[Peace-discuss] reduction in size of the Champaign County Board?

Tue Nov 2 13:24:11 CDT 2010

Do the 9 districts we have at present adequately represent the disadvantaged? How are the 11 districts to be determined? Who will determine them? Will the 11 districts adequately represent the disadvantaged? (Yeah, showing my ignorance here... but my heart is in the right place, even as my brain is suspicious). --Jenifer

--- On Tue, 11/2/10, Robert Naiman <naiman at justforeignpolicy.org> wrote:

On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 12:27 PM, Jenifer Cartwright <jencart13 at yahoo.com> wrote:

I'm still confused -- If more districts are added, can we be sure those won't be gerrymandered to advantage the advantaged? 

You can't be "sure," but the smaller the districts are, the harder they are to gerrymander, so, "all other things being equal," the concern stated indicates that one should support smaller districts.
 And if there are fewer reps from ea district, it again seems that the advantaged will be advantaged. 

Why? In my experience, it's the opposite. In some of the more conservative, Republican, rural areas, it's hard to field 3 vigorous progressive candidates. Maybe you find one or two progressive people who are willing to run. The other side runs as a slate. So, it's one against three or two against three; moreover, your people go into the poll, it says "vote for three," and some of your people vote for you and one or two of the people you're running against, resulting in a net zero vote for you if that happens to include the lowest vote-getter of the opposing slate. All of this makes it hard for dissident voices to break in with 3 member districts.
 On the other hand, 22 vs 27 members would be more efficient when it comes to making decisions and getting things done, all things being equal. But ARE they equal?? Bambi's pro and Carol's anti, if those are still their stands, makes it a no for me.
 --Jenifer
I'm not a fan of Bambi, but the claim that he supports this proposal is no argument. 

--- On Tue, 11/2/10, Robert Naiman <naiman at justforeignpolicy.org> wrote:

From: Robert Naiman <naiman at justforeignpolicy.org>

Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] reduction in size of the Champaign County Board?
To:
 "Karen Medina" <kmedina67 at gmail.com>
Cc: "Peace-discuss List" <Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>

Date: Tuesday, November 2, 2010, 12:08 PM

Here is the exact question which appears on the ballot:

http://champaigncountyclerk.com/elections/docs/2010/11_02_2010_Full_Specimen.pdf

"Size of Champaign County Board

Shall the CHAMPAIGN COUNTY BOARD SIZE BE REDUCED from 27 MEMBERS
elected from nine multi-member districts with 3 members elected from
each district, to 22 MEMBERS elected from eleven multi-member

districts with 2 members elected from each district?"

So, assuming that what we are voting on is the question that actually
appears on the ballot, the argument for not diluting poor and minority
representation would appear to support the proposal. If you
 increase
the number of districts, the resulting districts will be smaller, and
all other things being equal, poor and minority voters will be less
diluted in their representation.

I'm not familiar with the recent history that led to this proposal,

but I can tell you that based on my experience as a County Board
member from 1992-6, I definitely thought that the size of the County
Board should be reduced, because my experience was that the size of
the Board made it hard to organize other County Board members, with

the result that most of the time the Board was a rubber stamp for the
staff and the Board Chair.

On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 10:42 AM, Karen Medina <kmedina67 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Can someone comment on the issue of the reduction in size of the
> Champaign County Board?
> The following is what I
 understand of the situation.
>
>> why would certain groups get no representation?
>
> Diluted representation. i.e. the poor and minorities would be diluted
> by being mixed with rich white people and having fewer seats to fill.

> Right now the poor have enough of a say that a representative can get
> on the board. With fewer seats to fill, there is an easier chance that
> one of the removed chairs would be the voice of the poor.

>
>> they're moving from 9 districts to 11, right?
> Not necessarily. I think there are 3 proposals on the table of how
> they would move from 27 to 17 board members.
>
> The current situation is 9 districts with 3 reps from each.

>
> In May, 2010, there were 3 proposals:
> 17 members, 17 single-member districts
> 18 members, from 9 multi-member districts
> 22 members, from 11 multi-member
 districts
>
> I'm still looking for more information on this.
> John Bambanic is for the reduction of county board members.
> Carol Ammons is against (I think). and I think Jan Anderson was

> against (I think).
> But I have not talked to either of these women recently on the issue.
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net

> http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
>

-- 
Robert Naiman
Policy Director
Just Foreign Policy

www.justforeignpolicy.org
naiman at justforeignpolicy.org

Urge Congress to Support a Timetable for Military Withdrawal from Afghanistan

http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/act/feingold-mcgovern
_______________________________________________
Peace-discuss mailing list

Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss

_______________________________________________

Peace-discuss mailing list

Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net

http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss

-- 
Robert Naiman
Policy Director
Just Foreign Policy
www.justforeignpolicy.org
naiman at justforeignpolicy.org

Urge Congress to Support a Timetable for Military Withdrawal from Afghanistan
http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/act/feingold-mcgovern

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20101102/52e48713/attachment-0001.html>