Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Redistricting topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Staff presents reapportionment report; council and residents press county coordination and precinct fixes
Summary
At a June 8 public hearing staff summarized the reapportionment commission’s proposed seven-district map, explained corrections made after state comments on census-block splits and math errors, and told residents the county will notify affected property owners as part of the next steps; several residents urged the town to work with the county to fix precinct imbalances.
McCandless staff presented the report and recommendations of the 2026 reapportionment (redistricting) commission at a June 8 public hearing, outlining proposed changes to divide the town into seven councilmanic districts that respect federal census‑block boundaries and aim for equal population.
The staff liaison said the commission’s work identified several issues in an earlier submission — including census-block splits and arithmetic errors in district population totals — which the commission corrected so the map now conforms to state guidance. The presenter described the corrections with maps and said the next steps are further public hearings and formal submittal to county and state election authorities for review and finalization.
Council members and residents focused questions on notifications and precinct lines. Paul Hecman and other speakers urged the town to share suggested precinct fixes with county officials so polling‑place lines don’t create long wait times at some locations. “I would encourage folks to talk to their county representatives about this issue,” the staff liaison said, explaining the county is responsible for precinct boundaries and for notifying affected property owners.
Residents asked whether notices for 2024 and 2026 changes would be consolidated; staff replied the 2024 changes were denied by the state and thus were never effective, and that the county will notify property owners for any approved changes. The hearing closed after public questions and no council vote was taken at that session.
