2021-09-09 Redistricting Commission minutes (2nd Session)

Home

challenge to us? I don’t know, but it is a problem and you’ve seen the blocks of census tracts and counties and you’ve heard about, today, some of the issues with those blocks. Which again, it sounds like we’re kind of stuck with, and I do recall, ‘cause I did look at some of the information from the previous Commission’s activities in 2011. I do recall this issue of the blocks being raised at that time. And I believe that there was some correspondence generated, I will check again and see what I can find and bring that forward if it’s not already online, but that’s not a new problem. Yet, I don’t think it’s one that you’re able to resolve. Unless there’s something that can be done that, I’m not aware of. But, again, we have the deviation issue that was talked about. Most courts have used what statisticians call, the overall range, if you’re familiar with that, to measure the population equality of a redistricting plan. And that maximum deviation, or overall deviation, and our County Code states that that shall be less than 10 percent. And then, the maximum council district deviation, our County Code says that shall not exceed plus or minus, 5.99 percent of an ideal council district’s population. So, remember that the ideal district’s population would be just dividing that number equally across all 9 districts. So, it’s a 5.99 percent is our maximum per district. Federal courts have used two different standards for judging redistricting plans. For Congressional plans, it’s strict equality. Their exception is to achieve some legitimate state objective. Examples are making districts compact, we’re respecting municipal boundaries, preserving cores of prior districts, avoiding contests between incumbent representatives. So, on a case-by-case basis, there is a possibility of exceptions, but bottom line is you need to have a legitimate reason for it. Legislative plans based on the th equal protection clause of the 14 Amendment—a substantial equality of population among various districts, which is generally less than 10 percent, unless there is a proof of some kind of intentional discrimination. The exception would be some rational State policy and so far, the only successful rational State policy has been respecting the boundaries of political subdivisions. Non-discrimination, this is probably more of an issue on the mainland than here but need to make sure we are not discriminating against racial or linguistic minorities. Redistricting plans have been opposed on the basis that they’ve discriminated against specific ethnic groups and have bridged their right to vote by diluting the strength of their population. The test is whether your plan will have the effect of diluting minority voting strength and not whether it was inactive with an intent to discriminate. With the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, you may consider race in drawing districts, you should avoid drawing a racial gerrymander, particularly important is to be aware of bizarre shapes of your districts. Reapportionment, this is a quote from Justice O’Connor, “Reapportionment is one area in which appearances do matter.” So, you want to draw districts that are reasonably compact, and compactness is not just a geometrical concept, but it is also political concept. 28