Journal-Times (Grayson, KY)

May 1, 2013

Redistricting plan approved by judge

By Leeann Akers - Editor

May 1, 2013 — Special Circuit Judge Robert Conley has approved the magisterial redistricting plan submitted by the Carter Fiscal Court.

In an order issued last week, Conley said that the action taken by the Fiscal Court at its Dec. 18 meeting brought the county into compliance with redistricting statutes.

District 1 includes Iron Hill, Courthouse, Gregoryville, Oakland and North Midland Trail precincts.

District 2 consists of East Grayson/Stinson, South Midland Trail, North Rush, South Rush and Stovall precincts.

District 3 embraces Hitchins, Denton, Willard and Alpha Hall precincts.

District 4 is comprised of Soldier, Cedar Grove, Clark Hill, Eagle Hill, Pleasant Valley, Pleasant Hill and Grahn precincts.

District 5 includes Buffalo, Smokey Valley, Olive Hill Courthouse, Brickyard and Upper Tygart precincts.

The new redistricting proposal was based on population figures provided by the FIVCO Area Development District.

According to FIVCO’s figures, there is a 9.39 percent difference in those districts.

When the plan was approved during the December Fiscal Court meeting, Mignon Colley informed the court that those figures might not be accurate because they differ from those on file with the Legislative Research Commission (LRC) in Frankfort.

According to LRC’s figures, Districts 2 and 3 would represent a 12.1 percent difference from the average district population which is higher than the maximum of 10 percent allowed by state law.

Colley filed suit in Carter Circuit Court in October 2011 over the Fiscal Court's refusal to realign the county’s magisterial districts.

According to the case file, all parties involved in the case had agreed that the Fiscal Court had failed to comply with statutory requirements regarding apportionment in late July 2012.

Conley then ordered the Fiscal Court to take all the reasonable steps necessary to re-initiate reapportionment proceedings at its next meeting.

Although a reapportionment commission was again appointed, the Fiscal Court chose to adopt a plan that differed from the one presented to by the board.