Money and the 92nd Assembly District Democratic Primary Campaign.

There are exactly four weeks until primary day for the 92nd Assembly District (92AD) when incumbent Tom Abinanti will face off against county legislator Mary Jane Shimsky.   With campaign financial disclosures recently released, I'm going to take my usual look into the money involved in this campaign.

First a summary of the campaigns' financial positions:

Abinanti started this campaign cycle (which I'm measuring from November 1, 2021) with more than $63K in his campaign account.  To launch her challenge, Shimsky transferred $25,600 from her county legislature campaign account and received family loans with $1,500 outstanding.  Through late May, Abinanti has out-raised Shimsky by $16,585 and has spent $15,546 more, leaving Abinanti still with a sizable $37,135 cash advantage heading into the campaign's final month.  

Good for Tom, right?  Not so fast.  The spending numbers, when examined more closely, may suggest that the campaign is heading in a direction not so favorable to the incumbent.  Abinanti has raised $75,833 since November 1, 2021, broken down between $23,135 contributed by 66 individuals, with the remaining $52,748 coming from variety of PACS, corporations, law firms and similar entities.  Of this amount coming from individuals, only 36 donors (contributing $6,200) actually live within the 92AD.  Put differently, of Tom's cash haul since November, only 8.2% has been contributed by potential voters. Those in-district donors are split nearly evenly between Mount Pleasant and much larger Greenburgh (about 18 donors each). 

In contrast, Shimsky has reversed Abinanti's corporate/PAC v. individual contributor ratio.  Shimsky has received $48,248 from individual contributors and $11,000 from a mix of other campaign funds, law firms, and just a few PACs.   Shimsky's donors include 149 itemized individuals (typically donating $100 or more cumulatively) plus an unidentified number of small contributors who have given $1,330.   Shimsky's individual donors include 80 itemized in-district residents (plus likely several more small amount donors).   Nearly all (74) of these 80 donors live in the Town of Greenburgh.  

Who are the big donors to the campaign?

By far the biggest contributor is Lawpac of New York (trial lawyers?) which has given Abinanti $9,400.  His next biggest donor is an individual living in South Williamsburg in Brooklyn who has donated $5000 cumulatively.  Other $4000+ donors to Abinanti this cycle are the New York Hotel Trades Council ($4,700) the Stars and Stripes PAC ($4000 - building industry) and the DANY PAC ($4000 - disability advocates).   In addition to the Brooklyn donor, Abinanti has a donor of $2,500, 2,000, and three giving $1,000.  Only one these large donors resides in 92AD. 

Shimsky's largest donor is an individual from Hastings who has given $4,700.   Shimsky also has received from $1000 to $2000 from nine individuals (seven of whom live in district).   Shimsky's biggest non-individual donors are the Cricket Club of Westchester ($1000),  Kearney Group Corp. ($1000 - a "domestic transportation corp.) and David Vinjamuri's (failed) campaign account ($1000).  

Additional "indirect" funding:

1.  Democratic Party funds:   The Greenburgh Democratic Town Committee is backing Shimsky. At its March 24, 2022 meeting, the Executive Committee voted to spend up to $20,000 for endorsed primary candidates facing opponents, specifically identifying Shimsky and Mondaire Jones (no longer relevant).  It is unclear how much, if any, of this $20,000 has been spent to support Shimsky's campaign so far.  Presumably, the Greenburgh Democratic Town Committee will pay for mailings or other promotional material (lawn signs or brochures) on Shimsky's behalf.   The Mount Pleasant Town Democratic Committee, which backs Abinanti, has voted to allocate $2,500 toward his campaign (per the Mount Pleasant Democrats facebook page).

2.  State Funding:  A recurring complaint in every campaign where a challenger takes on an incumbent is the incumbent's ability to use state funding awarded to his office for constituent communication indirectly for campaign purposes.  While such constituent mailers are a legitimate activity by any officeholder, challenged incumbents frequently wait to spend their office mailing budget until late in a campaign cycle to make sure that every constituent home receives several reminders of incumbent's name, face and achievements in their mail.  State rules, however, impose a black-out period on such mailers thirty days before a primary.  Greenburgh residents have certainly received a number of mailers from Abinanti's office in the past few weeks (I received my most recent Abinanti office mailing yesterday - presumably the last such mailing before the black-out period).  

What does the incumbent's mailing advantage mean financially?  We can make some guesses.  There are 50,298 registered Democrats in the 92AD (under existing borders) which suggests about 25,000 households that a Democratic primary candidate would want to reach.  On average, a post card mailer costs about .50 cents, or $12,500 to reach those 92AD Democratic households.  Greenburgh residents have reported receiving somewhere from 6 to 8 Abinanti office mailers during the campaign.  A challenger would have to raise and spend, cumulatively, from $75,000 to $100,000 to match the advantage that Abinanti has gained through the privileges of incumbency. 

UPDATE 6/2: Courtesy of https://seethroughny.net/expenditures  we can see that in 2020 (a primary year) Abinanti expensed $77,045 in "bulk mail" and in off-year 2021 he expensed $66,820 for bulk mail.  I do not know if there are timing restrictions on allocation of the mail budget (e.g., possibly an assemblymember facing a challenger might backload his bulk mailings in the prior year and advance them in the primary year, allowing spending upwards of $150,000 on bulk mailing timed for the election cycle).  I have also learned that county legislators are allowed one bulk mail per year to their constituents which, possibly, could amount to two bulk mailings during an election cycle (i.e, one mailing late in 2021 and one more before the 2022 primary).  I cannot find the county legislature mailing black out rules.  It should be noted, however, that Shimsky's county legislative district #12 includes only 40% of 92AD Democrats.    

 Note: for full disclosure, the author has contributed a small amount and has canvassed for the Shimsky campaign.

Town of Greenburgh School-Age Population Continues to Slide

The complete New York Department of Education enrollment stats (reported by the school districts). are finally out. The numbers show a continuing decline in school age children (i.e, ages 5-17) in the ten school districts in Greenburgh (including Tarrytown, Valhalla and Pocantico Hills which also cross over into adjacent towns). 

These enrollment numbers are collected by the school districts in the fall of each school year. [It should be noted that Greenburgh Central's enrollment numbers dated May 2 shows an increase from 1,510 to 1,540.]  

 For comparison, here is the previous school year ('20-'21) with the '19-'20 totals at. the bottom:

The COVID-prompted bubble in non-public school enrollment and home schooling (remember learning pods?) is over.   The town districts went from 55 home schoolers pre-COVID to 128 last year back down to 78 this year (although there.may be a couple more as Pocantico Hills has not reported its home school enrollment for the current year.).   Similarly private/parochial enrollment is back to its pre-COVID level from two years ago after growing 5% last year.  

Overall, however, the trend of decreasing enrollment in both public and non-public schools continues townwide with a 2% drop over two years.  

Once again, I'm highlighting the school-age population % of each district to show the enormous disparities in our. communities in their success in attracting families with school-age children.  Also the school districts with the lowest school age populations tend to have the higher % of those kids enrolled in non-public schools.  

Contention at the Convention: Abinanti staggered by Greenburgh Dems as Shimsky wins the belt at the 92nd AD confab

Democratic Party district leaders (DLs) from the newly and bizarrely reconfigured 92nd Assembly District convened via Zoom last Tuesday (Feb. 22) to consider nominating a candidate for the upcoming June 28th Democratic Party primary.  The roster of DLs was somewhat different from previous years as the redistricters in Albany excised from the 92nd nearly the entire Edgemont school district (along with a small piece of the Greenburgh Central school district) and added Ward 3 in north-west Yonkers.  The convention electorate consisted of 59 DLs from the Town of Mount Pleasant (including the villages of Sleepy Hollow and Pleasantville), 150 DLs from Greenburgh (including all six villages, and unincorporated Greenburgh minus amputated Edgemont), and 18 DLs from Yonkers's third ward.

The candidates considered were (1) Tom Abinanti who is in his sixth two-year term representing the 92nd assembly district in Albany and who has held elected offices for more than thirty (!) years, and (2) Mary Jane Shimsky who is serving her fifth and (term limited) final two-year term in the Westchester County legislature (where Abinanti held office for twenty years before his Nov. 2010 election to the state assembly).  If www.ourcampaigns.com is accurate, Abinanti has not lost an election since a failed bid for the state senate in 2000.   Mary Jane Shimsky won her seat at the county level in 2011 and and has never lost an election.  Someone's winning streak is going to end this June. 

Team Abinanti's apprehension about the convention was reflected in a letter issued by Abinanti allies Bill Greenawalt and Joanne Sold, and a statement at the convention by Greenawalt, challenging the convention's validity on procedural grounds. The convention proceeded regardless and an impressive 87% of district leaders voted (including objectors Greenawalt and Sold). 

Here are the results presented as both DL totals and by weighted votes assigned to each election district (derived from prior voter turnout numbers). For purposes of the convention, the weighted vote total is the significant number as 50% weighted votes must be attained by a candidate to receive the party's nomination.   

Shimsky won the nomination with a comfortable majority of 55% weighted votes, far ahead of Abinanti's 36%. Nine percent of DLs (15 DLs all from Greenburgh) abstained. 

92ND ASSEMBLY DIST. DEMOCRATIC PARTY CONVENTION RESULTS - FEB. 22, 2022:  

Abinanti crushed Shimsky among DLs from the Town of Mount Pleasant, where Abinanti has lived for a number of years and has been active in organizing the party.  He also took a narrow weighted vote lead among Ward 3 Yonkers DLs. But Shimsky thrashed Abinanti in the Democratic voter stronghold of Greenburgh.  Abinanti faired poorly among DLs in Greenburgh's incorporated villages, where he received 22% of the weighted vote, and the unincorporated areas too, where he claimed just 21%.  Shimsky's success in Greenburgh more than compensated for Abinanti's strength in Mount Pleasant and possibly does not bode well for Abinanti in June as Greenburgh has 3.5 times the amount of Democratic voter turnout as Mount Pleasant (with the major caveat that DL convention votes do not necessarily predict actual primary voting results- just ask Paul Feiner).  The fifteen abstainers in Greenburgh were mostly political and party officials and their family members.

Abinanti primaried in June 2020 when he fended off Jen Williams by 10,054 (55%) to 8,065 (45%).  In that extraordinarily high turn-out primary (remember no-excuse-needed mail-in ballots?), Abinanti survived when other septuagenarian incumbents (e.g., Elliot Engel for Congress and Tony Scarpino for Westchester Disrict Attorney) were crushed by decades younger newcomers.  Abinanti's victory, however, was not unexpected as, unlike Engel and Scarpino, he enjoyed the backing of a unified local Democratic Party and faced a largely self-funded and effectively replacement-level novice.

As signaled by the convention results, Shimsky will certainly pose a much more serious threat to Abinanti's permanency than Williams did.  Shimsky is politically and electorially experienced, claims the support and respect of much of the local Democratic Party establishment, and has already proven herself a strong fundraiser in this campaign.  Williams brought none of these qualifications to her challenge two years ago. 

One intriguing subplot highlighted in the convention results is the impact of the Edgemont for Yonkers Ward 3 trade (straight up, no cash or PTBNLs).  It is suspected - though not confirmed - Tom Abinanti's friends in Albany engineered this exchange to rid the 92nd of Edgemont (where he was soundly beaten in the 2020 primary) in favor of possibly more Abinanti-amenable constituents in Yonkers.  Five of the six electoral districts eviscerated from the 92nd were very unfavorable to Abinanti and he might have been expected to lose those DLs by a margin of up to 10 to 1 (one DL would have abstained).   Instead of a huge loss among these DLs (and assuredly voters in the June primary), Abinanti effectively drew even among the Yonkers DLs newcomers. Thus, while  tossing Edgemont probably gained Abinanti fewer than 2% in the convention weighted voting, the possibility of swinging two hundred or more primary votes in Abinanti's favor - facilitated by the Edgemont for Yonkers swap - could play a decisive role in a tight primary in June.    

Greenburgh Public School Enrollment Declines for Third Consecutive Year

The NY State Education Department just released its official public school enrollment numbers.  In the 2021-22 school year - the third school year impacted by COVID - town of Greenburgh public school enrollment continued its decline since 2018-19, but the pace of decrease slowed, and some districts had small increases over last year.  Yet the three year overall decline (2.8% or 437 K-12 students) townwide now suggests a trend, rather than a statistical irregularity.  When NYSED releases the nonpublic and home school enrollment stats later this spring, we'll get a better sense whether students have left the public school system, or families with school-age children are decreasing in the town, consistent with  historically low national fertility rates.

Note the above enrollments are for K-12 only. Greenburgh Central, Elmsford and Tarrytown include preK in their publicly announced enrollments numbers, but to compare the ten Town of Greenburgh school districts, I've excluded preK.   Also, note that as the enrollment numbers are collected and reported by the school districts in October and November of each school year, 2019-2020 enrollment total precede the impact of COVID starting in March 2020.  

Source:  https://www.p12.nysed.gov/irs/statistics/enroll-n-staff/home.html

GREENBURGH COVID: OMICRON WAVE CRESTS - CASES START TO DROP

After peaking at 4,025 on Jan. 10, 2022, active COVID cases townwide start to drop, perhaps signaling the decline of the Omicron wave .  This trajectory is similar to the Delta Variant which crested in Greenburgh on January 20, 2021

.  

More on Greenburgh Redistricting: comparing the voting records (so far) of representatives Mondaire Jones and Jamaal Bowman

Greenburgh is currently split between two congressional districts, with 1/3 of the town lying in CD16 (Rep. Jamaal Bowman) and 2/3 in CD17 (Rep. Mondaire Jones).  The town faces a changed congressional district configuration next year that will apply for the next ten years after redistricting will be finalized in Albany in early 2022.  As I wrote last week, current congressional redistricting proposals pose three differing maps with respect to Greenburgh: 

1.  The Bowman Plan: the status quo continuing to divide Greenburgh with the south third of town  (the villages of Hastings and Ardsley along with the Edgemont school district) in CD16, and the remaining 2/3 in CD17.  The status quo is the preferred plan of many supporters of Rep. Jamaal Bowman who spoke at the recent lower Hudson Valley redistricting hearing. The Bowman Plan conflicts with census reality and is not a realistic outcome. 

2.  The Independent Redistricting Commission Letters Plan: The Democratic members of the IRC have proposed placing 90% of Greenburgh in CD16 with some neighborhoods in north Tarrytown and north Elmsford remaining in CD17.  This would make Greenburgh mostly a Bowman district. 

3.  The Unofficial Westchester Democratic Party "Berger" Plan:  Democratic Party leadership in Westchster Co. proposes placing all of Greenburgh in CD17.  Considering the influence of the party and Democrats' control over the redistricting process in Albany, this is the most likely outcome, placing  Greenburgh entirely within Mondaire Jones's district 

Maybe now is a good time to compare the voting records of Mondaire Jones and Jamaal Bowman in Congress.  

Not surprisingly, the two progressive Congress members have a very similar voting record. According  to 538's Biden Score, however, Mondaire Jones has voted 100% in line with Pres. Biden's positions, while Jamaal Bowman's score is 92.9%

According to Pro Publica, the two freshmen have differed on only 10 votes out of 365. In each of these ten bills, all of which passed the House, Jones supported and Bowman opposed the Democratic majority in Congress. 

These votes are:

1.  The Invest in America Act on 11/5 .   In his most notorious vote to date, Bowman joined the Squad Six (Bowman, AOC, Tlaib, Omar, Bush, Pressley)  to oppose the Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill (BIF) which 215 House Dems and even 13 Republicans (including four from NY) supported.

2.  House Res.  760 "Expressing solidarity with Cuban citizens demonstrating peacefully for fundamantal freedoms, condemding the Cuban regime's acts of repression, and calling for the immediate release of arbitrarily detained Cuban citizens."  On Nov. 3, Bowman was one of 40 Dems who opposed 175 Dems who supported this Cuban resolution.  Bowman found company in his opposition with fellow New Yorkers Ocasio-Cortez, Nadler, Meng, Clark, and Velazquez. 

3.  RENACER: The Reinforcing Nicaragua's Adherence to Conditions for Electoral Reform Act of 2021  to establish measures to monitor, report on, and address corruption and human rights abuses in Nicaragua.   Bowman (along with Ocasio-Cortez, Espaillat, Velazquez) was among 29 House Dems voting against.  Jones and 184 House Dems voted in favor.

4.  The Darren Drake Act."This bill directs the Department of Homeland Security to develop and disseminate best practices for vehicle rental companies and dealers to report suspicious behavior to law enforcement at the point of sale of a rental vehicle."   on 10/19, House Dems voted 211 to 8 in favor of this bill, which Bowman and fellow New Yorker AOC opposed.  

5.  The Libya Stabilization Act: "To advance a diplomatic solution to the conflict in Libya and support the people of Libya."  On 9/28,  211 House Dems voted in favor, with only Bowman, AOC, Cori Bush and Rashida Tlaib opposed. 

6.  Meeks Amendment to Bill authorizing fiscal year 2022 appropriations for military activities and programs of the Department of Defense. on 9/23, Bowman was the only Democrat to join 203 Republicans in voting against the Meeks amendment.

7.  Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for fiscal year ending Sept. 30, 2021 to respond to the 1/6 attack on the US Capitol complex and to expand Afghan visa program.  On 7/29,  Bowman, again as one of the Squad Six, voted against this bill which was suppported by 213 of his House Democratic colleague . 

8.  Trans-Sahara Counterterrorism Partnership Act:  "This bill provides statutory authority for the Trans-Sahara Counterterrorism Partnership Program, an interagency program launched in 2005 to partner with countries in the Sahel and Maghreb regions of Africa to counter terrorism and violent extremism."  On July 29, 214 House Dems voted in favor; 4 (Bowman, AOC, Cori Bush and Katie Porter) voted against. 

9.  Preventing Crimes Against Veterans Act:  "This bill establishes a new criminal offense for knowingly executing, or attempting to execute, a scheme to defraud an individual of veterans' benefits, or in connection with obtaining veteran's benefits for an individual."   On 6/22, 211 House Dems voted in faovr while Bowman joined 4 Squad members (AOC, Omar, Pressley and Bush)  to vote against (Tlaib defied the Squad to vote in favor). 

10.  HR 335: "To provide for an exception to a limitation against appointment of persons as Secretary of Defense within seven years of relief from active duty as a regular commissioned officer of the Armed Forces."   205 House Dems supported this 1/21 bill to allow Gen. Lloyd Austin to become Secretary of Defense, while Bowman was one of 15 Dems who opposed. 

With the exception of the BIF vote, all the differences with Jones arise from Bowman's departing from the Democratic Party majority on foreign policy or domestic security issues.  

For context, how do the 10 vote disagreements between Jones and Bowman compare to their voting records contrasted with other Democrats in Congress? 

Using Pro Publica's database, we can make these one-on-one voting records comparisons.

DISAGREEMENTS AMONG FRIENDS: vote differences between Democratic congress members:

I.  Jones & Bowman v. The Squad 

		AOC	Pressley	Cori Bush	I. Omar	Tlaib
Mondiare Jones		12	9	20	12	15
Jamaal Bowman		4	4	11	7	11

II.  Jones & Bowman v.  Dem Moderates

		Gottheimer NJ	Golden - ME	Crist FL	Murphy FL
Mondiare Jones		18	30	13	16
Jamaal Bowman		27	38	23	26

III.   Jones & Bowman v,. The New York Democratic Congressional Delegation:

		Espaillat	Velazquez	Torres	Clarke	Meng	Tonko
Mondaire Jones		1	3	3	4	4	4
Jamaal Bowman		9	11	12	10	12	14

		C. Maloney	Meeks	Jeffries	Nadler	SP Maloney	Higgins
Mondaire Jones		5	6	6	7	8	8
Jamaal Bowmaan		14	16	16	14	18	18

		Morelle	Rice	Suozzi	AOC	Delgado
Mondaire Jones		10	11	11	12	16
Jamaal Bowmaan		20	21	21	4	26

Again, these are a small number of votes out of 365 total in the 117th Congress, but it does stand out that Jones's voting record is closer to 12 other NY Democrats than to Bowman's vote history.   Bowman's vote record, conversely, is closer to 3 Squad members than to Jones's record.   Among the New York Delegation, however, Bowman is still closer to Jones than any other NY congress members except Ocasio-Cortez, of course, and also Rep. Adriano Espaillat (who has nearly the identical voting record as Jones, disagreeing with Jones only on the RENACER vote).   

As the New York and Westchester County Democratic Party leadership decides the future congressional representation of our town, Greenburgh voters should familiarize themselves with the small but arguably significant differences between the voting records of the two progressive congressmen who represent the town now and will do so in a yet-to-be-determined configuration for possibly the next decade.  If residents do have strong opinions about whether they want to live in the Congressional district of Mondaire Jones or Jamaal Bowman, they should speak up now to inform the Democratic Party leadership of Westchester and the Independent Redistricting Committee about their preference. 

Developments in Greenburgh Redistricting: Sorting out the future of the Bowman & Jones districts (and AOC makes an appearance)

The New York State Independent Redistricting Commission held a public hearing in White Plains on November 8th where the Commission heard nearly five hours of comments on the proposed redistricting maps for congressional, state senate and assembly districts for Westchester and Rockland Counties as well as parts of the north Bronx. 

In response to the Commission's proposed Congressional redistricting maps two different approaches were presented by organized teams of advocates at the hearings, leaving us with three competing visions: 

I.  The IRC Letters Plan:  The Independent Redistricting Commission "Letters" Plan presented by the commission's Democratic Party members on Sept. 15th was previously reviewed here for its impact on Greenburgh.  (The Republican "Notes" plan is dead on arrival, and irrelevant to this discussions).   

II. The Berger Plan:   At the 11/8 hearing, Suzanne Berger, Chair of the Westchester County Democratic Party - although she did not identify her position - introduced alternative maps in a powerpoint banally titled "Lower Hudson Valley Apportionment" (authors and endorsors are not identified in the document).  County Legislator Mary Jane Shimsky spoke after Berger in favor of this plan's approach.   These maps were subsequently shared on the Rivertowns Vote Facebook page by Gaby Bordwin, a prominent Democratic Party leader from Hastings and Shimsky's legislative aide.  While not actually labeled as such, these proposals can be assumed to represent the "unofficial but effectively official" recommendation of the Westchester County Democratic Party leadership toward congressional redistricting.  

The public rationale presented for replacing the IRC Letters Plan with the Berger Plan is that the county's infrastructure runs north south and the division of the county among congressional districts (necessitated because the county's population exceeds the 770,000 limit on new Congressional district) should reflect a West (Hudson River) and East (Long Island Sound) orientation.  Nevertheless, the County Democratic Party's process for drafting this proposal and the influences and interests taken into account are opaque, giving rise to the sense that the plan was drafted in a "smoke filled zoom" without input broader than party leadership.  It might be naive not to assume that the Berger Plan reflects the competing and differing level of influence of Mondaire Jones and Jamaal Bowman's offices and supporters over the Westchester County Democratic Party leadership.  

III.  The Bowman Plan:  A differing and conflicting vision was endorsed by a clearly orchestrated series of speakers who argued in favor of preserving NY CD16 in its present form to the applause of many hearing attendees.   Although none of these speakers mentioned Rep. Bowman, it seems rather obvious that these speakers were organized by his office as suggested by this meeting announcement: 

For lack of better names, I'm calling the "keep CD16" approach, the Bowman Plan.  Unfortunately, the Bowman Plan supporters failed to present an actual map at the hearing to demonstrate whether their plan is feasible.  As IRC Chairman, David Imamura pointed out, Westchester County creates a "bottleneck" that impacts redistricting for the entire state.  And as anyone who takes the time to try redistricting the state's 26 congressional districts using various websites has found, it becomes immediately obvious that keeping CD16 "as is" is impossible. 

CD16

CURRENTLY & BOWMAN PLAN (PLAN III):  

 IRC LETTERS PROPOSAL (PLAN I):

BERGER PLAN (PLAN II):

CD16 NOTES:   The IRC Letters Plan simply shifts CD16 north out of most of the Bronx, except portions of the Woodlawn Heights and Wakefield neighborhood adjacent to Mount Vernon.  Otherwise, this proposal creates a single central/south Westchester Congressional district stretching from the river to the sound that gifts Bowman the Democratic vote strongholds of north/central Greenburgh (except north Tarrytown) and White Plains, as well as Harrison.  

The Berger Plan also moves CD16 north but retains Co-op City  and Pelham from the Bronx.   Under this plan, however, much of New Rochelle is handed over to AOC's CD14, which contradicts the Berger Plan's rationale of uniting shore lines in single congressional districts (not to mention the Yonkers shoreline remaining in CD16).   The Berger Plan gives the  Greenburgh portions of current CD16 (Hastings, Edgemont, Ardsley) to CD17 together with Scarsdale and all of White Plains.  However, the Berger Plan extends CD16 north through Rye and Harrison, and divides the town of Mount Pleasant, in a classic gerrymander snakepath to reach north to encompass the east half of north Westchester and much of Putnam County.  

CD17

CURRENT CD17:

IRC LETTER PLAN FOR CD17 (PLAN I:

BERGER PLAN (PLAN III:

CD17 NOTES: The IRC Letters Plan pushes CD17 north as central and north Greenburgh (with the exception of north Tarrytown) are handed to CD16.  Under the Letter Plan, CD 17 would now encompasses most of Putnam county and expand west to parts of Orange County. I think it's safe to assume that Mondaire Jones is not thrilled by the IRC Letters Plan which takes away the Democratic Party vote basin of Greenburgh as well as White Plains, where he lives, in exchange for presumably less progressive areas in Putnam and Orange. 

The Berger Plan, on the other hand, is much more favorable to Mondaire Jones as it would expand his hold over Greenburgh and White Plains while gifting him Scarsdale.  While he would still receive much of Orange County, he would avoid Putnam.  

Impact on Greenburgh:

Current districts divide Greenburgh with the villages of Hastings and Ardsley, along with the Edgemont School district, falling in CD16 with the rest in CD17.  This is the preferred map of Rep. Bowman's supporters. 

The IRC Letters Plan would unite Greenburgh in CD16, with the exception of Tarrytown north of Rte 187 and portions of North Elmsford which would remain in CD17.

The Berger Plan unites Greenburgh in CD17 to the presumed approval of Rep. Mondaire Jones.  

Final thoughts: 

I may be totally wrong (not unusual) but the Berger Plan suggests to me the influence of Mondaire Jones's office and supporters as well as Jones's strength in Westchester in comparison to Jamaal Bowman.  While both representatives are freshmen, progressive Democrats, much of Bowman's influence is dissipated in Westchester as a large part of CD16 is currently in the Bronx. In addition, Jones is a rising fundraising star in comparison to Bowman.   There is no question that CD16 and CD17 will remain Democratic under any plan for the foreseeable future, but the friendliness of the changing districts to progressive, even Squad-aligned, representatives remains open to question and a reconfigured district may spur a moderate-Democratic primary challenge to Bowman.  Democratic Party activist Catherine Lederer-Plaskett has pointed out that under the Berger Plan, 50% of  CD16's population would remain in the Bronx, Yonkers and Mount Vernon, but the scripted protests of Bowman Plan supporters at the 11/8 hearing indicate that the Bowman team wants very much to hold onto his current north Bronx /South Westchester realm.

While I've pointed out above that the Bowman Plan is not reality based because of census changes, the Berger Plan has not presented its underlying data or downloadable maps to show how these proposals configure with the rest of New York's congressional districts and prove that they are actually feasible.

It's intriguing to speculate the extent to which AOC's team was consulted in drafting the Berger Plan.  AOC is given much of Bowman's current north Bronx precincts (including possibly less AOC-friendly Riverdale) but also is handed most of New Rochelle, introducing a third congressional district into Westchester, and suggesting some sort of agreement. 

What happens next:

The IRC will work toward presenting a single plan to submit for approval by the state legislature and governor in January.   With respect to Westchester, the Berger Plan will likely be very influential in shaping the final map (should the IRC agree on a final map) for Westchester congressional districts as it impliedly represents the wishes of the Westchester County Democratic Party leadership.  If no such final IRC plan is presented, or if it is rejected in Albany, then the state legislature will take over the map drawing.