HOUSE COMMITTEE ON ELECTION AND RULES
April 26, 2005 Hearing Room E
1:00 P.M. Tapes 46 - 47
MEMBERS PRESENT: Rep. Derrick Kitts, Chair
Rep. Paul Holvey, Vice-Chair
Rep. Kim Thatcher, Vice-Chair
Rep. Billy Dalto
Rep. Debi Farr
Rep. Mitch Greenlick
Rep. Steve March
STAFF PRESENT: Cletus Moore, Committee Administrator
Annetta Mullins, Committee Assistant
MEASURES/ISSUES HEARD:
HJR 39 – Public Hearing and Work Session
HB 3223 – Public Hearing and Work Session
Introduction of Committee Measures
These minutes are in compliance with Senate and House Rules. Only text enclosed in quotation marks reports a speaker’s exact words. For complete contents, please refer to the tapes.
TAPE/# |
Speaker |
Comments |
TAPE 46, A |
||
003 |
Chair Kitts |
Calls the meeting to order at 1:04 p.m. and opens a public hearing on HJR 39. |
HJR 39 – PUBLIC HEARING |
||
007 |
Cletus Moore |
Committee Administrator. Reads summary of HJR 39 and calls attention to the -1 amendments (EXHIBIT A). |
015 |
Rep. Farr |
Rep. Farr, co-sponsor of HJR 39, states she will defer to Sen. Deckert. |
018 |
Sen.. Ryan Deckert |
SD 14. Explains that HJR 39 deals with how Oregon redistricts. Believes this is the only opportunity the legislature will have to do something on redistricting. States they think the commission form of redistricting is a better, fairer way, though not perfect, of redistricting ourselves and that is what is in the -1 amendments (EXHIBIT A). The -1 amendments are answers to many of the questions that were raised at the last hearing on HJR 39. Explains that the bolded language in his prepared statement is in response to the questions. States there are 140 retired judges in Oregon. Reviews a prepared statement explaining the -1 amendments (EXHIBIT B). |
082 |
Rep. Farr |
Comments that her staff research shows there are 109 retired judges but will stick with the 140 that Sen. Deckert has stated. States that about 70 of those judges still live in Oregon and believes the pool is ample. |
099 |
Rep. Holvey |
Asks if they know how many judges are in each party classification or affiliation. |
099 |
Rep. Farr |
Responds there would be two judges from each major political party and the fifth person would be an independent. |
|
Sen. Deckert |
Points out that the four members would have to choose the fifth member. |
|
Rep. Farr |
Reports that they attempted to do the research on the affiliation of the judges and were unable to find the information. |
|
Rep. Holvey |
Comments that judges are nonpartisan and is curious how they would determine which judge is of what party. |
108 |
Rep. Greenlick |
Refers members to lines 14-30 on page 2 of the -1 amendments (EXHIBIT A). |
|
Sen. Deckert |
Points out that the language is on page 3, beginning on line 3. |
115 |
Rep. Greenlick |
Comments the question was whether the fifth member had to be nonpartisan. |
|
Sen. Deckert |
Responds the fifth member would not have to be nonpartisan. |
121 |
Rep. March |
Asks if the first sentence on page 5 in subsection (11) beginning on line 4, means that in 2013 the legislature could come back and set a new commission and do another plan. |
|
Sen. Deckert |
Responds that they used the California statute as a model but thinks it is a good provision. The language requires a 2/3 vote. The legislature may want the commission to come back and look at different issues. States he likes the idea that the legislature has some recourse especially if there is an overwhelming interest in this building to involve itself. |
144 |
Rep. March |
States that this is a proposal in California by the governor, not existing law. |
149 |
Rep. Greenlick |
Asks if the language beginning in line 43 of page 4 of the bill and the remaining language would remain in the bill. |
|
Sen. Deckert |
Responds that the language would stay in the measure. |
173 |
Moore |
Explains where the amendments are inserted in HJR 39. |
|
|
The Legislative Fiscal Impact on the original HJR 39 is hereby made a part of the record (EXHIBIT C). |
184 |
Chair Kitts |
Closes the public hearing and opens a work session on HJR 39. |
HJR 39 – WORK SESSION |
||
203 |
Rep. Thatcher |
MOTION: Moves to ADOPT HJR 39-1 amendments dated 4/19/05. |
|
Rep. March |
Comments he will agree with the amendments at this point but would like to see the measure printed and returned to the committee before the committee votes on it. |
214 |
|
VOTE: 7-0-0 AYE: In a roll call vote, all members present vote Aye. |
|
Chair Kitts |
The motion CARRIES.
|
|
|
|
217 |
Rep. Thatcher |
MOTION: Moves HJR 39 be sent to the floor with a BE ADOPTED AS AMENDED recommendation. |
|
Rep. March |
Comments that he cannot support moving this measure at this time. States he did not get the amendments until today and he understands the intent but would like to take some time to seriously consider it. If the committee votes on it today, he will be a no vote and may serve notice of a minority report. |
210 |
Chair Kitts |
Asks members for their desired timeframe to act on the measure. |
|
Rep. March |
Comments that he does not know how long it would take to get the measure printed. |
236 |
Chair Kitts |
Comments he could reschedule HJR 39 for the committee meeting on Thursday if that is okay with Sen. Deckert. |
|
Sen. Deckert |
States that is fine with him in order to get the words right. |
243 |
Rep. Dalto |
Comments he struggles with the bill because he believes the plan in place is unfair. States his concern with the commission is whether we would have a fair fix to the current plan that is currently adopted, or will the commission take up the plan we have now and make adjustment to reflect the population changes. States that if the commission starts with the plan we have now, it is not legitimate. States he is supportive of what Sen. Deckert is trying to accomplish but he cannot support the bill today. |
267 |
Sen. Deckert |
Comments he thinks the legislature has two choices: either the status quo or go to a commission process. Believes the legislature would miss an opportunity by no looking ahead. |
291 |
Chair Kitts |
Advises that the committee will bring the bill back on Thursday. |
|
Rep. Dalto |
Asks Sen. Deckert if he would entertain a friendly amendment that would direct the new commission to throw out the existing plan and create a new plan. |
304 |
Rep. Greenlick |
Comments that he does not see anything in the bill that suggests one way or the other—the commission does have the option to either move from where they are or throw it out, as is always the case. Asks if Rep. Dalto’s amendment would instruct the commission to ignore the plan that is in place. |
|
Rep. Dalto |
States he interprets the bill that the commission could take it upon themselves to create a new plan, but does not want the commission to not do the work. State he would like for the commission to start with a fresh perspective. That could be the commission’s baseline plan that moves forward into the future. States he does not think it would be necessary to create a new baseline every 10 years. |
|
Rep. Thatcher |
BY IMPLIED CONSENT WITHDRAWS HER MOTION that HJR 39 be sent to the floor with a BE ADOPTED AS AMENDED recommendation. |
322 |
Chair Kitts |
Comments that the -1 amendments have been adopted, closes the work session on HJR 39 and opens a pubic hearing on HB 3223. |
HB 3223 – PUBLIC HEARING |
||
|
Cletus Moore |
Committee Administrator. Reads summary of HB 3223. |
|
Rep. Greg Macpherson and Rep. Patty Smith |
Introduce themselves. |
|
Rep. Macpherson |
Explains they bring forward this bill as a bi-partisan effort. States it is not clear to him why state statute controls the timing and mechanics of county party organizational meetings. The state law is too inflexible and the Multnomah Democrats and Republicans have jointly requested the changes in HB 3223 to give them more latitude as to how they hold their meetings county wide. Introduces Jeff Merrick, Chair of the Multnomah County Democrats and Tim Trickey, Political Director for the Multnomah County Republicans. |
362 |
Rep. P. Smith |
Comments this is a bi-partisan effort and urges support of the bill. |
|
Rep. Greenlick |
Asks why they did not introduce a bill to delete the section from the statutes. |
|
Rep. Macpherson |
States that would have gone beyond what was requested of them. Suggests the committee could ask the requestors of the bill. |
374 |
Rep. Holvey |
States he is curious as to the central committees from other counties and perhaps the Democratic and Republican parties of Oregon. |
|
Rep. Macpherson |
Suggests a good question to ask those who are here would be what input was obtained from other participants and party organizations around the state. States from his reading the proposal, it gives them more latitude and it is difficult to see how it would be troublesome to other county organizations. |
396 |
Jeff Merrick |
Multnomah County Democratic Central Committee. Submits and summarizes a prepared statement in support of HB 3223 EXHIBIT D). |
430 |
Tim Trickey |
Political Director, Multnomah County Republican Party. States he is speaking on behalf of their chairman and other members of the Central Committee. This bill does very little to change the actual structure in terms of how county parties are organized, in terms of how the state party is organized and it gives flexibility in terms of involving the most people possible in the process. States they faced a similar situation as the Democrats did. They had a difficult time getting people out for their organizational meeting. They had 185 people out of the 697 precinct people in Multnomah County in attendance at the meeting, barely a quorum to be able to hold an official meeting. States they are trying to pursue a minute change rather than throwing out the entire statute. Believes there should be no opposition on either side of the aisle and there should be no nominal fiscal impact to the bill. |
513 |
Chair Kitts |
Closes the public hearing and opens a work session on HB 3223. |
TAPE 47, A |
||
HB 3223 – WORK SESSION |
||
020 |
Rep. Thatcher |
MOTION: Moves HB 3223 to the floor with a DO PASS recommendation. |
023 |
|
VOTE: 7-0-0 AYE: In a roll call vote, all members present vote Aye. |
|
Chair Kitts |
The motion CARRIES. REP. MACHERSON AND REP. P. SMITH will lead discussion on the floor. |
|
Chair Kitts |
Closes the work session on HB 3223 and opens a work session for the purpose of introduction of committee measures. |
INTRODUCTION OF COMMITTEE MEASURES |
||
035 |
Rep. Thatcher |
MOTION: Moves LCs 9092, 9093, 9094, 9095, 9096, 9097, 9098, 9099, 9100, 9101, 9102, 9103, 9104, 9405, 9106, 9107, 9108, 9109, 9110, 9111, 9112, 9113, 9114, 9115, 9116, 9117, 9118, 9119, 9120, 9121, 9122, 9123, 9124, 9125, 9126, 9127, 9128, 9129, 9130, 9131 relating to state financial administration, appropriating money and declaring an emergency (EXHIBIT E) BE INTRODUCED as committee bills. |
042 |
Chair Kitts |
Explains these are budget bills. |
045 |
Rep. Greenlick |
Requests copies of the LC drafts. |
051 |
|
VOTE: 7-0-0 |
|
Chair Kitts |
Hearing no objection, declares the motion CARRIED. |
051 |
Chair Kitts |
Closes the work session on introduction of committee measures and adjourns meeting at 1:40 p.m. |
EXHIBIT SUMMARY