Which District Are You?

Are you wondering what new Magisterial (Supervisor) District you’re in? Loudoun County has made a tool available online from which you can drill down to your block and see!

http://logis.loudoun.gov/redistricting/

Photobucket

Major kudos to the Loudoun County staff who put this excellent piece of public communication together!

25 thoughts on “Which District Are You?

  1. Gerry Mander

    Awesome! I’m in that strangely shaped district which I understand Andrea McGimsey will be running in. I typically vote Democrat but won’t under any circumstance be voting for her. She’s the reason Loudoun was gerrymandered like this.

  2. Epluribusunum

    Gerry – you may be an exception, but my inclination is to think that someone who typically votes Democratic would know the correct word to use in describing that action. That’s why I’m a bit skeptical of statements like this. Often they seem to be made by people who had no intention of voting for the candidate being criticized, but who wish to create an impression of greater credibility in the service of some agenda. I’m not saying I don’t believe there are people like your pseudonym, just that I’m skeptical of this sort of comment.

  3. Barbara Munsey

    David, while I agree that it is fairly common anonymous blog technique to say “I am a lifelong Republican BUT…”, I DO think Ms. McGimsey will have an uphill battle, no matter how they carve up the county to create a district to her liking.

    It fits the definition of gerrymandering to a tee.

    As do several other features of this ridiculous plan.

  4. Paradox13

    A gerrymander is any district drawn in a manner you don’t like.

    The district that Supervisor McGimsey represents under the new plan contains all the major planned future mixed-use developments, as well as a majority of the drainage of Broad Run. As development and water have proven to be critical issues, it seems to me that linking people with similar interests on those two issues is a reasonable way to draw a District.

    It is no more arbitrary than having a neighborhood in Catoctin surrounded on both the East and West by Leesburg District neighborhoods. Or, for that matter, linking folks in low-income housing on the south side of Leesburg with wineries at the north end of the County, which the HOA plan(s) did.

  5. Barbara Munsey

    Drawing the districts by watershed is an interesting concept, and one of the principles of bioregionalist politics.

    However, the districts are to be drawn in a compact and contiguous manner, preserving communities of interest, with representation by HUMAN population.

    From Wikipedia, on the conflicts of bioregional politics: “The tenets of bioregionalism are often used by green movements, which oppose political organizations whose boundaries conform to existing electoral districts. This problem is perceived to result in elected representatives voting in accordance with their constituents, some of whom may live outside a defined bioregion, and may run counter to the well-being of the bioregion … Furthermore, bioregionalism has been used to magnify the voting power of highly concentrated groups of greens living in remote areas.”

    Sounds like it fits.

    The Chesapeake Bay watershed is a defined “bioregion”.

    The Piedmont is another.

  6. Barbara Munsey

    Mr. McKeon, trolls tend not to use their names, and also don’t discuss the issues on the thread.

    As your post seems to be a simple ad hominem non sequitor, it seems to fit the definition better than the opinions I’ve posted, but as noted, that’s just my opinion.

  7. Charlie McKeon

    Andrea McGimsey is a very hard-working supervisor with a constant eye towards quality in all aspects of the development of this county. She’s a graduate of MIT, one of America’s very best schools. I think the county is very lucky to have someone with that caliber on its board. I support her one hundred percent.

  8. Charlie McKeon

    Barbara, you don’t see all the others throwing their wet blankets on the sites of the opposition. I don’t do it. To me it’s the online equivalent of hecklers.

  9. Barbara Munsey

    If it rises to that level in the opinion of the admins, then I imagine they’ll delete me.

    However, I don’t know how useful a restricted echo chamber would be.

    Unless it plans to be an in-kind donation, in which case that’s paperwork and declaration for somebody.

    As much as I may disagree with those operating this site on some issues, I really don’t wish the hassle of having to maintain that kind of documentation on a volunteer effort at blogging!

  10. Paradox13

    Ms. Munsey, until your post, I had never heard of bioregionalism. It is not, in any way, what I was intending to refer to.

    My point was, and remains, that people who live along a single, local waterway in a single, local county, have common interests in the quality of that water. Now, prior to 2010, that may not have been a voting issue or even a recognizable community issue. However, in light of the debates that happened last year and this year, it is reasonable to use that criteria when considering and evaluating local District lines.

    This is not to say that watershed should be the defining or sole criteria, but I believe it appropriate for it to be one of the criteria.

  11. Liz Miller

    All, I’m going to agree with Barbara on the “trolling” issue.

    As long as commenters stick to the topic at hand, and don’t break our commenting policy, I don’t consider it trolling. Barbara posts everywhere. She is part of the conversation. She seems to enjoy a debate. She also seems to know that not engaging with her is not conceding the point, but lack of desire to take it up with her on that particular day.

    There are other posters in the Loudoun blogosphere that truly do fit the description of Troll. Barbara isn’t one of them, in my own opinion.

  12. Barbara Munsey

    Paradox, the idea that concerns for a particular body of water are logical reasons to make political divisions is a base tenet of the bioregional philosophy.

    It redefines communities of interest, and negates many of the basic organizational functions of government.

    Water quality and environmental regulation are overarching concerns, and to focus on specific drainage basins as a political unifier over other issues more specifically recognized in voting, tax collection and structure, etc is an amazing redistribution of voting.

    IOW, you may never have heard of bioregionalism by that name, but you seem to support the concept.

  13. Charlie McKeon

    Say what you like, Liz – I respect your opinion – but look what’s become of an innocent post about how to find what district you’re in.

  14. Barbara Munsey

    As one of the admins introduced a justification for drawing districts by watershed, I’ll be happy to defer to the admins in whether responding to that topic of the discussion is pertinent or not.

  15. Liz Miller

    Gerry Mander started that one, NOT Barbara.

    It’s not your responsibility on this blog to call people out, it’s mine and my co-bloggers.

    If you think we’re failing on that, feel free to email me to say so, but calling others out for derailing is, itself, derailing the topic.

  16. Paradox13

    Barbara,

    We redefine communities of interests all the time. Just this year, the “HOA” community of interest appeared on the scene. Before that we’ve had schools communities of interest, Rt. 28 communities of interest, etc. In fact, every major developmental decision made by the Board redefines and recalibrates local communities of interest by changing traffic flow, school boundaries, water sources, even stores! Here in Leesburg, for example, there is a very very clear “Wegmans” community of interest.

    Your position, however, is that this community of interest (a school boundary for example) is more important than that community of interest (a watershed). And therefore the watershed community of interest can simply be dismissed as irrelevant and not worth consideration in the discussion.

    And on that, I disagree.

    And as for negating the basic organizational functions of government, that is untrue. Clean water and clean are ARE a function of government, especially when governmental decisions over development and land use are the reason we have debates over water and air quality.

    But that’s just my opinion.

  17. Paradox13

    No one wants anyone to “shut up.”

    It’s a matter of discussing the topic, rather than the author.

    I know you have some good and valid thoughts on the districts, Charlie. Your post about Andrea above is one I strongly agree with, for example. That is, I believe, what this post is discussing.

  18. Liz Miller

    No, you’re being asked to contribute to the conversation, not stifle it.

    This is supposed to be a place for discussion, debate, and exchanges of ideas. Disagreements are allowed about everything EXCEPT THE COMMENTING POLICY, where MY WORD IS LAW.

    Barbara is not a troll. Neither are you, Charlie. Please now begin to debate Barbara on the issues.

    Thank you.

  19. Barbara Munsey

    Paradox, I am not negating water quality as important. As I said, that is an overarching concern.

    Government as we know it is not organized around protecting a specific stream, etc. It is organized around doing in common what the individual cannot do as efficiently, i.e. build and maintain a road for the benefit of all who contribute through taxes, and benefit from the mobility either for personal use, trade etc.

    Where that road is will be subject to the overarching environmental regulations, etc.

    Since we have government/taxes/representation based on service needs at rock bottom, I have some qualms about redefining the base unit to be simple hyperlocal environmental features.

  20. Epluribusunum

    Not at all. I think we’re all smart enough to have a conversation involving a diversity of views (otherwise, what’s the point of a conversation?), and also recognize and identify attempts at derailing and changing the subject where that arises. I think we’ve been clear about the behaviors we won’t tolerate here, and those are pretty limited. Disagreeing with us isn’t one of them; besides, we may disagree with each other from time to time.

  21. Late to the discussion

    I’m a Democrat leaning independent. Nice blog Ms Miller.

    I was disappointed in the final district map. I understand the Democrat majority got to divide up the new district pie – elections have consequences. But I have to ask – what were they thinking? Those results appear to be completely politically drawn to help their own. How obvious can you be? I don’t see much objectivity or fairness or concern for the what the average joe may think of it. And yes – the new district drawn for Supervisor McGimsey just doesn’t look right. Isn’t she the lucky one? That’s not what candidacy and respresentation is supposed to be about. It isn’t pretty.

    With leadership comes responsibility. An opportunity was blown here.

    It is what it is. I thought I was over it till I read this blog and all the comments rationalizing what happened.

Comments are closed.