Feb. 24—ANDERSON — Legislation sponsored by state Sen. Mike Gaskill which could affect a redistricting lawsuit filed against the Anderson City Council has passed.

Gaskill’s bill would give a reprieve to an estimated 100 governmental districts around the state that didn’t redistrict after the 2020 census.

The legislation would legally push back the redistricting requirement to July 1, 2025.

The bill passed both the Indiana Senate and by the Indiana House on Wednesday. Both legislative chambers voted to approve the legislation unanimously.

None of the three groups that filed a federal lawsuit over the lack of redistricting in Anderson spoke at the committee hearings.

The impact of the legislation on the pending federal lawsuit against the Anderson City Council is not known.

The bill contains a provision that the salaries of elected officials can be withheld if redistricting is not completed by the 2025 date.

Last year Common Cause Indiana, the League of Women Voters of Indiana and the local NAACP filed a federal lawsuit alleging the six single-member council districts violated federal law based on the one person, one vote requirement of the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.

It is seeking a special election in the two districts after new boundaries have been created to eliminate the deviations in the number of voters.

District 3 is represented by Democrat Greg Graham and District 4 by Democrat Ollie H. Dixon. Both ran unopposed in 2023.

The initial map presented to the court had the 4th and 6th council members moved into the same district.

A Chicago law firm representing the city council filed a motion contending the request for a summary judgement was done because of a concern over the Gaskill legislation.

The attorneys representing the groups in the federal redistricting lawsuit against the council are once again representing the local NAACP.

Last month the law firm of Bowman and Vlink filed a motion to stop representing the NAACP in the lawsuit.

At the time, they indicated to the federal court that the position of the NAACP had apparently become incompatible with the other parties involved in the lawsuit.

They withdrew the motion to represent the NAACP earlier this month.

“The potential conflict has been resolved,” the withdrawal motion stated.

The motion added that there is no reason it could not represent the NAACP.

Follow Ken de la Bastide on Twitter @KendelaBastide, or call 765-640-4863.