Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission Analysis of Public Hearings Round One

Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission

Analysis of Public Hearings Round One

Types of Public InputPublic Meetings• Actual testimony• Additional material handed in

Public Hearings (Round 1)• Actual testimony• Blue Sheets handed in

Additional material handed in• Web Submissions• Snail Mail• Phone

Goal is to ensure everyone who voiced an opinion is heard for the mapping process. 2

3

4

Round One by the Numbers

Breakdown

• By city

• Number of attendees who signed in

• Number of people that requested to speak

• Total number of comments recorded

5

Round One by the Numbers

Location DateSign-in Sheets

Request to Speak Total Comments

South Phoenix 21-Jul 131 71 65

Nogales 22-Jul 26 17 16

Yuma (San Luis and Parker) 23-Jul 124 25 24

Mesa 25-Jul 114 50 50

Bullhead City 26-Jul 82 25 25

Casa Grade (Maricopa) 27-Jul 74 32 31

Prescott (Cottonwood) 28-Jul 153 37 33

Window Rock 29-Jul 21 7 7

Hon Dah (Holbrook and Wilson) 30-Jul 81 34 34

6

Round One by the Numbers

Location DateSign-in Sheets

Request to Speak Total Comments

Flagstaff (Page and Tuba City) 1-Aug 104 45 41

South Tucson 2-Aug 86 62 59

Glendale 3-Aug 126 54 46

Sierra Vista 4-Aug 49 53 50

Phoenix 5-Aug 84 54 48

Tucson 6-Aug 140 76 66

Round One by the Numbers

7

93% of those who

requested to speak,

spoke

Total summary of the number of times the public commented on one of the six criteria forRedistricting• Voting Rights Act – 49• Equal Population – 12• Compactness or Contiguous – 34• Communities of Interest – 265• Geographic Features / Political Boundaries – 114

• Competiveness – 236• Other – 292 8

Comments Based on Criteria

9

Round One by the Numbers

10

Round One by the Numbers

Competitiveness236 comments

Important

• Competitive districts are important- they get people involved

• Need more competitive districts on both sides of aisle.

• Competiveness is the most important of the criteria

• More competition = better candidates

Lower Priority• Competitiveness- should only

be used after other criteria• COIs should be prioritized

before competitiveness• Current CD and LD are

competitive now.• Compactness, COI, and

Geographic Boundaries are more important that Competitiveness.

11

CompetitivenessDefinitions offered by public

• Roughly equal voter registration among Is, Ds, Rs• Competitiveness means looking at whole district -

would a qualified candidate have a chance of winning?

• Either D or R can win an election every 2 or 4 years

• The majority of legislative districts being competitive in the general election

• Elections not decided in the primary12

Communities of Interest265 comments

• Partisanship has no factor in COIs• People live with likeminded people- should use COIs as

main criteria• Keep Flagstaff with Prescott as they are a COI and have

geographic similarities• Don’t keep Flagstaff with Prescott as they are not a COI

with similarities• Light rail is a tie to a COI• Oro Valley is a COI—talked about newspaper

description and likes it 13

14

Recurring InputSummary of top two to four public comments, by city, that included specific recommendations July 21 – South Phoenix• Support Senator Leah Landrum Taylor’s map – 8 • Make LD 15 competitive – 3• Ahwatukee as a COI – 3 July 22 – Nogales• Keep Santa Cruz County in two districts – 2• Create three border districts – 3

15

Recurring InputJuly 26 – Bullhead• Keep Mohave County together – 13• Create a rural Congressional District – 10• Keep Tri-Cities together (Kingman, Bullhead City, Lake

Havasu) – 4• Create a river district – 4

July 27 – Casa Grande• Keep Pinal County intact – 5• Keep Pinal County in one Congressional District – 4 15

16

Recurring InputJuly 28 – Prescott• Create two rural Congressional Districts – 8• Yavapai County as a COI – 4• Put Verde Valley with Flagstaff – 4

July 29 – Window Rock• Don’t split Navajo Nation – 2• Don’t gerrymander Hopi – 2

16

17

Recurring InputJuly 30 – Hon Dah• Create two rural Congressional Districts – 16• Keep Legislative District 5 together – 8• Create eight rural Legislative Districts – 6 August 1 – Flagstaff• Don’t separate Flagstaff – 13• Create two rural Congressional Districts – 6• Don’t include Prescott with Flagstaff COI – 5 17

August 2 – South Tucson• Keep Congressional District 8 together – 7• Keep Legislative District 30 together – 6• Keep Legislative District 26 together – 5• Move Tucson to Congressional District 7 – 4 August 3 – Glendale• Support Arizona Minority Coalition maps – 5• Put Tonopah Valley together – 3

18

Recurring Input

18

19

August 4 – Sierra Vista• Create three border districts – 12• Keep two border districts – 4

August 5 – Phoenix• Light rail as a COI – 4 August 6 – Tucson• Keep Legislative District 26 intact – 7• Keep Legislative District 30 and CD 8 intact – 3• Discussed how to address prison population– 3• Oro Valley as a COI – 3

Recurring Input

19

Types of Public InputPublic Meetings• Actual testimony• Additional material handed in

Public Hearings (Round 1)• Actual testimony• Blue Sheets handed in

Additional material handed in• Web Submissions• Snail Mail• Phone

Goal is to ensure everyone who voiced an opinion is heard for the mapping process. 20

21