Communities of interest. If nothing else, that phrase should stick in the minds of Utahns who take the time to engage in this year’s redistricting process. 

According to the Utah Independent Redistricting Commission (uirc.utah.gov) communities of interest consist of groups of people in a contiguous geographic area that shares common policy interests — whether it be cultural, religious, social, economic, or other.

The independent commission also defines what a community of interest IS NOT in terms of redistricting: the shared interest cannot be a political party, incumbent, or candidate.

Fans of the new commission — created by Proposition 4 that Utah voters approved in 2018, then later watered down by lawmakers in 2020 to advisory-only status — view communities of interest as vital to good representation. 

TJ Ellerbeck, executive director of the Rural Utah Project, points to Moab as a prime example of a community of interest undermined by unfortunate redistricting. After the 2010 census, state lawmakers sliced the small city of just over 5,000 residents into thirds, then tacked them on to larger, mostly rural House districts. Since then, none of its representatives actually reside in the colorful tourist mecca. 

Situated near Arches and Canyonlands National Parks, Moab is “one of the most important communities for Utah’s economy,” attracting tourists from all over the country and world, Ellerbeck told ABC4 news reporter Rosie Nguyen in August.

“Part of Moab was divided right down Main Street,” Ellerbeck said by phone Thursday. Those chunks of the city landed in the sprawling, mostly rural House Districts 69 and 70. 

But some of the city straddles the border between San Juan and Grand Counties. The San Juan County portion of Moab ended up in House District 73 which stretches westward through Kane, Garfield, and Wayne counties and even some of Beaver County. Ellerbeck believes there was a better option.

“Most people who live in San Juan County and commute use Hwy 191 that goes through Moab up to Price,” Ellerbeck said. “That’s the corridor that all the economics and travel revolves around, so it makes a lot more sense to draw a district that incorporates all the communities along 191 that all have a lot in common.”

Ellerbeck pointed out that the independent commission is required to consider communities of interest, while the State Legislature doesn’t have to use those criteria.

The Rural Utah Project is one of eight advocacy partners that joined forces to form the Utah Redistricting Coalition (utahredistricting.org#coalition). Other partners include Better Utah Institute, League of Women Voters, Stand Up Republic, Students United for Reproductive Freedom, Sunrise Movement – SLC, Utah Coalition of La Raza, and the Utah Muslim Civic League.

The Coalition’s aim is to boost civic engagement in the democratic process, hopefully resulting in fair district boundaries up and down the line.

Constitutionally tasked with drawing new district boundaries every 10 years, the state’s Legislative Redistricting Committee is continuing in that vein this fall while the independent commission carries out its parallel mission. But lawmakers have no obligation to implement any of the commission’s recommendations. 

Sen. Scott Sandall, a Tremonton Republican, co-chairs that committee along with Rep. Paul Ray, a Davis County Republican. This is Sandall’s first round of redistricting on Utah’s Capitol Hill, and he’s not sure what to expect from the independent commission. 

“We hope that they give us good maps that make sense geographically and politically,” Sandall said. “We don’t want them to come up with maps that can’t be supported … there’s no way to tell until they report to us Nov. 1.”

At stake in Utah are four Congressional, 75 state House, 29 Senate, and 15 school board districts. The new lines will shape political power for years to come.

Guardrails in place

According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, certain criteria govern how districts get drawn.

The U.S. Constitution requires that Congressional districts have nearly equal numbers of residents, while legislative districts have a similar requirement with slightly more leeway.

And the Voting Rights Act of 1965 prohibits intentional or inadvertent discrimination on the basis of race, which would dilute minority voices and representation.

States have also adopted additional criteria that include:

  • keeping districts geographically compact 
  • making sure districts are contiguous
  • preserving towns, cities and counties if possible
  • keeping communities of interest together
  • safeguarding previous district cores for continuity
  • making sure not to place two incumbents in one district

Beyond these guidelines, wiggle room exists to draw a variety of maps that have the potential to impact the state’s future in different ways.

Public meetings recently launched around the state for both the Legislative committee and the Independent commission to engage with residents. 

The teams

Utah’s Legislative Redistricting Committee consists of 20 state legislators — 15 Republicans and five Democrats. Committee members rely on the expertise of existing Legislative staff and legal counsel as they proceed. https://le.utah.gov/committee/committee.jsp?year=2021&com=SPELRD&mtgid=17715

The Utah Independent Redistricting Commission consists of seven members: three Republicans, three Democrats and one nonpartisan chair. https://uirc.utah.gov/about-the-uirc/

The Legislature allocated $1 million to each of these bodies to carry out their responsibilities. Both bodies use software to draw and adjust district lines according to their chosen criteria.

The independent commission hired the law firm of Ray Quinney and Nebeker for $308,000 and contracted with Love Communications for $99,000 to help inform and engage the public. 

Road trips

The legislative committee held its first public hearing at the State Capitol Sept. 2, to be followed by sessions in Grantsville, Ogden, and Logan on Sept. 8 and 9. The remaining hearings include:

  • Orem 6 p.m. Sept. 13
  • Rose Park (Salt Lake City) 7 p.m. Sept. 14
  • Cedar City 1 p.m. Sept. 24
  • St. George 10 a.m. Sept. 25
  • Richfield 10 a.m. Oct. 6
  • Moab 6 p.m. Oct. 6
  • Price 1 p.m. Oct. 7
  • Vernal 10 a.m. Oct. 8
  • Park City 6 p.m. Oct. 8
  • Clearfield 6 p.m. Oct. 13

https://le.utah.gov/committee/committee.jsp?year=2021&com=SPELRD&mtgid=17715

The independent commission held its first public hearings in Monticello and Heber on Sept. 3 and 4. Upcoming sessions include: 

  • Washington City 6 – 9 p.m. Sept. 17 
  • Cedar City 11 a.m. – 2 p.m. Sept. 18 
  • Roosevelt 6 – 9 p.m. Sept. 24 
  • Ephraim 11 a.m. – 2 p.m. Sept. 25 
  • Glendale 6 – 9 p.m. Oct. 1 
  • Provo 6 – 9 p.m. Oct. 8 
  • Saratoga Springs Noon – 3 p.m. Oct. 9
  • Layton 6 – 9 p.m. Oct. 15 
  • Logan 11 a.m. – 2 p.m. Oct. 16
  • Herriman 6 – 9 p.m. Oct. 22
  • West Valley City 11 a.m. – 2 p.m. Oct. 23

https://uirc.utah.gov/events/month/

The independent commission must submit its finished work to the state Legislative committee Nov. 1, which will then deliver its final maps to the full Legislature by Nov. 12. A special Legislative session will convene the week of Nov. 15 to debate, decide and vote on new boundaries.

How they differ

Perhaps the most obvious difference between the Legislative Redistricting Committee and the Independent Redistricting Commission is that one has final decision-making authority while the other does not. 

But they also are taking somewhat different approaches as they head toward the end goal of setting new political boundaries throughout the state. 

Rex Facer, a public management professor at Brigham Young University, chairs the independent panel. He recently described the learning curve the seven-member commission has climbed to prepare for their September and October public hearings.

“We have had to create a whole new process … we are doing it a little bit differently than they’ve done it in other places,” Facer said by phone. 

In recent weeks, they’ve split into three teams and immersed themselves in map-drawing — which meant learning new software, keeping key criteria in mind and prioritizing communities of interest.

“We’re simply trying to draw maps that represent the perspectives we’re hearing from people,” Facer said. “And we have to have reasonable balance across these districts.”

No easy task, he added.

“You can find yourself landlocked and struggling to figure out which part of the community to move into a separate district. Those are tough decisions,” Facer said.

But a common complaint he hears is that communities of interest have been split up. 

“So if we can try to keep them together, that will be productive,” Facer said.

In mid-July, the independent commission launched its interactive website (uirc.utah.gov) to give Utahns tools to explore the 2020 census data, submit comments and suggestions on the panel’s draft maps — and even create their own. 

For Facer, this is where public input becomes vital.

“Essentially communities can define themselves. Whether it be economic, social or ethnically-based, we’re giving wide latitude to communities to help us understand what they view as their communities,” Facer said.

The commission has already posted some of its maps online, hoping for specific public feedback as they travel the state. https://uirc.utah.gov/

But so far, the most common request they’ve had is to draw fair maps, Facer said. The commission has also received several community-of-interest maps that Facer said will be analyzed and incorporated into their process.

Sandall, speaking for the Legislative Redistricting Committee, said their big hiccup came with the months-late release of the U.S. Census data.

“Then we got the data release in the legacy format, which is a format used two cycles ago,” Sandall said. “So it took our vendor some time to put that in a format where we could launch our public outreach map.”

The Legislative committee’s public outreach tool (redistricting.utah.gov/maps/) launched in early September. 

“We’re looking forward to getting out and meeting with people and hearing their wishes — and seeing some of the maps that they begin to draw,” Sandall said.

But instead of having draft maps on hand for their public hearings, Sandall said they plan to “simply listen” during these outreach sessions.

“I think it would be premature for us to have a map that people could say we don’t like this or we do like this,” Sandall said. “It would look like we predisposed something before we even began the listening process.”

Room for improvement?

Sandall hesitated to say gerrymandering has played a part in the Legislature’s past redistricting processes.

“It depends on how you define it,” Sandall said. “If you say gerrymandering is just a bias, there’s no way in this process you can get away from bias … if you do a computer algorithm to generate your districts, a bias would exist in the parameters that you gave the algorithm. There’s always a process of personal preference or political pull … that has to go into drawing these boundaries.”

Sandall speculated on the other extreme, where districts are drawn exclusively to benefit one political party at all costs: “I don’t believe that definition of gerrymandering has been a  part of any process in the past.”

Republicans currently enjoy a supermajority, occupying all of Utah’s four Congressional seats, 23 of 29 state Senate seats, and 58 of 75 state House seats.

Hunter Davies, redistricting director for the Utah Democratic Party, urged Utahns to get involved and engage with either or both redistricting processes.

“It’s a chance for the public to say we want you to draw fair maps for us and to keep communities together,” Davies said. “Beyond that, call your representatives and email them … Let them know you’ll hold them to account for how these maps are drawn and how they vote on these maps.”

Facer, speaking for the independent commission, echoed the importance of public engagement in the process. But he’s got his eyes on the long haul.

“Some argue that it would take a constitutional amendment to make our commission more than advisory. That would be a significant hurdle,” Facer said. “At the same time … as we have more public support, there’s a greater likelihood that the Legislature will pay more attention to the commission’s work and will use its maps to drive its decision making.”