If there’s anything that gets people fired up in politics, it’s the topic of where to draw the lines that separate one voting bloc from another. In Texas right now, it’s a fight that may wind its way to the Supreme Court. In Deschutes County, it’s shaping up to be a bitter battle.
For the past several months, the District Mapping Advisory Committee, a group appointed by the current Deschutes County Board of County Commissioners, has been working to create maps that divide Deschutes County into five separate districts. County commissioners wanted to explore the idea of residents having direct representation from the commissioner that represents their district. The map that the DMAC selected — and selected one week ahead of its last meeting, to the chagrin of some — gives Bend two districts, with a third that incorporates southeast Bend and southern Deschutes County. Redmond has its own district, and Sisters and the western portion of the County have another. County commissioners will now vote on whether to bring this map before voters in an upcoming election. By the way some tell it, the map selected aims to create a Republican majority by offering the highest-population city, Bend, just two distinct seats.
The thing is, the seats on the county commission are supposed to be nonpartisan. Deschutes County voters dictated it so in 2022. Now some are crying foul, saying that partisan politics are driving the creation of the map. With U.S. Census data outdated, committee members struggled about what data to use to predict growth — and if growth should be considered at all at this time. Opponents of the map selected say the committee’s use of voting records was highly unusual, and points to partisan gerrymandering.
While the current map certainly shades to that, it has us asking: Does a county really have such distinct populations that district maps and district representation is needed at all?
Will commissioners from one district stop caring about the greater good in the entire county?
The County’s work covers a lot of ground: a vast health department, managing the landfill, the sheriff’s office and tackling land use issues, among others. These county-wide concerns are tackled for the good of all people in the county. We struggle to see how dividing county residents into districts is going to make one commissioner more of an expert on these county-wide issues, or how it’s going to provide better service for all of us. Will the creation of districts make health department dollars flow into one district and not another? Will sheriff’s deputies be encouraged to patrol certain parts of the county over others, based on the support they get from one district’s commissioner or another? Will commissioners from one district stop caring about the greater good in the entire county? We’d certainly hope not.
Some in Deschutes County may want this process to be politicized, and for the creation of districts to tip the scales in favor of one party or another. But with the creation of a nonpartisan commission, that’s not what voters have said they wanted. We’d wager that the creation of districts is going to make the public feel more disenfranchised. Most will want to see all five commissioners as one body, ideally advocating for the good of the entire county.
The folks who made up the DMAC had a job, and they diligently did what they were asked to do. But as the process has unfolded and we’ve seen the product of its work, it leaves us with a broader question: Is all of this just a solution in search of a problem?
As we prepare to add two more commissioners to the Deschutes County Board of County Commissioners, we think it’s fair to have gone through this process. This is the time to consider all the options. But now that the process has unfolded — in a time when nationally, partisan rancor is at an all-time high — we’ve come to believe that separating people into distinct districts and allowing them to vote for just one commissioner is not the ideal way to go.
Fortunately, the public will have the chance to weigh in on this, several times. People can share their views with the existing county commissioners at their upcoming meetings, for one. And if those commissioners do vote to put the map issue on the ballot, voters will get to vote on it next year.
For this editorial board, we’re leaning toward a no.
This article appears in Source Weekly November 27, 2025.
MAKE LOCAL JOURNALISM HAPPEN
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
I wrote a Guest Column for the Bulletin that was published August 1 expressing concerns about the process and makeup of the DMAC (on a typical 2-1 vote) then attended every meeting. either in person or online, to attend to the DMAC product. All were unacceptable, and given the remit of County Commissioners, I 100% agree with The Source editorial that the very idea of Districts and limiting our vote to one person are unwise. Our last opportunity to weigh in on placing a measure on the ballot before the County (that will no doubt incur expense defending it with taxpayer money) will be Monday 12/1 OR via email to citizeninput@deschutes.org.
I am in total agreement with your point. All along I thought the districting was creating a complicated and difficult plan. Just let us vote for the most qualified representatives for our county.
I agree with the Source. Voting for commissioner positions “at large” is the best way to handle this…..vote “no” on districting.
Including voter registration/voting data was a serious flaw in the DMAC’s process. However, moving toward all at-large representation risks a majority of council members being from one part of the county. People from La Pine, Sisters or Alfalfa may not feel well represented by councilors from NW Crossing. In their favor, the maps as presented do have relatively equal population, are contiguous and represent areas with similar outlooks.