The Wyoming Legislature’s Corporations, Elections, and Political Subdivisions Committee met in Cheyenne last week and continued hammering out a plan to redraw the state’s legislative districts following the latest census.

The committee voted to work with a statewide plan that allows for the Big Horn Basin to retain six representatives in the Wyoming Legislature, despite population levels that are below the ideal. However, Rep. Mike Greear, R-Worland, who sits on the committee, says the fight isn’t over.

“We’re a long way from home,” Greear said Monday. 

Ideally no district should have more than a +/- 5% deviation from an even split across the state’s 60 house and 30 senate districts. This way, all legislators represent about the same number of voters.

However, the latest Census figures showed that districts in the Basin are well outside that range due to declines in the number of residents in the area. House District 27, which Greear represents, is 15% below the ideal. HD 28, represented by John Winter, R-Thermopolis, has a deviation of -9.66%, and HD26, represented by Jamie Flitner, R-Greybull, has a deviation of -8.19%. (Sen. Ed Cooper’s District 20 — which is composed of Washakie, Hot Springs counties, as well as parts of Park and Big Horn counties — has a deviation of -12.38%.) 

The proposal crafted by Big Horn Basin lawmakers would reduce the deviation in the region’s districts down to about -6%. For the most part, the plan redraws lines internally rather than pulling voters from other areas outside the Basin.

A risky proposal?

At Thursday’s meeting, Sen. Cale Case, R-Lander, moved to amend the statewide plan and require districts to fall within the ideal deviation, which would have scrapped the Basin’s redistricting plan.

“The Basin situation is pretty intractable,” said Case.

However, Greear pushed back against the motion, and it ultimately failed on a 9-4 vote. 

Speaking after the meeting, Greear said he was surprised Case made the motion, as the senator had appeared to agree with the larger deviation, as opposed to pulling in voters from outside Basin districts. 

In an interview, Case said he has always supported redistricting plans that keep to the ideal deviation. He said he made the motion out of concern for Wyoming’s future population trends, as well as possible legal action that could arise from higher deviations. 

The senator pointed out that the Basin continues to lose population, a trend that is likely to continue. It’s also a trend in Fremont County, which Case represents.

“It’s not the pot calling the kettle black, believe me,” he said. 

If the Legislature approves the Basin’s proposed redistricting with the higher deviation, Case said, the problem is likely to come up again when the new U.S. Census numbers come out in 10 years — at which time it will likely be only a larger problem. 

Case said a better option is to pull in voters from northern Sheridan, Fremont and Natrona counties, as well as Yellowstone National Park communities, and get the Basin’s deviation down to the ideals. Only about 600 to 700 voters, Case estimates, would be impacted by such a redistricting plan. 

“All sorts of districts would need to be worked a little bit … I think that’s a better approach, and more reflective of Wyoming’s future,” Case said.

The senator added that, if the higher deviation is passed, it would be the first time in 30 years of redistricting Wyoming didn’t keep to the ideal. 

“It exposes us to the lawsuit. I don’t think it’s very good judgment,” Case explained. In the event of a lawsuit, he said the burden of proof to justify a higher deviation lies with the defendant — that is, the state.

However, Greear argues that pulling in voters from surrounding districts isn’t feasible. 

Besides trying to maintain about the same number of people, district lines are also drawn so “communities of interest” are represented by the same legislators, which is sometimes a challenge with the way the state’s population is distributed. 

The Basin’s districts are boxed in by Yellowstone, the Bighorn Mountains and the Montana border. In order to get the deviation closer to the ideal, areas outside the Basin would potentially need to come within districts that are mostly made up of Basin residents, which typically results in legislators from inside the Basin.

“No matter what we do, the Big Horn Basin is a mess,” Greear said during last week’s committee meeting. 

Local support, Yellowstone opposition

Last month, the Basin region’s redistricting plan was presented for public comment in Worland and Powell. 

At the Powell meeting, First Deputy Park County Clerk Hans Odde discussed the challenges of trying to redraw lines to get as close to the ideal deviation as possible. On a map of Cody, he showed how one proposed district boundary runs through a trailer park — which means neighbors on different sides of the park would have different representatives.

Dalton Banks, a resident of Big Horn County, which is in HD 26, said he thinks the proposed plan is a better approach than trying to draw in population from communities on the eastern side of the Bighorns.

“There’s more camaraderie with us and the folks in Powell,” Banks said. “I think it’s looking pretty good from a [HD] 26 perspective.” 

Not only do Basin residents want to share interests with those who share their district, people outside the Basin are often reluctant to accept representation from the region’s legislators. 

For example, Ryan Sedgeley, a resident of Madison Junction in Yellowstone, offered public comments at Thursday’s committee meeting. Sedegeley requested that all of the park’s communities — from Old Faithful to Mammoth Hot Springs to the East Gate — be part of districts based in Teton County. The northern portion of Yellowstone lies within Park County and residents there are currently represented by Park County-based lawmakers. However, Sedgeley said the Big Horn Basin is mostly agricultural and its voters tend to have “antagonistic” attitudes towards wildlife issues important to Yellowstone voters.

“I have a hard time seeing what we have in common with the Basin,” Sedgeley said.

Nowhere to go

Meanwhile, if Basin lawmakers tried to draw southern Yellowstone communities into Park County-based districts, the possibility of local opposition is just one hurdle they’d face. There’s also the difficulty for lawmakers seeking to travel to those communities. 

During the committee meeting, Greear said that once Yellowstone’s roads close for the season, legislators have to drive up to six hours to school board meetings, barbecues and other community events they’re expected to attend.

Pulling in more residents from Natrona County to the south also has challenges. In the 2010 Legislative Session, Shoshoni and Lysite were moved into HD 28/SD 20. Residents of the Missouri Valley near Pavillion were considered as one option, but meetings with the voters down there didn’t provide a lot of support for bringing them into Greear’s district.

“It’s been clearly expressed to me by the folks in Fremont County that that is not palatable to them, and it does disenfranchise them,” Greear told the committee.

That could leave the 6% deviation as the best option.

As the process moves forward, Sen. Case doesn’t expect any further attempts by committee members to keep redistricting in the Basin to the ideal deviation. 

“I think we should set the standard to being in bounds, but I’m just one person,” he said. 

Greear agreed that, for the moment, it appears the committee will adopt the Basin’s redistricting plan as presented. 

“I’ll keep fighting for it. I think we have a chance,” Greear said, but he added that nothing is ever certain.

The committee meets again on Tuesday in Cheyenne. The plan endorsed by the committee will then be considered by the full Legislature when it convenes in February.