They are finished with Sen. Thomas now and there's a 15 minute break until the next witness who wasn't named yet. I didn't catch anything particularly new in this last portion. It continued to go along the lines that the districts in Fairbanks were politically motivated to get rid of one Democratic Senator and thus bust the Senate's bi-partisan coalition.
By the way. Mr. Wallerie, if you haven't figured it out, is the attorney for the plaintiffs, Riley and Dearborn, one a resident of Ester and the other of Goldstream, as I understand it. Those two communities were put into District 38 which includes Bethel. Click here see a map of the Fairbanks districts. You'll get a much bigger one than I can put in here and you can see what the issue is. Districts 1 and 3 which represent the east and west sides of the City of Fairbanks are NOT paired. Rather each is paired with a much larger and more rural district. And even on this map you can only see parts of districts 38 and 3, 5, and 6.
Here are my very rough notes. Think of them as just giving you the
sense of the questioning and don't rely on them for all the details to
be totally accurate. Attorney White was easier to hear this time
round.
1:30 Continue
Wallerie: Have you ever seen that article before?
Sen T: I've seen some, Sean Cockerham, yes, I've seen this.
We get the papers in Juneau and we read them.
Wallerie: In the article it reports that Randy = Who's Randy Ruderich?
Sen. T: He's the head of the Democratic Party
Wallerie: Democratic Party?
Sen. T: No, Republican
Wallerie: He says Fairbanks is the best chance to gain seats.
Sen. T: An indication of what others believe about what redistricting can do.
Wallerie: Asking for your opinion. the plan would allow the Republcians to make gains based on the redistricting.
Sen. T: You gain one district by putting two Democratic Senators together.
Wallerie: If they pair two members of the Coalition - you and Paskvan and Kookesh and Stedman, that takes out two, ten percent of the senate. How do you think the effect will change the organization of the Senate.
Sen. T: You get the numbers down, lack of funding help among Republicans for those in Coalition now, and that gets them back in line.
Wallerie: Fractures in party now?
Sen. T: Yes, they aren't paying attention to party lines, same numbers and different people. lasted long enough to frustrate Republican party - they can't control their troops.
Wallerie: Any Republicans expressed this to you?
Objection - sustained.
Wallerie: Republicans say the 1992 redistricting favored the Democrats, your opinion?
Sen. T: Not in Fairbanks. A Democratic representative lost immediately. It wasn't until the corruption trials began and people changed. That's when I won, Paskvan won, Bob Miller won. Independents changed. Not result of redistricting. Right after, Dems lost seast and Republicans gained seats. It wasn't until the corruption that things changed.
Wallerie: Look at the infamous Tanana Flats. Show where the Tanana Flats would be.
Sen. T: hard to show, Just south of Fairbanks.
Wallerie: In current configuration, that's now part of Denali borough district. You know what that area is, right?
Sen. T: A big vacant area all the way to Denali National Park.
Wallerie: Why is the bridge going in there?
Sen. T: We're hoping it will help retain the military in the interior. They are about 40?% of economics of the Interior, want to keep them.
Wallerie: You're familiar with Creamer Field, right?
Sen T: We wouldn't have District B. Before things ran east and west and now they run north and south.
Wallerie: Without that connection there wouldn't be the conflict between you and Paskvan's districts.
Sen. T: yes.
White: A few questions. You have a personal stake?
Sen. T: I'd say more of a community stake, but sure I have a personal stake.
White: You have already decided to run. You have no right to be drawn into any particular districts.
Sen. T: Yes, I don't.
White: Would you say that two senators would be mroe effective than one representing Fairbanks.
Sen. T: Depends on what the house districts look like and how those people would represent.
White: Comments from your deposition? ?? Page 72 of deposition. Line , I apologize for not having the exact . . .
Sen T: that's true
White: If you are elected you could effectively represent that district can't you?
Sen. T: Yes.
White: Agree that city is entirely in the borough of FNS?
Sen. T: Yes.
White: You had not contact with the redistricting board?
Sen. T: No I didn't.
White: You would agree it's important to protect the Alaska Native voice in the legislture?
Sen. T: Yes
White: You are aware, you are aware.....about Alaska Native bill . . .That Alaska Natives usually vote Democratic?
Sen. T: Not the case in the last election - Sen. Murkowski.
White: That's unique. Article on Ruderich. True that Demcrats said that Ruderich's words are fantasy? As I understand it . . . aware of political make up of ....????
Sen. T: Either I told you that or my staff member did.
Wallerie: White ask if two was better than one. Some qualifications?
Sen. T: When you stretch the districts as they are, you could theoretically do whatever you want. We're working to get one Democrat out of the picture. Just talking about numbers. But if you're talking about being in the minority, it doesn't matter. Two isn't necessarily better than one. Or if your house district stretches down to Palmer, then there is an extreme dilution of the power and where the money has to go. In District 28 there are some 30 fire districts, where there were only 8 in the old district.
Wallerie: Wouldn't the inclusion of 38 would bring us up to 3 Senators from Fairbanks?
Sen. T: I don't see that Senator spending much time in Fairbanks?
Wallerie: That is an effective native district, so do you think anyone in Ester or Goldstream could ever be elected in that ditrict.
Sen. T: The population extracted and put into that district is not a native population.
Wallerie: White asked if the political tendancy of Goldstream/Ester area tends to be deomocratic?
Sen. T: Yes, those were democratic leaning parts of the old District 8. Putting all the Democrats into one district is something that's done in South American states or in the old south?
White: You're not saying that Lyman Hoffman would ignore Fairbanks?
Sen. T: I don't know how much time he's going to spend in Fairbanks. He's got big majorities in the loal areas. Not sure which are Yupiks, Athabascans, etc. Just as there was concern about how much time Kookesh was going to spend up here. Yes, I understand that's part of the sparse population in some areas of Alaska.
Done with Senator Thomas. 15 minute break until 2:15.
Monday, January 09, 2012
Redistricting Court Challenge: Plaintiffs Trying To Show Political Gerrymandering
In this portion Senator Paskvan was cross-examined by defense attorney Michael White who was pretty aggressive and with a clear antagonistic tone. "Are you aware..." is how he started most questions, though he seemed to have been moving around because sometimes he was audible and other times it seemed like he had strayed from the mike. He was going after Paskvan's characterization of a great difference between representing the City of Fairbanks and the Fairbanks North Star Borough. When White asked Paskvan if he was aware that the City was actually in the Borough and that Paskvan was, in fact, a resident of the Borough as well as the City, Paskvan sounded genuinely surprised at this idea and said, he'd never considered that, because he always thought of himself as a city boy. I'd say that while White was emphasizing legal distinctions, Paskvan clearly represented the mental maps that people really have about their identity.
Then Senator Joe Stevens took the stand and the questioning has been along the same lines.
With both Senators (Paskvan earlier, covered in the previous post) there were questions about how the maps were drawn which raised questions about gerrymandering. Paskvan pointed to the
Below are my rough, running notes as I could catch things off the phone. The Board's attorney, Michael White was hard to hear as he seemed to move in and out of mic range and he also spoke very quickly.
11:40am
White (attorney for the Board): You know that the maps that showed where Fairbanks was came from the Census data and not the Board? [Paskvan had mentioned that part of the City of Fairbanks had been misidentified on the maps.]
Sen. P: Yes, but I would have assumed that the Board representative from Fairbanks would have caught this.
White: You are aware that Marie Greene was on the board and is a Democrat? And she voted for this.
Sen. P: I was not aware.
Do you think Brodie was scheming againt you? [Missed stuff here, not sure what his point was, Brodie is a Republican as I understand it.]
Would you agree - hard to understand, not close enough to the mike?
Sen. P: Not my job to judge.
White: Would you agree that the city of FB is entirely in the NSFB borough? Yes
And all residents of FB are also residents of NSRB? I guess, never thought of that. Think of myself as a Fairbanks boy?
Aware there is no socioeconomic distinction? A: There must be consideration of government boundaries. To the extent that it fractures the city of Fairbanks, it fractures the socioeconomic integration of the city.
White: You are aware? that the Borough by law ???
Sen P: I believe that when people vote to belong as something, they have common beliefs When the people in NSB voted to create themselves they were identifying as a group.
White: ARe you aware that by law . . . A: People voted [for political subdivision] to say that they were similar.
White: Mentioned, Paskvans have long illustrious history, you'd agree that Fairbanks is hub for rural Alaskans? Certainly.
Fairbanks are connected to people around the state? Yes.
Aware of a bill - you voted for it? Yes to preserve rural native vote statewide
White seems to be moving around so that he gets away from the mike and it's hard to hear. Judge jsut asked him to take the Diana Ross microphone. Still hard.
He's talking in a very aggressive and hostile style.
Sen P: Concerned that native voice would be drowned out.
White: Alaska Native community tends to vote Democratic? Yes.
You have not filed for reelction? Correct.
You don't intend to file? Not, I haven't made up my mind.
White: ???? A: We've been targeted.
White: You mentioned Kookesh, Stevens, Stedman. ARe you aware. . .
Sen P: I understand that because of population loss in SE Alaska, there would be a need to adjust both Kookesh and Stedman's districts, so the questions discussed was whether that would be a pairing. Both are in the bi-partisan working group.
White: Are you aware . . ..??
Sen P: I don't know, Don't pay attention to those kind of details?
White: Have you seen the ??plan the plaintiffs are offering? No
White: Should you run in district B, you would be able to represent your constituents? You won't ignore constituents because theya re in the city or borough.
Sen P: It comes up with issues like annexation when there is a conflict between the City and Borough's interests. I don't like to use the term ignore, but it raises issues that are conflicted in the ability to represent two conflicting interests fairly Trying to be allegiant to two entities at the same time.
White: ????
Sen P: I said I try to do the best that I could do, but it creates conflicts with how one represents the City's interests while also trying to represent the Borough's interests, where the conclusion one would reach are incompatible.
White: ????
Sen. P: My testimony, is that it's wrong to put any Sen into a position, that the integrity of the FB city limits should be maintained,
White:??? lots of fast talk, but can't undertand.
Sen P: Talking about FB my home town. That's my district.
White: Kookesh has bigger district and has to balance different interests right?
Sen P: I assume Sen. Kookesh does what he can do. I believe he works hard.
White: As one of 20 Senators in the state, rep your district and ??
Sen P: yes.
White: Inerior delegats work together right for best representation, right?
Sen P: We hear from groups at the same time about the interest of those groups - 7am every other groups, social groups and chamber of commerce, get updates from Interior delegation, as a cohesive entity.
White: ???
Sen P: FMATS are capital dollars used on road projects. There are dollars used outside the city limits of FB as I said earlier.
White: ???
Sen P: The logic is there.
White: One more question. You agree the areas Ester and Goldstream are Democratic areas of Borough?
Sen P: Yes.
Wallerie followup? No
12:04pm Sen. Excused.
Another witness. Man with a camera, who are you with? ????
Joseph James Thomas the 2nd.
Wallerie (attorney for plaintiffs) What is your district?
Sen Thomas: District B
Wallerie ??
Sen T: This yellow area here
Wallerie: Different districts? This area here that runs off the map to Cantwell.
How long in legislature? Elected 2006 and took office in 2007.
Wallerie: Municipal govts in your district?
Sen T: No. FNSB. In district 8 Healy and Cantwell and Anderson. Denali Borough
Communities - Two Rivers, Fox, Ester, Goldstream, areas that have a definition.
Wallerie: What languages spoken?
Sen. T: Predominantly English.
Judge - we're doing things here that have nothing to do with you, just answer.
Wallerie: How is the Sen. organized?
Sen T: You mean the bi-partisan coalition? Six Republicans and ten Democrats. Need a certain number to have a majority, people who more or less see eye to eye.
Wallerie: We'll move along and refere to Sen Paskvan's testimony.
Does it make a difference if you are in the majority or not?
SEn. P: Refere to a member who is not in the majority talks about me and Paskvan: These are the guys you need to talk to if you want to get anything done.
Wallerie? Does it affect committee assginments?
Sen. T: Absolutely.
Wallerie: Whats the Bush Caucus?
Sen. T: Members from the Bush who talk about their issues?
Wallerie: ARe you a member? no Are they all native? No
Are there issues that might divide the Bush Caucus from the Interior Caucus? Yes, But they also work together? Yes
Wallerie: Aware of opposition to Sen Coalition?
Sen. T: Yes. Mainly related to the oil taxation. The house passed a bill last session in a few short meetings. But the senate slowed that down. We aren't giving back $2 billion without some discussion. Chamber of Commerce graded us on the oil issue. Low grades to the Sen. majority and high grades to the minority which has no power and accomplished nothing. Leaders - Stevens and Stedman - given F's and removed from the Republican party website. I skated by, somehow, with a C. Major motivation to changing redistricting that is taking place.
Wallerie: Here's a map of Fairbanks.
Sen. T: As relates to me. The inclusion of this area Chena Hot Springs Road to CH - this was in a different district. District 7. Changed drmatically. 38 all the way from the coast all the way to this area. HD 7 and 8 now ... changed dramatically. Now running because of a connection here connecting 3B and 4B and pitting two Democratic Senators pitted against each other. Good opportunity to eliminate one.
White: Objections -
Judge: All your objections raised work here too.
Wallerie: How many in current senate structure how many Dems (10) and REp(10).
So you couldn't voe on party lines because no majority.
So pairing of senators who happen to be members of the bi-partisan working group. Get ride of two Dems, then it would be 12-8 and I'm sure the Republicans could organize, and they would pick up a few Democrats from the rural committee. Have to get to 16 to keep the minority totally out.
Wallerie: In terms of other Senators in this plan. The pairing of Kookesh and Stedman. They are also both in the majority. Aware of proposal that would have put Stevens and Hoffman together?
Sen. T: All are indications of what could possibly happen. SE a potential one more Democrat losing which would tip things.
Wallerie: Aware of earlier board proposals that would affect your seat?
Sen. T: Yes. Went up Summit Drive and around ?? Loop where my house was. No other parts of Summit Drive included.
Wallerie: How were you aware?
Sen. T: It was in the newspaper.
Wallerie: When you saw this article, ...this isn't the current plan? NO. What was it about this article that made you concerned about redistricting process.
Sen. T: The way that people said they didn't know where the incumbants lived, but you would have had to know where I lived. I'm at 879, the only 800 number on the street. Apparent done for a particular purpose. The other houses on Summit Drive were excluded.
Wallerie: When you heard about this. Saw the map went to where your house should have been where all the other 800 houses were, the line would have gone straight. But it had to go this way. It would have put me in the other district.
What did you do? What can you do? I merely laughed and it was more evidence they were trying to change to coalition?
Wallerie: Were you aware people complained? And the eleimianted this bump?
Currently where is your house?
Sen. T: In this area here.
Wallerie: Connection between house district 3 and 4. Does that give you any impressions?
Sen. T: Not sure what you mean. Now connected city house district with a suburban district? Competing interests for funding. City very different. Competing interests in 106 road districts already among themselves, and they compete with the city. Different dynamic in terms of types of money you are looking for.
Wallerie: Fire districts in the borough?
Sen. T: In mine at least 8. Ivovled with them? Oh yeah. Always checking on what they need.
Wallerie: How do you work with 106 road districts.?
Sen T: No way to please all. Try to get chunk of money for the borough and let them dole it out.
Judge: 12:30 Lunch break, back promptly at 1:30.
Then Senator Joe Stevens took the stand and the questioning has been along the same lines.
With both Senators (Paskvan earlier, covered in the previous post) there were questions about how the maps were drawn which raised questions about gerrymandering. Paskvan pointed to the
- the splitting up of the City of Fairbanks into two different Senate districts even though there are two adjacent house districts that pretty much make up the city of Fairbanks. Instead each of those districts (1 and 4) are paired with districts that are mainly outside of the City. Much of his testimony was about why the city and borough have many competing interests in the legislature and how this splits the loyalty of the representative
- how the final map has the two house districts in Senate District B contiguous by what he described as a matter of feet, while the two City districts (1 and 4) were contiguous for miles.
- The fact that two Democratic Senators were paired even though this left an open seat with no incumbents adjacent to them.
- That getting rid of just one Democrat would tip the balance of 10 Democrats and 10 Republicans in the state Senate which would result in a Republican majority that would be much more likely to reduce oil taxes - the key issue for the governor.
 |
| Click to enlarge - red circle shows were districts 3&4 touch |
Below are my rough, running notes as I could catch things off the phone. The Board's attorney, Michael White was hard to hear as he seemed to move in and out of mic range and he also spoke very quickly.
11:40am
White (attorney for the Board): You know that the maps that showed where Fairbanks was came from the Census data and not the Board? [Paskvan had mentioned that part of the City of Fairbanks had been misidentified on the maps.]
Sen. P: Yes, but I would have assumed that the Board representative from Fairbanks would have caught this.
White: You are aware that Marie Greene was on the board and is a Democrat? And she voted for this.
Sen. P: I was not aware.
Do you think Brodie was scheming againt you? [Missed stuff here, not sure what his point was, Brodie is a Republican as I understand it.]
Would you agree - hard to understand, not close enough to the mike?
Sen. P: Not my job to judge.
White: Would you agree that the city of FB is entirely in the NSFB borough? Yes
And all residents of FB are also residents of NSRB? I guess, never thought of that. Think of myself as a Fairbanks boy?
Aware there is no socioeconomic distinction? A: There must be consideration of government boundaries. To the extent that it fractures the city of Fairbanks, it fractures the socioeconomic integration of the city.
White: You are aware? that the Borough by law ???
Sen P: I believe that when people vote to belong as something, they have common beliefs When the people in NSB voted to create themselves they were identifying as a group.
White: ARe you aware that by law . . . A: People voted [for political subdivision] to say that they were similar.
White: Mentioned, Paskvans have long illustrious history, you'd agree that Fairbanks is hub for rural Alaskans? Certainly.
Fairbanks are connected to people around the state? Yes.
Aware of a bill - you voted for it? Yes to preserve rural native vote statewide
White seems to be moving around so that he gets away from the mike and it's hard to hear. Judge jsut asked him to take the Diana Ross microphone. Still hard.
He's talking in a very aggressive and hostile style.
Sen P: Concerned that native voice would be drowned out.
White: Alaska Native community tends to vote Democratic? Yes.
You have not filed for reelction? Correct.
You don't intend to file? Not, I haven't made up my mind.
White: ???? A: We've been targeted.
White: You mentioned Kookesh, Stevens, Stedman. ARe you aware. . .
Sen P: I understand that because of population loss in SE Alaska, there would be a need to adjust both Kookesh and Stedman's districts, so the questions discussed was whether that would be a pairing. Both are in the bi-partisan working group.
White: Are you aware . . ..??
Sen P: I don't know, Don't pay attention to those kind of details?
White: Have you seen the ??plan the plaintiffs are offering? No
White: Should you run in district B, you would be able to represent your constituents? You won't ignore constituents because theya re in the city or borough.
Sen P: It comes up with issues like annexation when there is a conflict between the City and Borough's interests. I don't like to use the term ignore, but it raises issues that are conflicted in the ability to represent two conflicting interests fairly Trying to be allegiant to two entities at the same time.
White: ????
Sen P: I said I try to do the best that I could do, but it creates conflicts with how one represents the City's interests while also trying to represent the Borough's interests, where the conclusion one would reach are incompatible.
White: ????
Sen. P: My testimony, is that it's wrong to put any Sen into a position, that the integrity of the FB city limits should be maintained,
White:??? lots of fast talk, but can't undertand.
Sen P: Talking about FB my home town. That's my district.
White: Kookesh has bigger district and has to balance different interests right?
Sen P: I assume Sen. Kookesh does what he can do. I believe he works hard.
White: As one of 20 Senators in the state, rep your district and ??
Sen P: yes.
White: Inerior delegats work together right for best representation, right?
Sen P: We hear from groups at the same time about the interest of those groups - 7am every other groups, social groups and chamber of commerce, get updates from Interior delegation, as a cohesive entity.
White: ???
Sen P: FMATS are capital dollars used on road projects. There are dollars used outside the city limits of FB as I said earlier.
White: ???
Sen P: The logic is there.
White: One more question. You agree the areas Ester and Goldstream are Democratic areas of Borough?
Sen P: Yes.
Wallerie followup? No
12:04pm Sen. Excused.
Another witness. Man with a camera, who are you with? ????
Joseph James Thomas the 2nd.
Wallerie (attorney for plaintiffs) What is your district?
Sen Thomas: District B
Wallerie ??
Sen T: This yellow area here
Wallerie: Different districts? This area here that runs off the map to Cantwell.
How long in legislature? Elected 2006 and took office in 2007.
Wallerie: Municipal govts in your district?
Sen T: No. FNSB. In district 8 Healy and Cantwell and Anderson. Denali Borough
Communities - Two Rivers, Fox, Ester, Goldstream, areas that have a definition.
Wallerie: What languages spoken?
Sen. T: Predominantly English.
Judge - we're doing things here that have nothing to do with you, just answer.
Wallerie: How is the Sen. organized?
Sen T: You mean the bi-partisan coalition? Six Republicans and ten Democrats. Need a certain number to have a majority, people who more or less see eye to eye.
Wallerie: We'll move along and refere to Sen Paskvan's testimony.
Does it make a difference if you are in the majority or not?
SEn. P: Refere to a member who is not in the majority talks about me and Paskvan: These are the guys you need to talk to if you want to get anything done.
Wallerie? Does it affect committee assginments?
Sen. T: Absolutely.
Wallerie: Whats the Bush Caucus?
Sen. T: Members from the Bush who talk about their issues?
Wallerie: ARe you a member? no Are they all native? No
Are there issues that might divide the Bush Caucus from the Interior Caucus? Yes, But they also work together? Yes
Wallerie: Aware of opposition to Sen Coalition?
Sen. T: Yes. Mainly related to the oil taxation. The house passed a bill last session in a few short meetings. But the senate slowed that down. We aren't giving back $2 billion without some discussion. Chamber of Commerce graded us on the oil issue. Low grades to the Sen. majority and high grades to the minority which has no power and accomplished nothing. Leaders - Stevens and Stedman - given F's and removed from the Republican party website. I skated by, somehow, with a C. Major motivation to changing redistricting that is taking place.
Wallerie: Here's a map of Fairbanks.
Sen. T: As relates to me. The inclusion of this area Chena Hot Springs Road to CH - this was in a different district. District 7. Changed drmatically. 38 all the way from the coast all the way to this area. HD 7 and 8 now ... changed dramatically. Now running because of a connection here connecting 3B and 4B and pitting two Democratic Senators pitted against each other. Good opportunity to eliminate one.
White: Objections -
Judge: All your objections raised work here too.
Wallerie: How many in current senate structure how many Dems (10) and REp(10).
So you couldn't voe on party lines because no majority.
So pairing of senators who happen to be members of the bi-partisan working group. Get ride of two Dems, then it would be 12-8 and I'm sure the Republicans could organize, and they would pick up a few Democrats from the rural committee. Have to get to 16 to keep the minority totally out.
Wallerie: In terms of other Senators in this plan. The pairing of Kookesh and Stedman. They are also both in the majority. Aware of proposal that would have put Stevens and Hoffman together?
Sen. T: All are indications of what could possibly happen. SE a potential one more Democrat losing which would tip things.
Wallerie: Aware of earlier board proposals that would affect your seat?
Sen. T: Yes. Went up Summit Drive and around ?? Loop where my house was. No other parts of Summit Drive included.
Wallerie: How were you aware?
Sen. T: It was in the newspaper.
Wallerie: When you saw this article, ...this isn't the current plan? NO. What was it about this article that made you concerned about redistricting process.
Sen. T: The way that people said they didn't know where the incumbants lived, but you would have had to know where I lived. I'm at 879, the only 800 number on the street. Apparent done for a particular purpose. The other houses on Summit Drive were excluded.
Wallerie: When you heard about this. Saw the map went to where your house should have been where all the other 800 houses were, the line would have gone straight. But it had to go this way. It would have put me in the other district.
What did you do? What can you do? I merely laughed and it was more evidence they were trying to change to coalition?
Wallerie: Were you aware people complained? And the eleimianted this bump?
Currently where is your house?
Sen. T: In this area here.
Wallerie: Connection between house district 3 and 4. Does that give you any impressions?
Sen. T: Not sure what you mean. Now connected city house district with a suburban district? Competing interests for funding. City very different. Competing interests in 106 road districts already among themselves, and they compete with the city. Different dynamic in terms of types of money you are looking for.
Wallerie: Fire districts in the borough?
Sen. T: In mine at least 8. Ivovled with them? Oh yeah. Always checking on what they need.
Wallerie: How do you work with 106 road districts.?
Sen T: No way to please all. Try to get chunk of money for the borough and let them dole it out.
Judge: 12:30 Lunch break, back promptly at 1:30.
Redistricting Court Challenge: Paskvan Testifies
11:30 - they are on break. Sen. Paskvan has been testifying, basically that he thinks there was political gerrymandering to match himself and fellow Democratic Senator Thomas. He discussed the differences between the city and the borough areas - police powers, garbage collection, fire, building codes - and showed how now they have split up the two halves of the city of Fairbanks into two different Sen. Districts which will also represent large chunks outside the city. He also pointed to the fact that House Districts 3 and 4 are barely connected, really only a matter of feet, to be joined as one Sen. District, while 1 and 2 (the two main City of Fairbanks house districts) are connected by miles of common boundary, but are not connected as was the old Senate district. On the map, House District 4 (Sen seat B) is blue, the green is District 3. The red circle shows where they are connected.
Below are my notes. They are starting again. I'll clean up the notes later, but for those who want them now. These are NOT official transcripts by any means. They're just to give you a sense of the proceedings.
10:21 It's working.
Sen. Joe Paskvan -
Attorney: Current district?
Sen P: Sen District E
Attorney: Where on this map is it located? Describe district.
Sen. P: Fairbanks and Ft Wainwright basically.
Attorney: Exhibit J11 - Red outline is City Boundary, Roughly your dustruct?
What did you do before politics?
Sen P: attorney. Born and raised here. My grandfather came in 1909 then during 10's 20's and 30's traveled back and forth to Minnesota. Permanently stayed in interior AK in 30s. Dad went to UA in WWII and joined army. Opened business in FB after WWII. 25 cousins in family born here after the war.
Attorney: Good working knowledge of Fairbanks? Yes. Seen Maps of redistricting? Yes.
Current proclamation did you see problems with the maps?
Sen P - where the 4p to the west, there's a part omitted from City of Fairbanks. Annexation in 2008, city limits as changed by annexation not reflected in the redistricting map. Here and here. (I can't see it either). This area wasn't contested, but this area was and was focus of a lot of legislative discussion two years ago in Juneau. I live right here and I drive this street every day. This used to be outside of Fairbanks, but in 2010 all came in. Subject to main debate, south of Airport Road and West of Fred Meyer area. Political debate I was forefront in.
Attorney: Annexation. How did it end in legislature?
Sen. P: Apparently legislature can throw out annexation approved by planning board.
Attorney: Some resistance to annexation? YES Who resisted? Before got to legislature the FBNS borough resisiting and City of Fairbanks advancing. I was a resident of Fairbanks. When in legislature, FBNS borough passed resolution against. Rep. Wilson of North was spearhead to crush the annexation and I was spearhead to keep it. Primarily the debate played out in Rep. Bob Heron's committee and when I testified, Rep. Wilson was presenting hostile testimony. I was happy my side prevailed.
Attorney: Why did they oppose annexation?
Sen P: 3/4 million dollars in property and sales taxes from Fred Meyer west facility and some residents and also, ambulance response times from UA compared to downtown fire department from City of Fairbanks.
Attorney: Why an issue?
Sen P: I think borough made it more of an issue than necessary.
Attorney: Has to do with tax base? Correct. Service to people?
Sen P: For annexation to work, City had to show it could provide services, which it did.
Attorney: Why were you advocating for the annexation?
Sen P: Important to recognize that city of fairbanks has continuously expanded throughout my life time. Dad would say Fairbanks grows despite itself. This is aprt of the growth of the city of Fairbanks. As the elected Sen. for city of Fairbanks, my duty to represent interests of the City rather than the borough.
Attorney: Future annexations coming?
Sen P: Yes, and annexation south of airport road, will continue toward the airport and businsses and homes south of Chena River and north of Tananana and Johanson expressway, NE Fairbanks, all within the city of Fairbanks.
Attorney: Would you expect opposition on those expansions too?
Sen P: I would expect opposition, but as part of the natural growth of city limits over the decades, the annexation will eventually occur.
Attorney: What type of services offered by the city.
Sen. P: Incorporated in 1903, First Class city, has police powers including professional police, fire, garbage curbside pickup, city street maintenance, building codes going back many, many years. Less potential to burn down. City engineering makes sure codes complied with. More like a true city. I remember statehood and mid-60s and NSBorough incorporated, B residents always had significant problem with police powers, but people in Fairbanks used to police powers and two different states of mind. Borough relies on state troopers.
Attorney: How does fire protection compare.
Sen P: B. has volunteer fire connected to service districts.
A: Garbage?
Sen P: City has weekly curbside pickup and they take it to the dump. Borough has dumpster stations where people can deposti their garbage.
A: In Juneau, do these differences make a difference in representation in legislature?
Sen P: Certainly beyond the annexation battles, every year negotiations on capital budgets, allegations to FMATS which can service City and Borough and distinct from that capital budget appropirations solely to the city. As Fairbanks Sen. I want to focus on funding for the city of Fairbanks. Last year Sen. Thomas and I worked together on FMATS capital budget and a chunk of that wne to Fairbanks, since FB is the hub. If people in the are want to move, they have to go through Fairbanks.
. . .
Air quality is an issue that's different between the two. City has been able to ban the hydronic ?? boilers.
A: Controversial?
Sen P: Not in city, but concern in the borough if there would be boiler police and hotly contested.
Attorney: would being from the city affect how you work in Juneau?
Sen P: pause, not sure how to answer. We are trying to bring natural gas to lessen the whole issue. 1100 businesses and residents on natural gas - in the city.
[Clearly they are tyring to establsih that there is a different set of interests between the city and borough to justify having different legislators for each rather than merging them]
A: When you were deposed, there was a discussion on fracturing. What do you mean?
Sen P: Troubled me when the boundaries between 4 and 1, I live in here in the city and parts are to the east, but on this north south basis generally is where one part of the city is split from another part. That exists in my current Sen district, but kept east part of FB with the west Part.
10:50 - Currently using Steese Highway n/s - connects with Richardson Highway by Ft. Wainright gate. Learned the pairings split the east and west part of Fairbanks, term came to mind of fracturing the city. Puts FB at risk, maintaining the integrity of everything I've known all my life of what FB has been. Not just fractured to the east, where not paired with the one district, but also to the West where they didn't considere the annexation. The Board didn't care about at all the actual city boundary of FB. Thought the city should be a cohesive political voice because we do have differences from the area around.
Fractured to the west - 100s of voters - and to the east - 1000's of voters.
There is a risk to potential future annexation issues. Someone not a resident of city of Fairbanks and allegiance not to the city, you risk stifling the natural progression of the expansion of Fairbanks over the decades. As to capital projects within the city. There are capital projects different int he City limits different from Chena Hot Springs Road - just unique entities.
. . .
10:55 - A: Other cities in borough?
Sen. P: North Pole about 2,000, city of Fairbanks something north of 30,000 people. There's been talk of consolidation between Fairbanks, the borough, North Pole, and Ester, but haven't. Anchorage has. For us Police power is forefront in all this. The B population is extremely hostile to police powers for as long as I can remember, back to the late 70s - alcohol tax on area wide basis. Hotly contested as creation of police power in FNSB.
Also bar hours. I was born and raised in the bar business = owned Tommies - since the 30s til now. Bar hours issue, goes back to when city limits different from now. Bars open just outside city limits, mad dash to outside the city limits after city bars closed.
A:In terms of Sen. pairings, what are your thoughts on discriminatory impacts?
Sen P: getting away from fracturing discussion on east and west. When I became aware the pairings not east and west of Fairbanks, but with massive area north of Fairbanks - blip where 4B touches 3B what came to mind was gerrymandering. Infuriating.
Protest, overruled.
Sen. P will be leaving for Juneau this weekend.
Saw that two districts connected by area stretching for feet whereas 1 and 2 connected by miles. Clearly saw it as a way to get two Democratic Sen against each other.
I'm a Democrat. Joe Thomas is also a Dem. Sen. Q: What is Bi partisan working group?
Sen P: coalition in the Sen. hoping to address the issues of Alaska without getting bogged down in the extremes of either party. I've been a member since day 1. Set up in Dec. 2008 and I was sworn in Jan. 2009. Is Sen. Thomas also a member? Yes.
A:Who are the Republican members?
Sen P: Stedman, Stevens, Meyers, McGuire, Wagoner, and
A: What is Stevens position? Pres.
A: Kukesh? Democrat
A: Stedman: Co-cahir of finance, and sits on resource committee which I chair.
A: Other finance chair? Sen. Hofman - Democrat.
A: When you heard about the pairings in your district, did you know that you were the only Sen. pairings.
Sen. P: We were wondering where it was going to came at us from. I never figured it would be us. Concern was Kookesh and Stedman and Stevens and Hoffman. Both of those Republicans are less favored than others.
A: You never testified did you? No.
A: Were you aware of other proposals to pair Senators, other than those who were members of the bipartisan working group?
Objection, hearsay.
Sen. P: No.
A: What were you saying about other Republican Senators.
Sen P: Talking about decoupling of tax structure for oil and gas. May 2010 change for tax under AGIA pipeline. Sen. Stedman and I led the drive to decouple natural gas from the oil tax. With shale gas going on, we saw the drop of natural gas prices, BTU equivalency in pricing was basis of tax, but natural gas price dropping so not equivalent. We would have lost a lot of revenue. Passed the Sen. Failed in house, then passed in house, then vetoed by the governor. First time Stedman and I worked on keeping highest possible tax for Alaskans, as required by the constitution. Current hot issue is production tax. Stedman and I have been leading this issue - HB 110. We both have strong thoughts that we have to maintain revenues to State from our oil, especially given the credit structure. This makes Sen. Stedman to some extent a disfavored Republican. Neither Stedman nor Stevens pictures were on the Republican website.
Resource Development Council, the Alliance have given us report cards - I got a D, Stevens and STedman got F's, minority in Senate all got A's. All because of the bi-partisan working group trying to address these important issues. The majority favoring giving billions of dollars away are receiving A's.
A: Are you aware the plan actually opened a vacancy that doesn't have an incumbency?
Sen P: Yes, forcing two Dems to run against each other, and then creating an open seat to allow someone else to run. First Seekins and and then Higgins, both of whom were defeated by Thomas.
A: How do ??? vote? Mainly Democratic.
A: How about North Pole? Mainly Republican.
A: Military voting patterns?
Sen. P: When I was campaigning in 2010 presidential year, I came to learn the military has a low voter turnout even in election year.
A: Putting the tow military basis together how does this affect political party? (hard to hear)
Sen. P: much lower political voice can dominate because of low political turnout.
A: This part here?
Sen P: Ft. Wainright training grounds. When we got capital budget for bridge across the Tanana, to get strikers across the river for their training.
A: away from mike
Sen. P: More registered Republicans than Dems, but even more undeclared. Like me - I was undeclared until just before I decided to run. 1.4 - 1 R to D district.
A: How did you get elected as a Democrat in this district?
Sen. P: MY qualis, born here, raised here, family for generations, not interested in short term, but long run, and strong business background, many Republicans find me to be an attractive candidate. I am a capitalist, but have social issues some may disagree with.
A: In terms of the Sen. plan. Aware of any legitimate reason for breaking apart the city?
Sen. P: I can think of no legitimate reason for fracturing FB. A great deal of harm in moving people to the east and west. Now divided among three different house districts. Only rational contiguous boundary is to conect the east and west parts of Fairbanks so they hae a singular unified voice.
11:30 Judge - ten minute break, then we'll go to 11:40.
Below are my notes. They are starting again. I'll clean up the notes later, but for those who want them now. These are NOT official transcripts by any means. They're just to give you a sense of the proceedings.
10:21 It's working.
Sen. Joe Paskvan -
Attorney: Current district?
Sen P: Sen District E
Attorney: Where on this map is it located? Describe district.
Sen. P: Fairbanks and Ft Wainwright basically.
Attorney: Exhibit J11 - Red outline is City Boundary, Roughly your dustruct?
What did you do before politics?
Sen P: attorney. Born and raised here. My grandfather came in 1909 then during 10's 20's and 30's traveled back and forth to Minnesota. Permanently stayed in interior AK in 30s. Dad went to UA in WWII and joined army. Opened business in FB after WWII. 25 cousins in family born here after the war.
Attorney: Good working knowledge of Fairbanks? Yes. Seen Maps of redistricting? Yes.
Current proclamation did you see problems with the maps?
Sen P - where the 4p to the west, there's a part omitted from City of Fairbanks. Annexation in 2008, city limits as changed by annexation not reflected in the redistricting map. Here and here. (I can't see it either). This area wasn't contested, but this area was and was focus of a lot of legislative discussion two years ago in Juneau. I live right here and I drive this street every day. This used to be outside of Fairbanks, but in 2010 all came in. Subject to main debate, south of Airport Road and West of Fred Meyer area. Political debate I was forefront in.
Attorney: Annexation. How did it end in legislature?
Sen. P: Apparently legislature can throw out annexation approved by planning board.
Attorney: Some resistance to annexation? YES Who resisted? Before got to legislature the FBNS borough resisiting and City of Fairbanks advancing. I was a resident of Fairbanks. When in legislature, FBNS borough passed resolution against. Rep. Wilson of North was spearhead to crush the annexation and I was spearhead to keep it. Primarily the debate played out in Rep. Bob Heron's committee and when I testified, Rep. Wilson was presenting hostile testimony. I was happy my side prevailed.
Attorney: Why did they oppose annexation?
Sen P: 3/4 million dollars in property and sales taxes from Fred Meyer west facility and some residents and also, ambulance response times from UA compared to downtown fire department from City of Fairbanks.
Attorney: Why an issue?
Sen P: I think borough made it more of an issue than necessary.
Attorney: Has to do with tax base? Correct. Service to people?
Sen P: For annexation to work, City had to show it could provide services, which it did.
Attorney: Why were you advocating for the annexation?
Sen P: Important to recognize that city of fairbanks has continuously expanded throughout my life time. Dad would say Fairbanks grows despite itself. This is aprt of the growth of the city of Fairbanks. As the elected Sen. for city of Fairbanks, my duty to represent interests of the City rather than the borough.
Attorney: Future annexations coming?
Sen P: Yes, and annexation south of airport road, will continue toward the airport and businsses and homes south of Chena River and north of Tananana and Johanson expressway, NE Fairbanks, all within the city of Fairbanks.
Attorney: Would you expect opposition on those expansions too?
Sen P: I would expect opposition, but as part of the natural growth of city limits over the decades, the annexation will eventually occur.
Attorney: What type of services offered by the city.
Sen. P: Incorporated in 1903, First Class city, has police powers including professional police, fire, garbage curbside pickup, city street maintenance, building codes going back many, many years. Less potential to burn down. City engineering makes sure codes complied with. More like a true city. I remember statehood and mid-60s and NSBorough incorporated, B residents always had significant problem with police powers, but people in Fairbanks used to police powers and two different states of mind. Borough relies on state troopers.
Attorney: How does fire protection compare.
Sen P: B. has volunteer fire connected to service districts.
A: Garbage?
Sen P: City has weekly curbside pickup and they take it to the dump. Borough has dumpster stations where people can deposti their garbage.
A: In Juneau, do these differences make a difference in representation in legislature?
Sen P: Certainly beyond the annexation battles, every year negotiations on capital budgets, allegations to FMATS which can service City and Borough and distinct from that capital budget appropirations solely to the city. As Fairbanks Sen. I want to focus on funding for the city of Fairbanks. Last year Sen. Thomas and I worked together on FMATS capital budget and a chunk of that wne to Fairbanks, since FB is the hub. If people in the are want to move, they have to go through Fairbanks.
. . .
Air quality is an issue that's different between the two. City has been able to ban the hydronic ?? boilers.
A: Controversial?
Sen P: Not in city, but concern in the borough if there would be boiler police and hotly contested.
Attorney: would being from the city affect how you work in Juneau?
Sen P: pause, not sure how to answer. We are trying to bring natural gas to lessen the whole issue. 1100 businesses and residents on natural gas - in the city.
[Clearly they are tyring to establsih that there is a different set of interests between the city and borough to justify having different legislators for each rather than merging them]
A: When you were deposed, there was a discussion on fracturing. What do you mean?
Sen P: Troubled me when the boundaries between 4 and 1, I live in here in the city and parts are to the east, but on this north south basis generally is where one part of the city is split from another part. That exists in my current Sen district, but kept east part of FB with the west Part.
10:50 - Currently using Steese Highway n/s - connects with Richardson Highway by Ft. Wainright gate. Learned the pairings split the east and west part of Fairbanks, term came to mind of fracturing the city. Puts FB at risk, maintaining the integrity of everything I've known all my life of what FB has been. Not just fractured to the east, where not paired with the one district, but also to the West where they didn't considere the annexation. The Board didn't care about at all the actual city boundary of FB. Thought the city should be a cohesive political voice because we do have differences from the area around.
Fractured to the west - 100s of voters - and to the east - 1000's of voters.
There is a risk to potential future annexation issues. Someone not a resident of city of Fairbanks and allegiance not to the city, you risk stifling the natural progression of the expansion of Fairbanks over the decades. As to capital projects within the city. There are capital projects different int he City limits different from Chena Hot Springs Road - just unique entities.
. . .
10:55 - A: Other cities in borough?
Sen. P: North Pole about 2,000, city of Fairbanks something north of 30,000 people. There's been talk of consolidation between Fairbanks, the borough, North Pole, and Ester, but haven't. Anchorage has. For us Police power is forefront in all this. The B population is extremely hostile to police powers for as long as I can remember, back to the late 70s - alcohol tax on area wide basis. Hotly contested as creation of police power in FNSB.
Also bar hours. I was born and raised in the bar business = owned Tommies - since the 30s til now. Bar hours issue, goes back to when city limits different from now. Bars open just outside city limits, mad dash to outside the city limits after city bars closed.
A:In terms of Sen. pairings, what are your thoughts on discriminatory impacts?
Sen P: getting away from fracturing discussion on east and west. When I became aware the pairings not east and west of Fairbanks, but with massive area north of Fairbanks - blip where 4B touches 3B what came to mind was gerrymandering. Infuriating.
Protest, overruled.
Sen. P will be leaving for Juneau this weekend.
Saw that two districts connected by area stretching for feet whereas 1 and 2 connected by miles. Clearly saw it as a way to get two Democratic Sen against each other.
I'm a Democrat. Joe Thomas is also a Dem. Sen. Q: What is Bi partisan working group?
Sen P: coalition in the Sen. hoping to address the issues of Alaska without getting bogged down in the extremes of either party. I've been a member since day 1. Set up in Dec. 2008 and I was sworn in Jan. 2009. Is Sen. Thomas also a member? Yes.
A:Who are the Republican members?
Sen P: Stedman, Stevens, Meyers, McGuire, Wagoner, and
A: What is Stevens position? Pres.
A: Kukesh? Democrat
A: Stedman: Co-cahir of finance, and sits on resource committee which I chair.
A: Other finance chair? Sen. Hofman - Democrat.
A: When you heard about the pairings in your district, did you know that you were the only Sen. pairings.
Sen. P: We were wondering where it was going to came at us from. I never figured it would be us. Concern was Kookesh and Stedman and Stevens and Hoffman. Both of those Republicans are less favored than others.
A: You never testified did you? No.
A: Were you aware of other proposals to pair Senators, other than those who were members of the bipartisan working group?
Objection, hearsay.
Sen. P: No.
A: What were you saying about other Republican Senators.
Sen P: Talking about decoupling of tax structure for oil and gas. May 2010 change for tax under AGIA pipeline. Sen. Stedman and I led the drive to decouple natural gas from the oil tax. With shale gas going on, we saw the drop of natural gas prices, BTU equivalency in pricing was basis of tax, but natural gas price dropping so not equivalent. We would have lost a lot of revenue. Passed the Sen. Failed in house, then passed in house, then vetoed by the governor. First time Stedman and I worked on keeping highest possible tax for Alaskans, as required by the constitution. Current hot issue is production tax. Stedman and I have been leading this issue - HB 110. We both have strong thoughts that we have to maintain revenues to State from our oil, especially given the credit structure. This makes Sen. Stedman to some extent a disfavored Republican. Neither Stedman nor Stevens pictures were on the Republican website.
Resource Development Council, the Alliance have given us report cards - I got a D, Stevens and STedman got F's, minority in Senate all got A's. All because of the bi-partisan working group trying to address these important issues. The majority favoring giving billions of dollars away are receiving A's.
A: Are you aware the plan actually opened a vacancy that doesn't have an incumbency?
Sen P: Yes, forcing two Dems to run against each other, and then creating an open seat to allow someone else to run. First Seekins and and then Higgins, both of whom were defeated by Thomas.
A: How do ??? vote? Mainly Democratic.
A: How about North Pole? Mainly Republican.
A: Military voting patterns?
Sen. P: When I was campaigning in 2010 presidential year, I came to learn the military has a low voter turnout even in election year.
A: Putting the tow military basis together how does this affect political party? (hard to hear)
Sen. P: much lower political voice can dominate because of low political turnout.
A: This part here?
Sen P: Ft. Wainright training grounds. When we got capital budget for bridge across the Tanana, to get strikers across the river for their training.
A: away from mike
Sen. P: More registered Republicans than Dems, but even more undeclared. Like me - I was undeclared until just before I decided to run. 1.4 - 1 R to D district.
A: How did you get elected as a Democrat in this district?
Sen. P: MY qualis, born here, raised here, family for generations, not interested in short term, but long run, and strong business background, many Republicans find me to be an attractive candidate. I am a capitalist, but have social issues some may disagree with.
A: In terms of the Sen. plan. Aware of any legitimate reason for breaking apart the city?
Sen. P: I can think of no legitimate reason for fracturing FB. A great deal of harm in moving people to the east and west. Now divided among three different house districts. Only rational contiguous boundary is to conect the east and west parts of Fairbanks so they hae a singular unified voice.
11:30 Judge - ten minute break, then we'll go to 11:40.
Sounds of Silence - Redistricting Board Court Challenge Teleconference
[This is a strange post - A log of a silent teleconference to the Fairbanks Court where the challenge to the Alaska Redistricting Board is being heard.
Think of it as documentation, but for whom? The techies? The Board? I applaud the Board for making the effort to put the court proceedings online. When you do something new (for them) you take a risk. So far it isn't working, but I'm hoping it will get figured out.]
8:30am
I've called the conference number listed to listen in. It seems there is just one other participant - Matsu Borough. We're on pause while the judge comes into the court room. It says there is room for 150 participants, so anyone who wants to listen in can call:
I feel a little silly posting all this. Clearly they've asked someone to do something that is out of her area of expertise. I don't mean to call attention to it. But this is a pretty public event and I was poised to blog it live. And this is what was on. I really want to get into the substantive matters of the proceedings which will determine if the Board's plan will stand or will have to be revised.
Think of it as documentation, but for whom? The techies? The Board? I applaud the Board for making the effort to put the court proceedings online. When you do something new (for them) you take a risk. So far it isn't working, but I'm hoping it will get figured out.]
8:30am
I've called the conference number listed to listen in. It seems there is just one other participant - Matsu Borough. We're on pause while the judge comes into the court room. It says there is room for 150 participants, so anyone who wants to listen in can call:
Conference Number: 866-231-8327 (Limited to the first 150 participants)
Conference Code: 9074529311#
8:40 - someone else joined, but I couldn't understand who it was. Otherwise we're still hearing nothing.
Instructions: We've been muted and need to press #6 to unmute line. I wasn't planning on talking anyway.
8:48 - that last person left the conference - Fairbanks Court?? left the conference - Aleutian Research? joined
9:01 - There was a clicking sound.
9:05 I've never been on a conference call before to listen to a court proceeding. In court, the people in the gallery can listen in to whatever is happening. I'm not sure what limits there are on people listening in via phone. But it would be helpful if someone could tell us once in a while why we are hearing nothing but silence interrupted by someone joining or leaving the teleconference.
I realize this is new ground for the Board (they did some teleconferencing of their hearings, but this is in the court room in Fairbanks) and I applaud their attempts to allow people from around the state to listen in. And I'm sure this will improve as they figure it out. But it is frustrating.
9:11am I've called the Alaska Redistricting Board office in Anchorage and Mary Core there is going to check on what's happening.
9:13 am - Someone else just joined - Liz I think; Mary Core (from the Board) Now she left. I guess she was just checking.
9:21am - Nick McDermot (?) has joined.
9:24am - Mary Core's back. Mary Core left. Fairbanks Superior Court joined. Fairbanks Superior Court left.
Mary called me to tell me she'd contacted them and has to call others who called in to say they couldn't hear anything. She said the second time she called she could hear Board attorney
Michael White presenting his argument. And I hear something faint in
the background. Now the sound is gone again.
9:29am - I hung up and called back to see if that would help. But no. Still silent.
9:33am - Mary Core joined again. Nick and Liz have left.
9:34am - KTVA and Liz Clemens have joined.
9:40am - Mary Core left.
9:51am I'm posting this now and maybe something will start soon. Meanwhile, check the last post to get a sense of what is supposed to be happening.
Last thought: I assumed when she said we'd been muted, it meant no one could hear us if we spoke. What if she muted the court? Can you do that?
So I called Mary back at the Board in Anchorage and asked. She said they were getting lots of feedback from people on the phones - dogs barking, etc. - so they muted everyone and that seems to have messed things up and they are working on it. A fair number of folks - including TV stations - have called in and are upset. It's up to the Court system to make it work is what I understood.
UPDATE 10:16am -
10:07am - I can hear something in the background. No, it was someone joining the conference.
Operator joined the conference. Fairbanks Court is talking to the operator. We want to mute the other lines. Can we silence the announcement that people are coming on and off line. She said hit *3. Operator left. Someone else left.
Is this really the first time a court has had a teleconference and they can't figure out how to do it without the courtroom hearing people getting on and off?
10:10 Fairbanks court is talking again. It's very quiet. But she's talking to someone clearly trying to make it work. "Tell me what to do and I'll do it. I don't get it." The person she's talking to is hard to hear.
10:15am - She's checking who is online. "Recess now until about 10:20am, and trying to make it work so the comings and goings aren't interrupting the proceedings."
UPDATE 10:16am -
10:07am - I can hear something in the background. No, it was someone joining the conference.
Operator joined the conference. Fairbanks Court is talking to the operator. We want to mute the other lines. Can we silence the announcement that people are coming on and off line. She said hit *3. Operator left. Someone else left.
Is this really the first time a court has had a teleconference and they can't figure out how to do it without the courtroom hearing people getting on and off?
10:10 Fairbanks court is talking again. It's very quiet. But she's talking to someone clearly trying to make it work. "Tell me what to do and I'll do it. I don't get it." The person she's talking to is hard to hear.
10:15am - She's checking who is online. "Recess now until about 10:20am, and trying to make it work so the comings and goings aren't interrupting the proceedings."
I feel a little silly posting all this. Clearly they've asked someone to do something that is out of her area of expertise. I don't mean to call attention to it. But this is a pretty public event and I was poised to blog it live. And this is what was on. I really want to get into the substantive matters of the proceedings which will determine if the Board's plan will stand or will have to be revised.
UPDATE 10:21am - It's working. Sen. Paskvan is the current witness.
4 Districts Unconstitutional as Alaska Redistricting Plan Goes To Court
The court challenges to the Alaska Redistricting Board's Proclamation have dwindled from three to one. This begins to be heard in open court on Monday (today) January 9. The Board's website gives this information:
What: In re: 2011 Redistricting Cases v. Alaska Redistricting BoardWhen: Monday, January 9, 2012Where: Rabinowitz Courthouse, Courtroom 403, 101 Lacey Street, FairbanksConference Number: 866-231-8327 (Limited to the first 150 participants)Conference Code: 9074529311#
The Court's schedule shows this begins at 8:30am
The board also put up a list last week of 92 litigation documents that had been filed prior to the court date. Since then they've added another 79 documents AND they've added descriptive titles to the files which makes it MUCH easier to find things. (Previously there was an index file of the first 92 at the bottom of the list which I didn't find until after poking around and randomly opening numbered files.)
I confess that I have not read all the files. I focused on files that began with the word "Order" because these turned out to be decisions the judge had made. They tend to explain the issue and summarize the plaintiff's (Riley and Dearborn) and the defendant's (The Alaska Redistricting Board) arguments and the judge's reasoning why he found for one side or the other.
I don't know whether I found the most critical points but they seem important:
1. Four House Districts were found to not meet the requirements of the Alaska constitution - House Districts 1, 2, 37, and 38.
2. The Board argued they could not meet the federal Voting Rights Act requirements without stretching the Alaska Constitutional requirements.
3. The federal law trumps the Alaska Constitution, therefore
4. In court, it will be up to the defendants (the Board) to prove that the only way to meet the Voting Rights Act requirements was by creating districts which did not meet the constitutional standards.
I will try to get more on this up soon. Meanwhile you can look at the orders themselves.
Order on Compactness Districts 1, 2, and 37.
Order on Contiguity of District 37.
Lack of socioeconomic integration of District 38 not disputed
Note: The letters (i.e. the S after 38) is the Senate district the House District is in.
The board also put up a list last week of 92 litigation documents that had been filed prior to the court date. Since then they've added another 79 documents AND they've added descriptive titles to the files which makes it MUCH easier to find things. (Previously there was an index file of the first 92 at the bottom of the list which I didn't find until after poking around and randomly opening numbered files.)
I confess that I have not read all the files. I focused on files that began with the word "Order" because these turned out to be decisions the judge had made. They tend to explain the issue and summarize the plaintiff's (Riley and Dearborn) and the defendant's (The Alaska Redistricting Board) arguments and the judge's reasoning why he found for one side or the other.
I don't know whether I found the most critical points but they seem important:
 |
| Fairbanks House Districts - particularly 1, 2, and 38 |
2. The Board argued they could not meet the federal Voting Rights Act requirements without stretching the Alaska Constitutional requirements.
3. The federal law trumps the Alaska Constitution, therefore
4. In court, it will be up to the defendants (the Board) to prove that the only way to meet the Voting Rights Act requirements was by creating districts which did not meet the constitutional standards.
I will try to get more on this up soon. Meanwhile you can look at the orders themselves.
Order on Compactness Districts 1, 2, and 37.
Order on Contiguity of District 37.
Lack of socioeconomic integration of District 38 not disputed
 |
| House District 37 (green) |
 |
| House District 38 - click to enlarge |
Note: The letters (i.e. the S after 38) is the Senate district the House District is in.
Sunday, January 08, 2012
Free Snow
The Anchorage Daily News had a front page story about that sad situation of the side streets and main street sidewalks. I haven't been able to find confirmation of my belief that we've never had so many days over a long period of time where there was measurable snow. But the ADN did say there were only six days in December without measurable snow.
Here's our back deck. I've been clearing this, a little less regularly than the driveway, but it keeps building back up. This is maybe three days accumulation.
I'm starting to think I need to clear the roof. I have this wonderful gadget invented by the father of one of my students long ago. I have to find it in the garage. I'll try to get a video tape of how it works. It's ingenious and gets the snow off the roof without having to lift any shovels.
 |
| Photo from Facebook |
Japan makes more sense because they drive on the left side of the road. Anyway, we still have a way to go before we're in this condition. [UPDATE 1/9/12 - Commenter Kenrick provides link to other pictures of this road in Japanese mountains.]
NOAA (I think the link takes you to the site, not specifically Jan. 8, 2012) suggests that the US snow cover is pretty low this year.
Automated Model Discussion:So any of you in one of those snowless areas who needs some white stuff, it's free, but you have to pick it up yourself.
January 8, 2012
Area Covered By Snow: 14.6% Area Covered Last Month: 37.3% Snow Depth Average: 1.4 in Minimum: 0.0 in Maximum: 1000.2 in Std. Dev.: 6.2 in Snow Water Equivalent Average: 0.3 in Minimum: 0.0 in Maximum: 521.6 in Std. Dev.: 1.7 in
"A home rule municipality adopts a charter subject to voter approval and has all powers not prohibited by law or charter."
The quote in the title turns out to be an important point (maybe) in a post I've had chained to my leg since June. This post is going to be an example of finding stuff and then having to sort through the details and wait until I can talk to real people who know how this actually works. I've already done a lot of that, but I've looked at the statutes again, I see more and I have more questions.I've been following lots of leads, gathering bits and pieces of information, eliminating false assumptions, and trying to make sense out it all. I'm mostly there. It makes sense to me. Mostly. Now I'm trying to rewrite it so it will make sense to others.
I did two posts already on the mayor's veto of an amendment before the ordinance it amended was passed. See? Just trying to describe the topic will lose most readers. The first post on this last June gives a more conversational overview of what happened. The second has the back-up document (memos from various municipal attorneys to various mayors since 1975) and is more complicated. I'm hoping to post something that puts all the pieces together before too long. I've promised various folks I would in hopes that avoiding shame would get me to finish.
This post you're reading gives a little back-up information that is necessary to understand why I'm going to conclude (in the upcoming post) that the mayor does NOT have the right to veto amendments. (Well, depending on what more I find out, I may not conclude that.) The back-up document cites State Statute 29 (Municipal Government) on the powers of borough and city governments. Two municipal attorneys have cited this statute as the basis for the mayor's power to veto an amendment during the debate before the ordinance as a whole is passed.
But Anchorage is a home-rule borough. I'll let you read what the Alaska Department of Commerce Website says about the types of governments in Alaska below the state level.
How is municipal government structured in Alaska?
Article X of the state's constitution provides that the legislature classify the two forms of local government, cities and boroughs, and prescribe their powers and functions. The legislature has classified local government in the following manner and prescribed varying powers and duties for the different classes of cities and boroughs:
Classes
of Local Government in Alaska
| |
| Boroughs: | Cities: |
| Unified Home Rule Municipality | Home Rule City |
| Home Rule Borough (not-unified) | First Class City |
| First Class Borough | Second Class City |
| Second Class Borough | |
What is the difference between a city and borough?
A city generally exercises its powers within an established boundary that normally encompasses a single community, while a borough (intermediate-sized governments - much larger than cities) provides services and exercises power on a regional basis. Under the state's constitution, a city is also part of the borough in which it is located.
An organized borough may provide services on three levels. These are: areawide (throughout the borough), non-areawide (that part of the borough outside of cities), and service areas (size and make-up vary). A borough also has the flexibility and capacity to provide services at the community level, typically through the creation of service areas. (State Constitution, Article X, Section 5)
What is the difference between a general law and home rule municipality?
A home rule municipality adopts a charter subject to voter approval and has all powers not prohibited by law or charter. (State Constitution, Article X, Section 9, 10, 11 and AS 29.04.010.) A general law municipality is unchartered and its powers are granted by law. (State Constitution, Article X, Section 4 and 7 and AS 29.04.020.)
Anchorage is a home-rule borough. Actually, in 1975 the city and the borough merged to become the Municipality of Anchorage, so technically it's a unified home-rule municipality. This will be important because a home-rule borough/municipality makes its own rules through its charter and ordinances within the guidelines of the state statute. What has me caught now is figuring out what 'within the guidelines of the state statute' means.
Does the wording in a home rule borough charter or ordinances rule that governmental unit OR the words in the state Statute 29? Let me repeat a line from the statute above:
[it] adopts a charter subject to voter approval and has all the powers not prohibited by law or charter.So what exactly does this mean? Presumably that they can write their own rules as long as they don't do things that are prohibited. They can give the mayor less power, if the voters approve, than the state statute allows. Which is the case with the mayor's veto.
One person, who should know, told me that as a home-rule Municipality, Anchorage is not bound by the state statute, but by the Municipal charter and ordinances. But parts of the state statute have the following words:
This section applies to home rule and general law municipalities.
The arguments for the mayor's ability to veto amendments on not yet passed ordinances are based on the powers given in the section of Statute 29 on the mayor's veto powers, which are broader than the Municipal charter. [[UPDATE 10:30pm - AK Pi in the second comment notes that the veto language only applies to subsection (e) - not the whole section - of the veto powers, so it would not make the other parts of the veto section mandatory.] The question I'm trying to get answered is whether this section is applicable or whether the Municipal charter is applicable here. If the state statute trumps the charter, why would they write more restrictive language in the charter in the first place? As I said, a person who should know, says the Municipal charter rules because Anchorage is a home-rule Municipality. So I have to get back to that person to clarify my current confusion.
The statute doesn't say the mayor can veto amendments before the ordinance they amend is passed. It does say the mayor can veto "an ordinance, resolution, motion, or other action." So even if the state statute applies, there are still some problems with how to interpret 'other actions.'
But I'm going to post this, open-ended as it is, so readers can see
- why this is taking me so long*
- the kinds of little traps I run into trying to get answers to these questions
- that I really am working on this and hope to get something more complete out soon
- some of this complicated stuff in a smaller chunk you might actually absorb so you can get up-to-speed a bit and when the full post comes out it will be easier to understand (wishful thinking on my part)
Saturday, January 07, 2012
Flocking Bohemian Waxwings, Signs of Moose
I went out yet one more day to shovel snow off the driveway. It feels like I'm doing this every day. The sun was nice and the air so crisp and clean.
Here's a spot in the snow in front where a moose must have crashed for a while. The footprints are all around the mountain ash tree. (Where the Bohemian Waxwings end up on the video.)
And while I was clearing snow, a flock of Bohemian Waxwings flew in. I love to watch how they swarm. If you make the video full screen and watch closely, you can see them most of the way from the beginning in the lower right then as they fly out around the tree and then back on the left to roost in the tree. It was so quiet that I figured I needed some music, so I borrowed some from Waldemaar "The Bohemian" Music Video. His has much different and much better video, unless, of course, you're a bird freak. I hope he doesn't mind my borrowing.
Friday, January 06, 2012
"as a scientist, I should not be undertaking research on something if I didn't understand the ramifications of what the results could do."
Alexandra Morton is a biologist who moved to a small British Columbia community to study orcas, who writes a blog about salmon. From her blog bio:
Today she has a post that begins:
The basic message I got from reading the post was: the hearings have shown that the Canadian government has been overseeing the fish farms with the aim of making sure information that could jeopardize the business was unavailable.
Her blog post is a summary of the transcript with some quotes such as:
I'm not a fish expert. I haven't read the whole report, and so I'm not really sure what all this means. But, if you're interested in fish policy, fish farming, or even the openness of the Canadian government, this is well worth your reading. The sense conveyed in Miller's blog is that the government is suppressing data that would jeopardize commercial fish farming.
Thanks to David Ottness' FB post for this. Again, Andrea Morton's post is here.
In 1987, the first salmon farm appeared and I thought it was a good idea. I hoped it would help bring more people to the area and keep the little town alive. But from the beginning there were problems. First, the government put the farms where they promised us they would not. Then the farmers used underwater sounds that drove the whales I was studying away (Morton and Symmonds 2002). Then there were bacterial epidemics (furunculosis), toxic algae blooms (Heterosigma), escaped Atlantic salmon (Morton and Volpe 2002) and then the sea lice epidemics began (see references below).
From the beginning, I expected government to recognize the problems and explain how they would remedy them, but I was naive. Today, Echo Bay has no school and very few residents. There are 27 Norwegian fish farms operating and the companies are loosing money. They do not hire local people and use drugs to try and deal with their pathogen problems with no notification to the local people who fish for food in the area.
Today she has a post that begins:
I just finished reading the approximately 450 pages of transcript of the last three days of the Cohen Inquiry. I highly recommend them, they can be found at www.cohencommission.ca Go to Calendar and Transcripts and see dates December 15, 16, 19.
The basic message I got from reading the post was: the hearings have shown that the Canadian government has been overseeing the fish farms with the aim of making sure information that could jeopardize the business was unavailable.
Her blog post is a summary of the transcript with some quotes such as:
McDADE (Lawyer examining aquaculture): … as of the 24th, senior people in DFO were aware that the Pacific Biological Station in Nanaimo was finding ISA?
DR. MILLER: By the 24th, they were aware of my work, yes.
MCDADE: And so when statements were coming out from DFO after November 24th, and in particular, the statement from the Minister on December 2nd, saying they were not aware of any ISA, that would have been a surprise to you, wasn't it?
DR. MILLER: Yes, it was, but nobody was speaking to me at that point.
ROSENBLOOM: Did he say anything in terms of how positive findings might be consequential in terms of our relations with the Americans?
DR. MILLER: I think he just intimated that I, as a scientist, would not understand the complexities of these issues and that, as a scientist, I should not be undertaking research on something if I didn't understand the ramifications of what the results could do.
I'm not a fish expert. I haven't read the whole report, and so I'm not really sure what all this means. But, if you're interested in fish policy, fish farming, or even the openness of the Canadian government, this is well worth your reading. The sense conveyed in Miller's blog is that the government is suppressing data that would jeopardize commercial fish farming.
Thanks to David Ottness' FB post for this. Again, Andrea Morton's post is here.
Thursday, January 05, 2012
Alaska Governor Should Borrow Bradley Manning to Help Release Palin Emails
The ADN reported Wednesday that Governor Sean Parnell's office was given more time to release the rest of the Sarah Palin emails that have been sought in various freedom of information requests.
Perhaps the Governor's office could show some initiative and a little uncharacteristic cooperation with the Feds by working out a deal to let Manning help his office get the Palin emails out.
An extension, until at least Feb. 20, was requested by Randy Ruaro, deputy chief of staff to Gov. Sean Parnell, in October. Ruaro maintained that without an extension, responding to requests for the emails would "substantially impair" the other functions of the governor's office, as well as the ability to properly and thoroughly review the messages.It's taking quite a while. Palin left office in July 2009 and it's already 2012 now. Meanwhile Bradly Manning is sitting in prison for releasing a large number of government documents to Wikileaks. He knows how to do this and I'm sure he's got some spare time.
Perhaps the Governor's office could show some initiative and a little uncharacteristic cooperation with the Feds by working out a deal to let Manning help his office get the Palin emails out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)