Redistricting Board Meeting April 5, 2022 - Program Notes Of What's Happening And Why [UPDATED 4/6/22]

[UPDATED Wednesday April 6, 2022 2pm:  Lots of activity in today's Board meeting but in the end only a couple lasting substantive changes:

• Cantwell cutout fix approved by the board
• Randy Ruedrich introduced an amended version of Option 3 that keeps more of the original Proclamation Plan Senate pairings intact (ostensibly to avoid problems from the Court over changes not required by making the ordered changes to Senate seat K)
• Borromeo proposes and Board approves eliminating Option 1 (Bahnke Plan), presumably for the same reasons- minimize the number of changes not required by changing Senate seat K

Meanwhile you can get more of a blow by blow account from Matt Buxton's Twitter feed.)

There was lots of Sturm and Drang, discussion on next meetings, but the above two changes were the key substantive actions.  I'll adjust my section on the Map Options below]

This isn't the post I started to write, but seemed necessary for folks to make sense of things.  I try to identify the players, the goals, and the options for reaching the goals.  

The Board began its meeting at 10am and ended just around 1pm.  Without a break.  (I learned teaching grad students that 90 minutes is a good time for a break.  Two hours maximum.)  A number of issues came up with different speakers, which is, in part, how things should be.  

The Issues to be Resolved

From the Remand from the Superior Court:

1. To correct the Constitutional errors identified by this Court and the Supreme court in Senate District K:
2. To redraw House District 36 to remove the 'Cantwell Appendage'; and 
3. To make other revisions to the proclamation plan resulting or related to these changes.

Put Cantwell back into Denali Borough  - I'm starting with this one because it's the easy one  The Board was asked by Ahtna to reach into the Denali Borough and pull Cantwell into District 36 so all their shareholders would be in one district and the Board complied.  The Board knew it was making the district less compact, but it only affected about 200 people.  The Supreme Court said they couldn't pull Cantwell out of the Denali Borough and put it into District 36. 

This isn't hard.  They just have to put it back and make sure the new map gets the Mat-Su borough pieces back together and the Denali borough pieces back together.  Member Borromeo (I think) made a map to do this.  Member Marcum did as well and today they reported that both maps have the same numbers and details.  Tanner Amdur-Clark, the Doyon attorney who had pushed for this Cantwell cutout testified today he's disappointed, but ok with this.  So it would seem that as early as tomorrow the Board can approve this change which will give the staff time to do the metes and bounds (a verbal description of the boundaries of all three affected districts.

Fix Senate District K which unconstitutionally pairs South Eagle River with South Muldoon.  

This is where all the fireworks are.  Splitting the Eagle River districts into two Senate seats, as Marcum said, would give Eagle River more representation.  And the problem for the Court was that it would give South Muldoon - an ethnically diverse and much poorer district that Eagle River - less representation.  

So what everyone agrees is that 

• the two House districts (22 and 20) have to be split apart; and
• South Muldoon should be paired with North Muldoon.

The fight is over what happens to the now unattached Eagle River district.  

The Board Factions

There are two factions on the Board since November when members Bahnke and Borromeo loudly protested the majority's decision to pair South Muldoon with Eagle River.  I'm dubbing this Bahnke/Borromeo faction of the Board, The B Team.   Both are officially non-partisan and appointed by the officially non-partisan Speaker of the House Bruce Edgmon and by the then Alaska Supreme Court chief justice (Joel Bolger)

The other faction I call the R Team.  All three were selected by Republicans and are officially Republicans.  Simpson and Marcum were appointed by Governor Dunleavy and Binkley was appointed by then Senate President Giessel.  

The Map Options (so far)   [UPDATED Wednesday April 6, 2022 2pm -  The approval of new Cantwell map and changes in map options are the two key changes from today's meeting.   

For reference the  Redistricting Board now has two map options  

• Anchorage Option 2: (The East Anchorage Plaintiffs maps)
• Anchorage Option 3a: (The Randy Ruedrich Map - amended April 6, 2022)

Don't know if they changed the numbers.  Probably.  

The B Team wants to use the Anchorage map that is being called the Bahnke map (though Bahnke says that Simpson helped her with it).  It was presented to the Board around November 8 and has the two Eagle River districts together and North and South Muldoon together in respective Senate seats. But it also differs from the proclamation plan map in other Anchorage Senate pairings no one challenged and the Court didn't object to.  See Anchorage Option 1 - the Bahnke Map.

The R Team is the team that powered the unconstitutional map into being with a 3-2 vote and an unwillingness to discuss it or come up with any alternative or even justification.  (Part of why the Court deemed it illegal political gerrymandering.)  Now, they still want Eagle River to have two seats.  They want to keep North Eagle River/Chugiak paired with JBER, and they've picked the only other district they could find that is contiguous - South Anchorage including the Hillside and going all the way to Girdwood.  See Anchorage Option 2 - the Ruedrich Map.  

The East Anchorage Plaintiffs - the folks who sued the Board over Senate District K - have offered their own map.  This map is the same as Anchorage Option 1 (Bahnke) in terms of splitting Senate seat K and refitting them - North and South Muldoon together, both Eagle River districts together, and JBER and downtown Anchorage together.  But the rest of Anchorage Senate pairings are the same as the ones Marcum drew up and were not rejected by the Courts.  They argue that since the Court said to fix Senate District K AND "make other revisions to the proclamation plan resulting or related to these changes,"  that changing other districts in Anchorage goes beyond what the Court said to do and opens such a new map up to future court challenges or even rejection by the Court without a challenge.  

I asked member Borromeo about this argument.  She disagreed and explained that since the Marcum Map (It's not one of the map options, but all three the Anchorage option maps show the Marcum map pairings)  started with the unconstitutional pairing and then had a domino effect throughout Anchorage.  She's an attorney and I'm not.  But Holly Wells (the East Anchorage attorney) is also an attorney.  Wells' clients don't want to jeopardize their victory and are playing it cautiously.  There are obviously some political consequences in the maps, but I honestly couldn't tell you what they are in any detail.  The ADN article today by James Brooks says the Option 3  (Ruedrich) map pairs Democratic Senators Begich and Gray-Jackson for example.  

The so-called Bahnke plan (both Bahnke and Marcum asked that maps not be called by their names today and Chair Binkley agreed the maps should have people or organization's names on them.  I'll write more about this below, but I think they should continue to have organization's names (Board's v10, AFFER v 4, etc.) so the public knows where the map comes from.   OK let me start that sentence again.  The so-called Bahnke map is the map she proposed last November before the so-called Marcum map was approved.  It has different Senate pairings in the rest of Anchorage than the Proclamation Plan.  So, adopting the Bahnke map would change Senate districts that are not immediately affected by changing Senate district K.  

This was not what I planned on today.  But as I wrote this I realized that there are a lot of people who probably don't yet understand what I've laid out here.  That is the game.  Gaining a seat or two for Republicans is the likely aim of Team R.  While Team B is not partisan, both are Alaska Native women who are professionally involved in Alaska Native organizations and I would assume they are thinking about legislators who support Alaska Native issues.  Or maybe, as Borromeo's comments to me might suggest, they feel that they were scammed by Team R and they just want the playing field evened out to where it was before the Marcum Map appeared in November and was approved.  But that's pure speculation.

That sort of covers the major players and pieces of this game.  

I wanted to talk about other issues brought up today and yesterday - issues that are part of the strategy for each team to get what they want.  Some of these are minor issues.  Distractions.  Some are more serious.  Some are genuine concerns, some seem like they're disingenuous.  I'll mention a few of them briefly.  I hope to do them more justice in another post.  But new stuff happens daily and I can't promise I'll get there.    

Some of the key topics brought up by the public (some of which echoed by the Board)

Speed of decision - 

• Board should take plenty of time to give public time to understand the maps versus 
• Board needs to move quickly because candidates need to declare their candidacy by June 1 and they need to know their districts.  
• There's also a point here that I haven't heard raised at the meetings - if no new map is approved in time, the unconstitutional map would be used for the November elections.  There may be some other options, but that's what happened last time.  Those slowing down the process would strenuously deny this, but it would give them the Senate they voted for back in November.

Board members treatment of people testifying:

1. Board should just let people speak without arguing with them, intimidating them, asking them questions
2. Board needs to ask people for clarification so they understand the person's reasoning, evidence

Politicizing the process/gerrymandering - accusations from both sides, but mainly from the proponents of the Ruedrich map 

Names of Board Maps - Chair Binkley decided today, after both Bahnke and Marcum asked that their names not be attached to the maps, that all maps would not have names or organizations attached to the maps.  Just numbers.   I think that was not a well thought out solution. (Or maybe it was for the wrong reasons.)

Previously the maps were identified by the organization proposing them and if necessary by version numbers.  Board Map v3, v4, AFFR Map, AFFER Map, Senate Minority Map, Doyon Map.  That made it easy for the public to understand who drew the map and determine if there was some bias they should be aware of.  And the names were easier to remember and to distinguish the maps than numbers are.  Ideally, the public, without names on the maps, would look at the maps without being biased by the map maker.  But unfortunately, the details of maps are much too complicated for most people to do that.

The Board has the maps up now as Anchorage Options 1-3.  That's all.  

Some other issues for me:

• People saying things that aren't so
• The Board being really unable to simply and quickly make routine procedural decisions
• Intentional misinformation 

OK.  I think that is enough for today.  Tomorrow the Board meets at 10am and should approve the Cantwell map.  Then back to Senate District K

Redistricting Board - Suddenly Getting Public Testimony Is Important to Simpson And Marcum

 [UPDATE April 4, 2022 5 pm.  The Board has posted 

https://www.akredistrict.org/2022-proposed-revisions/  - Two proposed Cantwell maps  and the Bahnke map for Senate districts in Anchorage from last November, which Board voted down and approved the Marcum map.  I expect we'll see more maps.  Jamie Allard  and Susan Fischetti testified today that ER should get two seats and all the people who turned out Saturday for the Bahnke map were just political attempts to gerrymander Anchorage.  Randy Ruedrich today proposed "three 2021 Map Senate Districts are acceptable." It includes pairing HD 22 (Eagle River) with HD 9 (Hillside) and HD 23 (JBER/Govt Hill) with HD (ER/Chugiak).  

Public Map Comment submission page - here's where you can comment online.]

[My notes from the meeting are below.  I'll begin with an attempt to give an overview and sense of the meeting.]

This 8am meeting was cordial and frosty.  Some wanted to get this job done quickly and others felt the need to deliberate carefully and get more public testimony.  

Essentially, there are two groups now on the Board:  The B Team - members Bahnke and Borromeo and the R Team - members Binkley, Simpson, and Marcum who were appointed by Republicans and who voted for the Senate pairings that were rejected by the trial judge and the Supreme Court.  

Back in November the R Team rushed the Senate pairing map through the board over the strong objections of Borromeo and Bahnke.  Marcum's map just appeared overnight and no one had a chance to really see it before it was approved, leaving the map Bahnke had presented the day before on the table.  

Today, Simpson began wanting more public testimony, more options for the pairings, more time to hear from people.  I'd note that Saturday there were public hearings and the overwhelming majority asked for the Bahnke pairings and for this to be resolved quickly so candidates and constituents would know what their districts are.  Simpson mentioned that the Judge had asked for a status report (not a final plan) by April 15 so there was plenty of time.  

Borromeo said this was really not that hard and the Court's order could be done today, but she was willing to wait until Wednesday.  

Simpson backed off a bit and said that was fine.  Bahnke asked that there be a brief recess so that Marcum could show the group her map.  But staffer Peter Torkelson's computer didn't seem to be able to handle both Zoom and Autobahn (the mapping software).  

Where both sides were able to agree fairly quickly was Cantwell.  They have a proposal that they moved forward and Marcum also has one and wants to compare the two to be sure about deviation of the new districts.  Binkley made a plea asking if there was a way to keep their plan since everyone - Ahtna, Cantwell residents, all wanted this small move of 200 people into District 36.  But if I recall, it was one of the points Mat-Su sued the Board over.  Their expert was flabbergasted by the Cantwell cutout.  

The Board's attorney and Simpson, I think, and Borromeo all said, NO, we have to change it back.  And they are soliciting feedback - particularly from Doyon who had pushed for the change.  

Then there was lots of wrangling over the wording of the motion to approve the Bahnke map provisionally and post it so people could see it and submit comments and testify.  

There was some debate over whether there should be a hearing tomorrow.  Simpson thought it was unnecessary.  Borromeo pointed out that he started off by saying we needed lots of public testimony and eventually they agreed to have public testimony Tuesday and Wednesday beginning at 10am.  

Later there was public testimony via the teleconferencing and some people at the LIO.  Randy Ruedrich offered an alternative Anchorage Senate map which split Eagle River into two Senate Seats.  A couple of callers - Susan Fischetti and Jamie Allard - called to say that Eagle River should have two senate seats - one with JBER and the other with Hillside.  There were accusations of gerrymandering and politicizing the process by getting out so many people who wanted the Bahnke plan.  

Yarrow Silvers (one of the East Anchorage plaintiffs) and Denny Wells (who helped create the Anchorage Municipal reapportionment maps) both said they hadn't planned to testify, but had to respond to the previous commenters.  

They both pointed out that in the Anchorage Municipal Reapportionment hearings the Hillside and Eagle River people did NOT want to be paired.  They each wanted to be in their own districts.  Wells went on to say that Jamie Allard herself had made a passioned plea to keep Eagle River together and not split it up and put it with Hillside.  

As I understood things, the Board may well approve changing the Cantwell cutout, putting it back into the Denali Borough, and putting back a part of the Mat-Su borough that was affected.  If there isn't a lot of pushback by Wednesday, this could be finalized.  

The Senate District K pairings, which should be simple, may get complicated by people pushing to still split the Eagle River districts into two different Senate Seats.   Denny Wells also pointed out in his brief testimony today that there are no other communities in the state with just two house districts that have two Senate seats.  Not even Juneau.  

There's more to discuss, but I'm going to put my notes below.  They seem a little more complete than previous ones.  But remember, I'm not a court clerk and there are gaps and paraphrases, but it should give you a decent guide to what was discussed.  

My Rough Notes

Alaska Redistricting Board Meeting April 4, 2022, LIO (Zoom, teleconference) 8:00 am

Member Borromeo present at LIO in Anchorage.  Others on Zoom.

8:08am  

Binkley:  Ideas?

Simpson:  Would like more public testimony.  Like to hear more on possible alternatives, pairings.  A couple of days for folks to do that, think about it.  We could hear public testimony on plans before the public.

I know some members would like to move things along.  I personally do not have one I’m promoting.  I feel just having one before us doesn’t fulfill our obligations to look at options.  Need a couple of days to hear comments on other suggestions that have been submitted.  Then need to assimilate that.  Always probs with competing schedules.  For next couple of weeks available except on April 11. 

Judge who now has control has given us to 15 to provide a status report.  I’m hoping that status report is new Senate pairing.  I want to move, but not feel rushed.  Don’t want to cut people out who want to testify.  Want to report on 15th.  Say, we’re done, what do you think of it?

Borromeo:  More definitive in timelines.  Today we deal with Cantwell.  I think we can wrap things up in 15 minutes.  

Cantwell today.  Senate pairings ideas today.  

Public has five months to consider pairings.  Lots of testimony over the weekend.  More on line and in LIO.  Majority want to do the Bahnke pairings.  No more delay.

Simpson:  Wouldn’t object to dealing with Cantwell today.  In my memo I said didn’t think it would be controversial.  Pretty clear directive from the court.  Narrows what we have to do with rest of our time.  Would object to vote on Wednesday without letting people to weigh in. 

There was an alternative in Nov. but people haven’t really had time to comment.  

Sympathetic to moving forward, but want people to have full opportunity for plans not before us right now.  

Bahnke:

Borromeo:  Quick follow up  I’m willing to push this out as far as Thursday.  Don’t see need for longer.  If there are going to be alternative plans.  I’m proposing the Bahnke pairings.  Sorry for you loss, suggest you review the testimony.

Bahnke:  Testimony unanimous almost to adopt Bahnke.  Should be Bahnke Simpson pairings because we worked on that together.  

Simpson:  Lot of discussion, but not what we voted on.

Bahnke:  Reading the room, space.  Overwhelming testimony to not delay.  Court clear.  Only two specific spots:  Cantwell and Senate District K.  Public testimony Saturday.  No delays.  

Not expecting vote today.  We need to move this along.  Public has had since November to see the options.  I’m prepared to get them on the record so public can comment.

Singer:  If you want to start on Cantwell, sounds like Borromeo has a map.  I suggest follow constitution.  If Board has idea for D30 and D36 if we can vote on it as a proposal and put it on the website.  Those steps are important.  Ten years ago Board didn’t have hearing on remand.  I agree this is really a technical edit.  Likely to be uncontroversial.  But we could make an error.  We benefit from public testimony.  

Post to website and invite comments.  After testimony, decide.

Simpson:  I am all for what Matt said.  I Like the idea of putting member Borromeo’s Cantwell solution.  Don’t think controversial but give it a couple of days for feedback.  

Same for member Bahnke’s Senate pairings, I have no objection.  If we move it now would clarify what those pairings are and if they want to oppose or support they know what they’re talking about.

Borromeo:  Here’s my plan.  I would like vote to go out Wednesday.  And notify Doyon group because they have interest.  

Cantwell would be returned to Denali Borough and notice to Doyon.  Decision Wednesday.

I’m willing to vote today, but my second option is Wednesday.

Binkley:  Motion as I understand it is to adopt B4 version regarding Cantwell and D36, more specific.  Motion also says to make a final decision by Wednesday.  

Bahnke:  Let’s wait until Peter puts it up.

Binkley:  Need a second for action.  

Simpson:  I’ll second it

Peter, Can you bring v4 up so we can see what it looks like.  

Peter:  Not on autobahn on this computer.  What you see is Purple is what we adopted.  Red is Borough boundary is the before boundary.  There are three districts impacted.    Denali Borough, Matsu- Borough,   D30, D25, D36 - Using Borough boundary where 30 and 25 meet.  And Borough Boundary where 30 and 36 meet.  

Bahnke:  If we wait til Wednesday, how do we do this?

Binkley:  There’s a legit motion on table.  Motion maker could withdraw, or have a withdrawal, or could move to table the motion.  

Bahnke:  Could we vote on it today, but if we hear opposition, we could change it?

Binkley:  Motion to vote on Wednesday.

Singer:  I urge Board to follow procedure.  Today vote on this as a proposed correction to the original and publish and then comeback and vote on a final plan on Wednesday.  

Marcum:  I also worked on a Cantwell solution.  I’d like to compare in Autobahn - I’d like to do that.  Not prepare.  Not ready to vote on proposed correction unless have chance to do that.

Simpson:  I’m interested in seeing Member Marcum alternative, but that doesn’t block us from adopting member Borromeo’s plan.  If we get another solution from member Marcum.  We can take public testimony between now and then.  Better process.  Process was an issue in the litigation.  Favor of adopting member Borromeo’s version to put on the table.  Put on the table any other ideas and looking again on Wednesday.  Vote Wednesday.  If we get other alternatives that look more elegant or better, we don’t have to vote for it. 

Binkley:  Clarification?  Are you saying not to vote on it til Wednesday.  

Simpson:  I understood we would vote on it Wednesday.  Adopted today but not voted on. 

Binkley:  Slight change, then  bring it before the board for adoption Wednesday. 

Borromeo:  This is getting way more complicated than necessary for Cantwell. 

Amend motion to vote on it today.  Not controversial.  We haven’t had any testimony.  But I do want a time certain to wrap it up.  Also want to second Bethany’s request for ten minutes to show her option

Marcum:  I’ve already done the mapping, but it might be the same as theirs.  Just want to be sure by looking on Autobahn.  

Bahnke:  Move to do that what Marcum said.  Can we have at ease to allow her to prepare.  

Binkley:  I was disappointed with SC ruling that Cantwell shouldn’t be in 36.  To me there was overwhelming testimony to be included in 36.  Compelling testimony in SC.  Respecting ANCSA boundaries.  That’s why we did it.  Denali Borough did not oppose this.  People in Cantwell.  The only people who did were the people of Valdez. Who aren’t really affected.  

I’m hoping that the Court give attention to ANCSA boundaries.  I don’t know if there is a way, SC pretty clear.  Any way where Ahtna shareholders in Denali so they can be together.

Bahnke:  As much as I appreciate your concern, but the court was clear.  We have two paths.  Can’t bifurcate Cantwell.  That would encourage litigation

Simpson:  Thank you, Matt?

Singer:  Everyone in Denali Borough is SEI as matter of law.  Can’t improve Cantwell situation by putting it in 36.  Board needs to honor Borough boundaries.  I would call it an error of enthusiasm.  Board was seeking interest of people who heard them.  But now, not much room for creativity.  Need to get rid of appendage, nor break into Denali or Mat-Su boroughs.  Don’t see any other solution palatable to the court.

Borromeo:  Second what Matt said. 

Binkley

Simpson:  Thank you for articulating what was on our mind when we adopted Cantwell.  No good turn goes unpunished.  Trying to accommodate what people who lived there asked for.  We knew it was a strange appendage.  Agree with Melanie that the SC was clear.  Still interested to see if there is anything from Bethany that is a different approach.  I’d guess not.  Giver her time to present and vote onion a couple of days.

Singer:  Take care with process.  Encourage Board adopt as proposed revised proclamation correction, then have public hearings, invite today, and then adopt it as the final.  Adopt proposed plan, publicize, the vote.  Would counsel you, the court would have a problem if we don’t go in that order.

Borromeo:  Withdraw

Propose corrections correct 36, 30, 29   Return Cantwell to Denali Borough, deviation, all three more compact.  

Simpson:  Concur with withdrawal and new motion, with understanding that it is published at this point for public comment and voted on it Wednesday.

Binkley:  Is that clear? We had a version we worked on.  Be sure you are clear on what we’re proposing.

Peter:  I think I’m clear and comparing with member Marcum that will help us.  

Binkley:  Take at ease til 9am sharp.  Bethany, enough time for you?  

Marcum:  will do it offline almost have it done.

Bahnke:  While at ease, can you do the Sen K map pairings map.

Peter:  Are you referring to graphics we’ve been working on.   Please stay on Zoom call.  We’ll pause the recording and teleconference audio.  Then unpause at 9am.  

8:50am

9:00  Marcum:  Peter’s having trouble with Autobahn.

Peter:  Same computer doing Zoom and Autobahn and Autobahn isn’t working.  

Binkley:  Timing? 

Peter:  I think it will work, if Board has other things to discuss, I should be able to do this.

Simpson:  My suggestion is we adopt this for publication and let Bethany and Peter get together after the meeting.  If they have additions we can deal with that Wednesday.  

Binkley:  

Simpson:  Putting off to Wednesday anyway to get other public comments.  

Binkley:  Wednesday, settled on schedule yet?  Move along quickly.  Was Wednesday specific in your motion?

Borromeo:  Move forward, act on it Wednesday, give Bethany and public to weigh in on other proposed solutions on 36, 30, and 29.  

Simpson:  I thought Matt had hand up if has something else to add.

Matt:  Board members have made my point.  Adopting a proposed solution to take time to look at it and give public time to do the same.  

Binkley:  If we don’t need roll call.  Everyone understand the motion?  Objections?  Hearing none, the motion carries.

Moving forward

Borromeo:  Like to make correction  Bahnke pairings  22/24, 22,21  18/19  23/17  16/14 13/12   15,10  11,9

Bahnke:  Second

Binkley:  Same - 

proposed correction, sit out in public for comment until Wednesday and I would move to vote on Wednesday.  

Peter:  does this map match the numbers she listed, the colors are different.

Bahnke:  Introduced back in Nov.  it’s been out there.  Heard lots of testimony in favor of the Sen pairings.  Didn’t make pairings lightly.  Don’t live in anchorage, but seemed most reflective of what Constitution requires.  Don’t need same pairings as house district, but these do meet them.  It’s been out there since November.  Also ask we vote on this Wednesday with Cantwell cutout, so state has some certainty.  

Binkley:  Comments?  Not certain, can we consider this at next meeting?  

Marcum:  Thank you.  I heard Wednesday mentioned later.  Whether Wed is part of the notion.  I won’t be prepared to vote, but want opportunity for more discussion, heard from community about what and what can’t be done.  Want to see what members of the public come up with.  Last fall, but that was before what judiciary said.  Only yesterday did our attorney interpret what that means.  So think it’s important to give public time.  Take the time to do this right.  

Borromeo:  contrary to what Bethany just spoke to.  We had 30 Alaskans weighed in and 30 more in person or online - everyone said do it and do it fast.  Idea that public hasn’t had a chance to weigh in.  Asking Board to offer their pans.

Bahnke:  I appreciate only yesterday got interpretation.  Not hard to understand,  Out since March 30.  SC ruled a week early so Alaskans can move along and have maps so we know what the districts are for voting.  If you have other maps, bring them forward.

Marcum:  Want to correct Borromeo, every single Alaskan said the same thing.  That was not the case.  I’ll be watching for other options.  I’ve had inquiries about interpretation of SC.  Those folks have asked for information.  

Borromeo:  I agree we take it into consideration.  Every Alaskan who put forward a plan supported Bahnke plan.

Marcum:  Absolutely not true.  I have the testimony in front of me.

Binkley:  I would agree that overwhelmingly testimony consistent supporting Bahnke plan, there was some testimony that had other pairings.  Discussion?  I’d like to comment.  With regard to SC ruling and remand, two things:

 Don’t act too quickly

When you do have a plan….

Only date we have from the court is April 15.  The court wanted a status update on April 15, not a plan.  Agree we can do it in relatively short order.  Have to listen to SC and Superior court to not rush it.  Shouldn’t make same mistake as we did originally.  

If more ideas on how to do this better.  A lot has happened in last two weeks since we got ruling - on political scene - Municipal campaigns where senate pairings directly affected.  Statewide level as well with passing of Rep Young and the special election.  Well served by letting public weigh in.   Maybe narrow down.  I’m not support necessary.  Don’t mind this is the proposal that comes forward and put it out for the public to see it.  

Bahnke:  The pairings Nicole moved are reasonable in terms, not just coming up with new map.  Following court orders.  I appreciate need to get public testimony, but don’t want that to be excuse to drag this out.  SC ruled early.  Don’t see need to drag out further.  Could finish by end of the week.  Give public a day or two.  Testimony overwhelmingly supporting that map.  Need to be careful about delays.  We need to get this done.  Not sure what you are trying to accomplish by dragging this out.  Testimony overwhelming and if we drag it out, we aren’t listening to public testimony.  People said to move quickly.  Shouldn’t use public testimony to delay.  

Borromeo:  Question for the Board.  Put proposed solution on the table.  Heard from Bethany she isn’t prepared to put her proposed corrections on the table.  When is that going to happen.  I’ve done my homework.  I seriously hope you’ll have your proposals tomorrow Tuesday at 10am.   Most testimony so far has been to adopt the Bahnke hiring and do it quickly.

Marcum:  Thank you I have multiple plans but based on guidance from the court, I want to see what the public comes up with, then for us to be the all mighty decider.  We need to give the public their due.  That’s how I’d like to move forward.  No problem picking date for rather than presenting mine like I’m the all powerful.  

Borromeo:  When is she going to give us her plan.  And, regarding the public.  They said Bahnke pairings over and over.

Binkley:  Bahnke pairings is full plan. Hybrid about what she presented.

Simpson:  I have the Word proclamation map before me and going through pairings Ms. Bahnke read to us, it appears they are all different from that.  And a reason why it would take time to assimilate. Resent implicatiowanyone is trying to slow roll this.  Maybe some difference of opinion about meaning of expeditious.  If it takes 3 votes, I’m in favor of due deliberation.  We got int trouble for going to fast last time.  Concept that 30 Alaskans have weighed in on this, so that is all we need,  I don’t want to argue back, but that’s ridiculous.  I’m not voting on anything until we do  

I favor putting the plan that was moved, publishing it, getting it on the record until such time as we decide.  I said Wednesday.  If anyone else in the public. Wants to suggest, if Bethany or any other member.  Need a hard deadline so not strung out.  Favor moving expeditiously, but not precipitously.

Singer:  Two legal issues and maybe confusion about the motion.  Difference in public testimony.  Some members wanted 8 new Senate districts for Anchorage and others 4 of the eight districts Bahnke proposed in November.  Not sure which map - and I’m color blind so Peter’s map no help.

2.  Board consider taking a day on which both board and public will share any proposed plans they have.  Pick a day for sharing alternatives.  Put all cards on the table and website.  Tell pubic this is the day we’re going to act.  

Bahnke:  They are consistent with nov  10/11 10/15  12/13  14/16 18/19 23/17 20/21  22/24.  

Singer:  Eight districts in proclamation plan?

Bahnke:  Haven’t compared

Singer:  Court has suggested we look at K

Binkley:  Does that change all districts?

Bahnke:  Do you want to do side by side

Peter:  I think I can compare the existing

Bahnke:  Not existing, present one is dead

Binkley:  I propose we wrap this up so ??? Can catch plane.

Simpson:  I don’t think we need to do side by side.  My quick glance and they aren’t the same.

Take a couple of days.  My preference is to do surgical fix 21/22 K problem and that implicates surround districts.  Find a more concise, limited solution that complies with constitution. 

Put on table for public process with understanding not final, just going out for public review and 2.  Deadline for alternative parties to put in alternative versions and I’ll suggest Wednesday.  

Borromeo:  Move we consider for proposed correction for Sec. 10 the Bahnke pairing (listing them again)  16/14  13/12  15/10  

Binkley:  I can support that motion.  Objection?  Hearing none - adopted.

Discuss time and date of next meeting.  And then testimony.

Simpson:  I suggested Wednesday as a deadline for public plans.  If meet tomorrow, can do public testimony.  But people can put in written opinions without us having to meet.  Don’t care whether tomorrow, but that we do meeting again Wednesday.  

Third parties and Board pairings.  Any that come in at the deadline, we need time to assimilate and consider.

Bahnke:  I support Budd’s suggestion of Wednesday for alternative maps.  One concern Friday afternoon I can’t meet at all.  Wonder if we can leave Tuesday for people to call in if they don’t have internet.

Singer:  In section 9 you need 3 votes to take action, but could have fewer members if not voting.

Borromeo:  was going to say that.

Borromeo:  Board on track for maximum public testimony so we should back track on public testimony.  I’ll be here tomorrow.  

Binkley:  appreciate that, Marcum said we should maximize public opinion.

Simpson:  I can attend by Zoom, what time?  10am.  I’m on board with listening.  If a bunch of people show up, I’m comfortable with that.  

Binkley:  Objection?  

Bahnke:  We’ve notice for M-T-W-Th  Shouldn’t we meet Thursday?

Binkley:  Let’s wait and see what we have Wednesday.

Bahnke

Binkley:  We could schedule a meeting for every day until April 15

Marcum:  

Binkley:  We have people who want.  We have a hard deadline of 10 o’clock.  Need to wrap up and have public comment.  

Anyone?  One in house in Anchorage.  Could you come forward.  

Randy Ruedrich:  

Binkley:  Can you keep it to under two minutes?  

Ruedrich:  I will be offering an alternative, preserving 3       H=15/16  L=26/24     E -9/22  uplands of snow and avalanches.  2001 map, it was put into final proclamation as 18   if I have time I’ll talk about other things.  

Binkley:  If you can come back tomorrow at ten.  If to move one have to move several   Highlands district for Anchorage east side.

Susan Fischetti - testified Saturday and back today.  Agree with Mr Simpson to do this right since judge’s decision is only three weeks ago.  I only heard from Hodge.  Partisan gerrymandering - one-sided testimony Saturday shows it was orchestrated.   Sen Randy Phillips should be approved.  Judge has taken it off the table.  Con Bundy - it’s been done before.  

Also, can’t get to Chugiak and ER without driving through JBER only makes sense for them to be paired.  Do it for all Anchorage and not special inerests.

Jamie Allard:  Resident of Eagle River.  Bahnke plan should not be adopted, unfair, not nonpartisan, what constituents want, not what political parties want.  To get fair and just plan , but rushing the process you are denying the rights of public.  ER voices need to be heard.  No need to rush this with current elections  - tomorrow people are voting.  This Saturday 140 individuals not able to testify with emergency - in Hiland.  I beg of you, please turn this down.  Clear gerrymandering.  

David Dunsmore:  AFFR-  Good morning.  Not planning on testifying today, but conversation, just had a couple of thing to put on the record.  Reviewing the court decision.  Talked about public process but also, “court’s words that Bahnke pairing had clear public support.  Board needs to take that into consideration.  Court has acknowledged that.  

Also on the record, Ms. Allard, AFFR we participated in process.  Issue that ER/Chugiak didn’t have population to meet a full Assembly district.  But substantial pushback   And member Allard was very passionate to keep ER whole and intact.  There is a proposal the Board did that which does that.  Those are Bahnke’s pairings

Yarrow Silvers:  Hadn’t planned to speak but need to respond and will return tomorrow.  It is not gerrymandering to keep communities together.  When you split communities apart, for political reasons, that is gerrymandering.  

I’d have you look at what happened when Muni tried to pair Anchorage with ER there was overwhelming testimony to keep communities together.  Should keep them together and not split them for political purposes.  

Danny Wells:  Didn’t  plan.  Worked on Muni redistricting.  I’d reiterate what you heard from Yarrow.  We had substantial testimony against pairing ER and the Hillside.  Keeping ER and Chugiak together.  Comment on Saturday, retired today , that ER should have two Senators.  There is no other place in the state where a community with two house seats has two Senate seats.

Binkley:  Concludes our public testimony.  

Peter:  From time to time we have people raise their hands and the number is ??????.  

Adjourn.  We’re adjourned   10:08   Tomorrow morning at 10am

Redistricting Board Meets - One Board Member There In Person

 It was sort of odd.  Board member Nicole Borromeo was the only Board member physically present in the Legislative Information Office.  There was a giant Zoom screen behind her and people could also call in to listen and give testimony.  The only other Board member we saw was Melanie Bahnke on the Zoom screen.  We did hear from Bethany Marcum at the end who said she left her video and audio off because of Zoom bombing.  I learned at the end that someone had attacked but apparently they were able to control it.  [UPDATE Sunday April 3, 2022:  I realized this morning that the video of Mark Zuckerberg barbecuing or something like that, must have been the bombing.  I've fortunately been spared that so didn't recognize it for what it was.  I was just confused.]

Things started off with public testimony.  

About six people from Fairbanks called in to say that Goldstream had been plucked out of Fairbanks the same way Cantwell had been plucked out of the Denali Borough (unconstitutionally according to the Supreme Court) and so they should be returned to their West Fairbanks district.  

Twenty people, by my count, testified about Anchorage.  The basic message was that the Melanie Bahnke map was already known and commented on and should be adopted quickly.  There were a few comments about the pairing of other districts in the Anchorage area not directly connected to the Eagle River pairing.  Many also asked the Board to do this quickly, reminding the Board that there wasn't much time before candidates needed to know the districts they would be running in.  And there was one commenter - Susan Fischetti - who argued that Eagle River should have two Senate districts as it has had in the past.  

I'd also note that I missed Judge Thomas Matthews Order of March 30, 2022 which remanded the matter back to the Alaska Redistricting Board 

1. "To correct the Constitutional errors identified by this Court and the Supreme court in Senate District K;  
2. To redraw House District 37 to remove the 'Cantwell Appendage', and 
3. To make other revisions to the proclamation plan resulting or related to these changes"

It requires the Board 

"to make necessary corrections.  The Board shall submit a status update to the Court by April 15, 2022."

A key question that I haven't gotten a good answer for yet, is what is the deadline by which a new map must be approved that will replace the unconstitutional map promulgated in November.  That's a key question because in the last cycle, the map that was thrown out by the courts nevertheless was used in the 2012 election because a corrected map hadn't been promulgated in time.  The second map then was used in the 2014 election.  

My question is how does that situation get avoided this time?  How do we get one constitutional map that will actually be used for the next ten years? 

People have said that May 1 is the deadline that the Division of Elections has so they have time to get information out to potential candidates.  

So the question is whether the Board will expeditiously (a word a number of people testifying used) comply with the order.  Eagle River shouldn't be hard to do.  A couple of hours at the most.  The easy part is pairing the two Eagle River districts.  A bit harder is pairing the JBER/Government Hill district with another north Anchorage district and pairing the South Muldoon district with another Muldoon district.  

The East Anchorage plaintiffs have submitted testimony titled "Narrow Scope of Remand Authority to Correct Senate District K Pairings." It argues that the Board has only been instructed to fix Cantwell and Senate seat K.  The only other changes it can make to the maps are those necessary to fix those two problems.  That letter to the Board offers the following pairings for Anchorage:

From Board Member Bahnke's map:

Senate District I

• House District 17: Downtown Anchorage
• House District 23: Government Hill/JBER/Northeast Anchorage 

Senate District J

• House District 18:  Mountain View/Airport Heights
• House District 19:  U-Med

Senate District K

• House District 20:  North Muldoon
• House District 21:  South Muldoon

Senate District L

• House District 22:  Eagle River Valley
• House District 24:  North Eagle River/Chugiag

The rest of the Anchorage Senate pairings would duplicate the pairings in the Marcum map approved for the Proclamation.  Senate E (HD 9&10); Senate F (HD 11&12); Senate G (HD 13&14); Senate H (15&16).  

Again, they are arguing that is the only way to actually comply with the order.  Any other changes open the Board to new law suits that would definitely drag the process beyond the deadline for candidates to file.  

Also, Cantwell has to be put back in the Denali Borough, but that's only about 200 people and there doesn't need to be much other change.  

That would preclude any changes to Goldstream.  They really had to file their own law suit in the 30 day period after the original proclamation.  It's sad, but true.  

The next Board meeting is Monday, April 4 at 8am.  Followed by meetings scheduled for Tuesday and Wednesday at 10 am.  

From right to left:  Joelle Hall, David Dunsmore, Kay Brown, Rich Curtner, and I'm not 100% sure about the last one.  They all testified in favor of the Eagle River districts being paired and that the Board do it quickly.  (I just noticed there is a person with a flowered mask in there, but I'm not sure who that is.)

The Board has already posted public comments sent into the Board for today's meeting.  Here's part one - 19 letters,  mostly asking the Board to quickly adopt the Bahnke pairings.  There were a couple that talked about other districts not directly adjacent to those districts.

The second batch of testimony contains 22 documents, the vast majority of which ask for the Bahnke pairings to be used.  There are several that address the Goldstream issue.  And three that would like to continue to split the Eagle River seats, but connect them to different districts than the unconstitutional plan.  The very first one in this batch is from the East Anchorage plaintiffs' attorneys that I referenced above.  

If you want to add to the comments, go here.

One last comment.  Peter Torkelson is that last remaining staff member of the Board.  The others have found other jobs.  So there's a much larger load on Peter's shoulders now.  But he has gotten all that testimony posted on the redistricting board's website.  

Campbell Creek Yesterday And Last Year - Big Difference

 Weather, from one year to another, in one particular location, doesn't tell us anything about climate change.  For that you need data over many years and many locations.  

But, for whatever reasons - more snow, lower spring temperatures, etc. - Campbell Creek - from the bridge at Lake Otis - was almost completely iced over on April 15, 2021.  

But yesterday (March 30, 2022), I took the bike out for the first time to check out conditions and here's what Campbell Creek looked like.

Whatever the reasons, we are way ahead of last year.  

Cell phones let us quickly retrieve old photos to be able to do a comparative post like this.  

Redistricting Board Meets Saturday 2pm To Respond to SC Ruling

 It was scheduled for the morning, but they just changed it.  From the email:

Good evening subscribers,

To allow those following redistricting to also attend the memorial service for Representative Don Young, the Board meeting previously scheduled for 10am on Saturday, April 2 has been moved back to a 2:00pm start. 

The public notice has been updated with the new start time.  The updated notice also includes PDF files of draft minutes of the Board's Feb 16 meeting and the Alaska Supreme Court Order of March 25.

See: http://notice.alaska.gov/206009

Have a great evening!

Peter Torkelson
Executive Director
Alaska Redistricting Board

And from the public notice on State website:

The public is invited to join the Zoom conference or attend in-person at the Anchorage Legislative Information office.  Public testimony will be taken in-person or via teleconference using the phone numbers below.

The public may listen or testify via the Legislative Teleconference System by dialing: 

 - Anchorage 563-9085

 - Juneau 586-9085

 - Other 844-586-9085

To be clear.  If you Zoom, you just watch/listen.

If you want to testify

-go in person, or

-use one of the phone numbers

We Go To Alaska For The Afternoon

 We drove south to McHugh Creek where the spring tends to come a little sooner than in Anchorage.  It's good to just get out where there are just trees and mountains and water.  

The trail was sometimes snow, often ice (soft ice because it was well above freezing), dirt, wooden boardwalk, mud, and frozen mud. 

We heard ravens and this was our only sign of moose or bear.

We stopped at Potter Marsh on the way back.  Snow is gone, Water is still mostly ice.  Saw a few gulls.

Good day.  

Apocalyptic Beliefs Go Back A Long Ways

"Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has prompted some of America’s most prominent evangelical leaders to raise a provocative question — asking if the world is now in the biblically prophesied “end of days” that might culminate with the apocalypse and the second coming of Christ."  (The Times of Israel)

Christianity.com tells us:

"Ever since Jesus predicted the end, even before Revelation was written, Christians have worried and/or believed that the apocalypse was upon them. Several events were widely thought to herald the end of the world and were offered supposed biblical backing, but ultimately did not result in the apocalypse."

They they go on to list various times that many people expected the Apocalypse to happen.  But it didn't.  But they aren't debunking that it will happen.  Only that we can't predict it.

"We can’t control when the end comes. We can’t even predict it. However, there is one thing we can do: Be faithful followers of Christ regardless of the situation. And that is what we have been called to do."

These ideas were in my mind when I read   "Reindeer at the End of the World"  by Bathsheba Demuth.  How did I find that article?

My book club book this month is The Best American Travel Writing 2021.    The title didn't excite me. How could they already have a book out (back in January)?  2021 was only just over.  How did they evaluate stuff published in December?  (I think, now, it is the date the book is published, not when the original articles were published.)

Besides, I wanted a book that would take me to another world, to new ideas, with words that would excite me and make me smile.  A great novel of inspired biography maybe.  Not some travel industry hype.

Well, an advantage of a book club is that you read things you never would have picked on your own.  

Despite the fact that B picked this book as a substitute for the cancelled cruises he missed over the last couple of pandemic years, the book is much better than I expected.  I am way behind - but I've only got about 150 pages to read by Monday night, so I could make it.  

So far, my favorite chapter was "Good Bread" about a guy who takes his family to Lyon, France so he can learn to cook at a great restaurant there.  He ends up working in a bakery that only uses fresh local flour from small family farms.  As the bread baker in our household, I found lots to appreciate in the chapter.  

But this is about the Apocalypse and also Russia.   

 In "Reindeer at the End of the World"  Bathsheba Demuth writes about a trip that takes place on the Chukchi Peninsula in the Russian far east.  

While looking for reindeer, the author stumbles across Karl Yanovich Luks in the archives in Vladivostok.   He came to the far east in the 1920s to revolutionize the lives of the local folks and modernize the fox hunting and reindeer herding enterprises.  (It didn't turn out well.)

Karl was born in 1888 and grew up very poor and became a deckhand as a teen.  It was the last decades of the Czar Nicholas II, who 

"heir to four centuries of autocratic rule, sheltered in his palaces, spent lavishly , and hired more police.  The people Karl met outside these aristocratic walls found their present so unjust, so sickly, so impossible, their question was not would it end, but how.  Karl heard the Baptists preaching hellfire, Orthodox priests involving the salvation of saints, and a dozen other sects calling down the final judgment.  

As the historian Yuri Slezkine explains, these visions all shared a plot:  first the apocalypse, then a reign of harmony and perfection.  An old story, passed from the Middle East to Europe, from Jewish cosmologies into Christin traditions, going back almost 3,000 years to the prophecies of Zoroaster, who foretold a cataclysmic battle between light and dark.  The triumph of light would give the righteous a new life, one without suffering or toil, one where time is meted out in cycles of birth and death ended in a linear, immortal world."

As she tells the story of her visits with the indigenous reindeer herders, she keeps coming back to this theme.  

"Karl did not become a Baptist or worship saints.  He joined a socialist reading circle.  In Slezkine's masterful reading of the Russian socialist condition, the plot Karl learned also came from Zoroaster's lineage.  Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels foretold how the darkness of capitalist exploitation would become the light of communist utopia.  Between these poles was a kind of earthly revelation:  what socialists called revolution.  A word, Slezkine reminds us, promising 'the end of the old world and the beginning of a new, just one."

 "Another appeal of the apocalypse:  proclaiming it is not an act of supplication, but of certainty."

"The core of apocalyptic thinking is nihilism:  this world is too despoiled to continue.  The seduction of such stories is how certain they make the tellers feel.  An apocalyptic narrative is like looking at a horizon with no clouds or hills:  the way forward is terribly assured.  To walk it, there is no need to mind the lives of others, rendered invisible by the power of imagining they are already gone.  

"Apocalyptic prophecy is also an escape from contemplating- catstrophe."

The apocalypse was not a part of my upbringing.  It scares me that so many people accept it so easily.  My upbringing says we should do everything we can to make the world a better place.  Accepting the apocalypse as inevitable says, the world is a terrible place and there is nothing you can do about it, but not to worry, God will fix it for you if you follow his commandments.   

Even though the end of times has been predicted so many times in the past and yet failed to appear.  This may not be the most enlightening discussion of it, but getting bits and pieces from here and there helps me think about such things.  Gives me questions to raise when I meet people who truly believe.  

Great Anchorage Student Art At Museum

 This was the 50th year of the Anchorage Student Art Exhibit in the Anchorage Museum.  These exhibits are always a delight.  So much talent and originality.  I snapped pictures here and there that called out to me - but there was so much more than this.  Enjoy.  Go see these and more in person at the museum.   These are in no particular order.  They are higher resolution than normal so you should be able to click on them to enlarge.  

Anna McIllece "Peggy"  Grade 12

Anna Skaggs "Jeffery Heath" Grade 8

Brooke Harkleroad Grade 10  (Photo)

Collin Keith "Camouflaged" Grade 6

Jennie Becker  "Dog Collage"  Grade 8

Madison Griffin "Dragon" Grade 12

Majo Hernandez Zamora "Grasshopper"  Grade 4

Samantha Farren  (Acrylic) Grade 10

Sophia Fenoseff  "My Most Important People"
Grade 10

Claire O'Leary "Skyscraper with a Can" Grade 11

Gabriella Garcia "Sad Bubbles"  Grade 11

Gracelynn McCotter "Soul Seeker"  Grade 6

Kiana Reed "Girl at Midnight" Grade 6

Lauren Gaskill  "Wallflowers" (ceramic) Grade 11

Melody Lankford "Self Portrait"  (oil) Grade 10

Mercedi Lee "Nature's Rain" Grade 10

Michelle Harris "The Honey Gears" Grade 12

Naly Yang "Shiny" (oil pastel) Grade 12

Noelle Larsen "Covid" Grade 6

Sawyer Brock  "Dragon" (Collage) Grade 4

Sophia James "Wonderland Bus"  Grade 7

Thanks to all the students who shared their imaginations with everyone and to the Museum for giving them a place to do it.  If anyone does NOT want their picture up, email me (address upper right column).