The public's interest would be well-served to insert a Citizens Committee that will get full cooperation from the county
Here's a news video update from Sam Brannon on the county's redistricting process, with an August deadline that is closing in. There have a been a few "town hall" meetings hosted by some commissioners with only slight feedback and nary a word about the behind the scenes discussions taking place. We do know that the first public hearing held July 25 was like something out of the pages of King Louis XIV's royal court, "Ah, si je n'étais pas roi, je me fâche." At its next public hearing, we urge the commissioners court to fully engage the public and lay off its condescending treatment of citizens who have a genuine interest and a stake in redistricting.
Send your comments and questions to commissioners court members (below), to Sam at lovehayscounty@hotmail.com, or click on the "comments" at the bottom of the story
Commentary
By Sam Brannon
San Marcos, Tx – On August 9th and 16th the county will be holding Public Hearings on redistricting at the Courthouse, 1:30pm both days. The Commissioners Court plans to approve a map on the 16th of this month.
If you're as concerned with this as I am, contact your county officials today, and let them know you want the public's participation in the process.
If they were doing something good for the county's citizens, they would be talking about it and answering sincere questions knowing that their argument makes sense. Instead, our Commissioners sat silent in the Public Hearing on July 25th, answering no questions from the public, offering no comments of their own and not one would answer any of the questions I sent to them in advance.
click on map to enlarge
Editor's Note: One "alternative" citizen map circulating would leave western Hays County interests at a big disadvantage with only one commissioner member on the courtHere are some suggestions to the redistricting committee and the commissioners, before the process goes any further:
– We stop this process now. Cancel the hearing scheduled on Aug. 9, keeping the Aug. 16 hearing and adding the 23rd and 30th, and setting them in the evening. This schedule still allows for the 120-day window to get through the US Justice Department's review.
– The public's interest would be well-served to insert a Citizens Committee that will get full cooperation from the county. There are some maps that have been made outside of the "official" process that meet all US Department of Justice criteria and that are not gerrymandered, that keep communities in tact. They have logical boundaries and seem to better account for future growth. They should be officially considered and discussed. It can be done, but it won't be done by ambitious politicians.
Folks, this is just like the LCRA purchase. This is just like the government center decision. This is just like the Parks Bond award process. This is just like the wild spending and rising debt levels. Our county elected officials are eating our lunch, so far with only token interaction with the public.
Reach out to your elected officials now with your own thoughts and recommendations. They say they want your input, so give it to them, and make sure you get your questions answered.
Bert Cobb, County Judge - 512 393 2202, bert.cobb@co.hays.tx.us Debbie Ingalsbe, Commissioner Pct. 1 - 512 393 2243, debbiei@co.hays.tx.us Mark Jones, Commissioner Pct. 2 - 512 262 2091, mark.jones@co.hays.tx.us Will Conley, Commissioner Pct. 3 - 512 847 3159, will.conley@co.hays.tx.us Ray Whisenant, Commissioner Pct. 4 - 512 858 7268, ray.whisenant@co.hays.tx.us
25 comments:
Editor's Note: One "alternative" citizen map circulating would leave western Hays County interests at a big disadvantage with only one commissioner member on the court
really? 25% of the folks live out west, so they should have 25% of the seats. Also another 10 years from now it will be 15% of the population out west and you all still think the west side should have 2 seats? Think with your head not your heart. Simply math doesn't lie.
I think Bob O. has a good point about the growth along the I-35 corridor and the low percentage of the population that exists in the western part of Hays County. The east will continue to grow and the so-called environmentalists in the west such as Jim McMeans. CARD bunch and other anti-growth types in Wimberley will continue to fight for their little piece of, what ever it is.
It is interesting that their activism will earn them less representation on the County Court and elsewhere to accomplish their political goals. I think this is a shining example of unintended consequences.
Gee, and I bet Sam Brannon would be on that Citizen's Committee.
Not that that's a bad thing, but ..... it is pretty obvious will his picture in all the Roundup informercial articles.
Good marketing job, Sam. Are you paying the Roundup owner for you political career marketing forum?
Not that that's a bad thing!
To Richard Sullivan:
Explain, please, how activism will earn Jim McMeans et al less representation on Commissioners Court. Thanks!
And, by the way, what are YOU fighting for -- if anything?
The Total Deviation criterion is not the only factor to be considered in redistricting, but it is supposed to be aimed for. My own primary wish is that communities be left intact. Sam's Alternative Plan has near-perfect Total Deviation -- less than one third of 1% --, but it fails folks in the Wimberley area. We are thrown in one huge precinct that takes up more than half the area of the county. It's not the size of the precinct that bothers me, but the fact that it contains both
Dripping Springs and Wimberley. Those two areas have little in common: they both are conservative, but Wimberley is less so; Dripping Springs is courting development with unflagging zeal, while Wimberley is less infatuated with pell mell development that is much less desired here and that we know we will have to subsidize. Dripping Springs is already larger than Wimberley --, and will get larger still --, and DS will be able to outvote Wimberley on any issue. It will be like the HTGCD division all over again.
Redistricting tries to keep ethnic groups and towns intact. And the county has regs in place to keep historic buildings and areas from being destroyed. Can't some thought be given to keeping the character of Wimberley alive, too?
Richard S., if you are for growth and against POAs, why on earth did you move to a small valley town and into a subdivision with a POA, to boot?
Bert Cobb needs to go to the wood shed.
@ Cognitive Dissonance I agree with you. Richard S. needs to move someplace where there is no POA. Jim McMeans is not anti-growth he is for controlled growth. Most of us moved out here for the water and clean air. Growth is going to happen. We need to make sure that it is controlled growth not over growth or stagnation. No growth would be just as bad as too much or too fast growth. That is why we need leaders that can walk that fine line.
@ Anonymous #1 where is the "alternative" citizen map? I would very much like to see it. One Commissioner, if it is the right one, would be enough. The representative seats should be based on population numbers. That would be a better system.
Besides having an overall deviation of less than one-third of one percent, no other plan keeps communities together better than this one. Even San Marcos is essentially whole. Buda and Kyle share two precincts but it's evident they had to be split east/west in order to preserve the Hispanic numbers in precinct 1.
The point of that map is not that I'm suggesting it (necessarily) as the best answer, but...
Take all the politics and personalities out of it, and this map (and others) would be under serious consideration. The problem is that this process is eaten up with politics and personalities.
It predictable that Commissioners Conley and Ingalsbe won't entertain outside suggestions, but that's a huge violation of trust. They weren't elected to secure their own positions, but to represent the needs and the rights of everyone in Hays County.
The story here isn't about maps anyway, its about a Redistricting Committee that Candidate Cobb would have never allowed, but passed with a 5-0 vote by this court. This is terrible behavior by elected officials.
The word I'm hearing is to expect a last-minute "compromise map", perhaps the Map D that the Rios representative mentions in the 1st public hearing. IF that happens, safe to presume it was a map approved by the deal makers prior to the public dog and pony show (such that it is, with few dogs and no ponies).
As I said, when self-appointed insiders operate in secrecy, every outcome will be suspect. Goes with the territory.
One day soon we'll finally make this type of behavior too uncomfortable and too costly to participate in. Amen.
Thanks for the presentation, Sam. This redistricting is taking far too long and allowing the thing to be over debated and become boring. It appears that only a handful of citizens even care enough to show up at the Hearings. Probably, any of the maps will be acceptable as long as population is the main determining factor. Politics, little towns and especially demographics should not enter into it.
If I lose my present commissioner I will be disappointed but it won't make the earth stop spinning. I suspect any commissioner will continue to vote the same way no matter what geographic area he or she ultimately represents. If my new one is a dud, I will work hard to elect a better one in the next election.
What these citizens are really doing is showing their disagreement with the elections of the present commissioners.
+
There's now a Plan P redistricting map on the county website.
When are they going to post Plan D? During the first public hearing that's the only plan the consultant guy ever talked about.
Mr. Brannon worked very hard to bring about the current membership in the Commissioner's Court, and to see that Dr Cobb became our new County Judge. Is he really surprised that these folks are trying to gerrymander the county? Be careful what you wish for, Mr. Brannon.
I really don't think there will be a map that will make everyone happy locally.
The State Legislature made sure of that when they screwed Travis and Hays Counties.
There is a law suit pending on the State redistricting map. Anyone heard anything futher?
To 'wiggin': Bert Cobb knows exactly why I supported him for County Judge... because of the behavior of Jeff Barton in his time on the court... the arrogance and insincerity with which he operated. And yes, the cosmic irony is noted.
I told Candidate Cobb one day that whether he won or lost, I would do my best to keep the Commissioners Court accountable to the people. He told me, "You'll be my conscience." So be it.
I don't control anything that goes on in this county, but as I've told our Commissioners Court, I will continue bear witness to what I see. And if that bothers any elected official they're probably doing the wrong things.
Well said, Sam.
"I don't control anything that goes on in this county, but as I've told our Commissioners Court, I will continue bear witness to what I see. And if that bothers any elected official they're probably doing the wrong things."
Sam Brannon is a legend in his own mind. Thank God Hays County has Brannon to look out for us citizen idiots.
the unwillingness of this court to consider just the times of these events says it all. I guess that the employees of the well-driller, the car washer, and the doctor aren’t worth listening to as they'd have to take off work to attend... Working folks don't matter to this court. It's that simple, and so far all the allegations attached to this process seem valid. As I pointed out to the well driller, the car washer and Mr. Jones - my mortgage is longer than their terms of office and my concerns do matter.
At the public hearing on county redistricting today (Aug. 9) at the courthouse, all the maps still under consideration were on display. Several people spoke in favor of one map or another, but Plans O and P, or one of the 2 remaining M maps, were most often mentioned. At the end of public comments, Judge Cobb asked each commissioner which map s/he preferred. Ingalsbe said Plan P; Jones said M2; Conley was absent, but Judge Cobb said he believed Conley wants M1 Final; and Whisenant said Plan O.
The judge wants to have only 4 maps for the public to speak for/against at the final public redistricting hearing on Tuesday, August 16, at 1:30 p.m. at the courthouse.
Well, the vote on a final plan will be interesting with each commissioner favoring a different map. Conley must be ticked off not showing up for the public hearing, since his secret plan to keep the process secret and inside the country club house was exposed.
This is one big sick joke. It won't matter really which map goes into effect, as ANY one of the maps will hurt the county in general, and more-so specific parts of the county will be hurt with any one of the maps.
to Peter:
Explain how "...ANY one of the maps will hurt the county in general...."
To Anon 8/11, 8:30am.
I'll tell you how... If the people drawing the lines are considering party positioning, or are even considering the impact on their own re-electability, then by default, there is a dereliction of duty in regards to securing YOUR voting rights, and MY voting rights.
At redistricting Public Hearing this week, we documented well that dereliction of duty. We documented that "hispanics of voting age" was the primary consideration of the DOJ for Hays County, per Rolando Rios, the county's attorney/consultant on the project. When I asked the question, it was the first mention of it in any of the meetings thus far.
On Thursday, July 28th, I first asked the question about "hispanics of voting age" to Commissioners Ingalsbe and Conley, copying the rest of the court, and Sandra Tenorio. (I do not know Bud Wymore's email address). I asked why these numbers were not reported for the various maps.
On Friday the 29th, Commissioner Ingalsbe responded: "I have forwarded your questions to Rolando Rios. He left a voice message and said he would be at the next public hearing and would be happy to answer any questions then. I did ask that he answer the questions prior to the hearing."
At the 8/9 Public Hearing, Mr. Rios showed up WITHOUT the information that Commissioner Ingalsbe requested he bring about "hispanics of voting age". He did confirm that Pct 1 today has about 35% of voters in that category, and again confirmed its the DOJs MOST IMPORTANT CONSIDERATION.
I asked Commissioner Ingalsbe, "What will be the percent of 'hispanics of voting age' under your preferred map, Map P?" She replied, "I don't know."
I asked Commissioners Jones and Whisenant the same. They didn't know. Conley was not there.
And recall that I had posed the question to all of them 10 days prior and 4 days prior.
Yesterday, I dropped by Commissioner Ingalsbe's office to see if Rios had sent her the data. "I'll email him now."
As of 3:14pm today, we have SOME of the answers.
(We're paying this consultant/attorney $25,000 for this!)
Now... you add that to the secrecy of the process. And you add that to the fact that all the maps presented are basically multiple variations of a single map. Add to that that there are other significantly different configurations that meet DOJ requirements.
This process must be stopped.
"If the people drawing the lines are considering party positioning, or are even considering the impact on their own re-electability, then by default, there is a dereliction of duty in regards to securing YOUR voting rights, and MY voting rights."
Exactly, Sam. But unfortunately that is what redistricting has become - getting the most compliant and gullible constituents into your election district.
And while they're at it, divide up the minorities, the educated young adults and the poor into ineffective population numbers so they have no type of voting pressure block on their side.
Oh wait, I forgot. Now we can vote with a gun permit but not with only a student ID. Did they require an intelligence quotient with that ID check?
Can one vote with a death certificate - one with a post-mortem picture)?
Post a Comment