Kamala Harris As New Presidential Candidate - UPDATED

 I wrote a couple of posts strongly defending Biden staying as the Democratic presidential candidate (for example.)  I had several serious concerns should he drop out of the race:

1. Chaos that would result as various potential candidates jostled for the nomination and the impact on Black voters if Harris wasn't the candidate.
2. Issues over who had access to the money that had already been collected
3. Questions about whether a new candidate would be listed on the ballots of all states. 

I acknowledged that Biden was getting on in years (as is the GOP candidate) and that he clearly did not do well in the debate with Trump, but was worried the three concerns listed above would doom a new candidate.  I was also concerned that some of those calling for Biden to step aside - people who normally are politically savvy - might have had personnel encounters with Biden that revealed more than a single debate's worth of issues.  And I also heard people who said it was the money people who were pressuring other Democrats to get rid of Biden.  

Well, I was wrong.  The new candidate has stirred a level of enthusiasm for a presidential candidate I last saw at the Alaska Democratic caucus in 2008, when the Begich Middle School was packed - seriously packed like a sardine can - with people who had come out to caucus for Obama.  

The people working on all this - including Biden and Harris - made sure the three issues I listed above were resolved before the announcement.  Clearly they made sure Harris was the only candidate and the issues about the money - with her as candidate - apparently was not an issue.  And getting the new nominees on the ballot apparently will not be a problem.  Which makes sense since the Democrats haven't had their convention yet anyway.  

Yesterday I signed up for the White Dudes for Harris call this afternoon (Alaska time) and watched cavalcade of (mostly) white men explain from different perspectives why they were supporting Harris.

Singer Josh Groben

      

 There was an alternating pattern of politicians/officials and celebrities - mostly actors. 

New Orleans Mayor Landrieu

Others included:  Pete Buttigieg, Illinois Governor Pritzker, Wisconsin Gov. Tim Walz,

Actor Paul Shearer

Michigan Sen. Gary Peters, California Rep Adam Schiff, 

Actor Rob Lowe

Actor Joseph Gordon Levitt,  Actor Sean Astin (Patty Duke's son), Rep. Steny Hoyer, and others.  (You can tell by the money amounts listed on the screenshots that I don't have them all up in the right order.  Well maybe it's not clear enough, but the totals were on the blue/red bar on the right.)

North Carolina Gov Roy Cooper

 It went on for about three hours and they said that there were 170,000 participants.  Though the white dudes were not nearly as generous as other groups.  By the end there was about $4 million donated, which pales compared to the - STOP - 

I went back to check on the numbers for the White Women's call.  Different sources give different numbers.  BBC said $3 million in one hour.  The Hollywood Reporter writes that

 "Author Glennon Doyle shared on Friday [the call was Monday] that the call raised over $8.5 million so far."

So the $4 million raised in the three hour call was actually significant.  

Most of the celebrities who participated talked about activism they're involved with such as unions or spoke about why different issues were important to them.  

I'd note that I 'registered' Sunday, but never got a link to the Zoom call.  I tried again just before the call.  I couldn't figure out how to skip the donation page.  Maybe you couldn't.  Maybe that's a way to screen out saboteurs.  I wasn't pleased and donated the lowest amount - $25 - though I guess I could have done my own custom donation, based on amounts listed on the bottom of the screen.  But even then I had trouble getting to the Zoom link.  Eventually I found a link to the Youtube live page.  I would have contributed more once I got on if I hadn't been forced to pay before getting on.  (And perhaps there was a way that I didn't see.)

So, despite my earlier Keep Biden stance, I'm a happy camper.  I know I wouldn't want to keep the hours and travel schedule a president keeps and that Biden's already done this for four years.  Now he can be an elder statesman rather than possibly die in office.  

And there appears to be a great deal of enthusiasm over Harris being the candidate, while it appears that Trump's pick of Vance - who apparently was pushed on him by Peter Thiel and perhaps Elon Musk - isn't working out as well as Trump might have liked.  

Hillbilly Elegy is still on Netflix and we watched it the other night.  I'm not sure it's the most flattering portrait. Perhaps he thinks his rise from poverty and abuse are admirable - and I'm sure they are - but he comes across as pitiful in many scenes.  And I'm not sure how accurate a portrayal of his life the film is.  I doubt Trump has seen the film because he hates weak losers (which is how the young Vance is portrayed in many scenes).  If he did see it, it would support the idea that he chose Vance because of the financial support from Thiel and other tech billionaires. This is going to be a troubled relationship.   

UPDATED July 30, 2024

I got this as part of an email from Ross Morales Rocketto and Brad Bauman, who organized the White Dudes for Harris call:

"Over 193,000 people attended the kickoff call

We raised $4.2 million dollars last night for Harris for President

Over 150,000 folks signed up to join White Dudes for Harris

And our twitter account was banned…no joke, Guess we got under someone’s skin yesterday ;)" [emphasis added]

It becomes clearer each day that Musk bought Twitter to be an election influencer.  

Alaska Redistricting Board: About The Maps And How To Make Sense Of Them

[NOTE:  Board is meeting in Anchorage this afternoon:  

October 4, 2021: Anchorage Public Hearing: 4:30pm-6:30pm: Dena’ina Center 

 Kahtnu Rooms 1 & 2 (up escalators and to the left)

http://notice.alaska.gov/203893  from what I understand the Board will have maps up on the walls and people will be able to talk directly with Board members and staff, ask questions, make suggestions.  Whatever you say, also submit it in writing so it gets on the record.]

The Board's been meeting in SE Alaska and I read their announcements literally that they would simply have maps posted on the walls and the board members (at least two were going to attend these workshops)  who attended would be there to talk to attendees and that nothing would be broadcast.  I didn't look too carefully, because I was more than happy to be doing other things. 

But redistricting has been weighing on me and so let me share some thoughts about how people can figure out what's going on and weigh in on the maps, the heart of redistricting.

1. How many maps are there?
1. Depends on what you mean by 'a map.'  The Board was required to approve a draft map within 30 days of the Census Bureau giving out the official census numbers.  The Board produced two draft maps which they called version 1 and version 2.  (v1 and v2).  Then five other groups (the board calls them 3rd Parties) submitted alternative maps.  
2. After hearing public testimony, the board replaced v1 and v2 with v3 and v4.  The board approved of four of the five 3rd party maps (Doyon, AFFR, AFFER, and the Senate Minority maps.  They rejected the Democratic party map.) The approved maps have been posted on the Board's website along with v3 and v4 and are being shared with the public as the Board gets feedback around the state.  (Rejecting the Democratic map looks bad to casual observers, but it had a lot of issues. When questioned by Board member Borromeo, for nearly every district she asked about, they'd say, "This district has particular problems..."  The public has lots to digest and having one less set of maps map will make it easier for the public and I don't think anything important will be lost.  The Democratic Party is still free to point out aspects of their map that are better than any of the other maps is they feel it's important.)
3. So, there are two board maps and four 3rd party maps.
4. BUT, these are maps of Alaska and there are 40 state House districts.  So each proposal has 
1. a map of Alaska
2. maps of of key cities and regions (ie Anchorage, Fairbanks, Matsu, Kenai, SE, etc.)
3. maps of all 40 districts
5. You can get links to all the maps on the Board's map page.  The maps of Alaska in each plan are interactive - you can move around and enlarge them  to see details.  The individual district maps are pdf files.  If you have the right software and skills, there are also shapefiles.  If I understand this right, these have all the data on them and you can use them to make your own maps, as the 3rd parties did.
6. There's also a link to  an interactive map that overlays all the district borders of all the plans. Below is the AFFR map. The white lines outline AFFR District 25-M in Anchorage.  You can switch maps in the far left red bar (see blue arrow).  

   

   Click on image to enlarge

   
   
7. The Board offers a way to do your own maps.  All the current Alaska data are loaded there.  You can get there here.
2. How do you make sense of the maps?
1. Ah, that's the rub.  My suggestion is that you focus on your own district.  The Board's website has the 2013 plan too on the map page.  Go there.  Find your own district.  Print out that map.  Then start with v3 or v4 and find the district you'd be in with that map.  Print it out and then compare.  Then look at the districts the 3rd parties created for where you live.  
2. You can also go to the public meetings page.  This page lists all the meetings along with the minutes, audio recordings, and the testimony from the public.  You can listen to the tape of the meeting to hear what others are saying about the maps or read the public testimony.  This is where people have raised issues with the maps.  As I write this, they are only caught up to the September 20 meeting.  But there's enough to keep you busy and give you a sense of the key problems people found.  
3. If you notice a problem, how do you let the Board know?
1. Go to a meeting near you and testify.  I try to post info on upcoming meetings current here.  You can also subscribe to notices from the Board here.
2. Call in to a meeting. The meeting notices have a link to the information for calling in and testifying.  You can call in and just listen.  Testimony has been taken at the beginning and end of the meetings.  So if while listening, you can indicate to the operator that you want to testify at the end.
3. Speaking at meetings means you know the Board members heard you.  But if you want your message to be accurately captured, you can write it up at this link.
4. Ideally you do both so you know they heard you and there's an accurate record of your testimony.  
5. If the final plan is challenged in court, all the testimony can be used to show that the Board was informed of problems.  And if the 3rd party maps may be able to demonstrate that the Board's map  has NOT met the Constitutional requirements as well as other possible maps.  
4. But it's still so overwhelming, isn't it?
1. Yes, there's a lot there.  But if you focus on your district and nearby districts, then you can supply information about local issues and concerns.  
2. The 3rd party groups who submitted maps are also paying close attention to the map making and they represent different interests.  They've gotten mapping software in advance and are much more intimately knowledgeable than anyone else will be.  And if they think there are serious problems at the end, the will file a law suit challenging the maps.  The groups are:
1. Alaskans For Fair Redistricting (AFFR) - "Alaskans For Fair Redistricting (AFFR) is a coalition of Alaska Native groups, organized labor, public interest and community organizations. AFFR was created amid the 2000 redistricting process to ensure an equitable map for the people of Alaska"
2. Alaskans For Fair and Equitable Redistricting (AFFER) - This group looks out for Republican interests.  Randy Ruedrich (former Republican Party chair) and Steve Culligan presented the plan.
3. Coalition of Doyon, Ltd., Tanana Chiefs Conference, Fairbanks Native Association, Sealaska, and Ahtna. - This is a consortium of Interior Native Corporations and Sealaska.  Their ostensible interests are making sure that Native Alaskan interests are represented in Juneau.  And presumably they are looking for a map that will favor the various business interests of the Native Corporations. 
4. Senate Minority Coalition - Made up of the state Senate minority caucus and led by Sen. Tom Begich.  Begich has been involved with all the redistricting efforts going back to 1991 I believe and has been an expert witness and testified before the Supreme Court on redistricting.  This is group compensates for the loss of the Democratic Party proposal to some extent.  
3. Find the 3rd Party groups you think most aligned with your interests and contact them. Ask them for more information about the maps and how you can support their positions.  

Of course this is just one slice of what's happening, but the maps are the heart of redistricting so this is a good place to start.  

Alaska Redistricting Board: Approve All Plans But One For Road Show

 

Today was rather tedious at the Board.  Let me highlight first what they did and then, if I'm still awake, let me look at what it might all mean.

1. Public Testimony
1. Former Sen. Cathy Geisel called in to oppose a district in the AFFER (The Randy Ruedrich Group) plan which combined south Anchorage with Nikiski.  She said she'd represented a district like that and the interest of the hillside are very different from the interests of Nikiski.
2. Several others who I'm not characterizing because my notes aren't clear enough to accurately reflect what they said.
2. Questioned the 3rd Party Map Presenters from Friday

   

   Why for example is part of Palmer seemingly missing

   
   
1. Covered all the maps except the Matsu map.  If they explained why that was missing, I didn't hear them.  Maybe because it was only Matsu.  I'd heard it was very much like the AFFER drawing of Matsu, so maybe that's why.  
2. Questioning was very sharp and detailed.  Member Borromeo kept saying, I don't want to just hear general comments, I want specific evidence that it's more compact or more socio-economically integrated.  She was pretty harsh with Randy Ruedrich.  And with the Democrats.  It seemed for every district they had some problems and they said well this one was really hard so we had to do X.  But then they said the same about the next district, they had todo Y.  My thought was that she should have asked if there were any districts they were proud of.
3. Board's new v3 and v4 plans.    Peter Torkelson reported that over the weekend the Board came up with updated versions of the maps they presented Sept 9.  They called them versions 3 and 4, or v3 and v4.  They then went through the two new maps, district by district.  There's nothing quite so challenging as listening to someone talk about districts by describing them border by border.  Maps were on the screen, but it wasn't clear which district was which because you couldn't make out street names.  The Board did seem pretty pleased with v3 and v4 and after the descriptions they approved them as the new proposed plans.  
4. Adoption of Board's v3 and v4.  This happened very quickly.
5. Adopting 3rd Party Plans To Take On The Road.  They went plan by plan.  Nominating each for approval and then voting.  The approved all the 3rd Party plans EXCEPT the Democratic Party Plan.  Actually, the plan was approved and then member Borromeo asked for reconsideration and said she thought there was just too much wrong with it that they shouldn't waste the public's time on it.  There are enough other maps for them to consider. Member Bahnke argued that the public should be able to see as many plans as possible.  John Binkley agreed.  They voted and 3 to 2 voted not to accept the Democratic Party's plan.  Borromeo, Marcum, and Simpson voted against the plan.  Binkley and Bahnke voted for the plan.  It didn't seem like a political decision.  I think both sides had reasonable points.  It does seem symbolically a questionable move. Borromeo was also not pleased with the AFFER map but did say it had very low deviations and that might be something useful as they go forward.  
6. Discussion of Travel Plans To Take The Maps To The Public And Get Feedback.  Peter Torkelson, the executive director of the Board, explained they are making plans to visit communities around the state in person or online so they can discuss how the maps affect the communities and what issues people want changed.  Invited other communities to send in requests for a visit.  But did say they need to be done by Nov.1 because their final proposal is due Nov 10 (I think that's the date, didn't get into my notes.)  When they get back from tour they have to collate everything and finalize the maps.  

Some extra observations:

1. The Board essentially rejected any corrections over the weekend of the 3rd Party maps, except for the Senate Minority Coalition map which noted an error Friday and sent in a corrected file over the weekend.  I understand there is a time constraint, but the Board itself had time since they first offered their own maps and changed their maps over the weekend.  I'd note that at this point I have no idea how the new versions affect incumbents.  
2. The Board was fairly (and rightfully) critical of the various plans of the 3rd parties.  When I say critical here, I mean they asked very pointed questions for justification for every protrusion or pairing of communities or high deviations etc.  But the Board's own new maps, didn't get that kind of scrutiny.  The public testimony did a lot of that Friday of course.  And they'll get more as the go on the road.  But there is a tendency to get protective of one's own creation.  I think of many times that I'd have classes break up into groups and put together some sort of plan.  They often liked their own plans best.
3. I'd also note that Board Member Borromeo, when talking about spending the weekend working on maps, raised the point that someone had suggested that the Board members report on whether they had had help from outsiders to make their maps.  She thought that was a good suggestion and said the only help she got was from Eric - who's on loan from - one of the State Departments, maybe commerce and who worked with the previous board on mapping - and from the staff.  Then Melanie Bahnke said she hadn't consulted or been contacted by anyone else.  So that just leaves three other members of the board to declare their contacts.  No one else volunteered.  

There's lots more, but I'd need to look carefully through my notes.  And as a reader of the previous post commented, "I fell asleep reading it."  So this is probably enough.  Below are:

1. The email that board subscribers got today about today's meeting.
2. The Board's press release
3. My very, very rough notes of today's meeting

The Email

The Alaska Redistricting Board met today and adopted six proposals, which will serve as the basis for the public meetings starting next week.

• Board composites v.3 and v.4, which will replace the v.1 and v.2 maps previously adopted;
• The following 3^rd Party Maps:
• Coalition of Doyon, Ltd., Tanana Chiefs Conference, Fairbanks Native Association, Sealaska, and Ahtna.
• Alaskans for Fair and Equitable Redistricting (AFFER)
• Alaskans for Fair Redistricting (AFFR)
• The Senate Minority Caucus

 

I know that everyone would like to see the maps. The staff will be working diligently to ensure there are no errors in the maps before creating new shapefiles, .pdf maps, and interactive Google Earth files. We will let you know as soon as the maps are posted.

 

The Press Release

ANCHORAGE – Today the Alaska Redistricting Board adopted six proposed redistricting plans which will be the basis of public meetings across Alaska. The Board-drafted plans, v.3 and v.4 adopted today replace Board Composite Plans v.1 and v.2, which were previously approved by the Board on September 9, 2021.

In addition to the two revised board composites, the following plans submitted and presented by the following organizations were also adopted:

• Coalition of Doyon, Ltd., Tanana Chiefs Conference, Fairbanks Native Association, Sealaska, and Ahtna.

• Alaskans for Fair and Equitable Redistricting (AFFER)

• Alaskans for Fair Redistricting (AFFR)

• The Senate Minority Caucus

"I was pleased that the Board came together today to bring six proposed redistricting plans forward for Alaskans to consider,” said Board Chair John Binkley. “We will now be traveling around the state to learn which plan best reflects Alaskans’ desire for their legislative districts. "

The Alaska Redistricting Board will now start a public meeting tour, seeking feedback from Alaskans on all proposed plans before adoption of the final plan is required by the Alaska Constitution by November 10, 2021.

“We were pleased to hear from Alaskans from every region of the state and replace our initial maps with new and improved versions three and four, which better reflect the socio-economic integration characteristics of each region,” said Board Member Nicole Borromeo. “We look forward to hearing feedback from Alaskans on our new draft maps, as well as the four adopted third-party draft maps, as we present them in public meetings in communities across the state.”

Detailed maps will be posted on the Alaska Redistricting Board’s website at https://www.akredistrict.org/when they are available.

For additional information please contact TJ Presley at (907) 229-1385.

###

My very, very rough notes. 

Again, the main point is to give a sense of the discussion so when the transcript is posted you know where to look.  I tried being a little more conscientious about putting in the time now and then.

Alaska Redistricting Board Monday September 20, 2021

9:08 am People gathering.  Melanie Bahnke will be here by phone.

9:10 Chair opens meeting.  Quorum.

Simpson, Marcum, Borromeo, Bahnke (online), Binkley - all present.

1. Adoption of Agenda 
2. Borromeo move to adopt and move to Executive Session
3. John:  We aren’t going to do that.
4. Withdraw.  Agenda approved.

[Note Socio-Economic Integrity (or Integration) was used a lot.  I shortened it to SEI]

Public testimony

Cathy Giessel - appreciate board discussion about rural communities.  I recommend reject AFFER district ???.  It connects South Anchorage over large stretch of water to connect to one community - Nikiski.  This was done before at recommended of same people.  At that time all of N Kenai connected with South Anchorage.  I was the rep in that district.  Big learning curve because issues of Kenai totally different.  Set nets.  Historical businesses.  Sports fishing.  All very different from hillside.  People in Kenai complained to me about being connected to Anchorage.  In 2013 Courts corrected this redistricting.  I realize contiguity goes over water, but this is an absurd connection.  Urge rejection of AFFER map connecting S. Anchorage to Kenai.  

William Staff ??? - Fairbanks - thank chair and members for hard work.  Not easy.  Irrespective of your decisions, someone will be unhappy.   FBKS NSB - either break it down.  Or Keep integrity of Socio-econ intact.  CAn’t replicate old scenario because of population change.  3-4K people to strip out of Borough and keep us SE-coherent.  Against breaking B boundaries for population.

Soldatna - Gail Limon ?? Moore - Map not acceptable connecting Nikiski to S. Anchorage

Anchorage, sign up - Ann Brown - brief comment to record of Sept 17.  Discussion of role of community councils.  Organization to connect to community councils.  SC has talked about this patterns can’t   - by definition Anchorage is SE-Integrated.  Court also says patterns lack differences to adjust districts. In favor a map that would take that into consideration.  

Yarrow Silver in Anchorage - Board of Foothill community councils.  Advocating for fair redistricting. Started out optimistic, but disappointed Friday.  Your openness Friday were good.  Looked at Maps.  AFFR and ????   Treated east Anchorage.  AK Dem map similar to current districts and compact.  AFFR put thought and effort into putting neighborhoods and keeping them intact.  Community councils keep communities together for 50 plus year.  Chanshtnu park happened through community council.  

John:  Others signed up are reps of 3rd party maps ready to answer questions.

9:24

Move to consideration of 3rd party maps.

Exec Dir.  Peter Torkelson.  We have identical sized maps for side by side comparisons.  Sen. Minority Plan made a couple of small change.  Brought in Deering to NS Borough.  And Matsu to get  ???borders straight.  Matsu didn’t change deviation, but Deering change moved it up to 4+%

Begich not available but Sen. Kiehl will be.  

Melanie:  Can you hear me?  Yes

Borromeo:  Yes I do have questions for Sen. Kiehl.  

John:  Brief at ease til we get Sen. On he line.  

9:29

Melanie:  Asked staff to screen share.  OK, there it is.  [There are two screens.  One facing the Board and one facing the audience]  

9:31 back in session.  Member Bahnke has questions

Bahnke:  They put Deering back into North Slope district so matches Board version, but substantial difference is 37, 38, 39.

John:  Is Sen Begich on the line?

BEgich?  Yes

John:  I see Sens Kiehl and Kawasaki also online.  See changes slight.  Adding Deering into NS and Houston city limits incorporated.  

Yes.

Bethany?  Peter, scroll into Gulf Coast district.  Rational for Valdez and Cordova?  

Begich:  Complexity of puzzle pieces.  Both Cordova and Valdez part of unorganized Borough.  Valdez solves Kodiak underpopulation without undue deviations.  Has traditionally been with Interior in the past.  To avoid overpopulating SE,,  Template to have you look at.  Have to account for the population.  

John:  thanks

Bethany:  Thanks

Nicole:  Overall low deviations to be commended.  But also lack of compactness and SE-disparity.  Bering Straits and YK by taking Doyon villages with YK and Bering Straits.

Begich;  Follows up and down the river.  Old House district Chairman was apart of.  Relationships between Unalakleet and McGrath - study I did and upheld ten years ago.  Trade relationships - trails documented, part of the record ten years ago.  River connection and the past constitutionally accepted connection to trails and early trade.  

Nicole:  Thank you.  37 and 38.  Looks like cut YK districts into 3 districts, they want to be in one.

Begich:  Thanks.  Spoke to Calista.  Request use the villages that use the two rivers.  Doyon and ??? Boundaries to insure follow corporate boundaries.  Making up pop difference.  Directly connected to river connected to Bethel.  ???

Nicole.  Thank you.  32 - Valdez, Halibut Cove, Kodiak, left Valdez and connected Alaska Native groups together, but they don’t have historical connection.  Court found.

Begich:  I can. I was the expert witness in those case.  Tyonek relation only ??  Court said while boundaries important but ??? Also important.  Hard line to draw.  Only material difference between this and previous cycle is change to Cordova to Valdez.  We can’t honor every boundary, driven by population and SE-integration.  Alaska Native villages in the borough and rather isolated villages.

Nicole:  33 couples downtown Juneau with Haines and Skagway.  I’ll give my reasoning and then defer to SEn. Kiehl.  Two house districts and Sen. Districts.  Direct relationships between Juneau, Haines, and Skagway.  Court upheld this very map.  Whether connected to north and south not relevant.

Sen. Kiehl -  Thanks for opportunity.  Begich said well, court heard this and Board heard substantial testimony to keep Mendenhall Valley together compelling.  Small boat harbor and significant maritime elements of Haines and Skagway.  Tlingit Haida Juneau works well with Klukwan.  Significant connections.  Not things that would cause court to strike it down.  Looking for more perfect pairing…???

Melanie - comment about 38, 39, 40 maps.  39 now spread across 3 different ANCSA regions.  Have to fly from Nome to Anchorage to McGrath.  YK experienced tremendous growth and put Into 3 different districts.  I understand court recognized historic trade agreements.  But current practice is different.

Nicole:  There is a flight from Nome to McGrath.

Melanie:  Still have to go thru Anchorage

Begich:  Thanks for your comments.  Always difficult questions.  Don’t want to repeat problems from ten year ago maps.  Didn’t want to go deeper and deeper into ??.  Less of Doyon is in 39.  SE-considerations.  Difficulty with any maps with compactness and contiguity because of strangeness of census blocks were gifted.  Map not perfect but tries to reduced the disparities and also balance one person one vote which is also important.  

John:  thanks   Any other 3rd party maps Board has questions about?

Melanie:  Asked Friday.  Is Matt there?  

Peter:  Not now

Attorney Lee Baxter is here.  Distinction between ANCSA and Borough boundaries

Attorney:  Local - Borough and cities.  We don’t have that for ANCSA but it could be.  No SC precedent saying ANCSA boundaries dominant over local.  

Melanie:  Borough boundaries over ANCSA?

Attorney:  We know local boundaries are SE integrated.  ANCSA boundaries we have to analyze that.  Not precise answer because we don’t have one.  

Bethany:  

Peter:  Done with minority caucus map?

John:  Yes.  Bringing up Doyon coalition maps

Tanner and Marna Sanford From Doyon to mic.  [Nathaniel Amdur-Clark -went by the name Tanner last time and that’s how I identified him in my notes.  He told me later that Nathaniel is his middle name.]

Melanie - looks like map bisects Palmer.

Tanner - No parts of Palmer outside of district.  Might be one census block, but we’ll address that.  

Marna - we have redrawn map, we have a new map, a little different from Board map and the one you saw with split Palmer.  We thought we’d submitted the other one.

Melanie:  Which version should I look at.  I didn’t get your email.  New position not going with that version

John:  We’re looking at adopting 3rd party maps and they have to be complete.

Tanner:  I think submit it for public comment.  Public will comment on that and other districts.  I suspect that other 3rd party maps will be adjusting maps based on public comments coming in  

John:  I’m not sure we’re going to be able to go back and come up with all those changes as we go on the road if we have multiple versions as we go around the state.

Budd:  What I hear them, because of the timing, they have to submit and this is what is ready now.  Idea isn’t to change every time someone comments, but to track them and make a new map at the end.  

Tanner:  Keeping track and making changes will be internal, but helpful but between Friday and now very short turnaround.  If Board wants to set another date for 3rd party map updates would be helpful.  Keeping track would be internal.  Board can decide what they’ll do.

John:  At meeting Friday decided to adopt maps today because we have tight framework.  But as long as we take the maps we have now will be presented in public.  And you’ll see potential changes later.

Bethany:  Anchorage into Matsu?

Tanner:  Population realities of all SC Alaska.  To get right size, need parts of Kenai and best is to have Seward, then need a small pop from elsewhere.  Most SE integrated area is up the highway.  Also when coming S from the N.  Matsu.  Additional population has to be given up - SC precedent saying there is SE integration between North Anchorage and S. Matsu.  

Marna - Lazy Mountain….

John:  Can we look up north?

Melanie:  Can we look at YK area - how many different districts between split

Marna - Calista is 3.

John:  Southern part of Denali, looking at Cantwell.  Where is Denali Highway. Denali the Boundary?

Marna - Can’t see it on this map.  Have to get real close.  

John:  Boundary is Nenana River?  South fork?  Basically Nenana river is boundary.  Broke Borough boundary to include Cantwell.  Clear Boroughs all SE integration.  ANCSA could be but no precedent.  Why include Cantwell?

Tanner:  Board can take into consideration local boundaries including Boroughs, but doesn’t mean can’t take other factors.  Nothing that says B more important than Muncipalities.  If they are split there are rules about how that happens.  If they don’t have controlling votes in enough districts.  If split Denali Borough into three districts so B wouldn’t have controlling ??? In any districts.  

John:  population of Cantwell?

Marna About 220ish

Whole b?  

Marna Don’t know

Tanner:  Not enough for a house seat, but can be part.  1600 in Borough.  

Nicole:  Thanks.  You tried to connect Doyon villages ????  Like to bring up Kenai Pen Borough.  Another that took hits to its boundaries.  Why breach so often?

Tanner:  Wouldn’t accept premise that changes to Kenai is to keep Interior intact.  Changes to Kenai comes from view that Valdez is not SEI to Interior.  Have to build Kenai in way we have done. Not reflection of trying to keep Kenai and Ahtna.  

Marna Some maps take some Homer neighborhoods out.  Making case for Seward.  I think ours is only one that keeps PWS whole.  We believe B boundaries are not necessarily the best measure of SEI

Tanner:  SEI always referred as relative.  Most SEI you can be all things considered and population considerations.  37 has largest downward deviation of all the maps.  All maps will have at least one district with downward deviation.  To keep SW as SEI.  If not have these communities, deviation even higher.

Nicole:  evidence of SEI, because court has been critical that really should e evidence of historical linguistic and other evidence.

Tanner:  Relative.  In comparison to other possibilities.  Connecting the maritime coastal communities on Peninsula with SW Alaska makes some sense and compared to other option.  Connect them to Kodiak and a long skinny district along all of SC Alaska.  

Nicole:  District 24?

John: While at 37 I have question.  You made a value judgment here that in D37 that Good News and Platinum more SEI  with Seldovia and Halibut Cove, rather than PWS whole rather than YK District

Tanner:  100%  More SEI as a whole than to include Valdez in 

Marna Or Dillingham with McGrath..  To keep them together and have them in maritime district in entirety as a voting block. 

Nicole:  24 - Peters Creek, breached Anchorage and Matsu, plus finger into ER.  Clarification.

Marna We thought that was one single neighborhood.  Other maps stretched down to Base.  Could have one Downtown/Eagle River.  

Nicole:  AFFER reps?  

Mr. Ruedrich:  Good Morning.  Randy Ruedrich, Anchorage on behalf of AFFER.  This morning we filed new shape files with the board that clean up a few block files.  I said Friday we had 29 districts below 1 %  as of this morning we have 35 districts below 1%  Our new max is 2.8%

Nicole:  Thanks. Haven’t had chance to review new maps, so asking the Friday map.  Appreciate work in Matsu Borough.  An entire restructure of rural Alaska and problems with SE.

Taking Saxman out of Ketchikan is unconstitutional

Ruedrich:  Saxman dependent on resources in D2.  For that reason alone.  

Nicole:  AK SC has been clear about this area.  1992, they said it was impermissible.  Why did you do it anyway.

Ruedrich:  Because of VRA changes there were different rules.  I can go back and come up with better solution.

Nicole:  D2 - Metlakatla and Hyder.  Metlakatla wants to be with Ketchikan but you put them with Sitka.  

Ruedrich:  Tried to put Native communities with connection to Sitka into D 2.  Only way I could find to get Yakutat population to assist us in most severed pop deficit.  SE always has problems because of length, lack of width, my surprise we could do this. 20 years ago Icework district, Hyder up to Linn Canal.  

Nicole:  I’ll say that the justification from Sitka to Metlakatla.  Had to fly from Metlakatla to Ketchikan to Sitka.  

Budd:  This map looks like we tried to draw.  As soon as it hit the presses got comments from Ketchikan, Saxman, Metlakatla communities that we missed a portion of Ketchikan south.  When we went back, couldn’t see a way to make it work population wise   When we put people back into Ketchikan, couldn’t make it go up to Wrangell.  Fishhook to Hyder and Metlakatla.  Petersburg had to go with Sitka.  

Nicole:  38, Uniting Hooper Bay and Bethel.  Appendage to SE to Quingahak.  Not compact 

Ruedrich:  In consultation with Calista.  Hooper Bay wanted to be with Bethel.  If we colored that all yellow, it wouldn’t look so unique.  Specific trade and individuals from Hooper Bay have testified.  Expect Calista to testify, tomorrow if you are in session on why this is what they prefer to have.  Have not been with Bethel for years and they say they are SEI.  

Nichole:  56 villages in area have significant ties to Bethel.  Consider 

Melanie:  Look at criteria - three of those quantitative - compact, contiguous, numbers are numbers - the qualitative issue SEI is where we have all the discussion.  Breaking YK into 3 districts.  Also problem with Saxman.  Did SC already decide on this matter?

Lee:  For the record, that’s my recollection too.

10:41

Nicole:  Previous supreme courts have ruled against this?  

John:  Yes.

Mr. Ruedrich:  Part and parcel from Calista moving those 5 villages into 37.  Not requiring Doyon villages above into 37.  That’s the biggest positive impacts on Western Alaska districts.  2013 Map had 13?? Villages Doyon in D37.  Big step to compactness and reduces length of arc the Doyon villages were subjected to.  Calista sees this as improvement.  Villages in3 districts.  We had villages in 2 districts and no one voting on where their Sen comes from.  

Nicole:  Is Calista a member of your organization?  

Ruedrich:  Yes part of it.

Nicole:  Can we have someone from Calista with authority to testify to this.  Haven’t heard from other Calista villages.

Can we go to 39  Down coast from Shishmaref to Emmonak - what is the SEI for a district like this.  

Ruedrich:  Allow Calista to respond because all part of Calista.

Nicole:  Negative

Ruedrich;  Right, some are not  Population to reduce deviation.  Not enough people to avoid severe deviation.

Melanie:  Not only breaking B boundary, but also breaking four different ANCSA boundaries  Not a SC ruling, but something we should consider.  Doesn’t appear SE muster.  I have concerns..  Also too much emphasis on deviation over other factors.

Nicole:  Done with rural.  Let’s look at 32.  We did hear from resident in Nikiski who protested

Ruedrich:  Briefly back to NW Alaska situation.  Two villages we put into D39 from NANA in area highly influenced by deviation challenges.  2002, SC directed Shishmaref to be added to eliminate deviation.  In 2012 not enough population in Shishmaref, so whole area to Wiseman 

was included in NSlope/NANA district.  Now population large enough, even have surplus.  Would be largest deviation if that problem is not addressed.

Melanie:  Question for Peter - Two versions of Board maps, NS borough - what is that % deviation?  

Peter:  Positive 2.65%????  Wanted it noted that less than 3%.

John:  At ease for 5 minutes.

10:54

11:01  Back to order

AFFER map questions

Nicole:  District 5:  Different from others.  Specifically did rural and included Cordova with Interior district

Ruedrich:  Complicated problem as Cordova as a place in PW Sound.  In 2011 hearings they testified, they said they wanted to be with Kodiak 48-2 rather than Valdez.  Made decision to not put in SE.  Not enough population without Yakutat to properly build D36.  Only option we had left was a pre 1980 which puts Cordova with eastern Alaska.  So I saw no other solution.  Couldn’t make it work with Kodiak.  No possibilities.

Nicole:  No SE reason, just for population

Ruedrich:  Doesn’t have road access so has same problems.  Does have a seaport.

Nicole: And does have daily flights to SE.  Done to separate Valdez to Cordova.  Even tho said at one point in one meeting that they didn’t want to be connected to Valdez.

John:  Sen. Begich testimony said there were traditional trade routes and connections to keep in district.  If one considers that there is the railroad and Copper River connections.

Nicole:  Hillside and Nikiski.

Ruedrich:  What happens to SE Anchorage - over population.  Some parts of state terribly overpopulated and thus very under represented.  Kenai pop for 2.?? House seats.  When pairing Anchorage with Matsu, surplus population on both sides.  .4 of seat had to be pushed out of B to create eastern Matsu Richardson Highway district.  Only way this works, still have surplus population you put it into36  Kodiak-Valdez.  What we’ve done here was done in 1984 map.  Not ideal, but if these folks are not give opportunity to vote with citizens on Anchorage side, will have zero true representation because will be buried by Kenia.  Kenai overpopulated in 2001 and 1011.  Habitual abuse of Kenai.  

Nicole:  thank you.  Habitual abuse.  See breaching of B boundary.  You’ve weighed deviation above B boundary.  We can ask those residents when we go there.

Nicole:  Struggled constitutional requirements to keep thee districts compact, and apendages.  30 into 28.  27 is pretty compact in Turnagain area, but 22 and 25 encroaches western of 20, 20 into 25.  I could understand that you do have places that push and pull because I worked on Anchorage about 20 times.

Ruedrich:  The version we presented this morning resolves most of those problems.  Sorry, we were pressed for time.  22 compact N-S NL to Base.  36 cleaned up - put mostly into Hillside.  

Nicole:  Going to focus testimony because I don’t have access to new map.  Focus on rational basis fordrawingof Anchorage.

Ruedrich:  Tried to use Chester Creek as much as possible, Fish Creek, Campbell creek.  Divided E/W using Seward Highway and have as few deviations as possible.  D24 like shapes.  Different corners, tales, ears, a function of the creeks.  Not covered by waterways, in NE corner added to get population.

Nicole:  appreciates the deviation, but not the compactness.  Extend it again to FB, boundaries of NSborough broken.  I do appreciate time you put in map.  Shows problem when concentrate on deviation you lose other factors.  

Bethany:  Can you overlay house districts on this map.  Current districts not at all compact.  Balancing act between compactness and deviation.  

John:  Thank you  

11:19  Questions from Board members about other 3rd party maps.

Nicole:  if AFFR reps, I do have questions.  

Robin and David go up.  David Dunsmuir and joined by colleague Robin O’Donahue.

Nicole.  Thank you appreciate the work and commend you on low deviation.  Some community groupings and appendages.  Start withSE.  Start with D1.  Why Thorne Bay this way?

David:  I don’t believe that’s a B boundary.  For population purposes it was necessary to add population.  Looking for most compact, contiguous and SE-I way to do this.  Determined Thorne Bay most compact way to do it.  What is your evidence for ties of Thorne Bay to Ketchikan and why have you broken up ?? This way.  

David:  Not one specific hub communities, note transportation links by ferry and scheduled air travel.  Most commercial flights to Thorne Bay go to Ketchikan.

Nicole:  that helps.  Petersburg and downtown Juneau, puzzling to me why?  What’s evidence to group this way.

David:  Desifre to correct major SE flaw with current districts.  Fails to recognize close ties between Petersburg and Juneau, and fails to see Skagway and Haines on road connected to Juneau the largest off the road city.  Air Travel more than 6 times thru Sitka.  Ketchikan is not in top ten of passenger destinations for Petersburg.  Still didn’t have enough population.  Determined Prince of Wales had connection best way to get population.

Nicole:  coupled outer islands with Sitka, but also Skwagwary and Haines.  What’s justification.

David:  Hyder is in D1 allows unique issue of border crossings.  Sitka off roadway while Haines and Klukwan on system.  Rely on maritime, Marine Highway major SE and transportation factor .  Significant small plane activity.  

Nicole:  No one said transportation was a tie.

Gulf Coast - adding Aleutians and Whittier?

David:  Not Alleutians - Iliamna and 

Nicole:  SE ties, when looking at Gulf Coast region, we struggled to balance and you’ve seen actions with Valdez which is an offload system as opposed to unload system.  Believe better SE and cultural integration when include Lake & District.  Similarly allows Lake Iliamna in same district as Tyonek.  Only ferry link is to Kodiak.  Lake & Peninsula Borugh access to Bear Viewing.

Nicole:  Kept S portion intact around Homer and up east coast and Western.  Did you split Soldotna to two districts.

David:  We followed the city limits.  If a misclick not our intention.  

Nicole:  thought…. Maybe Soldotna not that far south.  

David:  Also followed City of Kenai boundary.

Nicole:  39

Bethany:  Only map we saw with Kenai and Soldotna split.  Population makes one neat district.

David:  Better reflects connection with highways.  Although close geographically, have own downtowns.  More along Sterling Highway closer ties with Soldotna.  Also, if you put them together Kenai communities have to go to Seward.  This is the most compact along Sterling Hwy and Kenai Spur Hwy.

Nicole:  Coupled Valdez with interior villages and split Doyon???.  What does Valdez have in common with Bettles/  

David:  Another …. Sorry missed this.  Alaska Highway.  Balancing desire from Doyon communities keeping their region integrated including road system portions of Doyon.  Balancing those concerns.  Believe will be constitutional, but awkward off road system communities with Doyon road system communities.

Nicole:  Note, board also struggled with Valdez.  D. 39, down YK, but took a lot more in.  An area that Melanie calling from Nome has questions about.

Melanie:  Similar to Q about others.  NW Alaska tied to Interior Alaska - what are the ties?

David:  Another area with problems .  Balancing community concerns.  Doyon desire to have region in as few districts as possible.  And hooper bay wanting to be with Bethel.  And Calista trying be be in two house districts?????   SE integration along Yukon River - Doyon and Calista  Already historic ties of commerce.  Another thing.  Mining is a commonality.  Made D39 one of our smallest to minimize how many Doyon into it and 38 bigger to get as many Calista communities as possible.

Melanie:  Not hearing SE Integration.  Again mentioned historic, but remind that historically there was warfare between Coastal and Interior communities.

David:  We have struggled through this process.  We believe it’s constitutional district best way to balance these concerns.  Multiple cultural groups being merged.  We will monitor with coalition partners and Doyon on how we can find better ways to resolve concerns.  Ms Bahnke we hear your concerns.  

Melanie;  Looking at current SE ties compared to past warfare.  Not much travel between Coastal and interior.  No animosity with our neighbors now.  

11:45

John:  Questions about Interior. Zoom into 31.  Looking at D33, loops down below ?? road.  Appendage to the east

David:  The Lakeview area - active gravel pit and trailer park.  Outside of city limits.  Looking at most urban parts of FB outside of city.  Not appropriate to put it in D31.  Either 33 or D?? Not part of North Pole - D35 greater NPole.  Want to recognize North Pole’s unique character

John:  31 on western side appendage that comes down.  Seems to come into Chena River neighborhood.  Parks Hwy north, integrated neighborhood.  Mr. Chair, we that is an unfortunate artifact of meeting population and census blocks. Would draw too much population in.  Since using Chena river as boundary, that that is the best.  You are correct that it splits a small neighborhood.

John:  Go toward Aurora and totem Park.  North college road.  Using ??? As boundary for D32.  Major collector street as strong boundary. No one lives in that census block.  

[John asking about details of Fairbanks  that I have trouble following and keeping up with][David’s mic is much too loud each time he starts talking.]

Thank you  

11:54am

John:  We have someone from Calista cCorp.  We have Mr. Leonard on line.  Still there Tom?

Tom  Leonard:  AFFER speaking on behalf of Calista Corporation, my Cupic name???

Calitsta invited comments from YK delta, Hooper Bay into Bethel - HB, Scammon Bay and Chevak move to 38.  And Quinigahak, Platinum Bay and Goodness Bay to 37.  Don’t have to include Doyon into our map.  Buckland and Deering into 39 as a placeholder solution, but open to other changes to help with overpopulation.

Melanie:  Thanks for calling in.  When we go to Bethel, what will we hear? 

Tom;  Thru the chair, great question.  Haven’t been able to speak with every community wouldn’t speak on their behalf.  Wanting fair representation would be their top choice.

Melanie:  Other than Hooper Bay, get comments from other villages?  Encouraged them to submit their comments to the board.  Thanks for calling in.

John:  Break for lunch.  Back in 30 minutes?  Enough.

TJ:  Also have members of AK Dem party online if Board has questions.

John:  Good idea.  Back at 12:30.  Stand adjourned, No recess.

12:01pm

12:36 Back on record. Alaska Democratic Party online.  Mike Wen??

Budd:  Putting Petersburg with S. End of Juneau?  Can you explain?

Erin:  Largely based on population constraints, political boundaries.

Nicole:  District 38 - Hooper Bay in Bethel  appendage on NE side.

Erin:  Two large census blocks.  Generally natural boundaries.

John:  Eek is in 38 and Quingahak in 37?  

Nicole:  D6 - Eilson and = Military base plus Valdez and interior villages.

Erin:  District we struggled with.  Tried other options that had other problems.  Minimizing ??? communities, include FB because of size of Borough.  

Mike:  Difficult population of FB with rural communities around FB and down Richardson Hwy.  Keeping Air force base in district similar to current D6.

Nicole:  Not hearing strong rationale, but appreciate the struggle.

See NPole and ?? together.  ButDistrict 5 Ester, Goldstream all the way to ??? River.

Mike:  Familiar.  North Pole more cohesive.  As you go further out, very similar.  Large area not much population.  How to draw most compact map.  Salcha, Eilson Chena Hot Spring Road, Ester, Goldstream more aligned than base or downtown FB.  

Nicole:  Neg 742 Alaskans.  Did you take that into consideration when doing FBNS borough.

Erin:  Goal to keep communities as contained as possible. 

Nicole:  D4 - deviation .00%.  Odd shaped district and appendage into western side of city.

Erin:  contiguous outside of city without breaking an additional boundary.  

Nicole:  Do you know pop in appendage.  SC said appendages that go to populated area will be suspect.   438.  OK.

Overall process of FB - troubled by lack of compactness when I see the map.

Mike:  Still looking at appendage.  Overall compactness and why went outside?

Nicole:  Understand you needed population.  D4.  1 and 2 followed city boundary.

Mike:  D4 where we had to go out of the city to get population.  It is a compact district.  Putting them together with populations to get them compact.  

Melanie: 

John:  I have question on FB first.  Same as Nicole in terms of compactness. D6 big appendix  D.5

Boundary of Eilson AF base.  

Melanie:  D39 - deviations in various districts.  North, assuming D40.  Why Deering and Buckland in 39.  

Erin:  Hooper Bay and Bethel that underpopulated 39.  So domino effect.  

Melanie:  Interior villages in 39? 

Erin:  a few Nulato Quinhagak…..struggle with population, pushed 39 east and north until we could achieve a decent deviation.

Melanie:  Understand challenge in that part.  You put Buckand and Deering because underpopulated.

Erin:  Largely based on location.

Melanie:  Factor any ANCSA boundaries.

Erin:  Yes, we began with ANCSA boundaries and worked from there.  Cascading effect.  

Melanie 39 had four distinct ANCSA regions.  

Nicole:  To Kenai, D29?  Area of state lots of concerns because of appendages throughout the district.  Compactness of 29 and 30.  Why shape like it did.  

ERin:  Census Blocks

Nicole:  Troubled with Kenai Pen.  

Erin:  Challenging has relationship with 32, Kodiak and Chugach borough.  Trying to look thematically SE at entire communities.  Kenai itself being the hub it is  

Nicole:  Anchorage.  Compactness and shape pleasing.  Deviation run on higher side.  Worried that court will struggle with some of these.

Erin:  Recognize deviation high in Anchorage.  Trade off or high deviation or people complaining about feeling part of community  Not want to go to Matsu.  But also not to Kenai.

Bethany:  Related 13 and 14 in ER overpopulated 4.5 4.92 and neighboring districts underpopulated.  Why not balance?

Erin:  Recognize residents actively organizing to exit from MOA.  SE very diverse.  Community park at Chanshtsu.  

Nicole:  Matsu  comes down from North, then over the top to Palmer.  D10.  Largely population and related to D9 which is also a large district.  Palmer D11, to city boundary of Wasilla.  

Erin:  Largely based on where other lines were drawn.  Butte and Lazy Mt area.  Cross pollination with many of these groups.  

Nicole:  D29 next question. Includes Butte, Sutton, Chickaloon, Knik,  Most others have gone south, not north to get population.  SEI point would help.

Erin:  Valdez didn’t want to be part of Matsu.  Looked at other communities in that part of Alaska.  

Nicole:  looking for specifics not generalizations about the commonality.

Erin:  A district we struggled with we though all were equally valid and equally challenging.

Bethany:  Boundaries 9 to 6.  Glenn Allen cut off from Copper River.  

Erin:  double check my map.  

Mike:  

Erin:  Valdez and ?? Not in same district.  Valdez and Palmer. 

Bethany:  Glenn Allen in D9 and Copper Center in D6.  Why split.

Mike:  Comes down to members in the reason prefer SE than Matsu.  Trying to keep them with Valdez, in D6 based on people we were talking to.

Erin:  If we remove Glenalnlen would ….

John:  Erin and Mike thank you very much.   Think that’s all the 3rd party maps.  Shift to Board’s version 1 and 2.  Peter, how do you suggest we proceed to do that mechanically.  

Peter:  Can we stand at ease til we get them up.  

1:13  At ease

1:17

Peter:  Board adopted two plans and spent time over the weekend to refine more refined versions.  V3 and V4.  Show and tell.  

John:  Start with V3.  

Budd:  Earlier I referred to error we made in Ketchikan.  Asked staff to make map to show how we changed our first plan.  

V1 and V2 both have the same.  

Budd:  Thin strip.  Included several 100 people.  Put it back pushed population too far.  Concept initially Ketchikan, Wrangell Petersburg into and interior region, lots of common interests.  But population wise wouldn’t work out.  Only way was to remove Petersburg from the district, then need to bring population from Southern part - Hyder and Metlakatla.

New one:  Ketchikan and Wrangell and Hyder and Metlakatla.  Then one island district gets more compact.  Two Juneau districts similar to previous versions.  Changes in D2 allowed to bring ?? To D4.  City and Borough of Juneau Split, a few census blocks to get population right.

Peter:  Moving north.  Changes in Anchorage.  Competition between deviation and compact.  Many hours of work to 

Matsu largely based on earlier version.

Bethany:  When first learned Matsu and Anch SEI, heard they wanted to see version which respects the borough boundary.  New dividing line and to get minimum deviations had to redraw many districts.  

Two dif maps opportunity to discuss and find out what residents think.

D25 - Palmer Lazy Mountain district.  Going north was detrimental to compactness.  30 between Palmer and Wasilla north.  Sutton and Chickaloon

26, to the South.  Fairview Loop and Cottonwood.

Just shy of two more Matsu districts.  Tried going north with D28, but messed up compactness.  Nice clean n border.  D29 short by 500 people, so added Nenana .  Matsu deviation at .39%

Anchorage:  ER and East Anchorage.  New version.  ER is now a donut district.  Most of core of ER.  Then outer ER more likely to have wells.  24 and 23.  Not enough.  But instead of using E. Anchorage used Elmendorf.  Lots of military live in ER.  No east Anchorage.  

In town.  Horizontal or vertical blocks.  Trying to find tighter deviations.  Trim blocks and become very uneven, due to census blocks.  Getting near zero deviation, but balance compact v deviation.  All but one district has less than 1%, total .88% deviation.

D18 Elmendorf side kept whole.  Nice compact district.  Discussion when we get more feedback.  Orientation of the airport, in that area east west, but south of Tudor more logical for North/South orientating  

Downtown w of Ingra, Tudor as southern for next district.  D15 south to Raspberry, Dimond.

D13 n. Border of Dimond to Johns Road.  

Back n. D19 from5th avenue many odd shaped census blocks.  !2 natural SH on West and Elmore to east.  

22 - southern part of Ft Rich and ER

Turpin and Nunaka Valley D21.  

Hard where 19,20, 21 intersect.  Cheney Lake, Baxter Bog Park.  Shapes not as compact, but got good deviation.  

District 10.  Chugach Foothills and Stuckagain Heights, Upper Huffman.

Down to Whittier

1:40pm

Peter:  Gulf Coast and Kenai unchanged .  Some changes in FB, no material changes - deviations and more compact.  Western AK unchanged.  Interior includes Valdez.

D37 -.?? %

John:  Move to version 4?  Nicole.

Nicole: I’m going to move to withdraw v2 and replace with v4.  Never done with v2, but it was only to show there were other options.  To show MOA could be whole without taking population from the north.  Last Friday, we spent Friday with Eric at office.  Started in interior with 36.  Rural interior underpopulated by about 20% and North Slope over populated.  Went into FBNS borough, because of SEI between FB and  surrounding rural villages.  Break at Eilson because currently with interior villages.  Roe v ??  1963 = Military an be transient  In Alaska on involuntary bases and often have residency in other states.  **** that was pre PFD

D32 City within a borough. 1.75 seats in city itself.  

[This is really hard to track for me and I’m sure worse for anyone reading this.[  32 encompasses all of City of FB.  UAF SEI and wanted to include places around U but population too low.  Had to go toward city limits.  

Norther Pole, Badger Road, Eilson.  Homes Road on north.  

Melanie:  32 some weird red line.  

S35 rural FB.

D34 - NE FB.

D25 moving south.  Valdez question for Board and 3rd parties.  Decided to move it with Matsu because Matsu is underpopulated. 

1:52  - Keeping Huston, Willow and Palmer whole.  2.94 deviation.  

D29 Wasilla and west Meadow Lake. 1.76% deviation.

D28 Palmer, whole, Lazy Mt. And Butte. Highest deviation for Palmer/Wasilla 4.??  Can decrease the high deviation.  

Melanie:  That little island, populated? 

Nicole:  There are people there, but not very many.

D27 Cotton Creek and RR  D1.2% high

D26  Palmer/Wasilla gateway

To SE:  underpopulated by about 1100 Alaskan.  Compact SEI reasons.  3.24 low deviation

D2 starts at Yakutat puts it into SE.  Includes Petersburg. 

Anchorage keeping intact.  Separate East Anchorage and South Anchorage.  Ended up redrafting whole MOA starting from South.  Where you begin shapes the rest of the map.  

Potter March - looks big, but no population.  

D12 - Turnagain and the airport.  Public said keep Turnagain with the airport.  This part of city changed most because of sizable subdivision in Sandlake.  

13 Spenard residents have showed up and want Spenard separate from Airport and Turnagain.  Used major roads as dividers - NL, Fireweed Chester Creek, Lake Otis

D14 midtown n- 13 boundary  eastern is Seward and Lake Otis , southern Dimond, Minnesota.  

D15 lower hillside

Campbell Airstrip and Park.  Looks large, but not much highway

D17 U-Med district Dowling and Tudor.  Wes is Lake Otis - natural occurring geography 

[It’s really hard to pay attention to lists of boundaries with not being sure which of the blocks on the screen.]

Base united despite testimony.  Military service more transient.  Applicable to Anchorage as to FB.  

D22 looks like very large - significant unpopulated by park

D23 NE Anchorage 

D24 South ER.  

Overall low deviation and relatively compact.  

Budd:  Mentioned transient nature of bases in Anch and FBKs.  Any data that shows the bases 

I was reading SC from our state.  Wasn’t looking at voter turn out.

Last time question from public about who helped us with maps.  Got help from Eric, 

Melanie:  Counsel told us not to look at voter turnout or age - none have done that including myself.  

Grow v. ??   1973.   

Lee:  That was prior to constitutional change in how we do redistricting.  

2:19 brief at ease.

2:28pm

John back.  How to take plans around the state.  To discuss with communities.  

Look at v.3 and v4 and then the 3rd plan.  

Bethany propose adopt v3 to replace v1 and v4 to replace v2.

Melanie.  Second that motion, friendly amendment.  Have staff check census block in Matsu and put them in districts they belong.  

John:  If staff does that, send changes to the board members.

Everyone understand?  Discussion?  Objection?  Hearing none.  Passed

Now look at 3rd Party plans. 

Chair looking for a motion to adopt any of the plans.

Melanie, according Constitution, move we adopt plan by Doyon coalition.  Budd seconds.  

Objection?  Adopted

ADP - Alaska Democratic Party.  

Melanie:  Move to adopt ADP plan.  

Second?  John seconds.

Objections?  Adopted.

Nicole:  I’m voting to oppose.  If you seconded the motion, can we have someone else chair.  John:  Motion to adopt.  

Budd.  I think you have to rescind that vote.  Since confusion.  More to rescind.  2nd.  Discussion?  

Nicole:  Appreciate the work the party put in, but in reviewing, the way they have sliced and diced so many Boroughs.  Not a plan we want to take on the road with us. 

Budd:  I concur.  We have a couple other 3rd party plans that better reflect the ‘democratic’ view that are better than this one.

John:  Don’t know there are any other partisan plans that have identified themselves as such

Budd:  AFFR and Minority Caucus.

Melanie  We can take on the road and let the state see them.  Doesn’t mean we adopt as final plan.  

Bethany:  Lots of time.  Lots of testimony on these plans over the weekend.  Might make sense to limit what we take.

Melanie:  Not everyone comes to Anchorage or has internet.  Not everyone can call in and be on phone for hours not knowing when they will be called.  Or to look at the maps.

John:  Has taken a lot of time for all these entities.  The public will have time when we go to communities.  Maybe overall we don’t think it’s that good.  But maybe a particular community likes it and will help when we have to make .

Nicole:  I don’t think it would meet SC.  Nothing to prohibit public and Dem party from weighing in.  I don’t believe on balance this plan is worth the effort.

Melanie:  Parts of each plan flawed, but encourage board members to include all 3rd party plans.  Doesn’t mean we will adopt.  But gives us time.  

Nicole:  Call the question and roll call vote.

Repeat motion.  To rescind our vote to adopt Dem Party plan.  If it passes, back to original motion  If fails, ADP plan will be adopted and goes on the road. 

Bahnke-  Borromeo, yes; no Marcum yes Simpson yes, Binkley yes.

Bahnke - adopt AFFER plan.  Second by Nicole

Bethany:  should have had this discussion on Doyon plan.  We heard for both from Doyon and AFFER that they have new versions of plan different from the ones they presented Friday.  Be clear that the versions we received on Friday.  

John:  My understanding.  Except Senate Minority Caucus which made the changes already.

Nicole:  AFFER presented problematic districts for rural area, but Palmer was useful, so we should take it.

Budd: AFFER has really good deviation numbers which may be helpful to us.  

Adopted.

Melanie:  propose we adopt plan from AFFR.  2nd by Bethany

Budd:  These folks have been to every meeting sent a lot of time deserves to go forward.  Bethany, they also made changes they heard us discuss.

John:  Except since Friday.

Adopted.  

Melanie:  adopt plan submitted by Senate Minority Caucus with amendments suggested Sept 19.  

Nicole:  can we have roll call vote.  

John:  Has value.  Knowledgeable people set it up.  We may not agree with it all.  I’ll support this the more info the better.  Not confused by too much info.  If we need more staff, we should make those changes.  

Nicole:  will also support it and appreciate their participation, from legal prospect and have concerns about parts but appreciate the low deviations.  

Budd, I’m supportive as well. They have participated actively in our hearings, well thought out ideas.  

Bethany:  I’m also going support it because I appreciate the knowledge, different because it has low deviations without sacrificing compactness.  

Nicole:  withdraw request for role call vote.

Adopted.

We have four 3rd party plans and two new versions of the Board’s.

Peter:  We will work really hard to get this done.  We will email as soon as done  If not on email list you can. 

2:53

John:  Public testimony?

Brian Hoek ??:  West Anchorage - Appreciate Borromeo’s work on that part of town.  Others had similar concerns as well.  More in common with airport.  About Fairbanks.  Sat through a few of these.  Direction I see is headed to break the FBNS borough.  I think that’s a problem  Balance between deviations and making sure everyone is represented properly.  One approach.  I see need to break it.  My hometown’s population is declining.  One pan I haven’t seen is a break on the SE side down the highway.  There is an approach.  I’ve worked on that myself.  There may be some historical districts.

Nicole:  Thank you for coming and for not moving to FBKs since Friday.  Please stay engaged.

Bethany:  Put you FBKs map on the website.  

Brian:  My wife and I were out of town when you started.  Working with tool available on the website requires some learning .  Working to satisfy my own curiosity.

John:  People can still make their own maps.    Staff has done an incredible job, worked tirelessly over the weekend to make all the maps available to everybody.  May need additional help moving things from community to community.  Looks like one person online.

Robert Hockema:  Testified at last board meeting.  About partisanship.  Tons and tons of discussion.  Want to testify.  Concern about AFFER map.  I know there will be modification.  Districts are drawn to make Republicans in coalition less competitive.  Out of all 40 districts. Talking about who would win based on who won elections in 2016 election.  AFFER most uncompetitive maps.  Incredibly important factor.  One person one vote if communities have harder time getting representation.  

Anyone else?  Close public testimony.

Peter:  Constitution directs us to hold public hearing tour.  In contact with a number of communities.  If your community would like to schedule a hearing in person or online.  Looking at visiting dozens of communities.  

John:  Most important part as we go out and seek input.

Nicole:  Thanks to staff, Peter, TJ, Juli and Jennifer have gone above and beyond, they are there nights and weekends.  That’s the level of work that Alaskans have gotten from the staff.  

Peter:  Thanks very much.  We have to wrap up tours by Nov. 1 an winter storms coming and we don’t want to get stuck.  We’ll have to come back and collate everything.  It will be messy.

John:  Motion to adjourn.

Moved, seconded, not opposed.  Adjourned.

3:07pm