Greater Greater Washington


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.

David Alpert is the Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Greater Greater Washington and Greater Greater Education. He worked as a Product Manager for Google for six years and has lived in the Boston, San Francisco, and New York metro areas in addition to Washington, DC. He loves the area which is, in many ways, greater than those others, and wants to see it become even greater. 


Add a comment »

Since Ward 2 doesn't border Wards 7 and 8, doesn't this have implications for the boundary of Ward 6 and / or Ward 5?

by Josh S on Mar 24, 2011 2:56 pm • linkreport

Correct. I was just adding something about that to the end of the post, as a matter of fact.

by David Alpert on Mar 24, 2011 3:00 pm • linkreport

How does the Census treat incarcerated persons?

"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 • linkreport


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 • linkreport

Can they aggressively adjust boundaries to rationalize things? For example, move the orphan part or Ward 4 back into Ward 3, and the orphan part of Ward 1 into Ward 2 along with southern parts of Ward 3. Then wack off the eastern parts of Ward 2 and put them into Ward 6, which could give up a bit on the east to Ward 7 and 8.

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 • linkreport

Great. If we become part of ward 8 we can forget about any part of the redevelopment of DC. Once we fall under Barry, there is no hope left. Something must be done.

by DowntownWard7 on Mar 24, 2011 3:27 pm • linkreport


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 • linkreport

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 • linkreport

I agree with @ah on this.

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 • linkreport

So both the blue and red bars represent those Wards as they exist today? As opposed to the blue bar representing the 2000 ward boundaries?

by Steven Yates on Mar 24, 2011 4:16 pm • linkreport

Does anyone know where one might find a good map of the DC Ward boundaries as they currently exist, preferably with a street/park overlay?

by David T on Mar 24, 2011 4:23 pm • linkreport

@David T:

I was looking too, this one seemed the best:

by Steven Yates on Mar 24, 2011 4:25 pm • linkreport

@David T: This has a detailed street and park overlay with ward-by-ward maps:

by Tim on Mar 24, 2011 4:27 pm • linkreport has a terrific cache of resources as well.

by Andrew on Mar 24, 2011 4:30 pm • linkreport

@Steven Yates

Yes, those are the 2002 ward boundaries using the 2000 and 2010 census data.

by Alex B. on Mar 24, 2011 4:35 pm • linkreport

Barry's already trying to grab the SW waterfront development that Tommy put in place. That's a tough pill because it's the most natural contiguous land transfer.

Probably not enough people to un-elect Barry though.

by ahk on Mar 24, 2011 4:36 pm • linkreport

Thanks Alex. That's what I thought.


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 • linkreport

"short of a bizarre scenario like ward 8 grabbing most of the Mall and surrounding parks and some people from Foggy Bottom or Georgetown."

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 • linkreport

@Adam L - I'm not sure if what I was suggesting was a "radical" shift or not (and G'town would still be Ward 2, which would include some of Ward 3 while dropping eastern bits.

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 • linkreport

@David 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.

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 • linkreport

As a Ward 8 resident who never voted for Barry, I'm not sure I understand the fear and loathing of having him as a councilmember.

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 • linkreport

Lance: I'm talking post-realignment.

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 • linkreport

Incidentally, last time around Evans described the process as 'squeezing a balloon' ... i.e., you can't just look at two wards (and their boundaries) in isolation. Because it's actually the outermost boundaries (i.e., DC/MD and DC/VA) that really determine what the outcome will be since they are the only boundaries that are NOT movable ...) For example, last time around Ward 1 really needed to move completely from where it was at to allow the other wards to redistrict in the ways the other wards thought they should ... and could have except that whatever changes they made affected each other ... and Ward 1 being in the middle automatically felt any shift in a more amplified manner than the wards that had the state boundaries to anchor them. Add to that the fact that the Ward Councilmembers use this as an oppotunity to bring in friendly supporters and push out of their ward troublesome constituents or potential poltical rivals, and it all gets interesting as everyone is squeezing that balloon ... and Ward 1 is getting shifted all over the place ... Should be even more interesting this time given the greater changes in population for some wards.

by Lance on Mar 24, 2011 5:05 pm • linkreport

@David, Okay.

by Lance on Mar 24, 2011 5:07 pm • linkreport

Lance: Looking again at the article I see a place where I worded it in a way that would indeed give the idea that I was talking about pre-realignment. I've edited it to be clearer.

by David Alpert on Mar 24, 2011 5:08 pm • linkreport

Anyone have a map of what the wards looked like before 2001, 1991, etc. for comparison purposes?

by MLD on Mar 24, 2011 5:12 pm • linkreport

@Steven Yates

"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 • linkreport

So... are the ANC districts not coterminous with the wards?

Comparing two maps:


it looks like ANC 6D lies both in ward 6 and ward 2.


by David F-H on Mar 24, 2011 5:17 pm • linkreport

Looking at a map, these numbers seem to imply that most of DC's population growth happened in a fairly liberal definition of "downtown," yes?

by jfruh on Mar 24, 2011 5:17 pm • linkreport


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 • linkreport


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 • linkreport

@David F-H (by the way, is David the most common name on this blog?)

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 • linkreport

@ah: For example, move the orphan part or Ward 4 back into Ward 3, and the orphan part of Ward 1 into Ward 2 along with southern parts of Ward 3.

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 • linkreport


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 • linkreport

@Hogwash: "Likely, any such move would result in a more active constituency, requiring Barry to adequately address concerns, or he'll be shown the door"

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:

“We’re going to stop this trend — gentrification,” said D.C. Council member Marion Barry (D-Ward 8). “We can’t 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 • linkreport

Ward 1 also lost Sheridan-Kalorama to Ward 2, although maybe Graham thought that was just as well.

by Herschel on Mar 24, 2011 5:35 pm • linkreport

@Steven Yates
Shouldn't the census release some information on names soon? You can do the math on 'David.'

"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 • linkreport


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 • linkreport

@Herschel - Yes, the piece of Woodley Park that is in Ward 1. There is a fairly substantial part of Ward 4 west of Rock Creek Park, all the way to Nevada Avenue. It's in ANC 3G, but Ward 4.

by ah on Mar 24, 2011 5:50 pm • linkreport

Really, this doesn't look too drastic: Ward 2 needs to shed about 1,500 and Wards 7&8 need to gain about that combined. The obvious push in between them is Ward 6; theoretically Wards 1, 3, 4, and 5 don't need to move an inch.

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 • linkreport

Since Ward 2 Jack Evans co-chairs the committee handling redistricting and has a greater stake in it than his co-chair At Large Mike Brown. It's unlikely that Evans is going to give up the lively business district that includes his baby, the Verizon Center. Maybe he'll chop off parts of the Ward to the north, but he's unlikely to give up the coming CityMarket at O and it's likely upper income residents.

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 • linkreport

Anyone know when the redistricting will happen? I'm in SE next to Potomac Ave metro and would prefer to stay in ward 6.

by Nicoli on Mar 24, 2011 7:12 pm • linkreport

@steven, that's a reasonable position.

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 • linkreport


by HogWash on Mar 24, 2011 7:28 pm • linkreport

@ah: I see what you mean. I was misreading the map. This business of ANC 3 something being in Ward 4, or ANC 6 something being in Ward 2 or whatever, is just ridiculous. Shouldn't those things be transferred into the right ward? I mean, they transfer the resident parking zone, for god's sake. Does someone want to get me started on the resident parking zones?

by Herschel on Mar 24, 2011 10:11 pm • linkreport

@Herschel Ward 1 also lost Sheridan-Kalorama to Ward 2, although maybe Graham thought that was just as well.

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 • linkreport

Will work the way it does every 10 years: Ward 7 will push into Ward 8 which will push into Ward 6 which will push into Ward 2 which will push into ward 3.

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 • linkreport

I don't like Tommy Wells, but I think he knows how to bring in development. I think M.B. is a great soundbite, but he's a godawful leader and politician. He ran DC into the ground (with the help of others) and Ward 8 economic development is slow because he hasn't figured out how to get development in, but keep "gentrifiers" out. It's a losing proposition.

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 • linkreport

I live in ward 8 and stop voting for Barry tears ago and cant wait for the day he is out of office forever the residents of ward 8 and the city as a whole will be better off

by Jerome on Mar 25, 2011 8:47 am • linkreport

Seems like the most logical solution is to take a small part of Ward 7, give it to Ward 8, then expand Ward 7 to the northwest across the river. Allowing Marion Barry anywhere near the SW waterfront would be a mistake.

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 • linkreport

...and why is this a problem?

by sick of 'em on Mar 25, 2011 9:47 am • linkreport

@ David are leftist enough, I say combine Ward 2 and 8 ...then watch your muti-million property value go down the drain. Will this appease your leftist reasoning?

by sick of 'em on Mar 25, 2011 9:49 am • linkreport

@Lance: We fought it and it resulted in the 1/2 Zones that go one block in around the Ward 1 / 2 boundaries.

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 • linkreport

Whats the margin of error on the Census ? How does it count people who may between homes or temporary living with family/friends and moving frequently?

by kk on Mar 25, 2011 10:33 am • linkreport

@kk -- The margin of error on the Census is not insignificant, not least because courts have interpreted the constitutional requirement for an "actual enumeration" to mean that the only acceptable method of counting is to go to every dwelling in the country and ask how many people live there, either by mail or in person -- no statistical sampling techniques allowed.

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 • linkreport


I suggest you read the following:

by MLD on Mar 25, 2011 10:51 am • linkreport

My community (Kingman Park) which is in Ward 7 is west of the river! (only part of 7 that is this way) Crazy! We were in Ward 6- 10 years ago. It would be nice if our community could return to Ward 6 because most of our community issues are related to Ward 6 and not Ward 7!

by asilerod on Mar 25, 2011 1:03 pm • linkreport

Move Georgetown into Ward is where the "I am against anything" crowd belongs anyway!

by DC John on Mar 25, 2011 5:51 pm • linkreport

CM Alexander Lives in Penn-Branch which is in the southern part of the Ward, but North of Pennsylvania Ave. It's unlikely Ward will grow that far into Ward 7

by Veronica O. Davis (Ms V) on Mar 25, 2011 5:58 pm • linkreport

Is there any way we could change the wards to make the smaller or larger completely redo the system of how they are laid out.

by kk on Mar 26, 2011 10:08 am • linkreport

Add a Comment

Name: (will be displayed on the comments page)

Email: (must be your real address, but will be kept private)

URL: (optional, will be displayed)

Your comment:

By submitting a comment, you agree to abide by our comment policy.
Notify me of followup comments via email. (You can also subscribe without commenting.)
Save my name and email address on this computer so I don't have to enter it next time, and so I don't have to answer the anti-spam map challenge question in the future.


Support Us