All the hubbub over the drawing of new lines for the six city council districts in Kansas City culminated last Thursday in a debate that I couldn’t tear myself away from.
I wasn’t there, but I watched a rerun of the legislative meeting on Channel 2, the Kansas City government channel. I’m an old government junkie, you know, having covered the Jackson County Courthouse for seven years (’71 to ’78) and City Hall for 10 (’85 to ’95).
The debate wasn’t compelling because it was heated; it really wasn’t. It was because council members spoke fervently and eloquently about their reasons for wanting to either keep the lines that a citizens advisory committee had drawn up or make minor alterations.
The highlight of the redistricting discussion, which lasted about 30 minutes, was an impassioned speech by Mayor Sly James, who exercised his option to speak last.
The Star’s Lynn Horsley covered the redistricting debate, but, because of space limitations, she wasn’t able to get much of James’ speech in the paper. Before I lay out for you what James said, let’s back up…
In the final days of the redistricting discussion, the biggest issue was whether the former Bannister Mall area should be in the 5th District, where the citizens advisory committee had moved it, or whether it should revert to the 6th District, where it has been all along.
That was one of several significant boundary changes that the advisory committee made as it attempted to equalize population, district to district, based on the 2010 U.S. Census.
Councilman John Sharp, who does his homework and almost always makes a reasoned case for what he favors or opposes, led the charge to bring the Bannister Mall area back into his 6th District. He spoke at length in favor of an amendment that would return the site to his district.
He said that 6th District residents, having suffered through the demise of the mall, had earned the right to see the area redeveloped, if and when a good plan comes along. Then, 6th District residents could take pride in that area once again.
After Sharp and a few other council members had spoken, it was clear that he didn’t have the votes to get the mall moved back to his district, but Sharp has always been good at making a strong case in the face of overwhelming opposition.
After everyone else had had their say, James exercised his right to have the last word, and he was impressive.
Following is his speech, edited for length…
“You know, the real problem here is twofold. No. 1, we wouldn’t even have to be going through this nonsense if we weren’t a segregated city. The Voting Rights Act wouldn’t apply. But none of us are talking about that. This concept that somehow changing a line on a map disenfranchises you from going somewhere, doing something, or (changes) who you are the day before is, in my opinion, total and utter nonsense.
“We have too many people sitting here saying, “My this, my project, my district, my line, my house.”
“Let me say this: This is my city. Everything in it is my city. So I guess I’ll just ask all of my colleagues: Do you love your council district more or your city more? Because if you love your city more, we’ll put this nonsense to bed, stop worrying about all these lines that we’re using to divide us, and we’ll move on.
“Nobody’s life will change because their district lines change. I would be willing to bet you that you can walk into any district in this city and ask the first 50 people you see what district they’re in and 40 of them won’t have a clue…and won’t care.
“This is the reason that we are still struggling to do the things in this city that need to be done…Because we systematically play one district against the other so that nobody gets what they need. We’re talking about 500 people here (moving them from one district to another). If it’s that big of a nothing, then why worry about it? If it doesn’t really change that much, then what’s the big deal about not doing it?
“Why are we spending so much time talking about two parcels of land…Geez, people. The only thing that matters is this city. That is the only thing, and until we start acting like that, we will continue to have these fights and arguments over pieces of property hither, thither and yon.
“I don’t understand it. This has gotten totally off track, totally out of whack…It is time for us to change our attitude and start believing in the entirety of this city. Each and every one of us took an oath to the city, not to our council district…
“If there’s no other discussion, will the clerk please call the roll?”
The clerk did not announce the vote after the roll call, but from what I could hear, it sounded like only Sharp and Councilman Ed Ford voted for the amendment and everyone else voted “No.”
The council then took up the redistricting ordinance itself, and Sharp cast the only “no” vote.
JimmyCsays: At the juncture of journalism and daily life in KC 
JFK’s writers actually made a mistake in his inaugural address. It was suppossed to read…”Think not what the district can do for you, but what you can do for Kansas City.”
You did your part in the short time you lived here, John, by helping keep the beer flowing in Westport.
Sly James is right when he says that most people who live in KC don’t know what district they live in. Aside from City Hall insiders, city employees and local political junkies, I am sure that most Kansas Citians don’t even know who their City Council representatives are or the number of council districts that make up the city.
Still, I am not surprised that some council members, particularly the in-district ones, are sensitive about changes to their turf. In John Sharp’s case, he probably wants to be there if ground is ever broken on some redevelopment project in the Bannister Mall area and be able to take credit for it. If it’s in another council district, he may not be given the opportunity to speak.
Personally, I have always been intrigued by KC Council re-districting which happens every 10 years_ after the US Census is completed. When I was a reporter for The Star, I covered the Northland sector of Kansas City for 10 years. But I have lived my entire life in Kansas City south of the river. I guess that puts me in a different category of people who know and/or care about the happenings at 12th and Oak.
The most interesting dynamic of this most recent redistricting is that the Northland is now divided into three districts. Until 1990, I think it had only the 1st District. In 1991, the 2nd District stretched into the Northland. Ten years ago, the 2nd District’s southern boundary moved from the Westport area to the middle of downtown giving it a much stronger Northland presence. Now, it looks like the 2nd District is entirely in the Northland while the 4th crosses the river. The 4th loses the Waldo neighborhood and a huge chunk of Brookside but will get the Briarcliff and Crestview neighborhoods along North Oak Trafficway.
This also means that in the 2015 city elections, Northlanders could make up half of the City Council’s representation. Despite what Mayor James says about us being part of one city and not six council districts, that would be a watershed moment in the city’s history. For years, Northlanders have complained about being under-represented by City Hall. It’s an attitude that has been ingrained in those folks ever since KC acquired the Northland in three annexations between 1950 and 1962. With this re-districting, however, that proverbial wall between the Missouri River has crumbled nearly to the point to where one can walk over it.
I would not be surprised to see the 3rd District cross the river 10 years from now. At that point, you would have two districts each in the Northland(1st and 2nd) and south of the river(5th and 6th). The 3rd and 4th would be on both sides of the river. 3rd District representatives will resist such a move because of the difference in racial demographics. But truth by told, when taking a look at the 3rd District and some areas north of the river between North Oak and I-435, there is not much difference in economic demographics.
Thank God for the foresight our leaders had during the mayoral administrations of William E. Kemp and H. Roe Bartle…If not for those annexations, Kansas City would be more like Louisville, Ky., or Omaha.
Makes no difference where the lines are drawn, the east side will still be a killing zone; our streets and sewers will continue to fail; and the KCMOSD will continue to screw more children than all the pedophiles in the US.
The demographic shift to the Northland will have the long-term effect of putting the city under the de-facto control of the police and fire departments, much like it is now.
So for all of the mayors’ one-for-all and all-for-one talk, nothing will change to impact the livability of the city. All politics is local but none more local than ours.
The real curse on this area, the line that counts most, is State Line.
That said, smartman is right, the East side cancer will kill what is left of the tax base in KC, south of the river.