First, it’s not clear that the mapping consultants actually carried out the wishes of the Commissioners when they produced the original Grid Map.  The instructions agreed on by the Commissioners stated that the starting point would be the “Township Median” of the state, and rotate clockwise, gathering voters in neighboring census blocks until the target number for a district was reached.  However, the commission omitted the other important instruction, namely which direction from census block containing the township median should be the next one.  Should it be the one directly above it?  Or to the right?  Or perhaps below it?  The question is really which block is clockwise from the one in the center?  That choice would have affected the boundaries of the resulting Grid Map in subtle ways.  But because the Commission failed to specify it, that choice was left to the mapping consultants, who had to act on an assumption in order to generate the map on time.  We also don’t know how neighboring blocks were combined to grow each district, but they appear to have been added radiating from the starting point.  The published diagram on the website doesn’t tell us much.  In any case, the choices they made have never been shared with the public, leading us to question the process they used to create the Grid Map.

My second concern has to do with the mapping software that’s been offered to help adjust the boundaries of the Grid Map when proposing new districts.  It’s just plain too difficult to use.  I’m an experienced software developer and I’ve tinkered with it for hours without finishing a single map.  Even with the training that’s been offered, if I struggle with it how do you expect the public at large to use it?  I doubt that 1% of them would have any success trying to figure out how to change boundaries or deal with the consequent ripple effects, much less how to get their proposed map to the point it’s worth submitting, assuming they can figure out how to accomplish that.  The Commission must be willing to accept maps submitted by other means and make sure they are input into the system so we can see them and so that they are not perceived to be disregarded or considered of lesser importance than those submitted through the current tool that are proposed by extremely savvy individuals or by powerful organizations that can afford to hire mapping professionals to promote their own agendas.  It’s the only way to get public input.

Finally, during the public training on the software, much was made about how individuals could share their maps with others so they could collaborate.  But, that functionality is not enabled for the average user.  According to Esri Tech Support, that must be configured by someone in the role of Administrator.  Although I submitted that information through your Contact Us form, but there’s been no response yet.  Given that Timmons has stated they will NOT provide technical support for their product to the public – the people who are footing the bill for their services – I suspect it will continue to be ignored.  In the meantime, there are people who would like to collaborate on maps as a Group.  Please ask Timmons to ensure this capability is enabled as soon as possible so we don’t waste more time waiting.

Thank you for your time.

William Bowlus-Root

A concerned citizen