---------- DOCUMENT HEADER ----------
---------- DOCUMENT HEADER ----------
ARIZONA STATE LEGISLATURE
Fiftieth Legislature – First Regular Session
JOINT LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE ON REDISTRICTING
Minutes of Special Joint Meeting
House Hearing Room 4 -- 1:00 p.m.
Chairman Weiers called the meeting to order at 1:13 p.m. and attendance was noted by the secretary.
Members Present
Senator Pierce, CoChairman Representative Weiers J., CoChairman
Senator Biggs Representative Goodale
Members Absent
Senator Meza Representative Pancrazi (excused)
Bob Lynch, Attorney, representing Pinal County Governmental Alliance (PCGA), reviewed a handout containing the following (Attachment 1):
He stated that in analyzing the constitutional requirements, he is troubled by the approach taken by the IRC. He responded to questions about the Hopi and Navajo Tribes and the IRC’s application of the required components in developing the maps.
Ken Moyes, representing self, made the following comments:
Christine Bauserman, Citizens for Common Sense Redistricting, stated that she researched Proposition 106 and the defining of communities of interest, one of the most important factors in redistricting. She was surprised at the first IRC meeting when a group showed up whose chairman told her their goal is to make sure competiveness is the number one factor in redistricting. Since January 2011, she has seen Yuma, Cochise, and Pinal Counties and Flagstaff representatives give presentations on communities of interest. She then noticed that people were showing up at the meetings and countering those testimonies, at least half of which were elected representatives, even though her research indicated that the process is supposed to be non-political. She added the following comments:
Joanne Daley, representing self, Sierra Vista, stated that testimony was given to the IRC that the people in Cochise County want the county to remain intact and are concerned about compactness and competitiveness. Everyone was thrilled when Cochise County remained whole in the CD and LD maps until the final day when it was cut in half on both maps. In response to a question, she related that the explanation from Colleen Mathis, Chairman of the IRC, was that she met with the Hispanic Coalition and someone else over the weekend and they developed the map. It was not the map presented on the previous Friday or the map people came to talk about that Monday morning. Public comment was taken, and at the end of the hearing, the commissioners voted on and adopted the map with a vote of three ayes, one nay, and one abstaining because he did not know what he was voting on.
She noted that Cochise County is a very unique area located on the border. There were discussions about having three CDs because of unusual circumstances in the county, one of which is that there is a major drug route in the eastern half in ranching territory. One rancher was killed and the Horseshoe 2 Fire was started by illegal immigrants. In response to further questioning, she said focus groups were recently held, and other than being whole, the people in Cochise County want to retain the communities of interest of Graham, Greenlee, Cochise and Santa Cruz Counties and the eastern portion of Pima County because of the population. With three border districts, maybe representation would be increased in Washington, D.C.
Matt Parrelli, representing
self, Sonoita/Elgin, stated that the current draft of CD and LD maps
proposed by the IRC for the Sonoita/Elgin area pose a significant detriment to
the community. The residents were stripped of CD-8 and LD-30 that have proven
satisfactory and workable over the past 10 years. The proposed boundaries for
the new districts appear to assure a minority-majority for Hispanics, which he
is not against; however, he is opposed to the total disregard for communities
of interest in favor of competitiveness and an overreliance on population
balance and contiguity, maintaining county boundaries where it makes no sense.
He provided plans for moving the proposed district boundaries for CD-2 and LD-1
to the west to incorporate the Sonoita/Elgin area with Cochise County/Sierra
Vista as a community of interest so the residents have the appropriate
representation that he plans to present at the IRC meeting on
October 25, 2011 (Attachment 2).
CoChairman Weiers read Resolution No. 839 from the Town of Hayden at the request of individuals who could not remain at the meeting (Attachment 3).
Jenn Daniels, Vice Mayor, Town of Gilbert, related that on October 6, 2011, the Gilbert Town Council unanimously passed a resolution supporting the IRC’s proposed map LD-9, version 8A, and respectfully requested that the IRC honor the Town’s input into the creation of the LD. Instead, the IRC voted to adopt the LD map that places the bulk of Gilbert into a single LD and places a sliver of the community into a district where the residents will be grossly outnumbered by residents from another municipality. If the IRC’s proposed legislative map is formally adopted, in a few years Gilbert’s growing population will render the one LD substantially overpopulated and severely underrepresented for 10 years. She requested that the Committee communicate to the IRC that its draft map is not in the best interest of the Town of Gilbert or its residents. The Town supports the concept of two strong LDs as embodied by the IRCs originally proposed map, version 8A.
Rick Fernau, Mayor, City of
Show Low, noted that the City of Show Low passed Resolution
No. R2011-38 on October 18, 2011, which urges the IRC to keep the legislative
and congressional representations of the region rural and undivided and
includes proposed maps for consideration and adoption (Attachment 4). The communities
of Navajo and Apache Counties, especially those south of Interstate 40, have a
fundamental right to be in the same LD and CD based upon culture, history,
economics and policy issues.
Jesse Bryant, representing self, Globe, said that volunteers in the region of the City of Globe have been working tirelessly with no paid lobbyists to get all of the cities and towns on the same page and to keep rural Arizona together. Ten communities passed a draft resolution, five more eastern communities have it on their agenda for this week and he anticipates more next week. The proposed CD map keeps eastern Arizona rural and eliminates Flagstaff and Prescott from the region. Due to their dense population areas, Flagstaff and Prescott are not like-minded. The Cochise County area is included in the proposed CD and would be a great addition to the character of eastern Arizona. He said the importance of keeping that representation was conveyed to the IRC at a meeting in Globe the previous Friday.
Robert Blendu, representing self, stated that communities of interest are very important and should remain together in order to have proper representation.
Tommie Martin, Supervisor, Gila County; Board Member, Eastern Counties Organization (ECO), related that the ECO developed a map with two rural CDs, and in looking at the three border ports, determined that two Congressmen have not served as well as three could so each border port (Douglas-Naco, Nogales and Yuma) was given to a different congressman. The Tohono O’odham Nation needs to be taken care of by itself. Regarding LDs, she stated that in eastern Arizona, the southern part of Navajo, Apache, Gila, Graham and Greenlee Counties have worked very well together and share common interests. She said she is not sure the IRC is listening to what people want, with a few exceptions.
Lynne St. Angelo, representing self, Pima County, read a resolution from the Pima County Republican Party condemning the actions of the IRC for knowingly violating its responsibilities for redistricting under federal and Arizona laws. It recommends that the Governor remove the five members of the IRC, that Attorney General Tom Horne continue the criminal investigation and civil litigation against the IRC and Majority Leadership of the Senate and House make redistricting recommendations to the IRC that are in the best interest of Arizona and the citizens.
Referring to the testimony by Mr. Lynch, she noted that SaddleBrooke and Oro Valley are at the very tip of Pinal County. They are strong communities of interest that are connected with Marana through the Tangerine Road Corridor, which also ties in with the I-10 Corridor to Picacho Peak where there will be development of a rail switching station, so they do not want to be separated. The proposed CD-1 map is not compact or competitive, it does not meet many of the criteria, and it includes the Navajo Nation and Flagstaff, which have nothing in common with these communities. She discussed the hiring of attorneys by the IRC commissioners and indicated that she does not believe the voters had any idea that $10 million will be spent for redistricting, but that is what is budgeted for the work of the IRC, which used to be done for free.
Senator Biggs commented that the State Land Department has not sold the land for the switching yard at Picacho Peak; if it does not become available soon, Union Pacific Railroad will probably move the switching yard to New Mexico or California.
George Lemen, Mayor, Town of Pima, stated that Pima is in Graham County. The community of interest for CD-1 as proposed includes Avondale, Laveen, Maricopa, Casa Grande, Coolidge, Eloy, Marana, Catalina, Oracle and Oro Valley. LD-1 includes Green Valley, everything west of Wilmot Road and south of I-10, Rita Ranch, Mt. Lemon, Vail, Ft. Huachuca and Sierra Vista. Ft. Huachuca and Vail may be reasonable, but the rest of the areas are not communities of interest. The Gila Valley is serviced by the Gila River and that watershed is in one district. Under the new map, it will be in three districts, so he is not sure where residents will go to talk about the watershed. The corridor along I-10 should not be in the same LD as the areas in rural Arizona. He added that he does not believe the IRC paid attention to communities of interest in this redistricting process.
John Mills, Legislative Special Projects, in response to a query, acknowledged that the mapping contract requires documentation from the IRC as to why lines were drawn, which will have to be done for the pre-clearance report to the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S. DOJ).
CoChairman Weiers noted that documentation was requested by the Speaker of the House and President of the Senate several days ago. Mr. Mills responded that to his knowledge, it has not been received.
Lerry Alderman, Councilman, City of Globe, stated that he attended an IRC meeting in Globe where a parting remark was made by Commissioner Richard Stertz that it looks like Flagstaff has Globe covered and they will have to live to Flagstaff standards because Globe does not have enough paperwork or emails to represent it. He submitted that the five other city council people represent 1,000 people each, so a letter of resolution was sent to the IRC, as well as from ten other cities representing their citizens. If that is not enough support, he does not know what is.
Laramer Mace, representing self, Prescott, stated that many people in the Yavapai County area want the Verde Valley to be separate from the rest of Yavapai County. He attended an IRC meeting in Prescott for which only two days’ notice was given and no one was told it would be telecast to Cottonwood. Fourteen people spoke from Cottonwood; ten were registered Democrats, two were Independents and the other two he could not determine. Those people stated that the Verde Valley area wants to be included with Flagstaff. At every subsequent meeting, comments were made that the Verde Valley area wants to be part of Yavapai County, which was ignored by the IRC. The IRC went out of its way to gerrymander a district that included almost every Native American reservation, which the Native Americans requested. In the LD and CD maps, the IRC carved out a portion of Yavapai County and placed it in with Coconino County. He submitted that an ideal district in that area would include the non-reservation portion of Coconino County, all of Mohave, Yavapai and LaPaz Counties, which would be more compact.
Eric Emmert, Yuma County, related that on September 19, 2011, the Yuma County Board of Supervisors made up of Republicans and Democrats signed Resolution No. 2011-41 asking to keep Yuma County whole in one LD, which he provided for the record (Attachment 5). He noted that Russell McCloud, Yuma County Supervisor, who could not attend the meeting, sent a letter to the Members stating that Yuma County is an agrarian-based economy, it is very notably a community of interest and should be preserved as one LD (Attachment 6).
Lou Smith, representing self, submitted that Yavapai County does not have anything in common with the other areas to which it is tied. One good LD can be formed out of Yavapai County. He opined that Attorney General Tom Horne should investigate the IRC members.
Representative Carl Seel, representing self, noted that the goal was to have an independent redistricting commission with no political interests; however, Strategic Telemetry is closely aligned to the Democratic Party. The founder, Ken Strasma, has donated thousands of dollars to the Democratic National Committee and other Democratic organizations. In addition, the firm’s website contains information which indicates that the firm, MoveOn.org and the Service Employers International Union (SEIU) may be connected to President Russell Pearce’s recall. He added that LD-6, which he represents, has gone from being solidly Republican to a district that may be deemed competitive; all of the current communities of interest were bifurcated.
Russ Clark, talk show host, representing self, Yuma, related that he attended an IRC meeting in Yuma with over 100 people. Yuma is a rural area and everyone who spoke asked that the area be kept together. He noted that he and others had heard about the IRC shredding documents and public hearings that were not held properly, which Attorney General Tom Horne was looking into, but the residents gave the IRC members the benefit of the doubt. As soon as the redistricting map came out splitting Yuma in half, his phone started ringing off the hook. He added that people he has talked to would like to see the IRC eliminated.
Senator Don Shooter, representing self, remarked that the City of Yuma is the third-largest population center in Arizona, but with the current proposal, there is no chance that the city will have a congressman or state representative in 10 years. He indicated that shredding of documents and consistent patterns of obstruction by the IRC are problematic. In response to a question, he opined that the CD map was drawn to benefit Congressman Raul Grijalva who publicly said he does not want to represent Yuma. He pointed out that over 400 people attended the IRC meeting, so the IRC members cannot claim they do not know what the Yuma citizens want. He added that an IRC sounded like a good idea, but the current structure lends itself to potential corruption. He provided the following handouts:
Dara Vanesian, Member, Pinetop-Lakeside City Council, stated that the White Mountain Apache Tribe, Pinetop-Lakeside, Round Valley, Heber-Overgaard, Snowflake, Taylor and Show Low communities are tied together in the tourism industry and their economies are dependent upon one another. Those communities plus Holbrook, Winslow and St. Johns have formed the Real Arizona Coalition to develop base jobs in the communities, yet the LD map currently in play separates Pinetop-Lakeside and Show Low into different districts.
She said Show Low’s new district, suddenly formed over the weekend of October 1, 2011, was clearly drawn to give certain political parties a competitive advantage. The CD needed minimum tinkering to obtain the required population for a new district, yet suddenly it is being carved into four LDs. Pinetop-Lakeside does not have anything in common with the Navajo Nation, but it does share common goals and an economy with the White Mountain Apache Tribe, whose Chairman signed a letter of support this summer for keeping the old LD-5 together. In addition, the Pinetop-Lakeside Town Council recently passed a resolution that supports the pre-October 1, 2011 map that keeps LD-5 intact, with some slight additions.
Lora Nye, Councilwoman, Prescott Valley, stated that during the Council meeting a week ago, many people from the Verde Valley asked to stay intact. She noted that there has recently been a breakthrough on water issues, so carving up the area will make it impossible to function and work together to maximize the best decisions about water. Yavapai County has already been carved out because it was way too large, but the current proposal does not make sense. The county has proven it is competitive and Republicans and Democrats have been chosen to serve in Washington, D.C. The county will be stuck with this new map for 10 years. She added that the Committee has an opportunity to “stop this train wreck” by listening to the people and giving them back their voice.
Harvey Skoog, Mayor, Town of Prescott Valley, stated that at the Council meeting a week ago, about 99 percent of the people asked to keep Yavapai County intact and indicated that if Williams is added to the LD there would about 214,000 people, which is an appropriate size for a LD. As far as the CD, over 700,000 people are needed. There is no community of interest with people from Maricopa County. There is already a perfect community of interest that includes the Yavapai and Apache Tribes and a fairly sizeable Hispanic community; the people do not want to be split and moved elsewhere.
Monica Joyner, representing self, Gila County, submitted that the obvious intent of the lines drawn by the IRC is to provide the greatest political advantage to its highly organized and predominantly progressive leadership (Attachment 10). Strategic Telemetry was hired without precedent to be the map maker in charge of accomplishing this predetermined end. This firm was the driving force behind President Obama’s 2008 campaign, MoveOn.org and other progressive targeting. She asked that the Committee make the IRC null and void as its inception is illegitimate and stop the map drawing process at least until litigation and Senate hearings are finished and another commission that is truly bipartisan can be constructed. She added that citizens have to live with these maps for the next 10 years and redistricting should be done impartially.
Vance Barlow, Town Clerk, Town of Colorado City, stated that, based on the proposed maps, he is concerned that Colorado City will be isolated from the rest of Mohave County and placed into a district that goes all the way into Greenlee and Apache Counties where the citizens have nothing in common other than love of the rural country. He noted that the area would be much better represented by keeping Mohave County in one district so it is more concise and follows natural geographic and regional boundaries.
Charles
Hammon, Committeeman, Mohave County Political Action Committee (MPAC),
Centennial Park, related that he resides in the far northwest side of the
state on the Arizona Strip, which is a very rural area. In the past, it has been
difficult to communicate with the people that represent the area because of the
rural nature and geographic differences, but much progress has been made in
recent years with the current representatives. The proposed LD map puts their
region in the same district as the north, northeast and eastern sides of the
state; however, the citizens on the Arizona Strip do not share the same
political interests and communities of interests as they do with the Kingman
area and the rest of Mohave County. He pointed out that the LD map
incorporates many of the Native American tribes and suggested keeping the
Arizona Strip in Mohave County.
Gary Watson, Supervisor, District 1, Mohave County, stated that LD-7 is so vast as proposed that the northern part of the district will be underrepresented. Representatives Goodale and McLain have done an outstanding job of representing everyone in Mohave County, so it is important to readdress this issue and bring the Arizona Strip back to Mohave County. The CD map runs from Colorado City all the way to Florence, which is too much. He asked the Committee to readdress contiguous, compact and communities of interest in both maps.
Sam Zitting, Chairperson, Mohave County Political Action Committee (MPAC), Centennial Park, endorsed the testimony of the two previous speakers. He said many people are very concerned about the ability to be represented if the proposed LD-7 map is adopted and he sees no logical reason why it would serve their district better than LD-5. It is a four-and-a-half hour drive from the community to the county seat in Kingman and current representatives have done an incredible job of making the trip to meet with and serve the people. If the area is included in LD-7, he is not sure where the representatives would reside, but it could be an eight- or nine-hour drive and the citizens would probably not see them. He asked that the area be placed back with the rest of Mohave County. In response to a question, he indicated that there are about 15,000 residents in the Arizona Strip area; about 98 percent are Republicans and LD-7 would be mostly Democrat, so it would be difficult to fit in politically as well.
Vince Leach, representing self, discussed the fact that Commissioner Mathis did not disclose information on her application about her husband working with a candidate for the House of Representatives, the destroying of score cards used by the commissioners to rate candidates for the mapping consultant contract and the withdrawal of the State Procurement Office from the procurement process in awarding the contract. He said Proposition 106 was passed to move to an independent commission. There are five people on the IRC but one person, the Chairman, is making the decisions. He added that the Joint Legislative Budget Committee (JLBC) earmarked $10 million for the IRC, which is before any lawsuits, which the Republican National Committee indicates will be forthcoming. He discussed the selection of attorneys by the IRC, the fact that Bruce Adelson who once worked for the U.S. DOJ now works for Strategic Telemetry and a comment made by Commissioner Herrera concerning SB1070.
Discussion followed between CoChairman Weiers and Mr. Leach about Strategic Telemetry.
Mr. Leach stated that what is being seen in LDs, CDs and supervisorial districts is a change in majority-minority counts, which means if there is a 38 percent minority, raising that two or three points seemingly will make everyone happy, but in 2020 when redistricting occurs again, that cannot be moved back, which is called retrogression. Also, the IRC is trying to make a decision based on what is happening in a very short window and forcing elections in districts that will be in existence for 10 years. He encouraged the Committee to take steps to stop the IRC.
In response to a question, Mr. Leach noted that if the northwest corner, which is primarily conservative, is pushed over into an area that is primarily liberal, one million acres of prime uranium land will be set aside. The Copper Corridor from Superior to Winkelman was kept under Congressman Raul Grijalva’s foot for years, which, hopefully, will be changed.
Mrs. Goodale stated that different people lost all of the timber land in the area and now attempts are being made to do the same with uranium.
Mr. Leach added that he has been working as part of a coalition with Senator Melvin and Representatives Pierce, Pratt and Fillmore on the Picacho Peak-Union Pacific Railroad switching yard, but there have been many roadblocks.
A. J. LaFaro, Chairman, Legislative District 17 Republicans, made the following comments:
Mr. LaFaro asked the Committee to recommend that the Governor remove the five members of the IRC because the next ten years of the state cannot hinge on the actions of those individuals who have no interest with regard to the great State of Arizona. Discussion followed.
CoChairman Weiers suggested that
the Committee invite the IRC commissioners and
Strategic Telemetry to a meeting to show how the maps were developed.
Joy Staveley, Vice President/Owner,
Canyoneers, Inc., Flagstaff, indicated that she is an original member of
the Flagstaff 40 when the group actually represented small business, which it
does not do anymore. She is representing 197 individuals, and there will
probably be more, who asked her to speak on their behalf. She read a letter
from former Mayor Joe Donaldson stating that Flagstaff and Coconino County do not have anything in common with the Navajo and Apache Nations, mostly
because they are sovereign nations. The letter states that the current Mayor
of Flagstaff, Sara Presler, does not represent the majority of the people of Flagstaff.
Ms. Staveley said not only does Mayor Presler not speak for the people she is
supposed to represent; neither does the Flagstaff 40. A small handful of
people in Flagstaff 40 have been lobbying the IRC with a paid lobbyist. She
said she spoke to the IRC three different times and she was respectfully
received, but her testimony and similar testimony given by others on
October 13, 2011 is mysteriously missing from the videotape footage.
She said Flagstaff is not happy with its CD map. Many people believe that the non-reservation portion of Coconino County belongs with Yavapai, Mohave and LaPaz Counties and northern Yuma where a true community of interest lies, which is what redistricting should be about. The Navajo and Apache Nations do not share the same visions, issues and concerns; they are a sovereign nation with their own specific needs and perspectives, yet the proposed maps include Flagstaff with the Navajo and Apache Nations. She responded to questions posed by CoChairman Weiers about the Flagstaff 40.
Richard Mihalik, representing
self, conveyed that there has been no referendum, polls or meetings asking
the opinion of the Flagstaff residents. He opined that the Mayor and
Flagstaff 40 have an agenda of their own. He said he has not been able to
attend every IRC meeting because the meeting dates were changed. He went to one
IRC meeting that was scheduled in Flagstaff, but the IRC members never showed
up; however, the mayor and the lobbyist hired by the Flagstaff 40 always knew
when the meetings were going to be held and attended all of the meetings.
Regarding the CD map, Mr. Mihalik opined that it is so skewed that he does not know how a Congressional representative could drive from Page to Cochise County and represent all of the people. Due to retrogression, in the next ten years, the CD will surround Phoenix and reach California. He said Cochise County has different issues and for someone to say the CD map represents all interests in this one group is crazy. He submitted that there will be many lawsuits over this kind of redistricting, which will be paid for with taxpayer money that he is tired of seeing going to waste. He agreed that the Indian Nations are sovereign and have their own issues.
CoChairman Pierce questioned how the Tribes can be placed on their own when there are not enough people and questioned if Proposition 106 should be eliminated. Mr. Mihalik responded that he does not believe the people knew what they were getting into when Proposition 106 was passed, but the process by which the five commissioners were chosen was skewed. A supposedly independent chairwoman having a meeting over the weekend with a Democrat and no other commissioners is not appropriate, nor is it appropriate for two people on a five-member commission to change the maps.
James Hallgren, representing self, Apache Junction, remarked that the IRC made no pretense of being independent and has openly and blatantly violated the Arizona Constitution, the Voting Rights Act and federal and state laws. The IRC needs to be held accountable by the Legislature because it has taken the citizens of Arizona hostage with a blatant agenda of trying to turn a solid conservative state into a progressive liberal Democrat state.
Beth Hallgren, representing self, Apache Junction, related that she attended a few IRC meetings, and from a clinical counselor perspective, she has seen unprofessional and rude behavior. She is a Republican, however, it was very obvious that the two Republican representatives were often interrupted and physically patted on the back in a demeaning manner or to downplay their position. At one of the meetings a Republican commissioner had worked all night on a plan, but he was not allowed to present it to the public; in fact, he was circumvented in a manner that was less than appropriate. She said the IRC disrespected its members as well as citizens who wanted to speak.
Jan Smith, representing self, Yavapai County, initiated a discussion about how the IRC members are appointed and asked if Proposition 106 can be amended by the Legislature.
CoChairman Weiers responded that Proposition 106 cannot be amended; however, IRC members can be removed by the Governor for justifiable reasons, which must be followed-up by 20 aye votes in the Senate.
Chairman Weiers thanked everyone for attending and indicated that the Committee will meet on October 25, 2011 at 1:00 p.m. in House Hearing Room 4.
Without objection, the meeting adjourned at 5:27 p.m.
_______________________________
Linda Taylor, Committee Secretary
November 1, 2011
(Original minutes, attachments and audio on file in the Chief Clerk’s Office; video archives available at http://www.azleg.gov)
---------- DOCUMENT FOOTER ---------
JLC ON REDISTRICTING
October 24, 2011
2
---------- DOCUMENT FOOTER ---------