Tuesday, February 25, 2020 I wrote a blog opposing this idea until I actually read this proposition and found out what we need to correct a wrong by having all parts of Anchorage Municipality have two Assembly people. When the municipality was proposed to Greater Anchorage voters they decided that 11 people should on the assembly this is great in theory. However this always left a neighborhood of the municipality with only one assembly member since the 1980's that has been the Downtown, Fairview and Mountain View. Conservatives will argue this will be a power grab for the liberals to maintain control. No it actually makes it all the members have the same workload. For the past thirty years Assemblyman like Allen Tesche, Charles Wohlforth, Pat Flynn and current assemblyman Chris Constant have to perform twice as much work because they are the only assembly member of that district.
Greater Anchorage Borough population estimate is 291,538 in population for 2020 census.
Under 2 for All you divide the municipality by 6 of nearly the same population.
Each Assembly district would have the same population of 48,590 for each district.
Current Assembly district model you take the estimated population of 291,538 then you divide it by 11 to create the one single member district which is 26,503 in population for the single member district. Now for the rest of the Greater Anchorage Borough minus that single member district you get population of 265,035 which you divide this by 5 district 2-6 would have the population of 53,007 for each district.
Yes it cost an additional $62,000 a year for adding an assembly man but the truth you are actually help other members by having each assembly district have two members instead of one.
For equal representation please vote yes on Prop 12. Here is the the links for more information on this question. https://www.yeson12anchorage.com/
https://www.facebook.com/2forallAnchorage/
I just sent you a private message on Facebook. I am currently researching and writing a piece in response to Two For All Anchorage's talking points. With the level of censorship I've already encountered in discussing this issue, It's uncertain whether it will be published anywhere.
ReplyDeleteThe "flawed design" of the Assembly, as the writers of the recent ADN editorial put it, came about through a transitionary measure in 1975, specifically Section 19.02. There is NOTHING in Article IV, which covers the Assembly, which binds the Assembly to have six districts as that charter section has existed the past 45 years. Passing Prop 12 WILL bind the Assembly to such a scheme. This makes Yes For All Anchorage's arguments to that effect null and void. So it's time to start asking those people the following questions: "Why this proposal?", "Why now?" and "Why a charter amendment?" Chris Constant, Rob Cupples, Cliff Groh and others have not only been unwilling to answer these questions, they have been active in censoring any such discussion when it occurs. That's another "Why?" question. I know exactly why. This is an obscure, every-know-and-then issue and they're eager to capitalize on voters' ignorance of a not-so-saucy housekeeping matter. What about five, two-member districts plus an at-large member, which is in a similar vein to how Juneau apportions its Assembly? There was support for it in the ADN comments you can no longer read. It also increases the representation to all of Anchorage over either the existing scheme or the proposed one without increasing the size of the Assembly.
That is the proposal I will come up if I am on 2020 redistricting committee. I would take that at large at more salary make the person the chair and run it in the same rotation as the mayor.
DeleteThe question is why now and for what reason.
ReplyDeleteAs is now the assemble districts are and have been determined by census numbers. As of now each district has equal representation as per population density. If there is 2 seats assigned to the downtown and north anchorage area they will be determined by population density numbers therefor the area will not have any higher representation. There will be new boundaries drawn upon completion of the 2020 census.
RLS
I think you're missing my point. The charter has never contained language which compels the Assembly to accept the existing districting scheme as the only valid scheme. Two For All Anchorage is framing its arguments in such a manner which leads people to believe otherwise. The 1975 ratification of the charter included a districting scheme which has continued to the present day by (in)action of prior Assembly bodies. Once again, what passage of Prop 12 will do is mandate six Assembly districts for the very first time. Others in the community have attempted to discuss other redistricting ideas. Neither their ideas or that of future Assembly members will have a voice, as redistricting will be tied to a particular scheme.
ReplyDeleteSir Edmund "fake name" hide in obscurity Clinton:
ReplyDelete1) The TWO for ALL team is hiding from any one. I hate to break it to you, but there is no conspiracy here. It is only in your head.
2) "Why This Proposal"? Why NOT this proposal? Proposition 12 reflects a minor correction to the current system already familiar to Anchorage residents that would FINALLY provide fair and equal representation to District 1 while also improving representation to EVERY resident through the reduction in constituents by an estimated 9% in which the assembly members serve.
3) "Why Now"? Residents of District 1 have waited 35 YEARS to be treated equally and fairly. The fact it took 45 year to get to this point is despicable. Plus, we ALREADY will be going through the reapportionment process in 2022, therefore this is an excellent time to improve our system and levels of representation without duplication in effort or cost. That's "WHY NOW".
4) "Why a Charter Amendment"? Because that is the required action to add a 12th member to assembly which is what is required under this plan, that's why.
5) "Why not 10 districts with an at-large member"? As stated above, under Prop 12 constituent levels will drop by roughly 9% improving access to representation. Under your 5 district plan constituent levels would INCREASE by roughly 10% decreasing levels of representation and access to representation. No thanks, I want BETTER representation, not WORSE representation.
6) "The question is why now and for what reason". If you have to ask this question you have not been listening, you are only speaking. Our entire message is precisely about "why now" and for "what reason".
7) "Prop 12 will mandate six assembly district for the first time". OK, and? This seems to only be a problem for you. It also mandates each district will have the exact number of representatives for the first time ever. Hallelujah!
8) "districting scheme which has continued to the present day by (in)action of prior Assembly bodies". Prior assembly bodies that have kept their thumb on the heads of communities like Fair View and Mt View for 35 YEARS by suppressing their representation because it was in their own best interest. Proposition 12 eliminates this possible abuse of power.
Sir Fake Name Clinton, you sir have had 45 years to take action and champion a better and fair system of representation for ALL Anchorage residents and you have failed to do so. Well, we have not. Our proposal may not be YOUR first choice, but it is REAL, TANGIBLE, IMPROVES representation for every single resident, has people ACTIVELY working to see it implemented, and can be put in place in 24 MONTHS. That is far more than I can say for either your 5 district scheme, or a single-member district scheme, neither of which I support. They are mere possibilities with no current path to reality. You have officially been "addressed". Can we now put the lies that we are dodging questions to bed?
Rob Cupples (real name)
Chair, 2 for ALL Anchorage - Vote YES on 12