Judge delays Nassau County redistricting

Supreme Court Justice Steven M. Jaeger ruled on July 21 that the Nassau County redistricting plan — which was crafted by the county attorney’s office at the suggestion of Peter Schmitt, a Republican who represents the 12th Legislative District — does not apply to the 2011 election. Jaeger went on to say that 2013 would be the earliest the Nassau redistricting plan could be put into use. 


“There is no basis in the Nassau County Charter itself, the legislative intent, the legislative history, or the established past practice of the legislature to immediately adjust the 19 county legislative districts for the 2011 general election,” Jaeger wrote in his ruling. He added that although the adoption of the plan is in accord with the Nassau County Charter, it did not follow the appropriate format.

Section 112 of the charter, Jaeger explained, requires that district lines be “described” by the Legislature within six months after it receives data from the U.S. Census — not redrawn, as Republicans contend. According to Jaeger’s ruling, the charter requires the redistricting process to begin in 2012 and end in 2013, in time for the 2013 election — which Democrats have long argued. The charter requires legislative districts to be redrawn every 10 years, and the last map was drawn in 2003.

County Legislator Howard Kopel (R-Lawrence) who represents the 7th L.D. said he will abide by whatever the law is and handle his constituents’ issues no matter who he is representing.

“I was happy with the old district and the friends I have and if it is changed I will make new friends in keep in touch with the old ones,” said Kopel, who previously fought for and won a concession that in a revised plan a majority of the Five Towns would remain in the 7th L.D..

Schmitt said he believed that immediate redistricting was required because the current population deviation –– the difference between the least and most populous districts –– stands at 22.7 percent, which he believes violates the U.S. Constitution’s equal-protection clause.

Democrats, however, have speculated that the GOP plan was established hastily in order to benefit Republican candidates in the upcoming election.