DMAC Meeting #3
Critics say communities of interest were never considered. The third DMAC meeting tells a different story. The committee traveled to Sisters, heard from ten residents, debated what “community” means for over an hour, and then voted to start drawing maps.
What Was at Stake
By the third meeting, opponents were already framing the process as a rush job. They said the committee was skipping important steps. One major claim was that “communities of interest” — the groups of people who share common needs and should be kept together in a district — were being ignored. Oregon law requires that districts not unreasonably divide these communities. If the committee had skipped that step, the whole map could be challenged. This meeting was where the committee took it head-on. Every member shared their definition. The debate was substantive, public, and recorded.
Who Spoke
Ten residents testified. The committee met at Sisters City Hall — the first meeting held outside Bend — so people in the north part of the county could attend without a long drive.
Rodney Cooper from the Sisters area urged the committee not to concentrate all five districts around one city. Cheryl Pellerin, a Sisters City Councilor, brought Portland State University population forecasts. The numbers were striking. Sisters is projected to grow 130% over the next 25 years. La Pine is projected to grow 87%. These are not small communities that will stay small.
Greg Bryant cited census-based population estimates showing Redmond rising from 33,274 in 2020 to 37,009 in 2023. He said fast-growing Redmond deserves its own commissioner district. Michael Tripp submitted his own hand-drawn map. He said the exercise showed just how few precinct combinations actually satisfy the committee’s stated rules.
Not everyone agreed with districts. Monica Tomosy of Sisters said the process was unclear and being pushed by two commissioners. Bryce Kellogg from Bend said the process was inherently partisan and that five at-large seats would better serve a liberal base. Samantha Smith from Redmond repeated that the timeline was too rushed. John Nielsen from Redmond asked whether voters should decide if they even want districts before a map is drawn. Mary Fleischman suggested the committee evaluate four districts plus one at-large seat.
The committee heard supporters, skeptics, and outright opponents. That is what an open process looks like.
What Happened
The heart of this meeting was the communities of interest discussion. Each committee member shared what the phrase meant to them.
Kebler stressed keeping incorporated cities and recognizable unincorporated areas like Tumalo and Terrebonne intact within a single district. He warned that using voter registration totals alone would overlook roughly 6,700 non-registered Bend residents in five precincts. Those people still need representation even if they are not registered to vote.
Dempsey took a different view. He favored using current voter registration as a practical stand-in for population, since the 2020 Census was already outdated.
Henderson said cities and their nearby unincorporated areas form natural communities. He pointed to functional boundaries — fire districts and sheriff patrol zones — as more meaningful than school district lines. Henderson also addressed the gerrymandering question directly. Gerrymandering, he said, is “when one political party has enough clout to create a map to what they want.” He noted the county is fairly well balanced, with a large share of the population identified as non-affiliated.
Brader urged simplicity. He confirmed the group is not redistricting — they are districting for the first time. Population alone, he said, could define shared interests without creating an unmanageable list of criteria.
Loesche warned against drawing lines around partisan concentrations. That, she said, is the path to gerrymandering.
No single definition won. But every member put their thinking on the record. The public could watch, listen, and judge for themselves.
Then the committee voted. A motion directing staff to prepare draft five-district maps passed 5-2. Staff would use the criteria the committee had discussed: cities, unincorporated communities, service-district boundaries, and reference maps. Michael Tripp’s community-submitted map would also be formatted in the same style for comparison.
A second motion — to also draft a four-district-plus-at-large alternative — failed 4-3. The fact that it was debated and voted on shows the process was not scripted. Members disagreed. They voted. The majority decided.
What This Means
Right now, under at-large voting, Bend’s roughly 50% population share means Bend voters can dominate every commissioner race. Sisters, Redmond, La Pine, and south county don’t get their own voice. Districts change that. Each community elects its own commissioner.
The third meeting proves that communities of interest were central to the process — not an afterthought. Every member defined the concept in their own words. The debate lasted over an hour. Growth data from PSU showed that Sisters and La Pine are going to keep getting bigger. Redmond’s population was already rising fast. These communities need a seat at the table that Bend voters can’t take away. Districts give them that seat.