[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",5976043,"mediaKeyId","5821962-f60f3485e03c3a23cc1251dbc0d12493","parentId",5821962,"title","Public comment at Utah redistricting meeting: calls for fairness, transparency and rural representation","audioSeconds",290,"startMs",4070000,"endMs",4360000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5821962-f60f3485e03c3a23cc1251dbc0d12493&start=4070&end=4360","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5821962-f60f3485e03c3a23cc1251dbc0d12493/thumbnail_4070000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/5976043/Utah/Public-comment-at-Utah-redistricting-meeting-calls-for-fairness-transparency-and-rural-representation","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/5976043-42d80499df9caa4edc8428427a436bbf/orig.mp4?Expires=1770481218&Signature=kX9m9RSl7YmkgG9Ev70KYV2OTgmcebUJouDwu2dAUBVgq2gGP7l6J5INxESnLNOSO5TNDipF-YldM3h1jceQPVatozQjjKPKSyxFMgMYBkEKko7lNQF4bH7mFufEQwGBeB1sZiMZetAwqIQWFg2S-hzmCDDD3b-HLVEFhBv0nPVO6jrbl3p1oFWlzRkxU5ki9e4jZdopeUjW9b-g4oy3ihD0AtoL74O5QeKJtXpAVasI5rfZEswAcsV2jRBWZQfhOqHobb7Id5Hw8oicBVmr7C3vM~emn763h3YyWeFOqcznZIJ7uXfGEUi3I5Mdws1cRYBXOo2dv95ofFudGNN8FQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Utah State Legislature","date","2025-09-24T00:00:00Z","article","More than 25 members of the public addressed the Redistricting Committee during a scheduled public-comment period, with speakers urging transparency of analytic inputs, strict adherence to Proposition 4, and protection of rural interests.

What people said: Speakers reflected a range of views. Several urged that maps keep rural communities whole and ensure rural areas retain effective access to congressional representation for issues such as federal lands and VA clinics. A number of speakers, including Stuart Hepworth, who described himself as a map author, asked the committee to post raw analytic inputs and give public access to working files so independent reviewers can verify results.

Others urged the committee to honor the intent of Proposition 4 and to avoid retrofitting post hoc data to produce preferred outcomes. Some public commenters asked the committee to include the minority Owens–Escamilla map among the publicly posted options for comment and review.

Why it matters: Public reviewers emphasized that redistricting affects daily services and long-term policy. Several speakers singled out the committee’s stated 10-day public-comment window and asked that datasets and test outputs be available during that comment window so the public and independent experts can review claims about partisan symmetry and bias.

What the committee said in response: Committee chairs and staff said materials would be posted to the committee web page by the following day and that the official 10-day comment window would govern which maps could be adopted under the court’s order. Chair Perucci closed the session by reminding the public of the Oct. 6 reconvening date for a committee recommendation.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Legislative Redistricting Committee - September 24, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","More than two dozen residents spoke during the Redistricting Committee meeting, urging transparency in analysis, respect for Proposition 4 criteria, and maps that preserve rural representation alongside urban interests.","taxTitle","2025 Utah Legislature, Utah Legislature, Utah Legislative Branch, Utah","taxId",78171,"location","Utah","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},5976048,"Minority members present alternate map and question partisan-symmetry testing and datasets",252,3368000,3620000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5821962-f60f3485e03c3a23cc1251dbc0d12493&start=3368&end=3620","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5821962-f60f3485e03c3a23cc1251dbc0d12493/thumbnail_3368000.jpg","/articles/5976048/Utah/Minority-members-present-alternate-map-and-question-partisan-symmetry-testing-and-datasets","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/5976048-44270aab131c300d8e1b986855311b15/orig.mp4?Expires=1770481218&Signature=ggdgF6t0JcKRMabK2-vgTlwlweA9vSlIlvUmL65t6Cx7PFATXSxdzrDtVIq66tc6IGiWkKsdkG3mY7GZX~V6zUsxjpSwGijdXoo21Q0i5cTd-9ZcUx8ABATS3grXViPsAlskSyltRYTz7i1HuRmb574KZK1rzLV9CWzicLtOypJTZjdsdgTWLHMIF2whBdANGvrYMl89OcAHGzsz3PNLOM6HHZ3-yc~OTrNWme-USWrUCG4SIGGxpvHJ8iVKXQJpFSo593RQxEy26csItO-E-rBjY~aQFQK3dMkVzuIMSDiuDfLgbSnD9fNpSuSSZnfetTkuEB215ioxunYGii3UCA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Representative Kamilla Owens and Senator Escamilla presented an alternate congressional map to the Redistricting Committee and said they retained an independent expert to test it. Owens said staff informed them the datasets used by the committee’s primary analyst would be made available; Owens said that dataset arrived the morning of the meeting and would be posted publicly.

Owens and Escamilla said they had hired Dr. Daniel Magleby, who described himself as an academic quantitative political scientist and said his analysis of the Owens–Escamilla map found it “consistent with what we would expect a neutral process to yield.” He said the map splits 13 municipalities and four counties and “falls well within the accepted range of what we would expect from a neutral redistricting process” when compared with standard simulation ensembles, including Harvard’s simulations.

Why it matters: Minority members raised procedural and methodological concerns about how the committee’s primary statistical tests were applied and whether the datasets used in those evaluations were the same across analyses. Representative Owens said she and Senator Escamilla had not been given full access earlier to the datasets they consider necessary to validate the symmetry and bias testing and that an independent expert should be able to review the data driving the committee analysis. Owens said, “We do have an expert with us who will be, who assisted us getting us to this map” and later that the dataset staff provided earlier that morning would be posted publicly.

Committee attorneys and other members explained the court-ordered constraints and the committee’s practice of drawing maps without using partisan voting data and then applying post-drawing tests to measure potential partisan impact. Mike Curtis of Lehi Research, identified himself during the meeting as counsel and summarized the statute as listing the seven Prop 4 criteria and also noting a “prohibition against purposefully or unduly favoring or disfavoring any incumbent, elected official, candidate or political party.” He read the statute citation as “section 28 19 1 0 3,” as enacted by Prop 4, and said the statute requires use of scientific methods, including measures of partisan symmetry, when evaluating maps.

Both sides said they had applied ensemble and quantile analyses; Dr. Magleby said he had requested the committee analyst’s data repeatedly and had not received it until the morning of the meeting. Representative Owens and Senator Escamilla said their independent analysis used Harvard simulation data and similar ensemble comparisons; they asked that all analytic inputs be made available so experts can independently verify the tests used to evaluate partisan impact. Committee leaders said some post hoc test results were available on the committee website and that committee staff had been asked to filter partisan material from committee-facing materials to avoid using partisan data in map creation.

Next steps: Committee staff said they will post datasets and supporting materials to the committee site; Owens and Escamilla said they would provide their expert’s analysis to the record as part of the public comment materials.","Representatives Kamilla Owens and Senator Escamilla presented an alternate congressional map prepared with an independent expert and pressed for access to the datasets and methods used by the committee's analyst to evaluate partisan impact.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},5976055,"Utah redistricting committee reviews five court-ordered congressional map options, sets public comment period",4104,46000,4150000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5821962-f60f3485e03c3a23cc1251dbc0d12493&start=46&end=4150","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5821962-f60f3485e03c3a23cc1251dbc0d12493/thumbnail_46000.jpg","/articles/5976055/Utah/Utah-redistricting-committee-reviews-five-court-ordered-congressional-map-options-sets-public-comment-period","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/5976055-5f6e3825a4051a9a4e480c57e44fc9aa/orig.mp4?Expires=1770481218&Signature=etiQRZJru0KvZ2vHDcxWAUf2jgTV7vXKQ7x~dSfQnPuj2GF~8GL2c~FyWHiTrcITh3-YGBSAR0Q-AhpbpHS3NkwecX2mZHrf6NM9BRhQgZ3Z0AizIgJZBJAWCaYtd9cj229Yy-vPgQCv7TB2Ww~7fBDGqUg124hxjaaNy3dTidGrgIbNjrNvIpoz8VkpG2EXdO-B3lMCoJCvZEvvjuEbVmVV8t3FY1OFdC48DUuXFPAVbdyT50wr9rdAIlSj-PwgWsSSPbH2B3mQxLOPNZN0phClYFXAuxs4OPg2T8jxkw0xiIrGuwOzUmajz-8wp9Ht86UWgpBngC9yxOjCpJX~pw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Redistricting Committee of the Utah Legislature reviewed five proposed congressional maps Tuesday and confirmed that it will accept public comment for 10 days before making a recommendation. Chair Perucci told the meeting the committee is working under a court order and Proposition 4 and “we can absolutely not use things like election results, voting records, party affiliation information, or consideration of incumbents or prospective candidates.”

Why it matters: The committee must follow Proposition 4’s criteria while also complying with Judge Gibson’s timeline. The court order requires that any map the legislature adopts be publicly available for comment for 10 days before the legislature may adopt it, and the committee said it will not take a final vote at this session.

Committee members and staff walked through five options labeled A through E. Committee leaders said each option was prepared to meet Prop 4’s seven statutory criteria and to avoid use of partisan data in map creation. Chair Perucci reiterated the timeline and process constraints: maps that are not publicly available before the start of the 10-day period cannot be adopted under the court order.

Map details presented during the meeting included municipal and county splits the committee sought to minimize. Option A, for example, was described as splitting three municipalities — North Salt Lake, Pleasant Grove and West Valley — and three counties (Davis, Salt Lake and Utah). Option B was listed as splitting North Salt Lake, Provo and West Jordan and the same three counties. Option C similarly split three municipalities (Mill Creek, North Salt Lake and Pleasant Grove) and Davis, Salt Lake and Utah counties. Option D split more jurisdictions and was criticized by several members as less compact; the committee recorded that it splits Eagle Mountain, Layton and Taylorsville and increases county splits to include Tooele and Wasatch in addition to Davis, Salt Lake and Utah. Option E split Cottonwood Heights and Provo and listed Salt Lake, Summit, Utah and Wasatch counties as split.

Committee discussion emphasized policy priorities written into Prop 4 — minimizing municipal and county splits, preserving communities of interest (including tribal lands, higher education campuses and military installations), compactness and contiguity — and the practical limits imposed by geography and census blocks. Chair Perucci and co-chair Senator Sandle said the committee had asked staff to filter partisan material from materials presented to members so the drawing process remained party-neutral.

No formal selection or recommendation was made at the meeting. The committee said it would reconvene on the morning of Oct. 6 to review public comments and then recommend a single map to the full legislature; the legislature will hold a special session later that day. Committee staff said maps and analytic materials discussed at the meeting will be posted on the committee web page by the next day for the 10-day public comment period.

Next steps: The committee will accept public comment on any map that was posted to the redistricting website by the stated public deadline; after that 10-day comment period the committee will vote on a map to recommend to the Legislature on Oct. 6. Chair Perucci said the committee intends to follow the court’s schedule while preserving legislative options to appeal the court’s order in higher courts if appropriate.","The Utah Redistricting Committee reviewed five proposed congressional maps Tuesday under constraints set by a court order and Proposition 4, opening a 10-day public comment window and deferring a final recommendation until Oct. 6.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Public comment at Utah redistricting meeting: calls for fairness, transparency and rural representation

Minority members present alternate map and question partisan-symmetry testing and datasets

Utah redistricting committee reviews five court-ordered congressional map options, sets public comment period