Supervisors Split Vote On First Step In Redistricting Process

Supervisors Bubba Tillman (left) and Butch Surrette had a heated discussion about redistricting in Monday’s meeting.

By David Howell
Editor

COFFEEVILLE – Working in back-to-back meetings, supervisors agreed to move forward with the next step in redistricting with the hiring of the John C. Stennis Institute of Government to redraw the district lines. The action came after a heated debate during the “first Monday” meeting held in Coffeeville (see related story below) .

    Last Friday, during a recessed meeting in Coffeeville, county officials met with Lydia Quarles from Stennis to discuss potential options.

    At that meeting supervisors learned that figures released in the 2010 Census did not reflect supervisors’ district lines from 2000. Instead, the population figures showed the population of the county broken down on beat lines from 1990.

    The total population reflected the 2010 Census count for the county’s population, 12,678; but the beat breakdown statistics were plugged into 1990 beat lines, Stennis officials ex-plained.Work-ing through the weekend, Sten-nis officials provided revised numbers which  indicated the population of Yalobusha’s five supervisor districts goes from a high of 2,758 in District 1 to a low of 2,300 people in District 5. District 2 has 2,477 people, District 3 has 2,679 and District 4 has 2,464.

   Department of Justice voting rules require that political boundaries maintain equal populations, a rule referred to as a one-man, one-vote policy, Board Attorney Crow told supervisors in an earlier April meeting.

    “You can’t exceed 10 percent deviation from high district to low district,” Crow said. With the updated statistics, the deviation in population from least populated Beat 5 to densest populated Beat 1 comes to 18.06 percent.

    “The problem if you don’t do it and somebody does sue you later on, you are going to have a new election – that’s the problem. Setting one aside and having another one,” Crow told supervisors Monday.

     “But If you are making a diligent effort to do it (redistrict), and you do it, then the court is not likely to stop your election or overturn your election results,” Crow continued.

    He also told supervisors that the redistricting will likely not be finalized by the August election.
 

Friday Discussion

    During the Friday meeting county officials quizzed Quarles on the specifics of redistricting, including the price, timeline and details.

    In addition to balancing the supervisor beat lines, they learned the population would also have to equalized in constable and justice court districts.

    “What about school districts’ map, are they going to have to address the same thing?” District 3 Supervisor M.H. “Butch” Surrette asked.

    “They are,” Quarles answered.

    “Are municipalities going to have to address it?” Surrette also asked.

    “Yes,” Quarles answered.

    “Are ours doing it?” Crow asked, referring to municipalities.

    “Your cities are going to have to do it,” Surrette answered.

    “They haven’t done it in years,” District 5 Supervisor Frank “Bubba” Tillman answered.

    “They are going to have to do it or they are going to be just like I want to be and not do it all. That’s the way I want to do it,” Surrette continued.
    

Final Thoughts

    “I am telling you guys, this is your decision. I don’t like it either,” Crow told supervisors before action was taken in Monday’s meeting.

    “No district has any more voting power than another. No vote doesn’t have any more pull than another,” Crow continued.

    “This is Yalobusha County, it is not Desoto. But I am required to tell you what my thoughts are based on existing law,” Crow advised.

    “The law tells us what we need to do to stay in compliance,” District One Supervisor Tommy Vaughn said.    “It’s not a popular decision by any means,” Vaughn continued. “I have to be for doing it as much as I hate to see it done.”

    After a heated discussion about how redistricting would affect bridge funding in each beat, supervisors voted 4 – 1 in favor of employing Stennis to draw new lines. Surrette cast the lone dissenting vote.

    The matter is expected to be discussed again in the next meeting scheduled May 20 at Coffeeville.