Redistricting Meeting September 28, 2011
By Patricia Morlen
Below are a few thoughts on the plans being proposed during the Redistricting Public Workshop on Wednesday September 28th. At this meeting we learned about a new plan, designated A1.
The presentation of the plans was conducted by Mike Sharp, a VP for Research & Polling, who were contracted to do the numbers for the county. Mr. Sharp started his presentation with a short, but clear explanation of the law(s) governing redistricting. He explained what the law states is REQUIRED and what is ALLOWED and NOT ALLOWED within the process. He then started with a map of the county as it exists, with labels to express how far off some of the districts are from being equal in population. He then explained how each of the plans being presented meet the REQUIRED criteria, and some of the ALLOWED criteria. They are simply variations in shifting geographic boundaries of districts along precinct lines. No precincts were split in any plan. No plan is seen as perfect, each having strengths and weaknesses. What is up to individuals and ultimately the commission is, given personal (could be read political but cannot be discussed as such) preferences, to select the plan most preferred.
County Commissioner District Redistricting Plans
Plan A is a plan of least change. The biggest thing it does is move Santa Anna Pueblo out of District 5 into District 1. This plan would most ensure the status quo in the makeup of the County Commissioners.
Plan A1 is very similar to Plan A except that it moves District 1 up to Pena Blanca and grabs the Santo Domingo Pueblo and Cochiti Lake on the way. This plan came about because about a year ago some people in Pena Blanca expressed that they did not want to be in District 5. They say that their County Commissioner has never visited them. So 49 people or so petitioned to get this plan drawn up, my humble opinion is that if Commissioner Madalena is not doing his job and addressing his constituents they should band together and vote him out. Instead they choose to continue to let him remain in office and petition to be placed somewhere else. If Government officials don’t do their job they need to be voted out; this plan would cause much more shifting of County Commission District boundary lines, and significantly changes the community makeup of District 1.
Plan B The biggest change in this plan is that District 5 will take a larger portion of the Enchanted Hills area in Rio Rancho.
Plan C is a very interesting plan. Plan C squarely places Districts 2, 3, and 4 in Rio Rancho thus giving Rio Rancho three seats on the Commission and making them a community of interest. It takes Corrales out of District 2 and places it in District 1, making Placitas, Bernalillo, and Corrales an agricultural community of interest. District 5 remains a Native American District, ensuring that the Native Americans will remain an undiluted community of interest with a voice on the County Commission.
Plan D This plan keeps Corrales in District 2, Condenses District 3 and moves District 1 further into Enchanted Hills Area along NM550.
Plan E This plan brings Corrales, Placitas and a small portion of Rio Rancho into District 2. It brings Santa Anna into District 1, and moves District 1 further into Enchanted Hills along NM 550. It also appears to move District 5 further into Rio Rancho.
After hearing Commissioner Lucero and Commissioner Leonard speak at the meeting, expressing their feelings on re-districting; I feel that the choice for them will be either Plan A or Plan A1. This basically keeps the status quo. If Commissioner Madelena may prefer Plan A1, it would allow the disgruntled people in Pena Blanca to move out of his District. Is it in the best interest of District 1 to take in Pena Blanca? This may be hard to say. District 1 would end up with La Madera to the East, a 100mile round trip; and Pena Blanca to the Northwest, a 60 mile trip to them. Does that equate to good representation? Representation is only as good as the Commissioner you elect. If you like the way you are represented on the County Commission, then plans A or A1 would be your plans. If you want a change then look at Plan C or E. If Placitas and Corrales combine your voice possibly would be stronger and harder to ignore.
These plans will be discussed at the next County Commissioners Meeting, which should be on Oct. 6th but has not been officially announced. At this time we also may see some new plans, if the Commissioners decide they want to change anything. Nothing is set in stone until the vote is taken. I would encourage you to come and express your opinion on the plans. You will have to live with the outcome for the next ten years.
You can look at the different Plans by going to the County Website at www.sandovalcounty.com
I’ve just heard that the County Commission will discuss this at their Oct. 20 meeting.
Orin, thank you for the work that you have done, since you have been here as of 2001 do not consider or entertain the thought that you or any PAC speaks for Placitas. If you want to speak for the area known as Bernalillo Heights go for it. Leave us old time Placitas residents out of your plans and proposals. We liked Placitas just the way it was before all the McMansions were built.
If you’ve been paying attention, I and some other members of ES-CA have been working hard to inform people about the Cashwell re-zoning application, that if approved could place up to 65 clustered homes on 87 acres east of the S-curve. Our attempt is to preserve the character of Placitas as much as possible, by not allowing clustering on ridge tops, poor use of water resources, etc. Others in ES-CA have also worked hard to prevent inappropriate gravel and mining operations here. So I think your remark is misguided.
I like Plan C. I think generally that the Placitas and Corrales communities generally agree on many issues. This plan would give Placitas a vote on the Commission that we currently do not have.