Gerrymandering Director Districts

Claim: D49 suddenly, secretly, and arbitrarily changed director districts to target and disqualify an oppositional board member.

 

D49 Answers: The action to rebalance director districts was discussed at multiple board meetings for over a year. It was neither sudden, nor secretive because multiple administrators and board members presented the process in multiple public meetings and documents. Neither was the decision in any way arbitrary or targeted at an individual. It honored the express preference of the voters of District 49 and it followed the statutory guidelines established by Colorado’s legislature. In fact, the final redistricting proposal affected two board members, not one.

 

Facts:

Fact 1: The redistricting was not arbitrary or optional. District voters approved the model of representation by district to avoid having all board members from one part of the district, leaving other areas without representation.

Fact 2: Redistricting is highly regulated by Colorado statute.

Fact 3: The phenomenon that redistricting might disqualify a sitting board member from running again is not new this year. It has happened before in D49.

Fact 4: Although the claim is that redistricting targeted only Ivy Liu, it actually disqualified both Ivy Liu and Rick Van Wieren, who have been on opposite sides of many board votes, because they both live in the new district that is already represented by Jamilynn D'Avola.

Fact 5: The elected Clerk and Recorder of El Paso County, Steve Schleiker, reviewed and approved the redistricting plan in District 49.

 

Evidence:

• Below are board meetings where Director Districts were discussed. 

• Colorado State Statute:
  • The number, composition, and configuration of director districts are delineated in statute:
  • C.R.S. § 22-31-109: Specifications for Director Districts
  • C.R.S. § 22-31-110: Changes in Director Districts

 

Conclusion:

Objective facts and evidence completely refute the accusation that D49 engaged in deceptive or biased gerrymandering to target a single board member. Instead, facts and evidence prove that D49 acted in complete alignment with the will of the voters, the statutory guidelines, and the assessment of our county clerk and recorder.