Democrats will likely maintain their strong hold on the County Council with some variation on two similar redistricting proposals that aim to increase the party's presence in Columbia.
A Republican alternative - which aims to dilute Democratic power in Columbia - also is up for consideration. But with Democrats dominating the Redistricting Commission and the County Council, it's doubtful the Republicans will have much of a chance.
"They have the votes," said Councilman Allan H. Kittleman, a District 5 Republican. "We can make them defend their positions, and I will certainly do that when it comes to the council, but they can vote where they want to vote."
The public will be able to comment on the three proposals at a Sept. 13 hearing, and the commission is to send one plan to the council by Oct. 15 for approval.
Commission Chairman David Marker said he thinks a compromise can be easily reached between his and fellow Democrat Priscilla M. Hart's proposal. Both plans would strengthen the party's presence in Districts 2, 3 and 4, which include Columbia and vicinity.
Hart's proposal includes moving Dorsey Hall from District 1 to District 4, putting Owen Brown village in District 3 and moving the boundaries of District 5 to include more of the southeastern part of the county.
Marker's proposal also would unite nearly all of Owen Brown village in District 3, put the areas along Route 216 and Gorman Road in District 5 and move the northern edge of District 2 south of Route 100.
In 1996, voters passed guidelines for the makeup of the commission - each major party picks three members and the County Council selects the seventh member, who heads the committee - ultimately resulting in one party holding the power.
The Democrats are benefiting from those guidelines. They control the commission by a 4-3 margin. They hold a 3-2 lead on the council.
But that doesn't keep the Republicans from trying to increase their power.
Republican perspective
The boldest Republican plan, submitted by Michael J. Deets, originally proposed to condense Columbia into two districts and shift the district boundaries in a way that would have moved incumbent Democratic Council Chairman Guy J. Guzzone from District 3, which includes North Laurel and Savage.
That would have resulted in Guzzone representing about 90 percent new voters and increased the Republicans' chances of gaining a majority on the council.
At the commission's meeting last week, Deets altered his proposal - which will be presented at the hearing - to have Guzzone's district boundaries include more of the U.S. 1 corridor near Jessup but not the North Laurel area.
The plan would divide Columbia among three districts and move Wilde Lake from District 4 to District 2, increasing the chances of electing a Republican in the District 4.
It also would bring together in District 4 most of the southern part of the county, currently divided between districts 3 and 4.
Deets said he favored his earlier proposal but had to compromise because the Democrats have never liked the idea of condensing Columbia into two districts.
"There's nothing preventing them from passing a plan that's highly partisan and self-serving, so we just have to do the very best we can to represent issues of fairness," he said.
Guzzone said it would have been "unlikely" for Deets' original plan to be accepted. But he doesn't fault Deets for trying - it's all about politics, he said.
"Would I get mad at someone for doing what's best for their party?" Guzzone said. "No. I understand where they're coming from."
Kittleman said he agrees with Deets' original idea of condensing Columbia because the area has only 40 percent of the county's population.
He said the Democrats' proposed boundaries are predictable, claiming they are trying to pack Districts 1 and 5 with Republicans and keep the other districts full of Democrats.
"I will be happy to represent anyone they put in my district," Kittleman said. "Whatever they want to give me, I'll take."
Census numbers
The council has until spring to make a final decision on a redistricting plan that adapts to the population shifts recorded in the 2000 census and keeps districts close to an ideal average population of 49,568 per district.
The census figures show that Guzzone's district is 9.5 percent below that average, while Republican Councilman Christopher J. Merdon's District 1, including Ellicott City and Elkridge, is 5.5 percent over. A variation of up to 5 percent is allowed by federal courts.
Despite the political maneuverings, Guzzone said he expects the county to have a new map of councilmanic districts within a reasonable time and with little controversy.
"The simple facts of the matter are that the Democrats will do what's best for the Democrats, and the Republicans will present a plan that's best for the Republicans," Guzzone said.
"And that's the way it is."
