Lawyers for some South Asian voters argue the time to fix NYC Council district lines is now

Lawyers representing a group of South Asian voters in Queens will be in court on Thursday arguing that the New York City Districting Commission should redraw boundaries for City Council districts to achieve fairer and more equitable representation for their community.

They argue the final map approved last year splinters a growing South Asian community across three City Council districts — 28, 29 and 32 — and violates the New York City Charter's mandate to ensure racial minority groups are protected. In opposing papers, the city Law Department argues the case should be dismissed because the court challenge was filed too late — one day before the start of ballot petitioning and four months after the plan was certified. The city also dismisses claims that the plan is discriminatory.

The case comes as Council candidates began collecting signatures last week, using the current district lines to secure a spot on the June 27 primary ballot — or their party’s nomination if they are running unopposed. A decision to throw out the current maps would likely result in an additional primary election and create further fallout for other city agencies like the New York City Campaign Finance Board, which is already using the current maps to determine who qualifies for public matching funds.

The Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund filed the lawsuit against the city’s districting commission last month. The commission drew the new Council district lines based on the most recent census data, 35 hours of public hearings with community members, as well as legal considerations stemming from the federal Voting Rights Act and the City Charter.

The case centers on the Queens neighborhoods of Richmond Hill and South Ozone Park, and more specifically along a 2-mile strip of Liberty Avenue, which plaintiffs say is the heart of a growing Indo-Caribbean and Punjabi community. The suit was filed on behalf of 18 individual voters and a community organization called Desis Rising Up and Moving. Their lawyers point to the growing immigrant populations from Guyana, Trinidad and Tobago, and India that have been in the area since the 1970s.

They claim the new Council district lines certified on Nov. 1, 2022 fail to meet the legal requirements that prioritize protecting racial and language minority communities —  in this case, a growing South Asian community that is split into multiple districts along Liberty Avenue and then on the west at 100th and 99th streets.

According to the City Charter, district lines must ensure “fair and effective representation of the racial and language minority groups” protected by the federal Voting Rights Act. In addition, the Charter explicitly states that the district lines should keep intact neighborhoods with common interests.

As an alternative, those bringing the lawsuit cite the so-called Unity Map that was submitted during the redistricting process by AALDEF, LatinoJustice PRLDEF, and the Center for Law and Social Justice at Medgar Evers College. Under that proposal, the nearby 28th District, which includes portions of Jamaica, Richmond Hill, Rochdale Village and South Ozone Park, becomes a Black majority district, while the 32nd District becomes an Asian American opportunity district.

Aimee Kara Lulich, an attorney for the city's Law Department, called the suit “an eleventh-hour request” filed too long after the plan was certified and too close to the start of election activity.

The city also filed sworn affidavits from Georgea Kontzamanis, operations manager for the New York City Board of Elections; Joseph Gallagher, senior counsel for the New York City Campaign Finance Board; and Grace Pyun, general counsel and acting executive director of the New York City Districting Commission.

Pyun said the districting commission would need to hire additional staff with an estimated two months of work to modify the district plans if the court orders the commission to redraw the lines.

Kontzamanis noted that new Council district lines would require changing election districts, the smallest units for organizing blocks of voters. She said the full process to create new election districts takes at least a month to complete, before candidates could resume collecting signatures on new petitions, which would likely delay the Council primary.

If the Council primary election was delayed, voters would likely face two primaries, as they did last year due to a fight over state and congressional redistricting. The primary for district attorney candidates, civil court judges and party positions would go forward as scheduled for June and another date would need to be set for the City Council.

Gallagher, from the CFB, noted that candidates have already begun raising money based on the current district lines. Council candidates must raise $5,000 from at least 75 contributors within their district to be eligible for matching funds for the first $175 of their contribution. A change to district lines could require some candidates to return matching funds.

Lawyers for the petitioners had initially asked the court to halt the start of the ballot petitioning for candidates in the upcoming Council elections. Justice Leslie Stroth denied that request last week and candidates began gathering signatures. Instead, she set a hearing date for oral arguments this week and then recused herself from the case since she is up for re-election this year. The court reassigned the case to Justice Erika M. Edwards.