Time for single member districts?
If the San Marcos CISD wants to change the way its trustees are elected, there are some hurdles it will have to overcome first.
At its meeting Monday night, the SMCISD board of trustees heard a presentation from the district’s counsel, Juan Cruz, on the method of electing trustees.
“Obviously this is not for action tonight, but I wanted to bring it to you because I think there may be some interest,” Cruz said.
Currently, the board has seven members who serve staggered three-year terms. There are five trustees from single-member districts and two at-large trustees in an arrangement created by a court order in the early 1990s. The court order, prompted by the American G.I. Forum vs. San Marcos CISD lawsuit, created single-member districts within SMCISD and would still be a factor if the district were to eliminate one or both at-large positions, Cruz said.
In 2011, district counsel said, the board had considered doing away with the at-large seats on the board. Redrawing the district lines, however, could be complicated.
“You would have to hire a demographer to do this,” Cruz said, and the districts would have to be contiguous and not be gerrymandered. He noted that in 2020, there will be a new census, and the district would have to hire demographers all over again.
The board’s options for structure, Cruz said, are to remain 5-2, or have six members from single-member districts and one at-large trustee, or have no at-large trustees.
If the board chose to change its structure, it would have to hold a public hearing on redistricting to let voters have their say.
If the board were to eliminate one or two at-large positions, the at-large trustees could have their terms cut short or could be allowed to serve the remainder of their term following the adoption of the redistricting plan, Cruz said.
The court order comes into play in the drawing of new districts, Cruz said. The new districts likely would have to have a minority population of at least 50 percent, as set out in the court order, Cruz said, adding that there is a question of whether the district can even consider a different redistricting plan with the court order in place.
“You do have a court order that’s not obviously similar to everybody else,” Cruz told the board. “If you do want to move forward with entertaining a 6-1 or 7-0, my suggestion would be to put it on the board agenda, see if you have four board members that agree to move in that direction, give me the authority to reach out to the counsel for the G.I. Forum to see if they could modify the court order or would agree to modify the court order, because this court order cannot be neglected.”
