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

 

  1. HJR 39, -1 amendments, Sen. Deckert, 9 pp
  2. HJR 39, prepared statement, Sen. Deckert, 2 pp
  3. HJR 39, Legislative Fiscal Statement, staff, 1 p
  4. HB 3223, prepared statement, Jeff Merrick, 1 p
  5. Introductions, 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, staff, 80 pp