Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Redistricting topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident urges review of election‑district boundaries; board agrees to study request
Summary
A New Brunswick resident asked the Middlesex County Board of Elections to examine disparities in election‑district populations under NJSA 19:4‑14; commissioners agreed to gather statute text and internal analysis for a future agenda item but did not commit to immediate action.
A New Brunswick Today editor asked the Middlesex County Board of Elections to review and, if necessary, redraw municipal election‑district boundaries that he said produce large disparities in voter counts between districts.
Charlie Craditel, identified in the meeting as an editor for New Brunswick Today and a resident of New Brunswick, cited NJSA 19:4‑14 and other statutes in a public comment, saying the statute appears to give the county board authority to "revise or readjust the election districts" if "serious inconveniences" have been caused or districts contain an "unreasonably large or small number of voters." "I read this to say this board has authority," Craditel said during his remarks.
Craditel pointed to examples in the board packet showing wide disparities in registered‑voter totals in some towns, including Old Bridge, where he said one district had more than 2,000 registered voters while another had roughly 334. He asked the board to put the matter on a future agenda so staff could verify the numbers, review applicable statutes and present options.
Commissioners responded that the board has previously performed redistricting work and that statutory limits — including ward lines and census timing — shape what changes are possible. Several commissioners noted work of this kind would be time‑consuming and that changes could only take effect on a timetable consistent with statutory deadlines and census constraints. One commissioner said action could not be taken immediately because deadlines have passed for the current cycle.
Board members agreed to gather the relevant statutes and staff analysis and discuss the matter at a future meeting; several commissioners suggested the April 15 meeting (the board's next scheduled meeting after the reorganization) as a time to review the materials, with no commitment to immediate redrawing or final decisions.
During the public comment period another resident, Bill Lawrence of Muscataway, asked about petition signature thresholds for legislative and county petitions; a staff member and commissioners answered that the signature requirement is a formula with high and low thresholds (the transcript records a range described as roughly 150 to 300, depending on turnout and formula). Staff said the board executes elections under state law but that petition signature policy is set by state statute and the legislature.
