March 1969 Home   Newsletters

May 1969

June 1969

Calendar
State Convention Highlights
Recognition!
Ethics
Membership Dues are Due
May Units - City Council Apportionment
Opposition to Abrupt Closing of Job Corps Centers
Legislative Review
Women Voters Ask U.S. to Formalize Relasions with Mainland China
Welcome New Members
LWV-Honolulu - Board of Directors, 1969-1970
50th Anniversary Celebration - Total to Date: $5,372 (Betty Tobiasson)

May Units - City Council Apportionment

At the May units, we will be attempting to reach consensus on apportionment of the City Council. Since February units when we discussed reapportionment, the City Council has considered a number of plans such as nine men all at-large, nine men all from districts, nine men, four at-large and five from districts roughly equivalent to the present senatorial districts, and an 11 man council, six at-large and five from districts. This last plan is the one which was finally passed by the Council. The Resolution passed by the Council sails for an eleven man council, six at-large and five from districts, maintains a four year term, sets forth the description of the five districts in detail (a map is on the next page), states that the resolution shall be submitted to the Supreme Court of Hawaii at the earliest date possible for consideration and approval by the Court, and states that if the plan is approved the initial election of councilman under the plan will be in 1970. The Resolution should be going to the Court very shortly for their reviews-and if they approve it, the Court can call a special election at which the voters can pass on the plan.

What will happen if the above plan is rejected by the Court? The City Council has until. September 1st to present a plan to the Courts so if they could agree on a second plan, they could go back to the Court. Both houses of the State Legislature have before them bills to reapportion the Honolulu City Council including an at-large plan and several combination plans. The Honolulu League testified at House and Senate hearings on these bills to ask that the members of the State Legislature allow the apportionment problem to be settled at the local level. We pointed out that progress was being made and urged them to allow us to complete the job "at home" -- and there seems to be considerable support for this point of view among the legislators. The Legislature can continue to amend county charters in all areas for the next three years until the new constitutional amendment takes effect. If the apportionment problem hasn't been solved by the 1970 session, the Legislature can always act at that time. What sort of apportionment plan the Legislature would pass for us, your resource committee does not care to predict. However, it is generally agreed that should the Supreme Court finally do the reapportioning they would call for an at-large council and not involve themselves in the problem of drawing district lines.

POINTS TO PONDER:

  1. Do you favor an at-large city council or some form of district representation?

    If you favor some form of district representation, would you prefer

    1. All district

    2. Combination

    3. "Big Island" plan (Nine members elected at large, but six members have residence requirements)

  2. How about the size of the council and the term of office?

  3. And if you favor some form of disixict representation, how would you plan for future apportionment?


APPORTIONMENT PLAN PROPOSED FOR

CITY AND COUNTY OF HDNDLULU

ELEVEN MAN COUNCIL - SIX AT-IARGE AND FIVE FROM DISTRICTS

[...] ELECTION REGISTERED VOTERS (after purging those failing to vote)

DISTRICT A - 36,142 voters

DISTRICT B - 38,031 voters

DISTRICT C - 37,925 voters

DISTRICT D - 37,608 voters

DISTRICT E - 37,357 voters


March 1969 Top   Home   Newsletters June 1969