The proposed new district map for the Kokomo City Council is in some ways similar to the district maps of the last several years, but what is likely to be the new map for the next decade differs in many ways.
As a result, some voters, particularly on the city’s southwest side, will likely be in a new district starting next year.
The all-Republican Kokomo City Council voted unanimously Monday to approve the redistricting map, called the “coordinator’s map,” created and presented by Indianapolis law firm Kroger, Gardis & Regas on first reading, moving it to a second and final reading later this month. If approved on second reading, the proposed new district map will take effect next year, which is also an election year for the nine City Council members.
All municipal legislative maps have to be redrawn by the end of the second year after each new U.S. decennial census if the districts’ populations have become unequal.
The proposed new maps fix the population unevenness of the previous maps and make most districts more compact.
The coordinator’s map as submitted.
According to an initial analysis by the law firm of the city’s six council districts using population data from the 2020 census, Kokomo’s total population deviation in its districts is 26% from the ideal district population of 9,934 (the city’s 2020 census population divided by six).
That’s largely due to natural population growth trends and annexation efforts over the last decade. As a result of both of those factors, the city’s population grew more than 31% from 45,468 in 2010 to 59,604 in 2020.
Specifically, the fourth district, which covers essentially the south central part of the city, is 1,500 under the ideal district population of 9,934, and the fifth district, which covers parts of the city’s south and southwest sides, is roughly 1,000 over the ideal population.
The new map’s deviation is 4.77%, under the 5% goal the City Council was aiming for. Other goals were to keep districts “reasonably compact,” with little to no splitting of precincts.
Under the new maps here’s the population size for each districts:
- District 1: 9,710
- District 2: 10,083
- District 3: 9,923
- District 4: 10,037
- District 5: 9,689
- District 6: 10,162
Notably, the new proposed district maps keep each current council member in the same district they represent now, with only one precinct — 203 — being split between districts.
“Each district lost or gained two or three precincts to try to maintain the core of the previous districts while evening out the population,” said Doug Kowaleski, a lawyer with Korger Gradis & Regas who worked with with Council President Ray Collins, R-District 3, to come up with the new proposed map.
The new districts at first glance are similar to the current ones, but at closer look there are significant changes, particularly to the third, fourth and sixth districts.
The city’s third district currently encompasses the city’s northeast side and the city’s east side all the way down U.S. 31 before wrapping around to include Indian Heights.
Under the new proposed district maps, the third district would lose precincts 301 and 303, located on the city’s near northeast side, to the first and second districts, respectively. Those precincts have historically been the city’s primarily Black neighborhoods.
The third district would still encompass the city’s east side and Indian Heights but would lose precinct 3 Harrison 1 on the south side to the fifth district. In addition, the third district would gain precincts 404 and 405 in the city’s geographical center from the fourth district.
District four, under the new proposed maps, maintains the city’s south center core but now extends into the city’s southwest side inside of the southeast, gobbling up precincts 501, 502, 604 and 6 Harrison 1. It would lose precinct 401 to the second district and, as previously mentioned, precincts 404 to 405 to the third district.
The city’s sixth district, which currently covers ground from the city’s northwest all the way to the southwest side, would be compacted to the city’s northwest side north of Boulevard under the proposed new maps.
The city’s first and second districts both lose and gain some precincts but, for the most part, keep their current areas.
The same goes for the city’s fifth district, which, under the new proposed map, lost its far northwest side but picked up the city’s far southwest sides.
PUBLIC PLANS
While the City Council is almost certainly going to approve the proposed district map presented by Kroger, Gardis & Regas, it wasn’t the only map up for their consideration.
In addition to the Indianapolis law firm and Collins’ map, two other proposals were submitted to the City Council for their consideration. One was by Andrew Ellison, a Kokomo High School and Indiana University Bloomington graduate with a degree in political science, and another was by Kevin Summers, a former Kokomo Police Department officer and City Council member.
Ellison’s proposed district maps were significantly different from the current district maps.
This district map was proposed by Andrew Ellison, a graduate from Kokomo High School and Indiana University Bloomington who has a degree in political science.
Ellison’s map would divide the city’s six council districts into very compact districts with each district covering either the city’s northwest, north, east and northeast, center and south center, southwest and southeast side.
Ellison said he did this to fix the fact that the sprawling sixth and third districts stretch all the way from the north sides of the city to the south sides, covering a number of different suburbs and neighborhoods.
“(District 3) is not the most representative district,” Ellison said. “The concerns of Indian Heights are very different from what you might expect in northeast Kokomo.”
Ellison also took in consideration the racial distribution, particularly the city’s predominately Black neighborhoods just northeast of downtown.
Currently, those neighborhoods are split between three districts. Under Ellison’s proposal, the bulk of the city’s Black population would be located in one district.
“I think we need to be very mindful to make sure that the minority population in the northeast side of the city is united so that they can make that choice for the candidate of their choosing,” Ellison said.
Summers’ proposed redistricting map would make one change to the current maps — moving precinct 5 Taylor 1 from the fifth district into the fourth district. This, according to Summers, would make the two districts’ populations closer to the ideal population of 9,934.
CRITICISM OF THE PROCESS
The relatively short time for the public to come up with their own district map and for the public and the City Council to digest and debate the proposed new maps, faced criticism, largely from local Howard County Democratic party officials.
On Oct. 24, the City Council approved its redistricting guidelines. Under the guidelines, the public had until Nov. 10 to submit their map.
On Monday, a public hearing was held for all the proposed maps, and while the submitted maps were available for the public and City Council to see before the council meeting, Monday was the first time most, if not all, saw the proposed maps.
Annettee Bourff Millam, chairperson of the Howard County Democratic Party, sent a letter earlier this month to Collins seeking more time for “serious public comment and involvement.” She described the approved timeline as “unrealistic” given the holidays and general election.
Steve Daily, a former Kokomo mayor who is still active in the local Democratic Party, spoke at Monday’s meeting, also asking for more time for public involvement.
“It seems to me we have just a very short period of time for anybody in the community to have any meaningful response to these proposals,” Daily said.
