HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 44 Proposing amendments to the Constitution of the State of Alaska relating to redistricting of the legislature. Co-Chair Therriault noted that the Committee would be working with the 0-LS0528\I, Glover, 3/3/98, version of the proposed legislation. Co-Chair Therriault MOVED to adopt Amendment #6. [Copy on file]. Discussion followed among Committee members regarding deletion of the language, "until sixty days after adoption and final adjudication of the succeeding redistricting plan and proclamation of redistricting". There being NO OBJECTION, Amendment #6 was adopted. Representative Gary Davis asked the outcome of the final redistricting plan referenced on Page 4, Line 6 - 13. Co- Chair Therriault noted that passage of Amendment #6 would remove the confusion. Co-Chair Therriault spoke to the fiscal note as provided by the Department of Law. Representative J. Davies understood that the fiscal note had been submitted because there would be costs in obtaining pre-clearance which would require expertise and time. JIM SOURANT, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN PORTER, thought that the fiscal note would not be relevant with passage of Amendment #6. Co-Chair Therriault explained that the mechanism for drawing the lines would be changed, not the requirements of who is eligible to vote. He also questioned the need for the fiscal note. Representative J. Davies commented that the base of the fiscal note was to address preclearance which would guarantee that there are no problems before the changes are implemented. This would be an expense which would occur in any case when a significant change has been made. Co-Chair Therriault reiterated that a change in the method of drawing the lines would not require a preclearance. Representative Mulder suggested that the bill's fiscal note could be changed on the House Floor or in Conference Committee. Representative Mulder MOVED to report CS HJR 44 (FIN) out of Committee with individual recommendations and with the accompanying fiscal notes. Representative J. Davies OBJECTED. Representative J. Davies believed that the approach taken with the province of the justice system could be a large mistake. He suggested that this system would encourage politicizing among the Supreme Court Judges with far reaching consequences. He stated that he strongly opposed the legislation. Representative Martin acknowledged that the legislation could be interuptive to the political process, causing chaos. A roll call vote was taken on the motion to MOVE the bill from Committee. IN FAVOR: Foster, Kelly, Mulder, G. Davis, Hanley, Therriault OPPOSED: Grussendorf, Kohring, Martin, Moses, J. Davies The MOTION PASSED (6-5). CS HJR 44 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with a "do pass" recommendation and with fiscal notes by the Department of Law dated 2/18/98 and the Office of the Lt. Governor dated 2/18/98.