|
public hearings that we've had, the nine public hearings that we've had previously,
<br /> unfortunately it didn't amount to too much feedback to the Commission. Not enough in
<br /> my personal opinion. It would be worthwhile to see those hearings following the
<br /> proposed draft plan and having it kind of reversed and switching those two around. I
<br /> mean, we have the technology now where people—and it's up to the purview of the
<br /> Chair, of course, and the Commission, to allow testimony. And I'm grateful for our Chair
<br /> to allow for these opportunities of testimony throughout our hearings and our meetings,
<br /> in particular. That may not have been the case in the past. I think different boards and
<br /> commissions handle them differently. So, we have that flexibility with the technology we
<br /> have here, that we're using today, we're able to communicate across the island and have
<br /> people call in and provide testimony given their condition, the location, and so forth. So
<br /> that there is that possibility, but it'd be interesting to see those particular nine public
<br /> hearings following the draft plan, and really connect with those communities after the
<br /> work has really made some progress, and we've submitted a draft plan. Thank you.
<br /> KOSSOW: Thank you, Mr. Hustace. Mr. Lopez.
<br /> LOPEZ: I was likewise impressed, I guess. And Jim didn't use that language but
<br /> impressed with the statement Common CauseI think it was Common Cause that
<br /> suggested that we have a plan before we go to public hearing. That struck me as a great
<br /> idea, but how do we get there? As Mr. Hustace pointed out, we were sorely impacted by
<br /> the lateness of the census data. We didn't start till like September, I believe. And we did
<br /> have training in early on, but by the time you get the training, you get the census data,
<br /> and able to work on something, for me, it goes out the door. So, it was a relearning effort.
<br /> I think what would aid this entire process is some education to the Commission, and to
<br /> the public, as we start to get into these things. I think the public is really left out in
<br /> understanding how we have to deal with census blocks. How you have to deal with
<br /> throughways, pathways, roadways. How we have to deal with balancing the numbers.
<br /> And yet, the thought that I picked up over the testimony was that it's—and maybe some
<br /> of the commissioners as well—you know, we need two hundred(200)people over here.
<br /> Well,just take two hundred(200) from here, or a hundred from here and a hundred from
<br /> there and move them over there. We can't do that. There's no way. And I don't think the
<br /> public really understands what a census block is. I just went through a discussion with
<br /> somebody asking me this question, why certain things happen. And one of the big
<br /> awareness was that you can't just move the boundaries where you want to or move
<br /> people where you want to. You'd have to take a contiguous block. So, as we get down
<br /> into this, and maybe I can bring it up here, but I think in part of this process, maybe
<br /> sometime within the next ten years, there can be a primer developed. Just a short booklet
<br /> about what, how, what are our constraints. What are the rules under which we are bound
<br /> to make this draft plan, and again, going into things like census blocks, and contiguous
<br /> nature, and pointing out, maybe, some of these. The pinch point was a real big one for
<br /> me. That was a real hassle. I think I can move eighteen hundred people, but then when
<br /> you see where the pinch point is, it's spread across things like Saddle Road. It's just,
<br /> can't do it, right? So, there's a whole lot of—excuse the term I'll usea whole lot of
<br /> ignorance on my part and in the public domain as to what our constraints are. And so,
<br /> when we get testimony, even one came in about reapportionment, which is a non-issue
<br /> 13
<br />
|