My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Exhibit 8 (2)
PublicDocuments
>
County Clerk - Council
>
County Clerk
>
Redistricting Commission
>
2011 Redistricting Commission
>
FINAL Plan and Report
>
FINAL REPORT 2011 RDC
>
Exhibit 8 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/21/2012 8:32:36 AM
Creation date
3/21/2012 8:28:10 AM
Metadata
Document Relationships
Exhibit 8
(Original Version)
Path:
\County Clerk - Council\County Clerk\Redistricting Commission\2011 Redistricting Commission\FINAL Plan and Report\FINAL REPORT 2011 RDC
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
was largely guesswork, with 271 students (zip codes only) not even <br />assigned to specific census blocks; <br />c. many census blocks weirdly configured (don't follow subdivision <br />boundaries, put half of one subdivision in same block as another <br />community, strange shapes, blocks in the middle of other blocks, <br />etc.) Under Ordinance 11 -29 they meet the definition o€'bizaare <br />council district shape'. Some examples in Puna alone: <br />15001021 - 0131214: strange shape with multiple 'appendages. <br />15001021 - 1061000/1001: one block embedded inside another. <br />15001021 - 1061003: includes a community inside an overly <br />large unpopulated block. <br />15001021 - 1064055: block embedded inside another block. <br />1:5001021 - 1063006: part of Haw. Beaches subdivision attached <br />to a huge unpopulated block. <br />15001021 - 1063048: same as above. <br />15001021 - 0.133045: this block surrounds 12 smaller blocks, <br />embedding them. <br />Recommendations: County administration should draft a letter to the U.S. <br />Census Bureau pointing out these issues, indicating the problems they <br />created in attempting to do a legal redistricting plan, and request that they <br />review and revise these problems, especially the census blocks, prior to the <br />next census. <br />2. late start <br />a. The commissioners were not approved until March 31. <br />b. The software was not available until end July. <br />Recommendations: Because of the above two factors, the commission was <br />cramped for time in which to do their work, and had to double up on <br />meetings. They also had to schedule 4 public hearings in each of the <br />council districts around the island within the month of October, and two <br />meetings plus two hearings in November. This put a lot of strain on the <br />volunteers and staff and may have affected the quality of the result. The <br />county clerk should alert the county council and the administration well <br />ahead of time to seek nominees to serve on the commission, and keeco <br />remindine them as needed. The County Council should awrove an <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.