Day 7 AK Redistricting Trial: Calista Challenging Board's Maps So They Can Control A Senate Seat

[The title is more provocative than normal here, but this was said very clearly yesterday and today in the trial.  Read on.]

What are findings of fact and conclusions of law and what is their purpose?

Findings of fact take the place of a jury’s verdict and provide the factual framework for the court’s judgment. In cases tried without a jury, findings of fact delineate the facts that support the judgment. As they are often described, findings of fact in a bench trial have the “same force and dignity” as a jury’s answers to jury questions. . . . Conclusions of law, as the name suggests, identify the legal basis for the judgment based on the facts found.  From "How To Draft Good Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law"

Court started with 'housekeeping' items, a key one was when findings of facts and conclusions of law would be due to Judge Matthews.  February 9.  Closing arguments will be February 11.  

Then there was testimony from Calista witnesses:  Harvey Sundown and Myron Naneng, plaintiffs in this case.  They testified from Scammon Bay and Bethel respectively.  Testimony for the two was less than an hour including technical difficulties hooking up and getting unmuted.  We learned that all the villages in the area are closely linked to Bethel, all speak Central Yup'ik, and basketball is big.  For the nearby villages the families and players go by snow machine, if further, the players fly.  

From what I could tell the Board's attorney was just trying to establish that all the villages are socio-economically integrated.  Calista is trying to switch three villages into the Bethel district  (38) and three out of 38 and into D37.  Speciically tthat Scammon Bay, Hooper Bay, and Chevak be included in District 38 and that Kwigillingok, Kongiganak, and Quinhagak be included in District 37.

The reason for all this didn't become clear until Randy Ruedrich was on the stand.  Eventually was clearly stated that the goal was to increase the percentage of Calista shareholders in District 37 so that Calista would have more power to elect (between the two house districts) the Senator of their choice.  Ruedrich was clear that while Calista has enough population for 1.5 districts, they are spread over three districts.  The Calista map Ruedrich made gave Calista 10% of D37 while the Board's map only made the 1% of the district.  

Singer pointed out that Sen. Hoffman is the longest serving Senator in Alaska history and won his last election with 90% of the vote.  Ruedrich countered with what Andrew Guy had said Friday, that Hoffman wasn't going to be the Senator forever.  He added that once a well know and popular incumbent is gone, it's risky and no telling what will happen.

Singer pursued other parts of the AFFER map for Alaska trying to point out that it would have ripple effects all over the state map.  

Ruedrich was on the longest - over an hour I think - [I used PT when I started because that's what my computer is on, but I think I switched to Alaska time part way into the hearing].  

The final witness was Thomas Leonard, Calista Corporate Communications and Shareholder Services.  His questioning didn't last more than five minutes. 

I'd recommend a look at the Calista website. It's much more focused on corporate business than culture and history found on the Doyon and Ahtna websites I linked to the other day.  

Today they clearly said what I've been thinking about for several weeks now:  what does it mean to have a corporate district?  I don't know, just asking the question.  Clearly, Native Corporations have social obligations to their people, but they are also large for profit corporations that are driven also by the need to make profits for their shareholders - for dividends and for social services.  

How would people react if Exxon wanted its own district?  Well, that's a silly question since they have their own Senators without needing to bother with elections - just the elimination of caps on campaign contributions.  Calista's website strongly supports building the Donlin Gold mine.

“Calista Corporation’s priority is supporting Shareholders by protecting our land, our traditional way of life and promoting economic opportunities that benefit our people. We support the Donlin Gold Project because strict environmental oversight, good-paying jobs and affordable energy brought by the project will allow us to grow healthy communities.”

Robert Beans, Calista Corp. Board Chair

I don't want to second guess Calista's corporate leaders.  I know they believe that they have the best interests of their people in mind.  But the promise of huge wealth often makes it easier to overlook the damage that acquiring it causes.  It's a human failing world wide.  So far the fear of of the impact on salmon has kept Pebble Mine at bay, but backers haven't given up. I listened to their engineers who said they'd learned from previous mining failures.  But I know before those previous mining failures happened, there were engineers who had said the same thing about those mines that came before them.  Canadian mining doesn't have a great environmental record.  

I'm excited that Alaska Natives are gaining more power and control over their lands. I think that's a good thing.  My concerns are the same I have for any large for profit corporation.  I know that requiring Alaska Natives to become capitalists meant requiring them to acquire a way of seeing the world that is antithetical to traditional native culture.  I'm sure Andrew Guy could tell me why I'm wrong. And he might have a good balance of values.  But the corporations pushing the Donlin mine don't.  

And given what I wrote yesterday about Valdez' case, aligning socio-economically integrated populations into districts so they can elect legislators who will strongly support their interests is why that criterion is in the Constitution.  Valdez' complaint was that Mat-Su would own their Legislator, not Valdez.  

Redistricting Board members will be on the stand tomorrow.     

I got to the meeting a couple minutes late. (You can dock my pay.)

[Back to running meeting notes, so recognize that this captures a lot, but not all of what was said.  You get the gist but not all the exact words.  But you can listen to audio for a lot of the meetings as you'll see below and the transcripts will eventually be posted.]

2:10pm Director Report:

• Web conferencing of Board meetings - I missed this part, but later they used GoTo Meeting so that a board member who was not in Anchorage could show his maps.
• Transcripts - staff change adds a little time to get the transcripts done. they are being done by a several different contractors.  Some we aren't sure where they are. They aren't up yet, but the audio is.
• audio for public hearings through May 5 (though some are missing)
• audio for board meetings through April 14.
• Four groups signed up to present new plans to the Board which will reflect the changes in the percentage required to meet the Voting Rights Act:  Rights, AFFR, Calista, AFFER
• Reading File Update - material added that were received since late Friday (I have pictures of the table of contents and I'm trying to figure out the easiest way to post these.)

Jim Ellis:  May 6 on getting added, close to printing and putting them together.  Most items added have been emailed to you.

Software requests - Chair asked staff to load all the private plans to computers, I assume that the rest of you want that too.  Desktop, laptop?  Other software plans, let us know end of day today, because we'll be here working tomorrow.

Torgeson:  Questions?

Discussion of final plans.  Taylor, you are ready for more, right?  Eric, you want to walk us through

Eric Sandberg:  I have almost ready.

Torgeson:  Not going off line, take a recess, but the recorder is still going on so Taylor can talk to the remote folks.
Jim, two minutes to click the button and broadcast the screen.

Holm - I'm here!!!

Eric:  Going over his new map of rural areas and going through the totals.
District 1 - Kodiak, Port Graham, and to boost Native % went up to Lower Kuskokwim
And combined with Aleutians (HD2)  33.9% Senate
3 and 4 - 3 is Bethel to Hooper Bay and Scammon Bay

Don't Panic Yet - this is just trying things out

4 - Yukon River up to Tanana River to McGrath and outskirts of Fairbanks - Salcha, Pleasant Valley, Fox...  Possible Native influence district
Combined 50+% Native Senate District
5.  East-west huge district  plus 6 North Slope

Bickford - you could add 1000 Native folks to 2 from 3 and maybe get better numbers.  [gets to 34.91]
Then you could take 1 into 4 a bit.
Eric:  4 is right at 35%, but certainly I think you could bump the pairings a bit.

Torg:  What was your other major approach?
Eric:  Tried to keep old 6 together, but it pushes up against the Coast line and gets non-contiguous Senate pairings.
Torg:  It looks like that one could use a bit more work, but it's close isn't it?
4 -2  House - effective/influence
3- 0  Senate -

Tried to bump Natives in Kodiak by going east, but doesn't work without going to SE.

A few other plans, but nothing better than this.

Torgeson:  Load up PeggyAnn's and Marie's?

PeggyAnn McConnochie - this is absolutely not ready to go.  I came in early to try once more on SE.  Try to put Skagway and Haines into District 2, doing that I leave more population in the Valley of Juneau, and at least one whole district in Juneau.  D3 only in Juneau.  Then where can I pick up White population for SE - Valley, Gustavus, then Elfin Cove and Pelican, and Tenakee Springs - but this makes it really ugly, with four crossings.
Torg:  Have we talked about that - crossing districts?
White:  No, depends on why - if to make voting rights act numbers, might be more defensible.
I think the board needs to hire some savants who can just see through all the numbers and population types and find the right patterns.

PeggyAnn McConnochie:  Good news - PofWales almost in one district.  But down here, I think unacceptable, population around this Bay, and I put with Ketchikan, but they consider themselves with Craig.  Warning VAP is only 32.6%
Marie and I spent a lot of time working on Rural districts again.  We spent, what?  An hour, two?  Tanana Chiefs spoke to us all in Fairbanks.  We prioritized TC and tried to get those six different groupings and not split the groupings.
4 stayed the same - Our 39 - one TC grouping - Ft. Yukon, Venetie, Beaver, Wiseman.  This in one area undivided.  From hear all the way over to this area - at Bering Straits, Doyon, didn't want Fairbanks, took just a little because we needed to get the population up.   Didn't want to take much of Fairbanks.  Looked at 6 - another TC group that we wanted to leave whole.  Dry Creek, Tanacross, Dot Lake Village.
The video gives you a sense of what this process is like. And I think you can sense that McConnochie is really trying to do this right. It's just hard.



Other side of Fairbanks, take a look - Calista.  This is basically Calista - Eric copied us LOL - we needed to shed population out of this area.  Large population - Wade Hampton - these two areas have the rest of TC chiefs.  The groupings can be separated, but each group needs to be the same.  Next down to 37.  Deviation of 2.34%.
Take this whole thing as new 36.  Down, 15,000 (did she mean 1500) people.  Tried to keep Calista whole, tried our best.  Kwethluk, Eek, Goodnews Bay, tried to keep together.  But just way too many people.  They are now in 37.  We aren't done, not happy.  Interesting to see what Eric has done - he doesn't really know the places the way Marie does.  We're not done, by a mile.  Helpful - protecting TC areas, Calista, and
Marie Greene - 39 goes back east.
PAM (PeggyAnn McConnochie)- We don't necessarily like it going from west to east.  Trying to keep people out who don't belong - people in suburbs of Fairbanks don't belong in Native district and vice versa.
TB (Taylor Bickford)- Where did you want to go for the 15,000?  Matsu
PAM - We can't with our deviations go into 38-40.
TB - Can either go to Matsu, Denali, or Fairbanks.  One of those has to happen.
PAM - Trying our best to not add those areas.  It isolates the problem.
White:  Left over 36?  15,000 under.  Impossible to make that an effective district.
TB:  Helpful to start doing it this way - shows the tradeoffs down the road.
PAM:  Trying to go from the optimum - what everyone tells us.  I want to tell these people that we tried our best, but there are too many people in that district.  Eric went the same way we did.  It good know there is another possibility, we just need to get 36 filled out.  But can't take them from
Torg:  I'm seeing a theme - East-West - Big 37.  Bob, do you have something to present?
TB:  I think I just hand control over to you.  See what happens.
Torg:  Good experiment.

Using GoTo Meeting - Computer Conferencing Software
Brody:  SE - got D2 to   Got up to 38.9
TB:  Go back to - Arc Map 10
Brody - [We all were given a blue spread sheet of all 40 districts, I can't find the numbers he's talking about]  I took most of Marie and PeggyAnn's map - they were under in most districts.
I made D3 a little large, D4 here in the middle.  But it put 2 way under.  To get 2 up, I went around the corner and got these and tha put the Native count to 39 and the total VAP to 35.  That's pretty much all what PeggyAnn and Marie have done.
PAM - Tanana Chiefs gave us a letter with villages they want together - Looks like you split up Tok out, Dot Lake in, No matter what we draw, there will be a couple on the edges.  Able to get VAP to 35 which would make this a solid influence district.
Holm:  What kind of Sen Pairing?
Brody:  Just the four in SE.  Resigned to having to find pairings elsewhere.  I have Kodiak taking Cordova, but Tatitlik in SE.
TB - Bob, I think that's total minority VAge - I think we need just Total Native.
Total Native 39, total VAP 35.
PAM - OUt of curiousity, if you could take all the Tanana Chiefs villages out?
Brody:  I don't know.  I was trying to get close to your deviation.  It will drop the VAP.  They are smaller villages, but 80% native.  Just a question how effective we want to make the SE districts.
PAM - Also trying to keep those TC villages together there.
Torg:  Wrangell is with Ketch and Petersburg with Juneau?  Split P of Wales?
Greene:  Haines and Skagway in 2?
Brody:  Same as you guys.  That's it for me.
2:55pm
TB:  Any more presentations?  I'm going to cut them off then.

Torgeson:  Brings us to adjournment.  Meeting Monday at 10am.  We'll have to have things to use a little earlier.  When you show it on the web, you don't have to send it out?  Right.
From now on meeting at 10am.
Adjourned.  2:57

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.  

Your Crib Sheet For Friday's Opening Day Of The Alaska Redistricting Trial

 There were originally five separate cases (links go to the original legal complaints):

• East Anchorage challenged over the Eagle River senate pairings
• Mat-Su challenged over being put into a district with Valdez
• Valdez challenged over being put into a house district with Mat-Su and separated from the nearby communities along the Richardson Highway
• Calista challenged over  Hooper Bay, Scammon Bay, and Chevak being put in a House district separate from that of the City of Bethel.
• Skagway challenged over being paired with the Mendenhall Valley rather than downtown Juneau

The five cases were consolidated into one case.  But the plaintiffs, the Board, and the judge all agreed to have them tried separately to make it easier to keep the issues clear and to establish a record for the appellate court.  Later, they also agreed to have Mat-Su and Valdez combine because the issues are the same and to eliminate repetition of witnesses and testimony.  So that's where we are today.  

The cases will be heard in court in the order I've listed them.  So we start tomorrow and 8:30am Alaska time.  You can listen in on Judge Thomas Matthews' Youtube channel.

Different from most trials, the opening arguments and direct testimony (original questioning of the witness in the court room) was done in writing and submitted to the court before the trial.  This was done to save time because the case has to be done 120 days before the date candidates have to file to run for office - June 1. That is the end of January.  

So, since you won't hear the opening argument in court, I'm going to give you the opening parts of it and if you want to see the rest, you can see the East Anchorage pre-trial brief and opening statement here.   I'd note the lead attorney in this case is Holly Wells of the law firm Birch Horton Bittner & Cherot.  She has done many workshops for state boards on how to comply with the public meetings law in Alaska.  She's also been one of the most succinct and on point attorneys in the pre-trial hearings.  

"I. OPENING STATEMENT

“The goal of an apportionment plan is simple: the goal is adequate and true representation by the people in their elected legislature, true, just, and fair representation.” Hickel v. Southeast Conference.1 The Alaska Supreme Court in Hickel v. Southeast Conference reminded Alaska’s leaders:

in deciding and in weighing this plan, never lose sight of that goal, and keep it foremost in your mind; and the details that we will present are merely the details of achieving true representation, which, of course, is the very cornerstone of a democratic government.”2

The East Anchorage Plaintiffs will present this Court with substantial evidence that the Board systematically deprived the voters in the East Anchorage communities of interest adequate and true representation in the Alaska State Senate. The evidence will demonstrate that the pairing of House District 21 with House District 22 and House District 23 with House District 24 was arbitrary, unreasonable, and in direct violation of the due process clause of the Alaska Constitution. Both the record and testimony will demonstrate that the Board’s process and procedure regarding the senate pairings violated Art. VI, Section 10 of the Alaska Constitution as well as the Alaska Open

1

846 P.2d 38 (Alaska 1993).

Hickel, 846 P.2d at 44 (quoting from 3 Proceedings of the ConstitutionalIN THE MATTER OF THE 2021 REDISTRICTING PLAN CASE NO. 3AN-21-08869CI

EAST ANCHORAGE’S PRETRIAL BRIEF/OPENING STATEMENT PAGE 2 OF 2401163926.DOCX

2
Convention (PACC) 1835 (January 11, 1956)).

Meetings Act.3 The East Anchorage Plaintiffs will submit evidence both from the record and testimony demonstrating that Board members intentionally misrepresented their considerations of partisan motivations, misrepresented their use of partisan data to select their pairings, concealed their analysis of the risk of dilution in the districts at issue on the basis of race and minority status, misconstrued testimony by East Anchorage community members to serve their impermissible objective, and held secret deliberations and meetings to veil their partisan and discriminatory goals. The evidence will demonstrate that the Board’s intentional pairing of Eagle River districts with East Anchorage Districts favored one geographical area, community of interest, and political party over another despite overwhelming testimony from both communities detailing their lack of shared interests, goals, and commonalities before the Board, and reiterated by East Anchorage witnesses from Eagle River and East Anchorage alike.

Upholding the adopted senate pairings not only muffles the voices of East Anchorage communities of interest, as so aptly stated by Board member Melanie Bahnke, it would confirm for future boards that partisanship and discrimination are “fair game” in the senate pairing realm. Under the underlying principles of the redistricting process, the Alaska Constitution, and the most basic tenets of fairness, the Board’s pairing of the South Muldoon and Eagle River Valley house districts and the pairing of the Government Hill/JBER/Northeast Anchorage and North Eagle River/Chugach house districts cannot stand.

And from Part B:

More specifically,  the evidence will demonstrate the following impermissible Board actions:

1. Holding executive sessions that are not permitted under the Open Meetings  Act (AS 44.62.310, et.seq.);
2. Adopting final senate pairings that were not presented to the public during the public hearing process in violation of Article VI, Section 10 of the Alaska Constitution;
3. Adopting final senate pairings that were not developed in accordance with the guidelines adopted by the Board for development of its final pairings;
4. Adopting senate pairings which the public did not have access to view;
5. Adopting final senate pairings that were not one of the senate pairings options published by the Board for public comment and testimony; and
6. Adopting pairings without regard to public testimony or relying upon misrepresentation of public testimony to justify pairings.

Don't assume this is a slam dunk.  The Board's attorney has done a great job of blocking access to Board members - having them cite attorney-client privilege for many questions during depositions.  He's also managed to delay the plaintiffs' access to transcripts of Board meetings.  He says this is due to the transcription service, but as I watch, the cumulative effect is keeping information from the plaintiffs.  

But I would add for point number 4 here that in neither the initial Board plans nor the modified plans that showed all the House seats, did the Board include Senate pairings.  On the other hand, all the third party submissions did include Senate pairings.  

See you all in court tomorrow.  

[UPDATED January 21, 2022, 10:30pm:  I didn't mean to leave this part (Conclusions) in here.  It was something I'd started on, but decided to put elsewhere and it interrupts the flow of the plaintiffs argument.  Since a number of folks have already seen it, I'll leave it here, but move it down to the end.  My rule is that I can make minor non-substantive corrections but not substantive ones more than an hour after posting, so I'll leave this here.] 

Conclusions:

I'm sticking my neck out here making conclusions before the trial even starts, but this has been a rare opportunity to hear all the pretrial wrangling of the attorneys.  Since this is not a jury trial, no one had to worry about potential jurors listening in.  

Essentially, Singer has been arguing about process and procedure.  He's acted confident in the way he spoke that there was [no] other correct position than his own on attorney-client privilege.  He called the plaintiffs' arguments 'laughable.'  He's stalled in getting the transcripts from the November board meetings to the plaintiff's attorneys.  The plaintiffs' attorneys didn't have that information or the affidavits when the deposed Board members and other witnesses.  He's blamed the transcription service for some of the delays.  He's blamed all the paperwork he needs to get into the court for other delays.  And, that point has some merit.  He's got five separate attorneys filing requests and motions and he has to respond to them all.  But in his firm's proposal to be the attorney for the Board, they talked about all the lawyers who would be available to back him up."

Alaska Redistricting Board: Meeting Tues-Fri Agenda and Documents - Testimony, Mapping Challenges

The Board is meeting today, basically they are mapping and for the most part that's not too exciting or revealing.  Though they will be asking questions and making comments as they go along which may be of interest.  There are also several agenda items that might be more interesting.  Unfortunately the Board is meeting for four days - Tuesday, Sept 7 through Friday Sept 10,  for almost full days.  But the minutes don't indicate when these more interesting actions are going to take place.  Perhaps they will say the at the meetings.  The proposed map surely won't be ready until Friday, which is the date they set for that to be done.  

"Live Video/Audio Web Stream: www.akl.tvTeleconference public testimony dial-in numbers:

Anchorage 563-9085, Juneau 586-9085, Other 844-586-9085

Agenda

1. Call to Order and Establish Quorum

2. AdoptionofAgenda

3. Public Testimony

   Dial into one of the phone numbers above and indicate to the operator that you wish to testify

   Review of Maps Submitted through Web Mapping Toolwww.akredistrict.org/create

4. StaffReport:MappingProcess,IdentifiedChallenges

5. Map Drawing Work Session

6. Public testimony

7. AdoptionofProposedRedistrictingPlan(s)

8. Guidance to Third-Party Map Drafters

9. Adjournment"

Hello Subscribers,

 

Sorry for the late start and distribution today.

 

the materials were, once again, too large to email, I have posted them on the Legislature’s Committee Document System at www.akleg.gov and the State’s Online Public Notice System at http://notice.alaska.gov/203559.

• The public testimony packet includes all testimony received to date.  There are dates in the upper right corner that note when the testimony was received and when it was first included in the board packet. While this may be redundant since these letters have been distributed before, this was to ensure that all public testimony was in front of the board as they began the mapping process. If you have submitted public testimony and it is not included in this packet, please let me know as soon as possible.  
• Per a motion this am, the agenda has been amended to add an Executive Session to receive legal advice following Agenda Item #4: Staff Report: Mapping Process, Identified Challenges.
• The reference table provided for Item #5: Map Drawing Work Session is based on the “Cities and Census Designated Places (CDPs), 2010 to 2020” spreadsheet published on the Department of Labor website at Alaska Population Estimates.  The 2010 data has been removed from the file that was provided to the board for reference.

 

Juli Lucky

Staff, Alaska Redistricting Board

(907) 563-0300 main office

(907) 251-9295 cell

From the Public Testimony packet here are the people who testified.  

Testimony Presented 9/7/2021 includes all testimony received through  9/6/2021

• Carolyn “Care” Clift 8/31/2021 
• Kimberly Collins 8/30/21
• Pamela Goode 8/16/21 
• Robert Hockema 8/23/21
• Hooper Bay 8/13/21.
• Don Larson 8/24/21 
• Sarah Obed 8/24/21
• Sarah Obed 8/30/2
• Bosco Olson 5/18/21  
• Yarrow Silvers 8/23/21
• Uta 9/1/21 

You can find the testimony (it's not clear if this was transcribed from oral testimony or it is only the written testimony.  I know for sure that some of these people gave oral testimony, but there are other who also gave oral testimony who are not on this list.  

You can see the slides for the overview of the mapping challenges here.

Here's the census data list.  It starts like this:

Hooper Bay Student's Job Shadowing Trip to Juneau

Now, if I had a degree in journalism I'd have gotten her name spelled out and a little more information about the program she's on.  But I don't and I didn't.  I'm not proud of this, but it's how it is and so I'm posting this as is.  She does tell us her name in the video, but I'm sure I'll mangle the spelling.  And I didn't see Rena Delbridge, the reporter she was shadowing when I met her, of the Alaska Dispatch today.  And I'm trying to get my stuff up reasonably close to when I shot it.  But isn't she great?

She'll tell you who she is and what she's doing in Juneau on the video.








[Thursday afternoon: I ran into her again today when I stopped by Gavel to Gavel to check out there place and some questions I had. She's shadowing their producer today. And we decided that she really didn't need to have her name up beyond what is in the video.]

Three Challenges To Redistricting Plan Arrived By Deadline - Cases Attached

[The court filings for all three challenges are at the bottom of this post.]

Yesterday - June [July] 13 - was the deadline for challenges to the Alaska Redistricting Board's Plan.  We've known about the Fairbanks North Star Borough's impending challenge since the Borough Assembly voted to challenge the board's plan last month.

click to enlarge considerably

Along with that challenge comes one from George Riley, 'a qualified voter who resides in Ester"  and Ron Dearborn, 'a qualified voter who resides in Goldstream.'   These are the two, generally considered more liberal, communities just outside the Fairbanks city limits which have been put into the huge new District 38 which stretches out to Hooper Bay.  (See the blue district on the map.)

I've only had time to glance at these two challenges.  The focus seems to be
1.  The board valued minimizing deviation (from the ideal district size of 17,755) too high, short changing other values such as "socially and economically integrated."
2.  Thus they put what is essentially suburban Fairbanks neighborhoods into a district with predominantly Native villages with no running water or sewage systems whose socio-economic interests are vastly different.

There's a lot more listed, but on first glance, that seems to be the crux.  I need to go back and review more.  (So many posts like that unfortunately.)  You can read the complete challenges below.

The third challenge comes from the City of Petersburg, and three Petersburg voters - Mark L. Jensen Nancy C. Strand, and Brenda L. Norheim.  Their complaint seems to center on the fact that Petersburg is socio-economically integrated with Sitka and other smaller SE villages and has been linked with them in their previous district.  Linking them with "with part of the City and Borough of Juneau (in District 32), a municipality with which Petersburg does not share such common socio-economic interests."

The complete Petersburg challenge is below.

My understanding is that all three challenges will be lumped together.  While I watched the redistricting board at work and listened to some of the public testimony, it was clear that 'socio-economic integration' means different things to different people.  If there's a district that links interior, road-system, basically non-Native towns to roadless, Native villages on the Coast, then complaints by Muldoon folks that they aren't 'socio-economically integrated' with Eagle River are unconvincing (though the board managed to unlink them.)

Petersburg's challenge, it would seem, doesn't have a chance if Fairbanks' challenge to District 38 doesn't prevail.

The Fairbanks News Miner  reported on the Borough's challenge. [And they have a link to the Borough's court documents.] So did the Anchorage Daily News.  They reported the Democrats and Alaskans for Fair Redistricting are NOT filing challenges because they thought they could better spend the money it would take on elections. 

The Board itself will meet Monday, July 18, at 10 am in their headquarters. According to board Executive Director Taylor Bickford, there will be some public meeting to announce the challenges to the board's plan and the status of the preclearance* report to be sent to the Justice Department.   Then the board will go into executive session to discuss litigation  and preclearance strategies.

*Because Alaska has had Voting Rights Act violations in the past, it is one of 16 states that need Department of Justice 'preclearance' before implementing their plan.

The Court Documents

[Scribd has been having problems.  The documents are below, but if they don't show up, be patient and try again soon.]

Fairbanks North Star Borough 's Complaint Re Redistricting Board


George Riley v. Alaska Redistricting Board


City of Petersburg Challenge to Redistricting Plan

Business of Clean Energy in Alaska Conference 2011 - Murkowski

 I'm at the Business of Clean Energy in Alaska conference at the Denaina Center. 


Lisa Murkowski just spoke following welcome comments from  Lt. Governor Mead Treadwell and Renewable Energy Alaska Project executive director. 

She began by saying the key is to both more energy production and reduction of energy use.  There are more than 27,000 homes that need weatherization upgrades and sorry that this wasn't funded again.  Better in helping homeowners affording jumps in energy prices.  Live heat did relatively well in the budget.  The debate going ahead in Congress will be with critical eye to the budget, it will be tough for us here in the state.  Whether weatherization, live heat or federal money to advance our clean energy technologies.  We need to be independent to futher build out our renewable energy technologies.  It's not a shortage of resources.  Was in Chevak and Hooper Bay to see the wind turbines beginning to offset those energy prices - not there yet, but will be.  We have best hydro electric potential in the nation.  Already 28 projects in state which provide about 24% of our energy.  Ocean potential.  These could potentially produce 3 times more than we currently consume.  We have 33,000 miles of coastline.  We need to learn to tie into it.  No shortage of resources, but turning them into energy.  We've seen CIRI's frustration with getting energy companies to sign on on Fire Island.  Red tape by NEPA for Naknek projects. 


Three hydro bills - last one calls all environmentally acceptable?? projects as renewable energy. 


We're onto the first panel now. 

Redistricting Board Adopts, In Concept, "The Bethel-Chain Amended Proclamation Plan"

Overview of Saturday March 31, 2012 Meeting

1. Looked at two maps the sent to VRA expert and discussed her findings and how the fixed them.
2. Chose to adopt, in concept, a map called "Bethel-Chain Amended Proclamation Plan" which was yesterday's 3/30 - 1 with changes after VRA review.
1. Basic Change = get HD 37 Native VAP up, move Nunivak from 38 to 37, 
3. Gave the staff and attorney power to clean up the plan, and get documents ready to send to VRA and to courts.
4. Approved in concept: senate pairings, truncation, term lengths.
5. Will meet one more time, probably Wednesday afternoon, to formally approve everything. 

[UPDATE 9:30pm:  The Board's website has added an announcement plus a map

A preliminary statewide map is available for download here*. Additional maps and data will be added to www.akredistricting.org and distributed via email on Monday, April 2nd.]

Basically, the board is done except for cleaning up and final formal approvals.
They presented their two plans - one that is relatively similar to the Proclamation plan, but rejoins the Aleutian Chain and fixes House Districts 1 and 2 in Fairbanks and, presumably, puts both City of Fairbanks House Districts into a single Senate seat. [In the end, that happened.]  Then it makes some adjustments to the Native districts to get overall population deviations within 10%.  One change from yesterday was moving Nunivak Island from HD 38 to HD 37.


There weren't any new maps available and maps of each district weren't available.  Talking after the meeting, my understanding is that Senator Paskvan and Senator Thomas are no longer paired in Fairbanks.  But I believe that Ester and Goldstream are still part of a rural Native District, that goes from McCarthy in the west, up along the Canadian border and across Alaska to the west and includes Nome and Gamble and Savoonga.  [They're in District 38 that goes west to Hooper Bay.]

 It's been a hectic week for the staff.  They had to be at the meetings and then afterward they were making maps.   The last meeting posted on their website is for Wednesday.  I'm sure now they will be able to catch up.  Many if not all of the districts in Southeast, Anchorage, are the same.  I think Kenai and Matsu have some changes.  The Board members have the statewide maps on their computers which they can enlarge to see districts, but details weren't worked out until late last night or early this morning and there were no maps available of the individual districts.  Even the new statewide map wasn't handed out.  They just explained changes to the map they presented yesterday.

The Bethel-Chain Plan - Adopted in Concept

This is the map we got yesterday. [UPDATE:  The new map is available here.  You can enlarge it greatly, but the urban districts are still hard to see.  Districts 3 and 4 are City of Fairbanks.  The Anchorage districts should be the same as the previous Proclamation plan, but we'll have to wait to see for sure.] The most obvious change I know about is that Nunivak Island, the red island on the left, has moved from district 38 to district 37.  It should be green on that map now.  Those two are in a single senate district which is connected by water via the island. 



The other plan they had sent to the VRA expert is similar, but connects the Bethel House District with a House District in west Anchorage to create a Native Senate seat.

Both maps had problems with the Native Voting Age Population in District 37, but were otherwise found to probably be VRA compliant.  So they made changes to get the VAP higher in 37 - including moving Nunivak Island to 37.  The first plan, they said, had fewer deviations from the constitution than the Anchorage - Bethel plan.  

In the end the Board adopted the first one which they had some trouble naming and even after naming it they weren’t completely consistent.  Board Chair Torgerson called it the Bethel-Chain Amended Proclamation Plan.   They spent most of their time going over all the potential problems and explaining very carefully their rationale for what they did in language that hold up in court.  I couldn’t help thinking “just because you say the words, doesn’t mean it’s actually so.”  But they have said all the right words - I think - so they can go back to the transcripts and say, “here, we said that” over and over again. 

They then asked staff to go through the plan, make necessary minor changes, set up the Senate pairings, truncation, calculate which Senate seats would be 2 year and which 4 year, do the metes and bounds, and all the other details that are necessary to turn in with the plan.   Here's my explanation of truncation and Senate terms from last June 12:

Truncation
1.   Substantially changed district requires new election.  Elected officials should represent the people who elected them.  But when the districts are substantially changed by redistricting, they have new constituents who didn't vote in their new districts.  And thus this new population is represented by


someone they had no say about.  So, it is believed  that a substantially changed new district should vote for its senator as soon as possible - which would be November 2012. 

So, truncation is the process of cutting short the terms of sitting Senators in those new districts that have substantially new populations so that the people can vote for the representative at the soonest possible election. [This is not an issue for House districts since they are all two year terms.]


2.  Two or Four Year Terms?  Alaska Senators serve for four years in staggered terms.   From the Alaska Constitution:

The term of representatives shall be two years, and the term of senators, four years. One-half of the senators shall be elected every two years.  [emphasis added]

Thus, in addition to truncating, the board has to make sure that half the seats are up for election every two years. So, for 2012, half the Senators would normally be up for reelection and the other half would be in "mid-term" - that is, they have two more years left in their terms and wouldn't normally be up for reelection until 2014.  Unless their districts have been substantially changed. 

They were pretty much certain that truncation would be pretty much like the Proclamation Plan that was sent back by the Supreme Court, but the GIS expert, Eric Sandberg, had gone back to Juneau and is the only one who could calculate whether a district had 'substantially changed.' Last time they figured all the districts except Juneau had substantially changed so all the Senators except Sen. Egan have to run in 2012.  They've assumed the same is true for this plan.  The actual percent of new voters in a district needed to truncate is vague, but 90% the same is ok and under 70% the same isn't.  You can go back to that June 2011 post to see more on this.

Metes and Bounds is the written description of each district.  I have a post on that from last June 13, 2011 as well when they did that the first time if you want to know more on that.

I've made a table based on the handouts and the discussion to show for each senate district:

• The house seats
• Next election
• Term length from 2012 election

Senate District	House Districts	Next Election	Term Length from 2012
A	1 & 2	2012	4
B	3 & 4	2012	2
C	5 & 6	2012	4
D	7 & 8	2012	2
E	9 & 10	2012	4
F	11 & 12	2012	2
G	13 & 14	2012	4
H	15 & 16	2012	2
I	17 & 18	2012	4
J	19 & 20	2012	2
K	21 & 22	2012	4
L	23 & 24	2012	2
M	25 & 26	2012	4
N	27 & 28	2012	2
O	29 & 30	2012	4
P	31 & 32	2014	2
Q	33 & 34	2012	4
R	35 & 36	2012	2
S	37 & 38	2012	4
T	39 & 40	2012	2

HTML Tables

Here are my ROUGH notes from today's almost final meeting of the Board.  Remember, a fair amount is missing and there may well be mistakes.  Beware.


Alaska Redistricting Board meeting Saturday March 31, 2012

10:14:  Got here just now, [it started at 10]  Bickford finishing talking about two plans.
[Checking during the break, the key change seems to be moving Nunivak Island from from HD 38 to HD 37.  There were some other minor changes and a village or two was switched.  This was all done to keep deviations.]

White:  VRA issues?  We both talked late with Lisa, she indicated some issues with House District 37.  Wanted the number higher than the 41.5%.  Changes Taylor just told you about were designed to fix those problems.  Lisa up late for us, and she says it now meets the numbers.  Like last time, she doesn’t think it’s a slam dunk, because trial court said we can’t divide the Chain.  Lower chain is mostly non-native.  When we drop down to that 41% we’re having trouble.  When we got pre-clearance, it was the first time DOJ cleared under 50% this year.

You remember from the trial what we talked about Lisa and Dr. Arrington said ‘ability to elect’ is dichotomy, thumbs up or down.  Compared to benchmark, this is not retrogressive.  Lisa:  you have a good shot if you have Native support behind you.  Amicus briefs sent to the court said they do not want their incumbents paired.  Wanted to comply with VRA and did least harm to Constitution.
Taylor Bickford: I think you said under the proclamation - you said 71%, not so, was actually 46%.  That district more closely resembles then.  Lisa:  Why are you dropping from 46 to 41 - we said because the Court said we can’t split the chain. 

White:  Now that we put the chain back together and Lisa wanted to look at effectiveness.  Concerns about dropping number, but by moving it back up she feels better.  Again, Native support will be important. 

Taylor Bickford:  We’re looking at this plan.  Also analyzed Anchorage plan.  Differences in how 37 arranged.  That plan after looking at numbers, you had a harder fight to make for VRA. 
Torgerson:  Her analysis wasn’t the Bethel Anchorage pairing, but …
Taylor Bickford: Any time you do a pairing like that with rural losing population. . .[I think this was looking at if the district would continue to be effective as population shifts.]
Also concerned about how chain configured.
White:  In the current plan, ????? native loses ???? can’t say. We don’t know what the standard is 2002 plan or proclamation plan?  [yesterday Board said the benchmark is the last VRA approved plan 'in effect." So they aren't sure if the Proclamation plan was ever in effect."]    When we present to DOJ we’ll show why it is not retrogressive to either plan.  that’s all I have.
Torgerson:  Questions?
White:  thank you Mr. Chairman.  You have the Bethel?  I can do comparison on just one.  We did our Hickel - this is the most constitutional plan in the history of the state
Torgerson:  The universe.
White:  But Lisa said not VRA compliant.  We had to make the map comply with the least necessary reasonable harm to the Constitution.  Two fixes.
1.  fifth effective house seat - 6
Taylor Bickford:  37 under the plan
White:  Call that district there, the interior comes around.  To do that, court found did least harm to fix both in Bethel plan and here, HD 39, will have some compactness and SE Integration issues.  Best fix is the configuration of 38 and 39.  Bottom line is least harm you can get away with to the constitution.
Third party plans had districts that affected the constitution 3 or 4 times.  Can argue that it is compact, similar to Valdez.  need to ????
2.  How to get the 3rd effective senate seat.  Because court mandated putting chain back together.  Required difficult machinations.  This plan does that without any real harm, only I see - senate pairing 37 and 38.  Trial court didn’t like this amount of open water, but far less than here.
Taylor Bickford:  said for house district
Torgerson:  You are saying "here," but using pointer, people here can see that
White:  In 37 we split Aleutian chain and paired it across the island to Bethel.  Trial court said no, SC didn’t say, but threw out their numbers.  Only rationale still applicable, not paring Native incumbents.  Key issue here, Trial court dealing with house seat.  Constitution Contiguous, compact, and SocioEconomic Integration.  Only requirement for Senate seat is as contiguous as possible.  I take that to allow this pairing across Nunivak Island. 
Torgerson:  In past plans, court has accepted connection over water.  The old Kodiak - Ketchikan was 1000 miles across water.  OK, because court has approved larger water crossings.
White:  In order to avoid splitting the chain, this is less harm, if it is even a violation at all.  We have lots of islands, this is nearly as practical. 
Taylor Bickford:  Nunivak Island has to go in one of the districts.  I wanted to make sure you are talking about minimal harm.  I’m not sure there is any harm to the Alaska constitution.
White:  I agree ……...necessitated by the need to create 3rd Senate seat.
Green:  Did you try to go this way too?  Along the coast? 
Taylor Bickford:  Yes, I tried to do that, but you cannot connect Bethel portion of 37 to 38 by land without adding too much population.  We started with Proclamation plan with that connected, but reuniting the chain made it hard.  Can make it contiguous by land, but then you have to split the chain.
White:  I don’t see any problem with the constitution in any of the others.  Geographic reality.  Because Hickel Plan does not comply with VRA, to make that plan comply have to take 39 in a way that doesn’t strictly comply with compactness and maybe SEI .  38 population issues that have nothing to do with VRA, Fairbanks still contains a good portion of 38, you can do it either of two ways and push it over to the heavily populated native areas on the coast.
Torgerson:  You are making it sound you could create another map.
White:  By unpacking the nearest area to grab - the Wade Hampton area is ?????
Torgerson:  How did the trial court rule on 38.
White:  urban and rural need to be combined, reasonable to do that, but reasonable harm, speculative pairing argument, I think that’s wrong because the pairing had nothing to do with 38 because same in PAM_E plan and Proclamation.  Districts you have to depart from C are 37 and 38.
Taylor Bickford:  I might be a little stubborn.  You’re talking about 39.  I’m not sure that isn’t compact.  Only so much you can do in rural Alaska.
Torgerson:  I don’t want you two to debate.
White: I would agree with you that an argument can be made based on AK geography.
Torgerson:  What about Kenai B?  How many times did we split it?
Taylor Bickford:  Twice.  This portion here is Tyonek - Beluga and needed to put it in some Native District.  In this case picked up by 36.  Second split by Kodiak.  Two villages from tip of Peninsula here, put into 36.
Torgerson:  Just curious, trying to put Tyonek back into Kenai.
White:  Kodiak doesn’t have enough population, have to get it from somewhere.  To get enough Native population need to get it to push up the VAP.
Taylor Bickford: Very good point, deviation too high and need population.  This was in proclamation plan.
Torgerson:  You were using your pointer, want people online to know what ‘over there meant’  picking up community in ????
White:  Although issue addressed in trial court (reasonable and justifiable to split Fairbanks two ways) not address by SC. 
????????  Nothing wrong with previous plan - except 6 and 2 and 1.

Torgerson:  Anchorage to Bethel
White:  Except for VRA, major difference is that in Bethel to Anchorage plan, two Senate districts that would cross over water.  36 across Cook Inlet and takes a HD in Anchorage.  In this plan only once in Anchorage-Bethel plan do it twice.  Fact you only have to do it once, makes the first unnamed plan, makes it do less harm to Constitution than Anchorage-Bethel. 
Which one does less harm is the one Taylor presented this morning.
Torgerson:  Questions?
10:44  Refer to Bethel as the Chain plan. 
White:  No pairings of Native incumbents, to be on the record, except Kookesh in Southeast. 
Torgerson:  I’m ready for a motion to adopt the plan.  Procedural question for you, we call this the amended proclamation plan or make, we have to be able to identify this plan.
White:  I anticipate adopt in concept for staff to clean up , call it Bethel-Chain Amended Proclamation Plan.
Brodie:  I move to adopt the plan as presented, known as the Bethe-Chain Amended Proclamation plan in concept.
Torgerson:  seconded by b member green..  Add allow staff to make necessary changes, in concept and we’ll have metes and bounds.
Vote: 5-0  Adopted the Bethel-Chain Alaska map.  In concept.  At this time we could do motion to authorize staff to make minor changes - then 1/10th of 1% maybe have to go a little higher now.  When they do metes and bounds if they find things improper, they have the authority to fix those.
Moved by PeggyAnn McConnochie and second
Taylor Bickford:  Are we sending a baseline?  We may need more than 1/10 of 1%
Torgerson:  I did bring that up.  No, I think you can note any changes you make.  I suggested to board we have tighter range of all the maps before us.  In this case we have less of the map you are working on.  If you find anomalies, let us know and we can adopt them
Roll call vote:  5-0 yes
Adopted allowing staff to clean it up.  D
Need to do Senate pairings, I’m assuming all the same,
[I took a 4 minute break]

Taylor Bickford:  We know the senate pairings for Sen districts would be the same.  if we combine City of Fairbanks, Paskvan would still have to run in 2012.
Torgerson:  All the geniuses here and Eric is the only one who can do this?
Taylor Bickford:  I believe he gets off at two.
Torgerson:  I’d like to adopt those today.  Then we’d have a complete plan.  People out there are waiting to see what we’ve done.  Let’s take about a 30 minute recess, Try to get hold of Eric.  I don’t mind doing this over teleconference.  I didn’t know Eric was leaving until yesterday afternoon.  Jim were going to go off line.  Break until 11:30.

11:30am 
PeggyAnn McConnochie:  Move to Adopt Senate Pairings iinto Bethel-Chain plan
these are the same as in the Proclamation Plan?
[I've put these in the table above]

Taylor Bickford:  Yes. 
White:  For the record, the issue of whether or not Fairbanks is entitled to a seat of its own, but the Board has decided a plan that puts the city of Fairbanks back together leaving that legal issue unresolved.
Holm:  I don’t.  Can you have Taylor describe for me 1,2, 3, 4.?  Describe the boundaries for my edification.
1 is essentially what used to be 4?
Taylor Bickford: NO, 1 is what used to be 2.
2 is what used to be 4.
Holm:  You numbered from east side of the city.  Doesn’t have any of the roads, but the populations are right so that’s good.

Roll call 5-0 

PeggyAnn McConnochie:  Move on truncations
A -4
B-2
C
D
[This is actually setting the term lengths, not truncation.  I have this in the chart above.]

Is there a second?  I would also say this is the same as the Proclamation plan.  We don’t have the data for sure on changes in districts.  Our GIS expert is not here, but if there are any changes

White:  What we have here is assigned the districts and years, but we haven’t actually done the truncations.  First you have to truncate and then you assign the years.  That was assigned randomly based on Senate Seat P which is not truncated [Egan in Juneau has substantially the same district.]
Brodie:  I’d like to table Ms. McConnochie’s motion.
Torgerson:  I think we can fix this in 30 seconds.  I don’t want to have 60 calls asking me  this.
Taylor Bickford:  This assumes all are truncated.
11:39   Off the record.
TRUNCATED DISTRICTS:  D, F, H, J, L, N, P, R, AND S


There’s some disagreemnt among the board members.  Bickford pointed out that they haven’t done the analysis of the populations of the districts to determine.

PeggyAnn McConnochie:  read the truncated districts:
TRUNCATED DISTRICTS:  D, F, H, J, L, N, P, R, AND S
Is that not what you wanted?
White:  I understand this to be the truncated districts, old ones last time in proclamation plan.
Taylor Bickford:  I understand but I don’t understand why reading the districts from the old plan
Torgerson:  Let me bring this back.
Moved to adopt the truncation.
5-0   Board has adopted truncation.
Next motion SEnate terms
PeggyAnn McConnochie:  I’ll go thru them one more time.  Reads all the districts, alternately 2 and 4 years starting with A.
Roll Call:  5-0  for.
Torgerson:  Board has adopted.
PeggyAnn McConnochie:  Motion to direct legal and staff to findings thaxxxxxxt are on the record?  
White:  I think that’s fine, summarize the informal written findings?
Roll call:  5- 0  has authorized the staff to make written findings for presentation to the board in the future.
PeggyAnn McConnochie:  Authorize legal to make any preparation for legal filings necessary????
White: 
Torgerson:  Authorize legal  to start proceedings to file in court. 
Roll Call:  5-0 yes. 
PeggyAnn McConnochie:  I’d like to authorize legal to start preparing documents for pre-clearance with DOJ.
Roll Call 5-0 yes

Torgerson:  The Board will get back together for teleconference of board to approve the formal proclamation and everything we approved in concept today.  At this point don’t see need for face-to-face we can.  Any guestimates for day?
White:  If you called meeting for Wednesday afternoon, but staff has to be ready.
Torgerson:  It will be Wednesday or thursday.  We have to notice the meeting.  Notived for all next week, but not for teleconference.  We’ll look at that, Wed or Thursday unless some issue comes up and we have to come together.
Then this board is adjourned.  No time for speeches.
Holm:  I’d just like to thank each of you for all the hard work you’ve done.
PeggyAnn McConnochie:  I’d like to thank everyone including Taylor and Mike and the court Reporter.
Green:  The same.
Torgerson:  Do we need the court reporter to transcribe the teleconference.
Anything else?  It’s 11:53 we are adjourned.

Sen Coghill Helping Reporter Chris Eshleman on Trauma Bill

[The video is taking forever to load, so I'm going to post this and add the video when it's done, probably within the hour.  Consider this a preview.  The video is ... well I describe it below.]

I've got a whole slew of posts to do, but I was too busy being there to get anything up until now, but there's more on the Iran divestment bill (HB 241) which did NOT pass out of committee today on a 3-3 vote, 4H'ers in town learning about the legislature, the Alaska Farm Bureau's lunch for legislators, Rep. Harris' mandatory winter tire bill (HB 322) and Rep. Doogan's ban on cell phones while driving, plus Hooper Bay student in town for the week shadowing different folks each day.  Not sure how many of these I'll get up, but here's an interesting bit of tape. 

Fairbanks News-Miner reporter Chris Eshleman invited me into the empty Ramona Barnes Conference room as he went in with Senator John Coghill who was explaining to him the intricacies of Senate Bill (SB) 168.  So this video is essentially a behind the scenes recording of a news reporter working on his story with a Senator who wants to get his story out.  





Basically the bill is to set up a fund which will help hospital with their
I'd note that after I turned off the video, Sen. Coghill told us that a big motivation for him on this is the fact that his two year old grandson died of a head trauma in part because it took four hours to get the appropriate doctor to the emergency room in Anchorage.  He assured us that this is not out of bitterness or anger, he understands that they did all they possibly could, but he doesn't want it to happen to others. 




Update Friday:  Here's the article Chris wrote from these sessions.  It begins this way:  

Alaska bill to aid trauma care moves ahead

by Chris Eshleman / ceshleman@newsminer.com 

 

JUNEAU — A House committee Tuesday advanced plans to create a public account to aid trauma care and, supporters hope, steer major emergency rooms toward better funding for trauma services. . . (click on link above for the rest.)

AK Redistricting Board - New Maps, Debates, Exec Session, Public Testimony

 [I started this around 9:15 am.  It’s really rough and I’m a bit tired.  So consider this only a glimpse of what happened with some omissions and typos and some inaccuracies.  But it will have to do until the official transcript and the video are up.  And it can help guide you to what you want to see when the video is up.]

Public testimony was pretty much:

1.  Anchorage folks wanted v4, though some military veterans including Assembly Member Jamie Allard argued that JBER, NE Anchorage, and Eagle River were the community that military and retired military lived in.  They supported V3, or Marcum's new v3.  

2.  Fairbanks people called to say Goldstream was integral to Fairbanks and shouldn't be put into the huge rural district that goes to Tok.

3.  North Pole should be a separate district from Fairbanks

4.  Fairbanks folks were also upset for having been waiting on the phone for five hours before they could testify.  

5.  Some discussion of Calista and Doyon villages being properly represented.  

You can see the Anchorage maps v3 revised overnight and v4 here  Although they said the Fairbanks maps were up, I can't find them. 

I'm going down to the Board Meeting to see the rest in person.  

Bethany Marcum:  New map.  Valdez testified did not want to be with Matsu and Matsu didn’t want them.  So looking at putting Valdez with Anchorage.  Just learned from legal counsel that problems putting Valdez with Anchorage.  

Nicole Borromeo:  Making her own map.  More compact.

Marcum:  Did review all the Anchorage maps and compact as they are and also looking at deviation.

Borromeo:  How is your D21 compact?  It snakes down in shape I don’t understand.  Your D16 Goes from south Addition to ??   How more compact?

Marcum:  I didn’t say more compact.  Balance of Compact and Deviation.

Borromeo:  My concern is about VRA, was that no matter where, these are highly dense diverse populations. 

Marcum:  I heard your comments about different housing, life style.

Binkley:  Looking at 16 I had same concerns, but in previous version it was a straight line.  

Borromeo/Marcum discussing deviation. Urban deviation vs. Statewide deviation.

Binkley offers Marcum more time to make adjustments.

Borromeo:  She’s been mapping all night and it’s now 11am and we have a deadline and soon I’m going to call the question.

Bahnke:  I appreciate your efforts and time.

Borromeo:  I think the board wants to give you time to make more compact.

Simpson:  says the same.  If you can do that in a half hour, that would be worth it.  

Borromeo:  Problems with 15 and 16.  

Binkley:  Board is saying can you take 30 minutes and see what you can do with that.

[Is there another Anchorage map in case Marcum’s is not acceptable?]

11:57am - Bethany Marcum completed her new maps.  Nicole Borromeo said v4 is better than this new map.  Now they are going to take testimony.  They are worried about time for testimony so they can get to their final vote. 

Borromeo:  we need to have a time limit.  Also we need to put the map up on the site.  I have posted v4 so people can see them.

Peter:  We have put the map up - 

Nicole:  Maps are under Meetings because they are not official maps.  

12:29

Yarrow Silver:Speaking for community council  Scenic Hills?  CC.  Not set off sei neighborhoods of East Anchorage. Including around Muldoon curve.  18-0.  Saw maps as of yesterday.  Spoke in favor of v4 map.

Now speaking for self. For Nicole Borromeo’s map.  More compact and reflects racially diverse community.  Map yesterday still here today and then quickly being changed.  Shouldn’t still be here.  V4 meets all needs.  Marcum’s just gerrymanders East Anchorage and other places.  This is supposed to be a non-partisan process.  Lots of talk about one person one vote, this sounds false because it dilutes the voices of diverse populations.  Nicole Borromeo’s map better.  

Binkley:  please don’t ascribe maps to people’s names - use map numbers v3b and v4

Joel Hall:  AFFR live in Peters Creek.  Thanks for changing break between ER and Muldoon.  Glad it happened today.  Not right to blend those two communities.  Also in favor v4 - compact is first order and one is clearly more compact.  There’s no real question about which is more compact.  We’ll have further comments after we process this.  AFFR will be back in ten years.  See ourselves as perpetual partner of Board.  We need to create a record of what we feel is wrong for future Board members.

Binkley:  Thanks for testimony and AFFR work on Alaska tour.  

Felisa Wilson:  Good afternoon.  Thank the board.  A little alarmed that maps changed at last minute.  Feels like it literally changed in the last hour.  After looking at newest map.  I think integrity of JBER and integrity of diverse communities best reflected in V4? map.

Connie Seprecio??  - spenard community council resolution:  Whereas boundary 3 house districts and 3 Sense districts.  Recommend new plan into alignment with local boundaries including Spenard CC.  Unanimously approved.

Personally - 23 Anchorage resident, 17 years in Spenard.  Frustrated by this morning.  All the changes - felt like now taking power from public most impacted.  V3 of all three maps no good. Urge you follow v4.  Straight lines, respects idea of compact.  New map looks like gerrymandering.  The fact that she only decided last night not to include Valdez.  V3 Not in spirit of he law.  Times up.  Fair and equal representation.  Let people’s vote speak, not because it makes sense for one party or another. 

Binkley - hard - Constitution requires public testimony.  At some point we have to decide.

Mary  Akpirg Director - Note that in General, having ES before comments makes it hard for public to give input.  People weren’t able to testify.  Because have other commitments.  You’ve done a good job generally of public testimony.  Marginalized communities generally have less time to participate.  AFFR as Joelle has put it, we support v4 as well.  Maps are very complicated and impossible to fix at last minute.

Mary:  I live in south Edition - map better reflects my neighborhood.  

  Donna Mears - North East CC in Anchorage Oct. meeting.  Understand CC boundaries not really necessary, we think they should be.  Small number of people in area never show up.  Our work is done at CC meetings. Community boundaries more important than slightly lower deviation.  It’s how we get together.  Met Oct 31, so don’t have statement on maps today.  I think she supported v4.

Binkley - any more in Anchorage?

Robin O’Donoghue - thank you.  I’ve spoken before mostly on behalf of AFFR.  Today on behalf of myself.  Thanks for one person one vote in Fairbanks.  Goldstream valley is a suburb of FB and closely connected to UAF.  I grew up there.  UAF and Fairbanks.  While Board recognized some things.  Putting Goldstream into greater rural airport does not reflect view of Assembly.  

Lastly suggest AFFR forFB is more logical and SEI also could plug in AFFR FB map into your overall map.  Thank you.

David Dunsmore:  Good afternoon.  AFFR.  Want to experiment more why we believe given Board’s choices now, it’s clear best in line with constitutional mandate and AFFR process in Anchorage trying to get communities.  One thing we appreciate - every public hearing on the road show introduced the public hearing process by explaining Board’s goal to get people who live work and play together should vote together. 

Detail for how true.  In East Anchorage. v3B  has odd ways concerning neighborhoods.  Nunaka Valley mostly with Mt. View.  While more in common with D20 or 21 on the map.  Tudor curve put in with Huffman neighborhood.  Large portion of land with no population - probably unconstitutional.  No connection physically between Chugach Foothills and Upper O’Malley.  That is some of lowest income in S Muldoon.  Putting them in with Upper Hillside large lots and limited road service and private wells, etc.  Chugach Foothills have no common legislative needs. 

Souht Anchorage - v 4 best logical S Anchorage districts sep from East Anchorage 16 logical abbott loop district etc.

V3 D11 splits Abbot loop between 11 and 14.  Better integration to keep those neighborhoods in their districts.  West Anch better rep under v4.  Ve problem in West Anchorage makes 3 distinct districts into different districts. Version 4 does better.  

Marcum:  You have different idea of SEI within Anchorage - explain

Dunsmore:  Well, compactness is still an issue here.

Bahnke:  thoughts on v3 on 21-26?  

Chris Nelson - North Muldoon.  Respectfully disagree about integrity of JBER and the bases.  I worked after retired on JBER.  Member of ER VFW post.  Speaking for myself.  Live in current home four years.  Military families live off post adjacent to JBER.  I think version today - appreciate give and take of Board.  New map best serves retired military.  The latest version best represents people like me.  But want to thank everyone of you for serving and your patience.  

Binkley:  thanks for your service to military and this process.

Borromeo:  Which one?

Chris:  V3alt

Binkley:  Going on line

Savanah Fletcher in FB.  On the line?  

Casey Casort - in FB.  

Binkley - 2 minute brief at ease to make sure we’re connected.

OK.

Casey Casort  - and Savanah

Savanah Fletcher.  FB   Parks Highway Ester and UAF.  Concern about Goldstream and that community cut off from our community.  Not fair while Salcha more fit 

Frustrating.  Had to take off work and then to wait for hours.  

Casey Casort - FB  also repeat Savanah’s frustration.  Still FB map that I know about from social media, not the Board.  Testified twice with board and frustrated that Goldstream cut away from Ester and UAF.  FB and NP separate.  Thank you.

Andrew Guy - Anchorage. Calista.  Thank you.  From ??? Corporation.  Been involved with redistricting process since 1980 to this year.  I do know factors and this is hard process to go through.  Vote for equal representation but a factor detrimental to Calista region.  I’ve given written testimony.  Oral testimony want to provide idea the factors for this process, but not the cultural Native factors.  Detrimental to Calista.  Even though we have the population to have two house seats.  Results is bad situation for my area.  COVID situation is example of that.  High cases and deaths from COVID.  Representation is money.  We have always give population to other districts that needed it.  Finally have a voice for number of people we have.  

Binkley.  Thanks, we do have written testimony before us.

Bahnke:  In terms of SEI - is it Calista with Doyon or Calista with Bering Straits. 

Guy:  Laughs.  Since 1980s.  Eskimo to Eskimo or Eskimo to ??.  We should help each other and that has happened in he past.  

Bahnke:  In terms of SEI ties?  

Guy:  Oh yes, our Yupik communities and Chupik further up.  Shared customs, 

Brian Redmeyer?  FB - reiterating what Savana and Casey said.  Goldstream vital part of community with UAF.  V3 doesn’t make sense.  

Erin Wilham??:  Anchorage.  Born and raised in East Anchorage. Urge adopt v4 map.  V3 problematically divides things.  V4 more compact and SEI.  V3 raises gerrymandering question.  

John Brown?  Member of Borough.  Speaking for self.  Goldstream shouldn’t be separated from FBNS district.  Only 3 stop lights between my house and UAF.  Clear violation of compact and contiguous. V4 real improvement.  

Nicole Eastman?  - West side of FB for 50 years, Goldstream and Ester.  Glad to see new plan doesn’t overpopulate FB, but Goldstream Valley closely connected to UAF and and FB.  Not connected to Tok and Delta.  Previous map like this was ruled unconstitutional.  Frustrated - on phone at 9am.  Very Anchorage centric time this morning - talking about Anchorage maps, heard from all the Anchorage people in the room first.  Anchorage already takes so much of the air in the State.  Since we have so little time, frustrating that you keep talking about the difficulty of he task.  

Allisa Princeton???  FB - appreciate Board’s problems but have to represent my community - Goldstream. Salcha and Eilson separate with NP.  AFFR map really better represents communities of FB and compact.  Asking communities to compete with each other.

Celest Hodge Growdon - Anchorage.  Pres of Alaska Black Caucus. Agree with so many.  Very difficult to testify.  Strong opposition to Marcum’s map.  It denies BIPOC for next decade to sacrifice communities of color for political reasons.  Ignores hours of public testimony.  African-American and Native Alaskans are a small group, but we shouldn’t be separated with other diverse communities.  Puts Muldoon Curve with Hillside.  Have to drive through 4 other districts to get to rest of district.  

Calvin Rodgers - FB - I work 9-5 been here with EarPod and only Anchorage maps are online.  We need them - the whole map.  Don’t have final version of FB. Goldstream and University should be together.  NP and FB nonsensical.  Can’t believe v3 still being discussed.  There’s support forAFFR and v4.  We should be talking about v4 and AFFR.  

Nome Mayor Luke Hopkin.  Former mayor.  Communities should be represented by boundaries , contiguous and compact districts that keep communities of interest together.  I live in Goldstream, last time district went to Gulf of Alaska and ruled unconstitutional.  Don’t be concerned about SEI of FBNS Borough.  Agree with other comments from FB area.  Eastern part of FBNS borough could more easily connected with Tok and Delta.  V4 best.  

Louise Bishop 

1:48pm Alyse Guttenberg - Thanks,  Been waiting with 9 am this morning.  Had to hear about Anchorage maps and still can’t see maps.  I live ten minutes from University.  Tok is a four hour drive.  Frustrated with time you’ve taken up debating folks.  

Bahnke:  We have about 35 more people, we take the time to hear them.

Borromeo:  Given that people have been waiting since 9am we should hear them all.

Jacqueline Debedit???   In Goldstream for over 25 years.  Agree with all the people who have spoken. My husband and I have worked at UAF all these years.  Please keep us together.  I heard fromCalista Guy.  Make that happen and keep us together.  Also NP and FB are separate. 

1:52pm Two minute break 

Peter - Goldstream/FB - lived whole life near Goldstream.  As much a part of FB as downtown.  People in Goldstream work all over FB and FB folks come to Goldstream

Bill Moser - from Juneau. Testify for v4.  Main point v3 should be gotten rid of.  Keep hearing over and over about constitutional issues with v3 and don’t know why you keep referring to it.  At this point in the game it doesn’t make sense to keep it.  Juneau, FB, Anchorage, rtsural communities.  Support v4, v3 needs to be gone.

David Guttenberg - Serve on NSB Assembly and was in the legislature.  Represented three different district in legislature. One that was ruled unconstitutional.  One that went to the Coast.  D28 in 2012.  You are repeating that map that was ruled unconstitutional.  When you repeat what was done in 2010 you force rep to represent so many different interests.  Forced inequality. thanks.  Will send copy to you.

Alex Baker - Anchorage - Fairview.  Testify for v4 best map for my community.  Only one member of Board at that time.  Author of v4.  Testimony of people in my community.  Clear that v4 evolved with public testimony.  Listening to testimony is one thing. But then you have to listen and make changes.

Rep. Zach Fields - thank board for rigorous travel schedule.  V3 different from v3 less compact from v4, similar deviations.  Rushed job and has sloppiness.  Appears to be gerrymander people out of their districts.  V3 did get rid of some of those things.  But new v3 still puts Snyder and        Even if inconvenient to elected officials - including me - but v4 is best.

John Nelson from Wasilla - 

Kelly Toch??    In Chugiak,  Did see new map updates.  New maps were Anchorage specific, hard to see how it affects our area.  Want to repeat gentleman who was military veteran.  In my area it’s interesting.  I’m actually now connected with Matsu.  Valley School board issues don’t interest me.  For these reasons v3 preferable.  Gets ER, JBER together.  

Kendra Foster - East Anchorage, multiple hats pres of Russian Jack CC, farmers market.  V4 looks like best opportunity now.  Over 100 languages spoken in E Anchorage.  Should keep us together.  Otherwise dilute our voices if mixed with ER or S Anchorage.  Hearing about FB and express my support for FB neighbors.  Board should listen to communities.  We are the experts on the areas where we live.  

[Around 2pm they said there were 35 more people!!!!! Not sure how many we’ve done.]

2:17  Tanner ??? - three points  1.  Western Alaska, question of SEI between Western Doyon-Ancsa region and Coast - Chevak, Hooper Bay and Scamon Bay.  Think it’s not worth your time, it just isn’t worth your time can’t be done constitutionally.

2.  FB  - .2 of district has to go outside Borough.  Should not come from Western part ofBorough.  Our coalition think it should come from (Doyon)

Anchorage talked to lots of people.  V4 more aligned than v3.

Bethany:  Changes for Doyon things we should be aware of.  Vast areas of state.  Border between 36  v3 and v4 are identical. Playing 3 and 4 changes for Nome districts from interior districts.  As Bahnke said, it would be unconstitutional.  

Borromeo - Doyon Villages are they captured in maps board has consensus.

Tanner:  My understanding trying to make Chevak and Scammon Bay switch, D38 D37 not a problem.  

Binkley - not sure we understand.

Tanner:  Bethel - do have problem.  Putting interior villages with Nome.  Sticking with v3 or v4 with slight moderation or our maps, but not try to do more than that.

Binkley:  Bethany will follow up with you.

Jamie Allard from ER - Appreciate all you are doing.  Public shouldn’t be attacking volunteers.  Resident of ER.  First generation veteran.  ER, JBER, E Anchorage, we are one.  Absolutely connected.  Close ties between ER and NE Anchorage.  My husband and I are both military vets because of diverse populations.  Heard mention of ER exit that this has taken 3 years to get this far.  Heard from my residents.  We are all part of the same Anchorage community.  Two areas with many military personnel - ER.  I’m for map 3.  I’m a person of color as first generation Chilean.  I don’t have others speak for me.

James Squyres from Gulkana - I’ve testified previously.  Heard all this talk about compactness for Anchorage.  Argument that district 39 can’t be put together because of SEI.  Difference of lifestyle of drainage.  About 5000 Alaskans in that area.  Denali B has ???  Don’t leave our area as a left over.  

David James - FB  Live in Goldstream for 25 years.  Object to pairing us with SE in rural area. It’s like ten years ago to pair us with Bethel.  I was in Tok when I was fifteen, I was in FB today.  Constitution clear on this.  Don’t do Senate pairing with Bethel.  

Sue  - speaking as individual now.  Like other people from FB frustrated we can’t see our map, and still kind find it on website, unlike Anchorage maps that went up quickly.  Glad you had so much public testimony and heard that we didn’t want to be overpopulated.  Assembly didn’t say wanted to do this.  They did not identify an area.   Doesn’t make any more sense for us on the east to be with Tok any more than Goldstream.  

Binkley:  Map should be in in two seconds.

Kristen ???  - Planned Parenthood - standing up for marginalized communities.  Do not separate them for partisan reasons.  Taking gold stream out of communities it’s associated with and same with putting NP into FB.  Doesn’t make sense to put them together.  Things go east-west in FB.  Seem political motivated, not community motivated.  Thanks listened to concern about being overpopulated but maps should have been up earlier we’ve been on the phone since 9am. 

Binkley - NP is no longer with FB.  Map up now.

Gary Newman - rep myself and decahedron.  5.2 seats of Fairbanks.  Board accepted that Eilson was economic center for FB more than ….  Eilson as economic engine fails on SEI.  Eilson is closed off unit.  Own schools, and hard to get in.  Didn’t vote in Anchorage, but PFD changed that.  But Goldstream excluded by FB board member. Seems political.  50 years in FB, trails are important here and people come here for trails. But Eilson folks go to south.  Board talked about Richardson Highway to connect with Valdez.  Seems logical that Eilson fits better in 36 than people closely engaged in FB.  V4.  No other testimony.  Seems a mockery of efforts residents of FB made to educate Board.  Need v4.  Commend you for all the time you put in, not an easy task.

2:45 Ann Brown Anchorage - Calling in support of final version of map 3, best for military and civilian population.  

Lacy Hemming.  Scenic ??? Not sure of number - supporting Nicole’s map, keeps community together following natural boundaries.  Do not support Bethany Marcum’s map, it ignores lots of public testimony.  Keep neighborhoods together.  Very different neighborhoods than ER.

Teresa Robel - Anchorage but raised in Goldstream.  FB and UAF vital part of Goldstream community.  Always closely associated with UAF and FB.  

John Nelson Wasilla - moved away 2 minutes in four hour call and missed my place.  Important to listen to people who live in the communities.  Understand people in ER.  Born and raised in Anchorage, then Chugiak before moving to Matsu.  Keep those communities’ representation together.  Wasilla needs to be together and not separate and divide people in city limits.  Discouraging to see Denali B into Matsu.  Partial to v3 but hard to find current version.  Let us record our messages rather than make us wait four hours.

Binkley - we do get written testimony  Another 60 this morning.

Cliff Rose - brief and thanks.  Mt View and Fairview communities. How divide on map.  They should be whole communities.  Important not just disenfranchisement.  And neighborhood context so they are understood.  Recent changes to Assembly regime.  Repped by only one Assembly member and soon it will be two.  That historical representation has impact.  Any maps that divide or don’t make those low income ….  Mt. View and Fairview shouldn’t be divided. 

Binkley - I don’t see anyone else waiting,  Oops we do have someone here in Anchorage.

Randy Ruedrich - Long wait.  Simple request on behalf of Calista.  Not Chevak, it’s about Calista villages into D37.  Calista representation diluted in Legislature. Calista can now start to build small majority in 37.  Second - want to address FB.  Commend the Board. Unfortunately people didn’t get to see map.  Impression from testimony that goes all the way over from the east side.  Half from the east and half from the west.  Timer goes off.  

Binkley:  Didn’t understand.  Take some villages and move them to 37 and then take some of Hooper Bay and that doesn’t affect 39.  Overpopulate 37 and underpopulated 39.  Online - Dawn Fraser from Delta - I live in D9 and you want D36.  For putting military units, Eilson, etc. into one group.  In school district speak Ukrainian Russian Spanish and English.  Very much and International community.

Binkley:  that concludes public testimony and take a few minutes to rearrange the room.  Take a 15 minute break.  

3:04pm  OK 30 minute break to sanitize the room and have some lunch.