001Search Edgecombe County Public Schools in the App Store or Play Store to explore the app for yourself. It's everything ECPS in your pocket. Time in the rain. Policeman was behind me, so I had to slow it down. I'm sorry, I'm a little bit late. He saved you. He could have saved you. I wanted him to go somewhere else. I'm thinking that we just heard from Mr. Ellis. He's two minutes away. We'll go ahead and hope that he is coming in. We will declare our work session to come to order. I would ask... Our board members, if you would approve our agenda, we need a motion. Madam Chair, I move for the approval of the agenda as printed. Second. It's been moved and seconded that we will approve our agenda as printed. All in favor of
002the motion, let it be known by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. Motion carries. And we'll move to item number three. We'll have a start, a discussion of the draft redistricting map. Come right in, Mr. Dean. I announced that you were coming. She said you're about an hour and a half away. Thank you Madam Chair and Board Members. Dr. Bryan thanks again. We have Blake here. We have the presentation available that you all heard last month. We recently heard it and you now have time. It was our intention that this work session would be the opportunity for you all to give us feedback and ask questions. during the right-hand meeting as an action item in order to take some action to give us direction about how the board would like to proceed. So this really
003is going to be an informal, I hope, information gathering, clarification to get a sense of where the board is with the maps that we produced. I'll just remind you that we produced three maps. One, A, is the option A is the criteria were to make us few changes as possible and to preserve the comments. The option B was to... Option B was to have the districts prioritize compactness. And it turned out that Blake made a slight tweak in order to, while prioritizing that compactness, also keep each board member within a district so there was a double seating of incumbents. And then option three was to prioritize communities of interest in preparing that map. into account feedback that was provided from the community so with that introduction i will be quiet and unless blake has something
004to add we'll hear from board members i guess i will add one thing i want i just want to make sure that folks can hear me yes sir we can And also, just to let you know, I have the slides at hand here if you want to look at the slides that we looked at last month. And I also have the interactive map available that I can share and steer. So if it makes sense to zoom in on something or look at two districts from two different options at the same time. I can do that. So those kinds of things I am ready to display as needed. Okay. Could you put C up for me? It'll just take me a moment right now. Let me just... No, it's okay. I can get it when you
005get a chance. The quickest thing is to show the slides. So let me do that. C is here. So... That is showing just the basic map, but would you like me to bring up option C in the interactive map? Yes, we can. Okay, so you're seeing that window now, but I have to change the layer that is active. So I will hide option A and show option C. And if you would like me to turn on any other... Layers like the existing districts or for precinct boundaries or incumbent locations. I'm happy to do that as well Get to that shortly, but I've been looking at That's what we're supposed to be doing they want to hear from us and and paying special attention to actually see and went back to look at the inactive parts
006of it. Most of the, all of the communities, all of the people in the East Rocky Mount area, in their next area, are actually voting in the N.C., in the district. Our towns are not split. Our communities are basically kept intact. Kind of easier for me to explain people how, what C looks like, really. that doesn't exist to be a whole but any compactness here that they're overwhelming percentage especially of minority voting districts here that's pretty pretty pretty even and intact there. On his comment does anyone else have any concerns questions or have looked at see Now is your time to speak. Well, see, doesn't split Tarboro. Four, five, and six are all three in Tarboro. So Tarboro wouldn't split. None of them are going to keep Tarboro. We're not in one district now. This
007comes closer to what we actually are going to need. None of them will keep Tarboro. Right. And Blake, Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that option C reduces the number of splits within Farborough from three to two. It does. It does. Right. And Princeville is kept together. Right. Right. It may reduce the number of splits, but Farborough is in three different districts, and I can turn on the municipalities here. you can see that there's a little bit of a gap where the river is between Tarboro and Princeville and you can see that Tarboro is actually in three districts. The color looks a little different here in District 2. But as someone said, every plan, every option is going to divide both Tarboro and Rocky Mountain because those municipalities' populations are larger than the
008ideal district population. I just got a question as far as option C, map C, talking about the minority population and stuff. I know things... When I look at equity, I don't see too much equity in option C, to be very honest. For instance, District 5, 17 to 77, Ms. Kent's district, Ms. Cahoon's district, 37, 59. It's not much of a chance. I'm sorry, you finish. Go ahead. I was going to say, but if you look at the other one, there's a wider, much wider, a wider voting. For example, I think it's in, is it B1A that has your district 90-something and 89 and someone in 89, the other 90-something, which is way out of kilter. Way out of kilter. This one brings it more in line with what we're doing. So where on the state
009does the incumbent live? Can he add what we did? You bet. Just one moment, please. So those little purple dots, for example, here and here and here, show the location and the number above them indicates which district that incumbent is associated with. If it would be helpful for me to zoom in, please let me know. Please zoom. Yes, please. Probably zoom in a little more. I can see it. That's a little too much. I'm going to back up and zoom a little. I haven't heard anything in a while, so I don't know if it's just been a long silence. That's better. That's better. Is he six? Two. Okay, he must be six. You're six, Raymond, is that correct? I am. Okay, I'm trying to get the picture of Tarver in my head. I was looking
010at four and I could never find him. He's right in the middle there. Okay. I'm five. You're two. Six. Who's three? Three. Yeah, I believe. That one has taken no part of mine because I was mostly at Vincent Speed. That takes you away. Yeah, it sure does. At Speed, Lawrence. That's home for you. That's home for you. But I'm two, so it's changing it a little bit. Takes you back home. Yeah. I do believe. Is the dot on three right there on the line? Yeah. Okay. Okay. Well, I cleaned my glasses, but I don't think I did a whole lot of work. I don't think it was bad. One in the purple. There is no double bucking here. Everybody's in there. You had a question or concern. Did you finish explaining it? Yeah, I got
011a problem with the C. Thank you. I mean, that's a lot of games. It was just about evening. and mr alice i just wanted to remind everyone that when when blake prepared these draft maps, he did not use any racial information. Race was not a part of the criteria for any of the three options. What we did was draw them based on the criteria that the board had listed on those three options and then went back and looked at the racial data. Now given that the... percentage of the newly added area around Rocky Mountain is 93% black. made a tremendous impact in the overall racial balance, or racial demographic information for the whole district. And so it is not frankly surprising to see that some districts have a different population spread. There were, in the
012current plan, there are a couple of districts that are almost, you know, 45, 46, or 48, 49. They're very closely split based on race that's more difficult when you have a change in the overall racial population and such significant changes that need to be made so the county went from 47% black to now 56% when I say the county, the whole jurisdiction of the school system. And so again, and then keeping communities of interest together, not splitting some communities that might be more racially homogenous. That all plays in. So I'm not saying that... You have to like this map or not like this map based on what it does, but I'm just trying to give the context and the background. And based on those numbers, we do have some change in the overall racial makeup,
013and I don't know that it's... frankly possible to go through and draw seven districts that have you know a close to 50 50 split or a 40 you know 60 i don't think you can yeah but i think you can i mean i think there's some little equity that can be worked out with a couple of the districts so they're there that's why we did three options so the board can feel comfortable looking at those three But just wanted to give that context for why this one in particular may have had more changes. But I think you'll see that in all of the plans there's going to be some. But that's why we've put out the chart so you can look at those. I just want to assure you that we didn't look at race
014as a criteria for drawing any of these three plans. So what about the hard copy map? Will we have streets, communities, for the community when they go up and look at a map and want to put in input where was that street? Can they identify that? on the map or would it stay blank like that? No, I believe that last time, 2021, we produced some large format maps based on PDFs that had some street, I don't know if they'll have every street, but they had, Blake, I don't know if you remember, they had significant detail in where the streets were. And we also will continue to have the interactive map posted on the website. And I would say that I would agree with what Debra said, that it's possible to list almost every street and
015label those streets, but once, and I can, for example, include the municipalities, but showing each neighborhood in Rocky Mount. At the scale that we need to have for a large format map means it would just be too cluttered and too hard to read when you've got all that information. If you're trying to do both neighborhoods and street names as dense as the neighborhoods are packed in Rocky Mountain, I don't think I'll be able to identify each of those little communities. As I said, municipalities, yes, and some of the outlying areas. for example Lawrence or Battleboro, places like that, I can do, but also the individual communities within Tarboro that were identified by the community group that submitted their letter, I don't think I'll be able to put all of those on the paper map. Hopefully
016folks, if they're familiar with the street names in a particular area, they'd be able to look at those street names and use that to sort of locate and orient themselves and get a sense. Blake, is it possible maybe if the board narrows down the option to have for the public to do a zoomed in? section of Rocky Mount or Tarboro or both that we could then rely on? Yeah, absolutely. That's definitely doable. I think that's a good idea. Do you have any comments? So, Jewel, do you have any comments? We're still on C-MAT, right? The street names will be there. Most people will be able to identify the areas from there, really. Yes, the map showing the entire jurisdiction will include every street and as many street levels as will fit, which should be almost
017all of them. Identifying boundaries will be there, basically. I would know the neighborhood that I'm in. I would know where I am. And one note on that, for Rocky Mountain, the city makes available their map of neighborhood boundaries. So I was able to use neighborhood boundaries. Within Tarboro, I was not aware of any map showing, for example, the exact boundary of the historic district or some of the other communities that were identified, but I was able to find the central point and in some cases the letter that the community group submitted had sort of boundaries or areas to make that clear. I can put labels for Carrboro, but it probably won't have the specific boundaries of a neighborhood. Though I can double check with the Carrboro planning staff if they have any data about the
018specific neighborhood boundaries. There was a slide showing the way that Carrboro is divided in draft option C. taking those community suggestions of the different areas within Tarver into account. I'll share that right now real quick. As we're going through these maps as well, I think it would be helpful for board members to be thinking about whether there are any changes that you would like to see to any of these three options or if you are satisfied with your choices as written. And I do just want to remind everyone that option B2 is the one we're looking at because that was the one that we drew to keep the incumbents in. Blake tweaked option B to keep incumbents in, so B2 is the one that we have focused on. No, so option B was the one
019where there were two option two incumbents but option B two does not have incumbents fitted in the thing. I know it does. I'm just saying that's an option that we have to bring back to Certainly, I mean the board can direct any changes go back to option B ask for something completely new or ask for tweaks to any of these three Absolutely But wasn't that one of the first things that we said we didn't want? I agree, but like I said, I don't see a whole lot of equity in some of the numbers there. I'd like to see some people have a fighting chance. Some of these, I don't see no fighting chance whatsoever. So, yeah, I agree the first that we talked about was that, but I know also that this is a work
020in progress, and we may have to go back and adjust and may have to. I would certainly rather see that than see incumbents pitted against one another. That's the last thing I'd like to see. I mean, you did it. If somebody's got a run in bail of 17 and 77, I don't know how that's fair, whether it's an incumbent or not. Right now at this point, I'm not going to throw out any of the options that we may have to come back and look at. I understand they didn't look at race, but when you look at it now, it's just, and I know it's not going to be equal. I know that, and I know the demographics changed and all that. I do know that. But I'm just looking at this. for both equity and
021volunteerism. And Mr. Ellis, I appreciate that. I would just point out, so District 7 currently is closely split in total population and voting age population. In all of the new scenarios, it becomes majority black because it is the... one of the districts that's closest to Rocky Mount, and Rocky Mount has such an overwhelmingly black population, that portion of Rocky Mount that's been added. So any of the plans, because seven... That's the take some of Rocky Madison increase that also district 5 is also currently closely split Black versus black in population black and white population about 50% or just over 50% but It has to push westward toward Rocky Mountain. So again, that is one of the reasons why that district is going to have an increasing percentage of black population. And I understand that, but
022like in Map C, you're looking in District 5, 18% versus 76, or 78, I can't really tell. 76, I think. 18% versus 76%. That's... That's a good chance in my opinion. When you bring down 1,400 people from each one of those in those areas, it's going to change the percentage of them. I would say that even in the A's. Not quite as bad in my opinion as option C, but still needed some adjustments to, there was an option. Actually, I think option C. I mean, option A was a little boring. But I didn't have an option. I guess what bothers me, while with option A is, district one 83 about 84 and 11% the population 82 to 13% you're going to have that in the rock and rank I don't have a problem with that
023And A, to me, splits too many of the districts. Your district, right in your neighborhood. Right in the middle. It's split right now. Pinetops, the line goes straight down Pinetops. It's always been like that. This, I think, what we're looking at is the existing map. I don't know if we'd be able to throw any out or look at them different, but I would also like to bring up the option that I would like to see something along the lines of the commissioners to look at. The current commissioners' districts. And I think that's something that we suggested. As an option that the board wanted to look at the commissioner districts, those are seven districts that were drawn based on the 2020 census numbers. So certainly that's something. It would not keep incumbents in. And I think
024we did talk about early on, we talked about that, put incumbents way out of, and two or three of them are. And you might can, but what I'm saying, you might can look at that and see where it comes and then adjust from there. Adjust the lines from there. I like the county commissioner lines because the community is very familiar with where those lines are. And so if you say, of course our numbers are going to be different. Like where I would live would be different and where somebody would live would be different. But these are areas that when our community goes to vote, they're probably going to vote at the same place that they're going to vote. You know, they're going to be familiar with the district because That's where they live. That's what
025they're accustomed to. All of these other maps, and I know my two cents worth last time was make the map, don't change the maps any more than we have to because I didn't want to make it confusing for the community that they think this is where I'm voting and now I'm voting as a here. I mean, sometimes the... The way districts are all cut up, county commissioners look like this, and school board looks like this, and then you go into Tarver and Rocky Mountain, then you have town council looks like this. To me, it's very confusing for every entity to have a completely different section of land. Now, I do know on the county commissioner map, Raymond, I think, because I brought one, I think you and I are both in the same district. But
026I think... lines could move just a tiny bit and put us in two different districts. And somebody else, two others are in and have the same problem. But maybe things could be moved around so we could follow that kind of, because I assume the numbers are basically what we want because they have to be that for the county commissioners. I actually helped work with the county commissioners on their map and it does, I mean, it meets redistricting criteria of having a, you know, less than 5% above or below the ideal size for each district. And I don't even have a printout of what the demographics are. I was just thinking. It's something the community is familiar with. Well, again, that's, you know, when I mentioned that early on, because, again, it avoids confusion of the
027community because they are familiar with those lines, and it's easier for the Board of Elections to administer elections and all that. That didn't seem to be an idea that the Board liked at that time. But given now that you've seen options, you want to go back and revisit it. Blake, is that the county commissioner's map that you have up? Excuse me. Yes, it is. This is from our presentation in October when we talked about how this was a division of the jurisdiction into seven districts, but how these districts would, how these compare to the locations of incumbents. And I think the key thing here is this district, if you can see my cursor, the part of Rocky Mount here that does not have an incumbent in it. what we would be looking at is having
028to distribute this district into other districts. And there are different ways to do that for certain, but if the board is interested in having me sort of use this as a starting point, It's already done for the commissioners. That district is already... Yes, these are the lines that are being used for the county commission, but two of these districts, this one here and this one here, would not have a school board incumbent in them. And this district and this district would have two incumbents paired. In the same districts? Well the numbering could be assigned however the board would prefer. The numbering doesn't have to be the same. The numbers that I show here are the numbers based on the school board districts. Which incumbent is from which. So for example, this number two is showing
029the school board member who is currently representing the school board district two. some tweaking that might could be done with that to move down The top portion, grab two. That's the area that she's familiar with. Six to the right. Five. I'd just like to see it and see if we've made some adjustments to it, just like we can make some adjustments to what we currently got and go back and look at them. But like I said, right now to me... Which map are you talking about? I don't know. You were talking about the cabinet commission. Oh, okay. That's what I was talking about right there. Oh, okay. But we haven't looked at option A or B, 2 to see if... Well, this might be a good time to look at the other two options that
030Blake has prepared and then maybe come back to this when the board's had a chance to look at all three and ask questions about those. But I just, I mean, me personally, I just don't, I don't see option C as an option for me. I see C. I wasn't even looking, actually looking at the, I was looking at the municipalities in place, the neighborhoods in place, and not splitting districts and those characteristics. That's what I was really looking at. And people are familiar with where they are. So I've just put up option A. And again, this was the one where the consideration that was prioritized was trying to minimize change from the existing inactive districts. 46, 46 again, that's 50-50. That's a lot different than... Option C for five, that was 18 and 76. 46,
031you've got a decent chance. 18 and 76, you ain't got a chance. The rest of them, seven, and I know that's Rocky Mountain, that's 175. Junior just switching one district for the other. You're switching one district for the other. Same numbers, same percentages. You just flipped. You said seven, and then the one that you named was five, which is 18 and whatever. But then you just named 72 and whatever for District 7. Options 7, 40, and 56%. That's not quite 55%. No, but what you named, you said 70-something. Yeah, that was... District 5 in map C is 18% versus 76%. 18 and 76%. That's a 50% difference. So you're flipping one person for the other. I'm trying to give two incumbents a chance to... Yeah, I am choosing people. That's what you just said about
032incumbents and not having incumbents run against one another. But you just flipped numbers. You just flipped from earth to earth. But we're just saying tweak the maps. Same thing? No, it's not the same thing. It is. When you're saying seven, you just switch the numbers around from five to seven. You're saying look after the income of one and don't look after the income of some of the other. I just said don't pit the income against one another. You may have to pit them in order to get it. Equity. You don't have to do that. You're made to get equity. If equity is gold. That's equitable. But the one you just named is not equitable either. You're just flipping names. I know it's not actual, that's what I'm saying. They should at least be somewhere around
03360, 50, 40 or somewhere in that area to at least give them a fighting chance. But you didn't give, but when you look at A, you're not giving the other person a fighting chance. Who? Not giving who? Seven. I know, that's what I know. One for the other. Exactly. Yeah. That was my point. Oh, well, I know that. That's my point. Okay, so we just, we look after. That's my point. We look after two in common sense. We look after two. And the other one is the odd man out. We look after one or the other. Over here we look after option C, we look after that income, but option A we look after that income. That's what we're saying. But if we could tweak the county commissioner maps and move along a little bit,
034maybe we wouldn't have incumbents against each other because the loans could move a little bit, but not drastically. And have a little more equity and have familiar division. And I'll be honest when you suggested that in the beginning, in my head I could not tell you where the line, I knew where my district was, but I was not familiar with everybody else's district. to see how it looked compared to the school board. I would need to see it. I can't. I have a copy. I have a copy. And that still ain't going to help you. Because... I've got it on the board. There you go. I put initials on them so I would make sure everybody got one. Is this the county commissioner? Yes. I got all these. Do you mind if everybody have one?
035No. I mean, this is three. They're all the same. Okay. All right. Do you have one? These are the Calcommissions. Yeah. Yeah. That's what they are. Yeah. That's what they are. You want to look at this? Well, I have one for me. I don't know where I put it. I think you got three on this end. Here. Send one back here. Sorry. Okay. I'm trying to figure out where we would be here. I kind of have little dots. I have little dots in our orange with initials for Jewel and Evelyn. You did it here? I wrote it in pencil and then I made copies so I don't know if you can tell. I see at the bottom you have five and six in the same and then three and seven which is he showed a
036long ago. Then Cohen's would be in the same district. Five and six and three and seven. And the X's are kind of where I think you live. The numbers are where the residence is. But I think it could be because, you know, I don't think putting in comments against each other is a good idea either. It's a terrible idea. But at the same time, if the goal is to get a 6-1 board, then C is the way to go. A 6-1 board. Six minority, one white. Because of the numbers. If you want a more balanced board, then that may not be your goal. I don't know. I see a 4-3. Then, you know, we could get something more like the county commissioners. And I think they're more minority. We should have, and this is my
037personal opinion, we should have more minority members on the board because of the population of our church. We should. Absolutely. That's a given. And I am a firm believer in that. That's a given. That's a given. But at the same time, it should be, we shouldn't cut everybody out to get what you want. And, you know, and I'm going to look out for me some, and you're going to look out for you. And you know we are. I mean, that's human nature. But I do want a fair map because this is a map long after we're gone people are going to use. When I mean gone, I mean dead. I don't mean off the board. But, you know, you want a fair one. And lines may have to be drawn later if communities pop up
038somewhere else and, you know, the population fills in somewhere else. We're going to have to go back and do it just like we did a few years ago with the census. So option, the option, currently there are two districts that are majority white. Option B has two districts that are majority white. If you look at voting age population, there's also one district that's within 10% in option B. So I think option B is that if you're looking at racial makeup, But again, you have three white board members, you only have two white majority districts currently. So that shows that race isn't necessarily what drives voting. Right, right, that's right. But in option B, there are two majority white districts. They're just not the same two as you currently have. I'm 73rd and 40th. So that's
039not always what drives it. I don't know, like if you want to put up District B since we haven't looked at that one. Sure. It's B2, but for simplicity's sake, I want B. We don't want to do that. Either way. Neither way. That's what I'm saying. Neither way. But it doesn't always drive it, though. Sorry, I changed it on my screen, but I forgot that I was sharing the county commission map. Just one moment. This is option B2. B2, not the county commission, right? Correct. Correct. Do you all have... I'm sorry, I was asking for what... The line between Battleford and Whitaker. For the two. Okay, B2... B2... 5... 47 percent. So you have about two. Two is 42, about 43 and 49. Three is 59, about 60 and 35. That's the only other, the
040only other in the dozen right, just the other four. 37, 56. Six. That's six. And that's a two. I'm sorry. If it would be helpful, I can share that table. I've got that on the slide here. Would folks like to see that, or is it more helpful to be looking at the map? Put the table up. For some reason, the sharing, let me do this. If it's helpful, I can zoom in on any part. Let's see. Appreciate your patience. Opened up the other PowerPoint presentation from October. Do this. It's 1,800 hours. If it's helpful, I can, for example, like that. Although that doesn't... This area is B2. Is that better? Of course, this is... This is showing the total population percentages and not the voting age population percentages. Total age population, you say? These five
041columns here, yes. I can, let's see, I can do, that may make it clear so you can see the columns at the top. But this is, yes, total population. I can move it over to the voting age population, but then you'll have to see which district is which. And so the bottom ones here are option B2. What I've just highlighted is C, and I will try to then zoom back. Oh, no, it saved it. Let me release that, and I'll just interpolate with the pointer here, if you can see the numbers here. So now what you're seeing on the top, this is C in this area, and the lower ones are the current. Could we have order for a moment, please? As we're wrapping this, I know you have to bring them in. I just
042would make two points. One is that given the... Given the demographic change in population of adding Rocky Mountain to the section, Rocky Mountain is 93% black. it is going to be, I'm not the demographer, but I would say it's going to be impossible to come up with districts that are racially balanced to the extent that they are in the current place. So that's number one. Number two, my other point, as my lawyer had, is that it is unconstitutional to draw maps based on race. That's right, that's number one. We can look at communities, we can look at current precincts and municipality lines. We can look at county commissioner districts. But what I advise you not to do is to look at maps and try to pick up districts that are predominantly one race or the
043other because I do not feel that that would be legal or survive a constitutional challenge. So again, we can tweak any of these maps based on Thank you for those comments. that so you I think that you have a competing interest or competing priority that you would need to give right direction is that do you want commissioners match with just one one board member in each of the seven commissioner districts so tweak the commissioners districts or do you want the same board member in or close to their current transcript. I mean, I guess that's, maybe I'm not explaining that well, but maybe you should say what kind of direction you would need to tweak the commissioner maps. Sure, and I think it might be helpful to show that map, the slide that I had earlier.
044This will take me just a moment because I closed down that PowerPoint presentation. because it seemed to be interfering with the share, but let me bring that up. And that particular slide is here. I will share again. Can folks see that? So as Deborah's saying, this is showing what the, and let me, actually let me, I'll leave it like this if you can see this okay. If the desire is to have a map that closely resembles this but puts only one incumbent in each district, it would be helpful to have additional guidance about if there are any kind of other criteria. If I have to make a judgment call, for example, with five and six here, do I do it in such a way as to minimize the changes to these existing districts? Or if
045I have a chance to try and do it in a way that makes the district more similar to what that incumbent currently occupies? because i i think that one way to conceptualize it is there is no obvious board member there's no obvious current board member sitting here tonight that would occupy that district under number one given how far away everyone lives so it's not going to be a minor tweak to to the commissioner maps to put a current board member in that district i don't think So what are the other criteria that you would have like? In doing this, I mean, sort of similar to the ones we considered before, as I said, trying to make the districts, if I'm making changes to these, doing it in such a way that they might resemble the
046existing school board districts, school board electoral districts. we're just trying to do so in a way that keeps these as close to the existing commissioner districts as possible um i think i mean i we could also look at compactness we could uh break take into account the community of interest uh preferences as as specified but um i'm just looking at this and thinking about all the different ways i could i could try and solve this puzzle as it were and as Debra said you know moving a line here so that the representative for district five would be in in this district up here which currently doesn't have an incumbent that's that's the minimal change that would be the minimal change option that comes to mind at least immediately moving this this line down so that
047it would include the current representative of District 5, but then, like Debra said, creating a district so that one of these two people that would be paired in this commission district is in this area, that's a much trickier one. I know that time is tight, but I can certainly provide the demographic information for the commission districts. I also have an idea about putting the demographic data on the option maps in a way that may be sort of easier to decode and make sense of than having to look back and forth between the map and the demographic table if that would be helpful. I'm happy to do either of those. That would be helpful. I would just say try to see what you can do with the commissioners. Mr. Blayton, when can you get this ready
048for us? I need to close this meeting out. I can get the county commission district numbers and the map. maps showing the demographic information alongside or in the same image as the map. That's something I can do, I would say, no later than Thursday. The alternative plan using the commission districts, I would say sometime next week, maybe early next week, but it may take a little longer. Okay. whichever one you're doing. Number one is the Board of the Election spoke of the fact that lining up our districts with the County Commissioner districts would be easier for the communities to explain it rather than having a lot of different areas that they have to memorize but looking at the kind of commissioners in my district I said I didn't even realize it was like that like
049I'm looking at on the map but you could I would suggest that you would do that that scenario and The C scenario, I don't know about that B one, if anybody is interested in looking at what the B would look like. But the county commissioner lines, see what you can get that done, and we want to see the best way we can get C done. Let's try that. Are there specific changes to see that you wanted to focus on or that you'd like to see made? Or, Dr. Wilson, are you just saying that you're probably... I'm just trying to get two scenarios. So not make any changes to see at this point? And put us in the county commission to see what that looks like. Right. Is there any... particular guidance to give Blake on
050how to make the decisions about changing other than just put someone in in those two districts is there any other criteria to use we would like to see it done with as few changes as possible yeah as few changes as possible and the municipality's whole and and and districts right whole And not split the community and area. Don't send me out the way of the real Travolta. You come across the street. Because that's what's going to show where the precincts are. I think so. I think so. Thank you. All right. Thank you all. I need to hear a motion to adjourn this meeting. So moved, Madam Chair. Second. It has been moved and properly seconded that we will adjourn our work session. Any other discussion on the motion? All in favor of the motion, let
051it be known by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, the same sign. Motion is carried and we have moved.