Thread by @redistrictAZ

Count-Down to #FairDistricts for AZ: 64 Days

The Navajo Nation submitted a proposed legislative district map today that would have protected the existing voting power of the Navajo Nation and other northern Arizona Am. Indian tribes.

It asked for a population deviation of 7%. @ndc_doug said: we can still keep within the overall 10% planned deviations as this is considered presumptive constitutional. We just have to be very careful on the districts that are over,

..to make sure none of them is over by more than 2.95%

Commissioner Mehl said: "With all due respect to their request. I think it just goes counter to everything we've talked about these things actually in detail and voted on them and at one point

"it's really trading the White Mountains for Flagstaff and and we heard vociferously from the White Mountains that they did not want to be part of this district and we heard a pretty even keel response from Flagstaff.

At one point I asked my colleague Vice Chair Watchman

"to the White Mountains and he said, Yes, he thought they whether the Navajos would prefer Flagstaff. So this just goes counter to all of the discussions we've had and I would not support it."

So 1) The Navajo Nation gets to speak for itself. And the map received today is their voice in this process and it deserves more respect and consideration than Commissioner Mehl's reaction allowed. That he speaks first and most forcefully does not make him "correct."

2) Shutting down hard conversations like this is going to lead to nothing but a final 3:2 vote. I am certain that Mehl's vote will be among the majority. And that may be enough for him. But it shouldn't be enough for the Independent Chairperson. And Arizonans deserve more.

3) the population deviation is a big ask - but not insurmountable. I have no idea whether it makes sense - but it is "presumptively constitutional" and deserves serious discussion and consideration. It shouldn't be dismissed because Com. Mehl has already made up his mind.

4) They KNEW this was coming. Leonard Gorman, executive director of the Navajo Nation Human Rights Commission told them it was coming. Why were they not prepared for this? What the hell are they paying @BallardSpahrLLP and @SWLawNews for? And the two firms' two VRA specialists?

5) Despite Com. Mehl's brash response the conversation is not dead. And made only more difficult by his rant and their unpreparedness. Add this to their backtracking on the CD and LD plans today - we'll be lucky they finish map drawing by December..

This is hard work. And it won't happen magically by haphazardly skipping from random thought to random thought. Or being yanked in whatever direction Com. Mehl leads. They need to think through how they are going to make decisions. And a systematic plan to make those decisions.

On how will they make decisions: An example: Commissioner Lerner has broached this multiple times asking for the rationale that it is fine for CD 9 to pick up pop. from MarCo on the East, but not CD 3 from the South. There may be really good reasons why

but they have not been expressed or articulated. Or it could be arbitrary because one serves a personal interest and the other doesn't. I don't know and neither do you because they have never talked about it. This and other conversations are needed. Yesterday.

On making systematic decisions. Start someplace. Review all the districts. Closely. Articulate what works and what doesn't. Ask questions. Together. Go back and make recommendations to fix what can be fixed and protect what works - in each district and the whole map.

On the one hand they are flying through really hard decisions (the map presented by the NavajoNation and those presented by the Latino Coalition.) On the other hand they can't talk about competitiveness w/o it dissolving into the weak broth called "spread"

Hoping to see something hopeful tomorrow. Today was pretty bleak.