SJR 21-CONST. AM: INCREASE NUMBER OF LEGISLATORS  1:43:39 PM CHAIR FRENCH announced the consideration of SJR 21. SENATOR DONALD OLSON, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor of SJR 21, read from the following the sponsor statement: " ….Each house district shall be formed of contiguous and compact territory containing as nearly as practicable a relatively integrated socio-economic area…." Alaska Constitution Article VI, Section 6, titled Legislative Apportionment. SJR 21 will put a constitutional amendment before the voters in the 2010 general election that would increase the size of the legislature to 48 representatives and 24 senators. Upon voter approval, the measure would apply to the 2012 determination of election district boundaries. In 1913, Congress established the first territorial legislature with 8 senators and 16 representatives. The size of the legislature was increased to 12 senators and 24 representatives in 1942. 17 years later a constitution for the State of Alaska was ratified further increasing the size of the legislature to the current 20 senator and 40 representative membership. A feature of that apportionment was that most of the senate membership was equally distributed among the 4 judicial districts in order that one region may not dominate the others. The U.S. Supreme Court decision requiring "one man, one vote" eliminated redistricting by this method. In the first 50 years of statehood, Alaska has not changed the size of its legislative body, the smallest bicameral legislature in the nation. In this time span, the population of the state has more than tripled. Most significantly, the population increase is disproportionate, strongly favoring large urban areas over rural and small community areas. The task then of applying the Article VI, section 6 requirements for contiguous, compact areas with integrated socio-economic features has correspondingly become more difficult and contentious. Except for the 1960 reapportionment right after statehood, all subsequent reapportionments have faced successful legal challenges, requiring boundary adjustments and on several occasions, a court constructed reapportionment plan. Federal protections in the U.S. Voter Rights Act of 1965 for large minority concentrations further complicate Alaska's reapportionment process. Indeed, they can act to counter the Section 6 requirements. Rural election district distortions are evident in the current plan. There is a probability that the new population distribution of the 2010 census cannot reconcile Section 6 and the Voter Rights Act without increasing the size of the legislature. Indeed, the Alaska Supreme Court has established redistricting priorities that place voter rights considerations before the compact, contiguous language of Section 6. Between 1960 and 2006, twenty nine states have changed the size of their legislative body. For the nine states with small populations similar to Alaska (509,000 to 1,429,000), the average size of their legislative bodies is 134 members. Another measure of the effect of the state's growth and complexity on the work of the legislature is its budget responsibilities. Legislative expenditures for government programs and projects has risen from a figure of $104 million in FY 61 to somewhere in the neighborhood of $7 billion currently. This is an increase from $2,700 per capita in 1961 nominal dollars to $10,000 per capita today. 1:49:07 PM SENATOR OLSON distributed a spreadsheet showing population trends in Alaska's 40 election districts. In 2000 the average population per district was 15,673 and the projected 2010 average population is 17,309 per district. It's disturbing that certain areas of the state will significantly drop below the average, he said. If SJR 21 is implemented the average population per district will be 14,424, which is much closer to the 2000 average. CHAIR FRENCH said he appreciates the history; it's a reminder that we can and do change when times change. 1:52:30 PM GORDON HARRISON, representing himself, said he is the former director of legislative research and he found the sponsor's comments regarding the history of the Alaska Legislature particularly interesting and important. The overriding concern of the delegates at the 1955-56 Constitutional Convention was to assure broad representation throughout the state, particularly in rural areas. In an effort to ensure rural representation, the delegates did two things. They increased the number of legislators from 40 to 60 and they apportioned the Senate on a basis of geography. In a complicated apportionment scheme each judicial district got a set number of senators, and then each got additional senators based on the number of election districts within the particular judicial district. Southeast and Central Alaska each got five senators, Southcentral got six senators, and Northwest got four senators for a total of 20. In the early '60s the U.S. Supreme Court overturned this scheme in a series of reapportionment decisions. Federal law required all state senates to be apportioned on the basis of population. 1:54:58 PM MR. HARRISON said it's interesting that in 1955 when Alaska's population was only 200,000, the delegates felt compelled to increase the size of the Legislature to 60 members. With a population that is now approaching 700,000, he suggested that it's a very timely and good idea to incrementally increase the Legislature by eight House districts and four Senate districts. This accomplishes the goal of maintaining a vital Legislature by having rural and Native interests adequately represented. The other objective is to make these districts workable and manageable for the people. Right now, some districts are huge and their many issues compete for time and attention. It's nearly impossible for legislators to travel to all the communities and adequately represent them. 1:56:45 PM The spreadsheet that the sponsor distributed demonstrates that absent this legislation, rural districts will be hurting. It's almost inevitable that Southeast will lose District 5 and it's likely that either District 6 or District 37 will be lost along with a Senate seat. That means 3 Native rural districts will probably be lost. He hasn't done the calculations, but he assumes that MatSu will gain 1.5 and Anchorage will gain 0.5. By increasing the number of House districts to 48, the population is reduced to 14,424, which is manageable. The Railbelt will get the additional 12 legislators, but the existing districts will probably stay whole. MR. HARRISON said he realizes that changing an institution is a big step, but this is one that he would recommend. It doesn't portend any fundamental change in the legislative process. SENATOR EGAN asked how the House and Senate districts would be affected geographically because some Senate districts are already huge. MR. HARRISON responded that without this change they promise to get even larger. If this were to pass, most House districts would hold their own while urban areas like Anchorage would have relatively small geographic districts. He confirmed that each Senate district is comprised of two House districts. 2:00:37 PM CHAIR FRENCH pointed out that this won't create new seats in Native areas; it simply maintains the status quo. The new seats will go to the Railbelt. The MatSu area will have 4 or 5 more representatives here in Juneau representing their interests. "They're not going to be outweighed or outnumbered by anybody," he said. MR. HARRISON agreed that this does nothing to change the balance of power between rural and urban areas. Rural districts will simply maintain some presence and the districts will be a more realistic size for traveling and campaigning. 2:03:04 PM JIM BALDWIN, representing himself, told the committee that during the last districting he represented the Office of the Governor. He said he supports SJR 21 as a valuable tool for the redistricting board; it may ameliorate the effect of the Voting Rights Act on the process. He explained that Alaska is covered by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act and as such it has to pre-clear any changes to the election process or procedure with the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). Any proposed change requires proof that it does not abridge anyone's right to vote on the basis of race, color or minority language. The idea is to prevent any back slide, or retrogression, in the level of representation for minority voters, he said. CHAIR FRENCH asked how it's possible to avoid conflict with the Voting Rights Act when population ratios change. Non-Natives moving to the state dilute the voting power of Natives. 2:06:29 PM MR. BALDWIN conceded that it may not be possible, but the Voting Rights Act and the regulations require the state to examine all possible alternatives before saying that retrogression cannot be avoided. The board- the state government - bears a fairly heavy burden in order to stay in compliance with the Voting Rights Act, he said. CHAIR FRENCH asked what prompted Congress to pass the Voting Rights Act. MR. BALDWIN replied it arose from post-Civil War constitutional amendments dealing with the treatment of minority voters, principally in the south. Other states were brought in because they had either literacy requirements in their constitutions or significant language minorities. According to the federal register, Alaska has been covered since 1972, principally on the basis of language minorities. The federal government wants to ensure that states protect minority voters and one means of doing that is to apply the retrogression test. He noted that it's been fertile ground for litigation during every redistricting cycle, primarily on the national scene. He cited Georgia v. Ashcroft as the most recent case. He said he agrees with Mr. Harrison that a retrogression determination seems to be looming. With just 40 districts the DOJ will possibly pressure the state to find minority populations wherever it can to try to meet the non-retrogression standard or to minimize it to the greatest extent possible. It's likely that the DOJ will emphasize finding where the previously rural populations exist and moving lines to pick them up. MR. BALDWIN said that the Alaska Constitution also has redistricting standards that require socially integrated and compact districts. He thinks that when the census is complete and the locations of minority populations are known, there could be pressure to pick up populations in urban areas - or to redraw districts in a way that keep Native populations together. If the number of legislators remains constant it will be a problem for everyone to confront, not just rural districts, he concluded. 2:12:58 PM CHAIR FRENCH asked him to tell the public why this resolution needs to pass this year. MR. BALDWIN said there's a very compressed time schedule for the board to do its work. Census materials will arrive in March 2011 and the board then has to develop a plan and go through preclearance in the court process by June 1 of the next election cycle. CHAIR FRENCH closed public testimony and held SJR 21 in committee.