Lawmakers keep on defensive over redistricting bills
by Kristal Dixon
kdixon@cherokeetribune.com
February 22, 2012 12:00 AM | 2699 views | 9 9 comments | 21 21 recommendations | email to a friend | print
HICKORY FLAT — A town hall meeting with state legislators Saturday designed to provide an update on this year’s General Assembly quickly turned into an animated question and answer session about the recent redistricting proposals.

About 60 people attended the meeting at Hickory Flat Public Library in which Senate Majority Leader Chip Rogers and state Reps. Calvin Hill (R-Hickory Flat) and Sean Jerguson (R-Holly Springs) were peppered with questions from audience members on why they proposed legislation changing how voters elect local school board and county commission members.

The legislators were on the defensive as they fielded questions from residents during the majority of the meeting.

Resident Cynthia Kight, who attended the meeting, said County Superintendent of Schools Dr. Frank Petruzielo deserves credit for turning the Cherokee County School District around from being placed on academic probation to one that’s lauded in the state.

Kight said she does not want to see the district return to the days in which its woes were the topic of discussion on television.

House Bill 978, she added, “takes away choice for the voters.”

Under the provisions of the proposed bill, Cherokee County voters will vote by post for six school board members and choose a chairperson elected countywide. The school board now has seven representatives elected countywide and the board elects its own chair and vice chair.

A companion piece of legislation, House Bill 979 requires commission members reside and be elected solely from their posts and for the commission chair to remain elected countywide.

The system currently in place allows residents to vote for two post commissioners and the chair.

Jerguson responded to Kight by saying the “delegation is not taking choice away,” and proceeded to explain the legislators’ reasons.

Legislators have to maintain the one-person, one-vote rule and reapportionment must reflect that law, Jerguson said.

However, Jerguson repeated the delegation’s stance that both the school board, as well as the Cherokee County Board of Commissioners, did not present a clear consensus in their recommendations to leave the voting process in place.

Both the school board and county commission were split in their recommendations to keep the existing election process.

Hill said the delegation requires that any request made by local elected officials be unanimous.

Jerguson said Cherokee County is one of two counties that elect school board member at-large and is the only county that elects its county commission members the way it does.

Residents in the eastern district elect commissioners for Posts 1 and 2, and voters in the western district vote for candidates in Posts 3 and 4. Voters countywide elect the chair.

Jerguson and Hill said that when they didn’t get a clear consensus from the local elected officials, they then decided to conduct a third-party telephone poll.

The Grassroots Conservatives of Cherokee County last month conducted two polls to examine possible changes to how voters elect school board and county commission members.

When those results didn’t present a clear majority, they then commissioned a committee made up of 13 citizens to present them with recommendations.

Hill added he was “surprised” at what he said were many people who are not in favor of the one person, one vote system.

Rogers didn’t say much during the meeting on the controversy, but noted it “doesn’t mean a hill of beans to me” when it comes to reapportionment and changing how voters elect school board members.

Another person in attendance, Shawn McClellan questioned the poll legislators referred to, adding Rogers contributed money to the organization to fund the research.

“It comes across as being really slimy,” he said.

Canton resident Debbie Davis, who described herself as “pro-charter school,” said after the meeting that she agrees with the change.

She noted the change would give her a chance to elect a school board member who “represents our schools.”

“They will have the best interest of our schools,” she said, referring to school board members.

Kelly Anfuso of Canton agrees, adding she is totally supportive of the proposed redrawing.

Anfuso, another charter school supporter who lives in the Hasty Elementary School boundary, said she believes the current school board members gravitate towards the higher performing schools rather than focusing their attention to Title I schools like Hasty.

“I want someone who would help out my school,” she said.
Comments
(9)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
Move
|
February 22, 2012
Well, in the spirit of Mike Chapman, if you don't like it, move. That is what he said to do if you weren't happy where you were.
Making the Grade
|
February 22, 2012
It is wonderful to see Cherokee County acting like a mature county and taking the weird East verses West thing out of the equation.

It is also nice to see that School Board Members will be required to be attentive to their own posts and not have to worry about something on the other side of the county.

Whoever said the School Board previously "elected" a chairman is absolutely wrong, flat wrong. The chairmanship was pasted around like a hot potato ever year to another board member UNTIL this year. Why change that this year? Enquiring minds know and others want to know.
Fact Check
|
February 24, 2012
Schhol Board members already are required to be attentive to their own posts, as well as the rest of the county, or they can't win countywide re-election. The School Board chair and vice chair are elected at a public meeting. The board voted at the January meeting to elect Chapman chair and Read vice chair. They do change every year; last year, Steiner was chair and Cochran was vice chair. There's no mystery to any of this - just go to the meetings, and if you can't go, just read the minutes posted on th CCSD website.

Hwy140
|
February 22, 2012
I fail to understand why this article did not include the suggestion made during the town hall that the process by which the BOE is elected be placed in a referendum for the voters to decide...now that is choice!

Joe Billius
|
February 28, 2012
Listen, why would the commity do thisss? i dont understand! Charter schools shouldnt even be in california! its rediculois
CCSD parent
|
February 22, 2012
Kelly Anfuso's kid goes to the charter school, not Hasty ES. And even though the charter school is a state school and the county school board is not the place for its parents to seek "help" as the school board doesn't set policy for it, the charter already has a de-facto rep on it: Michael Geist, whose kids go to the charter school.
Nostradamus lives
|
February 22, 2012
Seeing as consensus means "majority opinion" not "unanimous agreement," the legislators did get consensus from the School Board in August in the form of a proposed map, which five of seven Board Members approved of in August. Seems pretty clear to me? Just wait until people figure out that the School Board Member they are voting for lives in an area that is different that their school attendance zone. They will have no representation!
Forest G
|
February 22, 2012
First, where are these "rules" Hill refers to about what has to be unanimous. The media should ask to see a copy! And second, the charter peeps are so bent on revenge that they can't see the big picture! Since their parents are all over the county, the only way they can influence an election is to vote as a block in a countywide race. How many of them voted against Radcliff and Puckett? How many of them could still do that under this proposed plan where their vote gets parceled out among six different districts? They are cuttin off their own noses with their backwards logic, and the legislators are playin them as puppets in their political plan!
Fact Check
|
February 22, 2012
The slogan "one man, one vote" has nothing to do with governance models or reapportionment for local government. The phrase's usage in United States history stems from the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling that State legislative districts must be roughly equal in population. There are no laws or principles of reapportionment that dictate you cannot have at-large elections for local government. The delegation is in no way required to reduce the amount of votes each voter has in school board elections from seven to two.

The argument that because the school board and commissioners did not unanimously approve their submitted maps, the delegation was bound to create new ones, also has no legal basis. There are no laws or principles of reapportionment requiring reapportionment maps submitted by local government be unanimously approved by the local government body in order to be adopted by the delegation.
*We welcome your comments on the stories and issues of the day and seek to provide a forum for the community to voice opinions. All comments are subject to moderator approval before being made visible on the website but are not edited. The use of profanity, obscene and vulgar language, hate speech, and racial slurs is strictly prohibited. Advertisements, promotions, spam, and links to outside websites will also be rejected. Please read our terms of service for full guides