Laserfiche WebLink
Straight term; residency requirement for at-large seat. Now <br /> the third sheet, straight term; no: residency requirement for <br /> at-large seat. The fourth page regarding provision for <br /> staggered terms to be added at the end of Section 3-2 ; <br /> residency requirement for at-large seat. Next sheet again <br /> staggered terms without the residency requirement for at-large <br /> seats. In addition to that, of course, was the reapportionment <br /> thing that was passed out to you last week . You had some <br /> numbers and some districts , some figures that were compiled, <br /> typewritten and handwritten figures regarding districts 1 , 2, <br /> 3 , and 4 with precinct numbers for districts 1 through 4 <br /> based on the latest registered voters compilation from the <br /> clerk ' s office. The first set, I believe, you will have to <br /> look at the date above. One set is for January of this year <br /> and the latest figures in another set attached to it is for <br /> June of this year, which is just a couple of weeks old. <br /> The reason for the district breakdown by <br /> precinct is that if this commission is thinking about breaking <br /> up the at-large residency requirement and identifying the East <br /> and West designations more specifically then you can use the <br /> House of Representative District Precinct designation to make <br /> it a little closer at least of the registered voters in that <br /> particular district. Just as a general matter if you are <br /> thinking of districts, say, 1 and 2, combining districts 1 and <br /> 2 and having one at-large candidate or two depending on whether <br /> you have twoor four the totals. . .in order to equalize itself <br /> you would have to move precincts 11 , 12, 13, and 14 from the <br /> district 2 which is the Ainako, Kaumana, Puueo and Wainako <br /> precincts to combine them with districts 3 and 4. If you do <br /> that the registered voter count as of June, 1979 for districts <br /> 1 and 2 as compared to 3 and 4 would come out to slightly over <br /> 18, 000 per two districts. The 1st and 2nd districts would have <br /> something like 18, 284 and the second two districts, districts <br /> 3 and 4 would have 18, 387, slightly more. But , for our <br /> purposes , sufficiently close to use for division purposes for <br /> at-large residency. <br /> This is merely for your consideration, I am <br /> certainly not suggesting it but because of the deliberation of <br /> last week, I have been compiling this information together with <br /> Frances Higa to give _you more options if you want them. <br /> The other set, of course, has to do with the <br /> planning department reorganization . I have attached on page 3 <br /> a xeroxed copy of the county ordinance regarding variances <br /> which was requested by Commissioner Ishida the other week. <br /> The grounds for variances under Section 7.01, so that is also <br /> included for your information. <br /> Also attached to your stack of handouts should <br /> be the district seats which are set at two year terms and the <br /> at-large seats set at four' year terms with residency as well <br /> as no residency. This should have been with the first stack . <br /> There may be other alternatives you may want to <br /> consider but basically we merely worked on-, alternatives which <br /> have already been discussed. Do you have any questions? <br /> -2- <br />