Opinion ID: 2515815
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: S48874, McDonnell v. Bradbury

Text: Petitioner McDonnell did not submit a brief. We consider the arguments set out in her petition. [23] Petitioner McDonnell challenges the plan of reapportionment as it applies to Sunriver. She contends that House District 53:(1) violates ORS 188.010(1)(d) because it splits a community of interest between Sunriver and Bend; and (2) violates ORS 188.010(1)(e) because no transportation link within the district connects the northern half with the southern half (all transportation links go through Bend, which is in House District 54). House District 54 consists of the City of Bend and a very small amount of the surrounding area. House District 53, which entirely surrounds House District 54, consists of most of the remainder of Deschutes County, including Sunriver. Petitioner McDonnell argues, in effect, that some (unidentified) part of Bend has a greater community of interest with Sunriver than it does with the remainder of Bend. That allegation, and Petitioner McDonnell's other assertions, merely seek to substitute her judgment for that of the Secretary of State regarding communities of common interest. Transportation links are one criterion that the Secretary must consider, and he did so; but, as we have noted, he is not required to consider that criterion in a vacuum. Petitioner McDonnell points to nothing in the record that demonstrates that the Secretary of State did not consider the relevant criteria, nor does she show that the Secretary of State made choices that no reasonable Secretary of State would have made in drawing House Districts 53 and 54.