02-18-2011, 03:10 PM
Greg,
My understanding of how redistricting works is that there are a set of steps which have to occur everywhere in the United States, and then there is state and local law about how to get to the mandated goal of equal districts +/- a set deviation. The current deviation ceiling for Hawaii county is unusually high at 10%, the new deviation ceiling under Ford's proposal would be 4.9% which is more typical.
The reason for allowed deviations is to provide leeway when drawing up districts to work around geographical features or keep incorporated entities like cities intact as much as possible. Of course this has been abused in many cases, and districts have been drawn in weird shapes to shore up one party or the other's advantage. In Hawaii County's case, the current boundaries split Puna's representation into 3, one solely Puna and 2 others with sections of Puna added onto neighboring districts. From a geographical perspective those boundaries do not reflect the similarities and differences between various communities, and Ford's proposal mandates AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE that like communities with similar priorities be kept in the same district, and that districts be relatively contiguous and finally, the traditional Hawaiian political land divisions of the moku and ahupua'a be kept in mind as well. Under those rules it will be much harder for Puna's representation to be split up than it was last time, and Puna should see an increase in seats on the County Council, unless there really wasn't as much population growth in Puna as we all perceive, or unless Puna was massively under counted, which is possible.
Carol
Edited to add that this website:
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/15/15001.html
says Hawaii County had a 19.6% increase in population between 2000 and 2009, so unless there was a mass exodus in 2010 before the census count, or unless that increase mostly happened somewhere else (unlikely) Puna should show an increase of somewhere between 15 and 25%. This is my unscientific estimate made by applying my training as a geographer to what I see here in the landscape.
The other figure that caught my eye was the 23.1% of the population that was under 18 as of 2009.
My understanding of how redistricting works is that there are a set of steps which have to occur everywhere in the United States, and then there is state and local law about how to get to the mandated goal of equal districts +/- a set deviation. The current deviation ceiling for Hawaii county is unusually high at 10%, the new deviation ceiling under Ford's proposal would be 4.9% which is more typical.
The reason for allowed deviations is to provide leeway when drawing up districts to work around geographical features or keep incorporated entities like cities intact as much as possible. Of course this has been abused in many cases, and districts have been drawn in weird shapes to shore up one party or the other's advantage. In Hawaii County's case, the current boundaries split Puna's representation into 3, one solely Puna and 2 others with sections of Puna added onto neighboring districts. From a geographical perspective those boundaries do not reflect the similarities and differences between various communities, and Ford's proposal mandates AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE that like communities with similar priorities be kept in the same district, and that districts be relatively contiguous and finally, the traditional Hawaiian political land divisions of the moku and ahupua'a be kept in mind as well. Under those rules it will be much harder for Puna's representation to be split up than it was last time, and Puna should see an increase in seats on the County Council, unless there really wasn't as much population growth in Puna as we all perceive, or unless Puna was massively under counted, which is possible.
Carol
Edited to add that this website:
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/15/15001.html
says Hawaii County had a 19.6% increase in population between 2000 and 2009, so unless there was a mass exodus in 2010 before the census count, or unless that increase mostly happened somewhere else (unlikely) Puna should show an increase of somewhere between 15 and 25%. This is my unscientific estimate made by applying my training as a geographer to what I see here in the landscape.
The other figure that caught my eye was the 23.1% of the population that was under 18 as of 2009.
Carol
Every time you feel yourself getting pulled into other people's nonsense, repeat these words: Not my circus, not my monkeys.
Polish Proverb
Every time you feel yourself getting pulled into other people's nonsense, repeat these words: Not my circus, not my monkeys.
Polish Proverb