CA: AG considering whether gov's redistricting initiative is legal

AP - Tuscaloosa News ^ | July 05, 2005 | Beth Fouhy

[calcowgirl]

Secretary of State Bruce McPherson has asked the attorney general's office to examine the wording of a ballot initiative that would redraw legislative districts, a cornerstone of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's special election.

At issue are discrepancies between the wording of the measure that was circulated for signatures earlier this year, and the wording submitted to the attorney general's office for title and summary.

Under state law, the attorney general must draft an impartial title and summary. The title is designed to explain the result of a "yes" vote if the measure is passed and the result of a "no" vote if the measure is defeated. The summary is a concise statement of the main points of the proposed measure.

Lockyer spokesman Nathan Barankin said the attorney general was reviewing the two drafts and would offer an opinion as to whether the discrepancies in the wording were minor or more substantive.

"The secretary of state's office had asked us to take a look at the question of whether it's a problem that the redistricting initiative supported by the governor was rewritten after the title and summary of the initiative had been drafted and the fiscal analysis had been crafted by the Department of Finance," Barankin said.

However, Schwarzenegger's office said the issue was not whether the wording of the initiative was problematic but rather which version of the wording should appear on the ballot.

Schwarzenegger spokesman Rob Stutzman said he believed the differences between the two versions was minor and "the people should be able to vote on it."

The initiative, which would force lawmakers to forfeit the power to draw their own legislative districts, is one of three measures Schwarzenegger has placed on the ballot for a Nov. 8 special election. If Lockyer determines that the initiative has legal problems, it could become vulnerable to a court challenge by opponents or by the secretary of state's office.

Calls to McPherson's office were not immediately returned Tuesday. McPherson is a Republican whom Schwarzenegger named to the post last winter.

Lockyer, a Democrat, is expected to announce his opinion in the case later this week.

Ted Costa, the lead proponent of the redistricting measure and longtime champion of California ballot initiatives, said he had discovered the discrepancies himself about a month ago and had asked his attorney, Dan Kolkey, to alert McPherson's office. Still, Costa said that he was prepared to fight any challenge to the initiative, which he said was better drafted than any he had promoted in the past.

"Every initiative we've ever done we've been sued on," Costa said. "I'm expecting a whole barrage of lawsuits. We're prepared for that."

Kolkey said there was ample precedent under state law that would allow the redistricting initiative to withstand a legal challenge.

[NormsRevenge]

BUMP

[calcowgirl]

I'm still trying to figure out if they are talking changes between Costa's initial "redistricting" initiative and his final "reapportionment" initiative that is on the ballot, or something more minor.

I want to see a language comparison (e.g. A vs. B). Many of the things he put in his final version led me to be against it, while I supported the earlier version.

Sundheim supposedly said the differences were insignificant, yet Schwarzenegger's office thinks there is an issue of which version goes on the ballot?

I'm confused. LOL

Another Costa measure gone awry. :-(

[NormsRevenge]

Another Costa measure gone awry. :-(

--

Let's hope not. Ouch!

I'm sure Lockyer will straighten it all out real quick.. lol