While other lawmakers in their parties zigged, some mavericks zagged when it came to controversial new congressional district boundary maps.

And as Democrats and Republicans prepare to battle in possible lawsuits over those new maps, the mavericks' reasons for their votes sometimes undercut their party leaders' arguments about whether maps are fair. So some mavericks say that is not exactly making them popular among their colleagues.

"They did go after us in our caucus meeting, and that's their right," said Rep. Christine Watkins, D-Price. "We were working hard as Democrats to stand up against the process. But when I saw that [final] map, for my constituents, it was the one."

Watkins, the only Democratic state lawmaker elected outside Salt Lake County, is one of only three Democrats to support the congressional maps. The others were Reps. Susan Duckworth of Magna and Neal Hendrickson of West Valley City. The Legislature has 24 Democrats.

On the other hand, only five of the Legislature's 80 Republicans voted against the maps: Reps. Derek Brown of Cottonwood Heights; Steve Eliason of Sandy; Becky Edwards of North Salt Lake; Kraig Powell of Heber City; and Brad Wilson of Kaysville.

Utah Democratic Party Chairman Jim Dabakis has repeatedly said that his party plans to sue over the maps, contending Republicans unfairly sliced up the Democrats' one stronghold in Salt Lake County to dilute their votes — and drew four districts that are each at least 62 percent Republican (while the GOP says they are each at least 59 percent Republican).

But Hendrickson broke with Democrats, saying he likes what the map did in his portion of Salt Lake County — in West Valley City. He likes that the map put much of that city in the 2nd Congressional District, where Rep. Jim Matheson, D-Utah, lives. The rest is in the new 4th Congressional District, where no incumbent lives. And no longer are major portions of West Valley City in the 3rd Congressional District represented by Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah.

"I've been disappointed the last 10 years at who my congressman is, and may be disappointed again. But more of West Valley City was put into the 2nd District, which made me happier," Hendrickson said. "I thought it was a good map, a good compromise."

Dabakis has also said the maps will likely ensure that rural southern Utah will not elect a member of Congress because of the way that area is grafted to portions of Salt Lake County. But Watkins broke with Democrats because she likes what redistricting did to the southern Utah areas that she represents.

"I was going to vote against everything because I didn't like the mix of rural and urban because we [in rural areas] get lost," she said. "When I walked down on the floor that night and they put the map up, I said, 'Oh my gosh, they have my areas at least together.' They had San Juan, Grand, Emery, Carbon together. ... We didn't even get to keep that together in my [Utah] House seat."

She said she concluded, "That was the best one for my area. It was a tough, tough vote to make because of the process on that map."

Watkins and Hendrickson said they disliked the process that led to that final map, with Republicans negotiating it behind closed doors and then showing it to Democrats and the public only 20 minutes before debate began. They said because of that, their Democratic colleagues thought all Democrats would vote against the map — and are upset that they did not.

Hendrickson said, "I don't know that they understand. In our caucus meetings that day, I think they thought we were all together."

Duckworth did not respond to repeated requests for an interview about her vote.

Meanwhile, a similar script played out on the Republican side with a few mavericks breaking from the party and not quite supporting the party line about whether maps are fair — but Republicans say they have suffered no fallout for their votes.

Eliason said the congressional map affects his state House area "in ways that conflict with basic good principles of redistricting. It cuts my district in half. It cuts my primary city, Sandy, in half. It cut Midvale. ... It cut my main school district."

Similarly, Brown said he heard from many constituents in his Cottonwood Heights and Sandy district who were upset at plans to remove them from Matheson's district and put them in Chaffetz's district instead.

"To take that area and put it in a completely different congressional district and be represented by someone who is based in Utah County didn't sit well with a lot of my constituents," he said.

Brown, like Democrats, adds that he did not like the partisanship shown in congressional redistricting. "I just wasn't as comfortable with that process as I was with the [state] House and Senate maps."

In contrast, Powell of Heber City said he voted against the congressional maps because they did not always graft enough rural area with slices of Salt Lake County. He said the new 4th District has too little rural area. It combines western Salt Lake and Utah counties with bits of Juab and Sanpete counties.

"I was comfortable with the case that was being made for keeping a rural and urban mix," so each member of Congress would represent both issues, Powell said. "The map that ultimately was presented, I did not think had enough of a rural-urban mix. … It just didn't seem consistent with [the] theory."

The three Republicans interviewed said they received no negative fallout from their leaders or caucus for their votes.

For example, Brown said, "I spoke right before the vote with the speaker [Becky Lockhart, R-Provo]. I said, 'Just so you know, I am going to vote against this.' Her response to me was, 'Derek, vote your conscience.' That was literally the only advice she gave. It's always refreshing to hear that."

Of note, Wilson declined an interview about his redistricting vote. Edwards did not respond to repeated requests for an interview. —

Party-line votes

The congressional redistricting map setting boundaries for Utah's four U.S. House districts cleared the Legislature on a mostly party-line vote.

In the House, the measure passed 50-19. Just three Democrats voted for it; five Republicans opposed it.

In the Senate, the map was approved 20-5. All Republicans present voted in favor, all Democrats against.