<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Californa 'We Draw the Lines' Resource
The application period for becoming a commissioner has ended.
The first phase of the application process to become a member of the Commission ran from Dec 15 through Feb 16, 2010, and the second phase —the supplemental application phase—closed on Apr 19, 2010. Applicants who were tentatively eligible based on information they provided in the first application, were invited to complete the supplemental application. Applicants had until April 19, 2010, 5pm to complete the supplemental application. The Applicant Review Panel (panel) has reviewed the applications and interviewed nearly 120 applicants between August 6, 2010 through September 10, 2010. On September 22 and 23, 2010, the Panel held its final meeting and reduced the applicant pool to 60 of the most qualified applicants—20 Republicans, 20 Democrats, and 20 not affliated with either of those two parties. All the panel meetings were public and agendas are posted here. The panel on September 29, 2010 submitted the list of names to Legislative leadership. Legislative leadership can strike up to 8 names from each of the three groups. To learn more about the selection process, go to this link.
* * * * *
I note this would be whittled down by... wait for it... wait for it... the Legislative Leadership. They can only cut eight from each group of 20 though. This should wind up with a final field of 36 from which to seat the 14 commissioners.
* * * * *
Ah, this helps... at the above provided link at the bottom.
* * * * *
What happens now that the Applicant Review Panel narrowed the Applicant Pool to 60?
On Sept 29, 2010 the Applicant Review Panel transmitted the names and other information related to the 60 most qualified applicants to the Legislature. As required by the Voters FIRST Act, this pool of 60 of the most qualified consists of three groups of twenty each: one group includes 20 applicants who are registered Democrats, 20 who are registered Republicans, and 20 who are not registered with either of those two parties. Next, the Majority and Minority Leaders in the California Senate and Assembly may each strike, or remove, 2 applicants from each of the 3 pools of 20. This means that there may be a total of 8 strikes from each of the 3 pools of twenty. Assuming these Legislative leaders fully exercise their right to remove applicants from the 3 pools, this would mean that 8 applicants would be removed from each of the three pools of twenty, leaving 12 names remaining in each of the three pools. The leaders have until November 15 to make their decisions.
The name of the applicants who remain in the Applicant Pool after the Legislative Leaders have exercised their strikes, then come back to the State Auditor, who is required by the Voters FIRST Act to conduct a random drawing where the first 8 members of the Citizens Redistricting Commission are selected. This random drawing must be conducted by no later than November 20, 2010.
Finally, the first 8 members of the Citizens Redistricting Commission are required, by no later than December 31, 2010 to select the final six members of the commission from among those applicants who remain in the Applicant Pool.
This entire process of application and selection is set out in greater detail in the Act and in the regulations that the State Auditor adopted to implement
* * * * *
Okay, then this could wind up pretty lopsided either way, if the luck of the draw for the initial eight members were more Dem or Pubbie.
If there had been an intial group of nine, and the state auditor was required to pull three names from each group, it might have been more equitable.
This does seem to allow for a potential lopsided panel. Even if it's tilted towards Republicans, I don't like it. I want equity so that there doesn't come a time when Democrats rule the roost.
* * * * *
This State PDF document may go into more detail. I don't have time now to review it in full. In the first few pages it seemed to reiterate the same as above.
Farther down, it may give better breakdown on the selection of the eight.
LINK
Great information, thanks. Very interesting. I’m with you. Don’t like it, but don’t want legislators directly involved in redistricting either. It’s an age-old problem. Amazing that after centuries, gerrymandering issues are still with us. No one’s found the perfect solution.