Thread by @jeremyduda

Today's meeting of the @ArizonaIRC is about to begin. There's a Webex link on the agenda if you want to tune in. irc.az.gov/sites/default/…

Lots of heavy lifting will get done on the draft maps this week. The IRC had an all-day meeting on Friday to propose changes to the congressional and legislative maps, and they're meeting today, Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday this week to do the same.

They're expecting today's meeting to last until about 4pm

If you want to catch up on what the IRC did on Friday, here's my roundup azmirror.com/2021/10/18/red…

Neuberg says some have questioned why the IRC didn't start with the majority-minority districts, as past commissions have. Following the Voting Rights Act is a top requirement, she says, but the IRC doesn't want to give impression that it's doing racial gerrymandering.

Neuberg says she expects Voting Rights Act districts to be a major point of discussion today. “The VRA will not be shortchanged in any way whatsoever."

To that point, mapping consultant Mark Flahan says the Arizona Latino Coalition for Fair Redistricting has submitted its proposed legislative map, which they're working to upload to the IRC's online mapping hub.

The consultants have already incorporated the Latino Coalition's proposal for CD3, a Phoenix-based VRA district that would replace @RepRubenGallego's CD7, into the IRC's draft map.

The IRC is beginning today's main event -- discussion and revision of the congressional and legislative maps. Neuberg suggests they start the day with the CD map.

They're using the CD test map version 3.0, if you're following along at home

If you're wondering how these various iterations of the draft maps relate to each other, the mapping consultants put together a hand flow chart

CD map 3.1, per Mehl's proposal, puts Mohave County in northern CD2 (successor to CD1). The eastern 2/3 or so of Pinal County, which was taken out to make room for Mohave, is unassigned on this map.

CD2 in this map takes in Payson and other parts of Gila County. The district is short about 62k people. Each CD needs a population of about 794k. By federal law and court precedent, CDs must have almost exactly equal populations, unlike legislative districts.

Mapping consultant Doug Johnson points to odd peninsula from southeastern AZ-based CD6 that juts into Gila County on CD map 3.2. That's the non-tribal portion of the county. The tribal portion would go into CD2 in northern AZ.

Version 3.3 incorporates Lerner's proposal to put Graham-Greenlee into CD2 instead of Mohave. It also takes much of northern Pinal and the tribal areas to the east and south of the Phoenix area.

To balance population, CD6, which includes southeastern AZ and much of Tucson, now goes further into southern Pinal along the I-10 corridor, including parts of Casa Grande and Coolidge, the remainder of which would be in CD2.

Now they're onto version 3.4. The main goal of that version was to pull Goodyear, Buckeye and Avondale from southern AZ-based CD7 and into CD9, which has much of the rest of the West Valley and western AZ.

CD7 would go into Pinal around Casa Grande, CD2 would take Florence and part of San Tan, CD5 would go west to take east Mesa and most of Gilbert, while CD4 would take north Tempe, south Scottsdale and Salt River reservation.

Under this map, CD7 would be 45% Latino, with Garcia getting 55% of the vote in 2018 and Contreras getting 61%, which would make it an ability-to-elect district for minority voters. “It still tracks and meets our Voting Rights Act benchmarks," Johnson says.

Lerner still doesn't want Mohave in CD2, prefers putting in Graham-Greenlee. She said she worries that putting in Mohave instead would negatively affect Native American, Hispanic voters, and says those areas have similar interests as Apache, Navajo counties.

That would be version 3.3

Mehl prefers 3.2 or 3.5 that put Mohave into CD2. He notes that they have almost identical Native American population to 3.3 without going so far into southern AZ. And it has a positive effect on the rest of the map, he says.

Neuberg is concerned about the partisan makeup of CD2. If it tilts too far toward the GOP, she says it will eliminate Native American voters' ability to have a voice.

Watchman, a member of the Navajo Nation, prefers 3.3, which leaves Mohave out of CD2 and takes in Graham-Greenlee

Mehl says his plan has better geographic balance, because leaving Mohave out of CD2 leaves open the possibility of two rural, northern representatives

Lerner says Mohave has much different concerns with water, forestry than other parts of northern AZ to the east. “No matter what we’re going to have a big district... There’s no avoiding it as a primarily rural district. So to me I’m focusing on is what do they have in common?”

Mehl says parts of Pinal like Casa Grande have no commonality with northern AZ and residents have largely been unhappy being tied to it on the current map.
“A little less than last time, but we’re repeating the problem if you don’t include Mohave in District 2.”

Lerner says Copper Corridor mining areas are a better fit with northern AZ

York says he prefers 3.4 and 3.5 to 3.3, which take in northern, tribal part of Graham, along with much of Pinal, because ripple effect keeps most of the West Valley out of southern AZ-based CD7.

The IRC is back from its break. The debate over CD2 will now resume.

Mehl says Mohave will have to be connected to West Valley if they don't put it in CD2, which means the "river district" won't be much of a district. He motions to adopt his version 3.2 CD map proposal, York seconds.

Neuberg opens it up for discussion, asks Mehl what the benefits are to other districts if they put Mohave into CD2, says he needs to convince Lerner, Watchman

Watchman lobbies to keep those areas in separate districts, says the biggest economic interests for Mohave, Colorado River areas is tourism and agriculture. For other parts of northern AZ, it's forestry, ranching, mining.

Mehl says Mohave still has more in common with other parts of northern AZ than Casa Grande, neighboring areas of Pinal

Watchman says some part of rural AZ has to go with Phoenix area. Will it be eastern part or western part?

Lerner echoes that, and reminds that there's a partisan angle. She says including Mohave would make CD2 nearly 58% Republican performing, which would disenfranchise predominantly Dem Native American voters.

The IRC votes 3-2 against adopting Mehl's CD map version 3.2, which would put Mohave into CD2. Neuberg votes with Lerner, Watchman against Mehl, York. She says she likes the concept but is concerned about the wide partisan spread.

Mehl says version 3.5 is the compromise version, Lerner agrees. Lerner went through the motions of voting on her preference, 3.3. Neuberg votes no on that with Mehl, York. Then Mehl motions to adopt 3.5, Lerner seconds.

The big difference between 3.3 and 3.5 is that 3.5 leaves most of Graham-Greenlee in southern AZ-based CD2

The GOP advantage in CD2 under version 3.5 is 8.1%, which Johnson says isn't within the 7% range the IRC is using to determine competitiveness, but it's more competitive than other versions.

This is CD2 under version 3.5, the compromise map

Here's version 3.2, which Republicans Mehl and York favor

And here's version 3.3, which Democrats Lerner and Watchman prefer

Under 3.5, the proposed CD2 still went for Republican candidates in all 9 of the races they're using as benchmarks

The commissioners are now hashing out the boundary between CD4 (the CD9 successor) and CD1, which includes north Phoenix, central Phoenix and most of Scottsdale.

Lots of debate over whether to put Avondale, Tolleson into CD7, the southern AZ VRA district. York has lobbied to keep the West Valley out of CD7, but Lerner wants the heavily Latino cities to be in the district.

The IRC is going into executive session to get advice from legal counsel on VRA compliance in CD7. "It's uncertain how long we will be," Neuberg says.

We're back from executive session

Neuberg says it's time focus on the Voting Rights Act criteria for the districts. She wants to know the Hispanic voting age population numbers for the two VRA districts on the congressional map.

On the version 3.5 CD map they're working with, CD3 (Gallego) is just over 50% HVAP and CD7 (Grijalva) is about 44%, mapping consultant Doug Johnson says

The Arizona Latino Coalition for Fair Redistricting has submitted proposals for both districts, so they'll take a look at those as well

Johnson says the 3.0 map gets them from 44% HVAP to 46%

Mehl, York looking to add Latino areas of Tucson into CD7 from CD6. York suggests pulling non-Latino parts of Yuma, Santa Cruz County, Sahuarita, Green Valley to boost CD7 Latino numbers.

Neuberg says the sentiment on the IRC seems to be finding a way to boost HVAP to at least 50% in CD7 without going into the Phoenix area. Lerner disagrees, says they need to go into the West Valley to pick up Avondale and Tolleson.

Lerner emphasizes that the Latino Coalition wants that part of the West Valley to go into CD7

The IRC's consultants will draw up both options for them to look at

Neuberg wants to be careful to keep high-growth West Valley cities like Buckeye and Goodyear out of CD7. Lerner agrees.

The IRC has gone into executive session to discuss some legal matters, then they're breaking for lunch. They'll be back at 2pm, when the conversation will shift to the legislative map.

The debate over how to make CD7 a majority-minority district has major partisan implications for CD6, the other Tucson-based district, which would be the successor to the current CD2 (@Ann_Kirkpatrick's district)

The map they're using now has a Republican performance advantage of +4 in CD6. Putting Avondale and Tolleson into CD7 as Lerner (D) wants would help keep the partisan spread in that range, meaning CD6 is R-leaning but competitive.

CD6 could even get more competitive if they move Dem areas of Tucson over from CD7 to balance out the population from taking in Avondale, Tolleson other nearby parts of the Valley that are heavily Latino

Conversely, if they keep CD7 out of the West Valley and make it more Latino by adding parts of Tucson while taking out non-Latino parts of Yuma, Pima and Santa Cruz counties, as Mehl and York (R) are proposing, that'll make CD6 less competitive and friendlier for the GOP.

Interesting side note. The Latino Coalition wants Avondale and Tolleson in CD7. In previous decades, they'd probably get what they want because they're a group that DOJ would consult with before granting preclearance. But AZ no longer needs preclearance for its maps.

The @ArizonaIRC is back. They're moving from the congressional map to the legislative districts.

Johnson says the mapping team had trouble incorporating all the commission's proposed changes for northern Arizona. “This is really our first test that didn’t work.”

They're discussing LD test map version 3.1 right now

That map puts most of Flagstaff north of I-40 into predominantly tribal LD6, south of the freeway into LD7 with Verde Valley, Payson, Snowflake, Show-Low, Pinetop-Lakeside. LD5 is western Yavapai, including Prescott, along with Maricopa County around Wickenburg.

Now Johnson is showing version 3.2, which is the one that didn't work with the commission's request to draw a map that united Prescott with Verde Valley, doesn't leave enough population for LD7, so that dips into Pinal around San Tan.

The jagged edge of LD4 in map 3.2 is the boundary of Paradise Valley, which is kept whole in this map

They need to decide which LD map to use. Once again, Mehl and Lerner propose different maps. Lerner wants 3.1, Mehl wants 3.2. York and Watchman's preferences fall along partisan lines. Watchman says he simply hasn't had enough time to look at 3.2, which just came out today.

Neuberg says her four colleagues should look at the maps and decide if they can get where they want from either starting point, says they shouldn't try to be perfect with the starting points. “I’d really like it if we could get consensus... I’m not choosing a map, but I will.”

Mehl motions to adopt 3.2 as the starting point. Lerner says she prefers 3.1, but in the spirit of cooperation she votes yes. On a 4-1 vote, the IRC adopts 3.2, with Watchman dissenting.

Here's the LD test map version 3.1, with insets of the Phoenix and Tucson areas

Neuberg wants a competitiveness analysis of the newly adopted LD map. "Increasing competitiveness all across the board increases accountability to communities of interest."

My mistake, I meant to tweet out LD test map version 3.2, which is the one the IRC adopted.

The commission is back from break. The mapping consultants were putting together the Latino Coalition's proposed legislative districts. Here's the statewide and Maricopa County portions.

This map is now in the @ArizonaIRC's online mapping hub. It's labeled AZ Latino Coalition Legislature.

Johnson notes than only 2 of the Latino Coalition's 8 proposed legislative districts are under 50% Latino, though all perform as ability-to-elect districts for Latino voters. Lerner notes that one LD is 0.6% below 50%.

The mapping team has its instructions for the LD map: balance population, keep Kyrene School District whole, put Oro Valley and Marana together, and incorporate the Latino Coalition districts. Johnson says the coalition districts will probably require a second map.

The IRC has adjourned for the day. They'll be back tomorrow at 8am.