Four-member county committee tackles precinct redistricting

Are there good reasons for citizens to be concerned about the makeup of the committee? That is for you to decide

Note: We asked Pct. 4 Commissioner Ray Whisenant if he felt comfortable with the makeup of the county's 4-member Redistricting Committee. His short answer was 'yes,' both Commissioners Ingalsbe and Conley are veteran members of the court and Ingalsbe has some experience in redistricting. We are also informed by the County Elections Office that the county's redistricting plan must be completed by July or August and sent to the U.S. Justice Department for review and clearance, so now is a good time to make your preferences known about any changes that may take place. Commissioners precinct boundary lines are sure to change, possibly Justice of the Peace and voting precinct lines as well.

For updates on the county's Redistricting Committee activities, contact Laureen Chernow, Hays County Communications Specialist laureen.chernow@co.hays.tx.us, office 512.393.2296, Pct. 1 Commissioner Debbie Ingalsbe at debbiei@co.hays.tx.us, 512.393.2243, or Pct. 3 Commissioner Will Conley at will.conley@co.hays.tx.us, 512.847.3159

Send your comments and news tips to roundup.editor@gmail.com or click on the "comments" at the end of the story

Click on the map to enlarge

[The Ideal Population figure for each precinct in Hays County is 39,277 people (Hays County population of 157,107 divided by 4 precincts). Present populations for the 4 precincts and their deviation from the Ideal:

Precinct 1 (eastern San Marcos, mostly east of 1-35; eastern Kyle) 38,593. Needs to gain 684 population to be at ideal. Precinct 2 (Buda, Kyle) 52,671. Needs to lose 13,394 population to be at ideal. Precinct 3 (about half of San Marcos; Wimberley; Woodcreek) 33,893. Needs to gain 5,384 pop to be at ideal. Precinct 4 (Dripping Springs area) 31,980. Needs to gain 7,297 pop to be at ideal.

As you can see, Precinct 2 needs to shed population/area to all 3 other precincts.

If you live in San Marcos, you might prefer that all of your city be in one precinct instead of in Precincts 1 & 3 as it now mostly is. The problem with letting all of SM be in one precinct is that voters/residents in Precinct 3 (Wimberley/Woodcreek and environs south and west) would lose the currently most populous part – the western part of San Marcos. Lopping off the San Marcos area from Precinct 3 would leave a large gap to make up to get back to the 39,277 ideal.

Precinct 2 is the one which needs to lose territory. The precinct extends to the Travis County line on the north and to the Caldwell County line on the east. Let those boundaries of Pct. 2 remain. Precinct 4 (Dripping Springs area) needs to gain 7,297 people. Expand Pct. 4 to the east, along FM 150, taking in only the part of Kyle that is west and north of FM 150/2770 intersection (leaving Kyle largely intact). Precinct 1 (eastern San Marcos – mostly east of 1-35; eastern Kyle) needs only 684 people to be at the ideal. Maybe take from Precinct 2 the small area below Cotton Gin Road, near Caldwell County line. Precinct 3 needs to add 5,384 people. Keep current territory and from Precinct 4 add some area in the southernmost part of their current precinct. That territory might be the area south of a line formed by RR 3237 and RR 150 West, to where RR 150 West meets 2770. Also, from Precinct 2, add the area south of the line formed by RR 3237 and RR 150 West, up to the point where RR 150 West hits Cypress Road.

The County Redistricting Committee has the breakdowns of population on even intra-precinct level. These ideas are just a broad and first look at county redistricting. Add your ideas or objections in the comments. You can find precinct maps by going to the Hays County website. Click on the link and click on "Precinct Maps" in bold face: http://www.co.hays.tx.us/index.php/search/?search_paths[]=&query=maps.]

Redistricting the boundary lines for County Commissioner Districts happens only once every ten years, and this is the year that Hays County will undergo redistricting efforts.

New boundary lines could mean a new representative for you — one you didn't have a vote to determine. New lines and gerrymandering (moving voting boundary lines to benefit one political party over another) can have a long-term impact on the balance of power in our county government.

In short, it’s all about decisions now that stay with us for a long time.

Commissioners voted in early March to establish a four-member redistricting committee. Those members are Commissioners Ingalsbe and Conley and the Democrat and Republican county party chairs. There were a number of speakers from the public, all of whom spoke out against the make-up of this committee. Their reasons ranged from not enough diversity to self-interest on the part of both Commissioners.

The self-interest argument is obvious. Both Ingalsbe and Conley will likely seek re-election this year (the filing deadline is in December). It’s hard to imagine that either one of them would OK new boundary lines if the final map was not to their benefit.

Are there good reasons for citizens to be concerned about the make-up of the committee? That is for you to decide.

It might be wise to consider some of the facts:

- August 11, 2009 Ingalsbe requested that the County Commissioners approve hiring Rolando Rios (a consultant who will help draw new boundary lines for commissioners) without a competitive bid process. Fortunately, the idea was not supported by the court.

- June 8, 2010 Ingalsbe and Conley who sat on a 4 member committee (themselves and two staff members) reviewed the applications received from the competitive bid process and recommended to Commissioners Court that Rolando Rios be hired. This approach was noticeably different from what took place 10 years ago. In the previous effort, there was a 10 member committee to review bids and make a recommendation regarding a consultant.

- March 1, 2011 Commissioners Ingalsbe and Conley requested forming a four member redistricting committee to include themselves (Ingalsbe and Conley) and the Democrat and Republican party chairs.

Ten years ago, the court appointed 10 members to the redistricting committee. Those members were the six members of the Election Board (Elections Administrator, Tax Assessor, County Clerk, County Judge, as well as the Democrat and Republican party chairs), three staff members, and Ingalsbe. Two elected officials ultimately stepped down from the committee and were replaced by two minority representatives from the public.

In response to citizens concerns about the make-up of the redistricting committee, the court moved ahead with virtually no discussion, quickly approving the four-member committee as requested by Ingalsbe and Conley. Additionally, the court offered no reason why the committee was downsized, nor did the court address the conflict of interest concerns of the citizens.

Perhaps most telling was the absence of any comment from the Court members as to why members of the Election Board, which had been included ten years ago, were excluded from participating on the committee this year.