Atlas Redistricting Commission

[jimrtex]

I don't know the rules of the game here, but does MN state law require that CD's have exactly populations, and if so, does that matter? The exactly equal population metric tanks the ability to zero out muni chops, which is the justification I presume for Tim's map to have that extra county chop into Anoka.

The Muon2 game was fueled by allowing population deviations up to the federal 1% cap, which allowed and drove working within that 1% to lose chops as an important metric.

Minnesota would have a hard time justifying any deviation. The best they could come up is that block populations are not accurate (were deliberately obscured by the Census Bureau).

You don't want to give a federal judge any pretext to rule against your plan.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Deviation on the map is not at all large. I took the need to have smaller deviation seriously in my choices for municipalities to place in each district, and the only district that is over 1,000 from quota is the 5th (which was a massive headache of a district). Even then it's only -1,244. Which is only...-0.14% if I had to guess?
I don't think anyone else's plans were required to adhere to a such a small band of deviation, so in that context the deviations in my plan are completely justifiable.

[GregTheGreat657]

I don't know if you guys are still accepting new people, but I'd be happy to join as a Republican if you are

[GregTheGreat657]

Here is my Ohio proposal: https://davesredistricting.org/join/dadc48b3-2dd2-4867-8fa0-cc7895230774

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Y'all, still interested?

[GregTheGreat657]

Y'all, still interested?

I am still interested, don't know about the others

[S019]

Y'all, still interested?

I am, maybe we should start narrowing down the maps once more people post them

[S019]

Bump?

Anyways, if people don't want to post maps maybe we should just vote on what is proposed so far. (Since it seems we won't be getting everyone who signed up to join, maybe we should have a role requiring majority approval from Dems, Reps, and Indies, similar to CA)

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Bump

[S019]

Bump

At this point, I think we should be voting on maps to consider at least, I'll take control here and give 72 hours for someone to object to the motion. We've had a fair share of MN Maps and we should choose a blueprint for one, at least.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Bump

At this point, I think we should be voting on maps to consider at least, I'll take control here and give 72 hours for someone to object to the motion. We've had a fair share of MN Maps and we should choose a blueprint for one, at least.

But do we have a quorom?

[S019]

Bump

At this point, I think we should be voting on maps to consider at least, I'll take control here and give 72 hours for someone to object to the motion. We've had a fair share of MN Maps and we should choose a blueprint for one, at least.

But do we have a quorom?

I think we should go with the assumption that most people won't show up and we should work with what we have.

[GregTheGreat657]

What do you guys think of this map?

https://davesredistricting.org/join/6a4ce77c-7620-4ea2-9ab8-cb5bb6bc91ba

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Bump

At this point, I think we should be voting on maps to consider at least, I'll take control here and give 72 hours for someone to object to the motion. We've had a fair share of MN Maps and we should choose a blueprint for one, at least.

But do we have a quorom?

I think we should go with the assumption that most people won't show up and we should work with what we have.

Idea: pick a date (say, January 7 - something reasonable, something not immediate) and PM everyone once to inform them that they have until then to make an appearance or else you and others will move on and proceed. Also, link the thread.
That way, there is at least awareness of what is going on.

[Torie]

You should pick a state so posters are all working on the same map, and preferably one where official maps are not out, to then compare with what actually happens just for for. NYS would be a good choice given the legal issues (the "unduly" standard), although the state is complex to draw given all the VRA issues.

[palandio]

What do you guys think of this map?

https://davesredistricting.org/join/6a4ce77c-7620-4ea2-9ab8-cb5bb6bc91ba

The most controversial districts in your map are probably the 5th and the 6th.
- When MN being reduced to 7 seats was still seen as the most likely outcome, combining Minneapolis and St. Paul was proposed by other forum members. According to the metrics that I look at, even in a 7-seat plan keeping Minneapolis and St. Paul separate was usually the better option, but combining them was a legitimate option. On an 8-seat plan though you are forced to cut into either Minneapolis or St. Paul and that should push the idea aside until 2030.
- I don't subscribe to the general aversion by many forum members against 'donut districts'. In some situations they can be the natural choice, immagine a densely populated urban core and the rural shire around it. But most US metros are not the right place for this. What is the CoI that unites Washington Co. and Wright Co., but not Anoka Co.?

[S019]

You should pick a state so posters are all working on the same map, and preferably one where official maps are not out, to then compare with what actually happens just for for. NYS would be a good choice given the legal issues (the "unduly" standard), although the state is complex to draw given all the VRA issues.

The state was Minnesota, as was decided upthread, because we wanted to start with a simpler state

Bump

At this point, I think we should be voting on maps to consider at least, I'll take control here and give 72 hours for someone to object to the motion. We've had a fair share of MN Maps and we should choose a blueprint for one, at least.

But do we have a quorom?

I think we should go with the assumption that most people won't show up and we should work with what we have.

Idea: pick a date (say, January 7 - something reasonable, something not immediate) and PM everyone once to inform them that they have until then to make an appearance or else you and others will move on and proceed. Also, link the thread.
That way, there is at least awareness of what is going on.

This is a pretty good idea, and I'll do this shortly

[palandio]

I'm still in.

[OBD]

I’m here

[Thunder98 🇮🇱 🤝 🇵🇸]

I’m still in

[ProgressiveModerate]

Yep still here

[kwabbit]

I'm still interested.

[_.]

I tried my hand at a fair congressional map of Minnesota using the 2020 census results.

Image Link

The Population Deviation is less than 0.01%.

100/100 on Dave's Proportionality Index
62/100 on the Compactness Index
64/100 on County Splitting
19/100 on the Minority Representation index
28/100 on Dave's competitiveness index

The map above shows results from the 2020 U.S. Presidential election in Minnesota.

Check it out here and see county and municipality boundaries.


Partisan Breakdown by Election

2014 Minnesota Attorney General Election: 6D to 2R

2014 U.S. Senate Election in Minnesota: 5D to 3R

2014 Minnesota Gubernatorial Election: 4D to 4R

2016 U.S. Presidential Election in Minnesota: 5R to 3D

2018 Minnesota Attorney General Election: 5R to 3D

2018 U.S. Senate Election in Minnesota: 7D to 1R

2018 U.S. Senate Election in Minnesota (Special): 5D to 3R

2018 Minnesota Gubernatorial Election: 6D to 2R

2020 U.S. Senate Election in Minnesota: 4D to 4R

2020 U.S. Presidential Election in Minnesota: 4D to 4R


Minnesota doesn't really have minorities so there isn't much in the way of minority representation. There are two seats where minorities are over 30% of the Voting-Age population, one centered around Minneapolis and the other St. Paul.


Opinions?

[GregTheGreat657]

What do you guys think of this map?

https://davesredistricting.org/join/6a4ce77c-7620-4ea2-9ab8-cb5bb6bc91ba

The most controversial districts in your map are probably the 5th and the 6th.
- When MN being reduced to 7 seats was still seen as the most likely outcome, combining Minneapolis and St. Paul was proposed by other forum members. According to the metrics that I look at, even in a 7-seat plan keeping Minneapolis and St. Paul separate was usually the better option, but combining them was a legitimate option. On an 8-seat plan though you are forced to cut into either Minneapolis or St. Paul and that should push the idea aside until 2030.
- I don't subscribe to the general aversion by many forum members against 'donut districts'. In some situations they can be the natural choice, immagine a densely populated urban core and the rural shire around it. But most US metros are not the right place for this. What is the CoI that unites Washington Co. and Wright Co., but not Anoka Co.?

This is my new proposal:

https://davesredistricting.org/join/342ba08c-af71-4142-8a3f-be143044e46a

Opinions?

[Torie]

Here is my submission.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/76f90611-c593-4b67-93f2-e6cc8ffc98dc