Loading...
06-13-2001 Redistricting Min.COMMIINITY MEETING MINUTES JUNE 13, 2001 Supervisor in Attendance: Mr. J. L. McHale, III School Board Representative: Ms. Elizabeth Davis Planning Commission Member: Mr. Sherman Litton Media in Attendance: Ms. Kathryn Culbertson Staff in Attendance: Ms. Lisa Elko, Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Mr. Lawrence C. Haake, III, Registrar Mr. Bill Handley, Planning Department Demographer Mr. Steve Micas, County Attorney Mr. Stylian Parthemos, Senior Assistant County Attorney The meeting came to order at 7:05 p.m. Mr. Parthemos presented an overview of the County's proposed redistricting plan. He stated that the County's total population is just under 260,000 and therefore, the average population per district must be just under 52,000. He further stated that the most growth has occurred in the Matoaca District and noted that the population must be redistributed to bring Matoaca in line with the other districts. He reviewed the boundary lines of the areas proposed to be moved from one magisterial district to another and the proposed population distribution per district. He stated that the Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing on June 20, 2001 to consider the proposed redistricting plan and indicated that once the plan is approved by the Board, it must be submitted to the United States Department of Justice for approval under the 1965 Voting Rights Act. He further stated that it is anticipated the redistricting plan will be implemented after its approval by the Department of Justice, and new voting cards will be issued prior to the November 2001 general election for state offices. He stated that the Board of Supervisors adopted an ordinance on May 23, 2001 to divide the Manchester, Branches and Bellwood voting precincts and make them consistent with the State House of Delegates, adopted redistricting plan. When asked, Mr. Parthemos stated that the County has had five magisterial districts since the last annexation occurred in 1970. Ms. Loretta Braxton expressed concerns relative to 50,000 people being represented by one person and questioned statewide statistics relative to the number of citizens represented by an individual. Mr. Parthemos stated that he does not have statewide statistics, but noted that Henrico County which has a slightly higher population than Chesterfield also has five magisterial districts. Ms. Ann Maierfeldt expressed concerns relative to planning opportunities to compensate for population changes anticipated within the next ten years. Mr. Parthemos stated that the County is required to redistrict every ten years to ensure that the average population in each of the magisterial districts is within plus or minus five percent based on the census figures. Reverend Harold Braxton questioned whether the plan takes into consideration the Voting Rights Act by not diluting the minority vote. Mr. Parthemos stated that staff feels the plan complies with the requirements of the Voting Rights Act. Mrs. Loretta Braxton questioned the change in racial and economic demographics within each district. Mr. Parthemos stated that the Census Bureau will not release economic data until 2002. He further stated that there may be minor racial demographic changes as a result of the small percentages of people being moved from one magisterial district to another and indicated that these changes would amount to no more than two to three percent among the various districts. Ms. Roni Pitt, representing Deerfield Estates Subdivision, expressed concerns relative to shifting of Deerfield from one magisterial district to another, and stated that the citizens of Deerfield were hoping to remain in the Matoaca District for consistency in representation. Mr. Bob Herndon expressed concerns relative redistricting process for political purposes. to using the Mr. Jerry Harwell expressed concerns relative to changing demographics to allow an elected School Board representative to remain in his district. Mrs. Loretta Braxton expressed concerns relative to constraints, other than residency of elected officials, that were considered when formulating the redistricting plan. Mr. Parthemos stated that population requirements was the primary consideration for the redistricting plan. He further stated that, although the County does not receive economic data from the Census Bureau until 2002, it is required by law to redistrict during 2001. Mr. John Stokes expressed concerns relative to redistricting having an impact on school attendance. Mr. Parthemos stated that the redistricting plan does not have an impact on school attendance and indicated that the School Board handles the process for moving areas of the County for school attendance purposes. Mr. Sherman Litton questioned whether the population of the Correctional Center on Courthouse Road is included in the census. Mr. Parthemos stated that the inmates of the Correctional Center are included in the population figures of the census. There was brief discussion relative to advertisement and citizen notification of the proposed redistricting plan. Mr. Bill Hastings expressed concerns relative to various areas proposed to remain in the northernmost part of the Matoaca District while an area of Beach Road is being moved to the Dale District. Mr. Parthemos stated that people were moved from the Beach Road area to the Dale District because Dale needed additional people to meet the redistricting population requirements. Reverend Harold Braxton suggested that a committee of citizens be appointed to work on the redistricting plan together with the Board members. Mr. Parthemos stated that there is a very short time frame from the arrival of the census population figures and the implementation of the redistricting plan. Mrs. Loretta Braxton expressed concerns relative to a short time frame in which to consider adding additional magisterial districts to the County. Mr. Harry Daniel stated that the number of magisterial districts is currently governed by the County Charter and the creation of additional magisterial districts should be approached through an amendment to the County Charter. He reviewed the process for amending the County Charter. (NOTE: If the Board wishes to create additional magisterial districts, it my do so through the current, ongoing redistricting process without the necessity of amending the County Charter. If the Board wishes to consider a seven-district plan, such a plan would, however, need to be re-advertised for another public hearing.) Ms. Kathryn Culbertson expressed concerns relative to a plus 3.8 percent deviation for the Bermuda District and a minus 2.8 percent deviation for the Dale District and questioned the possibility of making the two districts more equal in population. Reverend Lawrence Pollard questioned the possibility of appointing a citizen committee to work with the Board on the redistricting plan. Mr. Parthemos stated that the redistricting process does not allow for a long period of deliberation. Ms. Beth Davis stated that all of the citizens' questions and concerns expressed during the redistricting community meetings will be presented to the Board prior to the public hearing. Reverend Lawrence Pollard expressed concerns relative to the ability of one person to represent the large number of people in each of the County's magisterial districts. When asked, Mr. Parthemos stated that, if citizens feel the County should have additional representatives, they could petition the Board and request that they consider an increase in the number of Board members. Mrs. Margaret Davis questioned whether changes can still be made to the proposed plan. Mr. Parthemos stated that the Board can still make changes after conducting the public hearing. Discussion ensued relative to Meadowdale Apartments being in the Bermuda District rather than the Dale District. Mr. Roger Medlock stated that the residents of Millside Subdivision support being returned to the Bermuda District as proposed. Mr. Bob Olsen presented an alternative to the County's proposed redistricting plan. Mr. Parthemos expressed appreciation for the citizens' input. Reverend Harold Braxton questioned whether there is an appeal process for citizens who disagree with the County's redistricting plan. Mr. Parthemos stated that he is unaware of an administrative appeals proce.ss. Mr. Daniel stated that citizens can communicate their concerns to the Justice Department. Mr. Parthemos again expressed appreciation for the citizens' input. The meeting adjourned at 7:55 p.m. REDISTRICTING PUBLIC MEETING june 13, 2001 ADDRESS Page 2 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40