Loading...
2011-04-14 Redistricting MinutesREDISTRICTING COMMUNITY MEETING MINUTES APRIL 14, 2011 GREENFIELD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL Staff in Attendance: Ms. Janice Blakley, Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Mr. Lawrence C. Haake, III, Registrar Mr. Zach Mayo, Planning Department Demographer Mr. Stylian Parthemos, Deputy County Attorney Mr. Scott Zaremba, Dir., Human Resource Programs The meeting came to order at 7:00 p.m. Mr. Parthemos welcomed residents to the meeting. He stated the redistricting process occurs every ten years, after the census is completed. He further stated the data provided by the census allows the county to equalize the population among its districts. He noted that the state is also in the process of redrawing both the Senate and House of Delegate Districts, as well as Congressional Districts. He stated this process will take place in a constricted period of time over the course of the next few weeks because all localities must be ready to mail out absentee ballots for the August primary elections, and the deadline for doing so is July 8th. He further stated the redistricting plans must be submitted to the United States Justice Department for approval, and they have a 60-day period in which to review the plans; therefore, all redistricting plans must be submitted by April 29th. He stated the county is trying to equalize its population through the redistricting process, noting that there has been a lot of growth over the last ten years, which has not been uniform among the districts. He reviewed the current population for each of the magisterial districts and stated the ideal population for each district would be 63,247, noting that the county can deviate a maximum of 5 percent over or 5 percent under that figure. He stated the population in all of the districts is outside of the range, except for Dale, which is barely inside the range. He further 1 stated, under federal law, the county cannot dilute the minority population in its districts with African-American representatives. He noted that African-Americans represent the Dale District on the Board of Supervisors and the Matoaca District on the School Board, so the county must ensure that racial percentages in those two districts are maintained through the process. He stated staff also tries to ensure that the districts be as compact as possible, and the property within the districts must be contiguous. He provided examples of non-contiguous and non-compact districts. He stated another factor that the county tries to take into account with redistricting is the number of people who will move from one district to another. He then reviewed the boundary lines of the areas proposed to be moved from one district to another under Plan A. He stated Plan B includes the same changes in the Matoaca, Midlothian and Clover Hill Districts and provided details of voting precincts and boundary lines proposed to be moved between the Bermuda and Dale Districts under Plan B. He reviewed current population numbers and the population numbers proposed for both Plan A and Plan B. He stated both plans increase the minority population in the Dale and Matoaca Districts. He further stated both plans meet contiguity and compactness requirements. He noted there is a greater degree of compactness in Plan A than in Plan B for Bermuda and Dale . He stated Plan A would result in 14,781 constituents moving, and Plan B would result in the moving of 42,082 constituents. He further stated the precinct boundaries are frozen by the General Assembly for three years prior to a redistricting process; therefore, the Registrar has not had the ability to readjust voting precinct boundaries to address overcrowding. He noted that there will be minimal changes in voting precincts with the redistricting process, although he does anticipate that the local Electoral Board, in conjunction with the Registrar, will be looking at splitting voting precincts in the near future to alleviate overcrowding issues at the polling places. He stated the Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing regarding redistricting on April 27, 2011, at 6:30 p.m. He then opened the floor to questions. Ms. Nancy Finch stated she heard Mr. Haake speak at the General Assembly regarding the number of new precincts that would need to be created at $25,000 each, which would amount to approximately $1 million for Chesterfield County, if she understood correctly. Mr. Parthemos clarified that the cost would be more in the range of $100,000 for the additional precincts. He stated the county attempts to avoid having split precincts, with lines for election districts running down the middle of the precinct, so that residents on one side of the line might be voting in one state Senate election and those on the other side in another state Senate election, although 2 they 'are voting at the same polling place. He noted that split precincts create confusion and result in a much greater risk of human error and voters receiving the wrong ballots. He stated the county wants to make sure that its precinct lines are consistent with the state. He further stated in past redistrictings, the county waited until May when the state had completed its plan, but this year the State Board of Elections has given localities a deadline of April 29tH to submit their redistricting plans to allow sufficient time for absentee ballots. In response to Ms. Finch's question, Mr. Parthemos stated if the state's redistricting plan is not completed on time, then the county will have to do the best it can and may end up having split precinct elections for primaries and then will correct them afterwards. He further stated once the county adopts its redistricting plan, it will be submitted to the Department of Justice, which has 60 days to review the plan. In response to Ms. Finch's question regarding the number of split precincts currently in the county, Mr. Haake stated the number is still very much a moving target. In response to Ms. Finch's question, Mr. Parthemos stated magisterial district boundaries can only be changed every ten years, but voting precinct boundaries can be changed at any time. He further stated the county is frequently dividing voting precincts to address overcrowding, indicating that state law provides that once a precinct has 4,000 voters in a Presidential election, it must be divided. Mr. Thomas Van Auken, a resident of the Bon Air Voting Precinct in the Midlothian District, inquired about the changes in the minority population in the Dale and Matoaca Districts under the proposed plans. Mr. Parthemos stated the Dale District would increase from 34.5 to 35.5 percent minority voters under Plan A and 37 percent under Plan B. He further stated the Mataoca District would increase from 19.5 to 20.5 percent minority voters under both of the plans. In response to Mr. Van Auken's question, Mr. Parthemos stated state law limits localities to changing their magisterial districts once every ten years through the redistricting process. He further stated there are exceptions, but none of them apply to Chesterfield. Mr. Van Auken inquired what would be required for Chesterfield County to get out from under the Voting Rights Act. 3 Mr. Parthemos stated the county would have to submit a request fo'r bail-out to the United States Department of Justice. He further stated this is something that the county has considered, but has not yet done. Discussion ensued relative to the process for making this request of the Department of Justice and the necessity for community support. Mr. Bill Girvin inquired about the difference between Plan A and Plan B and what it means for residents who are proposed to be moved from one district to another. Mr. Parthemos stated the residents plan will have different Board of and School Board representatives. will not have an impact on school lines are completely independent lines. who move under the redistricting Supervisors, Planning Commission He further stated redistricting attendance since school boundary of magisterial district boundary Mr. Girvin noted that the number of constituents being displaced would nearly triple under Plan B compared to Plan A. Mr. Joe Cacciotti, a resident of the Midlothian District, inquired about the logic behind moving residents from Midlothian District to Matoaca District and then moving Dale District residents back to the Midlothian District. Mr. Parthemos clarified that no residents are moving from Dale to Midlothian under either proposed plan. He stated residents are proposed to move from Clover Hill to Midlothian under the plan, indicating that both Clover Hill and Midlothian must increase residents. Mr. Cacciotti inquired why 65 people are being moved from one section of Midlothian to Matoaca. Mr. Parthemos displayed a map showing an area of Matoaca that is proposed to remain in Matoaca, noting that the only way for that to happen would be for the small triangle containing 65 residents to move from Midlothian to Matoaca; otherwise, it would not be contiguous with the remainder of Matoaca. In response to Mr. Cacciotti's question, Mr. Haake discussed his office's preparations to address overcrowding at polling precincts as a result of the impact of redistricting. 4 Discussion ensued relative to voting precincts that would need to be divided to avoid overcrowding between now and the Presidential Primary in March 2012. Mr. Cacciotti inquired about the difference in the cost involved with Plans A and B. Mr. Haake stated Plan A proposes three new precincts, at a cost of $25,000 each. He further stated Plan B proposes two new precincts, but has three times the number of voters who would have to be notified at a cost of approximately $1 each. He stated the total cost of both plans is yet to be determined, with the re-doing of maps and other details. Discussion ensued relative to the possibility of the federal and state governments providing funding to assist the county with costs incurred for new precincts since the county must comply with their mandates. Ms. Finch stated each supervisor represents 60 to 65,000 residents, and House of Delegate members represent 80,000 residents. She inquired whether the county needs additional supervisors. Mr. Parthemos stated there was discussion seven supervisors at one time, but it is kinds of changes when the county is in a s~ given four to five weeks to act on its further stated this may be something that might look at in another ten years. regarding moving towards difficult to make those _tuation where it has been redistricting plan. He the Board of Supervisors Ms. Finch expressed concerns that it would be ten years before the number of supervisors could be increased, indicating that there is a chance the supervisors could be representing the same number of residents as the delegates. Mr. Mayo stated given the population increase in the past ten years, it is unconceivable that the number of residents the supervisors represent would increase to that degree. Mr. Van Auken stated Matoaca ends up with the highest population in both Plan A and B. He further stated Mataoca is also the largest geographic area and is probably the area that will grow the most in the next ten years and inquired why Matoaca's population would not be reduced to less than the required population rather that above it. Mr. Parthemos stated that is an option and is something that would have been considered; however, much of Matoaca is fairly sparsely 5 populated and the idea was not to move any more residents rigYit no•~v than was necessary. Mr. Bob Olsen expressed concerns that all of the supervisors were supportive of increasing the number of supervisors to seven when they were elected, but now do not support it . He provided details of his suggested redistricting proposal, which results in a minimum number of additional precincts. He referenced an area of the Bermuda District that is proposed to move to the Dale District, indicating that an additional polling precinct would have to be created as a result of that move. Mr. Parthemos stated there are a number of different ways to address redistricting. He noted that the Drewry's Bluff Precinct is scheduled to be split within the next couple of years. He stated Mr. Olsen's proposal is an alternative that the Board is able to consider, indicating that there are reasons for each approach to redistricting. Mr. Cacciotti inquired whether the county's redistricting proposals were generated based on what the supervisors wanted, as Mr. Olsen has suggested, or based on the numbers that the county needs. Mr. Parthemos stated the redistricting plans were generated based on the criteria he previously described. He further stated the plans were discussed with Board members, and their ideas are reflected in the maps to some degree. There being no further questions or discussion, Mr. Parthemos closed the meeting at 7:53 p.m. 6 F- z W zw =~W ~~~ ?~z c' ~ ~ U r ai ca 0 ~a J Y ~ ~ d . v C G~ d ,a d ~ L = H 0~~~3 ?~ °V c H H L i Q t ea w ev H ~ ~ ~ Q ~ .~ lV =~ \ ~ ~ } ~ v ~ ~ ~ .S ~ ~ ao c~ M ~ M ~_ ~ ~ ~ ~ M jV ~ ~ p~ 7 ("~ ~ M d ~~ ~ M ~ w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~' ~ ~ ~ i i ~ a ~ ~~ ~ d N o ~ M ~- c~ ~ {- ~ ~. ~ ~ ( ~ ~, ~ ~ ~ J ~ ~ i ~~, 3 dl ~ ~ "" Z ,\ ~~ ~ ~ ~ --, ~ ~ S ~ w ~ ~ ~~~ ~ - V , - ~\ 1~ 3 O m i a a as Z 0 ~- w 'i a a w Z tZw' V /~ V Z ZW ~W ~~ ~~ yz Nom ILL V t T 0 r v U _~ d ea J Y ~ ~ d d d • ~ V ~ ~ L ~ ; o ~ 1` ~ - '°~ d 3rc~ ~ 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ d ~ 4 w ,c Z' ~ W O, h ~ ~ ~ ~ ~' ~ i ~ ~ ~ v ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ a j ~ c~ ~ ~ ~ b ~ ~ 4:`4~~~ ~ ~ ~a ~,~ r v 3 ~ ~ ~L - Q ry ~ ~ ~ J J ~ ~ j ~ ~ tQ'' v `7 T ~' LC ~ -JV v ~ ~, ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M f ~ ^ 1 ( V ~^ ~ N ~; d /=• L V M O 1~ ~ ~~ D ~ d aL ~' ~ ~ y ~ r x u v ~ ~ M~ _ ~ O ~~ ~~ ~ ~ -- ~ ~, q~ W ._!C ~' ~~ ~ ~ ~ J J ~ ~ z ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ J 7 ~ `\ 0 m a a c ~a as Z O `I~i 'i a ~~, r _n „~ ,,, _ _ , ~ ` _ ,~ ,~ Your Community Newspaper Since 1995 P.O. Box 1.616, Midlothian, Virginia 23113 • Phone: (804) 545-7500 • Fax: (804) 744-3269 • Email: news@chesterfieldobservercom • lntemet: www.chesterfieldobserver.com ADVERTISING AFFIDAVIT Client Description Ad Size Cost (per issue) Chesterfield County LN: Redistricting 4-6 Board of Supervisors 1/lOP -lip. $224.67 The Observer, Inc. TAKE Publisher of Please take notice 16at $te County of Chester6dd wID aot,dnet two ~,blie ~, ~o stlte Cophtn eo ~edistria ~ ages districts- aad to chan e the b fl~ d i~ of v CHESTERFIELD OBSERVER g oun az oting precincts. The meetings will be held at the following places and times: This is to certify that the attached legal notice was published by (I)Monday,Apri11i,2011 at7:00 iq atthe Chesterfield Observer in the county of Chesterfield, state of Virginia, on . p. Public Meeting Room in the Chesterfield the following date(s): 4/6/2011 County Admenishation$uilding, Route 10 and Lori Road, Chesterfield, Vnginia; and (2) Thursdal Apiit 14, 2011 at 7:00 p.m. `k Sworn to and subscribed before me this ~ ` day of at GreerJidd Sdtooi. 10751 ~ r ( , 201 1. SatioyRoad, Riduriond, A 23235. Representatives of County staff will make a redistricting presentation at each of these meetings, after which- members of the public will )lave an opportunely to comment and ask uestions th b ~ / q ,on e su ject ofreaestrictug. Legal Affiant es T, Grooms Jr., Notary Public A rnpy of the- frill teat of twb proposed r~districtistg ordinances and of maps showing two redistricting plans; which the Board of Supervisors well consiclgr` e ~lic h on April z7, 2p2I~ a My commission expires: February 29, 2012 y the Chester~fi d Co; nty~e~Ad,n,ntion Commission LD. 7182093 Building, Rt. to and Lori Road, Chesterfield V i i (SEAL) irg n a, are on file in the O&ce of the .Cleric to the Board of Supervisors and the ,`~,~~,,.,,~,,,~rrl, County Administrator's Office, Room 304, ,~ ,' (} ~~~~ ~ ~ R ~ /''~ 9901 Lori li6ad, Chesterfield, V and maybe examined by aU interested persons ``. i~i r ~ ~ '~~; j EAR • ~~ s l between the hours of 8:30 a:m. and 5:00 ~ ~ ;',~~~ y . S ~'' ~ Tf further ipnf q~ ~ ~ ; o EXPIRE ~ ~ o isd Contact C ~ - d , u C2-59-12 s ~ ounty A ~orner(si0i) 1. ' x7112093 ' • ~ : ~V.. ~~•~lRG1~~• %,,,q RY~~,..,,•~~• THIS IS NOT A BILL. PLEASE PAY FROM INVOICE. THANK YOU.