Hispanic populations in the Town of Babylon were split between the 4th and the 5th Senate District in 1982 and between the 4th and 8th Senate District in 1992 by a line dividing Amityville, North Lindenhurst, West Babylon and Wyandanch. The black and Hispanic population in the Town of Islip has been split between the 3rd and 4th Senate District by a line drawn between Brentwood and Bayshore. The demographic pattern in 1992, the legislature drew the Long Island Senate Districts so that all nine districts would be at least three-fourths non-Hispanic, whites. The balancing of the minority population was so effective that even in the decade in which Long Island black and Hispanic population grew rapidly and the non-Hispanic, white population declined, the composition of every Senate District was at least two-third non-Hispanic, white. Nassau County, when the 6th Senate District was drawn according to the 1992 Census, it had 16.2 percent black population including all persons who identify themselves as black, whether Hispanic or non-Hispanic, while the adjoining 8th Senate District had a 15.6 percent population black. The Hispanic population of the 6th Senate District was 6.9 percent and the Hispanic population of the 8th Senate District was 6.6 percent according to the 2000 Census. The minority population of these districts has grown rapidly by nearly evenly on both sides of Senate District boundaries. The black population is now 17.8 percent of the 6th Senate District and 17.1 percent of the 8th Senate District. The Hispanic population is now 12.1 of the 6th and 11.1 of the 8th. Suffolk County. When the 3rd Senate District was drawn according to the 1992 Census, it had an Hispanic population of 10.3 percent, while the adjoining 4th Senate District had a 9.1 percent Hispanic population. The 3rd Senate District had a 5.8 black population including all persons who identified themselves as black whether Hispanic or non-Hispanic, and the 4th Senate District had a 8.6 percent population in Suffolk County. The 2000 Census showed a minority population growing rapidly but nearly evenly on both sides of the Senate District boundaries. The Hispanic population is now 16.4 percent in the 3rd Senate District and 13.5 percent in the 4th District. The black population is now 8.6 percent in the 3rd and 10.9 in the 8th. Racially gerrymandering the large concentrations of black and Hispanic voters so as to dilute their voting power has been the only consistent principle followed in drawing these Senate Districts. The boundary between the 6th and 8th Senate District in Nassau, both districts have changed greatly over the decades. In 1972, the 8th Senate District extends from the New York City line to Hempstead, the Oyster Bay Town line in 1982. The western boundary of the 8th Senate District was moved from South Hempstead and the eastern boundary was moved from the Suffolk County line in 1992. The 8th Senate District was extended across the line into the Town of Babylon. In 1972, the 6th Senate District was entirely within the Town of Hempstead. In 1982 and 1992, the 6th Senate District was extended through the Town of Oyster Bay to the Suffolk County line. Throughout the three decades, however, the boundary dividing minority communities between the 6th and the 8th Senate District has remained virtually unchanged. The boundary lines drawn divided the minority communities within the Town of Babylon in 1992. A section of the Town of Babylon, comprising of East Farmingdale and North Amityville and part of Wyandanch, West Babylon, North Lindenhurst, Copiague, Amityville was attached to the 5th Senate District, which extends northward to the Town of Huntington and Oyster Bay and the City of Glen Cove. It was primarily a north shore district in 1992. The same part of the Town of Babylon identified -- I mean identical except for three blocks was attached to the 8th Senate District. A south shore district extending to the Selwyn part of Oyster Bay, then to the Town of Hempstead, the only consistency from the decades to the next is the line drawn dividing the minority community. The boundary lines for the minority community within the Town of Islip, 3rd and 4th Senate Districts, changed extensively from 1982 to 1992 and the boundaries between the two districts look not at all like the two plans except in one place. The portion of the district boundary that divides Brentwood and thereby splitting the minority community in the Town of Islip is precisely identical to the two plans from the townline and Molin Road and north of the intersection of Commack Road and Candlewood Path to the south. The consistent pattern shown in these three examples just give suggestion that the portion of the district boundaries that split the minority populations were established first and that any necessary changes, such as equalized district population in accordance with the latest census were made around the fixed feature. The split-up of minority communities does not result from efforts to keep existing local government boundaries intact. Although it has been to cut throughout county, town and village boundaries on Long Island in order to comply with the one person/one vote principle, the division of these local government units has been more extensive than necessary. In 1992, for example, the legislature created for the first time a pair of Nassau/Suffolk districts, one of which, the 8th Senate District, split the minority population in the Town of Babylon. If the legislators had wished to keep the local government unit intact insofar as possible, it could have created a single Nassau/Suffolk district by including more of the Town of Huntington in the 5th Senate District and could have kept the Town of Babylon undivided. Splitting minority communities cannot be justified in an attempt to achieve partisan ends or to protect incumbents. Partisan and incumbent protection have both been recognized by the courts as legitimate purposes in redistricting. But it is a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to use racially discriminatory means to achieving those ends. Systematically splitting the minority community decade after decade undermines democracy. Splitting the minority community denies representation of communities defined by actual sharing interest, not just by race, and making it difficult for their senators to respond to their needs. Okay. And I won't go into the educational aspect because I heard earlier Dr. Tobias speak relative to the educational portion of it. So I would not bring that up. But splitting the minority community discourages interracial coalition building. A racially polarized, a segregated policy has a corrosive effect on democracy. Interracial coalition building should be encouraged, but redistricting so as to dilute minority voting power and minimize minority percentages of any one district has just the opposite effect. Drawing districts in which black and Hispanic voters are not just the minority, but the smallest possible minority reduces the value of coalition partners and makes it easy and tempting to candidates to win an election without appealing to the voters and addressing their needs and concerns. So I call upon all of you today to just keep all of these facts in mind. I will submit a written document to my statements so that it can be viewed. Thank you. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: I have a question. I used to be in the radio business. Mr. Ham, I'm -- let me just get a couple of things straight. You live in Huntington? MR. NATHANIEL HAM: Yes, I do. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: In what part of Huntington? MR. NATHANIEL HAM: Dix Hills. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: Dix Hills. You're in the 9th Assembly District. MR. NATHANIEL HAM: Right. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: I've been struck by -- most of your testimony has to do with Nassau County. So I just want to establish you are a resident of Suffolk County in the Town of Huntington. MR. NATHANIEL HAM: That's right. My conclusion is that coalition building is very important. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: I understand. I'm wondering if you would address your own experience to the Assembly. As I've said to the previous witnesses, I'm in the Assembly. I'm concerned with drawing Assembly lines. And I'm looking at the Assembly Districts, the 9th, the 10th, the 11th, the 8th and the 7th. It strikes me in the Town of Huntington that -- I believe it was -- earlier Mr. Goldstein talked about - perhaps it was Mr. Brassell who talked about the fact that Greenlawn and Huntington Station were divided. It appears to me looking at a demographic map that the African American community in Ellwood and Greenlawn and Huntington Station are split between the 10th and the 9th Assembly Districts. Is that a concern of yours? MR. NATHANIEL HAM: Yes, it is. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: You live in Dix Hills. I should have asked Dr. Tobias, but I didn't notice the connection before. It's just south of you where he lives. MR. NATHANIEL HAM: Right. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: I believe the African American community in Deer Park and Wyandanch are split between the 10th and 11th Assembly Districts. MR. NATHANIEL HAM: That's right. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: Is that a concern of yours? MR. NATHANIEL HAM: That's a concern also. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: And if we were to go over to Islip - but that's a little far afield of where you live. Do you feel competent to talk about Islip as well? MR. NATHANIEL HAM: Actually, I think that if you check the pattern, the same pattern persists in Islip. For instance, I think Islip is divided into three different Assembly Districts. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: Assembly Districts. As I said before between the 5th, the 8th and the 7th. And that splits the Brentwood and Bayshore communities. MR. NATHANIEL HAM: That's a fact. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: I guess maybe coming from the Assembly, we have a natural -- well, we think we have a far superior house to the Senate because we have smaller districts and it's easier to represent. But in the context of your concern -- and, believe me, I'm a minority too. I'm a Republican. (Laughter.) MR. HOPPE: From the Canadian border. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: From the Canadian border, yes. And I guess -- this may seem a little unfair, but bear with me. But in politics, the whole history of politics, whether emerging immigrant groups or whether the African American population right after the Civil War and so on, has been that people who had been outsiders before, whether they were immigrants and not citizens at all or whether they were otherwise disenfranchised, as they moved into the political process, those of us who have studied political science over the years see there is a common pattern. They begin to get elected in the smaller neighborhoods where they perhaps have the cohesive populations and so forth. And not to say that the Senate is a better place, because we certainly are the better place, but they have larger districts. And speaking as an Assemblyman, I think it's fair to say that it's easier to strike out, to knock down barriers in the smaller districts. And so I'm wondering, given the population in the three areas we just mentioned, why the concern with the perhaps harder-to-attain larger districts and no concern for the Assembly District? I think out of twenty-two Long Island members of the Assembly only one is a minority. MR. NATHANIEL HAM: I think that both areas need to be addressed. And relative to senatorial versus assembly, I think that that's an area also that needs to be looked into. I don't think you can leave any stone unturned. The Senate, which happened to be up at this point in time, gives us an opportunity so we can address some of our larger concerns. But I do agree with you that the Assembly needs to be redefined. I'll be having more specific countdowns. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: I wish you would. I mean I'm tempted to say if you don't do it, who's going to do it. MR. NATHANIEL HAM: Right. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: And I don't mean to pass judgment. You live here, I live on the Canadian border. We couldn't be farther apart unless I were Mr. Parment who lives on the Ohio border. But be that as it may, we can all look at maps and I guess a fair comment -- I can make an uninformed and perhaps wrong comment but I'd say, you know, if you don't do some work on the Assembly, if you focus all your attention on the Senate, you may be missing your biggest opportunities of all. I would urge you -- if not you, somebody else -- to look at the Assembly lines and how you can create a Hispanic seat perhaps in Suffolk County or more minority Assembly seats in Nassau and Suffolk County because clearly you only got 126,000 people you have to build a district around and not 300,000. MR. NATHANIEL HAM: Thank you very much. We will take that under advisement and do some work on it. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: Thank you. SENATOR SKELOS: Are there any other questions? (No response.) SENATOR SKELOS: Thank you very much, sir. Zakhia Grant, Wyandanch Democratic Committee. (No response.) SENATOR SKELOS: Patrick Young. MR. PATRICK YOUNG: Hello! My name is Patrick Young. I'm an attorney with the Central American Refugee Center. We are located at 91 North Franklin Street, Room 211, Hempstead, New York. I live in Westbury. I just want to express the concerns of Central Americans on Long Island -- and there are more than 100,000 Central Americans who have moved here since the 1970s -- about the 2002 redistricting. I'm not an expert on legislative affairs, but I think that even an amateur can see the problems caused by the current district lines for Latinos on the Island. I'm not going to talk about Suffolk County or any type of broad approach to redistricting, but I do want to make the Task Force aware of the emerging core of the Latino population in Nassau County centered around what a lot of people call Little El Salvador which is located in Hempstead Village. Long Island's emerging Latino population has reached more than one-quarter of a million people. As a percentage of Long Island's total population, the Latino proportion has increased five-fold since the 1960s. However, current Senate Districts divide historically linked Latino communities in Westbury/Newcastle, which are in the 7th Senate District, Hempstead in the 6th Senate District and Roosevelt and Freeport in the 8th Senate District. Although Latinos in these villages all look to Hempstead as the center of Nassau's Latino culture - it's the place where the restaurants are, the community organizations, et cetera - the Senate lines see no commonality of interest among the people living in these villages and seriously dilute their influence with any State Senator. The interests of Latinos in these districts range from education, support for adult English language training, language access at State offices, et cetera. These interests can be overlooked as long as State Senate Districts on Long Island never contain more than seventeen percent Latino. No State Senator really sees the emerging Latino population as a primary constituency. It's important that the issues of Latino representation and the provision of a Latino vote be addressed now. If current trends continue, Latinos will make up one-in-five Long Islanders. This is not a population that has remained virtually unchanged over the last twenty or thirty years. This is a growing population. We are not claiming that forty years ago there was an attempt to disenfranchise Latinos because the Latino population was very small. But it is an emerging population. If these trends continue, one-in-four Long Islanders will be Latino, but they will have very little representation in the Assembly and no representation likely in the Senate and no concentrated voice in governmental affairs through their representatives. And that is problem that could endure for the next decade. Thank you. SENATOR SKELOS: Are there any questions? SENATOR DOLLINGER: Mr. Young, you said that if the population trend continues. Given the substantial growth, do you see any reason why it wouldn't? MR. PATRICK YOUNG: No. There's no reason to think that we will not see similar growth to what we have seen over the last decade in the coming decade. In fact, one of the changes we may see is that where the Latino population ten years ago was almost entirely Central American or Puerto Rican with some Cubans and others mixed in, that Dominicans now move in here as well as Mexicans. So we will actually diversify it. SENATOR DOLLINGER: How much -- based on your understanding of the numbers, how much is the population growth in the last decade? MR. PATRICK YOUNG: We think the 1990 Census actually undercounted as does the current Census. But we would see that the actual growth in the community has probably been about thirty percent/forty percent, and we would see similar growth no doubt over the next decade. SENATOR DOLLINGER: Just again based on your experience as the Program Director of the Central American Refugee Center, can you tell me what you think the extent of the undercount would be here in Nassau County? MR. PATRICK YOUNG: I could not tell you the extent. I know that after the 1990 Census the General Accounting Office published an alternative -- results of an alternative census for Glen Cove which showed that in the Salvadorean neighborhood in Glen Cove, which was intensively studied, in some blocks as many as seven out of eight people were not picked up by the Census. We do believe that this Census did a better job of counting. But it's impossible at this stage to determine what the undercount is. In addition to the undercount, since the Census was taken, if you go into any of the communities that I discussed, the number of new arrivals has also increased. SENATOR DOLLINGER: Do you have a sense of how quickly new arrivals are coming in? MR. PATRICK YOUNG: I don't know. SENATOR DOLLINGER: The reason why I ask that question, Mr. Young, is because in the congressional reapportionment, in the last reapportionment, which Senator Skelos' staff -- they did a I think what, from a demographic point of view, was I thought a near impossibility which was to make thirty-one congressional districts vary by only one person. They were all identical in size except two or three of them had one or two -- one fewer person or one more person. So with congressional reapportionment we have to design districts that are equal in the truest sense of the word. In the Senate and Assembly reapportionment there is a latitude given to the legislature in redrawing plans of deviations, which means we can make some districts -- the Senate District number is 311,000 and I think the Assembly District number is 126,000 or something of that nature. We get the -- they all don't have to be identical. We have a variation that in some cases can be ten percent, the smallest to the largest. One of the things that we can do with that is in districts in which we anticipate or which have a basis for growing populations, we can make those districts on the small end of the deviation scale with an anticipation that over time they are going to grow and we are going to see their population, even if they started at the small end, will midway through the decade or two-thirds of the way through the decade be at the norm or exceed the norm based on population trends. And that's why my question to you. It deals with how fast the population is growing because that might be a factor to take into account. If it appears that the Nassau County Hispanic population is growing quickly, then we may want to design districts that have smaller populations based on the bottom of the deviation realm rather than the top. MR. PATRICK YOUNG: Well, certainly anecdotally, it would be very easy to see that a place like Hempstead, Freeport, Newcastle, do continue growing. But I don't have demographic evidence. SENATOR DOLLINGER: That's why the interesting question is, although the Hispanic population is growing, the question is whether the overall population of the district is growing because our obligation is to balance those based on total population and not just on the influx of new immigrants. We have been in Queens and other places where there has been enormous growth in the population. It appears as though the trend is going to continue as well. So that was the basis for my question. And the final question is, do you anticipate that you or any similar group with respect to the Hispanic voices of Long Island would submit a plan to us? MR. PATRICK YOUNG: Yes. We are looking at submitting a plan for Central Nassau County. SENATOR DOLLINGER: Thank you. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: Would you help us out here. You have a unique perspective as the Program Director for the Central American Refugee Center in that I assume -- and correct me if I'm wrong -- most of the people you deal with most directly are not citizens or not yet. MR. PATRICK YOUNG: Actually, most of the people we deal with have been in the U.S. since the -- I'd say at least since the mid-1990s. So we have a large number of citizens as well as some folks who are undocumented and many more who are permanent residents and are in the process of becoming citizens. So it's a mixed community. It's not -- there's a lot of citizens. Twenty years ago there weren't a lot. Now there are. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: Well, that's even better for purposes of my question because we face a dilemma. You pointed out I think that the Hispanic/Latino population of some of these districts is -- doesn't exceed seventeen percent, and that that perhaps in your opinion doesn't get noticed or taken into account. The fact would be self-evident that the voting population is substantially less than that in a growing immigrant population. How do you -- and what do we have? We still have the seven years from the earliest possible time a person can become a citizen as an immigrant. MR. PATRICK YOUNG: It's five years. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: Five years. MR. PATRICK YOUNG: Or three if you are married to a U.S. citizen. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: How do we deal in trying to create a political -- remember, we are creating a political entity here through which the members of the community can carry out their political will. How do we deal with a growing minority population whereby the lag between the person's first arrival and presence on the scene and the time that person can vote is either three years if she's already an adult or five years or maybe eighteen years if the person is a baby when they arrive? How do we in drawing lines for the next ten years take that into account? Is there any way that you thought of that we can, I guess in the horse racing world it would be, handicap that district over the next ten years to most effectively anticipate the emergence of new voters as well as new residents? MR. PATRICK YOUNG: Well, I think that particularly if people see a benefit in becoming voters because they feel that their views are important to a particular State Senator -- in the Assembly world we're a little bit lucky because the Assembly District in Central Nassau, it does have minority representation and has been responsive to the Latino population. But people don't necessarily feel the tie-in with the State Senators since the State Senators by and large -- I'm not saying that they purposely ignore the district, but it's not -- or purposely ignore the Latino population, but it doesn't seem to be as important as other constituencies. I think that if they feel that Congress people, State Senators, Assembly people are being responsive, immigrants tend to become much more involved in the political system. In terms of getting people to become U.S. citizens, registering to vote, I mean we are part of the New York Immigrant Coalition and we are closing in on our 200,000th person we are registering to vote over the last couple of years. So it's a big goal within the immigrant communities to go from simply being an economic participant in life in New York State, going to work, paying your taxes, et cetera, to becoming a full civic participant in the life of the State. And, you know, what we don't want to see is, as this community becomes voters, that they find that there's not much to vote for because they're really not being listened to. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: Let me help you out a little bit and maybe you can pass this on. As somebody who goes to the well every two years for votes to sustain my representation of my people, I want to assure you that any group that's got seventeen percent is going to get my attention. When I was first elected, I was only elected by thirteen percent and a lot of us a lot smaller than that. So I wouldn't want you to minimize, when talking to people who may be wondering about this, the importance of seventeen percent. It's a lot. There are far fewer than seventeen percent of my constituents who are veterans and you better believe they get listened to. Now, again, I would just direct you briefly -- you live in Suffolk or Nassau? MR. PATRICK YOUNG: I live in Westbury which is in Nassau County. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: Are you familiar with both counties? MR. PATRICK YOUNG: Yes. Although not as much with Suffolk County. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: If I could ask you kind of the same question I asked Mr. Ham from your own perspective, why so little attention to the rather substantial Hispanic community in the Town of Islip which is divided into three Assembly Districts right now? MR. PATRICK YOUNG: To be honest, I'm not familiar with the Assembly Districts or Senate Districts in Suffolk County. I live and work -- ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: I would direct you to that, to pay some attention to that because I think, as I said before, there may be a much greater short-term opportunity to effect a true ability to elect and have a larger percentage if you attend to the drawing of the Assembly District lines in Suffolk County. MR. PATRICK YOUNG: Thank you. SENATOR SKELOS: Thank you very much. Michael De Cabinore. MR. MICHAEL DE CABINORE: Good morning. I'm going to speak about the congressional reapportionment. I have been a resident of Long Island for over fifty years. When I say Long Island, I just mean Nassau and Suffolk, not the geographical Long Island. I'm the Assistant Business Manager and Political Coordinator of Local 25 of the IBEW, the electricians union. I'm also a delegate to the Nassau/Suffolk Building Trades. And I'm a member of the Long Island Federation of Labor. Currently, Long Island has four full congressional seats and part of the fifth congressional district. Some people call that four and change when we say four dollars and a quarter. What I wouldn't want to see is any breakup of that four plus change. If the apportionment reduces any of the Long Island portion of the district, I would like to see it being taken out of the fifth because I don't want to see a breakup of the community. The county line of Queens and Nassau is a much stronger County line for the community than one between Suffolk and Nassau. Every April 5th we have a hearing -- not a hearing, we have a congressional night when we bring all of the candidates -- not the candidates, all the congress people to one meeting hall. Actually it's in our union hall. And we have a night where we all ask questions of each of the candidates. Excuse me, I keep calling them candidates. They're congressmen and congresswoman. And we ask them different questions from the labor community. But the community we have here is Nassau and Suffolk County. It doesn't include Queens. And although the congressman from the 5th happens to -- he carries the show any way, I hope if it is part of the 5th, we could keep -- we do keep him. But I think the only fair representation of the Nassau community, Nassau and Suffolk community, would be achieved if the CDs or the number of CDs that have to cross the line between Queens and Nassau is limited to one. That's it. SENATOR SKELOS: Questions? (No response.) SENATOR SKELOS: Thank you very much. ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: Just one little detail. What's your local number? MR. MICHAEL DE CABINORE: My local number is 25. SENATOR DOLLINGER: Just one comment. As you probably know, we have to reduce the number of congressional seats in this State from thirty-one to twenty-nine. So we are going through a reduction. And one of the consequences of that is that the number of people in each congressional district will significantly grow. We have a target of about 654,000 and change. And so I just did a quick tabulation. And in the four congressional districts that are currently wholly within Nassau and Suffolk -- MR. MICHAEL DE CABINORE: Right. SENATOR DOLLINGER: -- we're short by about 112,000 people. We need to go find 112,000 more to put into those districts in order to make them comply with our one man/one vote. SENATOR SKELOS: In fact, there will be 4.2 congressional districts on Long Island. SENATOR DOLLINGER: Correct. MR. MICHAEL DE CABINORE: There is currently 4.2? SENATOR SKELOS: No. There will be. MR. MICHAEL DE CABINORE: There will be 4.2. So that I'm asking that it be four whole. And as it now, a portion -- it's probably maybe even a little more, but it's still -- the .2 be another district. SENATOR DOLLINGER: I understand. I just want to make the point that what we have to do is go find people for the first four that are wholly contained within Nassau and Suffolk. And we'll have a little bit left over, but not as much as we had before. MR. MICHAEL DE CABINORE: But there will be enough for four you are saying? SENATOR SKELOS: Yes. SENATOR DOLLINGER: Yes. The answer to that is yes. MR. MICHAEL DE CABINORE: You know, I'm just saying that it's just one that crosses the line, which I guess would be the fifth. ASSEMBLYMAN PARMENT: Let me just understand. I'm sure I do. But your point is you would not like to see a second crossing of the Nassau/Queens or -- MR. MICHAEL DE CABINORE: Nassau/Queens. The City line -- ASSEMBLYMAN PARMENT: The City line -- MR. MICHAEL DE CABINORE: What we call Long Island. ASSEMBLYMAN PARMENT: Right. So Nassau and Suffolk would not share an additional congressional seat. MR. MICHAEL DE CABINORE: That's right, that only one would cross. And if there had to be a second crossing, the line in the community because -- I know Senator Skelos is from Long Island, but I'm sure he can tell you the line of the community between Nassau and Suffolk is not as strict or is not a change in communities as the one between the City line and Nassau County. And that there would only be one crossing. Because what happens is, in lobbying and other reasons, if you have -- if you have, you know, four dollars, and right now we have four dollars and a quarter, and then you say we will have four dollars and twenty cents, I don't want three dollars and a whole bunch of change. Because, you know, the congressmen who -- the three of them that would represent Queens would be less likely to be interested. SENATOR DOLLINGER: Just a final question. Would that analysis also apply to the State Senate and the State Assembly Districts? You prefer that they be wholly contained, as many as possible, in Nassau and Suffolk and not break the line with the City of New York? MR. MICHAEL DE CABINORE: Yeah. I'd say -- I realize that you may have to have one crossing. But I would like to see it limited. The same thing. SENATOR DOLLINGER: Thank you. SENATOR SKELOS: Any other questions? (No response.) SENATOR SKELOS: Aleen Barish. MS. ALEEN BARISH: Well, welcome to Long Island and thank you for the opportunity to testify today. New York, I'm sure you all know, was made a state on July 26, 1788. We began sending elected officials to Congress early the next year. In the two hundred and twelve years that Long Island voters have been electing members of Congress, only one woman has won that office. One woman in two hundred and twelve years, our own Carolyn McCarthy. I have to say that I am very fortunate in that Senator Skelos represents me in the State and Harvey Weisenberg in the Assembly and Carolyn McCarthy in the House of Representatives. I understand that New York must lose two congressional seats in the redistricting process. I ask that we do not undo the will of the people by eliminating the only woman in the Long Island delegation. Regardless of party affiliation, it is important and very important to every woman on Long Island that we have a voice in Congress. It took us a long, long time get to this point. We finally opened a little point in that glass ceiling. Let's try to keep it a wide open glass ceiling. We ask that you do everything in your power to keep Mrs. McCarthy's vital voice representing Long Island in the redistricting. I thank you very much. SENATOR SKELOS: Any questions? (No response.) SENATOR SKELOS: Thank you. Gwendlyn Brown. MS. GWENDLYN BROWN: Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Task Force Members. Thank you for this opportunity to express some of my concerns. I had not received any literature or any background in reference to the redistricting from the Task Force group. And if you do have it, I would appreciate something being sent to me in the mail. At this point I'm really expressing my concerns, a question and a statement. Where will the congressional and state legislative redistricting take place? If so, how will the new districts or the old districts affect the African American communities in fair representation? That is my statement and my question to you inasmuch as I do not have the background information to substantiate. ASSEMBLYMAN PARMENT: I'm not sure we have a complete answer for your question. But the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and its amendments and case law dealing with that Act of the Federal government has direct impact on how we draw the lines. And courts continue to struggle with this issue, and as we also do continue to struggle with it. But it will be our goal to create lines that would respond appropriately to the requirements of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. MS. GWENDLYN BROWN: 1965. Okay. Does this Task Force have any background information, literature or anything, a booklet or anything that I could possibly obtain? MS. LEVINE: If you would like, I would suggest that you call the office. You can get the phone number outside and we would be happy to assist you. MS. GWENDLYN BROWN: Okay. Thank you. SENATOR DOLLINGER: I just want to remind you of this that we made I think a critically important and a good decision earlier this week to make available on our website, which is going to be up I hope in the near future, which will allow people to download information, and we can have a disk available which will have additional information about census tract data and census data as well as political data which will show party affiliation and voting trends. And so there will be a lot of information out there for someone such as yourself who wants to get involved. And I would just encourage you to -- you've heard others at the table today talk about drafting a plan, a plan that would accommodate the needs of your community and its desire for a fair share at the table. I would just encourage you to do that. We hope to get lots of plans and lots of ideas so we can try and figure out what the right thing is for New York State. I encourage you to do that. MS. GWENDLYN BROWN: Thank you very much. SENATOR SKELOS: Dorothy Goosby, Councilwoman, Town of Hempstead. MS. DOROTHY GOOSBY: Good morning. May I have Mr. Richardson accompany me, please? Good morning -- good afternoon I think by now. It seems like morning still. It's certainly a honor to be able to sit before you and thank you very much for convening this forum. My name is Dorothy Goosby. I live in Hempstead. And I have held the office of Hempstead Town Councilwoman since 1999. My situation is an unusual one. I'm here today because of the lawsuit, Goosby v The Town of Hempstead. I was the lead plaintiff in the case which challenged the at-large voting practices used to select members of the Hempstead Town Board. In this ruling Judge Gleason of the United States District for the Eastern District of New York found that at-large voting practices used in the Town of Hempstead violated the Voting Rights Act and ordered the Town of Hempstead to submit a plan to remedy violation. The Town submitted a plan which proposed dividing the Town into one single member district for the Town's minority population and one larger at-large district for the rest of the Town. The Court held that this plan violated the United States Constitution Equal Protection Clause and ordered the adoption of the Town's alternative remedial plan which divided the Town into six councilmanic relatively equal single member districts. In this landmark ruling the court held, number one, that Hempstead's at-large election violated the Voting Rights Act in as much as it diluted the votes of the African Americans which resulted in their inability to elect their preferred candidates. Secondly, the Town's proposed two district plan violated the Equal Protection Clause. And, thirdly, the Town's proposed six district plan did not violate the Equal Protection Clause. The Legislative Task Force of Demographic Research and Reapportionment must be extremely cautious and follow the obligations of the United States Constitution, the one person/one vote principle, the State Constitution, Federal laws, court decisions and the numerous other demographic factors which go into redistricting. In recommending where the New York State boundaries should be drawn for the New York State Senate, care must be addressed to satisfy the three Jingles preconditions. First, that minority groups must be sufficiently large and geographically compact to constitute minority in a single member district. Second, the minority group must be politically cohesive. And, third, the minority group must demonstrate that the white majority votes sufficiently as a block to enable it in the absence of special circumstances usually to defeat minority preferred candidates. However, in a court of law the plaintiff in such a case must satisfy the three Jingles preconditions to prove a violation of the Voting Rights Act. While the Jingles preconditions are not in itself sufficient to establish a violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, the totality of circumstances concept must be factored into the process to ascertain whether or not the process would impair the ability of Black/Hispanic voters to elect or to participate equally in the political process and elect candidates of their choice. Furthermore, today, I'm here to ensure that as an elected representative from my community my voice is heard. My constituents elected me to represent their interest on issues that have a clear effect on their lives. Had not I exercised the opportunity to speak before this panel today, later I would feel partly responsible if the minority community were divided up and placed in many other districts. In the case where the minority community may be large enough to elect a representative in more than one community, and as the new redistricting plan might allow for the lines to be drawn in such a manner that only one minority would be elected, primarily because the lines would be drawn in such a manner as to ensure that minority communities are grouped together to elect one representative and the remainder of the minority community are placed in a district to prevent the election of another minority, we must exhibit extreme care in proposing the drawing of new lines that voting blocks or power structures which do not consider the needs of minorities are not factored into the process. We must ensure that voter dilution does not occur. We must factor into the process protection of the minority voting right. In closing, I do not know how the planning and scheduling of hearings were decided, but it was a terrible oversight on the part of this panel when it did not schedule a hearing in Nassau County. Nassau County has a population larger than Staten Island. As a result of where this hearing is taking place, many interested parties who might have testified will not because of the distance that they have to travel; and I might add, because of the time of day. The majority of the residents that live in Nassau County are working families and are not available at this time of day. It would have been so much better and easier for everyone if you could have one at seven o'clock and in Nassau County. In the future a hearing such as this would be a more effective meeting for those interested in testifying or participating in this process if a hearing was planned in that locality. I do hope and pray today that my testimony does not fall upon deaf ears. Thank you. Mr. Richardson. ASSEMBLYMAN PARMENT: You -- MS. DOROTHY GOOSBY: Do you have a question? ASSEMBLYMAN PARMENT: Yes. I would ask, as an elected official from Hempstead, do you feel that the African American and Hispanic voters tend to form a coalition that would be considered politically cohesive in regard to the Jingles test? MS. DOROTHY GOOSBY: Sir, if that were not the case, I would not be sitting here today as an elected official. ASSEMBLYMAN PARMENT: Do you think that type of coalition exists in other communities on Long Island? MS. DOROTHY GOOSBY: Most certainly. The only reason we have a problem with it now is because there is a line drawn between several other minority communities which does not allow them to be able to have a group that is politically cohesive enough to be able to elect a candidate of their choosing. And as it is, there are many problems within the minority community that are not identifiable because we do not have the representation that we truly need and that is applicable to the needs of the minority community. And that includes Spanish speaking as well. ASSEMBLYMAN PARMENT: Thank you. SENATOR SKELOS: Ms. Goosby, -- MS. DOROTHY GOOSBY: Yes. SENATOR SKELOS: -- a question for you. You mentioned that you're here today because of the cohesiveness of that population, the Hispanic and the African American population. Were you elected at-large in the entire Town of Hempstead? MS. DOROTHY GOOSBY: Well, we won't get into that because you understand -- SENATOR SKELOS: My question were you elected at-large. MS. DOROTHY GOOSBY: The first time by fluke. SENATOR SKELOS: And was Curtis Fisher, who is an African American, was he elected at large in the Town of Hempstead? MS. DOROTHY GOOSBY: He was selected and then he was elected at large because of his party affiliation, not because of what the community needs. And we won't get into that because if I began to tell you what the needs of our community are that I have discovered since I've been there, you would not want to indicate. SENATOR SKELOS: Again, my question was very simple. Was he elected at large and were you elected at large in the Town of Hempstead. MS. DOROTHY GOOSBY: I was elected at large to start -- the first time, elected at large. I was not selected. He was selected when he was first, you know, on as Councilperson. And that, of course, -- SENATOR SKELOS: My position is that the voters elect. And very simply, were you elected at large and was Mr. Fisher elected at large in the Town of Hempstead. MS. DOROTHY GOOSBY: The first time I was elected at large. The first time he was selected, not voted in. SENATOR DOLLINGER: I just have some questions about Hempstead to make sure I understand. You were elected in 1999? MS. DOROTHY GOOSBY: Yes. SENATOR DOLLINGER: In the new reapportionment plan approved by the court? MS. DOROTHY GOOSBY: No. That was not approved. It took twelve years for us to win that case, twelve years, and was not fully approved until January 20th, I think, of 1999 -- of 2000. SENATOR DOLLINGER: How big are the single member districts in the Town of Hempstead? MS. DOROTHY GOOSBY: Approximately 120,000 persons. SENATOR DOLLINGER: Congratulations. Good job, Ms. Goosby. MS. DOROTHY GOOSBY: Thank you. SENATOR SKELOS: Sir, I think you wanted to give testimony. MR. WILLIAM RICHARDSON: Good afternoon. I did take the liberty of preparing a statement this morning which has been submitted to this body of individuals. Let me say that my name is William H. Richardson II and I am currently the Executive Director of the Glen Cove Economic Opportunity Council's Family Development Center. This Center is one of the many local agencies of the Nassau County-designated anti-poverty agency known as the Economic Opportunity Commission of Nassau County. First, as I said, I did prepare my statement. But I feel that in the interest of not becoming quite so redundant here today, I'd like to speak more to that which has not been reverberated here this afternoon. I've heard a lot of things that are pretty much contained in my statement. One of the things that I haven't heard here this morning speaks to a lot of these issues as it relates to redistricting and how they came into existence to begin with. So I would like to begin with, just for a moment, taking a journey back through history to see if this particular statement sounds familiar to anyone here. "Gentlemen, I greet you here on the bank of the James River in the year of our Lord, one thousand seven hundred and twelve. First, I shall thank you, the gentlemen of the Colony of Virginia, for bringing me here. I am here to help you solve some of your problems with the slaves. Your invitation reached me on my modest plantation in the West Indies where I have experimented with some of the newest and still the oldest methods of control of slaves. In my bag here, I have a foolproof method of controlling your black slaves. I guarantee everyone of you that, if installed correctly, it will control the slaves for at least three hundred years. My method is simple and members of your family or any overseer can use it. I have outlined a number of differences among the slaves and I take these differences and make them bigger. I use fear, distrust and envy for control purposes." If this sounds familiar, it should, for it is the very same prescription of racism and discrimination used in the year of our Lord two thousand and one. But then Willie Lynch predicted that this prescription, when administered wisely, would last through the year 2012. The Senate Districts drawn by the Legislature for the 1970s, the '80s and the '90s show a consistent and unvarying pattern of splitting the black and Hispanic communities in Nassau County. Specifically in the Towns of Hempstead and North Hempstead and the plans for the 1980s and the 1990s extend the pattern to Suffolk County, specifically in the Towns of Babylon and Islip. In Nassau County there are large and growing black and Hispanic populations in the compact and contiguous region comprising Freeport, Roosevelt, Uniondale, Hempstead, West Hempstead, Lakeview, South Hempstead and Baldwin. But I think that much of this is known. Here is where we find the second portion of Willie Lynch's prescription. It lends specifically to the color or shade of one's skin. He uses intelligence, size, sex, size of plantation or home, status on the plantation or in the community, the attitude of the owner, whether the slave lives in the valley, on a hill, east, west, north or south, whether they have fine or coarse hair, whether tall or short. This is the very same prescription used to minimize minority voting strength in any one district throughout Long Island. I want to conclude because it goes on and on and on, but as I say, it's pretty redundant because much of what I have written has been stated here today. First, I would like to say as a continuing student of Adelphi University, where I just recently graduated and am now going on to my Master's in Sociology and Psychology, that I understand the importance of not only education but of quality education, for it allowed me to gain the empowerment needed to empower those in my community who look like me. So I would like to just say in concluding that in order to engage in a serious discussion of race in America, because that's what we are talking about, we must begin not with the problem of black people, but with the flaws of American society, flaws deeply rooted in historic inequalities and long-standing cultural stereotypes. How we set up the terms for discussing racial issues shapes perceptions and responses to these issues. As long as black and Hispanic people are viewed as a "them," the burden falls on blacks and Hispanics to do all the cultural and moral work necessary for healthy race relations. The implication is that only certain Americans can define what it means to be American and the rest must simply fit in. Well, I challenge that the emergence of strong black and Hispanic gangs, especially among our young people, is nothing more than a revolt against this sense of having to fit in. The variety of black ideologies, from the moderate views of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas in his youth, to those of Louis Farrakhan today, rest upon a fundamental truth, that white America has been historically weak-willed in ensuring racial justice and has continued to resist fully accepting the humanity of black people. Intelligence has been defined, ladies and gentlemen, as the ability to hold two opposing thoughts in one's head while maintaining the ability to function. It is our contention at the EOC of Nassau that if we are to reshape our own destinies as a people, allowing for a greater measure of voting power in American popular cultural society, we must all gain a greater understanding of this. And we call it the bifocal vision process. For we are living in a hotel civilization where the lights are always on and we are continually working through the darkness to find that glimmering flicker of light leading to hope. I thank you today. SENATOR SKELOS: Any questions? (No response.) SENATOR SKELOS: Thank you very much. MR. WILLIAM RICHARDSON: Thank you. SENATOR SKELOS: Seretta McNight. MS. SERETTA McNIGHT: Good afternoon. My name is Seretta McNight and I am a resident and voter coming from the 18th Assembly District, 4th Congressional District and 8th Senatorial District. And we heard about these hearings and the idea that it was going to be a redrawing of the lines. And certainly you heard it this morning from a variety of individuals in terms of the dilution of the vote in our communities, specifically senatorial. When we look at how Roosevelt and Freeport are broken up from Uniondale and Hempstead, we find that we don't have a voice when it comes to commonality of the issues of concern in our communities. Although I don't have a prepared statement, certainly in listening to Mr. Richardson, who followed our Councilwoman - that, yes, we did elect. Although Senator Skelos it was an at-large election, the reality of it is that if it were not for the struggle of the twelve years preceding that where we were advised and aware of this process to be able to try and have one person/one vote, Mrs. Goosby would not have been elected at an at-large situation. So I think that the seriousness in terms of representation -- when you talk in terms of the American Constitution, being American and one person/one vote, and no taxation without representation, that the reality is that in Nassau County, certainly where I hail from, the reality is that race is a factor. And if we go across the country, we will find that in communities of color, we are under-represented and under-served because there is a diluting of the block vote, a commonality of interest along those lines that draw our districts. But the other thing that really moved me this morning in hearing Mr. Richardson's presentation was the idea that I'm looking or sitting looking at this process from the standpoint of having hailed from Roosevelt. When we talk about education -- and certainly we know that the Assembly and the Senate are going to be receiving this legislation, the latest proposal, for the disenfranchisement of our community, the taking away of the vote in local control. So when we talk about drawing lines, we talk about empowering communities, we talk about one person/one vote, the idea that in the 21st century there is even a proposal to disenfranchise a group of people seems to me to be just over the top. And now here -- SENATOR SKELOS: May I ask you a question? MS. SERETTA McNIGHT: No. Let me finish, Dean -- Senator Skelos. Excuse me. And now here to be able to sit and hear you talk in terms of drawing lines or how we can best draw so that we will have a greater participation, I think that those issues that were articulated this morning in terms of the seriousness of people participating and the idea that there has got to be discussion throughout, and especially in Nassau. I don't understand why there aren't hearings in Nassau. When you look at the numbers, we find that the greatest growth downstate, or according to the numbers that I have received, when we look at these populations by county, that the greatest growth, over forty something thousand, can be found in the 4th Congressional District, can be found in the 18th Assembly District, according to the maps that I pulled offline from the information and Census data. And so, therefore, when we do have unification of our voice in terms of us being connected as we are in the 4th Congressional District, we get the type of representation where our issues and our concerns are brought forward as they are on the Federal level through our representative, Carolyn McCarthy. But now when we look on the senatorial, State senatorial level, and having been a candidate for the New York State Senate in 1996, posting impressive numbers, almost forty percent, we knew from the outset there was no way we would be able to get elected because of the sheer numbers and because there was a division in terms of our communities and being able to have that power to vote. So what am I saying? I'm going to let you get to your question, Senator Skelos. What am I saying? I am saying that since I have received this lovely card about helping us draw the lines and we have a right to fair and effective representation, and I would submit, to echo what my Councilwoman has stated in terms of there needs to be hearings in Nassau County since we know that in our district we've had significant growth, that the Congressional District in the 4th does not need to be redrawn. Mrs. McCarthy is doing a wonderful job. And it also allows for the opportunity for there to be indigenous leadership coming from out of that community. And then the third thing that I would ask you to do as you travel through this process and you open the doors up for people to be equal participants in this endeavor, is that you seriously consider, seriously consider one person/one vote and people really having a voice to be able to exercise sending representatives of their choice that are going to actually represent them. Okay. Go right ahead. What do you have? SENATOR SKELOS: Just that you brought up the Roosevelt School District. MS. SERETTA McNIGHT: Yes, sir. SENATOR SKELOS: Are you a school board member or were you a school board member of the Roosevelt School District? MS. SERETTA McNIGHT: Yes. I was the President of the school board that was removed because we dared challenge the State Education Department to say that not only has it been proven there is inequity in the funding formulas and that we constantly fall short, but the idea that there was culpability in terms of them not having functioned with providing the necessary education as was supposed to be provided by law. SENATOR SKELOS: You were removed as head of the Roosevelt School District? MS. SERETTA McNIGHT: Absolutely. By the legislature. By the legislature. The Assembly had the say. SENATOR SKELOS: Let me ask you a question. Are you represented in the Assembly by Assemblywoman Hill? MS. SERETTA McNIGHT: We have an elected official that sits in the Assembly. SENATOR SKELOS: She is -- MS. SERETTA McNIGHT: Are we represented -- if we were represented -- SENATOR SKELOS: Is she an Afro-American? MS. SERETTA McNIGHT: If we -- African American is the appropriate term, Senator Skelos, because African American denotes that our ancestry goes back to Africa, which we know was the creation of all human forms of life. SENATOR SKELOS: Is she a representative of the 18th Assembly District? MS. SERETTA McNIGHT: The 18th Assembly District representative is Earlene -- SENATOR SKELOS: The legislation that you talked about -- MS. SERETTA McNIGHT: -- Hill. SENATOR SKELOS: -- potentially disenfranchising you or whatever the legislation is going to do or was to do with the failure of the Roosevelt School District, is she sponsoring it in the Assembly? MS. SERETTA McNIGHT: Absolutely. SENATOR SKELOS: And -- MS. SERETTA McNIGHT: Does that make it right? No, it does not. SENATOR SKELOS: So are you saying that -- MS. SERETTA McNIGHT: And that's what we need to be clear about. SENATOR SKELOS: -- she is not representing your community? MS. SERETTA McNIGHT: I'm saying at this particular point in time, no. SENATOR SKELOS: So -- okay. MS. SERETTA McNIGHT: But that's not an issue here. The issue is not bad representation. The issue becomes the ability to have representation. And if, in fact, the representation is not representing the people, then we have a job to do in terms of making the change. SENATOR SKELOS: But representation doesn't have to be what you just think is good representation. Now here you have perhaps Senator Fuschillo and Assemblywoman Hill agreeing on legislation that the entire legislature has to vote for and the Governor supports. MS. SERETTA McNIGHT: Let me put it like this. SENATOR SKELOS: So there is a cohesiveness between their two opinions. MS. SERETTA McNIGHT: There can be a cohesiveness between opinions. That does not mean that the opinion that is illustrated by the cohesiveness is necessarily correct. Those who are empowered, who abuse power, it does not mean because you are in power to do something that you should do it regardless of the impact or effect. And to make such a comment, Senator Skelos, let me put it to you like this. Having been born and raised in this country and knowing that we are the only race of people that have had to die for the right to vote, we have to pursue through the courts equal protection of the laws under the Constitution. We always as a people have to go to extraordinary means. For you to minimize or to suggest the idea that there is an African American representative and, therefore, they are representing your interests or not representing your interests simply because they are black, I think trivializes when -- because this is the way I'm taking it. Let me finish, sir. SENATOR SKELOS: You can think what you wish, but what I'm saying to you is you brought up the legislation. And I'm just pointing out that it has to pass both houses and who is the representative in each house. MS. SERETTA McNIGHT: And what I'm suggesting to you or stating very clearly is the idea that just because a remedy is proposed, if, in fact, it disenfranchises an entire community guised under providing an education for children, it is not acceptable. That's the point in that particular piece with -- The reason I made the analogy was the idea that here in the 21st century, this technologically sound universe where we can be around the world in a matter of a second, to think that we have actually or that we are being faced with in my community the idea of being stripped of having representation, of being taxed without having representation, at the very fabric and foundation, that we had a Boston Tea Party or that these things the American Revolution was for, to think that now in this day and age, and because it is being proposed does not make it correct. And when you only get one side of the equation -- you know, there have been no public hearings. The legislature has not assigned a task force. There has been no significant investigation. So what happens is that when you have folks who are of like mind, you can be like-minded about the wrong thing or about bad things or about things that are infringements upon the rights of others. So I think that, to be clear about that. The reason I raise that issue is the idea that one person/one vote, and in any -- to me personally, and this is just my opinion, who am I? it's just my opinion -- but I certainly firmly believe that there are oftentimes ways to come up with other solutions as opposed to taking away anyone's rights. I just believe that. And I just believe that voting and voting rights are just non-negotiable. It's just a non-negotiable entity. That becomes a great equalizer, a stabilizer, the idea that you get one vote like I get one vote, like he gets vote, like she gets one vote. And so to take an entire group and just say poof, no, not anymore. I'm just saying it's unacceptable. So I'm passionate about that. I'm passionate about that. Any other questions for me? SENATOR SKELOS: Senator Dollinger. SENATOR DOLLINGER: Just one. As I hear your testimony and those of others, including the Councilwoman before you, your testimony is, in essence, allow the communities of interest to be combined, and then, given that fair opportunity, everybody takes their chances. They're no predetermined outcome. And what I hear you saying is simply don't draw the lines in such a way as to prevent those natural communities from coming together. MS. SERETTA McNIGHT: Exactly. SENATOR DOLLINGER: Is that correct? MS. SERETTA McNIGHT: Absolutely. And evidence of that would be in the 4th Congressional District where we have the type of representation that we have. SENATOR DOLLINGER: But, again, the critical thing is it's not from our perspective. While certainly incumbency is a factor, it's not who is representing the community and the quality of the job they do sitting in that seat, the kind of constituent service or the ability to bring back Federal money or State money, et cetera, that's not the issue. The issue is -- and I think you said it earlier -- is that if the communities are constructed, if district lines are constructed in such a way as to bring cohesive communities together, there is no predetermined outcome. For example, to put it in sort of blunt terms based on this morning, if there were districts created which had stronger minority concentrations of population, that does not mean there will be a Democrat, that does not mean there will be a Republican, that does not mean that there will be a person of color representing those districts. But, nonetheless, what we are trying to do is figure out where those communities of interest are. And it seems to me that what you're saying is don't erect an artificial barrier to those communities coming together and having the opportunity to vote for a candidate of their choice. MS. SERETTA McNIGHT: As currently exists in the 6th and the 8th senatorial districts. Absolutely. SENATOR DOLLINGER: That's an issue we have to wrestle with. But that's what I hear you saying, just allow the natural confluence of communities to come together and then everybody will get a chance to vote based on their community of interest and based on their own individual interest and then voters will decide. MS. SERETTA McNIGHT: Absolutely, especially since those like communities, according to the system the way it's structured now, are separated. SENATOR DOLLINGER: Correct. SENATOR SKELOS: Any questions? (No response.) SENATOR SKELOS: Thank you very much. MS. SERETTA McNIGHT: I thank you very kindly for the opportunity. And please do consider coming to Nassau as our Councilwoman so eloquently requested so that we can even have greater participation. And, look, try and do it at a time when those of us who work don't have to bother to take off to come. Okay? Thanks so much. You all have a good day. SENATOR SKELOS: Diana Weir, W-e-i-r. Welcome. MS. DIANA WEIR: Good morning. My name is Diana Dominguez Weir. I am a Councilwoman in the Town of Easthampton. I did travel seventy miles to be here, even though I'm still in Suffolk County. We are in the easternmost part of Long Island. And I come before you to speak today as an elected official, as a Latino, as Chairperson -- past Chairperson for our County's Hispanic Advisory Committee. And it was mentioned before about the Brentwood community. And I respectfully request that you do pay attention to those boundaries. Brentwood started out as mostly Puerto Ricans coming from New York City in the 1940s. And we are in the year 2001 and we do not have an elected representative of Latino extraction from that community. So it is important to try to remember those things. This is an old community, an established community, where we have representatives in the Democratic party, in the Republican party, that are committee people, that have gone through the process, that are community volunteers, that are business owners. And yet we have not been able to elect someone of Hispanic origin to any of those districts, any of the three districts that intermingle in the Brentwood area. So I respectfully request as a Latino who is elected from a non-Hispanic area to give an little impact to the undercount question. The largest growing Latino community documented and undocumented in Suffolk County, according to Newsday, was in the two East End Southfork towns of Easthampton and Southampton. Because we have a huge tourist economy, a lot of the hotel, motel, landscaping, you know, second homeowner type positions require that type of labor. The census, although it is a much better census than it was in the 1990s, does I believe have still some undercounts. And the reason I say that is that in the Easthampton High School approximately thirty percent of our students are now Latino origin. And obviously the census does not show that thirty percent of our population is Latino. So I do feel that there is an undercount there and that perhaps you can take that into consideration. So that is my remarks. They were not prepared. But I felt that it was important to share some of that with you. ASSEMBLYMAN PARMENT: Just one question. Speaking as an elected official and representative of the Latino community, do you believe that there is evidence to show that the Latino and African American communities would coalesce around candidates jointly trying to elect an individual? MS. DIANA RODRIGUEZ WEIR: That's difficult to say because, speaking as a Latino within the Latino community, I mean we have thirty different countries that represent Latinos meaning Latin American, South America and Central America. And we are all very proud of our origin. So we have a lot of discussion amongst ourselves. It's very difficult to agree on issues. But it would help, but I don't think, and was said by the Senator, Senator Dollinger, that it would guarantee a Latino or an African American to be elected. I think it would help because those communities do tend to work together on issues that are important, you know, to their communities. But I don't know if it would -- it's hard to say. I mean I just couldn't say. I'm elected and, you know, I'm a Latina in Easthampton. And a Republican also, a minority in a Democrat town. So I couldn't say that with any certainty. SENATOR SKELOS: Thank you for coming. MS. DIANA RODRIGUEZ WEIR: Thank you very much for allowing me to speak. SENATOR SKELOS: What I'm going to do now is run through the speakers list for those who were called and were not present. Bridgehampton School? (No response.) SENATOR SKELOS: Martin Dense, D-e-n-s-e? (No response.) SENATOR SKELOS: Philip Goglas, G-o-g-l-a-s? Are you here? MR. PHILIP GOGLAS: Yes. SENATOR SKELOS: Come on up. MR. PHILIP GOGLAS: Good afternoon. My name is Philip Goglas. I'm from Central Islip. I was able to come now during my lunchtime. I'm a Family Court Hearing Examiner. I work in Family Court here in Central Islip. I'm also involved in the fire department and Central Islip Summer Committee. My comment is going to be a brief one. Basically is, considering the redistricting, if you could take into consideration basically the communities that have like interests, such as I heard earlier, the Brentwood, Bayshore and Central Islip area. What I would hope that wouldn't happen is like the Congressional District represented by Gary Ackerman, where it covers Queens, parts of Huntington. It doesn't even really look like a district. It runs along the north part of Queens and Long Island. I don't think that you can get good representation if you had a district like that. So when reconsidering the district lines for the State Senate or the Assembly, that you consider some of the communities so that we can get better representations from the people who actually live in those communities. And I think you should through the information, you should be able to figure out which communities are more alike. So a person representing Central Islip, Bayshore, Brentwood should have a representative from that area as opposed to maybe Sayerville or someplace out in the east that has different interests and different goals entirely. So if you could just take that into consideration. That's pretty much what I would ask for for our community. That was it. SENATOR SKELOS: Any questions? (No response.) SENATOR SKELOS: Thank you very much, sir. MR. PHILIP GOGLAS: Thank you. SENATOR SKELOS: Michael Carroll? (No response.) SENATOR SKELOS: Zakhia Grant? (No response.) SENATOR SKELOS: We've run through the list. Does anybody wish to testify? (No response.) SENATOR SKELOS: Does anybody here wish to testify at this time? (No response.) SENATOR SKELOS: Could I have a motion then to adjoin? ASSEMBLYMAN ORTLOFF: So move. SENATOR DOLLINGER: Second. SENATOR SKELOS: All in favor? (Chorus of "ayes.") SENATOR SKELOS: Thank you very much. (At 1:00 o'clock p.m. the proceedings were concluded.) * * * |
|
Back |