So Mark Pietrowski adds me to a Facebook group called Fair Map DeKalb County. The group was started by Kori Crooke-Rempfer. The purpose of the group is:
Fair Map DeKalb County is a group focused on making sure that the process to create new county board districts is non-partisan and fair for all residents.
In DeKalb County a partisan map that will split apart communities taking away their voice on the county board has been proposed. This map focuses more on making districts safe for incumbants than it does on what is best for the people of DeKalb County.
Fair Map DeKalb County is urging county board members to vote no on the partisan map and to instead support a non-partisan map that was created by the independent IMO department at the county.
The non-partisan map makes sure to keep communities together and puts county resident’s well being before politics.
The redistricting map supported by this group was created by the DeKalb County Information Management Office (IMO) and is requested by Paul Stoddard-D (District 9).
According to the Stoddard map the goal is to:
Create 12 County Board districts with the only considerations being to use 2010 Census block data, not split municipalities and keep incumbents in their district.
The redistricting map requested by Scott Newport-R (District 8 ) was approved May 12, 2011 by the DeKalb County Board Ad Hoc Redistricting Committee to send forward to the full Board as its recommended changes to the County Board District Boundaries.
Here is my email exchange with Scott Newport:
Mac,
The map that the County Board will consider next week was approved by a majority of the ad-hoc redistricting committee with only one dissenting vote.
The statutory requirement governing this process requires that districts are compact, contiguous and similar in population. The map drawn by IMO would result in districts that are less compact and with more variance in population.
Further, the statute does not require that municipalities be undivided. The statement suggesting Cortland would not have a voice on the County Board is absolutely false. With the ad-hoc redistricting committee map, six board members would represent Cortland on the County Board. Under the IMO map only two would represent Cortland.
The notion that the proposed map is a partisan map is nonsense. If one wants to see a partisan map, they need look no further than the Illinois maps.
Scott Newport
——————————————————————————–
From: Mac McIntyre [mailto:mmcintyre@eworldlinx.com]
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2011 9:29 AM
To: newportdistrict8@gmail.com
Subject: Fw: Fair Map DeKalb County meeting June 9Scott,
Working on article on the redistricting. Received the below message from Mark Pietrowski. I’d appreciate your response to the statements made and some background into your thinking of your redistricting map proposal. ASAP of course.
Mac McIntyre
—– Original Message —–
From: Mark Pietrowski
To: [undisclosed recipients]
Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2011 2:29 PM
Subject: Fair Map DeKalb County meeting June 9Hello,
My name is Mark Pietrowski and I had the pleasure of meeting many of you during the campaign in 2010 for County Board.
I am messaging you today to invite you to my home in Cortland, 245 Judy Ln. this Thursday, June 9 at 7:30 to discuss the new non-partisan group Fair Map DeKalb County. This will be an informational meeting.
Fair Map DeKalb County is a group focused on making sure that the process to create new county board districts is non-partisan and fair for all residents.
In DeKalb County a partisan map that will split apart communities (Cortland will be divided into three different districts) taking away their voice on the county board has been proposed. This map focuses more on making districts safe for incumbants than it does on what is best for the people of DeKalb County.
Fair Map DeKalb County is urging county board members to vote no on the partisan map and to instead support a non-partisan map that was created by the independent IMO department at the county. The vote on the map will be June 15 so we must act now to inform they county board that we want a fair map that does not divide communities.
The non-partisan map makes sure to keep communities together and puts county resident’s well being before politics.
Please invite your friends and neighbors and join the Fair Map DeKalb County group on facebook.
Here is a link to the fair map: http://www.dekalbcounty.org/GIS/Redistricting/Redistrict_Stoddard_v2.pdf
Here is a link to the partisan map: http://www.dekalbcounty.org/GIS/Redistricting/Redistrict_Newport.pdf
Please e-mail or call me at 815-762-2054 with any questions. If you cannot attend the meeting but want to still help contact us to learn how.
Sincerely,
Mark
According to Pietrowski in a Facebook group post, Newport’s map “is the partisan map that divides communities and was drawn by an incumbent to make sure certain incumbents have an easier time being re-elected.”
It would probably be safe to assume that at least one of the certain incumbents Pietrowski is referring to is Riley Oncken-R (District 3). In a group post Kristen Lash-D (DeKalb 3rd Ward) wrote: ” The whole point of the Newport map (should be called the Newport/Onken map) was to split Cortland so that they couldn’t easily vote out their incumbents based on the landfill.”
Ahhh, the mega-dump! Full disclosure: I’m adamantly opposed to the landfill expansion as orchestrated. I’m a member of Stop-The-Mega-Dump. We (a grassroots resident group) are in the courts appealing the 17-county mega-dump and I’d love to see Pro-17-County-Dump Oncken face Cortland voters at the polls in his bid for re-election. The guy really has too much time on his hands anyway. [snark]
Actually, I feel about the same way for Pro-17-County-Dump Paul Stoddard-D (District 9). But his map doesn’t split Cortland as does Newport’s times three. Keep in mind that among his stated goals for his map is: “keep incumbents in their district.” The Stoddard version doesn’t keep Oncken’s District 3 in Cortland but it does give the town a district that its town population would share with DeKalb’s southeast side. The Stoddard redrawn District 10 has been realigned to cover Cortland.
District 10 incumbent and Pro-17-County-Dump Patricia Vary-D posted that she wasn’t running for re-election in 2012. She also doesn’t think the Stoddard map is the fairest map of them all:
As I understand it, it is state law that County Board Districts have to be equal (plus or minus 10%, I think). Therefore, townships would not work.
However, the districts are supposed to be compact and organized as close to “neighborhoods” as possible. That is not the case with the Newport map. Nor, actually with the IMO (Stoddard 2 map) if you look at my district 10. With the IMO map, Dist 10 encompasses most of South DeKalb (present configuration), all of Cortland, a good thing, BUT much farmland clear up to old State Rd, over to Maple Park, and fairly far South. In that way, I think it is flawed as far as neighborhoods.
I am a Democrat on the County Board, but will not be running again. I do, however want a Fair map for the County. I was hoping that the IMO would be a little better at compactness!
I actually think that the Augsburger map with the “tweaks” done to Dist 5 by Hulseburg comes the closest to fair. It does split Cortland partially, but most is in one District. See what you think–some tweaking for Cortland?. I hope that we can come up with a better solution. I am embarassed by the Dems in Springfield, by the way. That is the best example of why we need nonpartisan, informed, computer driven mapping in the future. Everybody forgets that during the 10 years in between.
–Pat Vary
Mark Pietrowski lives in District 10. He’s never hid the fact that he might consider running for the County Board again in 2012. If he chooses to run I would likely support his run. He came to the week-long WMI Landfill Expansion Siting Application Public Hearing at Kishwaukee College on almost every day. He told me near Day One that he was undecided on the expansion, wanted to hear the facts, and as a then-candidate wanted to knock on doors and factor their concerns into his decision.
After the hearings Pietrowski opposed the landfill expansion. He proved he could weigh the facts and his constituents’ concerns and make the appropriate decision. The problem for his 2010 campaign for the District 3 seat on the county board was his opponent, incumbent Ken Andersen-R also weighed constituent concerns and facts presented at the hearing and appropriately voted against the siting application. It then became a political newcomer (Pietrowski) versus a respected board member (Andersen).
Pietrowski lost a good race. He is one of the bright stars of young local Democrats and Republicans who are stepping up to serve in a generational transition of leadership. But his and Lash’s questioning the motivation of Newport (who voted against the siting application by the way) and Oncken are fairly due Stoddard.
None of the local Democrats who posted on the Facebook group approve of the gerrymandering the state Democrats apparently did with the legislative districts map. While they are certain the local Republicans are trying to gerrymander their way to ten year control of the county board they would never stoop to such tactics. [BS]
Redistricting is politics. Politics in Illinois is embarrassing but the worst thing voters have done about it is to blog about it. But someday they could do more.
Wayne Demunn of Kirkland suggested:
[…] I don’t agree with the logic of more population gets more reps. The perceived logic is that a larger populated area should have more representatives but I think this notion in itself is a part of the problem. I would also contend that the population method does not work at the state or federal level either. I think the the townships should be represented equally in a county board form of government and the only way to truly do that would be to elect the same number of officials from each township.
Now there’s an idea! It’s an idea that would take a referendum to pass. That’s a referendum that could be on the next ballot. But it’s not a new idea. Former county board member, Steve Slack-D (District 3) wrote: “ In the beginning the County Board was the County Board of Supervisors … township supervisors made up the Board …”
I think each township got three votes; one each for supervisor, road commissioner and tax assessor.
Tim Bagby wrote: “See Reynolds vs. Simms. One man one vote applies. While it would be administratively convenient, it (sticking within confines of township boundaries) isn’t required.”
Talk about administratively convenient! I mean we’re talking about significant instant tax dollar savings! We are already paying for township supervisors, commissioners and tax assessors. We pay them better than we do our county board members. We can demand more in return. And save most of whatever it is in our county’s legislative department.
About that one man one vote thing. It doesn’t make sense at the county level in Illinois’ tangled web of local taxing districts. Being the largest municipality in the county DeKalb gets 10 of the 24 votes on the county board (currently). That’s what one man one vote is. Yet the county has absolutely next to no jurisdiction within the corporate boundaries of DeKalb or any other municipality in the county.
Everyone agrees Illinois needs some serious local government consolidation. Wayne Demunn’s got a good place to start.
But the redistricting battle being waged for the control of the DeKalb County board is partisan. And its politics through and through.
Links to DeKalb County Board District Boundaries Reapportionment Map Room
Note: Mark Pietrowski is holding an informational meeting at his house 245 Judy Ln. in Cortland beginning at 7:30pm Thursday, June 9, 2011 for those interested in the Fair Map DeKalb County effort.
Click Here To Submit A News Tip Or Story
1 Comment
Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Some of us saw all of this coming a long time ago. I signed the petition a while back but not enough other people did:
http://www.ilfairmap.com/