MONTICELLO, NY — Sullivan County’s legislative districts are due for an update.

The last round of redistricting took place in 2014, prior to years of growth, a global pandemic and a slew of population shifts. Insofar as these shifts are reflected in the 2020 census, the county has to redo its legislative maps, which determine the districts for the nine members of the Sullivan County Legislature.

Consultant Dave Heller of Main Street Communications (MSC) was hired in April to draw up a trio of potential maps for the legislature to consider and to vote on. Heller did so, and the maps were released on June 22 for public consideration. The public has had chances to weigh in since then at legislature meetings and with written comments.

Anne Hart, chair of the Sullivan County Democratic Committee, indicated that some of the county’s towns would be sending in comments on how the maps would affect them, though the state committee was not in a position to comment at length. “I’m certainly hoping for a robust and thoughtful set of public comments,” said Hart.

Hart’s counterpoint on the county’s Republican committee, Gary Maas, had similar comments from the county-eye view: the party was waiting to see where redistricting led.

“Things have changed, but that don’t matter to us too awful much,” said Maas. The legislature would kick it around, and the Republican majority helmed by chair Rob Doherty likely had its preference, he added; his guess was that they preferred option one.

Reporting from the Sullivan County Democrat indicates that Democratic legislator Nadia Rajsz as well as Doherty prefer option one out of the three maps on offer.

Option one has attracted negative attention in the Town of Tusten, one of the towns affected by the redistricting shifts.

Tusten currently exists wholly within district one. Redistricting options two and three would move it entirely to district five, while option one would split it between districts two and five.

“I can’t live with number one,” said Rick Lander, chair of the Town of Tusten Republican committee. There’s no reason to split the town up, he said; legislators keep saying it has to go by the numbers, but it should go by the town as well.

Lander has been advocating privately with legislators, expressing concerns with option one, he said; “I know through the census you have to change it, but there should be rules to keep [towns] whole.”

The Tusten Democrats have also weighed in on option one, attempting to rally outraged comments to be sent to the county legislature in advance of its July 21 vote.

“This is not a Democrat, a Republican or any other individual party issue,” wrote local advocate Star Hesse, putting out the call for comments. “If option one is approved, the voting strength of the whole Town of Tusten will be shattered and split between two districts.”

Concerns about towns being split on the maps came up during a July 7 meeting of the Sullivan County Legislature.

Legislator and Democratic minority leader Ira Steingart said that the rules the body had discussed for the maps—including not splitting up towns and villages—had been followed for some districts and not for others. He asked if the legislature could get an affidavit from Heller ensuring

that he hadn’t taken private direction from any legislator while creating the maps.

Legislator Michael Brooks said in response, “Every 10 years when redistricting comes around, we all know what the parameters are… Anybody can pick anything apart… There’s always going to be pieces of your district you’re maybe not going to be thrilled about.”

“Mike, I get that, [and that] it’s always a five-to-four vote,” said Steingart, referring to Doherty’s majority against his minority coalition. All the same, he said, he wanted to make sure that the process had been followed.

Other legislators asked to slow the process down, to allow for time to examine the maps more closely and to tweak them if necessary. Legislator Luis Alvarez said he had checked the numbers on the maps, and that they all added up, but that the maps themselves could be better.

Asking for an affidavit seemed a little accusatory, said Doherty. The legislators could ask Heller to come and explain his reasoning, but Heller was not required by their contract to do so.

Doherty appeared to close off the idea of tweaking the maps before they got passed. “I can tell you, voting on the maps will be on executive and will be on full board, so this might all be moot by then.”

Still curious? Click here for a roundup of redistricting information.