From the Daily Illini - I don't think I saw any NG stories on the results of Champaign's redistricting.
The chosen plan has about 15,000 people in each district, and was drawn by Vic McIntosh, District 3. He said the old map had many split districts, and he wanted to fix that this time around.
"I tried to draw it so there were no big changes," McIntosh said. "With the new plan, only one precinct remains split."
All but two of the Council members voted for McIntosh's map during last week's study session. The two others, Marci Dodds of District 4 and Gina Jackson of District 1, voted for another map.
Dodds said she chose the other map because she believes partisanship played a part in the drawing of the chosen one.
"Map 1 (the map chosen) is a much more partisan map," Dodds said.
Anyone seen the maps the article is talking about? McIntosh is my council rep (even he has *never* returned a single call or email from me EVER). I'd like to see if I got lucky and was moved out of his "sphere of influence."
What's the partisan map look like?
I think you can find all the submitted maps here.
I think the selected map was map #1, but I'm not sure.
"I think the selected map was map #1, but I'm not sure."
Map 1 was the map selected. (On page 10) I don't understand how they can redraw the map after only a partial census. That does not seem fair. I suppose there could be some legal/constitutional issues regarding this.
The Circle is all around you.
The legal and constitutional issues are that they HAD TO redraw the maps. You cannot be in possession of knowledge that your existing districts are impermissably out-of-balance and not do anything to correct it.
The partial census only counted folks in west Champaign and proved that more people lived there than had previously been counted. The remaining city was now recently counted, and there is no choice but to consider the 2000 numbers to be valid.
every map has districts that are out of balance shortly after it is passed. in fact, this same special census has put the cultra representative district out of balance. but the state isn't redrawing that map. there was no legal responsibility to redraw the lines based on the new census data.
Dear Anon 7:13... It depends on how you define "legal responsibility".
No, you won't find this "responsibility" codified in any statute. It comes from the United States body of case law known as "one man-one vote".
The City could have waited and seen if an voter had the energy to sue the City over the unbalanced districts. This approach would be favored by those who think the government can do most anything it wants, because the citizens don't have the resources to fight city hall.
On the other hand, the city corrected the [now verified] population unbalance without some west Champaign resident of old District 5 needing to file suit to prove their power was diluted.
Please show me one instance at any time in the 40 years since Reynolds v. Sims where a map that was valid at the time of its passing was ruled unconstitutional mid census because of changes in the population. You won't, for a very good reason. A ruling like that would bring about redistricting anarchy, since many courts have recognized the fact that every single redistricting plan is flawed from the beginning, because it uses "old" population figures (one year old). Hundreds of redistricting plans have been passed since Reynolds v. Sims. Do you think that not a single person in those 40 + years considered and tried this idea? One can certainly make reasonable arguments that the Champaign action was allowed. No reasonable person with any knowledge of redistricting law could suggest that it was required.
You make my point. It was the right thing to do based on principles, even though the City could probably escape punishment for ignoring those fundamental principles. What is the argument for not redistricting?
"The legal and constitutional issues are that they HAD TO redraw the maps. You cannot be in possession of knowledge that your existing districts are impermissably out-of-balance and not do anything to correct it."
Caesar, you're changing your story. You are the one who claimed legal and constitutional responsibilitiies to redraw. If you're talking on principles, then, as I said, you can make an argument that it is allowed. There is no argument that it is required.
So thanks for making MY point.
You are right.
I should have said: "[To be good stewards of the power entrusted to them] they HAD TO redraw the maps. You cannot be in possession of knowledge that your existing districts are impermissably out-of-balance and not do anything to correct it [and still claim to be fair]."
Point well taken.
Good day,
For those interested, a copy of the proposed district map is available through the City of Champaign planning dept. It will also breakdown the precincts for each district, which I found much easier to understand. I believe that precinct 10 is the only split precint.
Please correct me if I am wrong. I am under the assumption that the new map relies on number from 2 sets of census data. Data from a "special" census that was conducted recently for western champaign, and data from the 2000 census for the rest of Champaign. If this is the case my issue is that if you are going to draw new maps, the whole city needs new data, otherwise you run into problems with the one man one vote principle because not all of the data is current. I would have no qualms with a district map redraw if ALL of the data is current, or from the same census. Also, though this may be another issue, aren't at large seats supposed to negate this problem.
The Circle is all around you