2020 census concerns in Camden — where ‘thousands’ avoided 2010 count — reflect worries nationwide

(LAN’s Jesselly De La Cruz was quoted in this article, which originally appeared on Philly.com, on the 2020 Census and the importance of counting everyone)

https://www.philly.com/news/census-2020-citizenship-jobs-new-jersey-camden-20190425.html

Protestors at the Supreme Court in Washington

Camden’s population a decade ago was 77,344, according to the 2010 census. But Mayor Francisco Moran knows that wasn’t right.

"I can tell you there are thousands of folks who have not allowed themselves to be counted,” he said at a forum Wednesday night in Camden, where local residents and statewide nonprofit groups expressed concerns about the census, which begins next March.

Communities across the country are working to make sure all their residents are counted, since population determines how the federal government distributes hundreds of billions of dollars to local governments, how voting districts are drawn, and how many seats each state gets in the U.S. House.

Local governments have formed commissions to explain the importance of filling out questionnaires and reach populations that are traditionally undercounted.

At the New Jersey Complete Count Commission’s last scheduled meeting of the year Wednesday, residents raised questions that echoed concerns expressed throughout the country. They included:

What role will the proposed citizenship question play?

The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday heard oral arguments as it decides whether the 2020 census can ask for residents’ citizenship status. The court’s conservative majority seemed willing to defer to the Trump administration’s plan to do so.

Dozens of state and local governments and the Census Bureau believe the citizenship question could deter millions of people, especially immigrants, from answering the questionnaires. That would depress population counts and diminish the political power and funding of local governments, particularly those with large immigrant populations.

Federal judges in Maryland, California, and New York — where Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Philadelphia joined others in suing the Trump administration — have ruled against the addition of the question.

The Trump administration argues that the question is necessary to know how many residents are citizens.

The Supreme Court is expected to rule in June.

Jesselly De La Cruz, executive director of the Latino Action Network Foundation, asked that state and local governments focus on earning the confidence of communities shaken by the prospect of the citizenship question. The Census Bureau has emphasized that federal law prohibits it from sharing personal information it collects.

Local governments are recruiting “trusted community leaders” to persuade residents to fill out census forms.

Regardless of whether the question shows up on forms next year, Census Bureau employees have said damage already has been done in terms of creating a climate of mistrust around the census.

Will the resources be available?

Peter Chen, policy counsel at Newark, N.J.-based Advocates for Children of New Jersey, noted that other states have already distributed millions of dollars to nonprofits for census outreach in their communities. He urged New Jersey to quickly get money to organizations.

"This is going to require an enormous effort,” Chen said.

Two bills introduced in the Senate and Assembly in February ask for $9 million for New Jersey groups to help get residents counted.

How will the Census Bureau reach hard-to-count communities?

Each decennial census undercounts certain populations, such as young children whom adults may not think to include, people who move often, people who are homeless, people living in poverty, and racial and ethnic minorities.

Governments across the country have been working on strategies to persuade hard-to-count populations to fill out their questionnaires. Those plans include working with faith and community leaders, translating information into many languages, collaborating with schools to teach students and parents about the census, and opening census offices in areas where participation in the past was low.

For example, in one census tract in Camden, less than one-third of residents filled out their forms in 2010. So they’re getting special attention.

Moran, Camden’s mayor, said an accurate count in Camden “is paramount to us.”

"The strain on services in the city is tough for us when we have limited resources,” he said.

Who will do the counting?

The Census Bureau plans to hire from 400,000 to 450,000 census takers to follow up with people who do not fill out their questionnaires.

Cheryl Bolden, a supervisory partnership specialist for the Census Bureau, reassured New Jersey Complete Count commissioners and residents that the bureau is hiring people to work in their own neighborhoods for these positions.

"We are totally and completely dependent upon local involvement,” she said.

Most of the bureau’s job fairs have been in North Jersey, but Bolden said more will be coming to South Jersey.

N.J. Supreme Court must reject systemic racism in affordable housing debate

 

N.J. Supreme Court must reject systemic racism in affordable housing debate | Opinion

By Richard T. Smith and Christian 

Estevez

 

After 16 long years of Trenton gridlock, New Jersey municipalities are finally making meaningful progress addressing our state's pressing housing affordability crisis.

 

Thanks to a New Jersey Supreme Court decision handed down last year that turned over enforcement of our state's fair-housing laws to the judiciary, hundreds of municipalities are in the process of developing plans to provide tens of thousands of homes to meet the needs of working families, seniors and those with disabilities.

 

More than 70 towns have already reached agreements on their affordable housing obligations, which add up to more than 20,000 units. These settlements clear the way to quickly begin development on projects that provide decent, stable homes for New Jersey families in safe neighborhoods with access to jobs and good schools.

All of these recent advancements illustrate that a consensus is forming in New Jersey that municipalities can and should tackle their responsibility to provide fair-housing opportunities for families under the state constitution's Mount Laurel doctrine.

 

At heart, New Jersey's fair-housing laws aren't just about building homes. They're also about expanding ladders of opportunity to the middle class for the many thousands of families who are priced out of our state's many thriving communities.

 

While our state boasts some of the most desirable towns in the nation,  longstanding patterns of exclusionary zoning have shut too many New Jersey families out of the American Dream. These unconstitutional obstacles have hit minority communities -- especially African-Americans and Latinos -- the hardest.

 

Yet the progress we have made is being threatened by a group of recalcitrant municipalities that are seeking to undermine the Mount Laurel doctrine by pursuing a strategy of delay and obstruction. These towns are arguing they should not be held responsible for any of the state's fair-housing needs that accrued during a 16-year gap period beginning in 1999,  when bureaucratic gridlock kept New Jersey's fair-housing laws from being enforced.

 

In essence, these towns are arguing they should be able to ignore the many challenges New Jersey families confronted during this time, ranging from the Great Recession to the devastation caused by Hurricane Sandy and the state's ongoing foreclosure crisis.

 

These legal arguments would artificially paper over up to 60 percent of the state's housing need. This means that tens of thousands of New Jersey families will never have the chance to move into homes they can afford in the state's many thriving communities. And it will cement our state's long history of racial and socioeconomic segregation for another generation.

 

That's why our organizations have joined together to submit a friend of the court brief laying out the impact of this case on the struggle for racial integration in New Jersey. That brief has been accepted by the court.

Almost as disturbing is the housing study that these towns are relying on to make these dangerous arguments. The study, written by Philadelphia-based Econsult Solutions, relies on a deeply flawed understanding that ignores the systemic racism which disadvantages New Jersey's minority communities, especially African-Americans and Latinos.

 

It argues that houses which have recently sold for up to a half-million dollars should be classified as affordable.

 

And Econsult principal Peter Angelides testified recently at an Ocean County fair-housing proceeding that there was "no measure" to indicate that New Jersey's minority communities still suffered from housing discrimination -- an astounding,  out-of-touch statement directly contradicting statistics showing that our state is one of the most segregated in the nation.

 

The New Jersey Supreme Court is set to take up the question of whether towns must truly do their fair share to respond to our state's housing crisis on Nov. 30.

 

The justices must reject these towns' radical ideology and vindicate their own 2015 landmark fair-housing ruling. The process the court established must be allowed to continue so that we can finally bring an end to the decades of litigation surrounding this issue.

 

It's time to turn to the work of building a state in which black and Latino families are no longer excluded.

 

Richard T. Smith is president of the NAACP New Jersey State Conference 

(info@NJNAACP.org).

 

Christian Estevez is president of the Latino Action Network (esteveznj@gmail.com).

 

Bookmark NJ.com/Opinion. Follow on Twitter @NJ_Opinion and find NJ.com Opinion on Facebook.

 

 

http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2016/11/nj_supreme_court_must_reject_systemic_racism_in_af.html#incart_river_home

FIVE NOMINATIONS, NO LATINOS: CHRISTIE SHUTS OUT ONE-THIRD OF NJ FROM COURT REPRESENTATION

FIVE NOMINATIONS, NO LATINOS: CHRISTIE SHUTS OUT ONE-THIRD OF NJ FROM COURT REPRESENTATION

For Immediate Release: December 10, 2012
Contacts:
Frank Argote-Freyre, President – 908-670-0552
Christian Estevez, Executive Vice President – 973-418-7012

The Latino Action Network today announced its opposition to Governor Chris Christie's plan to leave the Supreme Court without either an African-American or Latino member for the first time since 1994, and asked the State Senate to reject the nominations.

“New Jersey’s Supreme Court should represent everyone. One third of New Jersey residents are Latinos or African-Americans,” said Frank Argote-Freyre, President of the Latino Action Network. “Yet Governor Christie's nominations would reduce the diversity of the New Jersey Supreme Court for the next decade or more - during which time New Jersey will become a majority-minority state.”

New Jersey, according to the 2010 Census, has the twelfth-highest percentage of people of color of any state, with Latinos, African-Americans, and Asian-Americans making up 40.7 percent of the state's population. Latinos are the largest minority group in New Jersey and accounted for the vast majority of population growth in New Jersey over the last decade.

"With this move, New Jersey would go backwards, not forwards in judicial diversity," Argote-Freyre said. "We urge the Senate to reject these nominations and instead work with Governor Christie to ensure that any one of a number of well qualified Latinos have a place on the Court. Five nominations without one Latino is enough."

The Latino Action Network was part of an alliance of Latino and African-American groups that asked Governor Christie and Senate leadership to respect basic principles for the Supreme Court (included in full below). In addition to diversity, our groups asked for partisan balance: at least three justices representing each political party, as has been the case for the entire history of the Supreme Court. Unfortunately, Gov. Christie's nominations repeat the nominations in the spring where nominations are used to try to gain an unfair partisan advantage.

"If there is any message that came out of the recent Presidential election, it is that diversity matters in America," Argote-Freyre added. "Now is not the time to turn back the clock in New Jersey."

The Latino Action Network is a broad, statewide coalition of Latino organizations devoted to civil rights and political empowerment.


------
ATTACHMENT: SEPTEMBER 2011 LETTER FROM LATINO AND AFRICAN-AMERICAN ORGANIZATIONS

Association of Black Women Lawyers of New Jersey • Black Issues Convention • Garden State Bar Association • La Causa NJ • Latino Action Network • Latino Coalition • Latino Institute, Inc. • NAACP, New Jersey State Conference

September 12, 2011

Dear Senate President Stephen Sweeney, Majority Leader Barbara Buono, Minority LeaderThomas Kean, Chair Nicholas Scutari, Vice-Chair John Girgenti, and Honorable Members of the Judiciary Committee:

As New Jersey's State Supreme Court convenes for its 2011-12 court year, we write to remind you that the court is respected for both its diversity and its independence.  Indeed, some have noted that the court’s diversity, which includes both ethnic diversity and diversity of thought, contributes inextricably to the court’s national reputation for judicial independence.  It should be no surprise, therefore, that we, the undersigned, express our concern with the recent confirmation of of Anne Patterson without demanding an unequivocal, public statement from Governor Chris Christie that he will reflect the court’s history of diversity and judicial independence in each of his future nominations.  Moreover, it is our view that these twin hallmarks of justice – diversity and independence -- must be reflected not only in the Governor’s appointments to the State Supreme Court, but also in his appointments to our State’s appellate, superior and municipal courts.

We urge you, as the branch of government with the Constitutional duty to review court nominations, to only advance any further candidate to our State’s highest court if the Governor nominates justices for the two more seats on the Court becoming vacant over the next six months that maintain the diversity and independence of the Court.

With respect to ethnic diversity, the clarion call of the 2010 Census data could not be clearer: New Jersey is one of the most diverse states in the country.  Latinos, African-Americans and Asians comprise in excess of 40% New Jersey's population and there is little question that our state, like our country, will become decidedly more diverse over the next decade.  Notwithstanding this fact, as a result of the Governor’s nomination of Anne Patterson to fill the vacancy created by Justice Rivera-Soto’s resignation, the State Supreme Court convening today has not a single justice of color, for the first time in decades.  Significantly, of the 11 other states with population demographics similar to New Jersey’s, only one has a State Supreme Court without any minority jurists: Arizona. With Arizona’s notorious reputation for racial and ethnic division, we need leadership that refuses to emulate this model.  Governor Christie’s promise to the citizens of New Jersey was to move this state forward.  His policies not only belie his promises, but they also threaten to move our State’s judicial system backwards.

With respect to judicial independence, the intent of the framers of our State Constitution is clear. The framers intended to hardwire judicial independence in the judicial nomination process.  In response to rampant corruption in the courts that made the reputation of New Jersey’s judiciary among the worst in the nation, the framers put into place two basic mechanisms to safeguard the integrity of the courts: first, appointment of judges by the Governor for a seven-year term with reappointment unless the judge had acted unethically; and second, partisan balance on the Court — no matter who serves as Governor, court appointments would ensure representation of both parties.

Admirably, the foregoing principles have led governors to respect the independence of the Court across party lines — reflected in moments such as Governor Thomas Kean's reappointment of Chief Justice Robert Wilentz and Governor Jon Corzine's appointment of Justice Helen Hoens.  Indeed, it is a testament to New Jersey’s independent judiciary that the two dissenting justices in the recent Abbott decision were both Republican justices appointed by Democratic governors.

Governor Christie’s actions and statements to date give cause for alarm as to his willingness to maintain traditional appointment principles and brazenly ignore the intent of the framers of our State Constitution.  While we applaud Senate President Sweeney for standing up for the citizens of New Jersey in leaving Justice Wallace's seat vacant, we now ask the Senate to make its commitment to diverse and independent courts clear.  The Governor's actions have made it clear that he does not support the court’s history of judicial independence, which he mis-characterizes as “judicial activism.” Indeed, the Governor has stated that he intends to make appointments that reflect his own partisan ideology.  This is precisely the result that the framers of our State Constitution not only wanted to avoid, but put forth measures to avoid.

If Governor Christie remains unwilling to embrace his constitutional duty to respect the intent of the framers, as Constitutional officers, your duty is to stand up for that which is fair.  We ask that you lead where the Governor will not, and demand that he publically articulate his respect for the intent of the framers. We ask the Senate not to move forward with any further Supreme Court nomination unless it is part of a package of nominees with the Governor that addresses all of these issues. This package should result in a continued balance between political backgrounds, continue the tradition of representation of each of the state’s two largest groups of people of color, and promise judges that if they do their job ethically they will not face a partisan review of their decisions.

Otherwise, the fair and impartial judiciary, which has served New Jersey well for over 60 years, will be eradicated.  While we have not agreed with every decision rendered by the judiciary, we have never doubted either its integrity or its fundamental bent toward fairness and justice.

We ask that you to act immediately to ensure the continued trust of the citizens of New Jersey in our State’s judiciary. We thank you for your leadership and your support for an independent and representative judiciary, and we look forward to working with you throughout the judicial nomination process.

Sincerely,

Association of Black Women Lawyers of New Jersey

Black Issues Convention

Garden State Bar Association

La Causa NJ

Latino Action Network

Latino Coalition

Latino Institute, Inc.

NAACP, New Jersey State Conference