Carroll County residents who spoke at a public hearing Saturday are not impressed with a proposal to change how they would vote for five county commissioners.

Del. Donald B. Elliot (R-Dist. 4B) of New Windsor and Sen. Allan H. Kittleman (R-Dist. 9) of West Friendship released a map on Oct. 24 that features four commissioners elected by districts and a fifth elected at large.

The Carroll County Delegation to the Maryland General Assembly is expected to decide this week whether to introduce the issue to the General Assembly this year.

Ellen Dix of Eldersburg was one of about 20 people who spoke on the issue at Saturday’s hearing.

Dix told the delegation she was disappointed that they could not reach a decision last year, adding she does not like the latest map since it creates unequal representation.

‘‘One district is going to be represented by two people – the one at-large for president and the one who represents their district,” she said. ‘‘That doesn’t seem fair that we get two in Eldersburg and Finksburg doesn’t get two.”

The Carroll Board of County Commissioners has three commissioners who are elected at-large, but residents voted in 2004 to expand the board to five commissioners elected by district. The change never took place, though, because the General Assembly could not agree on what the district lines would be.

The new map is an effort between Del. Donald B. Elliot (R-Dist. 4B) of New Windsor and Sen. Allan H. Kittleman (R-Dist. 9) of West Friendship. It has district lines similar to the state’s legislative district lines, though Westminster and its surrounding communities would be its own district.

Under Elliot’s plan, each district would have 300-1,300 more Republicans than DemocratsŽIndependents except for Dist. 2, the southeast portion of Carroll, which would have 351 more DemocratsŽIndependents than Republicans, according to data provided by Elliot

If approved by the General Assembly, the districts would be in effect for the 2010 election, and would have to be adjusted after that year’s census, Elliot said.

The delegation previously supported a map known as Option 1, or the Wheatley map, which immediately created controversy because it was different from Option 2 (Wheatley modified), which was supported by a redistricting committee, all eight municipalities in Carroll County, and the Maryland Municipal League.

Option 1 kept Taneytown and Manchester together, linked New Windsor, Union Bridge and Mount Airy, kept Sykesville and Eldersburg in one district, and grouped Hampstead and Finksburg together.

Option 2 brought Taneytown, New Windsor and Union Bridge into one district, made Hampstead, Manchester and Finksburg one district, split Sykesville and Eldersburg into two districts, linked Mount Airy and Sykesville into one and Eldersburg and Finksburg into another.

Both options created a central district for Westminster.

Dan Smith of Hampstead said at the hearing that he is against the referendum, adding that if going to five commissioners is a step for the county to go to charter government, it should not bother with the middle step.

A charter government is more likely to be elected by district, allowing council members to respond to the home district. A majority vote by the county council can enact local legislation. A county executive, who can be appointed or elected, oversees the day-to-day operations.

Romeo Valianti of Westminster said he also supports charter government. ‘‘I’d rather have charter government than what you have,” he said about the delegation’s new map.

He also said if Carroll stays with five commissioners, he wants to vote for all five and also dislikes the unequal representation.

Krebs said in a charter government, the county executive would also live in one of the districts. However, the county executive would not vote, as does the commission president.

Republican Central Committee of Carroll County members also said they would want to vote for all five commissioners. Reasons included that districts create divisiveness in the county and voters would get to vote for more commissioners instead of two under the compromise.

Central Carroll Republican Club President Michelle Jefferson of Westminster said she favors commissioners elected at-large and does not support the new map. ‘‘Don’t shove something down our throat just to get something done,” she said.

Michele Carroll of Eldersburg said voters feel that they cannot trust the delegation because the referendum was not honored, and the delegation needs to look at their options again and see what’s best for the county.

Kittleman said he likened the 2004 referendum to more of a ‘‘straw poll” to see what residents thought at the time, and added that the outcome does not legally bind the delegation. That comment drew the ire of residents such as Ken Ward of Finksburg.

‘‘If you think this was nothing more than a straw poll taken at a point in time, it didn’t seem that way to me,” he said. ‘‘If that’s what you think, then if so much time has passed, the logical thing to me seems that it would go into another referendum.”

The League of Women Voters of Carroll County urges the delegation to not change the outcome of the 2004 vote, said Elaine Hanratty of Eldersburg, president of the chapter in a prepared statement.

‘‘The voice of the voters in Carroll was clear in 2004. The people have spoken with regard to what they want the nature of their county government to be by the electoral process,” she said Saturday. ‘‘It is up to our elected officials to carry out the will of the people as expressed at the ballot box.”

Elliot said in October that another referendum is not necessary because his plan accomplishes the same goal voters said they wanted three years ago: regional representation.