The Alaska Redistricting Board will meet at the Anchorage Legislative Information Office's Denali Conference room, 1st floor. Live stream will be available at: http://akl.tv
Public Testimony will be taken in-person, via Dial-in Teleconference, by email to: testimony@akredistrict.org
Or from the Board website's public comment form here: https://www.akredistrict.org/map-comment/
When:
- Monday, May 15, starting at 1 pm.
Where:
- Anchorage Legislative Information Office
- 1500 W. Benson Blvd, Anchorage
- Live stream: http://akl.tv
- Teleconference
Teleconference public listen-in and testimony phone numbers:
- Anchorage: 563-9085
- Juneau: 586-9085
- Other: 844-586-9085
Agenda
Call to Order and Establish Quorum
Adoption of Agenda
New member swearing in, pending appointment
Adoption of Minutes
Public Testimony
Review by Legal Counsel of Alaska Supreme Court Decision
In the Matter of the 2021 Redistricting Cases, April 21, 2023
Consideration of Adoption of Interim 2022 Plan as Final 2023 Redistricting Plan
Board member comments
Adjournment
Board Member Bethany Marcum resigned from the Board [on March 23, 2023] after being appointed to the Board of Regents [on
January 23, 2023] by the governor. However,
her appointment was not approved by the Alaska legislature today. So it's possible she might be reappointed to the Redistricting Board.
[
UPDATE May 11, 2023: The governor reappointed her to the Redistricting Board on May 9, 2023]
In one sense, that would be a good appointment because she has been through the whole Redistricting process. However, she was one of the most partisan Board members voting twice for splitting Eagle River into two Senate seats. Both those efforts were deemed unconstitutional gerrymandering by the Alaska Supreme Court.
The Board's decision Monday will be whether to approve the Interim Redistricting Plan (imposed by the Supreme Court in May 2022) as the Permanent Plan. The Court imposed this interim plan after rejecting the Board's plan because there wasn't time for the Board to devise a new plan to meet the deadline for candidates filing for office.
Most of the 40 House seats and 20 Senate seats are already approved and locked in. There really isn't much the Board could tinker with. Just a couple of new house pairings to make new Senate seats in Northeast Anchorage would be my guess. Since changing districts is always a bit confusing to voters, there is no real reason to make the changes except as a last ditch effort to mess with the legislators in those seats.
From my perspective, approving the interim plan as the permanent plan would be the best decision for the state and for the voters and for would-be candidates in the districts that could be played with.
I've circled the Senate seats that could possibly be in play. The House seats can't be changed, they can only be paired differently to create different Senate seats. Below are the incumbents of the House and Senate seats.
House Seats |
Senate Seats |
17 - Zack Fields - Democrat | I - Loki Tobin - Democrat |
18 - Cliff Groh - Democrat |
J - Forrest Dunbar - Democrat |
19 - Genevieve Mina - Democrat |
K - Bill Wielechowski - Democrat |
20 - Andrew Gray - Democrat |
|
21 - Donna Mears - Democrat |
|
22 - Stanley Wright - Republican |
|
All the seats except one House seat has a Democratic incumbent. The only real purpose of rearranging the House pairings into new Senate seats would be to put Democratic incumbents in competition with each other and shake things up a bit.
I don't think the Superior Court or the Supreme Court would approve such an action. It would be seen, once again, as partisan gerrymandering.
But the Republican majority on the Board did this twice before and there's no way of holding them accountable if they try it again. It will just waste public monies to go through new court hearings and, if actually accepted by the Supreme Court, in redoing state maps and confusing voters in those districts.
NOTE: I'm slowly working on a post that looks at the Alaska Supreme Court's recent Opinion that explains their reasoning for the decisions last year that found the Board majority had committed partisan gerrymandering. The Court took its time debating and writing its decision because it really isn't urgent. It's a guide for the 2030 Redistricting Board. And I'm taking the same approach. It's not urgent. But I'll have something up before the end of summer, assuming that this Board meeting next week doesn't do something that will require the Court to add new discussions.
I would note that the Court also said that once the Permanent Plan is approved by the Board, the public will have 30 days to challenge it. I understood that to mean if they approve the Interim Plan as the new Permanent Plan. If they do something else, that too would be challengeable. But I also understand that those challenges are limited to the Anchorage Senate pairing changes. The rest of the map remains the same and those challenges were already heard.
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.