Government
Ward 2 now too large, wards 7 and 8 too small
The Census has released its DC data which will be used for redistricting. Ward 2 will need to shrink, while wards 7 and 8 will need to grow slightly.

DC's population grew from 572,060 in the 2000 Census to 601,723 in the 2010. If every ward were equal size, they'd be one-eighth of the 2010 total, or 75,215.
The redistricting law requires each ward to be within 5% of the average. That means a ward could be as large as 78,796 people, or as small as 71,455. The red dotted lines in the image above show the acceptable limits. The blue dotted lines represent the limits in the 2000 Census, and the blue bars the sizes of the wards after redistricting in 2001.
Ward 2, which finished the 2000 Census the 2001 redistricting smaller in population than many other wards, grew 16%, putting it at 79.915, just a bit too large. Meanwhile, Wards 7 and 8 were about average after 2000 2001 and stayed roughly constant, with Ward 7 growing by about 0.7% and Ward 8 shrinking by about 0.3%.
Since DC grew overall, that means they're now smaller than the average, and Ward 7's population of 71,068 and Ward 8's of 70,712 make them too small for the cutoff, meaning they will have to pick up territory. Currently, Ward 7 includes a small area west of the Anacostia (Kingman Park), meaning that one or both will have to add more territory west of the river.
Since we know the Census tends to undercount poorer and minority areas, there's a good chance Wards 7 and 8 are actually larger than these numbers claim, but this is the official data which DC must use for its redistricting.
Ward 6 also grew rapidly, gaining 13% in population. However, it was the smallest ward after the last Census, and its gain wasn't quite enough to put it over the cutoff.
Wards 1, 3, and 5 all grew about 4-5%, and yes, that means that our ACS-based estimate was not correct. That also didn't show ward 2's rapid growth at all.
Ward 2 doesn't border 7 or 8, except at Hains Point. That means that it's not possible to take people from 2 and add them to 7 and 8 directly, short of a bizarre scenario like Ward 8 grabbing most of the Mall and surrounding parks and some people from Foggy Bottom or Georgetown. Ward 5 may need to have its boundary adjusted, and ward 6 almost surely will move west in some fashion.
Comments
- Bikeshare is a gateway to private biking, not competition
- Judge denies injunction against closing schools
- Long-term closures: A solution to single-tracking?
- Metro policy for refunds after delays falls short, riders say
- PG planners propose bold new smart growth future
- Prince George's County struggles to get trails right
- Public land deals have both benefits and pitfalls






by Josh S on Mar 24, 2011 2:56 pm • link • report
by David Alpert on Mar 24, 2011 3:00 pm • link • report
"Since we know the Census tends to undercount poorer and minority areas, there's a good chance wards 7 and 8 are actually larger than these numbers claim, but this is the official data which DC must use for its redistricting."
by Axel on Mar 24, 2011 3:14 pm • link • report
They're enumerated wherever they lay their heads - if they're in DC city jail, they'd be included in the (current) population of Ward 6.
by Matt on Mar 24, 2011 3:21 pm • link • report
Or do I just need to plot the address of CMs on a map to figure out what will happen?
by Ah on Mar 24, 2011 3:21 pm • link • report
by DowntownWard7 on Mar 24, 2011 3:27 pm • link • report
Traditionally, ward boundaries only move on the periphery so as to avoid the massive shifts you mentioned.
The second point, about where the council members themselves live is far more relevant. Some examples: CM Evans, for example, lives in Georgetown. That means it would be very unlikely that Georgetown would be sliced off and given to Ward 3. By the same token, I believe CM Alexander lives in Hillcrest, so it's unlikely that the area would be redistricted into Ward 8.
by Adam L on Mar 24, 2011 3:34 pm • link • report
Move to Ward 3? Actually, since you apparently live in Ward 7, you're probably not going to become one of Barry's constituents anytime soon; don't sweat it.
by OctaviusIII on Mar 24, 2011 3:41 pm • link • report
I would hope also, that when the CMs look at making these choices, they opt to keep neighborhoods together, where possible.
by Andrew on Mar 24, 2011 3:44 pm • link • report
by Steven Yates on Mar 24, 2011 4:16 pm • link • report
by David T on Mar 24, 2011 4:23 pm • link • report
I was looking too, this one seemed the best:
http://citizenatlas.dc.gov/atlasapps/downloads/PDF/District_ANC_Ward.pdf
by Steven Yates on Mar 24, 2011 4:25 pm • link • report
by Tim on Mar 24, 2011 4:27 pm • link • report
by Andrew on Mar 24, 2011 4:30 pm • link • report
Yes, those are the 2002 ward boundaries using the 2000 and 2010 census data.
by Alex B. on Mar 24, 2011 4:35 pm • link • report
Probably not enough people to un-elect Barry though.
by ahk on Mar 24, 2011 4:36 pm • link • report
@ahk
That's what I was thinking too. As a SW resident, I'm not looking forward to the prospect of trading Tommy Wells for Barry. But the only way around it that I see is that if Ward 8 takes some of Ward 7, and then Ward 7 takes some of the southern part of Ward 5 or eastern part of Ward 6.
by Steven Yates on Mar 24, 2011 4:41 pm • link • report
Bizarre though it might be, can we hope/lobby for this, please? If ony for the comedic value of Marion Barry representing Georgetown? I would become a true believer in karma if the Georgetown ANC that is so hot and bothered about - gasp - students now would have to deal with the Mayor For Life. Just delicious. Think he'd be very concerned that "multi-generational families" are being "forced out" of their neighborhoods by noise and trash?
OK, back to reality. More likely (though less fun), it appears that some of Ward 2 will have to move to Ward 6 (Mt. Vernon Sq., Chinatown, Penn Quarter?). I suppose they could also move the rest of Shaw back to Ward 1, but that would leave both Wards 1 and 2 near the upper limit - don't know if that's disfavored or not. Some of Wards 5 and/or 6 will have to go to Wards 7 and 8. Burning questions:
Will Ward 8 cross the river and grab the Navy Yard? Southwest Waterfront?
Which of the West of the River neighborhoods will now be in Wards 7 or 8?
I would love to be a fly on the wall for the internal debates that will take place over this.
by dcd on Mar 24, 2011 4:48 pm • link • report
But more generally, is the principle to move the boundaries the minimum amount possible or does it permit somewhat more wholesale rethinking? If it's the former, it means that the wards become more bizarrely drawn, as it would likely call for adjustments primarily, if not exclusively to Wards 2, 7, and 8
by ah on Mar 24, 2011 4:50 pm • link • report
It sounds like you're using the pre-2000 Census realignment numbers to say how much poputlation was gained or lost by each ward. But since these Wards got realigned ... so that they were all fairly equal in size (plus or minus 5%), should we really be talking about their gain or loss in population from post-realignment to 2010? Otherwise we're comparing apples to oranges since they're not the same entities. (I.e., It's not even a matter of 'comparing back to 2000 before the realignment' ... it's a matter of not being able to compare because other than having the same Ward 1 and (maybe) Councilmember, they're not the same districts?)
by Lance on Mar 24, 2011 5:00 pm • link • report
Likely, any such move would result in a more active constituency, requiring Barry to adequately address concerns, or he'll be shown the door.
IMO, problem solved and you people wouldn't have to fear whatever it is you fear or dislike about that man - Marion Barry.
by HogWash on Mar 24, 2011 5:00 pm • link • report
The blue bars above are post-realignment. After the wards were redrawn, Ward 6 was just a tiny bit over the -5% cutoff.
by David Alpert on Mar 24, 2011 5:01 pm • link • report
by Lance on Mar 24, 2011 5:05 pm • link • report
by Lance on Mar 24, 2011 5:07 pm • link • report
by David Alpert on Mar 24, 2011 5:08 pm • link • report
by MLD on Mar 24, 2011 5:12 pm • link • report
"But the only way around it that I see is that if Ward 8 takes some of Ward 7, and then Ward 7 takes some of the southern part of Ward 5 or eastern part of Ward 6."
Ward 8 taking some of Ward 7 is not likely since, as I pointed out above, Ward 7 CM Yvette Alexander lives in the southern portion of her ward. If the boundary is moved up she would effectively be zoned out of the ward she represents and would either have to A) move further north to remain in the ward, or B) challenge Barry for the Ward 8 seat. Neither is likely. I guess they could always gerrymander Ward 7 around her home.
by Adam L on Mar 24, 2011 5:16 pm • link • report
Comparing two maps:
http://citizenatlas.dc.gov/atlasapps/downloads/PDF/District_ANC_Ward.pdf
and
http://citizenatlas.dc.gov/atlasapps/downloads/PDF/ancs_wards_2A.pdf
it looks like ANC 6D lies both in ward 6 and ward 2.
Help!?
by David F-H on Mar 24, 2011 5:17 pm • link • report
by jfruh on Mar 24, 2011 5:17 pm • link • report
For me, Tommy Wells is my favorite council member, by a fairly large margin. He seems to hold pretty similar views, particularly on local issues. Marion Barry is probably my least favorite council member. He represents the old guard to me, the bad old days. So right there is a huge swing in how much I like my elected representation.
I'm not terribly concerned with how responsive he'll be in terms of case work, as I've never needed it (though I've heard Wells is excellent with it). I've liked the direction I've seen my neighborhood take in past few years. My concern with Barry is that he'll somehow screw that up.
by Steven Yates on Mar 24, 2011 5:19 pm • link • report
Without seeing a tract-level map, I would hypothesize that you are correct. I'm willing to bet the large increases in Wards 2 and 6 has occurred mostly in the broadly-defined Center City area.
by Alex B. on Mar 24, 2011 5:20 pm • link • report
Yes, ANC 6D actually contains parts of Ward 2, but no one actually lives in those parts (Haines Point, office buildings south of the Mall). I want to say they got that in the last redistricting because the ANC felt that any changes in those areas (particularly the area south of the Mall) had a greater impact on those living in 6D then in say 2A, 2C or 2F. Someone might know more about this, I just remember hearing about it at a candidate forum.
by Steven Yates on Mar 24, 2011 5:25 pm • link • report
I assume the small bit of Ward 4 west of 16th St. is what you're calling the orphan part. What is the orphan part of Ward 1?
by Herschel on Mar 24, 2011 5:28 pm • link • report
There is a portion of Ward 1 (Woodley Park) that is west of Rock Creek Park. It only represents a handful of square blocks.
I gather that Jim Graham fought rather hard to keep that section of his Ward during the last round of redistricting. He eventually (and grudgingly) gave up a portion of his U Street area to Ward 2.
by Alex B. on Mar 24, 2011 5:31 pm • link • report
Ward 8 needs less than new 750 residents to get over the lower threshold. Barry's most recent margin of victory was more than 87% - he got 24,430 votes, and his closest competitor got 1130. Assuming the redistricting brings in the bare minimum to get over the threshold, or even a few thousand more, that's not enough to change the electoral math. As for the distaste for Barry as an elected official, may I direct you to his comments today, as reported in the Post:
Were going to stop this trend gentrification, said D.C. Council member Marion Barry (D-Ward 8). We cant displace old-time Washingtonians. The key to keeping this city black is jobs, jobs, jobs for black people so they can have a better quality of life in neighborhoods in the city, he added.
by dcd on Mar 24, 2011 5:33 pm • link • report
by Herschel on Mar 24, 2011 5:35 pm • link • report
Shouldn't the census release some information on names soon? You can do the math on 'David.'
@dcd
"Ward 8 needs FEWER than 750 new residents..."
People are discrete units, population is a continuous variable (gets less than)
by David F-H on Mar 24, 2011 5:36 pm • link • report
Redistricting is a political process. I can just about guarantee that the ward boundaries will change far more than just the bare minimum required to get Ward 2 down and Wards 7&8 up.
by Alex B. on Mar 24, 2011 5:37 pm • link • report
by ah on Mar 24, 2011 5:50 pm • link • report
My guess is that it comes down to:
1. DC Central Detention Facility (population 2,200) moving from Ward 6 to 7,
2. Part of Randle Highlands moving from 7 to 8, and
3. Ward 6 takes part of Penn Quarter & the Mall from Ward 2.
by tom veil on Mar 24, 2011 6:00 pm • link • report
There is public participation in groups making recommendations, but the CM's will likely stack those committees with their minions to lobby for what works best for the CM.
by TommyWellsFan on Mar 24, 2011 6:59 pm • link • report
by Nicoli on Mar 24, 2011 7:12 pm • link • report
I would guess that most residents never attempt to contact the rep for anything. I've never. Living EOTR for these years, I can say w.o question that my area has improved drastically. From TheArc to Giant...better housing to improved school facilities. Obviously, the counterargument is that Barry had little to do w.any of it. However, most people look @the improvements in their communities as proof of whether their reps are working for them. The numbers don't lie..excluding unemployment, Ward 8 is much better than it was in 2002.
I would be interested to know how his overall effectiveness with constituent services are. Guess I never bothered to find out.
@dcd, that's Barry for ya! Yes he represents the era of Harry Reids where blacks are still called negroes in everyday conversation. He's an old man with too-loud a dog whistle. But I think the power you guys WOTR give him locks the power he has EOTR.
Can't imagine the new boundaries but I believe a significant amount of those in the two wards didn't mail their prestamped envelopes.
by HogWash on Mar 24, 2011 7:26 pm • link • report
by HogWash on Mar 24, 2011 7:28 pm • link • report
by Herschel on Mar 24, 2011 10:11 pm • link • report
No, he fought hard for it and many in the neighborhood didn't want to see the change because he'd really gotten involved in the issues the neighborhood saw as important ... including fighting the conversion of residences into embassies and bringing the first public funding to help redevelop Mitchell Park (which ended up being a $2M investment by the District and a $500,000 investment by the neighbors who did a lot of fundraising.) From his perspective, I'd guess he wanted to hold on the S-K because it is fertile ground for campaign contributions. But Graham also needed to hold on get rid of other parts of his ward that included a veritable opponent that was waging a war against Graham claiming Graham was anti-African American. And because of the balloon issue I discussed above, he couldn't really get rid of that area AND hold on to S-K. And there was a formidable portion of the neighborhood who wanted Evans. We (the ANC) formally supported keeping Graham ... and even honored him with a plaque of thanks at the last meeting before the change occured. And he thanked us a few weeks later by introducing some cockamamie legislation that would have allowed his Adams Morgan constituents to use S-K as a parking lot for up to 4 blocks past the Parking Zone/ Ward boundaries. We fought it and it resulted in the 1/2 Zones that go one block in around the Ward 1 / 2 boundaries. His justification was that 'people are used to park there.' At the time I remember some wise people asking 'and how will we handle this at the next redistricting? ... will we need to keep those 1/2 boundary areas because 'people are used to parking there?' At the time Carol Schwartz also promised to study devising a different parking scheme that didn't base its boundaries on the ward boundaries so that the next time this issue came up (i.e., NOW in 2011) that this wouldn't be an issue ...
by Lance on Mar 25, 2011 12:02 am • link • report
Jack will lose downtown to Wells so Jack will retire since that's his golden goose.
Graham will try to get south of U back and we'll fight like hell to stop that, just like we had to fight to get out of Ward 1 10 years ago.
Which councilperson will be in charge of re-districting this time?
by Tom Coumaris on Mar 25, 2011 3:08 am • link • report
It's funny that someone mentioned all the great things that happened in Ward 8 with schools since 2002, because the lack of school funding in Ward 8 was one of the reasons given to vote against Fenty. It's a little confusing.
by ahk on Mar 25, 2011 8:40 am • link • report
by Jerome on Mar 25, 2011 8:47 am • link • report
And as for "stopping that trend--gentrification" Barry has always done an excellent job of stopping it in his own ward to the great detriment of his constituents. History is just that--history. It's in the past. I'm offended by Barry's mission to keep the city black. How is that more defensible than someone saying they want to turn the city white?
How about we come to the consensus that we want to turn the city into a better city? Or is that just too easy...
by MJ on Mar 25, 2011 9:24 am • link • report
by sick of 'em on Mar 25, 2011 9:47 am • link • report
by sick of 'em on Mar 25, 2011 9:49 am • link • report
Okay, you got me started. First, what sense does it make for someone who lives in Georgetown or Logan Circle to have unlimited free parking in Sheridan-Kalorama, while people in the Kalorama Triangle don't? Making the resident parking zones co-extensive with the council wards was an idiotic idea from the start, and I'm afraid that Carol Schwartz's promises started ringing remarkably hollow when she lost her seat on the council.
Second, the "compromise" that resulted in the 1/2 zones one block on either side of Connecticut Avenue was basically a cruel joke. It provides at least three times as much resident parking for S-K in KalTri as it does for KalTri residents in S-K, because of the long blocks in KalTri and the short blocks and embassy-only parking to the west of Connecticut Avenue. This while the majority of Sheridan-Kalorama residents have off-street parking to begin with.
by Herschel on Mar 25, 2011 10:11 am • link • report
by kk on Mar 25, 2011 10:33 am • link • report
In theory, the system accommodates frequent movers because it wants to know where you were living on a specific date -- April 1, 2010. So even if you were between long-term homes and just crashing on a friend's couch for a few weeks in April, that is where the census is supposed to count you. In practice this can be tricky to nail down, of course. The April date makes it particularly problematic to count college students, who are supposed to be counted in their place of school-year residence and not their parents' house. I had a friend who was a census taker in Berkeley in 2000 ... she said that by the time the census sent out people to follow up at homes that hadn't sent in their forms, it was mid-May, and most students had left for the summer. So she ended up talking to kids who were the last ones in their large group homes to still be there for the semester, trying to come up with a list of everyone who had been there on April 1.
by jfruh on Mar 25, 2011 10:50 am • link • report
I suggest you read the following:
http://2010.census.gov/2010census/about/how-we-count.php
by MLD on Mar 25, 2011 10:51 am • link • report
by asilerod on Mar 25, 2011 1:03 pm • link • report
by DC John on Mar 25, 2011 5:51 pm • link • report
by Veronica O. Davis (Ms V) on Mar 25, 2011 5:58 pm • link • report
by kk on Mar 26, 2011 10:08 am • link • report
Add a Comment