Establishes apportionment commission to create apportionment plans for congressional and state legislative districts based on federal censuses; repealer

Summary of specific provisions

This bill would establish a citizen apportionment commission that would draw maps for congressional and state legislative district boundaries every ten years following the U.S. Census. The commission would propose district boundaries that would be submitted to the legislature for approval. AS many as three plans would be developed, with public hearings required if the first two plans are rejected, at which the legislature would testify to the commission regarding any objections to the plan. The legislature would have the ability to amend only a third plan, which would be submitted by the commission. Thus, the legislature would have the ultimate authority in approving a final plan, with the ability to amend a third plan should previous plans be rejected.

The district lines for all plans would be drawn according to a set of principles and guidelines that do not abridge or deny minority voting rights while seeking to align districts as best as possible with local boundaries and community character to ensure the even-handed and nonpartisan drawing of lines. The citizen apportionment commission would be appointed by the legislative leaders from a pool of candidates who are vetted for conflicts of interest by a separate nominations committee.

The specific provisions of the legislation are detailed below.

Sections 1 and 2 - Removes mention of the legislative task force on demographic research and reapportionment (LATFOR) from sections 5-a and 12 of the legislative law, replacing it with the civilian apportionment commission.

Section 3 - Repeals section 83-m of the legislative law with regard to the formation of LATFOR.

Section 4 - Amends the legislative law by adding a new article 6-a with regard to the creation of a citizen apportionment commission and apportionment nominations committee.

The nominations committee would be composed of eight members, with the temporary president of the senate, speaker of the assembly, minority leader of the senate, and minority leader of the assembly each appointing two members. Members could not serve if they currently

hold or, in the past two years, have held elective or public office, a position as a lobbyist, a political party position, or are a relative or spouse of an elected or public official.

The nominations committee develops a list of 40 persons known as the "nominations pool" who are vetted for conflicts of interest (such as having held or holding public office, being a registered lobbyist, among other items described above), and consist of the following members: 15 persons enrolled as Democrats, 15 persons enrolled as Republicans, and 10 persons not enrolled as Democrats or Republicans. Members would also be selected to represent the geographic, racial, ethnic, and gender diversity of the state.

The apportionment commission would be selected from the members of the nominations pool, with each legislative leader (majority and minority) appointing two members, for a total of eight members. The eight members would then appoint three additional members, One of whom would serve as Chair of the commission. No more than four members of the apportionment commission would be enrolled in the same political party, and members would be selected to represent the diversity of the state as described above. The commission would be charged with developing reapportionment plans and would make such plans and corresponding data available to the public.

All apportionment plans would be drawn according to the following principles:

- all congressional district shall be as nearly equal in population as practicable; - districts shall be contiguous; - districts shall not be established that abridge or deny minority voting rights; - districts shall not be drawn to favor or oppose any political party, incumbent, or candidates for office; - the most and least populous senate and assembly districts shall not exceed the mean population of districts for each house by more than one percent; - counties and county subdivisions shall not be divided in the formation of districts, and where it is unavoidable, more populous counties or subdivisions will be divided in preference to those with smaller populations; - villages shall not be divided; - districts shall be as compact as possible; and - districts shall unite communities of interest.

The commission would hold public hearings throughout the state on the first apportionment plan submitted to the legislature. After the public hearings, the plan would require a vote of the legislature without amendments. If the proposal is rejected, the commission would submit an amended proposal after hearing the reasons given by the legislature regarding the first plan's rejection at a public hearing. The second plan, again, would be voted upon by the legislature without amendments. If the second proposal is also rejected, the commission would submit a third plan following a second public hearing at which the legislature would testify. The third plan would be subject to the normal amendment process.

Justification

Concerned New Yorkers have indicated that the current reapportionment process exposes the legislature to claims that the deck is stacked to favor the re-election of incumbents and to discourage potential challengers, as signified by the large number of unopposed elections and the largely uncompetitive nature of most other contests. Furthermore, it appears as if voters are selected by legislators through the redistricting process, rather than voters selecting the candidates of their choice. The oddly shaped districts are perceived to be drawn to maximize the election of incumbents above all else, creating disjointed boundaries that are not aligned to local divisions and undermine the fabric of the community.

While most legislators are being re-elected because of their diligent efforts to represent their constituents, the appearance that the reapportionment process is subject to conflicts of interests should be eliminated. An independent commission would enable the reapportionment process to unfold in a manner that debunks any claims that legislators are primarily concerned with apportioning districts in order to facilitate their own re-elections.

The process proposed in this bill is similar to that used successfully in Iowa for many years and recently implemented in California, and is supported by all the leading good government organizations in New York.

Prior legislative history

S.7124 in 2006 S.1155 in 2007 S.1614 in 2009

Fiscal implications

To be determined.

Effective date

Immediately.