Proposed lines have been drawn – literally and figuratively – for the state’s new voting districts for the House of Representatives. The Apportionment Board voted to pursue a one-seat district plan on Thursday that would divide up current constituencies and pit incumbents against one another.
The proposal would, most notably, carve up House Speaker Shap Smith’s district.
The Apportionment Board voted to recommend a new map of legislative districts for House representatives that creates 138 new single-member districts. (There are currently 44 single-member districts.) The draft plan rearranges existing voting areas and carves up towns in several dozen
instances.
Download the map of the Draft apportionment plan, June 1
Download the map of the current districts. Act 151 House Map
Lawmakers must realign districts this year in response to demographic changes tracked by the 2010 Census. House and Senate districts were last reapportioned in 2002. Based on data collected from the 2010 census, the “ideal number” of citizens for every one law maker is 4,172 for state representatives and exactly five times that amount for state senators.
The board rejected a plan offered by former Addison Democratic Sen. Gerry Gossens, which would have preserved many districts now held by incumbents, and modified others in response to population size restraints as required by law.
The single-district plan was approved in a 4-to-3 vote. (CORRECTED: We originally stated that the vote was along party lines; it was not.)
Though Democrats hold solid majorities in the House and the Senate, they have just three out of the total of seven seats on the Apportionment Board. The two GOP and two Progressive board members joined forces to support the new map, which gives the two minority parties an electoral leg up.
Board Chairman Tom Little, a former Republican representative, was disappointed with the tally on Thursday. “I hope when we take a final vote there will be more of a consensus,” Little said.
Redistricting is a once-a-decade ritual that often leads to political food fights in the Legislature. Though members of the board from the minority parties have insisted the redistricting changes are not political in nature (in fact they are bound by statute to avoid conversations about incumbency and political impacts), the effective result would be the potential elimination of Democratic incumbents in a number of districts.
One of the Democrats who would be directly affected by the proposed redistricting plan is House Speaker Shap Smith. His district, Morristown, which is now joined with Woodbury, Worcester and Elmore, would be divided into four new districts. One-half of Morristown would be a standalone district; the other half would be merged with Johnson. Smith, in this scenario, would be pitted against Rep. Mark Woodward, also a Democrat, currently from Johnson.
Such a plan is unlikely to survive in the Legislature where Democrats dominate the House and the Senate, according to Smith.
“I guess the question is whether you want to spend time engaging in an exercise that’s going to thud in the Legislature or do something that’s going to work,” Smith said.
At the meeting Thursday, Gossens tried to make a case for the latter.
Gossens presented to the board a map broken into 82 districts, including: 44 single-member districts, 28 two-member districts, four three-member districts, four four-member districts and one five-member district and one 17-member district that includes Burlington, Winooski and South Burlington.
The map presented by Gossens, which was supported by fellow Democrats Chairman Little and member Frank Cioffi, was created in an attempt to keep as many towns from being split as possible.
Brook suggested that starting with one-member districts, then readjusting accordingly to minimize divided towns, would be a good way to go about working through the problem.
Gossens said he would “certainly vote in favor of not splitting up towns.”
Steve Hingtgen, a Progressive member of the board, said in a previous VTDigger.org article that single-member districts give constituents easier access to representatives and make politicians directly accountable to voters.
House Speaker Smith said he didn’t think it was appropriate for a committee to engage in an intellectual exercise. He argued that politics has to be taken into account. “You try to draw districts that both make sense from a representation perspective and also from a political perspective,” Smith said. “I do understand what the point is – redistricting is mixture of politics and policy. I’m worried that the direction they might want to move in is going to be overshadowed by something that is political, and that would be too bad.”
Although the board does not need to present a final map until Aug. 15, there is pressure to move things along as it must submit the finalized version of its first draft July 1. The first draft is sent to be reviewed by the Board of Civil Authority, which represents towns throughout the state.
An additional map must be created for Senate districts as well. With a current deviation of 20.89 percent in the state for the Senate, Chairman Little suggested that they go about redistricting a couple of different ways: One way is by taking the deviation percentage as it is and leaving the Senate district lines alone.
Here is a partial list of towns that would be divided in the proposed redistricting: Barre, Bennington, Springfield, Lyndon, St. Johnsbury, St. Albans, Franklin, Morristown, Waterbury, Milton, Grand Isle, Monkton, Hartford, Ira, East Montpelier, Swanton and Fayston.
Here is a partial list of the towns that would be reconfigured into new districts: Eden and Hyde Park; Johnson and Morristown; Wolcott, Craftsbury, Greensboro and Stannard; Glover and Barton; Lowell, Albany, Irasburg and Coventry; Jay Westfield and Troy; Calais, Woodbury and part of East Montpelier; Cabot, Marshfield and Plainfield; Bolton, Huntington and part of Waterbury; Starksboro, Lincoln and part of Monkton; Highgate and part of Franklin; Berkshire, Richford and part of Franklin; Danby, Dorset, Peru and Winhall; Whitingham, Readsboro, Halifax and Marlboro; Stratton, Somerset, Searsburg, Wilmington, Dover and Wardsboro; Rockingham and Westminster; Putney and Dummerston.
The map lacks enough detail of Chittenden County to determine how the redistricting would affect incumbents from that area.
Anne Galloway contributed to this report.
