Redistricting Board Clearly Split 3-2 The 3 Republican Appointees Ram Their Agenda Through

 I strive to write accurately and to not have sensational headlines. And I think the title of this post is more accurate than not.  I'm out of town, so I listened to the tape of the meeting available here.

The Board met on the record for about 30 minutes.  At the beginning of the meeting where they waited for all the members to be fully connected to the feed and we got a very brief overview from the board's attorney about each of the five legal challenges the board's results. Matsu challenging the overpopulation of the Matsu Heights district and seeks to invalidate the House plan as a result.  Valdez challenging the district it's in.  Skagway wants to be with downtown Juneau rather than Mendenhall Valley.  Felicia Wilson in Anchorage with two other challenged   Calista challenged that Hooper Bay and Scammon Bay are not with Bethel.  Doyon filed in support of the Board against Matsu.  Judge Morse has consolidated all the cases into one.  Will be heard in Anchorage Superior Court.  Scheduled room for Monday for scheduling litigation.  Board will defend against each of these.  Board believes followed the Constitution and respect the rights of those challenging the decisions.  Suits are all on the website.  Board went into Executive Session at about 26 minutes into the meeting.  

When the Board came out of executive session (about 1:34:00 on the tape, or with 20 minutes left) things got testy.  Member Bahnke tried to make a motion but the Board Chair recognized Member Marcum who seemed to be reading a motion to put Binkley and Simpson on the subcommittee to meet with and advise the attorneys. Member Borromeo pointed out that she and Simpson are both attorneys and had worked together well when hiring an attorney  Basically the three Republicans circled the wagons and said as little as possible while hiring legal counsel.  She argued the two attorney Board members (Simpson and Borromeo) should continue to work together in the subcommittee listening to and advising the Board's attorney.  But a lot of water has gone under the bridge since then.  Borromeo's and Bahnke's suggestions and objections were met, basically with silence by the three GOP members.  Except for Board Chair John Binkley speaking in parliamentary procedure.  While the three GOP members may not have technically violated the public meeting requirements, they clearly had worked out what they wanted in advance, let the two minority members have their say, then voted for Binkley and Simpson to work with the Board's attorney.  

Do the Republican members have reason to believe that Borromeo and/or Bahnke are a confidentiality risk?  After all, they did publicly object to how the Board made some key decisions - specifically the way the Eagle River Senate seats were formed.  And they refused to sign the Proclamation as supporters of the decision.  

On the other hand, Bahnke and Borromeo are the only two Board members to declare that they had drawn their portions of the maps without talking to anyone except Board members and staff.  None of the Republican appointed members would make that statement and circumstantial evidence would suggest they got a lot of help in their mapmaking from people off the Board.  Member Marcum couldn't even form a complete sentence when she made the vague motion on allocation of terms.  Clearly she'd been coached on how to do it.  

So I think the GOP members' fears are either a) the two non-partisan Board members might tip off the opposing attorneys or b) they'll make it harder for the GOP members of the Board to get what they want.  

I propose they all swear an oath that they won't consult people off the Board during the legal process.  I suspect the GOP side of the Board will be much more heavily impacted by such an oath than the two Independents.