Tag Archives: Vermont Apportionment Board

Son Of Hey, Let’s Have Some Fun With the Chittenden Senate District!

After I wrote my post about the Chittenden Senate district, I found out that Sen. Kesha Ram has decamped to the suburbs. Specifically, the tony confines of Shelburne. Her Legislative bio still says “Burlington,” but oh well.

This dramatically changes the calculus for reapportionment, or at least my version of it. Rather than try to amend the original post, I decided to start afresh here.

For those just joining us, Vermont is preparing the once-a-decade task of redrawing legislative districts to reflect population changes. The Legislative Apportionment Board will draw up a proposal in time for the House and Senate to approve it or make changes during the 2022 session.

Thanks to a 2019 law, districts cannot include more than three House or Senate seats. This will mean dismembering the six-seat Chittenden district, which is a good thing. Multi-member districts are basically incumbent-protection schemes.

Because Chittenden County is growing while many other areas are shrinking, the district will get at least one more seat and possibly two. (By sheer population, it warrants 7 1/2.)

Adding a Chittenden seat means taking one away somewhere else, so let’s assume the new district will have seven seats, not eight. That means shifting one sizeable community out of the district. Colchester is currently in the Grand Isle district, and it’s likely to stay there in order to protect eternal incumbent Dick Mazza.

But for purposes of this thought experiment, I’m going to focus entirely on Chittenden County and try to describe districts that would be as even as possible population-wise, and keep communities intact whenever possible. On my map, no district would have more than two seats — and the lines could easily be drawn so that each district would have a single senator.

Continue reading

In Which I Answer the Apportionment Board’s Questions

Oldie but a goodie.

In Which I Answer the Apportionment Board’s Questions

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is the_gerry-mander_edit-wr.jpg
Oldie but a goodie.

Vermont’s Apportionment Board is preparing for the once-a-decade redrawing of legislative districts. The process has been delayed by months due to the Trump administration causing the first delay in American history for the Census, but the board is doing what it can before it can get its hands on the numbers.

That includes seeking public input on apportionment issues. The board recently posted a piece on VTDigger asking people to answer a few basic questions. So, here are my answers.

What is more important to you: making sure the populations in each district are as close to equal as possible, or allowing larger (within constitutional guidelines) differences in populations to maintain district lines closer to the status quo?

As close to equal as possible. You may already be aware of my general feeling about “the status quo.” The question, I infer, is mainly about district lines following town/city boundaries whenever possible. But that’s already more a polite fiction than an actual reality. It’s sort of a faint yearning for the days when each community sent a single Representative to Montpelier. And those were not the Good Old Days.

Continue reading