In a first, court will decide new WA redistricting plan as commission falters

November 16, 2021 Crosscut by Melissa Santos

For the first time ever, Washington state’s bipartisan redistricting commission has failed to agree on new boundaries for the state’s legislative and congressional districts. 

Now, it’s up to the state Supreme Court to draw new district maps — a decision that will shape state politics for the next decade.

Under state law, the four voting members of the commission had until the end of Monday to decide how to redraw the state’s 10 congressional districts and 49 legislative districts. At least three of the four commissioners needed to agree on a plan.

But in a statement issued late Tuesday morning — about 11 hours after its midnight deadline had passed — the commission acknowledged it had failed to adopt a redistricting plan in time, meaning the court will now determine Washington political maps for the next decade.

“The late release of the 2020 census data combined with technical challenges hampered the commission's work considerably,” the statement from the commission said.

Next:​​New WA political maps a mystery after final redistricting meeting

Individual commissioners did not respond to messages Tuesday asking for more details.

The state Supreme Court has until April 30, 2022, to decide on a new redistricting plan. That has never happened under the state’s current redistricting system, which Washington voters approved in 1983.

Redistricting happens every 10 years, following the release of new population data from the U.S. census. The process at its core is about ensuring all political districts have equal population — but the redrawing of district lines also shapes which political party has the advantage in a given district, as well as whether certain communities’ votes get split and diluted.

One major point of discussion has been whether to create a legislative district in the Yakima Valley where most eligible voters are Latino. Matt Barreto, the faculty director of the UCLA Voting Rights Project, said last month that the state commission should create a district in Central Washington that is majority Latino by citizen voting age population, or else risk violating the federal Voting Rights Act.

Next: Proposed WA redistricting maps may violate Voting Rights Act

In advance of Monday’s deadline, the two commissioners appointed by Democrats, April Sims and Brady Walkinshaw, said creating a district in the Yakima Valley that complies with the Voting Rights Act was a top priority for them.

The two Republican members of the commission, Joe Fain and Paul Graves, had focused more intently on increasing the number of politically competitive districts, meaning fewer safe seats for Democrats or Republicans. A legal analysis the GOP members commissioned also disputed that it would be necessary to create a Central Washington district where most eligible voters are Latino.

Other issues at play in the monthslong redistricting discussions included whether to group lower-income, racially diverse communities in south King County in the 9th Congressional District, while removing whiter and wealthier areas such as Mercer Island. Another issue was whether to place the Yakama Nation reservation in a single legislative district instead of two.

The breakdown in the redistricting process was unusual in that, when the commission adjourned just after midnight Monday, it appeared they had, in fact, reached a deal. 

On Monday night, commission members had met for nearly five hours out of public view — reportedly in groups of two — emerging only occasionally to give vague progress reports. They then reconvened minutes before their midnight deadline and unanimously approved what Sarah Augustine, the commission’s nonvoting chair, called a “final congressional plan” and a “final legislative plan.”

Next: Redistricting in Washington state: What's at stake in 2021

It wasn’t clear Tuesday what exactly those plans were, or what happened to them after the vote. A commission spokesperson, Jamie Nixon, did not immediately respond to Crosscut’s questions about what the commission had actually voted on. 

The documents hadn’t been posted publicly as of noon Tuesday. Nor had the commissioners discussed or debated them in public before voting to send them to the Legislature for final approval. Brad Hendrickson, the secretary of the state Senate, wrote in an email Tuesday that he had received a signed cover letter and resolution from the commission indicating its members had reached an agreement, but no actual maps.

Michele Earl-Hubbard, vice president of the Washington Coalition for Open Government, wrote in an email that the way the commissioners emerged and immediately took action at the end of their meeting with no public discussion suggests they held an illegal meeting out of public view. 

That could happen even if the four commissioners were meeting in groups of two, which theoretically wouldn’t be enough to create a quorum. Earl-Hubbard said a violation of the state’s Open Public Meetings Act can happen when information gets conveyed by intermediaries, even if the commissioners didn’t meet all together in secret. 

She called it a “serial or daisy chain meeting.”

“They screwed up,” wrote Earl-Hubbard, an attorney who frequently works on public records cases.

Next: WA redistricting efforts aim to give more power to people of color

 “Plus, it showed the public they were being secretive and had something to hide. They should be open, even if they think they don’t need to be. Why do something this important by shutting the public out?”

The state’s Open Public Meetings Act requires deliberations and discussions — not just final actions — to occur in public. State law dictates that the Redistricting Commission must follow those rules.

Redistricting Justice for Washington, a coalition of groups representing communities of color, also expressed disappointment in how the commission went about its work. In a statement Tuesday, the coalition said the commission’s final meeting “lacked transparency and was full of confusion.”

Additionally, the Redistricting Justice for Washington coalition said it is prepared to take legal action, if necessary, to ensure the state’s new redistricting maps comply with the federal Voting Rights Act. In recent years, voting rights cases brought in the city of Yakima, as well as Yakima County, have led to changes in voting systems that aim to ensure Latino voters can elect their preferred candidates.

Tina Podlodowski, the chair of the state Democratic Party, said she thinks the state Supreme Court will draw fair maps, but probably not ones that will make Republicans happy.  She said she doesn’t think the draft maps initially proposed by the Republican commissioners would have stood up to a legal challenge under the Voting Rights Act.

Podlodowski said she feels comfortable about the court taking over, even if the commission’s failure to reach an agreement is somewhat disappointing.

“I think we have a court that has been infinitely fair in a variety of different decisions,” Podlodowski said. “I have full faith in them.” State Senate Majority Leader Andy Billig, D-Spokane, released a similar statement expressing his trust in the court.

Caleb Heimlich, the chair of the state Republican Party, didn’t immediately respond to an interview request Tuesday. A party spokesperson, Steve Johnson, said GOP officials "are waiting for the dust settle on everything" before commenting.

                     Statement from the Washington State Redistricting Commission

"Last night, after substantial work marked by mutual respect and dedication to the important task, the four voting commissioners on the state redistricting commission were unable to adopt a districting plan by the midnight deadline. The late release of the 2020 census data combined with technical challenges hampered the commission's work considerably. Pursuant to RCW 44.05.100, the Supreme Court now has jurisdiction to adopt a districting plan. The commissioners have every faith that the Supreme Court will draw maps that are fair and worthy of the people of Washington."

You can find more information about the Washington State Redistricting Commission at our website. You can watch our meetings live and recorded on TVW or YouTube. Find us on Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter. Sign up here to receive press releases and media advisories.

_______________________________________________________________________________

OLYMPIA – After failing to submit a final mapping plan by the statutory deadline, the Washington State Redistricting Commission (WSRC) has published the state legislative and congressional district mapping plan that won consensus among the voting members of the Commission.

“While we acknowledge we missed the deadline for our maps to be considered by the Legislature, we see no reason why the Court can’t do so,” said Commission Chair Sarah Augustine. “These maps reflect the input of the thousands of people who took part in the process with us. It would be a shame to see these maps go unconsidered simply because the clock struck 12.”  

The Commission sent a copy of the final mapping plan along with a transmittal letter and resolution to the Supreme Court today. The plan won Commission support but was not completed in the time prescribed by law thereby giving jurisdiction over the process to the Court.

“These maps were created in a bipartisan process with unprecedented public input and resulted in the doubling of minority-majority districts, greater consolidation of cities, counties and communities of interest, and full consideration of the eight Tribes with which the commission consulted,” Augustine said. “The WSRC staff and I are at the disposal of the court for anything they may require as it assumes responsibility for this important task.”

Under the leadership of the most diverse Commission ever appointed, staff executed a public outreach campaign to solicit the people for their input into the mapping process and its outcomes. Between public commentary at 17 public outreach meetings and 22 business meetings, more than 400 state residents delivered live public testimony about maps or about the Commission’s processes.

Commissioners received more than 2,750 comments on their draft maps or on the old maps, and more than 3,000 sent an email, commented through the website form, mailed a letter, or left a voicemail. Finally, utilizing a mapping tool made available to the public on the Commission’s website, 1,300 maps were created, of which 12 were formally submitted as third-party maps.

This level of public involvement was historic, and the WSRC thanks all those who took the time and energy to engage with redistricting process. The public’s contribution to this process brought great value and helped guide much of the final plan.