My eye was caught by this post by Kari Chisholm on BlueOregon: Jim Huffman calls for mathematical redistricting. A very bad idea.. The gist of the post (which I encourage you to read) is that Professor Huffman proposes that instead of tossing redistricting into the partisan laps of the legislature, and then to the secretary of state, we engage some mathematical wizards who don't know any of the players, and let them draw districts by some formula of their own choosing.
Mr. Chisholm posted maps of how the districts would look under two of the formulas. One of them, the "shortest-splitline" algorithm, produces a map that you can see here. The idea is simple: first draw the shortest line that splits the state with 3/5 of the population on one side and 2/5 on the other side. Then split the 2/5 portion into two sections of equal population by using the shortest line that will do so. Divide the 3/5 section into a 2/5 section and a 1/5 section with the shortest line that will do so, and then divide the 2/5 section into two sections of equal population using the shortest line that will do so. As I'm barred from posting on BlueOregon (one of the downsides of having a mostly fictive existence), I'll give my reaction here.
The result is rather zingy. It also meets most of the statutory tests. Eastern Oregon, a common community, remains a single district. One district has most of the Portland metropolitan area. One district has the southern portions of I-5 and US 101, in conformance to the statute that encourages districts to be located along transportation links. The northwest district similarly has US 26, US 30, and US 101.
What of the remaining district, a long wedge that runs southwest from roughly Hood River to the coast? It doesn't have any unifying transportation links, but it does have a community of interest: it has most of our state's major casinos.