Waller County Democratic Party
Sam Eng, Chair
Marilyn Hicks, Pct. Chair #101
Gloria Thompson, Pct. Chair #102
Curley Franks, Pct. Chair # 104
Thomas Ybarra, Pct. Chair #205
Janet Murphy, Pct. Chair #207
Marion Gollmer, Pct. Chair #208
Gwen Carter, Pct. Chair #310
Steve Elder, Pct. Chair # 311
Harvey Laas, Pct. Chair # 313
Barbara Chambers, Pct. Chair #414
Randy McKaskle, Pct. Chair # 415
Becky Dickson, Pct. Chair #416
Christopher Lee, Parliamentarian
John Mull, Advisor
Eileen Birney, Advisor
Marilyn Hicks, Pct. Chair #101
Gloria Thompson, Pct. Chair #102
Curley Franks, Pct. Chair # 104
Thomas Ybarra, Pct. Chair #205
Janet Murphy, Pct. Chair #207
Marion Gollmer, Pct. Chair #208
Gwen Carter, Pct. Chair #310
Steve Elder, Pct. Chair # 311
Harvey Laas, Pct. Chair # 313
Barbara Chambers, Pct. Chair #414
Randy McKaskle, Pct. Chair # 415
Becky Dickson, Pct. Chair #416
Christopher Lee, Parliamentarian
John Mull, Advisor
Eileen Birney, Advisor
PARTY!!!!!
MORE TRASH
Why are we having to discuss this proposal to have a DUMP? Don't the powers to be know that Dumps are not a popular, dangerous and just NASTY? Doesn't anyone remember what happened when Best Pak opened their Dump Site on FM 359?
DATE \@ "MMMM d, yyyy" October 20, 2011 by Landfill reporter
OCT. ARTICLE FOR DEMORATIC WEBSITE
LANDFILL PINTAIL #MSW2377
Ready, Set, Get your pens/pencils everyone in Waller County. TCEQ was personally contacted by phone Friday, October 14, 2011.
I. The public comment period is still open.
See http://www.tceq.texas.gov/agency/permitting/pub_part.html, page 3.
Comments can be emailed to: www.tceq.state.tx.us/goto State whether you are for or against the landfill and your reasons.
Comments can be mailed to: Office of the Chief Clerk, MC 1-05, TCEQ, PO Box 13087, Austin, TX 78711-3087.
II. A contested hearing can still be requested.
See: http://www.tceq.texas.gov/agency/permitting/pub_part.html, pages 2 & 3.
In a request for a contested hearing, you must state in your email or letter how the landfill would harm you more than “the general public.” You must also include:
-your name, address and daytime phone number
-Permit # Pintail #MSW2377
- a sentence saying you “request a contested case hearing.”
-the location of your home, business or property that will be affected, and the distance from the landfill to your home, business or property.
III. Public hearing set.
TCEQ staff & Pintail l will be at a public hearing November 10, 7:00 p.m. in the auditorium of the Hempstead High School. See: http://www.tceq.texas.gov/agency/hearings/calendar.html#pintail
Page 2, landfill reporter, 10/15/2011
IV. You can ask to be put on a list that will get updates.
(1) - You need to give them the landfill #MSW2377 and your contact information if you phone 512-239-3311.
OR:
(2) - At the public meeting on November 10, ask for the sign-up sheet for updates.
OR:
(3) – Send a letter to: TCEQ Office of the Chief Clerk, Mail Code MC-105, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, TX 78711-3087, giving your contact information and Landfill Permit #MSW2377.
DO THIS IN OCTOBER!
PLEASE, your landfill reporter.
OCT. ARTICLE FOR DEMORATIC WEBSITE
LANDFILL PINTAIL #MSW2377
Ready, Set, Get your pens/pencils everyone in Waller County. TCEQ was personally contacted by phone Friday, October 14, 2011.
I. The public comment period is still open.
See http://www.tceq.texas.gov/agency/permitting/pub_part.html, page 3.
Comments can be emailed to: www.tceq.state.tx.us/goto State whether you are for or against the landfill and your reasons.
Comments can be mailed to: Office of the Chief Clerk, MC 1-05, TCEQ, PO Box 13087, Austin, TX 78711-3087.
II. A contested hearing can still be requested.
See: http://www.tceq.texas.gov/agency/permitting/pub_part.html, pages 2 & 3.
In a request for a contested hearing, you must state in your email or letter how the landfill would harm you more than “the general public.” You must also include:
-your name, address and daytime phone number
-Permit # Pintail #MSW2377
- a sentence saying you “request a contested case hearing.”
-the location of your home, business or property that will be affected, and the distance from the landfill to your home, business or property.
III. Public hearing set.
TCEQ staff & Pintail l will be at a public hearing November 10, 7:00 p.m. in the auditorium of the Hempstead High School. See: http://www.tceq.texas.gov/agency/hearings/calendar.html#pintail
Page 2, landfill reporter, 10/15/2011
IV. You can ask to be put on a list that will get updates.
(1) - You need to give them the landfill #MSW2377 and your contact information if you phone 512-239-3311.
OR:
(2) - At the public meeting on November 10, ask for the sign-up sheet for updates.
OR:
(3) – Send a letter to: TCEQ Office of the Chief Clerk, Mail Code MC-105, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, TX 78711-3087, giving your contact information and Landfill Permit #MSW2377.
DO THIS IN OCTOBER!
PLEASE, your landfill reporter.
DUMP INFO
NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING
FOR PROPOSED AIR QUALITY PERMIT
PROPOSED PERMIT NUMBER 1157C
APPLICATION. Gulf Chemical & Metallurgical Corporation, P.O. Box 2290, Freeport, Texas 77542-2290, has applied to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) for an amendment to Air Quality Permit Number 1157C, which would authorize modification to a Molybdenum and Vanadian Recovery System at 302 Midway Road, Freeport, Brazoria County, Texas 77542-2290. The amendment will authorize an increase in emissions of the following air contaminants: ammonia, hydrogen chloride, ammonium sulfate, ammonium sulfite, volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, and particulate matter including particulate matter with diameters of 10 microns or less and 2.5 microns or less. This link to an electronic map of the site or facility’s general location is provided as a public courtesy and not part of the application or notice. For exact location, refer to the application. www.tceq.texas.gov/assets/public/hb610/index.html?lat=28.947406&lng=-95.315396&zoom=12&
The TCEQ Executive Director has completed the technical review of the application and prepared a draft permit which, if approved, would establish the conditions under which the facility must operate. The Executive Director has made a preliminary decision to issue the permit because it meets all rules and regulations.
PUBLIC COMMENT / PUBLIC MEETING. A public meeting will be held and will consist of two parts, an Informal Discussion Period and a Formal Comment Period. A public meeting is not a contested case hearing under the Administrative Procedure Act. During the Informal Discussion Period, the public will be encouraged to ask questions of the applicant and TCEQ staff concerning the permit application. The comments and questions submitted orally during the Informal Discussion Period will not be considered before a decision is reached on the permit application and no formal response will be made. Response will be provided orally during the Informal Discussion Period. During the Formal Discussion Period on the permit application, members of the public may state their formal comments orally into the official record. A written response to all formal comments will be prepared by the Executive Director. All formal comments will be considered before a decision is reached on the permit application. A copy of the written response will be sent to each person who submits a formal comment or who requested to be on the mailing list for this permit application and provides a mailing address. Only relevant and material issues raised during the Formal Comment Period can be considered if a contested case hearing is granted on this permit application.
The Public Meeting is to be held:
Tuesday, November 15, 2011 at 7:00 p.m.
Freeport River Place
733 Mystery Lane
Freeport, Texas 77541
INFORMATION. Citizens are encouraged to submit written comments anytime during the meeting or by mail before the public meeting to the Office of the Chief Clerk, TCEQ, Mail Code MC-105, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087 or electronically atwww.tceq.texas.gov/about/comments.html. If you choose to communicate with the TCEQ electronically, please be aware that your email address, like your physical mailing address, will become part of the agency’s public record. If you need more information about the permit application or the permitting process, please call the TCEQ Public Education Program, toll free, at 1-800-687-4040. General information can be found at our Web site at www.tceq.texas.gov. Si desea información en Español, puede llamar al 1-800-687-4040.
The permit application, Executive Director’s preliminary decision, and draft permit will be available for viewing and copying at the TCEQ Central Office located at 12100 Park 35 Circle, Building E, Room 103, Austin, Texas; the TCEQ Houston Regional Office located at 5425 Polk Street, Suite H, Houston, Texas 77023-1452; and at the Freeport Branch Library, 401 North Brazosport, Freeport, Brazoria County, Texas. The facility’s compliance file, if any exists, is available for public review at the TCEQ Houston Regional Office at the address located above. Further information may also be obtained from Gulf Chemical Metallurgical Corporation, P.O. Box 2290, Freeport, Texas 77542-2290 or by calling Mr. Nicholas Reba, Environmental Engineer at (979) 415-1589.
Persons with disabilities who need special accommodations at the meeting should call the Office of the Chief Clerk at 512-239-3300 or 1-800-RELAY-TX (TDD) at least one week prior to the meeting.
Issued: October 31, 2011
FOR PROPOSED AIR QUALITY PERMIT
PROPOSED PERMIT NUMBER 1157C
APPLICATION. Gulf Chemical & Metallurgical Corporation, P.O. Box 2290, Freeport, Texas 77542-2290, has applied to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) for an amendment to Air Quality Permit Number 1157C, which would authorize modification to a Molybdenum and Vanadian Recovery System at 302 Midway Road, Freeport, Brazoria County, Texas 77542-2290. The amendment will authorize an increase in emissions of the following air contaminants: ammonia, hydrogen chloride, ammonium sulfate, ammonium sulfite, volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, and particulate matter including particulate matter with diameters of 10 microns or less and 2.5 microns or less. This link to an electronic map of the site or facility’s general location is provided as a public courtesy and not part of the application or notice. For exact location, refer to the application. www.tceq.texas.gov/assets/public/hb610/index.html?lat=28.947406&lng=-95.315396&zoom=12&
The TCEQ Executive Director has completed the technical review of the application and prepared a draft permit which, if approved, would establish the conditions under which the facility must operate. The Executive Director has made a preliminary decision to issue the permit because it meets all rules and regulations.
PUBLIC COMMENT / PUBLIC MEETING. A public meeting will be held and will consist of two parts, an Informal Discussion Period and a Formal Comment Period. A public meeting is not a contested case hearing under the Administrative Procedure Act. During the Informal Discussion Period, the public will be encouraged to ask questions of the applicant and TCEQ staff concerning the permit application. The comments and questions submitted orally during the Informal Discussion Period will not be considered before a decision is reached on the permit application and no formal response will be made. Response will be provided orally during the Informal Discussion Period. During the Formal Discussion Period on the permit application, members of the public may state their formal comments orally into the official record. A written response to all formal comments will be prepared by the Executive Director. All formal comments will be considered before a decision is reached on the permit application. A copy of the written response will be sent to each person who submits a formal comment or who requested to be on the mailing list for this permit application and provides a mailing address. Only relevant and material issues raised during the Formal Comment Period can be considered if a contested case hearing is granted on this permit application.
The Public Meeting is to be held:
Tuesday, November 15, 2011 at 7:00 p.m.
Freeport River Place
733 Mystery Lane
Freeport, Texas 77541
INFORMATION. Citizens are encouraged to submit written comments anytime during the meeting or by mail before the public meeting to the Office of the Chief Clerk, TCEQ, Mail Code MC-105, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087 or electronically atwww.tceq.texas.gov/about/comments.html. If you choose to communicate with the TCEQ electronically, please be aware that your email address, like your physical mailing address, will become part of the agency’s public record. If you need more information about the permit application or the permitting process, please call the TCEQ Public Education Program, toll free, at 1-800-687-4040. General information can be found at our Web site at www.tceq.texas.gov. Si desea información en Español, puede llamar al 1-800-687-4040.
The permit application, Executive Director’s preliminary decision, and draft permit will be available for viewing and copying at the TCEQ Central Office located at 12100 Park 35 Circle, Building E, Room 103, Austin, Texas; the TCEQ Houston Regional Office located at 5425 Polk Street, Suite H, Houston, Texas 77023-1452; and at the Freeport Branch Library, 401 North Brazosport, Freeport, Brazoria County, Texas. The facility’s compliance file, if any exists, is available for public review at the TCEQ Houston Regional Office at the address located above. Further information may also be obtained from Gulf Chemical Metallurgical Corporation, P.O. Box 2290, Freeport, Texas 77542-2290 or by calling Mr. Nicholas Reba, Environmental Engineer at (979) 415-1589.
Persons with disabilities who need special accommodations at the meeting should call the Office of the Chief Clerk at 512-239-3300 or 1-800-RELAY-TX (TDD) at least one week prior to the meeting.
Issued: October 31, 2011
TALKING TRASH
Point of View: Part VChristopher Lee
Silence is golden. Golden as in gold, as in money… riches. We haven’t heard much on the dump lately except for the public relations ads that Green Group Holdings (GGH) has taken out in the local newspapers trying to brighten their image and convince everyone that everything is rainbows and unicorns. When in reality they are preparing to force the dump on the good citizens of Waller County whether they want it or not. You see, it is all about the money. The “gold” for the big corporation in Georgia. If dumps were so wonderful then why aren’t other communities beating down their doors to get one? Answer? Because they are not great. They are what they are, a dump, a place for garbage. A place where things get put that nobody else wants.
The sad truth is this. Your elected officials were either asleep at the wheel or in cahoots with GGH. Which is it Commissioner’s Court? This dump would not be an issue now, or in the future, if your county commissioners had done what they were supposed to do. What were they supposed to do? Act with responsibility and in the best interest of Waller County and it’s citizens, that’s what. Instead of a good ole boys club and business as usual they should have been plotting the course of Waller County for years to come. They should have been seeking public input at every turn. They should have been talking to constituents and officials from surrounding and other areas of the U.S. They should have had a plan.
Now it is too little too late. GGH is like a boa constrictor with its teeth sunk in and its coils around its prey. It’s going to happen because we weren’t protected by the people we elected to protect us. Now they are all talk about planning and looking to the future but guess what? The damage is done. Dumps, Power Lines, Trans-Corridors… what else are they going to allow to take hold on their watch? They know these things are coming long before they become an issue. Why is it they only seem to see dollar signs instead of people?
GGH is trying to change its image by a marketing campaign designed to give you a sense of security about the dump. Remember the lull before the storm. Once the dump starts you can’t get rid of it. Once it starts, it is here to stay. Once it starts, there is no stopping it. GGH may be true to their word. Are you willing to risk it? Are you willing to gamble with your future? Your children’s future? Your grandchildren’s future? How many big corporations have you seen do something solely because it benefits the community? How many big corporations have you seen that you are willing to trust? How many big corporations have you seen do something because it benefits them in some other way?
GGH is no different. Why are they doing all these great things? Not because they want to I assure you. It is because they are required by state or federal law, rules, or regulation. What they aren’t required to do by these have been negotiated by the Host Agreement. The key word here is negotiated. By definition that means they are getting something in return for giving something. So just what do you imagine your illustrious county commissioners have consented to giving? After all, they have had your best interest in mind during this whole ordeal. NOT! So what are they getting? Tax breaks? Special considerations? Future promises for growth or other dump sites? Don’t forget this wasn’t the only location they set their sights on in Waller County. Just what are we at risk for now? Only the commissioners know and I am sure they won’t tell.
Remember, the commissioners knew about this a year ago. Remember Otis Styers visited GGH in Atlanta early in the process. Remember that Otis Styers brought the County Engineer with him. Remember that Otis Styers did not share any information with the other commissioners or YOU. Remember that this dump is square in Otis Styer’s precinct. Remember NONE of your elected officials reported to you until it was too late and we the people forced their disclosure. Remember these things in the elections in March 2012 and again in November 2012.
Silence is golden. Golden as in gold, as in money… riches. We haven’t heard much on the dump lately except for the public relations ads that Green Group Holdings (GGH) has taken out in the local newspapers trying to brighten their image and convince everyone that everything is rainbows and unicorns. When in reality they are preparing to force the dump on the good citizens of Waller County whether they want it or not. You see, it is all about the money. The “gold” for the big corporation in Georgia. If dumps were so wonderful then why aren’t other communities beating down their doors to get one? Answer? Because they are not great. They are what they are, a dump, a place for garbage. A place where things get put that nobody else wants.
The sad truth is this. Your elected officials were either asleep at the wheel or in cahoots with GGH. Which is it Commissioner’s Court? This dump would not be an issue now, or in the future, if your county commissioners had done what they were supposed to do. What were they supposed to do? Act with responsibility and in the best interest of Waller County and it’s citizens, that’s what. Instead of a good ole boys club and business as usual they should have been plotting the course of Waller County for years to come. They should have been seeking public input at every turn. They should have been talking to constituents and officials from surrounding and other areas of the U.S. They should have had a plan.
Now it is too little too late. GGH is like a boa constrictor with its teeth sunk in and its coils around its prey. It’s going to happen because we weren’t protected by the people we elected to protect us. Now they are all talk about planning and looking to the future but guess what? The damage is done. Dumps, Power Lines, Trans-Corridors… what else are they going to allow to take hold on their watch? They know these things are coming long before they become an issue. Why is it they only seem to see dollar signs instead of people?
GGH is trying to change its image by a marketing campaign designed to give you a sense of security about the dump. Remember the lull before the storm. Once the dump starts you can’t get rid of it. Once it starts, it is here to stay. Once it starts, there is no stopping it. GGH may be true to their word. Are you willing to risk it? Are you willing to gamble with your future? Your children’s future? Your grandchildren’s future? How many big corporations have you seen do something solely because it benefits the community? How many big corporations have you seen that you are willing to trust? How many big corporations have you seen do something because it benefits them in some other way?
GGH is no different. Why are they doing all these great things? Not because they want to I assure you. It is because they are required by state or federal law, rules, or regulation. What they aren’t required to do by these have been negotiated by the Host Agreement. The key word here is negotiated. By definition that means they are getting something in return for giving something. So just what do you imagine your illustrious county commissioners have consented to giving? After all, they have had your best interest in mind during this whole ordeal. NOT! So what are they getting? Tax breaks? Special considerations? Future promises for growth or other dump sites? Don’t forget this wasn’t the only location they set their sights on in Waller County. Just what are we at risk for now? Only the commissioners know and I am sure they won’t tell.
Remember, the commissioners knew about this a year ago. Remember Otis Styers visited GGH in Atlanta early in the process. Remember that Otis Styers brought the County Engineer with him. Remember that Otis Styers did not share any information with the other commissioners or YOU. Remember that this dump is square in Otis Styer’s precinct. Remember NONE of your elected officials reported to you until it was too late and we the people forced their disclosure. Remember these things in the elections in March 2012 and again in November 2012.
WHAT DOES THIS MEAN? COMMISSIONERS COURT passes a resolution to limit landfills.
Tuesday, July 12, 2011 Commissioner’s Court approved a resolution limiting the location of landfills in Waller County.
Appears to be more LAWYER SPEAK! Is the resolution BINDING OR NON-BINDING? "LIMITING"? What does that mean? Please, will Commissioners Court DEFINE LIMIT. Are WALLER COUNTY RESIDENTS being sold out?
There are more LANDFILLS slated for Waller County.
1. WHO are the cancerous entities setting these projects up for our county?
2. WHO stands to gain from these projects?
3. WHO asked this company to come to Waller County?
4. WHO is involved in the land DEAL?
cont. local news
Appears to be more LAWYER SPEAK! Is the resolution BINDING OR NON-BINDING? "LIMITING"? What does that mean? Please, will Commissioners Court DEFINE LIMIT. Are WALLER COUNTY RESIDENTS being sold out?
There are more LANDFILLS slated for Waller County.
1. WHO are the cancerous entities setting these projects up for our county?
2. WHO stands to gain from these projects?
3. WHO asked this company to come to Waller County?
4. WHO is involved in the land DEAL?
cont. local news
WHAT TRASH MEANS TO YOU
According to the Environmental Protection Agency, the average American produces about 4.4 pounds (2 kg) of garbage a day, or a total of 29 pounds (13 kg) per week and 1,600 pounds (726 kg) a year. This only takes into consideration the average household member and does not count industrial waste or commercial trash. If this sounds like a staggering number, you would be surprised to know that Americans are not the number one producers of garbage in the world. In Mexico, the average household produces 30 percent more garbage than in America.
more...pg. 5 local news
more...pg. 5 local news
BREAKING NEWS
Department of Justice Objects to Texas Congressional Plan
DOJ will join the argument for a new Texas map
The U.S. Department of Justice filed a federal court brief earlier today objecting to the racially gerrymandered Republican drawn Texas congressional map. The DOJ objection is an important step forward in winning the federal court fight in Washington, D.C. and forcing a redrawn map that fairly reflects Texas’ growth over the last decade.
The Department of Justice will now argue in alliance with intervener groups before a three-judge panel in the DC Federal District Court that the Texas map should be overturned and a new plan drawn. The Lone Star Project and the Texas Justice Fund support the intervener group led by State Representative Marc Veasey (HD95 – Fort Worth) which was the first to be approved by the federal court. Other intervener groups supported by Hispanic and African American advocacy organizations are party to the suit as well.
The DOJ objection positions the department in alliance with the intervener groups and in opposition to the Texas Republican State officials when arguing to the federal courts. The DC Federal Court is expected to set a time-table for legal discovery and a trial on the merits within the next several days.
What Happens Next?
The three-judge panel in Washington, D.C. will set a trial schedule to hear formal arguments from all parties to the suit and make a final determination whether or not the Texas plan violates Section 5 of the US Voting Rights Act. The Department of Justice will argue against the State of Texas before the three-judge federal panel in Washington, DC.
After the DC Court rules, the focus will shift back to Texas, where the San Antonio Court will make its decision on possible Section 2 violation and then order redrawn maps if required.
Last week, a Federal District Court in San Antonio completed a trial hearing arguments that the Texas Congressional and State House plans violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act requiring state plans to reflect the voting strength of citizens. The three-judge panel in Texas will hold off on issuing an opinion on that trial until the DC Court rules whether the Texas plans violate Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act preventing plans from reducing the existing opportunities of minority voters.
Comments by Lone Star Project Director Matt Angle:
"No one should be surprised by the DOJ opposition to the Texas Republican map. Texas Republicans ignored the Voting Rights Act to draw an overtly partisan racial gerrymander. It is an assault on the Voting Rights Act."
"Over and over Republicans show they would rather destroy minority voting strength than work to earn minority votes."
"The DOJ's position is further proof that Texas leaders have failed the voters. Their map will cost Texans hundreds of thousands to defend before it is ultimately found to be illegal and redrawn."
September 19, 2011 3:21 PM
DOJ Weighs in on SBOE Maps, says it lacks enough
info to clear House, Congressional maps
More information needed to clear House, Congressional maps under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. Hence the final paragraph of this brief says:
CLARIFICATION: The Department of Justice is a merely a resource witness (albeit a very important one) in this redistricting drama. The final decision on all four of the maps remains with the DC Court. As DOJ noted, "“The proposed Senate plan [and State Board of Education plan] has no force or effect unless and until this Court determines that the plan meets the requirements of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.”
From the Department of Justice: "Defendants believe that the scope of the issues between the parties can be substantially narrowed. In order to establish the districts that remain at issue in this litigation, Defendants will present proposed stipulations to Plaintiff and to the Defendant-Intervenors on or before September 20, 2011."
The DOJ submission can be found here.
Copyright September 19, 2011, Harvey Kronberg, www.quorumreport.com, All rights are reserved
Can't Move Forward With Redistricting Plans
Judges Say Texas Can't Move Forward With Redistricting Plans The Feds Say Are DiscriminatoryRyan J. Reilly | September 30, 2011, 2:30PM320ShareTexas not to move forward with redistricting plans for both congressional and state legislative seats until they are approved in court.
Justice Department lawyers have declared in court that they believe the congressional and statehouse redistricting plans signed into law by Gov. Rick Perry have been adopted at least in part for the purpose of "diminishing the ability of citizens of the United States, on account of race, color, or membership in a language minority group, to elect their preferred candidates."
They've argued that regardless of intent, the plans would have the effect of diminishing the ability of Hispanic voters to pick their preferred candidates.
A panel of three federal judges in San Antonioruled that Texas should wait until the courts rule on the legality of the maps. In San Antonio, the panel of judges has heard testimony about the maps but hasn't ruled on their legality, while the D.C. panel -- charged with deciding whether to preclear the maps -- won't hold hearings for a month, according to the Texas Tribune. The court in San Antonio is handling a separate suit filed by opponents of the plan, while court in D.C. is handling the suit involving the Justice Department.
"According to the Texas Election Code, any changes that must be made in the county election precinct boundaries 'to give effect to a redistricting plan' must be finalized by October 1, 2011," the judges wrote,according to the Texas Tribune. "Because the redistricting plans have not been precleared ... all persons or entities that would otherwise have a duty under Section 42.032 of the Texas Election Code are relieved of those duties until further order of the Court."
Justice Department lawyers have declared in court that they believe the congressional and statehouse redistricting plans signed into law by Gov. Rick Perry have been adopted at least in part for the purpose of "diminishing the ability of citizens of the United States, on account of race, color, or membership in a language minority group, to elect their preferred candidates."
They've argued that regardless of intent, the plans would have the effect of diminishing the ability of Hispanic voters to pick their preferred candidates.
A panel of three federal judges in San Antonioruled that Texas should wait until the courts rule on the legality of the maps. In San Antonio, the panel of judges has heard testimony about the maps but hasn't ruled on their legality, while the D.C. panel -- charged with deciding whether to preclear the maps -- won't hold hearings for a month, according to the Texas Tribune. The court in San Antonio is handling a separate suit filed by opponents of the plan, while court in D.C. is handling the suit involving the Justice Department.
"According to the Texas Election Code, any changes that must be made in the county election precinct boundaries 'to give effect to a redistricting plan' must be finalized by October 1, 2011," the judges wrote,according to the Texas Tribune. "Because the redistricting plans have not been precleared ... all persons or entities that would otherwise have a duty under Section 42.032 of the Texas Election Code are relieved of those duties until further order of the Court."
Pol. Adv. paid for by the Waller County Democratic Party. This communication is not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee and is to be applied to every page on this website.