Sorry, you need to enable JavaScript to visit this website.
Article Image Alt Text

Above, the redistrcting map passed by the Hays County Commissioners Court. Precinct 1 is represented in pink. Precinct 2 is shown in green. Precinct 3 is shaded in blue. Precinct 4 is represented in yellow. Map courtesy of Hays County

Redistricting map adopted despite concerns

Wednesday, November 10, 2021

Following a lengthy discussion, the Hays County Commissioners Court approved a redistricting map that drew community concern.

The court-appointed Redistricting Advisory Commission (RAC) presented the M9 and SM2 maps during the last meeting. On Nov. 4, two additional maps were proposed and added to the RAC’s website titled CC1 and CC2. These maps were submitted by Commissioner Lon Shell. As this was addressed during Tuesday's meeting, several county residents and those within the RAC chose to speak out about it. 

“In understanding these proceedings it’s easy to see how governance attempts to hold power by picking voters. Attempts to sidestep this process reduces trust in governance. We still believe that our map is the best map for representing change in the demographic data in Hays County,” said Mark Trahan, Hays County Democratic Party Chair and RAC appointee. “The map is well-balanced, it uses clean, rational lines for distinguishing precincts and the map has been reviewed by the RAC and the public and legal council and was provided with time for public comment.” 

Trahan’s comments were met with applause as Hays County Republican Chair and fellow RAC appointee, Bob Parks also spoke in regard to the commissioners having the authority to make the final decisions on deciding on a map. 

“I’d like to point out to my co-chair and other people in the room that the RAC committee, by the name and by the charter as an advisory commission, it’s not a final decision commission and the decisions on the redistricting are left strictly to the commissioners court and always have been that way,” Parks said 

Joaquin Gonzalez, staff attorney with the Texas Civil Rights Project was present during the meeting and further brought out that the M9 and SM2 maps keep precinct 1 as a Latino opportunity district event at a lower threshold, while the CC2 map takes away influence that the Latino community would have in precinct 2.  

Several written comments were sent in that opposed the CC1 and CC2 maps and in support of the M9 map. A set of letters was also read aloud from the precinct 2 Justice of the Peace, Beth Smith, Judge Andrew Cable of precinct 3,  Judge John Burns of precinct 4 and Judge Lucinda Doyle of precinct 5 in support and agreement to make changes within Blanco Vista and Champions Crossing for emergency services purposes. Judge Jo Anne Prado of precinct 1 and Judge Maggie Moreno also wrote in their support to the court regarding the JP and Constable precincts. 

After public comment, it was made clear that Shell submitted the maps. Shell took this time to address the situation and proposed maps. 

“Obviously the timing is not ideal and this timeline has been severely compressed and that is, my intent was not to do what everybody’s assuming that is and I know I probably can’t change their minds but that’s the honest truth,” Shell said. 

According to Shell, Commissioner Debbie Gonzales Ingalsbe was the only other commissioner that he notified about the submitted maps.  

The purpose of the map changes, according to Shell, included keeping the city limits of Kyle and San Marcos split within two commissioner precincts. Shell also considered Texas State University as a community of interest. 

“I wasn’t sitting here saying ‘I’m going to wait until the last minute,’ I let the RAC do what they did, I stayed out of that,” Shell said. “I took the recommendations, I looked at them, I analyzed them on that Tuesday while people were talking and I brought in, two of those issues came up to me and I decided to see what could I do about that in the only way that I can.” 

Shell further explained that the CC1 map was created as more of an exercise and he didn’t like the numbers but still felt the need to share it to the website. The CC2 map was the final outcome after working with the numbers and following the communities of interest.  

Commissioners then had the opportunity to make comments regarding Shell’s CC2 map. Commissioner Walt Smith spoke about the hard geographic lines that distinguish the precincts. 

“By using those individual blocks and looking at where those voting precincts are, it gives us the opportunity to go in and I think that it’ll actually help us whenever we have to look at where those voting precincts are because it makes it a clear delineation,” Smith said. 

Commissioner Mike Jones was still not completely satisfied with the CC2 map due to the separation within his precinct. 

“Again, I said last week there’s not a map that I like for precinct 2 but I understand that we’re the fastest-growing one getting 13,000 out of my precinct, there’s not a good way to do it,” Jones said.

“I guess my biggest concerns regarding this whole process is that you know, we really, we did not have ample opportunity to none of us, I, the public, even the court as we’ve all mentioned did have ample opportunity to review and analyze these maps,” Ingalsbe said. 

Bob Bass of Allison, Bass, Magee further explained that all three map plans were all balanced and passed the constitutional test and  provide for a minority-majority district in precinct 1 or 2. 

Ingalsbe made a motion to approve the M9 map with a second from Judge Ruben Becerra, however, conversation continued with Becerra expressing his feelings toward the CC2 maps. 

“When I say that this map was drawn in secret, I don’t want you to take that as a jab but that’s the impression,” Becerra said. This is a very tough thing, all of us are feeling the pressure.” 

As discussion continued, Shell said his intention was not to draw the CC1 and CC2 maps in secret. 

“There was no intent to do this secretly and I’ve been completely upfront with that,” Shell said. “If there was a different timeline it definitely would have been done differently and again I take this seriously, it’s done once every 10 years and so I’m not just going to sit back.”

The court agreed to publicly choose the M9 map to edit during the meeting.  Becerra then called for a 10-minute recess in which the commissioners had time to further converse and consider map revisions and edits. Another public hearing was held where those in attendance were again able to express their concerns and opinions regarding the issue. 

After the public hearing, the court further conversed and agreed to roll the item over to later in the meeting and moved on to the remainder of the items on the agenda.  

As the court returned to the redistricting item, Steve Floyd, Hays County GIS manager, joined the meeting virtually to assist in editing the map M9 lines upon Jones’ request and along with the court’s suggestions.  

The court voted on the M9 map and the motion failed 3-2 with Becerra and Ingalsbe as the two voting in favor. A later motion was proposed to adopt the CC2 map with a change of the census block (tract 109.17 block 2004) to go from precinct 2 to precinct 1.

During a stopping point, Becerra gave others who later walked into the discussion an opportunity to speak. Sandra Tenorio, chair of the Hays County Tejano Democrats made a comment in regards to precinct 1. 

“I appreciate the commissioner trying to protect Latinos by packing into precinct 1 but in fact it does not protect our interest,” Tenorio said. “I would appreciate it if someone is going to state, save us from ourselves, they might ask us what we want because as Latinos we are well aware and quite capable of  looking at these maps ourselves and assessing what we think is right for our community.” 

Ultimately, the court passed the motion 3-2 to adopt the CC2 map along with the order to establish criteria and the redistricting plan as well as the justice of the peace and constable map.   

To see the map passed by the commissioners court visit sanmarcosrecord.com.

 

A clarification was added to this article in regards to the county Justices of the Peace and the written letters submitted to Commissioners Court. 

San Marcos Record

(512) 392-2458
P.O. Box 1109, San Marcos, TX 78666