The Rural Patriot

November 2, 2006

Cattaragus Co. Redistricting Development

Filed under: Cattaraugus County — theruralpatriot @ 12:27 pm

New developments in the case:

The redistricting plan, approved in 2003 and set to take effect with the November 2007 elections. The local law reduces the number of legislators from 21 to 17 and the number of districts from 10 to seven.
(snip)
County Attorney Dennis Tobolski said there is a motion by Charles Krause (county legislator, R-Great Valley) to join the case as a plaintiff. Tobolski said the motion was made through Wright’s attorney, Christopher Moen of Willamsville.

“The judge will have to decide on that as part of the overall decision,” Tobolski said of Krause’s motion. “I pointed out to the judge that would appear to make Mr. Krause both a plaintiff and a defendant in the same lawsuit.”

When the legislature approved the redistricting plan May 14, 2003, Krause and Randolph Legislator Howard “Bud” Zollinger voted against it.

“In 2003, I voted against it then. I knew it was wrong. I’ve done it in good conscience. It was wrong and I still feel that way,” Krause said.

State Supreme Court Judge Larry M. Himelein gave Mr. Moen 10 days to submit “a legal brief on court cases supporting his position” of Mr. David Wright’s, (Machias), civil lawsuit that the 2003 redistricting plan is not valid due to a law that allows reapportionment once every 10 years.

Advertisements

2 Comments »

  1. And this is only to determine if the case should go forward!

    And just how many redistricting Plans were there? Was more than one approved? Maybe one should not be called a “redistricting plan” because it concerned weighed voting. But isn’t that a redistricting plan” if it affects the votes of a district?

    Comment by LV Vet — November 2, 2006 @ 5:34 pm | Reply

  2. From my limited knowledge of the plan (from prior posts):

    Both sides have agreed to seek summary judgment that will allow Judge Himelein to decide the case without taking it to a jury.

    And

    …the lawsuit seeks to overturn a redistricting plan approved May 14, 2003, that also reduced the number of legislators from 21 to 17 in the November 2007 election. On the same day, county lawmakers approved a “weighted voting” plan that sought to restore the “one-man, one-vote” principle. Ideally, in a “one-man, one-vote” situation, each legislator would represent 3,998 people. In 2003, county legislative districts were still based on the 1990 census. The weighted voting plan took into account population changes found by the 2000 census in assigning legislators similar populations to represent.”
    (snip)
    Two plans were enacted; however, only one is allowed under municipal law.

    (If I remember correctly), Another item of note here is that (supposedly) redistricting is allowed only once every ten years. Apparently, that was violated also with the 2003 decision. (I could be wrong regarding this point.)

    Comment by theruralpatriot — November 3, 2006 @ 11:01 am | Reply


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: