City Council
Regular MeetingDanbury, CT · July 5, 2023
Minutes
City Council Ad Hoc / Committee Of the Whole
Reapportionment
Wednesday, July 5, 2023
Call To Order:
Mr. DiGilio called the Committee of the Whole meeting to order at 7:05 p.m.
NOTICE:
Mr. DiGilio read the meeting notice.
Roll Call:
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Buzaid, Eriquez, Knapp, Levy, DiGilio, Rotello, Esposito, Esposito III,
Fox, Masi, Henry, Merchan, Chianese, Cammisa, Tomchik.
COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: Putnam, Visconti, Halas, Palma, Britton, Perkins
PRESENT: 15, ABSENT: 6
ALSO PRESENT: Bob Yamin, Corporation Counsel; Les Pinter, Deputy Corporation Counsel; Dan
Casagrande, Outside Counsel; Joseph Mortelliti, Outside Counsel; MaryAnn Doran, Registrar of Voters (R);
Jan Giegler, Town Clerk; John Kleinhans, Mayor’s Office; Elisa Etcheto, Legislative Assistant.
1. Reapportionment
Mr. Casagrande (Outside Counsel) provided an overview of the process and purpose of reapportionment. He
discussed a draft complaint/pending lawsuit and noted the legal issues that need to be addressed; Sec. 2 Voting
Rights Act of 1965 (Majority Minority Districts: minority groups need to be able to vote for a minority
candidate of their choice), and the 14th Amendment Equal Protection Clause (voting districts must be
substantially equal; rule of thumb is about 10%).
He noted that Dr. Morrison was hired to review the 2 plans presented out of the Reapportionment Ad Hoc and
their compliance with the Sec. 2 Voting Rights Act. The result was that both plans could violate Sec. 2, and his
suggestion was to keep the existing wards map. Concerns regarding population growth were noted in the draft
complaint and the existing map was reviewed by Dr. Morrison for the Equal Protection Clause (10% variation
between wards). The map was found to violate the threshold. A new map/plan is presented.
Dr. Morrison explained that his goal with the new wards plan was to fulfill the threshold requirements by
making minimal changes to the existing map because the existing plan has produced minority candidates to
represent minority populations. The new plan rebalances wards to within 7.5% and addressed irregularities in
the boundaries of the wards.
*Joan Bielizna, Registrar of Voters (D) arrived at 7:26pm.
Mr. DiGilio asked Mr. Casagrande regarding deadlines. Mr. Casagrande noted three deadlines; Self Imposed
deadline: Plaintiff asked for a map to be chosen prior to political caucuses which are mandated to take place by
July 18, 2023. State Mandated deadline: August 7, 2023, per General Statutes 9-169, requires all redistricting to
be approved 90 days prior to the upcoming election. Registrars deadline: October 6, 2023, per General Statutes
9-168 & 9-169, requires identification of polling locations for the upcoming election. He noted that only the
plan must be in effect by August 7th, the new Ordinances can go into effect after the plan is approved.
He suggested two action plans; the first is to recommend the new plan, subject to a Public Hearing before final
action, on or before July 18th. The second option is to continue working on the plan/map for the 2025 election,
which will most likely result in litigation.
Mr. Rotello discussed the need to thoroughly review the plan, and noted his reservations with the process, and
the recommendations of Dr. Morrison. He clarified the purpose of the Public Hearing/s.
Mr. Chianese noted that Dr. Morrison’s new plan is close to the original Plan A, however, the new plan
proposes a majority of changes to the downtown area. Mr. Morrison noted that the plans need to comply with
both Sec. 2 and the Equal Protection Clause. He pointed out a variation in the downtown population with
regards to population totals and the portion of that population that can vote.
Ms. Merchan asked what sources were used to establish the Latino population. Dr. Morrison explained that the
2020 Census only provides for a Hispanic Category. He noted that the American Community Survey does help
determine Hispanic populations that are not yet citizens. He noted that a thorough analysis is needed to make
further recommendations regarding downtown wards.
Mr. Fox asked about discrepancies in Dr. Morrison’s last recommendation. He asked if the council had
participated in the new plan, and asked why changes were made to downtown boundaries. Dr. Morrison noted
time constraints, and explained that he moved some boarder irregularities that would not affect incumbents.
Mr. Rotello asked why the majority of changes occurred in the downtown area that would move 400 Hispanics
from the 6th Ward to the 7th. Dr. Morrison explained that he needs to know the voting status of the Hispanics he
is referencing and would need more time to process the data.
A motion was made by Councilman Knapp, seconded by Councilman Levy, that the Committee recommend
to the City Council that the Council approve the modified redistricting plan presented by Dr. Morrison, and
accordingly modify the plan approved by the Council on April 4, 2023, subject to a public hearing to be held
at 6:00PM on July 17, 2023, followed by a special meeting of the Council on that night to take final action
on the modified plan, provided that (1) Registrars of Voters timely review the modified plan to determine
consistency of the modified ward boundaries with precinct boundaries and to make changes as required by
state law; (2) the modified plan shall be effective as of August 7, 2023 (as per state statute); and (3) the
Council shall proceed to consider amendments to the Code of Ordinances Sections 8-1 and 8-2 to adjust the
boundaries of wards and voting precincts in accordance with the modified plan. 13 Yes, 2 No (Rotello, Fox)
Motion Carried.
Mr. Chianese asked Corporation Counsel to confirm that the timeline presented will fulfill the requirements.
Mr. Pinter noted that this item can go straight to a Public Hearing. Mr. Rotello noted his discontent with the
flawed process that will continue to affect the city into the future. Mr. Fox noted his concern over the process,
and Mr. Levy discussed the need to revise the Charter and suggested that experts will need to be consulted to
meet both Sec. 2 and the Equal Protection Clause. Mr. DiGilio asked for a Roll Call Vote.
ADJOURNMENT
A motion was made by Councilman Levy, and was seconded by Councilman Masi, to adjourn the
meeting. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 8:47 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Elisa Etcheto, Legislative Assistant
Attest: Vinny DiGilio, City Council President
Agenda
RECOMMENDED REAPPORTIONED ELECTION WARDS
FOR FUTURE USE BY THE CITY OF DANBURY, CT
Peter A. Morrison, Ph.D.
Peter A. Morrison & Associates, Inc.
July 4, 2023
This memo documents the relevant technical features of my Recommended City Election Wards (“the
Recommended Plan”) for future use by the City of Danbury, CT. I recommend its adoption as a
“minimal change” refinement of the City’s original plan, in use since 2013. The Recommended Plan
restores “substantial equality” of total population within each ward, as of the 2020 decennial Census.
My analysis of the original plan confirmed that Wards 6 and 7 were out of balance. Since the preceding
2010 census, residents have come or gone, or changed residence within Danbury, leaving certain wards
with too many residents or too few. Accordingly, I recommend restoring “substantial equality” of total
population within each ward. My sole aim has been to bring the City’s existing plan into compliance with
Federal and State legal standards, based upon the 2020 Federal census count of the City’s total population.
The Recommended Plan rebalances the two outlier wards (#6 and #7), thereby restoring “substantial
population equality” among all wards (a Total Deviation from Ideal of 7.50%). The City’s five other
wards are essentially unchanged. In several instances, minor boundary irregularities were straightened
out to improve overall compactness of the Recommended Plan. Correcting these minor boundary
irregularities have avoid the appearance of diluting the voting strength of Danbury’s Hispanic and Black
residents.
Overall, the Recommended Plan assures strict compliance with Connecticut’s newly enacted voting rights
act (CTVRA)1 as well as Section 2 of the Federal Voting Rights Act2. The following are specific
considerations I have taken into account:
1. Right to representation. The Recommended Plan realizes the intention of the City’s elected officials to
adopt a plan that will continue to assure the rights to representation of all the people in the City of Danbury.
2. Equipopulous Wards. Fourteen of the City’s 21 Council Members are to be elected by ward, two in
each of the City’s seven wards. These seven wards are substantially equal in total population, based upon
2020 Census PL94-171 summary population counts. “Substantially equal” means that each ward
encompasses a total population nearly equal to the exact mathematical ideal of 12,360 persons per ward,
i.e., one-seventh of the City’s 86,518 total population.
Danbury’s wards need not be exactly equal in total population, given the other traditional redistricting
considerations one is obliged to respect. Courts have allowed districting plans up to a 10-percent total
deviation from this ideal. A plan’s total deviation from ideal (“TDI”) is measured as the absolute
difference between the most populous ward and the least populous ward, divided by the ideal number
(here, 12,360). Table 1 below documents adherence to these guard rails.
1
The John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act of Connecticut was signed into law on June 12, 2023.
2
Section 2 of the Federal Voting Rights Act prohibits vote dilution, defined as any electoral practice or procedure that
minimizes or cancels out the voting strength of members of racial or language minority groups in the voting population. See
pp. 6-10 at: https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1429486/download for an overview of these prohibitions.
2
Table 1. Wards Equalized on Total Population as of 2020
Recommended Plan
Total Deviation Voting-age Population (VAP)
Population From Total VAP % White % % Black %
Ward (all ages) Ideal (all groups) Not Hisp. Hispanic (any part Minority
1 12,046 -2.54% 9,338 49.4% 31.2% 8.4% 39.6%
2 11,844 -4.17% 9,535 54.3% 22.2% 10.6% 32.8%
3 12,082 -2.25% 9,689 61.2% 18.6% 8.1% 26.7%
4 12,550 1.54% 9,694 37.8% 33.9% 10.6% 44.4%
5 12,771 3.33% 10,170 39.8% 37.4% 9.4% 46.9%
6 12,642 2.28% 10,125 51.8% 25.5% 9.8% 35.2%
7 12,583 1.81% 9,697 43.2% 37.7% 9.1% 46.9%
Citywide 86,518 68,248
Ideal
12,360 +7.50%
(1/7)
Sources: US Census Bureau, 2020 Census, PL94-171 Summary File.
For the Recommended Plan, the most-populous ward (Ward 5) has 12,771 residents, which is 3.33% too
many. The least-populous ward (Ward 2) has 11,844 residents, which is 4.17% too few. These two
extreme deviations combined (3.33% plus 4.17%) total to 7.50%, which is the Plan’s Total Deviation
from Ideal (“TDI”). Relative to the maximum acceptable TDI (10.00%), this 7.50 TDI is within the
acceptable range of “substantial equality”.
3. Respecting existing administrative boundaries. The Recommended Plan respects existing voting
precincts where possible so that precinct boundaries now in use may be preserved.
4. Compliance with Federal redistricting guidelines. Section 2 of the Federal Voting Rights Act
prohibits vote dilution. Vote dilution is defined as any electoral practice or procedure that minimizes or
cancels out the voting strength of members of racial or language minority groups in the voting population.
See pp. 6-10 at: https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1429486/download for an overview of
prohibitions.
The Recommended Plan complies with these Federal redistricting guidelines. Consistent with them, the
Recommended Plan respects existing concentration of the City’s Hispanic and Black residents and
voters in Wards 4, 5, and 7, where minorities constitute between 44.4% and 46.9% of the voting-
age population (VAP). See Table 1 above and supporting data in Appendix Figure A.
The precise boundaries of each recommended new ward visualized in Figure 2 below are defined by GIS
electronic shape files that accompany this memo as a deliverable. These shape files define each newly
adopted ward with reference to 2020 census block geography and the 2020 Census count of population
within each census block.3
3
The City should archive these shape files as the official record of the reapportioned Recommended Plan, as implemented for
holding future elections. Shape files are a collection of spatial files, index files, projection files, and data files. When opened
within GIS software, shape files define the boundaries of each ward and the population within that ward.
3
These shape files should be used to prepare all necessary high-resolution maps for public review and
implementation of the Recommended Plan. For purposes of holding future elections, the City’s existing
election precincts can be adjusted to align with newly-adopted boundaries, referencing recognized streets,
voting precincts, newly annexed territory, and other necessary details for conducting future elections.
Figure 1 below shows the City’s existing ward boundaries, which have been in use since 2013. Figure 2
compares the Recommended Draft 2023 Recommended Plan with this original 2013 benchmark plan.
Figures 3 and 4 provide close-up detail of Wards 6 and 7; and Downtown.
Figure 1. Map Showing Existing Ward Boundaries
Official Version:
Below is a simplified rendition of Figure 1.
4
Simplified Rendition of Figure 1
5
Figure 2. City of Danbury 2013 Benchmark Plan and 2023 Draft Final Plan
(subject to Registrar’s review of boundaries)
New Wards
Existing Wards
Key:
Heavy black boundaries denote existing wards (adopted in 2013)
Different colors denote newly reapportioned wards in 2023 Final Plan
6
Figure 3. Close-Up Detail: Wards 6 & 7
(subject to Registrar’s review of boundaries)
Key:
Heavy black boundaries denote existing wards (adopted in 2013)
Different colors denote newly reapportioned wards in 2023 Final Plan
7
Figure 4. Close-Up Detail: Downtown
(subject to Registrar’s review of boundaries)
2023 Ward
Key:
Heavy black boundaries denote existing wards (adopted in 2013)
Different colors denote newly reapportioned wards in 2023 Final Plan
8
Appendix Figure A
Concentrations of Hispanic and Black Voting-age Persons as of 2020
Respectfully submitted,
__________________________________
Peter A. Morrison
Peter A. Morrison & Associates, Inc.
July 3, 2023
Get email alerts for Danbury
A daily email when new agendas and minutes are posted.