It seemed that the first part of the afternoon, they reflected on what they've been doing and what's coming next. Looking back at yesterday they talked about an issue that I noticed Thursday - they weren't evaluating their own plans with the same rigor they did the third party plans. From my notes of the meeting:
Torgerson: Need to treat our plans with the same criteria we looked at the others.They went on to talk about the technical details they need to take care of - how to follow the Hickel process correctly, how to officially make findings each step of the way, getting to senate pairings, truncation, metes and bounds, and officially signing off.
Brodie: To a certain degree that’s right. If plans meet VRA and complies easier.
Torgerson: Making a finding geez.
Brodie:
White: You’re saying, just because we discussed what they are, we should be voting based on knowledge, what consultants think.
Brodie: I guess it becomes qualitative, if you say it violates constitution because of X here or Y there, it’s subjective. I’d hate someone to say you ignore that one and chose this one.
White: I’m not talking about findings themselves. We should look at these plans the way we looked at third party plans.
Brodie: We should have done that before we sent it away.
Taylor Bickford: If we pick a plan … third party says you picked a plan that didn’t have the least violations. Maybe the other plans are less. I think they’ll do that analysis anyway.
White: I think I hear your point. One plan you have to deviate here and here. Fairbanks will be the same, there might be deviations in different areas, but it becomes down to the board’s judgment. Just a matter for the board to choose.
Brodie: pretty abstract concept.
White: Glad they gave us the word reasonable.
They look like they are getting close to finishing and that they've settled on a plan that is basically the Proclamation Plan with changes in the Native districts and Fairbanks.
When they got back the word from Lisa Handley - the plans looked ok for Senate seats, but she didn't like house district 37 - the Aleutian Chain which they had put back together. The Native Voting Age Population (VAP) was 41% and the statewide minimum they'd been aiming at was 42%. Last time she'd said the Aleutians could be a lower VAP because the non-natives voted very much like the Natives. But since they made some changes in the district, that might not hold in the new configuration and it was best to get it to 42% to be sure.
I asked afterward what Handley's call on the Bethel-Anchorage plan was. Bickford said it was the same. OK, except for house district 37.
Instead of approving 3/30 - 1 as their plan tonight, after staff made the changes that Handley called for, they decided to adjourn until tomorrow.
Here are my rough notes for Friday afternoon. I had time to spell check and clean them up a little bit, but USUAL WARNING: things are missing here. Use these notes to see what they talked about, or to figure out what to follow up on, but keep in mind my fingers aren't as fast as their tongues.
BOARD MEETING 3/30/12 PM
2:05
Torgerson: What does it mean the Board has to make a finding.
White: Did Hickel plan comply to constitution. send to vra expert who said it didn’t comply. That may be sufficient to make a finding. I recommend the board specifically state on the record that we make a finding. Based on the VRA report, the Board finds this based on our review with counsel. On this point sufficient evidence:
1. Have Hickel Constitution
2. Hickel plan complies with constitution
3. Hickel Plan, based on advice of VRA expert, does not comply with VRA and therefore we must create a plan that deviates from the constitution to the least degree necessary to comply to the VRA. We can’t make findings on that until we get back report from Lisa Handley. Then based on her report we have to decide how to finish.
Taylor Bickford: You talked about ??? that
White: Footnote 15. In order to . ..
[Here’s footnote 15 from the Supreme Court Decision:
“1. In order to expedite further judicial review we recommend that the Board make findings, in furtherance of the Hickel process, that the initially designed plan complies with the requirements ofthe Alaska Constitution, that it either does or does not comply with the Voting Rights Act and, if the latter, that the new Proclamation Plan ultimately adopted by the Board deviates from the requirements of the Alaska Constitution to the least degree reasonably necessary to ensure compliance with the Voting Rights Act.]
original design plan complies with Constitution
either does or doesn’t comply with VRA - if you make a finding helps me defend it in court
if not,
new plan deviate from the constitution to the least degree to reasonably comply with VRA.
In order to do that you have to have a plan you actually adopt. We’ve gone through the other plans and found they either didn’t comply to Hickel Act, or had more constitutional deviations than ours. . .
Torgerson: When will we have transcripts.
White: Monday - transcriber nods
Silence
Torgerson: You can write down I’m thinking on record.
2:10pm
Brodie: Report we get from Lisa, are we, submitted two plans, ask her one questions - do the submitted plans comply or not?
Torgerson: Plan A or Plan B.
Brodie: Shouldn’t ask her to grade the plans, don’t want to have to have a sledge hammer.
Torgerson: I wasn’t anticipating her picking which one was best. She can give us her opinion on which best for DOJ pre-clearance - that’s what we’re hiring her for -
Taylor Bickford; I think Lisa will give us thumbs up or thumbs down.
Brodie: I wouldn’t want to have two choices and pick the lesser.
Torgerson: we have five or six all within VAP??????
Taylor Bickford: If she says one or two plans comply. then look at third party plans, to see which of their deviations comply. ???????
[I think they are just brainstorming as they wait to hear back from Lisa Handley]
Torgerson: Other thoughts.
Green: ???? having it on record……
Torgerson: Need to treat our plans with the same criteria we looked at the others.
Brodie: To a certain degree that’s right. If plans meet VRA and complies easier.
Torgerson: Making a finding geez.
Brodie:
White: You’re saying, just because we discussed what they are, we should be voting based on knowledge, what consultants think.
Brodie: I guess it becomes qualitative, if you say it violates constitution because of X here or Y there, it’s subjective. I’d hate someone to say you ignore that one and chose this one.
White: I’m not talking about findings themselves. We should look at these plans the way we looked at third party plans.
Brodie: We should have done that before we sent it away.
Taylor Bickford: If we pick a plan … third party says you picked a plan that didn’t have the least violations. Maybe the other plans are less. I think they’ll do that analysis anyway.
White: I think I hear your point. One plan you have to deviate here and here. Fairbanks will be the same, there might be deviations in different areas, but it becomes down to the board’s judgment. Just a matter for the board to choose.
Brodie: pretty abstract concept.
White: Glad they gave us the word reasonable.
Torgerson: How many times have we put on record that this is the most constitutional plan ever in the universe. Is that a finding?
[their saying it doesn’t make it true]
White: Here’s what I anticipate; Get Lisa’s info. If it doesn’t comply ok, remove it. If both are, give me 15 minutes. Here’s my opinion on both. Then board discusses, then on the record, we like plan X because, it minimally violates the AK constitution. Then we have everything on the record to adopt a plan. Then senate pairings then Analyses for truncation, then adopt in concept, give staff a few days to do clean up work, then do proclamation by phone or however. Can be done when it’s done. Doesn’t delay it going to court.
Torgerson: Do we need to review your submittal to the court? Did we come back together I don’t remember?
White: No, we did proclamation then people challenged it.
Torgerson: I’m trying to see if we need to get back together, besides for signing?
White: I don’t believe so. Just give me the authorization to file the amended plan with the courts.
Torgerson: We automatically make findings on why we adopt one over the other. Before we adjourn, we adopt, senate pairings, truncation.
White: Senate pairing
Torgerson: Because of Fairbanks
White: And the chain.
Truncation issue.
Torgerson.: Truncation comes with adoption.
White: I recommend, this is our final plan, staff do fix up stuff.
Torgerson: Board, if we do this, is it reasonable that we ask legal and staff make findings and we would adopt them or we could do them as a board. Staff to present findings first, it could be next week sometime, not have to be in this marathon session we’re in, but put off to next week.
Green: comfortable with that
Brodie: OK, yes, we still review. Planning and Zoning staff does it and we review
Holm: In writing easier to review.
White: When you leave today, everything is done, Then just need to write it up.
Torgerson: I don’t think we’ll get done today, but understand. wrap up tomorrow. Then authorize Eric to make Metes and Bounds changes, keep the deviation under 10%. I’m ok with that. Truncation tried to take up tomorrow. Adopt findings and Final proclamation at same time.
We should recess. Mr. White call Handley and see where she is at. Look at Constitutional deviations to see where they are. You need 15 legal minutes or 15 Michael White minutes?
2:30pm We’ll go off teleconference and off record until 3pm.
3:30 - it was pushed back to 3:30 so it’s coming back into session now.
We sent the maps to Lisa, VAP wasn’t high enough in hd 37. The higher the better, more likely to get pre-clearance. This time going in with expedited review. Want to go in with best chance. Taylor needs a couple of hours to work on getting the VAP up a little bit. I’m considering that will get late. I don’t want to rush too much. Legal still needs to take a look at the two maps and make their comparison for the Hickel process and that will take some time.
Holm: Tomorrow I’m teaching a class at 2pm - so you know.
Torgerson: I’m working on the path at ten. You’re not kidding me, the Final four starts at two, I see right through that. Nice try.
Holm: That’s true, but I’m doing a class.
Torgerson: If we have four board members, I’d like five, but we’ll pass up the planter painting class and finish off the plans.
Holm: If we can make the decision in the morning and take a later lunch. The class won’t be more than 30 or 45 minutes.
Torgerson: Good compromise. Anything else we really, really need to talk about?
Taylor Bickford: Want to touch on what John said, she said we’re close. The Senate districts work, the other house districts work. Just 37. We’re at 41 now and need 42%. You’ve taken in new sections, it’s wishy washy, so it’s better to just get into ok numbers.
White: She’s talking about the PAM_E plan, not the Anchorage.
Torgerson: Not Pam_E [3/30 - 1]
White: Whatever we’re calling it.
Adjourned. 3:36pm
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments will be reviewed, not for content (except ads), but for style. Comments with personal insults, rambling tirades, and significant repetition will be deleted. Ads disguised as comments, unless closely related to the post and of value to readers (my call) will be deleted. Click here to learn to put links in your comment.