Thread by @redistrictAZ

Here I am again - Day 7 of 7 (or 9) mapping days with the @ArizonaIRC. Counting down are 62 days to #FairDistricts if they meet their aspirational deadline of Dec. 22. I'm not much of a gambler;50/50 is my take at the moment. What odds would Vegas give?

You know the drill by now:
Here is the link to follow along: azgov.webex.com/azgov/j.php?MT…

The link to make comments during the meeting today: forms.gle/JZwaSxh894TdCN…

And the 24/7 comment link: irc.az.gov/contact-us

OH -- and if you have the personal contact info of Commissioner David Mehl of Cottonwood Properties and @SALCLeaders - he is also accepting comments. Just an option if you feel you are not being heard equally.

Fair Warning - I have a commitment at 10:00 am - so I will be behind bit after that - but expect to catch-up during lunch/other break or the always enjoyable E-Session... or two.. Notice how they never seem to have anything to report after E Session? No surprise, really..

OK - down business not griping..
On competitiveness - Since the @ArizonaIRC is choosing not to use their own measures - which they voted on 5:0; and are now using a hybrid made-up-along-the-way measure -here's how the current iterations stand

According to planscore's model, plans 6.0, 6.1, and 6.2 all give Dems a predicted 53% of the legislative seats. 6.3 yields 47%.
More detail...

Using the 7 pt gap only, LD6.0: 5C/12D/13R
Where the 5C are LDs 2,4,9,13,23
BUT: counting district 12 (outside the range but 1 flip in 9), there are 6C (and 11 D)

Using the 7 pt gap only, LD6.1: 6C/11D/13R Where the 6C are LDs 2,4,9,13,17,23
BUT: counting district 12 (outside the range but one flip in 9), there are 7C (and just 10D)

Using the 7 pt gap only, LD6.2: 5C/12D/13R Where the 5C are LDs 2,4,9,13,17
BUT: counting district 12 (outside the range but one flip in 9), there are 6C (and 11 D)

Using the 7 pt gap only,LD"6.3":6C/11D/13R Where the 6C are LDs 2,4,9,13,16,23
BUT: counting district 12 (outside the range but one flip in 9), there are 7C (and just 10D)

All of the "action" (switches between D and C) is with 16, 17, and 23. Marana and Oro Valley seem to be central to these shifts ...

[Note about 6.3; while they are using the same naming convention as the draft maps, Timmons stored this map in the submitted maps folder, not the draft maps.]

So when the competitive number goes up, it's always coming out of the D districts - the R always stays at 13.

WOW! Comm. Neuberg blows off the Navajo Nation again, members who are in the room, to make in-person comments.
How humiliating of the stellar legal team @BallardSpahrLLP and @SWLawNews to have to give advice on AZ open meeting laws - which are so completely lame to begin with.

Com. Watchman allows the NN to introduce themselves - and then will summarize the public comment he received from them - IF ONLY they had done this regularly -they might have a thread of legitimacy to claim #Transparency

But alas - they did not! and so the @ArizonaIRC gets a 50% on transparency.BTW - this is a failing grade...

Com. Watchman now: Providing a summary of process and states there is plenty of time to provide more comments. Mentions pop. deviation. We have heard that. Looked at that in comparison to other COI.

Com. Lerner - TY to public and the NN - many comments indicate people are getting very concerned. We still have along way to go. We are working on DRAFT map. Emphasis on DRAFT.
Com. Mehl: Comments are robust and specific comments on specific districts. Will become more so...

Com. York - Our process has been very transparent (I disagree- but you knew that already, r?) COI tend to create dense populations of like-minded folks -bear w/us.

Neuberg announces they are working in good faith. Do we believe that is true of all five commissioners? I do not.

So Com York says they are transparent - Com. Neuberg says they are acting in good faith.

Actions speak louder than words... I hear their words; I do not see commensurate action.

LEGISLATIVE MAPS
Notice the infamous 6.3

Goal of 6.0 version- changes on Tucson area
York wants to know about the country club area.. Seems so on-brand

York asks about rotation of D9 and D10 - @ndc_doug - only changed pop. deviation -- very western tip. Lerner - that was a request...
Changes in Tucson area..

This is the map that connects Oro Valley, Saddlebrooke & S-Ranch, Marana and the other communities Com Mehl wants. Cat Foothills cannot be in this district. for pop...

Now the #Infamous 6.3

Neuberg giving directions and asks "for broader vision" Here: is the thing: they do not have a state vision - it changes regularly
Mehl says they are all competitive - says his least fav. is 6.1 bec of split of Marana and Oro Valley says they are similar
Key thing: Imporves D20

Would someone ask Com. Mehl what impact the combination of Marana and Oro Valley has on his personal business interests? And a reminder: The role of all 5 commissioners is to advance the PUBLIC interest

Now said: I KNOW in my bones Comms Mehl and York think their personal business interest IS IN the PUBLIC interest. I disagree. And should every other commissioner - especially the supposedly Independent Chair.

Com. Lerner notes kindly that she and Com. Mehl always seems want a different starting point. makes the case for 6.1.

Com. Mehl addresses 6.3 - and has great respect for that group.
Com. Lerner address the @SALCLeaders preference - makes her uncomfortable - creates partisan shifts - esp. bec. we are not doing that w/other "citizen Submission"

Open, of course, to looking at their suggestions.
Mehl pushes back. Is not out of place at all he says...
Holy Moly!

Watchman likens 6.3 to the NN submission. If we follow what Com. Mehl is suggesting 6.3, then let's include NN as a suggestion as well.
6.1 reflects more competitiveness;

York like 6.3 how D20 becomes a STRONG MM district ; would support my colleague to support 6.3
Mehl clarifies -- only suggesting adopting making changes in D16 south -
Neuberg agrees - likes 6.1 better - doesn't wanton get bogged down in starting point bec. we will make changes

Moving into E-Session

So a procedural glitch - they will no longer consider 6.3. as a starting point. It will no longer be named 6.3. Watchman pushes - what is the right approach procedurally?
Neuberg: No longer an option for us.
WOW!

The map can stand as a citizen submitted map. It does not have to be removed.
Watchman - not approved
Legal- if any commissioner asked fora map to be brought up
Watchman - let's be straight with the public
Mehl allows it be removed as 6.3.

Neuberg doing back flips to support other maps existing that have not been approved. Removed from the flow; but maintained LD0033 in AIRC Hub.

THANK You. This was in fact the right thing to do.

Back to map drawing...
@ndc_doug ?? does that "seventh seat" perform on all ranges or just one.. We have all the spreadsheet..
Neuberg asks for a motion for starting point: short pause -- Lerner proposes LD V6.1 for deliberations: Mehl seconds.
a 5:0 vote

Down to business on 6.1 - Back into E-Session re: VRA compliance and polarization.

Here's a thought - How about inviting the VRA?RPV experts to give @ArizonaIRC an actual briefing so they understand the law and can apply it as they move forward. They are completely tied in

knots over this. And there are only two reasons I can surmise - one they are choosing to push the envelope time and again which is making the legal team stress; or they simply have has really bad briefings to date. Open to other scenarios.. remedial education?

BACK and LIVE from E-Session

Still on Agenda Item #5 - VRA - performance, etc...
On to 6.1
Mehl - moves that the lines of 6.3 be added into the 6.1 map and spouts support from business community

Commissioner Lerner - suggests vote may not be needed.
Neuberg - says "what Mehl is suggesting" can't Mehl speak for himself..
Why yes - he says we have the data

Lerner - if we do that change - what happens to D19 Summerhaven communities? Mehl - doesn't change much - Lerner asks for a moment
Legal says you can lock it in --
Neuberg: it would only be conceptual
Mehl _ i don't want them to go through all the work

unless -
Neuberg - wants to give clear direction to mapping...
We are at a crossroads and wldl LOVE to have clear directions to the mappers --
Mappers Ask - please specificities exactly which districts to integrate .. \Neuberg - will you be able to make these changes today?

Mappers say we are likely to have it ready today

OK friends -- leaving you know - I'd say don't let them anything silly while I am away - but I think that is an unrealistic expectation.

So what did I miss??

Back from break --
CD plan 5.0 - built out to 6.0 and 6.1
Move D8 into D1
Instead of maps - those of us on WebEx see this

here is the map they were looking at

6.1
@ndc_doug as D7 shifts out of urban Phx area -- can there be an opportunity district - D8 becomes a west valley seat - then D3 Guadalupe up to Lavigne - some moves west;Avondale

And Tollesonadn W Glendale and S. Peoria, Surprise S. of Bell Road and Thunderbird E of Sun City
Results: in 6.0 -CD 3 = 54%; CD 3 in this version 51%

CD 8 increase 10% bump in Latino vote - not an effective, but getting close --
rotation of 1, 3 8, 9 /Bell/Thunderbird division --
Neuberg "Honoring the VRA" -wants to go into E-Session to get more guidance - So Be It...

Seems like a good time to point out that not every word

out of the mouths of @BallardSpahrLLP and @SWLawNews is privileged

Back from the 3rd? E-Session of the day??

West Valley options -

This sucks. Really sucks. Any cats?

Added cats. And these districts still suck... Sun City and like cities split; Northern Glendale goes to the Colorado River...
Now Neuberg says Sun City are a unique COI -- how they live their lives, how they budget.

York likes 6.0 because Glendale is not split -- FYI- it IS split... =-- he is comfortable w/ 6.0 GTK.

York and Mehl "motion" to approve CD v6.0...
Lerner - can support - points out D 3 and a few other districts might need tweaking...

See what the supposedly independent chair just did there? She said at the end I likes 6.1 better - but everyone else is happy with 6.0 so I'll go along with that .. when both Commissioners Lerner and Watchman stated their original preference for 6.1.
Gaslight Anyone?

Com. Lerner suggests some changes; York has better ideas.

It is Pie-eS-Two-Wah

You can do this Com. York.
Really.

Phonics come in handy at every point in life.

Breaking for lunch -- mappers want an hour..
2:00 reconvene..