View Full Version : Redistricting initiative torpedoed

07-21-2005, 5:29 PM
Well, someone screwed up. Hard to believe that these highly-paid political/legal consultants could screw up something so basic as sending the same piece of text to both the AG and the print shop, but they did it. The redistricting initiative is off the ballot:

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-redistricting21...headlines-california (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-redistricting21jul21,1,5499557.story?coll=la-headlines-california)

What this means for us is the same gerrymanders will still be hanging around and the same pistol-packing anti-freedom extremists will still be in the legislature, and we'll keep seeing more goofy bills (SB357, etc), rather than what we should be seeing (CCW reform, AWB repeal).

07-21-2005, 7:37 PM
Pfui. Judge tosses redistricting measure off ballot
By John Hill and Jim Sanders -- Bee Capitol Bureau
Published 4:47 pm PDT Thursday, July 21, 2005
A Sacramento judge Thursday tossed Proposition 77 from the Nov. 8 special election ballot, saying proponents of the redistricting overhaul initiative did not follow legal procedure in circulating their petitions.

Backers of the initiative said they would appeal Judge Gail D. Ohanesian's decision. The LAT link said there -would be- a hearing today; the SacBee confirms the result as reported. (SacBee has sort of recently implemented registration, but the link is Bee (http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/story/13270741p-14113099c.html), if that is useful to you.)

07-26-2005, 9:10 AM
I heard on the news last night that it was back in, anyone confirm this?

07-26-2005, 9:46 AM
Originally posted by 50ae:
I heard on the news last night that it was back in, anyone confirm this?

Latest I've seen:

http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/ca/election/stor...9683p-14141955c.html (http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/ca/election/story/13299683p-14141955c.html)

Sacramento Bee:

Redistricting measure gets reprieve
Ruling assures a public review - not a ballot spot - for Prop. 77.
By Jim Sanders -- Bee Capitol Bureau
Published 2:15 am PDT Tuesday, July 26, 2005
A Sacramento judge's order to toss the Proposition 77 redistricting measure from the upcoming special election ballot was temporarily suspended Monday by the 3rd District Court of Appeal.
The practical effect of the appellate order was to allow Proposition 77 to be included in a public review period that begins today and ends Aug. 15 for initiatives on the upcoming ballot.

The request to allow public review of Proposition 77 was part of a wider-ranging appeal by Ted Costa and other proponents that seeks reversal of a Superior Court ruling to disqualify the measure.

"We hope this is the first step toward restoring the rights of the 951,000 people who signed petitions to put Proposition 77 on the ballot," said Dan Kolkey, an attorney for the proponents.
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who signed the ballot argument for Proposition 77, sent the appellate court a letter expressing support for the proponents' request for a temporary suspension.

Proposition 77 would give to a three-judge panel of retired judges, rather than the Legislature, the power to draw district boundaries for legislative, congressional and Board of Equalization seats.

The appellate court emphasized that its order Monday was no indication of how it ultimately will rule on the larger appeal.

State Attorney General Bill Lockyer, who opposed the temporary suspension, said through a spokesman after Monday's order was released that "we look forward to making our case" to the court.

The appeal by Costa stemmed from Thursday's ruling by Superior Court Judge Gail D. Ohanesian that proper procedures were not followed in circulating petitions for the measure.

Specifically, Ohanesian found that the text of Proposition 77 that was sent to the attorney general's office to launch the petition drive was different from the text used to solicit signatures.

Costa and other proponents had voluntarily disclosed the error to the secretary of state's office, but only after their petition drive was over and signatures had been counted.

Ohanesian did not agree with proponents' claims that their mistake should be overlooked because the differences in text were minor and, therefore, voters were not misled.

Lockyer filed the lawsuit that prompted Ohanesian's ruling and the subsequent appeal.

Costa, in court documents, argued that allowing immediate public display of the redistricting measure would do no harm, regardless of what ultimately happens to his appeal.

The state is required to place all upcoming ballot measures on public display for 20 days to enable legal challenges of text, ballot arguments, fiscal analyses or other such documents.

Failure to subject Proposition 77 to the public review could jeopardize its placement on the ballot, even if Ohanesian's ruling eventually is overturned, Costa argued.

But attorney Lance Olson, representing Californians for Fair Representation, which opposes Proposition 77, said the timing crunch is due largely to the failure of Costa and of the governor's staff to immediately disclose the differences in text once problems were discovered in May.

"These guys deliberately delayed disclosure," Olson said. "Their behavior shouldn't be rewarded in any way."

Margita Thompson, Schwarzenegger's spokesman, characterized Olson's comments as "grasping at straws."

"What is it that they are afraid of?" she asked. "Why are they afraid of having this initiative reach the voters?"