Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission Analysis of Public Hearings Round One.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission Analysis of Public Hearings Round One."— Presentation transcript:

1 Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission Analysis of Public Hearings Round One

2 Types of Public Input Public 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 3

4 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 5 Round One by the Numbers LocationDate Sign-in Sheets Request to SpeakTotal Comments South Phoenix21-Jul Nogales22-Jul Yuma (San Luis and Parker)23-Jul Mesa25-Jul11450 Bullhead City26-Jul8225 Casa Grade (Maricopa)27-Jul Prescott (Cottonwood)28-Jul Window Rock29-Jul2177 Hon Dah (Holbrook and Wilson)30-Jul8134

6 6 Round One by the Numbers LocationDate Sign-in Sheets Request to SpeakTotal Comments Flagstaff (Page and Tuba City)1-Aug South Tucson2-Aug Glendale3-Aug Sierra Vista4-Aug Phoenix5-Aug Tucson6-Aug

7 Round One by the Numbers 7 93% of those who requested to speak, spoke

8 Total summary of the number of times the public commented on one of the six criteria for Redistricting Voting Rights Act – 49 Equal Population – 12 Compactness or Contiguous – 34 Communities of Interest – 265 Geographic Features / Political Boundaries – 114 Competiveness – 236 Other – Comments Based on Criteria

9 9 Round One by the Numbers

10 10 Round One by the Numbers

11 Competitiveness 236 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

12 Competitiveness Definitions 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 primary 12

13 Communities of Interest 265 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 14 Recurring Input Summary 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 15 Recurring Input July 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 16 Recurring Input July 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 17 Recurring Input July 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

18 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 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

20 Types of Public Input Public 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 21


Download ppt "Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission Analysis of Public Hearings Round One."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google