In the previous election, voters approved redistricting
utilizing total population, which included revisions
to the Charter in order to create districts with
resident counts being as close to twenty-five percent
of the total city’s population as possible and no more
than a ten percent population disparity between
districts. This ‘apportionment’ clause has always
been in our Charter but has been willfully ignored
and politically manipulated by some on the commission
for quite some time, and in my opinion the
district disparity issue should have been resolved
many years ago.
Of course, any attempts to adhere
to the Charter mandates would have quite possibly
exposed questionable practices and lack of adherence
to the Charter by former commission members and
city attorney.
Although Monterra is expected to be complete
by the Spring of 2014, the city will be estimating
the projected population, adjusting the district maps
accordingly based on current and future building
Certificates of Occupancy (CO’s) rather than actual
number of residents, in addition to using a district
population average scheme. The contention is that
this will reduce any future districting changes, but it
also does not count everyone on a real time data basis.
An additional error using CO’s also becomes apparent
when you take the total number of residents and
do the math, which comes out to anywhere between
2.85 and 3.06 persons per household depending on
which formula you use, an error of up to five hundred
residents per district. In addition, the ‘district
population average’ scheme was never discussed or
approved at the Charter Review Board meetings or
at the city commission meetings while implementing
the enacting Ordinance.
The Charter states that no district shall have a
population variance of greater than ten percent from
any other district. The ‘Plain Language Rule’ in law
dictates that laws must be interpreted using the ordinary
and plain meaning
of the words used unless a
law defines specific terms.
In other words, the law is
to be read word for word
and we should not divert
from its ordinary, plain
meaning. This rule applies
to our city ordinances and
our city Charter which is
our Constitution that we
have sworn an oath to
uphold.
To avoid ambiguity,
legislatures often include
definitions in the law
which defines important
terms used. Some laws
omit definitions entirely
or fail to define a particular
term, such as our
Charter and it’s implementing
Ordinance. This
is part of the problem
that we face in the push
to change the Charter, a
push that was originally
and possibly still politically
motivated.
The
Charter Review Board
and city attorney failed
to define key phrases and
meanings within the Charter changes, therefore key
provisions and clear mandates are open to interpretation
by the city attorney whose participation has
been questionable within the entire Charter review
process.
One very questionable issue is the Charter’s ‘ten
percent rule’. If you utilize the current data set offered
by the vendor who performed the population
analysis, you’ll quickly see that no two city districts
currently deviate by more than 9.1 percent. If you
look at the same data utilizing statistical analysis, the
deviation is only 8.62 percent using the same numbers.
This is part of the problem, in addition to FAU
utilizing a ‘District Population Average’ formula,
one which was never previously discussed. In fact,
the vendor admitted their numbers presented in the
presentation were “incorrect”. Also, the vendor does
not include Estada as a part of Monterra and the
residency numbers!
The question becomes, should we redistrict?
Yes, it’s required by the Charter. What do we want
to do then? Change districts completely or simply
bring districts into parity? If you change districts
substantially you may be gerrymandering and may
find yourself in a lawsuit. If we change them to bring
them as equal as possible, we need to concentrate on
districts three and four because of size and discontinuity.
I am very sure of no need for drastic redistricting
based on the 2012 base map data. As far as
I am concerned, it’s just a question of not dividing
residential communities in order to make all four
districts nearly equal without favoring or disfavoring
any incumbent, which is against the law.
The city has an obligation to allow the residents
to be fully involved in the redistricting process. As
such, multiple Public Meetings will be held at City
Hall on advertised dates so everyone who can attends
will have an opportunity to be a part of the
process. Also, you can view all of the redistricting
material at www.coopercityfl.org and click on the
box labeled ‘election redistricting project’ in addition
to watching the commission meeting videos on the
issue under the link entitled ‘Government’ at the top
of the page. Simply click on ‘View Meeting Videos’
and select the meeting or workshop you wish to view.
Now is the time to make your voice fully heard to
ensure transparent, ethical, honest and open government
in Cooper City.
I want to make government more like a business; a problem solver, not a problem creator. My focus while in office will be restoring freedom, combating runaway taxes, eliminating uncontrolled government spending, and reducing inefficient, excessive regulation. My 'agenda' is to restore liberty, not restrict it, to shrink government, not expand it and observe the limited, enumerated powers of our Constitution, not ignore them.
Wednesday, May 8, 2013
Cooper City Redistricting
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for posting your concerns and leaving your comment! it may be approved shortly...
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.