Though an update on Navajo County redistricting was on the agenda of the Oct. 25 Snowflake Town Council meeting, Town Manager Paul Watson advised the council that he did not have any new information.
Watson had provided the council members with copies of the three basic maps that have been moved forward in the redistricting process, and noted that one of the maps was submitted by Councilman Tom Poscharsky. “He’s been on this more than I have,” said Watson, “so he’s our resident expert.”
“The maps speak for themselves,” said Poscharsky. “One doesn’t keep communities of interest together.” Snowflake and Taylor, Pinetop/Lakeside and Heber/Overgaard are together, but Winslow and Holbrook are not.
Poscharsky encouraged everyone to attend the next redistricting meeting, which will be held on Tuesday, Nov. 8, and the Board of Supervisors meetings, which have been moved to Nov. 15 and 29, where they plan to finalize redistricting.
In similar business, council discussed a resolution regarding recommendations for legislative and congressional districts, and the approval of a resolution.
Watson provided draft maps and a letter from the commission outlining the process. The maps show that the proposed legislative map splits parts of Navajo and Apache counties into separate districts.
This was discussed at the Apache and Navajo Counties Mayors and Council Members Association meeting, and it was agreed that the two counties should be included in the same district if possible. There is a new map they are supporting that keeps them together.
“Because of all the controversy and the number of people there are in opposition, they are going to have a legislative hearing,” said Watson. He noted that he understood, but did not have confirmation, that “they may actually disband the commission and start all over. There’s quite an uproar over all this.”
“I think there was enough representation there that they realize we do not like what they’ve come up with,” said Watson, referring to a meeting on congressional redistricting held in Phoenix.
“I’d like to know where we stand on it, as far as is this something we feel is in the best interest of everyone in this district,” said Mayor Kelly Willis. “Are we going to be well represented?”
“Our first priority is to make sure we are together with other communities in Navajo County. Our second priority is that we ought to be together with the communities of Apache County,” said Watson, explaining that town officials closely with them on many things. “Beyond that, you get into other communities of interest.”
Mayor Willis asked if there were comments from anyone present in the audience.
“I agree with some things, but on the resolution, why say we want to keep it rural? It’s going to keep you tied,” said Becky Gibson. “We don’t all see rural in the same way.” She said she felt “communities of interest” was a better way to state it, and told the council that “Taylor Mayor Fay Hatch had written a letter that lists all the items, I think you should include the details,” she said.
Gibson also expressed concern that when speaking to one of the commissioners, she was told the commission never defined the new criteria.
“The hearing period ends the last day of this month. I don’t know if they will re-map and take any other comments,” said Gibson. “It’s a statewide problem and it’s going to affect more than just the next 10 years.”
“I hope that you would put more than, ‘We want to stay with the rural districts,’ because we’re not the same as all the other rural districts in the state,” she concluded.
“We need to keep rural not only for the natural resources, but I think that our greatest natural resource is our people. In order for those values to be safeguarded we do need to have rural Arizona stay together,” said Lowry Flake. “I have not been able to find a definition of what ‘communities of interest’ are, what ‘contiguous’ is, but I think the redistricting committee made a great mistake not to define those six or seven areas that they were addressing. We do want communities of interest, not only because we share so many activities together, but we want to protect our families and our family values,” he said.
“I believe the resolution you have in front of you, which is identical to others passed by communities in the counties, is trying to keep communities together,” said Watson, noting the priorities are: “We need to stay with communities of Navajo County and second stay with communities of Apache County, then this resolution talks about rural communities of Arizona. We can’t stand alone. When we look to find communities of common interest, this resolution addresses that.” He then suggested that as they move forward, they add more detail.
“I think this resolution is really good, but the map we’re going to send with it tells exactly what we’re talking about. So I think we’re making ourselves very plain,” said Watson.
“You restated your major goals plain and simple. It’s understandable, time is of the essence. Right now, tonight, you can approve this. It’s not going to get lost in volumes of paperwork. It’s simple, it’s understandable. Your message is being put out. If you approve it we’ve got something on the table in place, from here out we’re on the record. Don’t miss that,” said Scott Morris.
“I think we’re all saying the same thing in different ways,” said Mayor Willis who moved to approve the resolution, which passed unanimously.
