Town of Brookhaven

Councilmember Jonathan Kornreich (D-Stony Brook) questions the town’s mapmaker during a public hearing on Thursday, Sept. 29. Screenshot from the town website

The Town of Brookhaven’s controversial redistricting process concluded on Thursday, Sept. 29, after the Town Board voted unanimously to approve the latest proposed map.

The Town Board, which has a 6-1 Republican majority, took over the redistricting process after an appointed redistricting committee failed to find agreement on a draft proposal. Days after the committee formally disbanded, Town Supervisor Ed Romaine (R) presented his own map. For more on this story, see “Brookhaven officials react to latest redistricting proposal” (TBR News Media website). 

Councilmember Jonathan Kornreich (D-Stony Brook) kicked off the public hearing with a forceful line of questioning of the town’s designated mapmaker, David Schaefer of Schenectady-based firm Skyline Consulting. 

Kornreich pressed Schaefer on a range of subjects, such as his familiarity with the hamlets throughout the town. He also inquired about how Schaefer arrived at an original determination to split Port Jefferson Station and Terryville between Council Districts 1 and 2, and why he decided to move most of Ridge into CD4.

Responding, Schaefer said that he created the initial maps solely to bring the six council districts into roughly equal populations. “The first draft that I submitted is all population driven,” he said.

Following Kornreich’s line of questioning, residents pressed their representatives on the Town Board repeatedly over concerns that arose throughout the redistricting process and the alleged inequities in drawing the district lines. 

Ira Costell, a resident of Port Jefferson Station, argued Schaefer’s approach was unproductive, reducing redistricting to an analytic method while ignoring its impact on communities of interest.

“There’s more than just standard deviations and numbers at play here,” Costell said. “There’s people, there’s communities, there’s interests, and there’s fairness at stake here, and I don’t see a lot of it in what the mapmaker initially did.”

‘Despite the hideously flawed process that led here, I think in the end we’ve created a map that’s got some compromises, and it’s got a little something for everyone to be unhappy about.’

— Jonathan Kornreich

Costell further railed against the committee process, saying, “The hearings were poorly advertised, they were chaotic, they were confusing, they were marked by a lack of support information from the town, which resulted in maps that just appeared out of thin air.” He continued, “What does seem transparent, however, is the majority on this board seems poised to ignore the clear will and desires of the voters who did speak out.”

Terryville resident Lou Antoniello suggested Schaefer was not being truthful during his remarks. He added that tampering with district boundaries may affect future redistricting procedures.

“While the map that this board put together is light-years better than the original map, which cut out a huge chunk [of Terryville from CD1], it’s still cutting — cracking — Council District 1,” he said. “That sets a dangerous precedent for the future.”

Members of the redistricting committee also attended the public hearing. Among them was Gail Lynch-Bailey, who had served this year and in 2012. She referred to the two initial maps which split Port Jefferson Station and Terryville as a ploy to divert the public’s attention away from alleged gerrymandering in Council District 4. This district includes the racially and ethnically diverse communities of Coram, Gordon Heights and North Bellport.

“Once the public realized the commission had had no input into them, the maps were readily recognized by many for what they were: diversions, bait-and-switch tactics, ‘pay-no-attention-to-the-man-behind-the-curtain’ maps intended to focus attention on the northern CDs instead of what was going on for CD4,” she said. “This ruse was, and still is, unconscionable.”

Also making an appearance was Ali Nazir, the Republican co-chair on the redistricting committee. He defended the movement of mostly white Ridge into CD4, citing the hamlet’s longstanding ties to the Longwood community.

“Despite rhetoric of the contrary, Ridge has always been in Council District 4,” Nazir said. “Ridge has a long history with the Longwood community, and to arbitrarily excommunicate them from the Longwood community is quite frankly wrong.”

Port Jefferson Station and Terryville, however, remain mostly united within the boundaries of Council District 1. Kornreich, who voted with the majority, justified his vote, saying this map would not split minority communities or dilute their votes.

“We negotiated in good faith, and the supervisor fulfilled his promise to keep Gordon Heights and North Bellport together, not to dilute the minority vote, and in good faith, I will support the agreement we made,” Kornreich said. “Is it an ideal map? No. Is it a map that I were to draw? Of course not. But when you’ve got one Democrat and a row of Republicans, you tell me what level of political power you have.”

In concluding his remarks, the CD1 councilmember said the final map reflects a series of compromises. “Despite the hideously flawed process that led here, I think in the end we’ve created a map that’s got some compromises, and it’s got a little something for everyone to be unhappy about,” he said, adding, “I hope that we can get to work and solve the real problems that face our town.”

No other board member spoke during the hearing. Following the vote, a droning cry rained from some in the audience, the dissidents shouting, “Shame on you, shame on you.” 

It remains unclear whether the map will face challenges in court or whether those challenges could hold up given the bipartisan outcome.

Facebook photo

After months of controversy, the Town of Brookhaven’s redistricting process is nearing completion. Earlier this week, the town released its latest proposal to reapportion its six council districts.

While this new map signals progress for the residents of Council District 1, our work is unfinished. This map still splits Comsewogue School District unnecessarily. As this redistricting process enters the home stretch, let’s remember how we got here. 

At the outset, powerful and unknown forces sought to crack Council District 1, targeting Port Jefferson Station and Terryville which share a school district, zip code, library, civic association and chamber of commerce. The original draft maps proposed cutting this hamlet in two, dividing our residents across different council districts. If adopted, these plans could have caused a diversion of public resources away from our area and disrupted years of progress — and future plans — made by our residents.

Seeing that our interests were at stake, the people took action. Civic organizations and business groups mobilized the troops, sending members to public hearings to resist these plans. Many spread the word by writing letters to the editor, which appeared on this page. And our hometown paper regularly covered the issue and vigorously editorialized on behalf of our districts.

The people of Port Jefferson Station/Terryville and beyond presented an overwhelming, unified front — a force too large to be ignored. Confronted by such stark opposition, the redistricting committee had little choice but to acquiesce to the community’s demands, restoring the boundaries of Council District 1 to their previous form.

The Town Board’s new map looks promising for most Comsewogue residents, but not all. Under this plan, the dividing line between CD1 and CD2 is Pine Street, meaning Comsewogue families in the school district east of Pine will belong to Council District 2. 

This year’s redistricting controversy has brought our community together. It has demonstrated the power of civic and business groups in coordinating their efforts. It has taught us there is strength in unity. It has also illustrated the dynamic interplay between a community and a community newspaper. 

When we speak with one voice, there is nothing we cannot accomplish. The Town Board will hold a public hearing on Thursday, Sept. 29, at 5 p.m. On that day, we must tell our elected representatives to bring our neighbors back into CD1. For the betterment of our community, let’s finish our work to the bitter end. No Comsewogue family can be left behind. 

Building upon our successes, we should remember we are not alone in this cause. The Mount Sinai activists were equally triumphant in preventing the splitting of their hamlet. And in CD4, our neighbors in Coram and Gordon Heights continue to fight apparent attempts to gerrymander that area.

The Town Board has a 6-1 Republican majority, and must adopt a new map by Dec. 15. How we proceed over the coming weeks could impact Brookhaven elections over the next 10 years.

Graphic from the town website: https://www.brookhavenny.gov/DocumentCenter/View/29593/Brookhaven-Proposed-Districts-2022

The Town of Brookhaven has released its first proposed map to reapportion the Brookhaven Town Council. 

Last week, the town’s appointed bipartisan redistricting committee disbanded after failing to adopt an official map for the six council districts. Without a recommendation from the committee, the Town Board is now responsible for redrawing the district lines.

Following the dissolution of the redistricting committee, Brookhaven Town Supervisor Ed Romaine (R) met with the six representatives on the Town Council to discuss their priorities for the new map. 

Jack Krieger, the town’s communications director, offered a statement outlining the methodology used to arrive at this new proposal. The supervisor could not be reached for comment.

“Over the course of the last several months, more than a dozen public hearings were held across the town by the Brookhaven Redistricting [Committee] in an open, transparent and public process,” Krieger said. “At these meetings, in emails to the [committee], and in local media, numerous residents, civic associations and community leaders voiced their concerns and opinions as to what newly created districts should include, and what they should not.” The communications director added, “The map that will be voted on includes numerous elements from these suggestions.”

In an exclusive interview, Councilmember Jonathan Kornreich (D-Stony Brook) offered some points he raised during his conversation with the supervisor. 

“The supervisor outlined a couple of his priorities, like keeping communities together and making as few changes as possible,” Kornreich said. “Another one that he expressed, which I didn’t happen to agree with, was getting as close to zero [percent deviation] as possible.” The councilmember added, “As long as it’s legal, as long as it’s within the tolerance, that [zero deviation] is just not as important to me. The other criteria are more important.”

One of the reasons for the outpouring of public resistance throughout the committee hearings was a general fear of dividing communities of interest across political boundaries and consequently diluting their voting power, leading to possible gerrymandering.

Krieger defended the new map in his statement, arguing that it “reduces the number of hamlets that are split between districts of multiple council members, has substantially equal populations with the least possible deviation, and contains clear and readily identifiable boundaries.” He added, “The map makes only minimal changes to accomplish this, with 90 percent of residents seeing no change in the district in which they live.”

Kornreich also addressed the public’s concerns. He said the debate surrounding his district, Council District 1, has been about defending the integrity of communities rather than advancing the interest of a particular party.

“This whole thing of me trying to defend the integrity of my council district was never a political effort,” he said. “It was a bipartisan civic effort. The people who had my back in this were as Republican as they are Democrat.”

Residents will again have an opportunity to weigh the redistricting plans during a public hearing on Thursday, Sept. 29, at Brookhaven Town Hall. The hearing will begin at 5 p.m.

Free Car Seat Inspection will be held on Sept. 24 at Safety Town. Photo from TOB

Brookhaven Highway Superintendent Daniel Losquadro has announced a free child safety seat check on Sept. 24 from 8 a.m. to noon at Safety Town, 249 Buckley Road in Holtsville. The event is being held on National Seat Check Saturday, part of the U.S. Department of Transportation’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s Child Passenger Safety Week (Sept. 18-24, 2022).

The Suffolk County Sheriff’s Office, along with certified technicians from the Brookhaven Highway Department, will be on hand to inspect car seats and make sure children are riding in the right car seats for their age and size as they grow.

“Car crashes are a leading cause of death for children,” said Brookhaven Highway Superintendent Daniel Losquadro. “Many parents and caregivers believe they know how to use the correct child restraints for their children, but these restraints are frequently used incorrectly. I am happy to provide this free car seat inspection to teach parents and caregivers how to identify, choose and correctly install the right car seat for their child’s age and size.”

“Nationwide, more than half of car seats are installed incorrectly, putting children’s safety at risk in the case of an accident,” said Sheriff Errol D. Toulon, Jr. “I would like to thank the Town of Brookhaven’s Highway Department for joining with us to offer this free car seat safety check to help ensure that parents are installing and using their car seats correctly.”

The Child Safety Seat Check is funded, in part, by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration with a grant from the New York State Governors Traffic Safety Committee. Inspections are by appointment only; call 631-451-5335 to reserve your spot.

Caption: Free Car Seat Inspection will be held on Saturday, Sept. 24, 2022, at Safety Town.

The Town of Brookhaven seal. Photo from the town website

Following a contentious virtual meeting on Monday, Sept. 12, the Brookhaven Redistricting Committee failed to reach a compromise on a proposed map, sending the redistricting process to the Brookhaven Town Council.

The committee voted on three maps during the meeting, none of which received the six votes necessary to adopt an official proposal. There was significant controversy leading up to this meeting. Despite this, all eight members and the committee’s mapmaker, David Schaefer, were present.

However, members calling attendance seemed to be the only unanimous outcome of the night, as the three Democratic appointees clashed with their Republican and Conservative Party counterparts throughout the evening.

The meeting got out to a rocky start after an unsuccessful motion to adopt an agenda. Schaefer then presented three maps that the committee requested during the previous session.

Schaefer first presented a “map of least change.” This map addressed only Council Districts 2 and 6, the two districts whose populations fall outside the 5% deviation allowable under the Town Code. After a vote, this map failed 3-5, with Democratic appointees Rabia Aziz, George Hoffman and Gail Lynch-Bailey voting “yes” and all others voting “no.”

Schaefer also presented a map that loosely follows the proposal of Coram resident Logan Mazer. On the whole, the Mazer map was viewed favorably during the public hearings. However, this proposal was ultimately shot down by another 3-5 vote, with the same committee members voting for and against it.

Schaefer’s final presentation was a map that followed the boundaries of Proposal 2, one of the two original draft proposals which met fierce opposition during the public hearings. With some adjustments to the boundaries of CD1 and CD2, this new map kept much of Proposal 2 intact.

In the face of this public opposition, the map was the highest vote-getter, with a 5-3 vote count — one vote shy of formal adoption by the committee. Ali Nazir, Edward McCarthy, Delilah Bustamante, Krystina Sconzo and Chad Lennon voted “yes,” with the entire Democratic caucus voting it down. 

In a phone interview, Lynch-Bailey confirmed that the redistricting committee officially disbanded the following day around noon after Nazir and Aziz, the co-chairs, could not reach a compromise. Failing to adopt a proposal, the committee sends the process to the Town Council. 

During a Town Board meeting Tuesday, Sept. 13, Supervisor Ed Romaine (R) discussed some of the criteria he will be looking for in the new map. He said he hopes to achieve an equal population distribution across council districts, keep minority communities together within district boundaries and reduce the number of split communities. The Town Board must adopt new council district outlines by Dec. 15. 

The supervisor expects a new map to be available on the town website by next week. A public hearing on the matter will be held at Town Hall on Thursday, Sept. 29, at 5 p.m. 

Visit our website to follow features on this important issue:

New Village Recreation Center Fall Class Schedule

20 Wireless Road, Centereach, NY 11720
Call: 631-451-5307 to register.

Kids Karate (Ages 6-12)
Check out these new Karate classes. Kids will learn confidence, concentration and respect. Be the next Karate Kid!
Tuesdays, 4:30PM – 5:30PM
September 20, 27, October 4, 11, 18, 25, November 1, 15
Pre-register by Monday, September 19, 2022
$50.00 per 8-week session

Yoga
This class offers a balanced approach to yoga consisting of physical postures, breathing exercises, and relaxation to help restore physical, mental and emotional health and well being. Wear comfortable clothing and bring a mat, blanket, or pillow
to sit on.
Fridays, 7:00PM – 8:00PM
October 7, 14, 21, 28, November 4, 18
Pre-register by Monday, October 3, 2022
$35.00 per 6-week session

Fall Craft Fair

Love crafts? Come in to browse or buy some of the handmade crafts made by local vendors here in Brookhaven!
Saturday, October 8th
11:00AM – 3:00PM

 

Above: The three Democratic appointees to the Brookhaven Redistricting Committee during an unofficial public hearing on Friday, Aug. 5. (Left to right) George Hoffman, Rabia Aziz and Gail Lynch-Bailey. File photo

The Brookhaven Redistricting Committee is nearing its Sept. 15 deadline, and the eight-member commission is in shambles. With less than a week to go, it seems probable that the committee will not meet the six-vote threshold necessary to adopt an official map for the Town Council. The following is an open letter sent on behalf of the three Democratic appointees on the committee, addressed to their fellow commissioners: 

Dear Co-Chairman Ali Nazir and Commissioners,

We, the members of the Democratic caucus of the Town of Brookhaven Redistricting Commission, renew our request for our next meeting to take the form of an in-person public hearing, to be held at Town Hall on Monday, Sept. 12, at 6 p.m. 

We also request that our co-chairs work out in advance of the meeting an agreed-upon agenda that indicates the issues to be discussed at the meeting, which includes a discussion on both maps that are currently before the commission: Prop2A13 and TMOLC. 

If there is a possibility that maps may be voted on at that meeting, it should also be included on the agenda.

We ask that the mapmaker [David Schaefer] join us, virtually if that is his only recourse, to review the maps and add data similar to that which accompanied the initial two proposals. 

The Town Code establishing reapportionment criteria sets no number of public hearings. Thus far, we have held six hearings on zero maps and six hearings on two unrequested maps. 

The concept of having zero public hearings on the three maps we actually requested is anathema to us. 

 

Sincerely,

Rabia Aziz, Co-Chair

George Hoffman

Gail Lynch-Bailey

Brookhaven Redistricting Committee member on the public’s distrust of government

Gail Lynch-Bailey, a member of the Brookhaven Redistricting Committee in 2012 and 2022, above. Photo courtesy Lynch-Bailey

Gail Lynch-Bailey, president of the Middle Island Civic Association, has the unique distinction of serving on the Brookhaven Redistricting Committee both in 2012 and this year. In an exclusive interview, she discusses the breakdown of norms, procedures and public confidence as the committee works to meet its Sept. 15 deadline.

What is your background, and how did you get involved in the redistricting process?

I am the president of the Middle Island Civic Association. As such, I qualify to be a civic representative on the redistricting committee. I did it 10 years ago in the same vein: I was a Democratic appointee then and am one now.

What are your thoughts on how this year’s redistricting process has developed?

This 2022 redistricting process has been contentious and frustrating. It has caused me to rethink a lot of recommendations for the next time the town undergoes this process. I don’t think that we had enough time with the professional mapmaker. As commissioners, we needed a session early on in the process. Instead, we had six meetings with no maps, then two maps appeared, and then we had six hearings based on those maps — which were false maps because we had no input into them.

Now, we’re struggling to see if we get some public hearings on the mapmaker’s three maps we have legitimately requested. I sincerely hope we can do that because I think that’s part of our obligation to the public.

What are some key differences between the redistricting process this year and the one from 2012?

Ten years ago, we met in person as a commission and introduced ourselves. We learned a lot about each other and then had an informational and educational session with the counsel, Jeff Wice.

Then, we had a series of public hearings that were not scheduled during the week of the Fourth of July — when people are on vacation. We had two sessions per week running across three weeks in July. Then, we had a nice work session where we talked about what kind of maps we would like to get from the mapmaker. We had a very good understanding of the three maps we wanted. One was a map of least change. Another was along school district boundaries because that was one of the things we heard about from the public during the public hearings. The last map added more changes involving election districts and things like that.

We went from very little change to much more in those three maps. Then we had time to look at those maps before we went out to the public again. And that was what was missing this time: We got maps on a Friday, and then we were back in front of the public the following Monday. The public thought these were our maps, but we hadn’t even begun understanding what they were. They weren’t based on anything we or the public requested.

That meeting with the mapmaker and understanding of what we would get was missing. And I don’t know who made the schedule of the hearings, but it was unnecessarily daunting. 

What do you think accounts for the committee’s problems this year?

Perhaps it was going to be contentious from the start only because of the nature of the political arena right now. People distrust government at higher levels than I have ever experienced. One side may think that people will be mad no matter what we do. The other side will think that we’re not being transparent. The people are mad, and understandably so.

There have been a lot of complaints about a lack of publicity. Many things have changed at the last minute: We have had several cancellations, which only added to the lack of credibility in my opinion. 

These issues only compounded the already-high level of distrust in government from both sides. We have heard from people who identify as Republicans and Democrats about the attempt to change the Mount Sinai, Port Jefferson Station and Terryville areas. People from both sides of the aisle came out and said, “Why are you doing this? It’s completely unnecessary and we don’t understand it.” And they were absolutely right to ask that kind of a question. 

We’re supposed to be talking about the population disparities between [Council Districts] 2 and 6. Those are the two that are out of alignment, according to the 5% rule [in the town code]. Those first two maps made some strange changes that nobody could understand why they were there.

After you left the committee’s Aug. 18 virtual meeting, a resolution was approved 5-2 that preserves one of the initial drafts maps while reverting the boundaries of CD1 and CD2 to their current form. If you had been in the meeting, how would you have voted?

I probably would have voted “no” because it is not addressing what I have requested, which is the 2-6 boundary. 

With the proposed movement of Ridge into Council District 4, do you believe that district is at risk of partisan gerrymandering?

Yes, I am very worried about that. I live in CD4, and as a civic leader I work with Councilman [Michael] Loguercio [R-Ridge] all the time. We have an excellent relationship. 

I also understand that some of the people from the Ridge Civic [Association] would love to have fewer council representatives — they have three. 

Any number of the maps that we [the Democratic appointees] have proposed gets it down to two, eliminating Ridge from Council District 6. But we’re looking to do it equitably and fairly by not diluting the minority vote. It’s important.

How has public participation during this redistricting cycle differed from that of 2012?

The public has been very engaged, very vocal and very passionate. Again, this goes back to that distrust issue. And also, the ability of people to record themselves, get their message out, and share messages among people is different than it was 10 years ago. People have been able to share information — good information — about what’s going on, regardless of party, when they think that something is awry. 

Last time across all six public hearings, I think we may have had 25 to 29 separate speakers. We had more than 30 at the last public hearing alone … and that was just one hearing. It has been supercharged and contentious at times. I used the term “frustrating” earlier because our job is to listen during these sessions and not respond, and that has been hard for many of us to do. 

We know a lot of these people through different organizations and dealings over the years, so to be unable to sympathize with them or reassure them has been really challenging. 

What steps can the committee take in the next two weeks to meet its deadline and produce maps that reflect the will of the people?

I think the three maps we have requested should be posted on the town’s website immediately as soon as they are ready. I believe that the committee should meet to discuss the maps and then have a public hearing on those maps. We still have time. We have [the rest of] this week, all of next week and part of the following week. That’s plenty of time to get things done. 

The public has asked for two things: a map of least change, and respect for the possibility of a majority-minority district. There are three tenets that school districts, businesses and all levels of government have adopted: diversity, equity and inclusion. Those aren’t just trendy buzzwords. They are the hallmarks of creating a better society, and the maps that the committee and the town adopt need to embody those three tenets. 

Ten years. That’s a long time in local government. It’s a long time for all levels of government. But at the local level, 10 years can be an eternity.

Town of Brookhaven Councilmember Jonathan Kornreich (D-Stony Brook) presented a proclamation to Lou Antoniello, whose dream of bringing Shakespeare to the Train Car Park has finally come true. Photo from Joan Nickeson
By Aidan Johnson

Port Jefferson Station/Terryville is receiving a breath of fresh air with the help of public funds and engaged community members.

In an exclusive interview with Town of Brookhaven Councilmember Jonathan Kornreich (D-Stony Brook), he discussed ongoing work throughout the hamlet such as the revitalization of the Train Car Park at the intersection of routes 347 and 112. Kornreich believes the area is finally getting the care it deserves.

For many years, the Port Jefferson Station/Terryville Civic Association had dreamed of making the park a central hub for the community. Residents created an ambitious plan, and the town even hired engineers, but the plan never materialized. 

Despite the idea of revitalizing the Train Car Park falling by the wayside, when Kornreich entered office in March 2021 he met with local civic leaders to discuss their priorities. Since the park remained at the top of their list, they decided to approach the project for a second time. 

“Once we really understood that the [original] plan for the park was not feasible, we decided just to break it into achievable steps and go for the intent of what they were trying to do,” Kornreich said. This process worked, and both a stage and a fence were built.

Resident and member of the civic association, Lou Antoniello, had long wished for the Train Car Park to serve as a venue for the performing arts. With the new additions, those aspirations have finally become reality.

Last month, Antoniello fulfilled his dream of bringing “Shakespeare in the Park” to the Train Car Park. On Wednesday, Aug. 3, “The Taming of the Shrew” was played there. Kornreich, who had helped bring Antoniello’s wish to fruition, felt that the performance night encapsulated all the hard work and years of devotion everyone had put in. 

“It was like an idyllic evening, and a lot of people came,” the councilmember said. “It just was such a happy night.”

In addition to the Train Car Park, plans are in the works to give the Jefferson Plaza a facelift. Similar to the park, the plan to redevelop the shopping center has been in the making for quite some time. 

“Like so many plans, things gestate for a long period of time before they are born — and certain ideas for a long time,” Kornreich said, adding, “I believe it was [town] Supervisor [Ed] Romaine [R] who came to them and suggested that instead of redeveloping the whole thing as commercial, it would be a more interesting project if you had mixed-use development — half residential and half commercial.” 

There is hope that the Jefferson Plaza redevelopment project will catalyze more investment throughout the area. [See TBR News Media story, “Developers pitch plans for Jefferson Plaza,” June 23.]

Overall, the councilmember expressed excitement about the direction he sees Port Jefferson Station/Terryville taking. 

“I think there’s going to be a diversity of housing stock,” Kornreich said. “I think that it’ll be a place where younger people can and will want to live … a place where people can live in proximity to public transportation.” He added, “People want to live someplace walkable, and maybe it’s starting to move away from the car-centric lifestyle.”

Brookhaven Redistricting Committee member says residents must stay engaged

George Hoffman, a member of the Brookhaven Redistricting Committee, congratulated the residents who have mobilized throughout this process, but he believes their work is unfinished. Photo courtesy Hoffman

The redistricting committee recently approved the creation of three new draft maps, one of which you voted ‘no.’ Could you briefly explain your ‘no’ vote?

Ali Nazir, the co-chair, requested taking one of the first maps — which created all this controversy — and refining it by putting Council Districts 1 and 2 together but leaving everything else as it is. 

Ali’s resolution solves the issue of Mount Sinai and Terryville. Still, it keeps [Council District] 4 the way the mapmaker drew it. I voted ‘no.’ Rabia [Aziz] voted ‘no.’ Gail [Lynch-Bailey] had left because she had to go to a civic meeting by that time. The rest of the [members] voted ‘yes’ [for a 5-2 vote] and that’s very concerning.

What is your message to those who have successfully resisted the first two draft maps?

I congratulate the communities of Mount Sinai, Terryville and Port Jeff Station because they mobilized quickly to preserve their communities of interest. They wanted to stay with the original council district boundaries we have had for 20 years, so I would not minimize their involvement. And it was a very personal involvement: they were defending their communities and protecting their backyards. If they hadn’t come out in such strength, maybe the majority on that commission may not have put it back. But I think the bigger goal is still to crack CD4.

In your eyes, does the transfer of Ridge into Council District 4 constitute an act of partisan gerrymandering?

Yes, and I think it may even violate the [John Lewis] Voting Rights Act. It’s pretty clear that Ridge is a solid Republican-leaning area. To put it into a diverse community solely because it will affect the outcome of that district, I think, is certainly the definition of gerrymandering.

With a few adjustments to Council Districts 1 and 2, Hoffman said Proposal 2 (above) is still in play. Map from the Brookhaven Redistricting Committee’s website

How can concerned residents help to deter an unfavorable redrawing of CD4?

To all the residents of Brookhaven, we should be concerned. They should care about their own community — it’s important to fight for your own community of interest — but help as much as you can to have a fair and balanced redistricting townwide because what’s going on is not fair and it’s not balanced. My recommendation would be that everyone has to stay engaged.

What changes are you looking for in the coming weeks?

I think all six districts have a right to stay close to what they are currently. I recognize that Council District 2 is down a couple of thousand in terms of population, so you need to balance that. Council District 6 had a lot of growth, so you do have to remove some of the people there. But there shouldn’t be mischief in doing that.

What is your reaction to the committee’s recent meeting with David Schaefer, the mapmaker?

Last night [Aug. 18], we met with the mapmaker for the first time in a month and a half. We should have met with him at the outset, or at least after the first six public hearings. Because so few people showed up at the initial hearings, he should have at least asked us what our vision or goals were for the first map. To do a map without even talking to us is like an interior decorator designing your house without consulting you. 

I don’t think he’s politically motivated. I think he has good skills as a demographer and was pretty candid with us. But I do believe that he’s responding to some instructions. I think he’s data in/data out, and I don’t think you can do redistricting that way. Maybe he’s too much on the statistical side and not sufficiently understanding of communities.

Isn’t that the real purpose of redistricting? To balance out the populations but don’t destroy communities.

What is your understanding of the history of councilmanic districts in the Town of Brookhaven?

For years, the town used to elect its council people at large. There were always seven members — six board members and a supervisor — but they ran townwide. What happened was that they were not very responsive to local communities. You could vote against a community and still survive if you had the rest of the town, and it got very bad. 

A civic network was formed called ABCO, the Affiliated Brookhaven Civic Organizations, and it became huge. They would do a meeting and have dozens of civic organizations throughout the township meet to talk about how unresponsive the town was to their needs. It culminated in a movement for a referendum for council districts to divide the Town Council into six districts based on regional community interests. It went to a vote. The community was very organized, and they prevailed.

Council District 4 was seen as the most diverse district in the town. People saw it as the district that probably would be most successful at electing a diverse candidate, and both parties understood that. That was 2002, so for 20 years now, we’ve lived under these districts, more or less. 

I’m a bit taken aback by what’s happening in this redistricting. It’s pretty clear to me now that the goal is to change CD4 into a more favorable district, almost partisan gerrymandering to help the incumbent there [Councilman Michael Loguercio (R-Ridge)]. 

What are the risks of an overly analytical redistricting process that neglects the complex realities on the ground?

This is sort of a digression, but it has been over 75 years since splitting India into India and Pakistan. The map was done by a British guy who never went to India and just drew a straight line down the middle of the country following rivers, and over a million people died because the partition was done without any understanding of communities.

You can’t just do demographics without understanding the consequences of your mapmaking. I think [the mapmaker] has been much more on the statistical side, and I would like for the map to reflect a keener understanding of the communities of Brookhaven.