Clark County Council revisits redistricting map

Posted

Work to include a new Clark County Council district restarted last week as councilors voiced their desire to come up with a new map that would avoid moving them out of the districts they currently represent.

During a council time meeting on March 30, the Clark County Council discussed the next steps to approve a new map of their representative districts. During the November election, Clark County voters approved an amendment to the county’s home rule charter which changed the number of districts from four to five. It also made the formerly at-large council chair position an appointed position by the members of the council. 

Following voter approval, the county formed a redistricting commission that was tasked with coming up with a new five-district map. The commission spent months designing a map, and at one point disbanded before they were reconstituted at the behest of the county council. The commission once again deadlocked on a decision regarding the map in February, putting the decision of a map back into the council’s hands.

Now the county council has resumed discussions on what will ultimately be approved. Chief among concerns from the council this time around is keeping the current councilors in the districts they were elected to represent.

Previous maps that were considered would have put Clark County Council Chair Karen Bowerman and councilor Gary Medvigy in District 4, though Bowerman represents District 3. District 2 councilor Julie Olson would have also potentially moved into the new District 5 in some of the maps considered.

“It’s really clear and it should be obvious to each of us … no voter voted to deliberately change the district of any councilor,” Medvigy said. “The voters’ will was to break this up into any district.”

Christine Cook, the legal counsel for the county council, said the map that is technically in effect now is the one that was approved by voters. Alongside the issue of councilors switching districts, Medvigy said he wasn’t in favor of that map based on population issues.

“That map is trouble and doesn’t comply with state law. We need to comply with every aspect of state law,” Medvigy said.

Though Olson said she couldn’t tell if a potential move into the currently vacant District 5 would help or hinder her chances at re-election, she was in favor of keeping councilors in their current districts. Some of the maps under consideration would have moved then-District 5 councilor Eileen Quiring O’Brien into Medvigy’s district before she left the council in March.



“It would be nice if council districts were consistent … that there wasn’t three councilors in one district,” Olson said.

Paul Newman, a Clark County Geographic Information Systems analyst who designed some of the alternative maps, said he did not take the current councilors’ residences into account when he drafted the maps. Cook noted keeping councilors in their same district isn’t part of the  criteria laid out in state law.

“When you adopt your plan, make certain you are referring to the criteria rather than something that isn’t a criterion,” Cook said.

The council agreed to move forward using one of the alternative maps considered by the commission as a basis for a draft map. The map fit the state criteria the best, which required compactness and as close to equal population as possible in each district, among other requirements.

The council will meet next week to officially move forward with a draft based on their direction. 

A public hearing on the draft map is set for April 13. The council will formally vote to adopt a map at least seven days after the hearing.