Minutes - 20060216 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Geof Gledhill said that there is not anything new in the materials. The Board last left this issue on page 3 of the abstract. Chair Jacobs said that the understanding was that if they could complete this discussion tonight that it would go on the March 2"d agenda as a decision item. Commissioner Halkiotis asked Geof Gledhill to briefly highlight proposals 2, 3, and 5 on the map, which he did. The proposals are outlined on page 5 of the abstract. Geof Gledhill said that once the County Commissioners decide on any of the systems, then they will have to get specific about how it works. The specificity would have to be in the resolution. The Board could vote on the system on March 2"d and then vote on the specifics of the resolution later. Chair Jacobs asked far an explanation of haw districts, at-large, nominating, and residential relate to the Voting Rights Act. "Nominating" districts are those in which only the residents of the district vote for the candidate in the primary election; and the candidate must reside in the district. Geof Gledhill said that you could not have two people nominated from D-1 and two people nominated from D-2 because the people living in D-2 would not receive the one person, one vote. The one person, one vote requirement applies when either the nomination is done in the election ar where the general election is done by district. The one person, one vote requirement would not be applicable where the districts were residential only. "Residential" districts are those in which the candidate must reside in the district but all residents of the county vote Commissioner Gordon asked about the deviation of the one person, one vote requirement in each proposal. Proposal 2: District 1 -the permissible range would be 44,000-48,500 to meet the one person, one vote requirement District 2 -the permissible range would be 65,800-72,800 Proposal 3: District 1 and 2 - 27,400-30,300 District 3 - 54,900-60,600 Proposal 5: District 1 - 36,600-40,436 District 2 - 73,169-80,871 Chair Jacobs asked if this would have to be adjusted every census, and Geof Gledhill said that if there is a district system where you are nominating or electing by district, it must be periodically adjusted. If there is a residential district system, there is no statutory authority for adjusting. Commissioner Carey said that he recognizes that the Board may decide to take more than one map to the March 2"d meeting, but he would encourage them to take just one map and to provide the opportunity for public comment at the March 2"d meeting. He said that one decision they need to make is how many County Commissioners they want the new system to include. The second decision is whether to include district nominations or at-large nominations. The third decision is whether to have district elections ar at-large elections. The fourth decision is which of the maps to adopt. And finally, the fifth decision is the applicable date of implementation. He would like to comment on each of these decisions. Discussion ensued on the principles listed on page six of the abstract. The Board agreed to endorse all of the principles an page six -Structure of the Board of County Commissioners' Principles. Commissioner Carey said that his position on these decisions complies with the list of principles. He thinks that it is important to keep the number of Commissioners at five at this time. He said that you can always increase the number of Commissioners