[Again, very rough, but current. On break now. I'll try to figure out my photo problem and clean some of this up.]
Public Testimony
Dave Cobb - Mayor of Valdez - reading his statement - Valdez will be effected. Should interact with other groups in region, drainage, socio-economic. Richardson Hwy north and east Alaska have commonalities, high cost of energy - missing a lot of this - HD 6 boundaries in Board G 0 God Plan - have the benefits: Richardson highway in one district. Copper Valley Electric etc. in one district. Voting districts not interrupted. 1.18%, 2 of three PWS CCollege in one district. Pipeline in one district. No community interrupted. Hospital districts are covered. This plan for 6 as in Plans G and A ease redistricting burdens around the state. Should not include Anchorage and others not directly related with pipeline, Matsu, Kenai, SE Alaska. City met Wednesday with legal counsel and chose Board Plan G as the best for Valdez, Alternative Plan A.
Ernest Weiss - Aleutians East Borough
AEB six Akutan, False Pass, .... all fishing. Sandwiched Lake and Pen B and west ???. Haven't fully reviewed but have discussed with Mayor.
Since I've been involved early 2011 - our stance keep B together not divided and the Chain. None of the plans divide us. Congratulations. In general as it splits HD 37, that's not compact nor contiguous, don't support the Gazewood plan. Will listen.
AFFER and Calista remarkably low deviations congrats, but don't want to stretch too far into the middle of the state. prefer mostly ???
A and G ok. Senate, pair us with Bethel or Kodiak, but if stretch to Yakutat would stretch to Attu worth noting. Pairing with Valdez wouldn't make sense.
12:21
Matt Ganley - Resources ?? for Bering Straits Native Corp.
In past argued need for SE Integration. With Calista map offered today, lowest deviation and most SE integration for the district. They've achieved that goal remarkably. For Bering Straits prefer fewer from Delta, but we understand need for compromise. Did work in early 90's for Ahtna at that time - pleased to see retained in this version. Retaining ANCSA boundaries important. Calista map as presented today, comes as close. . . AFFER map too stretches. Horsehoe interior district hard to make SE Integration argument. Retaining coastal orientation in Arctic Districts important, majore development coming in decade. Keep as close to coastline as possible
Liz Medicine-Crow?
Natalie Landreth - Native American Rights Fund, Outside Counsel for Bristol BAy - they've sent letter noting strong preference for Calista map for option 2 and option 3 is also ok. Shishmereff should be maintained with it.
Low deviation helps with representation. Donut/Ahtna - good district SE integration good. More likely to have represenation that knows their interests. Interior different from Coastal. Large, unwieldy hard. Separating fish seats 32 and lower Cook Inlet and 37, 38 and align along coastal areas, clients won't return my calls cause fishing in Bristol Bay will get good rep in house and senate. 32 - Kodiak Chugach reason - on behalf of Eyak - our expert witness, Matt Ganley is here - close relationship between Eyak (Cordova) and ?? as one family. Closely united enough. . . Southern - can't keep up here. Integration lots of evidence available on that alliance and with Kodiak. Relatives even tho languages the same, Kodiak slighty different, same creation stories.
One final comment - impact of Shelby County - removing section five changing Native control seat, in our view VRA still matters in SEction 2 - doesn't care about intent. I've seen some media saying only intent. But section 2 also bans changes that has results, doesn't care about intent. VRA still matters, but matters differently. Removes administrative burden of pre-clearance, but does protect Natives - as when you paired Western FB with Bristol Bay.
White: I agree with analysis of section 2 - Calista?
Landreth: yes -
White: No issues with Calista map?
Landreth: No I do not as long as it doesn't change.
Torg: All I have signed up. Susan Olsen?
Olsen: Live in Anchorage, concerned citizen, interested in political processes in state. Not an insider, but can read ARticle 6 of constitution.
1. Time table - board met the constitution in 90 days in 2011, but now in the middle of 2013 and don't have plan. Superior Court said need to follow constitution. Ten months later told to draft new plan. Last month on 30 Court said to get cracking and Board said previous testimony would suffice didn't make sense.
I see seven plans plus at least four others. I downloaded the first three plans of the board and realized that was fruitless. There is no analsysis, no descriptions of the difrerences or reasons for them. I could download and see differences, but without explanation of the differences I can't comment. Not a technical expert, can only see what constitutions says.
Enforcement of ARt. 6: if first plan not valid sent back to board. It may be sent back to board if still found not valid. This says the first time it does go back. The second time it may go back. I think it should go to a master board. Board has been dilatory. 2.5 years later. Board shouldn't need judge to admonish them to get going. No meaningful public process for the citizen. If technical, one thing but Constitution says public process. This is technical process. Can't have Democracy without elections and can't have elections if we don't know where the lines are. Board can't do job, suggest master apppointed.
Cooper Landing David Nees??:
Point out in last redistricting 2010 first time Cooper Landing with Anchroage 120 year old city not ever incorporated with Anchroage. Only one plan returns CL to Kenai Pen where we belong. 100 members should be in rural Alaska. Have nothing to to with Anchroage, like to keep it that way.
Torg: Senate pairing that does that, district is all in Kenai.
We'll come back here. Sen. Meyers please.
Kevin Meyers: Appreciate your taking time out of summer, taking much longer than expected. Senator for District L, 24 and 26 in SE Anchroage, SErvice High, Lower Hillside. I've represented in Assembly, state house, and senate. Very diverse, some very low income and very wealthy. R 5 zoning - mobile homes duplex apartments and south to where people have airports in the homes. Diverse. Ive reviewed all plans. Many. Most keep my district intact. A couple not so good. Want to talk about
Dowling road to Huffman, New Seward to Hillside. Good clear boundaries. Easy to undeerstand. Major roads as boundaries and that's what you did with A,F, G. Also AFFER and Calista plans. But in the past represented an area - road divides the district and that's very confusing to neighbors as they walk across the street. A few plans split neighborhoos D and E and Gazewood plan. I know you have to consider many things - please look at community councils. Makes it easier for them, know how to keep people accountable. You've been torn between federal and state requirement, now federal has been resolved. You had it right two years ago
Tom Klinkner - Birch, Horton, Bittner and ... Petersburg Borough, You'll hear from others at Juneau meeting next week. You've heard from mayor a year ago. Petersburg favors plan A of the ones under consideration - Petersburg, Sitka, and Wrangell - ones we have common interest. Plan F not good - borough split in different house districts. Most other plans don't include Wrangle - PofWales. Not included with Juneau, and glad of that.
Torg: No questions, I know we'll get more in Juneau.
Brian Hove; Live in Disrict 19 Anchroage. First of all - comment made earlier. Obviously this process is very difficult. I think the board correct to wait until SC decision made. Speaking in favor of AFFER revised plan, particularly regarding west Anchorage District 19. SC allows for deviations to come down radically. AFFER wide plan about 1.4%. If take into consideration things required in constitution - equal proportion and common interests - 1.44% deviation is just about right.
Scott Hawkins: Also like to echo comments of Sen Meyer and Mr. Hove, Board has done a very credible job. Hard to comply with two different standards. You had it right two years ago. I want to speak for AFFER plan, at least for Anchorage. 30 year participant. Very good job of compact sensible districts in Anchorage. Negligible impact on Anchroage with changes from last time. 7 of 14 districts no changes and the other 7 have minimal changes. No confusion for voters.
12:53 Frances Bennett: 15 year resident of Anchorage and live in District 19. I too testify in support of AFFER plan. Anchorage has had some tumultous elections in recent past. Keeping things as they are now makes sense. Not to be a parrot, I think you got things right two years ago.
Torg: Anyone we missed. No one signed up on teleconference. We will stand in recess. We'll be here til 4pm. Until we have folks to testify.
So, if you have something to say, come on down here or call in.
