Legislature(1997 - 1998)
02/06/1998 01:45 PM House FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 36
Proposing amendments to the Constitution of the State
of Alaska relating to redistricting of the
legislature, and repealing as obsolete language in the
article setting out the apportionment schedule used to
elect the members of the first state legislature.
Co-Chair Therriault distributed a new version of HJR 36 -
0-LS0939\F, CS HJR 36 (JUD). [Copy on file]. Co-Chair
Therriault proposed a conceptual amendment to the version
before the Committee. He noted the confusion in language
used to describe election districts versus Senate
districts. Election districts as described in the bill are
actually House districts. Co-Chair Therriault proposed
that the word "election" be replaced with "House" on Page
1, Lines 7 and 9, and Page 2, Lines 12 and 13. He MOVED
that as Amendment #1.
JEFF LOGAN, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN, commented that
in the original constitution, Senate districts were not
changed each time there was a census. Senate districts
were set based on geography. Therefore, there was no need
in changing those lines, although, House numbers did change
with the census. The drafters placed "election" districts
rather than "House" in those spots. He agreed that
inserting "House" would diminish the confusion and that
Representative Green would support the change. Legal
Counsel will make the changes elsewhere in the bill to make
it conform to the Alaska State Constitution.
Representative J. Davies referenced Section 5, suggesting
that section specify House and Senate districts. Co-Chair
Therriault stated that he intended to offer an additional
amendment changing that language.
There being NO OBJECTION to Amendment #1, it was adopted.
Co-Chair Therriault MOVED to adopt Amendment #2. [Copy on
file]. He commented that Amendment #2 would modify Section
5 of the Resolution, leaving the proposed language.
Representative J. Davies recommended deleting "and" in the
first line.
Representative Martin opposed using the word "contiguous".
Co-Chair Therriault pointed out that "contiguous" is used
instead of "compact". Representative Martin reiterated his
concern with that language. Representative J. Davies noted
that if "contiguous" was not used, two separate compact
territories could result. Using "contiguous" guarantees
that it remains one area. Representative J. Davies offered
a friendly amendment to Amendment #2 adding "each" before
House. Co-Chair Therriault agreed to that change.
Representative Martin OBJECTED to Amendment #2. A roll call
vote was taken on the Motion.
IN FAVOR: J. Davies, G. Davis, Foster, Kelly, Kohring,
Hanley, Therriault
OPPOSED: Martin
The MOTION PASSED (7-1).
Representatives Foster, Moses and Mulder were not present
for the vote.
Representative J. Davies MOVED to adopt Amendment #3.
[Copy on file]. Because of previous action taken, he noted
that the second portion of the amendment would be deleted.
Co-Chair Therriault OBJECTED to the new Amendment #3 for
the purpose of discussion. Representative Martin requested
to add language to the amendment on Page 2, Line 13,
changing "contiguous" and adding the word "adjacent".
Representative J. Davies OBJECTED. He noted that it was
his intent to remove the word "contiguous" when addressing
circumstances relative to Senate districts composed of
contiguous House districts. He advised that dropping
"contiguous" could alleviate the possibility of a lawsuit
for the State.
Co-Chair Hanley thought that removing "contiguous" could
create a situation in which unconnected areas were grouped
inappropriately together.
Representative Martin WITHDREW his motion to amend
Amendment #3. Representative J. Davies WITHDREW Amendment
areas "shall" be adjacent unless impractical. There being
NO OBJECTION, Amendment #3 was WITHDRAWN. Co-Chair
Therriault recommended that the Committee wait to receive
the new redraft before further changes were adopted.
Representative J. Davies MOVED to adopt Amendment #4.
[Copy on file]. Co-Chair Therriault OBJECTED for the
purpose of discussion.
Representative J. Davies commented that Amendment #4 would
address who could be on the Advisory Board to the Governor.
Currently, the proposed legislation specifies that the
board will consist of five members, none of whom can be
public employees or officials. He pointed out that such a
broad statement disenfranchises over 50% of the State
population. Co-Chair Therriault replied, when the
Constitution was written, there were a smaller number of
people who fell into that category, at that time it was
acceptable. He did not see a compelling reason to change
that. Representative J. Davies stressed that 50% of the
population would not be eligible to serve on the board with
that language.
Mr. Logan noted that the sponsor of the legislation would
oppose the amendment as written. He asked that a clearer
definition of what a "public" employee is be determined.
Mr. Logan said that the language would not exclude all
public employees, pointing out that there have been
military personnel on the board.
Representative J. Davies WITHDREW Amendment #4. There
being NO OBJECTION, it was withdrawn. Representative J.
Davies requested that the sponsor consider adding language,
which would address the concerns in Amendments #4 & #5.
[Copy on file].
Co-Chair Therriault asked for further clarification
regarding census taking of people in hotels. Mr. Logan
noted that the Director of Census, Martin Turner, has
advised that hotel guests are counted, but there is a
procedure used called "key night" when at the census date,
enumerators are sent to those locations. Persons who are
staying at the hotels on the census date that are transient
are asked if they have another permanent address and then
crosschecked at the other address. If they are permanent
residences of the hotel, they then are included in the
census. Representative Martin pointed out that many hotels
are for homeless.
Co-Chair Therriault stated that a new draft of the proposed
legislation will be distributed to Committee members at a
later date.
Representative J. Davies stated for the record that he does
not propose to discriminate against military residents.
Mr. Logan addressed a previous accusation from the
Department of Law regarding the sponsor's intent for the
legislation. In the House Judiciary Committee, the intent
was to establish a clear record in order to maintain the
status quo. There is a preference that two House districts
touching create a Senate district, but in those cases where
there is a geographical challenge due to water, the current
configuration is acceptable. Mr. Logan quoted material
indicating the U.S. Supreme Court preference toward single
member districts.
Representative J. Davies commented that the fact of the
Court preference does not establish that it is an absolute
requirement. He stated that it should not be concluded
from those findings that some single member districts could
violate representation. Mr. Logan summarized, there are
seventeen (17) states that allow multi member districts.
HJR 36 was HELD in Committee for further consideration.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|