Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioner Sherrill's 3-and-2 plan fails after hours of debate over fairness and process
Summary
A proposal to change Macon County's commissioner structure to three district seats plus two at-large seats failed 1—4 after an extended public and staff discussion about fairness, mapping constraints and the need for broader public input.
Commissioner Sherrill moved on March 10 to ask the General Assembly to change Macon County's election structure to three distinct districts with two at-large seats, saying the current mix gives District 2 a perpetual advantage. "That's where it's unfair," Sherrill said during the board's lengthy debate, arguing the change would let residents across the county seek office on the same two-year cycle.
The discussion, which ran for more than an hour, included a staff presentation laying out four statutory options for changing the county's voting structure: five electoral districts; five at-large seats; a hybrid of district residency with countywide voting; or the three-district/two at-large model Sherrill proposed. Staff warned that any change requires careful line-drawing to meet population-equality principles and that some options must be approved by referendum or a local act under state law.
Commissioners raised several concerns. Some said the public should have more time and input before the board asks the legislature to act; others said the current system is imperfect but that the 3-and-2 plan could solve stark inequities in representation. One commissioner urged caution, saying the board should seek public hearings and Planning Board review before sending a local act to Raleigh.
Sherrill's motion to adopt the 3-and-2 resolution and send it to the General Assembly was seconded and put to a roll-call-style voice vote; it failed 1—4. Board members who opposed the measure cited timing, the potential for unintended consequences when precincts are redrawn, and the view that the community needs more education and input about the options.
Next steps remain procedural: if the board wants to pursue a structural change in the future, staff said the board would need to finalize a preferred option, draw districts consistent with the census and statutory guidance, and decide whether to pursue a local act or a referendum. Several commissioners said they would prefer forming a community committee and holding public hearings to gather input before making another formal request to the legislature.
