Jury keeps officers, nixes changes to districts

Published 12:00 am Monday, January 13, 2003

VIDALIA &045; For many people, the beginning of the year is a time for change. But in its first meeting of 2003, the Concordia Parish Police Jury decided to keep some things the same.

The jury started its proceedings with the election of new officers. When no one made any nominations for the president and vice president slots, Police Juror Cathy Darden moved that President Rodney Smith and Vice President Red Tiffee continue their tenure.

The jury also nixed a few small changes proposed by Parish Planner Oliver Schultz to the reapportionment plan he unveiled last month.

Email newsletter signup

While the jury did allow for a shift of 10 to 15 households from Melvin Ferrington’s district to Smith’s district, Schultz’s plan to adjust the lines to account for an inaccurate census map caused a great uproar in the jury chambers.

Schultz explained that the way the census map reads, it appears that School Board President Mike Grantham lives in his own district. An accurate map from satellite photos show other wise, though, and Schultz said he doubted the school board would agree to the proposal if it weren’t tweaked a bit.

&uot;The school board is not going to approve this plan the way it’s drawn,&uot; Schultz said.

The jury didn’t go for the tweaking, which would have transferred a handful of houses from Charlie Blaney’s district to Ferrington’s district.

Police Juror Gene Allen said he didn’t care if the map didn’t meet the approval of the school board if it happened to be pleasing to the jury.

&uot;It doesn’t matter,&uot; he said.

Ferrington ordered Schultz to undo what he had done since his last visit.

&uot;We ain’t going to do it,&uot; Ferrington said. &uot;You go back with your pencil on this.&uot;

Expressing dissatisfaction with Schultz’ progress on the remap, which is several months past due, Allen even suggested hiring a new planner. To Schultz, he said, &uot;I am sick of you.&uot;

Schultz complied with the jury’s wishes, stating simply at the end of the discussion, &uot;We’re leaving it the way it is.&uot;