|
Sat, January 21, 2012
On January 18, 2012, the New Hampshire House will vote on HB592, redistricting the New Hampshire House based on the 2010 census. The Bill as it stands disenfranchises three of the four communities making up the current Rockingham District 1.
A brief background:
In October of 2011, The Special Committee on Redistricting held public hearings to take comment on redistricting the New Hampshire House. According to Committee Chair David Mirski, the purpose of the hearings was "to get a clear understanding of how our citizens feel they should be represented." At the Rockingham County hearing on October 20, residents did make their feelings clear. Whether from Portsmouth, Derry, Northwood or elsewhere, they wanted local representation.
David Bates, who chaired the Rockingham hearing, stated there were three principles guiding redistricting.
Of highest priority is the federal concept of one person/one vote.
Of second priority is Article 11 of the NH Constitution which was amended after a ballot question on November 7, 2006 asked voters:
Are you in favor of amending the second part of the Constitution by amending article 11 to read as follows: [Art.] 11. [Small Towns; Representation by Districts.] When the population of any town or ward, according to the last federal census, is within a reasonable deviation from the ideal population for one or more representative seats, the town or ward shall have its own district of one or more representative seats. ...The excess number of inhabitants of a district may be added to the excess number of inhabitants of other districts to form at-large or floterial districts conforming to acceptable deviations.
The Ballot question passed by a vote of 240,767 to 100,688, over 70 percent, leading to the following phrase being added to the NH Constitution.
[Small Towns; Representation by Districts.] When the population of any town or ward, according to the last federal census, is within a reasonable deviation from the ideal population for one or more representative seats, the town or ward shall have its own district of one or more representative seats. ...In forming the districts, the boundaries of towns, wards, and unincorporated places shall be preserved and contiguous. The excess number of inhabitants of a district may be added to the excess number of inhabitants of other districts to form at-large or floterial districts conforming to acceptable deviations.
The third priority guiding redistricting was HB 592 which redistricted Rockingham District 1 as follows:
District No. 1 Northwood [1 representative]
District No. 2 Nottingham [1 representative]
District No. 3 Deerfield [1 representative]
District No. 4 Candia [1 representative]
District No. 5 Candia, Deerfield, Northwood, Nottingham [1 representative]
HB 592 was introduced on January 24, 2011. It was the documented basis for all public hearings and remained unchanged until December 14, 2011, at which point, 24 hours before the only statewide public hearing by the Committee on December 15, the entire Bill was replaced by Amendment 0030h. Of the five-plus-hour public hearing, over four hours were taken up with testimony of Committee members and other legislators. Several citizens who had hoped to speak left, others stated they had come to speak on the original bill and only saw the amendment when they arrived in Concord. What happened to the transparency the Speaker touts as so important to this House of Representatives?
The amended bill calls for Northwood to have its own district, the new Rockingham District 1. Candia, Deerfield and Nottingham would be joined together as the new Rockingham District 2 with three at-large representatives. A new Rockingham District 32 would elect one at-large representative serving all four towns. In other words, despite guiding priorities 1, 2 and 3, Candia, Deerfield and Nottingham will not receive a dedicated representative and are placed in two different at-large districts.
Several floor amendments are being introduced by representatives in other districts to correct injustices. Manchester representatives are seeking to adjust Manchester wards which were placed with suburban Litchfield. Concord representatives are seeking to restore a Concord representative to a Concord ward placed with Hopkinton.
If redress is being sought through amendments for urban districts such as these, how much more important is it to insure that sparsely populated but geographically large areas such as Candia, Deerfield and Nottingham have a dedicated representative? Residents of Manchester, Concord, Epping and Raymond, have the most direct access possible to their representatives. Their districts are geographically small enough, and their populations large enough, that residents can and often do see their representatives face to face at civic, school, and other events. In our widespread geographic communities, without high schools, with no regional events and few town wide events, many of us never see our elected representatives. When was the last time you saw one of yours [other perhaps than at a political meeting]? We are too spread out and too rural to run into a representative at the local supermarket or coffee shop. Residents in each of our communities deserve a representative who is familiar with our local issues and who is a visible member of our community.
Where do our current representatives stand?
Joe Duarte said he feels strongly that each town should have its own representative and plans to vote against any bill which will not give Candia a dedicated representative.
John Reagan was directed by the Deerfield Select Board, after a vote on December 19, 2011, to express to the Committee on Redistricting the Select Board's wish that Deerfield have a dedicated representative. Speaking for himself, however, Reagan stated that the Bill as it stands is fine with him and he plans to vote for it.
James Sullivan stated that he preferred the original bill giving each town a representative, however he has still not decided how to vote on January 18.
Kyle Tasker said he plans to vote for the Bill. However, he will seek additional advice from Steve Vaillancourt, a member of the Committee on Redistricting and framer of the amended bill.
What can you do?
Contact your representatives before the vote on January 18 and tell them redistricting is not a political issue; it is important to Republican, Democratic and undeclared voters. Tell them it is not about politics or supporting Party or Committee leadership; it is about local representation for their constituents. Tell them it is not about avoiding a primary face off because multiple members of one Party come from the same community. Tell them that ten years is too long to go without direct representation. And tell them that the court suits which have been threatened create an unnecessary expense for the state.
Finally, tell them individually and collectively to file a floor amendment giving all four of our communities a local representative.
Joe Duarte [Candia] 483-8454, joe.duarteATleg.state.nh.us
John Reagan [Deerfield] 463-3009 john.reagan111ATgmail.com
James Sullivan [Deerfield] 463-9793 james.sullivanATleg.state.nh.us
Kyle Tasker [Nottingham] 724-4716 kjtaskerATgmail.com
Representative Frank Case [Nottingham] had stated in the past that he supported a dedicated representative for each community. However, he is still undergoing rehab after his stroke and cannot be reached. Please do not disturb his family at home.
This editorial was endorsed by seven of the nine members of the Forum Board, with one member not voting, and one voting against.
|
