l~'~-.
1
L
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
I8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
KERR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COURT
Special Session
Monday, July 23, 2001
4:00 p.m.
Commissioners' Courtroom
Kerr County Courthouse
Kerrville, Texas
PUBLIC HEARING - REDISTRICTING PROPOSALS
i
c
f
PRESENT: FREDERICK L. HENNEKE, Kerr County Judge
H.A. "BUSTER" BALDWIN, Commissioner Pct. 1
WILLIAM "BILL" WILLIAMS, Commissioner Pct. 2
JONATHAN LETZ, Commissioner Pct. 3
LARRY GRIFFIN, Commissioner Pct. 9
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I N D E X
July 23, 2001
2.13 PUBLIC HEARING - proposed redistricting plans
for Commissioners' precincts in Kerr County
2.19 Adoption of redistricting plan for Commissioners'
precincts in Kerr County and authorization of
submission of plan and supporting information to
U.S. Department of Justice for Voting Rights Act
preclearance _y //~~~
--- Adjourned U'
PAGE
3
57
60
3
1
2
i
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
On Monday, July 23, 2001, at 9 o'clock p.m., a special
meeting of the Kerr County Commissioners Court was held in
the Commissioners' Courtroom, Kerr County Courthouse,
Kerrville, Texas, and the following proceedings were had in
open court:
P R O C E E D I N G S
JUDGE HENNEKE: Good afternoon, ladies and
gentlemen. We'll call to order this public hearing on the
issue of redistricting for the Kerr County Commissioners
precincts based on the 2000 census.
(The regular Commissioners Court meeting was
closed at 9:00 p.m., and a public hearing
was held in open court, as follows:)
P U B L I C H E A R I N G
JUDGE HENNEKE: I want to thank all of you
for coming up. I'm just overwhelmed by the interest and the
support. It's an important issue, and I want to thank each
and every one of you for coming out to express your opinions
on this issue. Due to the crowd, we're going to adjourn
tYiis public hearing down to the County Court at Law
courtroom, which is in this direction to my right, to your
left, which has a better venue for an audience of this size,
better site lines, as well as more -- more seats and more
comfortable seats. So, if y'all will just orderly rise and
move down the hall, we'll start up there as quickly as
possible.
4

9
S
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1J
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
(Relocated to County Court at Law courtroom.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you all again for your
cooperation and skill in relocating. You're getting to be
good at this; it's the second time we've had to relocate at
a public hearing in less than a month. We're thrilled by
the participation. Just a word of explanation as to how
we're going to proceed this afternoon. We have two maps for
consideration, one of which has been the subject of a
workshop, and the other of which was presented after the
workshop. The map which is on my right, your left, was
prepared by our legal consultants, the firm of Bickerstaff
Heath out of Austin. The map on my left, on your right, was
prepared by the William Velasquez Institute out of San
Antonio and submitted by Mrs. Sylvia Arredondo as a
citizen's map for consideration, and we want to thank her in
her efforts for bringing this together. What I'm going to
do today --
AUDIENCE: Viola.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Viola. I'm sorry, ma'am.
What I'm going to do this afternoon first is to allow
Ms. Arredondo to make any explanation of her map that she
would like to make, and also ask then Mrs. Reddington to
briefly describe her map. And then, as part of those
explanations, I'll -- we'll allow questions as to the
5
9
s
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
1J
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~.
25
specific maps, and then when we're through with the
questions as to the specific maps, we'll ask Ms. Reddington
if she has any comments regarding the ability of the maps to
satisfy the criteria that were adopted by the Court back in
April, and after that, then we'll ask for any public
comments as to which of the maps is believed to be best
serving the interests of all of the citizens of Kerr County.
Because this is a public hearing and because
we're making a transcription of this hearing, we'll ask you
to stand and speak loudly and give your name when asking a
question or when coming forward to make public comment for
the record. And please excuse me if -- if you forget and I
feel the need to remind you for your name, because it is
extremely important that we have an accurate record of who
made what comments in this very important process. I think
there's no more fundamental responsibility of government
Chan to insure that each individual has the right to have
their voice heard and have their voice heard equally in
heir government. County government is the closest form of
government to the people; in my opinion, the one that's most
responsive to the needs of the people, and we take this
responsibility very, very	seriously.	It's mandated	not only
by Che Texas Constitution,	but by the	United States	
Constitution, and has been done every ten years ever since
1790, and done successfully. And we are dedicated, here on
G
the Commissioners Court, to making sure that the process
works and that the final result is something that will serve
Kerr County and all of its citizens well for the next ten
v I years.
5
t
E
c
1C
11
12
~., 13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
With that brief introduction, I'd like to ask
Ms. Arredondo if she would like to come forward and make any
comments regarding the map that was submitted on her
behalf -- by her on behalf of the citizens of Kerr County.
Ms. Arredondo?
MS. ARREDONDO: Where would you like me to
stand, Judge?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Well, you can come down and
stand next to your -- your submittal, or you can stand --
MS. ARREDONDO: I'll stand at the table.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Whatever works best for you.
MS. ARREDONDO: Yes. Good afternoon, Judge
and Commissioners. My name is Viola Arredondo. I reside at
1201 North Street in Kerrville, and I would like to express
my gratitude for this opportunity to speak on this very
important issue of redistricting. As we all know,
redistricting occurs only once every 10 years. And, because
of the growth in Kerr County, we are given an opportunity to
make o}ianges that will benefit all of the citizens of Kerr
County. I bring your attention to -- to the redistricting
plan I submitted, to the right, with the assistance of the

E
E
c
10
11
12
.~ 13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
•--
25
William C. Velasquez Institute, which is a nonpartisan
organization and has a history and experience in assisting
communities in the redistricting.
It is important to note that the districts,
as they appear on the plan, were misnumbered. To avoid the
confusion with the information and data submitted to this
plan, I will refer to each of the districts as they appear
on the plan. There is a striking difference in the plan
LYiat I submitted and the plan submitted by the Bickerstaff
and Associates. Let me address the most obvious, District
3. We acknowledge a new district is being proposed, with
its physical boundaries totally within the confines of the
city of xerrville; however, after research, not only have
there been other county districts to be drawn within the
city limits of certain municipalities, but there are
currently -- but currently there are being proposed in the
counties of Tom Green, Guadalupe, Travis, and Potter. This
not only benefits the County, but it establishes a direct
relationship between the County Commissioners and the City
officials.
The plan I submitted follows traditional
redistricting principles, insuring that districts are
compact and contiguous. Compactness is important because
political representation in our system is based on the
belief that geographical communities share a common
R

interest. Another reason is the perception that elected
officials can better serve their constituents if they are
within a more limited geographical area, rather than an area
9
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
extending over a great distance. It respects the political
subdivision. A district should avoid splitting counties,
cities, precincts, and other similar governmental or voting
units, and placing different portions of such units in
different districts. District 3, as proposed, meets this
criteria. In communities of interest -- in preserving
communities of interest, district lines should be careful
not Lo divide population or communities that have common or
shared interests. What constitutes shared interests may be
such things as income levels, educational backgrounds,
housing patterns and living conditions, cultural and
language backgrounds, employment and economic patterns, and
the issues raised with the representatives on such issues as
crime and education.
For the first time in Kerr County's history,
we have established an influence district. An influence
district is where a minority group constitutes a less-than-
controlling voting group in a district, but nevertheless
constitutes such a sizable minority in the district so that
they can influence the outcome of the election. Sizable is
determined to be in the high 30's to 50's. District 3 meets
this definition. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 protects
,~
E
1C
11
12
13
14
IS
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
L voters by precluding district lines drawn in a way that
' results in minority voters having less of a chance to elect
3 the candidate or candidates of their choice. Districts 1,
2, and 4, for the most part, will remain intact, with
increases in size and overall geographic areas of
representation. Let me close by saying thank you for your
lime and your attention.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. Is there anyone
in the audience who would have any specific questions of
Ms. Arredondo about the map she's presented? Anyone have
any specific questions? Yes?
MS. DAMS: I do.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Stand up and identify
yourself, please.
MS. DAMS: Marie Davis. On District 3,
Viola, do you have any county roads that are in that
specific area?
MS. ARREDONDO: This is all within the city
limits, ma'am.
MS. DAMS: Okay. So, you wouldn't
actually -- a Commissioner wouldn't have a Commissioner's
precinct there, then, would you?
MS. ARREDONDO: Yes, ma'am. It's drawn for
the Commissioners -- County Commissioners' precinct, yes,
ma'am.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
2S
10
MS. DAMS: But if you have that -- if you
have only city streets and you -- and you do not have county
roads -- 'cause it's my understanding that a Commissioner is
basically -- their duties are county roads and --
MS. ARREDONDO: That is part of their -- of
their duties, ma'am. I have a book that has 75 pages of the
Commissioners' duties and responsibilities, and some do fall
within the municipalities of -- within the city limits.
MS. DAMS: Sure. Some of their duties --
you're right, but I just wanted to bring up the question of
county roads, because it seems like that District 3 you've
drawn just for the city, and without any county roads in it
at all. But, okay, that's all I have.
JDDGE HENNEKE: Anyone else have any
questions of Ms. Arredondo regarding her specific proposal?
Yes, sir?
MR. EVANS: I'm Maury Evans, and I was
wondering if you could point out on your map where the
precincts are. At least give us sort of a picture of what
you're doing.
MS. ARREDONDO: Okay. The Precinct 3 that I
am referring to is this right here.
MR. EVANS: And that's basically the city of
Kerrville?
MS. ARREDONDO: Yes, sir.
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
11
JUDGE HENNEKE: Could you possibly tell us
the boundary streets of that precinct?
MS. ARREDONDO: Okay. I have Pershing
Avenue. I have Guadalupe Street, Francisco Lemos. It goes
on to Benson Drive, Deer Valley Loop. It hits Loop 534, it
goes all the way around Loop 534 till it gets down to
Cypress Creek Road. Cypress Creek Road down to Linda Joy
Drive, Ford Street, Carol Ann Drive, Lytle, Singing Wind
Drive, goes all the way down to Memorial Boulevard to
Highway 27. And, this is Highway 27.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. Are there any other
questions? Yes, sir?
MR. MURPHY: Jim Murphy. Since your lines
have been changed where the Commissioner in District 2 no
longer lives in that district, and District 3 as well, what
are your plans for those two individuals?
MS. ARREDONDO: Sir, I believe that our
concern for the employment of our Commissioners should not
be our priority. Our concern should be the community as a
whole, and the community as a whole is our residents that
live in this area that stand to benefit from having an
elected official that lives and resides in their precinct.
It will be another 10 years before we have this opportunity
again.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Yes, sir?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
ly
20
21
22
23
24
25
12
MR. BUROW: Clarence Burow. I'm concerned
about the population, where we're trying to equalize them.
When I drive into town, it says 17,000-something people, and
all the others are going to get cut down well below 9,000,
accordingly.
MS. ARREDONDO: Sir, this is one of the
things that we do when we do the districting. Everything
has to be equalized. Our deviation is less than 5 percent.
We are allowed 10 percent, I believe, by law.
MR. BUROW: So, you're -- you were within --
MS. ARREDONDO: Our deviation is far less
than even 5 percent in the -- in the deviations of
population.
MR. BUROW: I think that would be -- you
know, the other plan that they've broken down as to who
lives -- how many people live in each district, and I'm
still saying when I drive into Kerrville, the sign says,
"Population 17,000," and that's way above what the -- what
the other precincts would have. Am I wrong?
MS. ARREDONDO: I'm not sure I understand.
You're talking about population. You're talking about
voting population?
MR. BUROW: I'm talking about what it says,
if that's -- you're following the city limit sign, assuming
that city limit sign says 17,000 population.
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
13
(Discussion off the record.)
MS. ARREDONDO: Total population of District
3 is 1,997 (sic).
MR. BUROW: 10,497?
MR. ARREDONDO: 10,497.
MS. ARREDONDO: Ten thousand.
MR. ARREDONDO: That does not include all the
city.
MR. BUROW: Not all the city?
MR. ARREDONDO: There are not -- the physical
boundaries fall within the city limits, but the total
population of District 3 --
JUDGE HENNEKE: Excuse me, sir. Would you
identify yourself?
MAN: My name is Joseph Arredondo, and I
assisted Viola in preparing the -- the data and information,
the research and so forth. But, the district -- that
particular district only has 10,497. Our largest proposed
district is, I believe, 11,315, which is a deviation of less
than 4 percent.
MR. BUROW: Thank you.
MS. ARREDONDO: Which is District 9.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Yes, Dawn?
JUDGE WRIGHT: I'm Judge Dawn Wright. I'm
the J.P. in Precinct 2, and my concern is for the justice
14
T
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
court in Precinct 3. That's falling entirely within the
jurisdiction of municipal court. Would that court be
eliminated?
MS. ARREDONDO: No, ma'am, I -- I don't think
I understand the question. I don't --
JUDGE WRIGHT: Inside the city limits,
municipal court has jurisdiction.
MS. ARREDONDO: Yes, ma'am.
JUDGE WRIGHT: Justice court handles cases
outside of the city limits. By putting all of this inside
the city limits, would that eliminate the J.P. court in
Precinct 3?
MS. ARREDONDO: Ma'am, I would have to look
into that, but I can say that this has been done at other --
in other areas within -- within the state of Texas, and it
is currently being proposed in four other communities --
counties, rather, the counties that I mentioned of Travis,
Potter, Guadalupe, and Tom Green. So, I'm sure that --
JUDGE WRIGHT: You don't know if they're
eliminated?
MS. ARREDONDO: -- that is not a problem.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions regarding
Ms. Arredondo's proposal?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Judge?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Yes, go ahead, Commissioner.
15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What is the minority
population in Precinct 3 that you've planned?
MS. ARREDONDO: Minority -- by "minority,"
are you speaking Hispanic? Black?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Total minority.
MS. ARREDONDO: In 3?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Correct.
MS. ARREDONDO: Black population is
5.2 percent. Hispanic population is 37 -- 37.1 percent.
Other is 2.0.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Do you have any comments
about the fairly sizable primarily Hispanic population that
are going to live in -- I guess it would be Precinct 4 on
your map, the way you have it drawn. I mean, there are --
right now, that Hispanic population is included in Precinct
3, which is the minority precinct currently, and they're
being basically taken out of the minority.
MS. ARREDONDO: Sir, in order to conform with
the compactness and being contiguous, there is no -- no way
that we can include them in that part.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: So -- but, in the current
plan, I believe in our plan up here, they are included in --
that portion of the Hispanic population is included. So --
MS. ARREDONDO: Yes, sir. And, as you can
tell by the map, it doesn't look very compact.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
IS
16
1l
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
16
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Yes, Commissioner Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Ms. Arredondo, it
would appear from your map that your proposed map has
displaced the Precinct 2 Justice of the Peace, who resides
in the current Precinct 2, and I'm not certain whether or
not you have displaced other J.P.'s or other constables, but
I would appreciate you addressing that point, please.
MS. ARREDONDO: Okay, sir. My particular map
is a proposal. There is nothing that says we have to adhere
only to this proposal. It's something that I would like to
negotiate and possibly incorporate into what is currently
being proposed by -- by the -- the rest of -- or by the
Commissioners. Whatever needs to be changed, we are more
than willing to -- to see and -- and to negotiate to some
kind of -- of an agreeable term. But, as to where -- where
they live, their residence, I have no idea. The only
addresses that I did have were the County Commissioners'
addresses when I started with the plan.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I have a --
JUDGE HENNEKE: Go ahead, Commissioner
Griffin.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: What county -- what,
if any, county services would you see falling -- would there
be any county services in Precinct 3, as you have it mapped,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
17
that would be provided by Kerr County? For example, Roads
and Bridges have been mentioned. There's the law
enforcement issues, there are several other areas of county
services, and I'm just wondering, is -- did you envision
that that all gets taken over by -- since Precinct 3 has no
county population in it, unincorporated, that those services
would no longer be available in what would then be called
Precinct 3?
MS. ARREDONDO: No, sir, I do not envision
that that would -- that would go away.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: But there would just
be a general -- renewal?
MS. ARREDONDO: Yes, sir. Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Okay.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Right here in the jury box?
MR. DONNELL: I'm Charlie Donnell, and I'm
not representing anybody in particular, but I'll display my
ignorance here, and perhaps you could help me out. Is a
County official required to live within his district?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Yes. If you're elected by a
precinct, you must live within the precinct for which you
stand election.
MR. DONNELL: And the same for the -- the
districts, too?
JUDGE HENNEKE: Yes. Back in the back?

s~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
18
MS. DAVIS: The J.P.'s and constables.
MR. MACDONALD: My name is Granger MacDonald.
I was curious. You mentioned Potter, Tom Green, and
Guadalupe Counties. Have you compared them for any kind of
homogeneous situation to Kerr County?
MS. ARREDONDO: No, I have not.
MR. MACDONALD: I'm intimately familiar with
Tom Green County. There's 112,000 people in Tom Green
County, and 98,000 of them live in the town of San Angelo,
which is significantly different than what we have here in
Kerr County. Amarillo is the county seat of Potter County,
and it's about the same ratio. Seguin is the county seat of
Guadalupe County, and while it's a smaller percentage than
Tom Green County or Potter County, they're not relative to
the size that we have here in Kerr County, where Kerr County
actually has more citizens in the city of Kerrville.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Yes?
MR. ESTE: Wayne Este from Hunt. Precinct 4
here; Precinct 1 there. It says up there, "Citizen Plan,"
and then you keep referring to "we." Would you identify
"citizen" and "we"? Who are "we"? So that we know who
we're talking about.
MS. ARREDONDO: I'm a citizen here and I
reside here in Kerr County, and possibly when I said "we,"
I -- I was hoping, and I do -- I feel I do have the support
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1%
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
19
of some of the people in the audience, so on their behalf, I
was saying "we."
MR. ESTE: What you're saying -- to answer my
question, you're saying you are the citizen presenting this
plan, and that "we" encompasses only you? Is that --
MS. ARREDONDO: No, sir, that encompasses
other people, other individuals that I have spoken to.
MR. ESTE: Would you identify that group,
please?
MS. ARREDONDO: Sir, there is just a vast
different scope of people. I have spoken to some of the
black, African American citizens. I have spoken to some
Hispanic, and as well as some of the Anglo citizens that
live in Kerr County.
MR. ESTE: But no identified group? Just --
MS. ARREDONDO: No, sir, there is no group.
MR. ESTE: Okay.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Anyone else have any
questions for Ms. Arredondo?
(No response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay, thank you. Ms.
Reddington, do you want to give us an explanation as to the
Bickerstaff proposal over here?
MS. REDDINGTON: Yes, Your Honor. Thank you.
Ladies and gentlemen, members of the Commissioners Court,
20
1
~-. 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
.-~.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
it's a pleasure to be back again with you, and I see some
familiar faces, but I think we have a few more people than
we had the last couple of times I was down. If you don't
of the general redistricting principles? And that will
help, I think, to explain the plan that was developed to
present to Kerr County today. There are several basic
principles that govern redistricting.
The first one, and the most compelling one is
the one-person, one-vote requirement of the United States
Constitution. This provision requires that when we draw
districts for representatives, people who serve in a
representative capacity, after the census numbers come out
every ten years, those districts should be balanced and be
relatively equal in population. When you're drawing
constitutional or congressional districts, they are almost
exactly even. We have a little bit of leeway when we're
drawing local government districts, such as single-member
school board districts, Commissioners Court districts, City
Council, or ward districts. The courts have said that they
need to be within about 10 percent from the biggest to the
smallest in deviation from the ideal precinct size, so we
try very hard to draw lines that will bring the populations
into balance.
21
1
.-~ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
,-. 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
.-.
25
In addition, the Voting Rights Act covers the
state of Texas and covers any change in election procedures,
election requirements, and the Voting Rights Act protects
minorities, and we may not draw lines that have the purpose
of other principles that are also important in
redistricting. These are considered, or have come to be
called the traditional redistricting criteria, or
traditional redistricting principles. And, those of you who
were part of the Citizens' Advisory Committee or who were
here at the last couple of meetings heard the Court discuss
the types of criteria, the criteria that they would want to
adopt and try to follow as we developed a new districting
plan for Kerr County. I will just go over briefly what some
of those criteria were, because the courts have said they
have found over the years that these are important
considerations in addition to the one person/one vote and
Voting Rights Act considerations.
First of a11, one redistricting criteria
that's very important is to follow easily identifiable and
often geographic boundaries; perhaps a river, a creek, a
stream, a road, a highway, something that people can
recognize as being a good boundary for a district, so
22

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
they'll know where they live. "Well, I live on this side of
Highway 7, and I live north of Behrens Creek" or something,
so they'll know where they reside and they can identify the
boundaries of their district. Also, the courts have agreed
over the years that communities of interest should be kept
together. What's a community of interest? Well, it can be
a neighborhood. It can be a subdivision. It can be an
ethnic group. It can be a city. It can be a group of
people who are of similar socioeconomic classification,
people with, maybe, religious preferences. There are many
different kinds of communities of interest. They develop
over time, and they can be respected and should be respected
as these lines are being drawn.
To the extent possible, Commissioners
precincts should be composed of whole voting precincts. The
elections administrators have a very difficult time when we
change boundaries of election precincts, and voters have a
difficult time because they are suddenly, perhaps, voting in
a new location and they have to relearn where they're to
vote, who the candidates are, who would be representing
them, and it causes a lot of confusion. If any of you have
ever had your polling place changed, had your voting
district redrawn, you will -- you understand why it is
important, whenever possible, to use the voting districts
that we currently have.
23
1
.-~ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
.-. 13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
.~-.
25
In addition, we try to base our line drawing
on the existing precincts and districts as they are now,
because people have come to develop constituent/
representative relationships with their Commissioners, with
their Justices of the Peace, their constables. They know
help in resolving them. So we try to preserve, where we
can, the constituent/representative relationship. This is
accepted by the courts as a standard redistricting
principle.
I mentioned that the districts should not
exceed 10 percent in deviation, and I did not mention, but
Ms. Arredondo mentioned, and this is very correct, districts
should be compact and they should be contiguous. What does
"compact" mean? Well, it can mean that it's very small in
size, or what you could get within a circle. But, it can
also be compact if there are adequate -- there's a
functional compactness dimension to all of this. If a road
goes through a district and everyone can use that road, the
district may be long, may be narrow, but it is functionally
compact because it is accessible. The various parts of the
district are accessible. So, we -- compactness is
important, and contiguity is important. Believe it or not,
there are a few counties in the state where the districts --
24
1
~. 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~.
25
a Commissioner's district might be broken into two parts.
appropriate, and we certainly don't want that to happen in
this county, so we want the districts to be contiguous.
And then, as I said, the plan should be very
Well, it means drawing districts that are substantially
smaller -- that have substantially smaller minority
populations than in the past. Sometimes there is an attempt
made, in violation, really, of the Voting Rights Act, to
split minorities and to put -- when you could draw a strong
minority district with over 50 percent minorities, there has
been historically in places an attempt to divide those
minorities, split them up, put them into two precincts and
keep them from electing someone to represent them who would
be of that particular minority. That's called fracturing or
splitting of minorities. The Voting Rights Act says that
you cannot do that.
And, in addition, you cannot pack minorities.
Sometimes minorities would have enough to have a strong
influence or even elect a minority representative of their
choice in two different districts, but by drawing lines in a
certain way, you pack all the minorities together into one
district. You have confined them to electing only one
25
1
,-„ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
^ 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~.
25
representative. So, this is also considered something that
runs afoul of the Voting Rights Act. So, these are the
and the Court actually adopted a set of criteria based on
these traditional redistricting concepts that they wanted to
use to guide them as they develop plans.
Now, in working with the Commissioners, in
meeting with the advisory committee, our firm has worked on
computers -- nowadays, all of this is done by computer, and
we've worked to develop a plan that tries to follow these
various redistricting criteria, and we have come up with --
after several different iterations, Judge, and several
different times of trying this, we've come up with what
we're calling Kerr County Illustrative Plan 2. And, those
of you who were here at the last meeting remember that there
were some concerns about certain lines, and so we have
adjusted -- gone back to the drawing board, if you will, and
adjusted this, and we've tried to keep a number of these --
or all of these criteria in mind as we drew these lines. We
wanted to avoid disruption of Commissioner/constituent
relationships. We wanted to try to use existing precinct
lines where we could, voting district lines where we could,
to minimize the disruption that the redistricting will
cause.
Kerr County had grown considerably, and after
z6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
.-,
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
.~-~
25
the census of 2000 data was released, we analyzed that data
and we found that the total maximum deviation from the
largest to the smallest precinct, the total deviation from
the ideal precinct size in Kerr County was 17.43 percent.
well, that was well above the 10 percent that is really
acceptable, and so we -- we then determined that the ideal
precinct size should be 10,913. That's easy to determine,
because you simply divide the population of the county by
four. Now, when we did the assessment and we analyzed the
demographics, where people live in Kerr County, we found
that you have one precinct that is predominantly Hispanic.
And, if you take the most recent census data and you
superimpose it on the current Commissioner precinct lines,
you find that one precinct, Precinct 3, this one right here,
is 36.02 percent Hispanic currently. Now, that's the
current census data superimposed on the current census
lines. Okay? That's what we brought to the court the first
time in our initial assessments. It was this booklet that
we brought to the County.
So, what does the 36 percent figure mean to
want to go too much above -- we don't want to go too much
below that figure in redrawing these lines and rebalancing
the precincts, because that would be considered
retrogressive, and we don't want to run afoul oT the Voting
27
1
,,.~ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Rights Act, and we don't want to do that. So, as we
developed this new plan, we were very careful that we didn't
deviate too much from the 36 percent figure. Now, the plan
that Mrs. Arredondo presented -- and I have to say that I
think it's wonderful to have another option, another plan
presented. It's very normal and very typical. We do
redistricting all over the state, and we see citizen plans
often presented, and she has done a very good job with her
data. And we received at our office late last week the
digital format data, and we were able to print up a plan in
a very similar format to this one so that we could make a
better comparison.
I will tell you, Ms. Arredondo, that we came
up with a slightly different number, probably having to do
with some split census blocks, but it's not too different,
and I have those numbers for you. But, we came up with very
similar numbers to what you -- you mentioned as you
presented your plan. The numbers that are important for
this plan that the Commissioners are looking at are the
deviation, the total deviation numbers. And, by working
very closely, we were able to get the total maximum
deviation under this plan down to 2.87 percent. So, we're
trying very hard to get all of the precincts equal, because
it's not fair for you to live in a precinct that is
overpopulated and someone else to live in a precinct that is
28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
~-.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
underpopulated, because you are having to share that
Commissioner with more people and your influence is somewhat
diluted. So, it's important to get as close to zero as you
can, and this plan does that with a 2.87 percent total
maximum deviation. That's the difference between the
largest and the smallest as they deviate from the ideal
precinct size.
And, we also maintained the minority
percentage in Precinct 3. With this plan that was developed
by the Commissioners Court, it was 35.15 percent minority --
or Hispanic, I should say, and 4.02 percent black or African
American, and then there were some other non-Hispanic and
Asian individuals living in this precinct. Non-Hispanic
Asian was .52 percent, less than 1 percent, and non-Hispanic
other -- that could be Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, many
different racial groups would be considered in that
category, and we have 1.48 percent non-Hispanic other ethnic
groups. So, this -- this remains a minority precinct. It
remains, we think, a non-retrogressive plan. And, Judge,
I'd be happy to answer any questions about it. I think that
pretty well gives some background and brings everybody up to
speed who might have missed the first couple of meetings.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Are there any questions for
Ms. Reddington regarding the Bickerstaff Illustrative Plan
Number 2?
29

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. ARREDONDO: Yes.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Yes, Ms. Arredondo?
MS. ARREDONDO: Ms. Reddington, could you
please tell us what possible things do the people that
live -- the Hispanic people -- you said the Hispanic
community have in common that live in the city with the
people that live out in the rural areas. Can you tell us
what the commonalities are?
MS. REDDINGTON: The Hispanic population,
or --
MS. ARREDONDO: The population that you have
in the city with the population that is out in the rural.
What are the commonalities? Because that is one of the
concerns.
MS. REDDINGTON: Well, I think that people,
whether they're living within a city or living out in the
country, share a common interest in good county government,
in having the court systems, the jail, the law enforcement
systems properly handled, electing individuals who will be
able to carry out those administrative duties. In counties,
the Commissioners Court and the County Judge -- with the
help of the County Judge, has the budgeting
responsibilities, adopts the budget for the county and
allocates funds for various county purposes. So, I think
anyone living in the city or the county would probably have
30
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2S
those common concerns.
MS. ARREDONDO: Would you say that language,
educational, income levels are the same?
MS. REDDINGTON: I don't know. I don't know
that much about the education levels or the -- or the
difference between education levels in the country and in
the city. I don't think that that would be a particular
difference. There are highly educated individuals in the
country and in the city, and vice-versa. Yes, sir?
MR. SIEMERS: Paul Siemers. I have a couple
quick -- well, one particular question. If I understand it,
the citizen plan is 100 percent -- the precinct that's in
the city is 100 percent made up of city residents?
MS. ARREDONDO: That is correct.
MR. SIEMERS: How is the city distributed,
percentage-wise, in the districts in your plan?
MS. REDDINGTON: I can't tell you exactly,
because we don't have any data on exactly how many live
within the city. We could develop that; it would take some
time. But, if you look at it, it's typical of Texas
counties, where usually each precinct comes into the county
seat into the courthouse area. It looks, just by eyeballing
it -- that's really all I can do -- it looks like more of
the city population is in Precinct 3. There is some
residential developments down in here that would be in
~~

E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Precinct 2. It might be suburban; it might be slightly
outside the city limits. Precinct 1 has a sizable urban
population in Kerrville, and then Precinct 9 comes into the
town and into the city limits, but it also contains the
somewhat urban area of Ingram. So, it would be hard to say,
and I don't know that that's a statistic that would be of
concern under the Voting Rights Act.
MR. SIEMERS: Have you had access to the
distributional data to determine the standard deviation for
the citizen plan?
MS. REDDINGTON: Yes, we did. And, as I was
telling Ms. Arredondo, we did attempt to calculate that
using her data, and I can go through that. we came up with
a slightly different total maximum deviation for this plan.
And I haven't had an opportunity to give this to her, but
I'm -- I brought a number of copies for you and for the
Court to distribute. But, it looks like, under her plan,
Precinct 1 -- this is the way we put it on the computer, and
it's --
MR. SIEMERS: Let me ask you a specific
question.
MS. REDDINGTON: Let me --
MR. SIEMERS: Is there anything retrogressive
about what they've done in their plan?
MS. REllDINGTON: No, their plan does not
~~
E
8
c
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
appear to me to be retrogressive. I do think this plan
is -- I think both plans are satisfactory under the Voting
Rights Act, but I do want to share with you the numbers we
were able to come up with, and you can see if you think this
is about what you had. For Precinct 1, we had a population
of 10,997, with a deviation from the ideal precinct size of
minus 3.81 percent. For Precinct 2, 11,315, with a
deviation of plus 3.68 percent. For Precinct ?_ ~n aa~
persons, being underpopulated minus 3.85 percent. And then,
District 4, with 11,348, being overpopulated 3.99 percent.
So, when we calculated that, what you do when
you have your -- your plus and your minus, you -- and you're
subtracting a minus from a minus, you turn it into a plus
sign and you actually are adding those two together, if you
remember your math from grade school. So, what we get is
3.99 percent minus minus 3.85 percent, for a total maximum
deviation of 7.84 percent. So your deviation is a little
higher than you indicated, at least when we put it on the
map, buL it's not a lot different. And it probably has to
do with some split census blocks, which we did not attempt
to change in your plan, but we've corrected in the county
plan that we've been working on. So -- but that's not --
you know, that's something you can go back in and work on.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions for
Ms. Reddington? Yes, Mr. Arredondo?
E
c
1C
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
1 MR. ARREDONDO: Joseph Arredondo. In the --
? in the 1990 County Commissioners redistricting, the -- I
3 believe District 3 just came a little bit above Interstate
4 10, and now it drops way down to the end of the county, and
~ there seems to be quite a bit of an extension there.
' MS. REDDINGTON: You're talking about this
area right down in here?
MS. ARREDONDO: And a little bit higher.
Also in the 1990 plan, it shows, in my view, an unusual boot
there which comes out and kind of sticks out like a sore
finger into District 2. Can you tell me the reasoning
behind why that was done?
MS. REDDINGTON: I -- I don't know what was
done in 1990. I can't address that. I can tell you what I
think happened down here.
MR. ARREDONDO: Yes.
MS. REDDINGTON: If you want me to try to do
that, 'cause I'm looking at the 1991 plan which we presented
to the County in the initial assessment of the current plan.
There is a -- there is a very large census block down here.
It's very large. And --
MR. ARREDONDO: When you say large, what's
the number?
MS. REDDINGTON: Let me explain that what we
use when we draw these plans is the census geography, and
Za
it's -- this is sort of what it looks like. This is a map

E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
which shows these black lines, shows the census blocks, and
here you can see, some of them are very large. Some of them
are -- create little doughnut shapes. But, as you move into
the city -- this is a close-up of the city -- they usually
conform to the city blocks. So, out in the rural areas,
they're quite an irregular shape and sometimes very large,
but in town they're the size of usually a city block.
Here we had a very large and irregular census
block which the County, in 1991, or maybe in 1981 or
whenever they first redistricted, decided to cut with a
voting box line, and so that meant that District 2 actually
looked like this. 1 don't know if you can see it. I
apologize for the small size here, but it actually was
shaped like this. We went back and corrected that and took
the entire census block into Precinct 3. We did that to
avoid having the problem of a split block, because when you
have a split block you have to send someone from the County
out on the ground to walk around and see how many houses are
on this side of the line that splits it, how many houses are
on the other side of the line that splits it. It's a
continuing -- it's a nightmare, and it's labor-intensive and
it really is a -- an area where you can have some
inaccuracies and it's difficult to allocate the population
to the right district.
~c
L
C
E
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
So, in talking with the Commissioners, they
felt that it was appropriate to get that whole census block
into one precinct or the other, and so that's why this line
was drawn this way and why it looks a little different than
it does -- than it did in the 1991 plan. Now, the other
question you had about north here? I don't -- I don't think
I understand your question. I didn't follow.
MR. ARREDONDO: Well, there seems to be a
Portion of District 3 that comes down, and is that -- kind
of a boot-like shape. Is that as a result of population in
Lhat area?
MS. REDDINGTON: This right here?
MR. ARREDONDO: Yes, ma'am.
MS. REDDINGTON: That would be within the
city limits of Kerrville, it appears. And I imagine we drew
it that way in order to be sure that we maintained an
adequate minority population and didn't retrogress. I'm
thinking that's probably what happened there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: If I can make two
comments to help address Mr. Arredondo's comments, and this
is for everyone else's information, as well. Census blocks
are developed -- correct me if I'm wrong, Ms. Reddington.
Census blocks were developed by the Census Bureau, and have
no relationship necessarily to population. There are
numerous cerrsus blocks in the county, including some to the
~ti
i
L
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
far south, that don't have any population in them. So,
you're not changing people; you're just making a -- you
know, things fit a little bit better. There are a few
subdivisions in that far corner that has more, I guess, in
common with Comfort area, as opposed to Center Point area.
MS. REDDINGTON: Few people down here.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's kind of the Pipe
Creek/Comfort area. They go to the Comfort schools. That
was the reason it was put back in here, I guess, the
commonality issue.
MS. ARREDONDO: Commonality with what?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: With the Comfort schools.
MR. ARREDONDO: District 3 or District 2?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The people in that far
southern area go to Comfort schools.
MR. ARREDONDO: They used to be part of
District 2.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right, but they still
went to Comfort schools, and this is Precinct -- most of the
rural area of Precinct 3 on this map goes to the Comfort
schools. Most of the rural area of Precinct 2 go to Center
Point schools. Those are keeping commonalities together a
little bit. As for the reason the boot sits down in there,
the hole in the middle of that little area near the city is
Schreiner College, and those are, I guess, primarily student
~~

F
E
c
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
dorms. And we were doing it to what the data looked like;
that's why it was drawn that way. It was drawn the same way
last time. We found kind of --
MS. REDDINGTON: That tends to be more Anglo.
It would seem the percentage of Anglo population is higher,
so it would not make sense to put that into Precinct 3,
because it would dilute the minority population in
Precinct 3.
MS. ARREDONDO: Ms. Reddington, would you say
that District 3, then, meets the definition of a compact
district, the way it looks? As it appears?
MS. REDDINGTON: I actually think that it
does. It's very hard, when you have a county like this,
where your population center is not in the middle of the
county, it's hard to really deal with that, and some of
these lines look sort of funny because we're following
highways or we're following creeks, and those don't give you
a very smooth or even line. But, they're good boundaries to
use, because typically people don't live down in the creek
bottoms, and so you've got a good line that doesn't -- that
isn't confusing to people. So, we've got some
irregularities just because of that. I would say that it is
functionally compact. I think it's a districting plan that
makes sense.
There -- there are not many places left where
~Q
E
8
c
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
you can really draw a nice square district. I have a couple
of counties in west Texas where we still have sort of a
grid, almost, for the Commissioners' districts, and they all
come into the courthouse and one of them has the northwest
corner and one of them has the southwest corner, and it
still looks like you sort of would imagine it, and very
compact. And -- but most districts -- most counties, with
the pressure from the Voting Rights Act in 1991 to maximize
population of minorities in districts, and just the
practical considerations with rivers and mountains and big
ranches and everything and major highways, don't look as
neat as we might wish.
DODGE HENNEKE: Yes, sir?
MR. EVANS: Maury Evans again. I was
wondering if you could tell me -- trace the boundaries of 3
and tell me what the boundaries are. Like, if I went to --
acid she did on her 3, and I was wondering if you could tell
me, 'cause I tried to draw some maps of the precincts and so
forth from what the County has available now, and I went to
look at the booklet from 1990, and it's 42 pages long, to
describe how this county's redistricted -- or districted,
and I had a hell of a time finding the boundaries there.
And I was wondering, could you tell me --
MS. REDDINGTON: I can do that for you. I'll
try. This is the Fredericksburg Highway coming down from

E
c
1C
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
l the northeast. Then this is Interstate 10 -- I might have
to get my glasses here. This is Interstate 10 as the --
3 really, the northern boundary across here, east-west. Let's
I see. Then this follows the -- the current Commissioners'
precinct line here. We did not deviate from that.
MR. EVANS: Yeah, I understand that, but can
you tell me what it is? 'Cause the current one is really
hell to figure out. You just follow the current one?
MS. REDDINGTON: We followed the current
boundary line. Maybe one of the Commissioners can help me
with that, this street name.
MR. EVANS: That's my problem, is the current
ones are really difficult to follow.
AUDIENCE: What do you mean, current?
MS. REDDINGTON: Do you want me to tell you
the current lines, or do you want me to tell you --
MR. EVANS: Well, you're using the current
ones. It would be nice to know what the current ones are.
MS. REDDINGTON: Well, I'm sorry, we didn't
label -- we only labeled where we changed, where we deviated
from the current lines, so I don't have a label on that, but
I'm sure we could look at a street map --
MR. EVANS: We've had trouble finding out
what precinct people actually live in that are running for
office.

1C
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1 MS. REDDINGTON: To help you out a little bit
? right here, because we eliminated a jog that came in right
3 here and just carried that line straight across. And, I
1 think that -- let's see -- Lake Street. Let's see.
~ AUDIENCE: Lake Drive.
' MS. REDDINGTON: Lake, and then it comes
around here; this is a creek.
MR. GARZA: That's Town Creek.
MS. REDDINGTON: So you would follow Town
Creek here down to Main Street, okay? At Main, you then go
northwest on Water Street. This is -- this is the
current -- no, that is not a current line. You'd go
northwest on Water Street to Irene, to --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Guadalupe.
MS. REDDINGTON: Guadalupe. You follow
Guadalupe over to the river here.
MR. EVANS: Which side of the river is the
precinct on? Do you know?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: North side.
MS. REDDINGTON: Well, it's on the north.
This is the river right along here.
MR. EVANS: Okay. So, the boundary is the
north side of the river?
MS. REDDINGTON: The north side is Irene
Street to Guadalupe street, and then the Guadalupe River,
4l
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
all the way around to Sidney Baker. Sidney Baker. And we
have a little jog in here which we maintained so that this
justice precinct can have an office at the courthouse,
because that -- I mean, the confusion that would be involved
in moving a justice precinct office, where the highway
patrol is used to filing their tickets, people are used to
going for small claims court and everything, would be
tremendous. And then we -- we did clean that boundary up a
little bit by continuing on here from Earl Garrett down to
Water Street, and then from Water back to the river, and
then just following the existing boundary on out. So, that
kind of walked you around the --
MRS. EVANS: But we're over here on the edge.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Excuse me, ma'am. You need
to identify yourself.
MRS. EVANS: Excuse me. I'm Joanne Evans,
and we're down to the current boundary. Please continue
down.
MS. REDDINGTON: Okay.
MRS. EVANS: Because we've got that little --
little thing sticking out that looks all by itself.
MS. REDDINGTON: All right.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Which little thing?
MRS. EVANS: We were down --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: By Schreiner College?
42

MRS. EVANS: No, down at the edge of the map.
MR. EVANS: The last part of it.
MS. REDDINGTON: Do you want to just come up
and point to it?
MRS. EVANS: Sure. Sure I will.
(Mrs. Evans indicated on the map.)
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Lane Valley.
MRS. EVANS: You've taken it down into here,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
lE
li
lE
1~
2C
2:
2:
2:
2
2
haven't you?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right.
MS. REDDINGTON: Right along here.
MRS. EVANS: Yeah. But, I -- this is -- you
know --
MS. REDDINGTON: Then it goes down here.
MRS. EVANS: Yes. But --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: You're talking about in
the far southeastern part of the county?
MRS. EVANS: She just left it here, and I was
concerned about --
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Okay.
MRS. EVANS: -- some of that there.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: What we used primarily
when we got out in that other area is the census block,
I following the power lines, the main transmission.
~ MRS. EVANS: Power lines, oh.
43
COMMISSIONER LETZ: And we -- well, you have
to use the census blocks. We didn't pick the census blocks,
so we use did census blocks and went along there, and
through Commissioners Williams and myself looking at the
roads, put the -- tried to keep, like -- so everyone that
lives on Lane Valley is in one precinct, everyone that lives
on up toward Stoneleigh, as best we could, to get everyone
that lived off -- used a road that lived off a road to be in
one block, using the census blocks that were predetermined
by the Census Department.
MS. REDDINGTON: Believe me, I wish we could
have intervened earlier, could have intervened with the
Census Bureau and helped them draw new census blocks or
create census blocks that were easier to work with. They
are a handicap for us.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: The area I would agree
it's difficult is the north boundary of Precinct 2.
MS. REDDINGTON: Right here.
p COMMISSIONER LETZ: Right through here, the
power lines. We tried to clean that up this year, and --
Commissioner Williams and I did. We both met with
? Ms. Reddington, and I think we have it a lot better than it
3 used to be. That far corner that goes to the south, tYiat's
9 basically Lane Valley Road. We picked everything on Lane
5 Valley Road and a little bit down towards Lake Hills
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
1_`
1F
1"
1£
1'
2
2
2
2
2
2
44
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1.
1~
1`
1E
1'
1'
1
2
2
2
2
2
Subdivision in the far southeastern corner.
MR. EVANS: That little green -- from the
very bottom up to where that little green part shoots off --
no, a little bit further up. There's a little green chad
sticking out.
MS. REDDINGTON: Why does that look like
that? It's a chad.
MR. EVANS: What is that?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: It's a census block.
It's a large census block.
MS. REDDINGTON: It's just an
irregularly-shaped census block.
MR. EVANS: And if you get those census
blocks, can you actually figure out where your boundary is?
COMMISSIONER LETZ: We did the best we can,
but some of them are very difficult, I'll agree, you know,
county-wide, on some of the boundaries that were used by the
S Census Department.
a COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Also voting
)I districts.
L COMMISSIONER LETZ: And voting districts.
~ COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: An attempt not to
3 split a voting district.
q JUDGE HENNEKE: Yes, sir?
5 MR. MURPHY: Could you do this later and get
45
on with what we're supposed to be here for?
JUDGE HENNEKE: We're here for --
MR. EVANS: I thought that's what we were
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
lc
1`
lE
1"
1.
1
2
2
2
2
2
here for.
MR. MURPHY: We're here to point out plans
and so forth.
JUDGE HENNEKE: It's important for people to
know where their boundaries are. So, are there any other
questions for Ms. Reddington? Over here. Yes, sir?
MR. BUROW: Clarence Burow. I have a
question. I want to confirm the census -- I worked in
census when it was -- you had the entire 43 sheets of blank
sheets, because there was no population in it, no lines.
Virtually impossible to -- but that's a statement. The
question is, the minorities in -- in the other precincts,
you told us about 3. Do you have the --
MS. REDDINGTON: Yes, sir.
MR. BUROW: I'd like to know how they're
3 broken up in the others.
~ MS. REDDINGTON: Okay. In Precinct 1 -- I'm
L just going to talk about Hispanic and --
~ MR. BUROW: Okay.
g MS. REDDINGTON: -- non-Hispanic black,
4 because the other groups are really small enough that I
5 don't think that they are going to have a big impact.
46

Precinct 1, this precinct here, has -- in this plan, under
this plan, 12.95 percent Hispanic and 1.05 percent black.
Precinct 2, under this plan, has 17.53 percent Hispanic, and
1.06 percent black. As we said, just so you can remember,
Precinct 3 has 35.15 percent Hispanic and -- let's see, and
4.02 percent black. And Precinct 4 has 11.21 percent
Hispanic, and .67 percent black.
MR. BUROW: So, they've essentially got one
precinct where the Hispanic population could swing some
political weight?
MS. REDDINGTON: Yes, it's an impact
precinct. The technical term, as Mr. Arredondo said, is an
impact precinct. It will have an impact on the election. A
candidate can have an impact. You look at the percentage of
voting age population, though, when you're doing a voting
rights analysis, and I think that might be a figure of
interest. In Precinct 3, the total Hispanic voting age
population is 30.15 percent, so it is still -- under this
3 plan, it is still a substantial minority percentage in terms
of voting age population.
~ MR. BUROW: Thank you.
~ JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other questions for Ms.
3 Reddington? Yes, sir?
q MR. KING: I'm Streeter King. Mr. Evans
5 mentioned about maps. I know sooner or later you're going
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
1~
1`
if
1"
1.
1
2
2
2
2
2
L
47
to get into the voting boxes and so forth, and that's really
the -- the real problem with maps, 'cause we can't walk
precincts by metes and bounds, and that's what he was
talking about with 42 pages. We need adequate maps, and I
don't know whether the County will furnish them where we get
them, but it's very difficult to do anything, you know, the
county -- Precinct 1 thing. But the voting is very
important, so I don't know when you're going to get into
that.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
19
1_`
1F
1-
1£
1'
2~
2
2
2
2
2
JUDGE HENNEKE: We'll take up the voting
election precincts after we have concluded with Commissioner
precincts. The timetable for that is not quite so severe.
MR. KING: Okay.
JUDGE HENNEKE: The schedule the Court
adopted had us approving the new voting election precincts
by October 1st.
MR. KING: Okay. Well, as long as we can get
some maps by the time the election rolls around.
i JUDGE HENNEKE: Absolutely, sir.
~ MR. KING: It would be nice.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. Any other questions
? for Ms. Reddington? Okay. Thank you, Penny. Yes, sir?
3 MR. FURMAN: Judge, is it appropriate at this
4 time to make comments, just general comment?
5 JUDGE HENNEKE: If there are no other
48
questions of -- regarding either of the specific maps, yes,
it is -- at this time, this is a public hearing. If anyone
would like to offer specific public comments, we'd entertain
those at this time. Since you're on your feet, I'll
recognize Jack Furman.
MR. FURMAN: I'm Jack Furman. I've looked at
these things this morning, and I notice Ms. Arredondo, if 1
understood her correctly a while ago, indicated that the
maximum deviation was under 5 percent. My numbers have the
maximum deviation at 7.8 percent, using her numbers, and a
minimum deviation of 7.5 percent, whereas the law firm's
deviation I have at 2.87 maximum, and .46 minimum. That
seems to be, to me, a much more even population
distribution. I didn't see a lot of difference in the
Hispanic and black population differences between the two
plans, but I was concerned that Precinct 3 was drawn in the
city limits of Kerrville where the County has no Road and
Bridge, only rarely has any law enforcement activity. So,
if the citizens of Kerrville have only one Commissioner,
basically, although the City represents almost half the
population of the county and furnishes over half of the
county tax revenue -- at least it used to; I guess those
3 numbers are about the same -- it seems to me that this plan,
1 Illustrative Plan 2, is a lot more exorable than this plan
i in terms of population distribution and fairness.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
lE
li
if
1~
2(
2"
2:
2
2
2
49
1
,^ 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
~-.
19
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2S
JUDGE HENNEKE: We have a request from David
MR. JACKSON: Thank you, Your Honor. Jack, I
think, made some very good points. If I understand the
criteria correctly, you -- these are not your words; these
are my words -- that you would want to develop a compelling
reason to change what the status-quo is, what the existing
districts are, perhaps to come to some clear understanding
why you should redraw the lines, move people around, move
offices, perhaps, and those sorts of things. It's there,
really, the debate gets down to a very interesting study of
the City versus the County, which is the point that Jack's
raising. And I don't think there's a compelling reason to
do that in Kerr County.
In my work and what I do, I see residents of
a very similar standing, a very similar interest all over
the county. It's true that some portions of the county have
an agricultural focus, but for the most part, when you draw
a circle around the city, the city calls that an ETJ. It's
another way of identifying, perhaps, the area that's
currently under development. We have an awful lot of
development out in the county that, in some cities --
perhaps even Austin, where you come from -- would be urban
in nature. They're small-acreage tracts that are served by
water, sewer issues. Those all need representation on a
1
.-. 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
,,, 2 4
50
balanced, equal plan, which is one of the criteria.
So, my observation is, I don't think there's
a compelling reason to make one district all within the city
if you really want to come up with what would be in the best
interests of all of the Kerr citizens. The County
it should have some fairly homogenous, similar interests.
But, you also want the Commissioners to represent a
population and not, as Jack says, have just a constituency
that's already, in large part, represented by the city, the
tax base and those sort of things. We have a lot of people
outside the city, and I don't think that it's compelling, to
me, at least, in listening to the presentation. I do
respect the issue here, and I respect the alternative that
has been presented, but I'd come down to no real reason to
make that kind of a dramatic change at this time, based on
what I think the population is made up of.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. Jim Murphy? Jim,
did you want to say anything? Okay. Mr. MacDonald?
MR. MACDONALD: Granger MacDonald, in what's
now Precinct 2. I'd like to compliment the work done by the
Bickerstaff group on the -- on the map of trying to keep
four very equal socioeconomic entities. And all four
25 ~ precincts, as are drawn on that, share some commonality; has
1
.-~ 2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
.r-.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
51
some urban area, has some rural area, and the four different
got a big job in the next ten years of handling surface
water, wells, septic tanks, and the Sheriff's Department,
and the last thing you need to do is create one precinct
that has no interest in the Sheriff's Department, no
interest in septic tanks, no interest in surface water, and
no interest in what happens to water wells or development in
the county. And -- because you've created a precinct that's
already developed, already in the city, and that's served
strictly by the police force. The new city precincts would
not have any interest in what happens to volunteer fire
departments. This County Commissioners Court has been great
about supporting volunteer fire departments. You've got to
keep four precincts that have got common problems so that
they can understand what's going on for the benefit of the
entire Kerr County population. Thank you, sir.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. Yes, sir?
MR. KUBENKA: Yes. My name is Stan Kubenka.
I'd like to bring up two points to the Court. Number one,
I'd like to focus your effort to the fact that you're
speaking of county government, not cities. There are other
cities, like Ingram is a -- a true city. And Center Point,
of course, is a community. Also, I'd like you to look at
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
52
the vision for long-term. I know that's difficult, but we
have the citizen plan over here that appears to have a
Commissioners drawing line that would be very nonvisionary
for the long-term. There's no doubt that our Kerr County is
a targeted area for growth. Like it or not, this is what's
happening. And if we were to choose the citizen plan, that
Number 3 would probably be proportionally out of whack
within the first 12 months of the first ten years. So, I'd
like you to consider Plan 2. I think it's had the most work
done that's been constructed for all the citizens of Kerr
County for the county government. Thank you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. Anyone else?
Yes, sir?
MR. HENDER5ON: Yes. My name is Hiram
Henderson, and I'd like to go on record as being in support
of the County's plan, Plan 2. It probably concerns more
about the broader issues of being concerned about the
community and all of the citizens, rather than a little,
small, selected group. And to create this island within the
city tends to absolutely divide, as the word is being used.
It will tend to divide the citizens, rather than bring the
citizens of Kerr County together. And public service is
about broader issues, about all of the cities of -- citizens
of Kerr County. Thank you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you, Mr. Henderson.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2s
53
Yes, sir? Mr. King?
MR. KING: Well, I have to say that under the
-- Mrs. Arredondo's plan, it might be an opportunity
somewhere in the future to elect a minority for this
Commissioners Court. You all know -- I think are aware of
what's going on in the city, as far as the single-member
district. When the City Attorney says, Well, we don't have
to worry about it; just let them file suit -- and they're
going to file suit, I'm sure of that. There hasn't been a
minority on this County Commission, as far as I know, since
reconstruction, and I don't know whether we've ever had a
woman on the Commission. And I'd just like to say, unless
you get the minorities in some group where they'll have an
opportunity to elect a Commissioner or a councilman or
whatever -- because, right now, and under this plan, they
have no -- no idea -- no way of ever having a representative
to represent the minority. Thank you.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other comments?
MR. KUBENKA: Stan Kubenka. I'd like to come
back to the very, very first beginning thing that you talked
about with the Constitution of the United States; one man,
one vote. That's a criteria that really ought to be
considered. If we try to come up with different focus
groups, whatever they may be, we could be here forever. One
man, one vote.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
29
25
54
JUDGE HENNEKE: Anyone else?
MR. SIEMERS: Paul Siemers. I don't have
anything original to say. I wholeheartedly agree with what
Granger MacDonald said and others have said. I think it
would be a big mistake for everybody to have a precinct that
was totally contained within the city, and I certainly -- on
that basis, I would support Plan 2 here.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Mr. Romero? You had your
hand up?
MR. ROMERO: I'm of the opinion that there will
someday be a Hispanic, there will be a woman serving on the
Commissioners Court, and I think it just has to be the right
person. I don't think that you can -- as far as I'm
concerned, I don't -- and if I were elected to something, I
just would hope that I was elected and -- and just happened to
be Hispanic. But I think it's going to happen, and I think
just the right person has to come along. I think it has --
that person has to serve and pay his dues to this community,
and I don't see this community as being totally biased against
anything like that. But that's just my opinion.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you. Anyone else?
Yes, constable?
MR. GARZA: I'm Constable Angel Garza, and I
live in Precinct 3. And I'm kind of in support of Plan 2,
like Mr. Romero here said. One man, one vote. And I just
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1S
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
55
feel like -- you know, I feel like I'm a Hispanic; I was
elected to the office, I think, on what I stand for and who
I am. And the people of the -- my precinct, you know, saw
that. So I feel like, you know, this is a good plan, as far
as I'm concerned.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Thank you, constable. Yes,
sir?
MR. EVANS: Just one last comment. Maury
Evans. It used to be one man, one vote, but they did change
it to women get the vote as of the 18th amendment.
(Laughter.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Anyone else? Commissioner
Williams?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: I would just point
out that the elected constable in Precinct 2 is also
Hispanic.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Anyone else have any
comments? Pat Dye?
MS. DYE: My name is Pat Dye, and just an
observation. Having been in county government for over 22
years, this is a very good plan, this Plan 2, and I think
the election polling places is going to be not real easy,
but I think it's going to be much better this time to
hopefully find workers. But, it brings to mind this having
one Commissioner's precinct in the city limits of Harris

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
56
County. If I'm not mistaken, when John Lindsey was County
Judge, I believe I remember reading an article that he
wrote, but in that one instance, all of Harris County
encompasses the whole city. And I think, then, that's when
we can start looking at combined governments and having dual
county and -- and city. Maybe not the fire protection, but
the police protection, having combined services that way.
That's all I have to say.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Any other comments? Any
other comments during this public hearing?
(NO response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Once, twice, going. At this
time, we will conclude the public hearing.
(The public hearing was concluded at 5:19
p.m., and the regular Commissioners Court
meeting was reopened.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: We're going to take about a
10-minute break, reconvene at 5:30. Commissioners Court
does have scheduled, if we choose to do so, a vote on which
plan to -- to adopt and to move forward with the necessary
requirement with the Department of Justice. So, we'll take
a break and come back about 5:30. Thank you all.
(Recess taken from 5:20 p.m. to 5:30 p.m.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Ladies and gentlemen, if we
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
.~~.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
57
could come to order, please? Before we -- before we
formally reconvene the Commissioners Court special meeting,
I was handed during the break a letter from Ms. Vivian
actually pertains to school districts. I'll read the
on to list the advantages. The process we're involved in
now has obviously nothing to do with the Kerrville
Independent School District lines, as far as elementary
schools are concerned. I did want, however, to recognize
that I was given this letter from Vivian Calhoun, who lives
on Thompson Drive, and I will forward it to Dr. Jackson at
the school district for their consideration, but it will not
be a part of this record, because it does not relate to
Commissioners precincts, redistricting.
So, at this time, we'll reconvene the regular
special session of the Kerr County Commissioners Court. The
item for consideration, which is posted on our agenda as
Item Number 14, is to consider and discuss the adoption of a
redistricting plan for Commissioners' precincts in Kerr
County and authorize the submission of the plan and
supporting information to the Department of Justice per the
Voting Rights Act preclearance. There has been an order
prepared by our consultant regarding adoption of a plan.
1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
58
Would the Commissioners like to make any comments before we
have a motion and a vote?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I have a question.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Would you like to proceed to
a vote at this time?
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: I have a question,
just for what happens downstream. We submit this for
Justice preclearance and so on. Then does the Justice
Department -- is that the next step? They come back and say
it's okay or whatever? And then do we take further action
at that point, or does it happen automatically, or what --
what's the process from here?
MS. REDDINGTON: The Commissioner asked what
happens after a plan is adopted by the County. Well, we
will need to work with your County Clerk and with your
Elections Administrator to develop your election precincts
within the lines, the new lines that you adopt, and then all
of that will be converted into metes and bounds
descriptions. It will go to the Justice Department in the
form of a submission which will explain the Court's
considerations and concerns as you work through this
process. And we will request that the Justice Department
preclear this plan so that you can conduct your next round
of elections. They have 60 days in which to act, and can
gain another 60 days by asking for additional information,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
59
so it could be up to 120 days before we hear back from them
as to whether or not the County has received preclearance.
But, we will -- we will get the submission in to them as
early as possible, and hope to hear from them before
December 1st.
COMMISSIONER GRIFFIN: Okay.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Are there any other questions
regarding the process? Is it the consensus of the
Commissioners that we're proposed to go ahead and take a
vote on the map at this time?
COMMISSIONER BALDWIN: Yes, Your Honor.
JUDGE HENNEKE: If so, I'd entertain a motion
as to adopting an order approving a map and moving forward.
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: Judge, I'd like to
offer a motion to adopt Kerr County Illustrative Plan 2,
which was submitted by the Bickerstaff, Heath, Smiley,
Pollan law firm, and move the process forward.
COMMISSIONER LETZ: Second.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion by Commissioner
Williams, second by Commissioner Letz, that the Court adopt
the Illustrative Plan Number 2 prepared by the Bickerstaff
Heath law firm as the map for Kerr County Commissioners'
precincts based on the Year 2000 census, and authorize
submission of the plan and supporting information to the
U.S. Department of Justice for Voting Rights Act

,~^
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
60
preclearance. Commissioner, does your motion include
authorizing the County Judge to sign any necessary
submissions?
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS: It does, Your Honor.
JUDGE HENNEKE: Okay. Any further questions
or comments? If not, all in favor, raise your right hand.
(The motion carried by unanimous vote.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: All opposed, same sign.
(NO response.)
JUDGE HENNEKE: Motion carries.
Ms. Reddington has prepared three orders which reflect the
motion that was made and adopted. She has asked that -- I
have one here; there are two on the bench down there. She's
asked that we all sign those before we depart today so that
she can make rapid progress towards the preclearance. If
there are no other issues to come before the Kerr County
Commissioners Court on this Monday, July 23rd, we stand
adjourned. We thank you all for your attention and
participation in what is extraordinarily important for all
of us here in Kerr County. Thank you very much. We are
adjourned.
(Commissioners Court adjourned at 5:38 p.m.)

1
2
3
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
61
STATE OF TEXAS ~
COUNTY OF KERR
The above and foregoing is a true and complete
transcription of my stenotype notes taken in my capacity as
County Clerk of the Commissioners Court of Kerr County,
Texas, at the time and place heretofore set forth.
DATED at Kerrville, Texas, this 30th day of July, 2001.
JANNETT PIEPER, Kerr County Clerk
BY:
Kathy Ba 'k, Deputy County Clerk
Certified Shorthand Reporter
ORDER NO. 27152
APPROVAL OF RDOPTION
OF REDISTRICTING PLAN FOR
COMMISSIONERS° PRECINCTS IN KERR COUNTY
AND AUTHORIZRTION OF SUPMISSION OF PLAN
AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION TO
U. S. DEPRRTMENT OF JUSTICE FOR VOTING RIGHTS ACT
"GRE-CLEARRNCE"
On this the 'c';:,r•d day of July 2001, upon motion made by
Commissioner Williams, seconded 6y Commissioner Let z, the
Court unanimously appr-oved 6y a vote of 5-0-0, of adopting
Ker^r• County Illustration Plan 2 pr•epar•ed by Picker•staff and
~ Heath Law firm as the map for• Kerr County Commissioners'
precincts based on the Year• ^cQi00 census, and authorize
submission of the plan and supporting information to the U. S.
Department of Justice for• Voting Rights Act pr•eclear•ance
and authorize the County Judge to sign any necessary
submissions.