Pages

Friday, August 12, 2011

Big questions arise in countdown to county's final redistricting plan


Now just 2 working days from the anticipated vote on the new (precinct boundary) lines, this court still has no idea of the impact of its decisions


Editor's Note: The redrawing of Hays County's four commissioner precincts has quickly climbed to "hot topic" status ever since Buda Councilwoman Sandra Tenorio spilled the beans with her letter to Democrats stating that the initial meetings of the county's redistricting committee were closed to the public, at the insistence, Tenorio said, of Pct. 3 Commissioner Will Conley. Tenorio is one of 4 appointed members on the redistricting committee created by commissioners court in March. Commissioners Debbie Ingalsbe (D-San Marcos) and Conley (R-Wimberley), and local GOP Chair Bud Wymore, are the other three members.

We appreciate the commissioners court finally opening up the redistricting process to public comment. Fortunately, citizens certainly have obliged and are weighing in with their own redistricting preferences. But they are raising more questions than commissioners and committee members seem capable of addressing with a straight face. Sam Brannon, a regular follower of commissioners court proceedings, weighs in with his own poignant observations below in a letter (edited for length) to commissioners. Brannon and all Hays County voters deserve some clear answers.

Commissioners court is primed to vote on a final redistricting map at a Tuesday Aug. 16 public hearing. A lot of folks will wake up the next morning residing inside a new commissioner's precinct. The court, in its final decision, should adhere to the Voting Rights Act guidelines in the best interests of the voters, first and foremost, and lay aside trifling political concerns. Conley and Ingalsbe should never have been appointed to the committee, in the first place, as they are up for election next year and carry clear conflicts of interest in the outcome of the final redistricting plan.

Redistricting occurs every ten years, following the U.S. Census, to adjust to changes in the population. For politicians, making decisions honestly, unselfishly, and with an open mind to citizen concerns sometimes is only a once in a lifetime opportunity.

Click on the link for more information on redistricting and a look at the final 4 proposed maps: http://www.co.hays.tx.us/index.php/government/comm-court/redistricting-meetings/

Send your comments and news tips to roundup.editor@gmail.com, to Sam at sam_brannon@hotmail.com, to commissioners court members (scroll down 3 stories), or click on the "comments" at the bottom of the letter
_________________

Judge Cobb and Commissioners Ingalsbe, Jones, Conley and Whisenant:









You and everyone on the Commissioner's Court are running head long into some big problems.

I waited nearly two weeks for the information on "Hispanics of Voting Age" from Rios. Mr. Rios confirmed twice in the last Public Hearing that HVA is the primary criteria in the DOJ (US Dept of Justice) review. Nobody on Commissioners Court had any idea what this number was for the maps they were presenting.

In the same meeting, Mr. Rios (county's redistricting legal consultant from San Antonio) indicated that the HVA for Pct 1 under today's lines were 34.6%. That number is incorrect by about 10 points.

After not getting these numbers in the last Public Hearing as requested and promised, it took another 48 hours to receive data that I had to punch into a spreadsheet. Rios is using incorrect calculations.

Now just 2 working days from the anticipated vote on the new (precinct boundary) lines, this court still has no idea of the impact of its decisions, and no basis to believe that it will pass DOJ other than verbal guarantees from a man who has so far provided incorrect calculations.

This is a dereliction of duty to the voting rights of the people of Hays County.

As a Hays County resident, taxpayer and voter, I demand:

1. A halt to this process now and the formation of a citizens committee.
2. That Rios not be paid a dime for his services.
3.
The process be extended to Aug. 30 with a new schedule of public hearings on Aug. 23 and Aug. 30.
4.
Rios provide the accurate current numbers for each Precinct in the current map, ALREADY TOTALED, by end of day today. He's paid, and you each are paid, and I should not have to be keying into a spreadsheet to find that these calculations are WRONG.

This court is creating a scandal either through its indifference, or incompetence. IF you proceed as planned, there will be a LOT of light shining on this process, and it won't reflect well on anyone. I and others will evaluate legal options to stop this if this court doesn't do so on its own.

You can avoid any further embarrassment to Hays County by acting in the best interest of those you were elected to represent.

Best –
Sam

9 comments:

Only tax the poor said...

I think we are all supposed to pray that the correct Plan is chosen by the enlightened ones.

I want to be in the district that has the highest tax base so I know I will be treated more favorably.

Could Wimberley please be put in the same district as Cape Cod and Beverly Hills?

Leopold said...

I don't have a real burning interest in redistricting, but I also don't like cheaters. If the facts in this letter from Brannon are factual, then it sounds to me like the court has some explaining to do. Can they all be so ignorant that they can't recite the Hispanic Voting Age percentiles in their maps??

Anonymous said...

For me and other Dems in the south part of precinct 4 it IS ALL ABOUT POLITICS. We have no business being in precinct 4. We want to move to precinct 3 so we can all help un-elect Mr. Conley next year.

Anonymous said...

Do you mean Democrats like Barton or Rose? What the hell's the difference?

When the Dems get some coyones, maybe then I will vote for one again.

The most pressing election is to get that sideburned goober who replaced Rose out.

(He is so bad at this job I can't even remember his name.)

Sam Brannon said...

Please request or demand that a Citizens Committee be set up on Tuesday to oversee this process, rather than take the final vote on the map.

Also request or demand that the process be extended as described. We have until the end of the month to meet all deadlines. Write:


Bert Cobb - bert.cobb@co.hays.tx.us
Debbie Ingalsbe - debbiei@co.hays.tx.us
Will Conley - will.conley@co.hays.tx.us
Ray Whisenant - ray.whisenant@co.hays.tx.us
Mark Jones - mark.jones@co.hays.tx.us

Retrocon said...

The 'voting age' numbers are only important in evaluating the viability of minority districts, but that is an issue Hays county must deal with, as we need to preserve one of the four commissioner's precincts as a minority opportunity precinct. The Dept. of Justice will want to see those numbers when it conducts its review.

But voting age numbers were never given importance by the consultants, so at least Jones and Whisenant can be excused for drawing plans without regard to those numbers -- they were never provided with those numbers. I'm not sure of what information or instructions the four members of the redistricting advisory committee had received.

At the last public hearing, the consultant Rios indicated that although voting age numbers were important to DOJ, those numbers for each district were not particularly critical when drawing district lines. That is because he was taking a loose interpretation of the threshold of percent Hispanic needed to maintain our one Hispanic precinct. As long as the total numbers for proposed plans were in the same ballpark as the current plan, he didn't see any objection. But we have found out that the consultants had miscalculated, and thus misstated the voting age numbers. Perhaps with the real numbers for voting age percentages, the consultant's advice might be a little different regarding minority districts.

Anonymous said...

to Retrocon:

Relax. One of the precincts is/will be headed by a Latina, Debbie Ingalsbe. Few, if any, people in Hays County have a wish to gerrymander Latinos, African Americans, or "other" out of voting
clout.

Sam Brannon said...

I think the point is that the commissioners court is making decisions with important ramifications without having good advice or the proper data in hand. That's dangerous.

Retrocon said...

I am fully relaxed in knowing that one district will continue to be represented by Commissioner Ingalsbe in a majority Hispanic district. My point is about the numbers.

If the consultant believes that the percent Hispanic voting age population in precinct 1 is down in the mid-30's, then he will talk about things like precinct 1 being a 'coalition district' that can be preserved as long as a good mix of Hispanic, African-American, and 'progressive' whites remains in the district. I have not known of coalition districts of the percentages quoted at the public hearing ever being protected by the Voting Rights Act, yet that is what the consultant stated.

If, however, the Hispanic voting age percentage in precinct 1 was actually much closer to 50% when calculated correctly, then it becomes a little different issue when supplying the numbers to DOJ. For example, was precinct 1, when it was created in 2001, above the 50% HVAP threshold? Then over the decade did the number drop slightly under 50%? If so then DOJ may want to see precinct 1 restored above the 50% HVAP threshold, if it can be easily accomplished, which it can.

So the numbers become more of an issue if they are close to certain thresholds like 50%, and less of an issue, and even dropping into unprotected legal status if in the range of the mid-30's.