Basic Principle
Chatham County is authorized by a local state legislative act that provides for what are called residency districts. The Commissioner candidate must live in one of five districts, but is selected by a county vote. In theory, the districts are meant to contain relatively equal population. However, there is no strict requirement that existing districts must be revised every ten years for the purpose of drawing new districts from the official census date.
The Current Situation (based objectively on population figures alone)
Currently within Chatham, there has been significantly greater population growth in the northeast, so our current districts are not even in population.
The Two-fold Request of those seeking change now
The Republican party has requested two things:
1. A redrawing of these district lines to balance out the districts.
What does a closer look at this picture disclose? A committee, that is already known to be in favor of this proposal, was established by the current Commissioners to redraw the lines based on the 2000 census. This is problematic in that the county has grown by about 10,000 more people in the last 6 years (from a 2005 census estimate). The proposed new districts drawn up by the committee are supposed to be implemented at the County election in 2008. By that time, there will even be more people living in the county and it will be only two years away from the next census. By 2008 these new districts would already be outdated and inaccurate.
Looking ahead, the new draft map for redistricting that the committee appears to have agreed on is now posted on the Chatham County web site at
http://www.co.chatham.nc.us/CountyCommissioners/redistricting.htm
This map would become effective in 2008, and George Lucier would be in the same district as Patrick Barnes. Commissioner Lucier would still have 2 years to go in his term, but Commissioner Barnes is up for re-election in 2008. If Commissioner Lucier wanted to serve beyond his four year term, he would have to contest Barnes in the 2008 primary. The map needs to be carefully evaluated.
Lastly, any redistricting process usually takes several months to evaluate all the consequences of any "new map". This committee is doing it in a mere three weeks.
2. A redefining of the process for electing Commissioners.
The current system for an election requires that the candidates live in a specific district; however, the population of the entire county votes for each Commissioner, both in any primary or general election. In this way, both the district and the entire county is represented.
The proposal to likely be placed on the November ballot as a referendum would have only the residents of any given district vote for a Commissioner from that district, in both the primary and the general elections. This proposal has at least two serious potential consequences:
- It elevates the potential for a division within the Board of Commissioners. It creates a climate in which any Commissioner concentrates primarily on those issues affecting their district. In order to get reelected, that Commissioner would only have to garner the favor of their district constituents. This raises serious concerns about "pork barrel" politics, etc. Citizens know that the county currently has many serious countywide issues (schools, growth, water, economic development, agriculture, etc.), and that each Commissioner needs to be concerned and knowledgeable about all of them to find the best solutions for the entire county as a whole.
- It increases the potential for disenfranchising the Afro-American voters. The population numbers show that the Afro-American population is not focused in any one area within the county. Therefore, they do not have a majority in any one district. Consequently, it is highly unlikely that they would be able to carry any one district and elect a representative from their community. For an example, in the recent May primary the top voter getter for county commissioners was Carl Thompson of Bear Creek, an Afro-American who was the first Afro-American elected to a countywide office when he was first elected in 1978. He served three full four-year terms, yet would not have won any of those races if only the voters in his district had been allowed to vote.
- The potential referendum is also expected to be a November campaign issue since Tom Vanderbeck, the Democratic District 4 candidate, who opposes the district only voting, will be running against Karl Ernst, the Republican candidate, who has spoken out in favor of these changes.
CCEC Cannot Endorse Such a Plan for Electoral Reform
CCEC has honest concerns about the motives for each of these proposals, as well as the current recommendations, as they do not appear to be well thought out and carefully considered. The potential negative impacts of this change at this time are significant enough to warrant citizen concern.
CCEC, Inc Board of Directors
August, 2006
