Browse
Search
Agenda - 05-05-2005-1b
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2000's
>
2005
>
Agenda - 05-05-2005
>
Agenda - 05-05-2005-1b
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/19/2017 12:30:54 PM
Creation date
8/29/2008 10:21:33 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
5/5/2005
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
1b
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
105
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Page 2 <br />District Election for the Orange County Commissioners <br />serving, that the Board could not figure out how to effectively draw districts. <br />This is somewhat surprising since, at least today, the districts are very easy <br />to draw. The Chapel Hill Township which includes the urban portion of the <br />county makes up almost perfectly 66.66% of the county population (Chapel <br />Hill Township 67.05 %). The Hillsborough and Efland small town areas of <br />the county makes up almost perfectly 16.66% of the county population <br />(Hillsborough and Eno Townships plus the Efland precinct 16.70 %). The <br />more rural area of the county also makes up almost perfectly 16.66% of the <br />county population (Bingham, Cedar (rove and Little River Townships plus <br />the Cheeks precinct 16.25 %). The population division almost perfectly and <br />very easily works out to a Board of seven (7) members with four (4) elected <br />by and from the urban portion of the county, one (1) by and from the small <br />town area of the county, and one (1) by and from the more rural part of the <br />county, plus one (1) at large. <br />When District Representation first carne before the Board, the Board did not <br />bring closure to this matter by putting it before the county for a vote on <br />District Representation, even after all the work and recommendation for <br />District Representation by the Commission. The matter is now back before <br />the Board yet again, brought forward by the petition of more than a thousand <br />county residents. The petition was posted and available for signing at almost <br />every crossroads grocery in the rural part of the county for months before it <br />was presented to the Board. The issue was discussed with you by a number <br />of county residents in your recent successful bid for re- election. Moreover, <br />since the petition was filed and discussed with the Board, you have <br />participated in a lengthy session with rural residents at the Schley Grange <br />where the community, without exception, vigorously supported District <br />Representation. <br />I understand that the Board now wants to study this issue all over again, and <br />to take the rest of this year and perhaps into next year before bringing the <br />matter on for consideration by the Board. Even then action that would allow <br />the residents of the county to vote on this issue seems remote. You have <br />expressed to the community at the Schley Grange your opposition to District <br />Representation. At least two other commissioners have expressed in one <br />forum or another their resistance to the idea of allowing the community to <br />decide this issue. While one commissioner supports a referendum on district <br />14.3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.