You can add Knightdale to the list of critics of the Wake County school board redistricting proposal.
As noted in today's article, Knightdale community leaders are lobbying the school board to change a proposal that would put the town into three different board districts. They're currently now in District 1 but the plan would send part of the town to Districts 2 and 4.
"The ability for us to have any influence on the board is certainly diluted," said Knightdale Mayor Russell Killen.
School board member Chris Malone, who represents Knightdale, said he's looking at whether changes can be made. But he said he doesn't think there's a way to reduce the population of his district without splitting up his Knightdale precincts.
"I'd like to keep all of my district," Malone said. "But I can't."
The redistricting plan calls for him to lose 11,778 people to put District 1 within 1 percent of the other districts. That's partially accomplished by moving precinct 17-06 to District 2 and District 17-08 to District 4.
Click here for a map done by Knightdale showing how the town would be impacted.
Malone said he had discussed with attorney Kieran Shanahan various ways of shrinking his district, including putting all of Knightdale into District 4. But in the end, he said they determined that splitting up the town into multiple districts was the best option.
Killen said the maps released by Shanahan were so vague that he didn't realize the town would be split into three precincts until he asked Knightdale's Planning Department this week to overlay the districts with the town's boundaries.
Since Tuesday, Killen, the Knightdale Chamber of Commerce and the Knightdale 100 have been lobbying the school board to change the maps. Click here for a Wednesday blog post from the Knightdale 100.
One of the redistricting guidelines is that "except when required by federal law, districts should respect the boundaries of municipalities." But the plan splits more municipalities into multiple board districts.
Malone said growth was making it harder to keep municipalities in one district. He said it would have been easier if there were only seven board districts and not nine.
Killen said he could accept if the town was put into two districts. But he said he couldn't see why it was necessary to be split into three.
"You have to split a town of 12,000 people into three districts?" Killen said. "Really?"
Killen and other town leaders are worried that they'll lose influence on the school board by making up small parts of three districts. They also say the needs of Knightdale schools are different than those in Garner and Southeast Raleigh.
“We will not have a voice," said Jennifer Bryan, executive director of the Knightdale Chamber of Commerce. "We’ll have three separate representatives and our interests will be diluted."
But Malone said the change should be viewed as a positive, saying "the (board's) commitment to Knightdale will not wane."
"I don't see this being an appreciable difference," Malone said. "Now you'll have three board members advocating for your interests."
The plan is for the board to discuss possible changes on Tuesday. A vote could take place that day.
Killen is urging the board to take more time to make any changes. The filing period for candidates starts July 25. The board's goal is to complete the maps by June 24.
Killen had backed Raleigh Mayor Charles Meeker, one of the partners in his law firm, in his efforts to save the diversity policy. But Killen said he doesn't think that had anything to do with the proposed redistricting changes to Knightdale

Comments
Fixing Knightdale...
Thu, 05/12/2011 - 10:20 — Bob_SconceIt ought to be possible to go down to just 2 districts if they sort of rotate Tedesco - Sutton - McLaurin. JT moves North into Sutton's area of Knightdale. Sutton moves east into the north part of McLaurin's district. McLaurin moves SE, taking more of Fuquay from JT. Of course, once again, that means McLaurin loses her district.
I should have added in the
Thu, 05/12/2011 - 11:02 — KeungHui (author)I should have added in the blog post that Killen can accept but wouldn't really like Knightdale to be in two districts. They'd ideally to stay in one distirct. But he and other town leaders would prefer two over three districts if forced to choose.
Considering we have to live
Thu, 05/12/2011 - 10:49 — shearertwConsidering we have to live with the redistricting for 10 years (or more)...absolution no consideration should be made with regard to current BOE members. Every consideration should be focused on providing the most logical and effective representation of the people over the next decade.....period.
I agree....
Thu, 05/12/2011 - 11:02 — Bob_SconceAnd it's true in spades for seats up for election this year -- at least with the others, you have the concern of the board booting out an elected member in favor of its appointee. But, if the seat is up, there's no such concern.
Naive questions b/c I'm
Thu, 05/12/2011 - 11:15 — shearertwNaive questions b/c I'm simply not following this closely....
How much consideration is being given to future growth with regard to this process? It makes no sense to me to try and get all the districts within 1% just to have them totally out of wack in a year or two. This may be happening, but I'd prefer we target the districts to be within 1% in the year 2015-2016. That way, over the course of the next decade, the average representation will be better than if we just use 2010 data.
Heh...
Thu, 05/12/2011 - 11:20 — Bob_SconceJenn Mansfield made a similar point on Tuesday. The answer, apparantly, is none at all. In the 2001 redistricting, that was a consideration. But, in the meantime, there was evidently a Supreme Court decision that severely narrowed the district's ability to do so. As a result, we'll be out of whack quicker. I haven't read the decision, but the logic seems flawed.
Flawed indeed. I bet we're
Thu, 05/12/2011 - 11:36 — shearertwFlawed indeed. I bet we're basing the 1% variance number on the 2010 data, so we're likely already out of whack and will not truly be at 1% variance with any plan based on that data.
I believe Cox v. Larios is
Thu, 05/12/2011 - 11:27 — KeungHui (author)I believe Cox v. Larios is the Supreme Court case from 2004 that Shanahan was pointing to in order to go with only a 1 percent variance. Click here for a link.
"They also say the needs of
Thu, 05/12/2011 - 08:02 — shearertw"They also say the needs of Knightdale schools are different than those in Garner and Southeast Raleigh."
Which is exactly why this school system is too large. They will not meet the needs of Knightdale, WF, HS, FV, Garner, Rolesville, Wendell, DT Raleigh, SE Raleigh, N Raleigh, Cary, Morrisville, Zebulon, Apex, and......because they cannot possibly do so. If anyone thinks that a nine member panel of, generally speaking, regular citizens working on a part-time basis, can effectively operate a school system as large as WC, take a day and drive around, because it will take you an entire day, or maybe a week. We don't need more BOE members, we need more independent school systems.
Question for the legal folks
Thu, 05/12/2011 - 07:27 — Dove314What binds WCPSS to having 9 members on the BoE? Why not 7? or 11? If it becomes too much of a challenge to create 9 equal sized districts, is there ever the option to change the number of districts to a number which allows for a better fit for the population, similar to when NC gains (or loses) seats in the US House?
State law...
Thu, 05/12/2011 - 07:59 — Bob_SconceWhen the GA merged the Raleigh and County systems, they said that it would have 9 seats. You'd need the GA to change that.
I looked at it a few years ago and noticed that the law didn't prevent districts from overlapping each other. It'd be a little risky, but the board could try saying "District X encompasses the entire county" and see what happens.
That makes how many now?
Thu, 05/12/2011 - 07:16 — FSandYOUTEN!?