12-11-33 Council Meeting Minutes

Home Browse Search

e ",# N. REPORT OF 00161ITTEE ONE— DISTRICTZJING THE CITY INTO SIX COUNCILMANIC DISTRICTS. South Bend, Indiana, December 11, 1933. To the Common Council of the City of South Bend: The special committee on redia- tricting the city reports to the Common Council, regarding_ the veto by the Mayor of the redistricting ordinance, that the same political influence which attempted to control the Common Council and failed has succeeded with the Mayor for the same reasons that it has succeeded with him in the past. His conduct at this time is only an additional demonstration that the Mayor although elected as a Democrat is eompletelylunder the domination of certain.Republicans and is a Democrat in name only. His distressing record is repudiated by Democrats. The kepublicans who led him astray and have adopted him acre welco: to what consolation is derived from his adoption into their party. We recommend that the Council override the Mayor's veto. 'Your committee further reports, in the event the ordinance if passed is taken into court, as th partisan political propaganda hints that it intends to do, that attorneys in the city have volunteered their- services to.resist the political attack on the ordinance, who can be depended to subpoena witnesses, without exception, into court to testify under oath as to the actual Snfluence behind this xxi#ffinj: attack, and thus the public will know the full facts, as those interested in a proper ordinance have been fully aware of them. We further report that while the Mayor's veto message was withheld.until so late an hour that your committee has-had no opportunity to examine; it,.yet the committee was able to glean some slight advance information - regarding the figures contained in the message, and we wish to point out how absurzd it is to claim any degree of accuracy as to figures-when taking {into account th following facts: That the precinct boundary lines in the various wards according to the law were materially changed between the elections of 1930 and 1932; that the eighth ward since being created has only figured in the 1930 and 1932 county elections, and its precinct boundary lines,, together w those of the fourth and former fourth ward have been greatly changed; that the new boundary lin of the new districts, as provided in the ordinance, have of necessity divided some of the laaemi: present precincts in halves, thirds, quarters and still smaller sections. When taking these facts into account it is readily seen how difficult it is to form moFe than rough estimates as to figures and without any great degree of accuracy. When in additionto thi. estimates and-averages are attempted for a num4er of past elections the task is.made still mor, difficult. It is gratifying to know that the committee's position is finally eondeded thatbthe election figures of 1932 alone cannot form a proper or fair, basis for redistricting the city an, that an effort to average or estimate the figures for a number of past elections iff the zkonly proper method. When thus following a proper method the difficulties of the task from the foregoing facts *becom apparent, and your committee submits that its figures are as reliable and dependable as any othi tlyat can be presented, especially when such figures are inspired by pastizsan, political consii See page 221 ) A, upon • th at Y rs erations