Posted on: Friday, August 10, 2001
Voting districts to include military dependents
By Kevin Dayton
Advertiser Capitol Bureau Chief
After delaying for a week, the state Reapportionment Commission gave preliminary approval yesterday to maps that would reshape the 25 state Senate districts and 51 state House districts.
In its most controversial decision so far this year, the commission voted 5-4 along party lines to count 53,261 dependents of non-resident military personnel as if they were permanent state residents. The five Democrats on the commission voted to count the military dependents, and the four Republicans voted to exclude them.
If the military dependents are excluded from the tally of permanent residents, some observers believe Maui and the Big Island would each gain one House seat. But if they are included, Maui and the Big Island likely would each gain only districts they share with another island.
Commission members said they have no way of knowing if those military dependents consider themselves state residents or not, and said the commission would be on safer legal footing if the dependents are counted.
Madge Schaefer of Maui's reapportionment advisory council was angered by the commission's vote yesterday.
"They went against the voter's wishes, saying their opinion didn't matter," said Schaefer, referring to a 1992 state constitutional amendment that excluded minors and non-resident military from the population base.
Some Neighbor Island observers wanted those military dependents excluded from the count of state residents, siting the 1992 amendment.
Opponents predicted the new boundaries will be challenged in court because of that vote, but Commission Chairman Wayne Minami said a court challenge was almost assured no matter how the commission voted.
Minami also noted that after the constitutional amendment was passed, the Reapportionment Commission at the time complied, but the method of counting residents was later overturned in federal court.
The new maps approved by the commission yesterday also would lump some lawmakers in the same districts as other incumbents.