Wisconsin taxpayers to pay half the cost of redistricting consultants hired by Supreme Court
MADISON, Wis. — Wisconsin taxpayers will pay half of the $128,000 bill filed by redistribution consultants hired by the state Supreme Court for their work in reviewing proposed legislative plans, the court’s liberal majority ordered Monday.
Conservative justices disagreed, sharply criticizing the majority for hiring the consultants and not releasing more information about the work they did and the details of the charges. They called the court’s order a “brazen imposition of judicial will.”
The court hired a pair of redistricting consultants to review the maps subsequently filed by Republicans and Democrats Republican drawn cards discarded as unconstitutional. After the advisors determined that the Republican entries were partisan gerrymanders, the Republican Party-controlled Legislature approved maps drawn by Democratic Gov. Tony Evers.
He she signed passed into law in February, potentially allowing Democrats to gain majority control of the Legislature after more than a decade in the minority.
The Supreme Court ruled in its ruling Monday that the costs will be shared equally by the parties in the case, including six groups that submitted proposed maps. Those eligible for the money include Evers, Republican and Democratic lawmakers — all funded by taxpayers — and three groups of voters, who were represented by private attorneys.
The charge amounted to $21,359 for each of the six parties, or just under $64,100 from taxpayers.
Justice Rebecca Dallet, writing for the Liberal majority, praised the advisers for their work. She said they “carried out their duties ethically, transparently and substantially within budget.”
But Chief Justice Annette Ziegler wrote in a dissent that “transparency is glaringly absent.” She called the bill submitted by the consultants “woefully inadequate” and lacking in detail. The dissenting justices also focused primarily on hiring the consultants, saying the liberal majority did not have the authority to enter into the contract.
“Legitimate questions remain unanswered, including the language of the report that protects investigations into whether and what undocumented covert communications might be between members of this court or the director’s office and these ‘consultants,’” Ziegler wrote.
Dallet said: “There was no ex parte communication between the court and the consultants regarding the contents of their report. Those who suggest otherwise are reading the standard language in the report about confidentiality out of context.”
The majority of the costs are charged by the two main consultants, who are hired for $450 per hour.
Jonathan Cervas, of Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, submitted a bill for $62,721 for more than 139 hours of work. Cervas New York redrawn maps from Congress and the Senate after a court struck down the maps passed by the Democratic-led Legislature.
Bernard Grofman, of the University of California, Irvine, submitted a bill for $39,762 for more than 88 hours of work. He helped Redraw Virginia federal and state legislative districts after a bipartisan committee reached an impasse.
The fees of three other research assistants were just under $26,000.
Under the contract, the consultants could receive up to $100,000 each.