Legislative leaders getting closer on redistricting

Capitol Weekly

January 26, 2006

Legislative leaders, political reform groups and key elements of organized
labor believe they are getting tantalizingly close to overhauling the way
California politicians draw their own legislative and Congressional
districts.

"This would be historic. It's possible that legislative leaders will seize a
historic opportunity to craft something themselves, rather than running
another initiative battle," said Jay Hansen, legislative director of the
Building and Construction Trades Council.

If a bipartisan deal--futile dream for decades--is struck on this most
difficult of political issues, the result could be placed before voters in
November. It would be unique in the nation--a state Legislature voluntarily
relinquishing power over reapportionment, the partisan, once-a-decade
redrawing of political boundaries. The legislation at issue is a Senate
constitutional amendment, SCA3, authored by Sen. Alan Lowenthal, D-Long
Beach , and coauthored by Sen. Roy Ashburn, R-Republican.

"We are probably 75 percent in agreement," said Kathay Feng of California
Common Cause. "There is a spirit of cooperation that has emerged from the
special election, and one of the areas that was identified for reform is
redistricting."

"The thorniest issue," Feng adds, "is the creation of that independent
commission." Congressional leaders, who have no say on the proposal, have
not yet weighed in on the proposal publicly, Capitol insiders say, but they
are not happy. "They are going to hate it," one said.

The latest version of SCA 3--it is a work in progress--would require a
two-thirds vote of the Legislature, but not the governor's signature. It
would then have to be ratified by voters on an upcoming ballot, either in
June or November. It likely would be linked to an easing of term
limits--perhaps 12 years in each house--and it would take effect in 2011,
following the next census. The core of the proposal is an independent
commission that would draw the boundaries of Senate, Assembly, U.S. House
and Board of Equalization Districts.

Republican and Democratic leaders in both houses support reapportionment
reform, and they say that prospects for an agreement are good. "I think it
likely,"  said Senate Republican Leader Dick Ackerman. "Whatever bill winds
up on the floor, I will fight to get it off (passed),"  says Senate Leader
Don Perata, D-Oakland.

In the Assembly, GOP Leader Kevin McCarthy is enthusiastic about the
proposal, as is Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez. "He has made a commitment to
get this done," said Nunez spokesman Steve Maviglio.

The crux of the discussions is the nature of the independent commission. The
support of the legislative leadership is all but certain to hinge on the
composition of the commission and how the commissioners are chosen.

Currently, the commission would have five members. Four of those would be
chosen from a list of 25 selected by retired appellate judges; the fifth
member of the commission, the chairman, would be selected by the other four.

Legislative support for redistricting reform stems in part by the likelihood
that any agreement will include changes in legislative term limits, a
Republican-backed initiative that voters approved in 1990. That law limits
members of the Assembly to three, two-year terms and Senate members to two,
four-year terms.

Extending term limits is a touchy subject, for both Democrats and
Republicans, but especially Republicans. Privately, many lawmakers favor it.
Publicly, it may be a different matter.

"People are all over the map on this," says Ackerman. "I personally think
that term limits need to be modified, but I don't support tying that to this
(redistricting) thing. There is no real consensus on that. It might look as
if we're trying to feather our own nest, and it might shoot down the
reapportionment amendment."

"The feeling among most (in the Democratic Senate caucus) is that if you
stick term limits in there, it's going to be a harder sell (to the public),"
a Democratic staffer said.

Lowenthal, fighting for reapportionment reform, makes it clear that he is
not seeking term limits as part of his redistricting measure.

"There are others who see this as an avenue to other things, such as term
limits reform. I am focusing on redistricting." He notes that any term
limits agreement would have to be handled separately. Like SCA3, a term
limits change would require voter approval. That could mean putting two
linked amendments on the same ballot, with none taking effect unless both
are approved.

The negotiations include the leaders in both houses, and the League of Women
Voters, the American Association of Retired People, the League of Women
Voters, the Mexican American Political Association, Common Cause, CalPIRG
and the Building and Construction Trades Council, or BCTC, a labor group
that represents 400,000 workers. Representatives of the groups have been
meeting privately for weeks.

"Our members are going to be directly affected by this,"  says Hansen.
"Reapportionment is a complicated process, and we like anything that can get
our members more engaged in the process and make maps that are easier to
understand."

However it is packaged, redistricting reform is gaining traction in the
Legislature.

In its original incarnation, "I couldn't even get a second in committee,"
Lowenthal says. "In going over the priorities for the 2005 legislative year,
we had a Democratic retreat in December 2004, this was just before the
governor's state of the state address, and I mentioned that one of our
priorities should be redistricting. Only one person stood up to support me,
(Senator) Jack Scott."

"But I think now there is a critical mass of folks who have at least begun
to understand that we need to reestablish trust between the public and the
Legislature, and that we're going to have to demonstrate that we want to do
the right thing by redistricting."

The proposed five-member commission is patterned after a similar body in
Arizona .

A panel of retired appellate judges selected by the Judicial Council would
come up with a list of 25 names--10 Democrats, 10 Republicans and five
declined-to-state. Those selected could not be legislators, legislators'
family members, lobbyists, or contractors, consultants or appointees of the
Legislature, among other restrictions.

From that list of 25 people, the Republican and Democratic leaders in each
house would select commissioner. Those four commissioners would then select
their fifth member, the chairman. The commission and its staff--the
conflict-of-interest measures that apply to the commissioners also apply to
the staff--would write the district boundaries. The commission's decision is
final, and not subject to approval from the Legislature or governor.

"They have no vote at all, no input," Lowenthal said.

---

John Howard is the Managing Editor of Capitol Weekly