Wilson Asks Federal Court to Stay Out of Redistricting Fight

Gov. Pete Wilson on Tuesday asked a federal court to stay out of the legal battle over reapportionment and let the state Supreme Court go ahead with a new redistricting plan.

In papers filed in U.S. District Court, attorneys for Wilson said a suit by California Democratic members of Congress urging that a panel of federal judges assume control over congressional reapportionment should be dismissed or at least set aside until the state court completes its plan.

Wilson called the Democrats’ suit “an undeniable waste of judicial resources” and a “transparent effort” to find a sympathetic court.

The Republican governor rejected the Democrats’ charge that federal courts were better equipped to handle the complexities of congressional redistricting.

The state Supreme Court has twice before redrawn both state legislative and congressional boundaries, Wilson noted. Today, the state justices can perform their task even better because of improved computer technology and the fact that they are getting an earlier start on the job than in previous decades, he said.

In other developments, a spokeswoman for Secretary of State March Fong Eu said the state high court must speed its current timetable and approve a reapportionment plan by Jan. 28, or risk forcing a delay in the June 2 primary.

Eu will file a brief with the high court today listing a series of deadlines that must be met so that the new districts can be implemented and candidates can declare for office in time for the primary, the aide said.

If those deadlines are not met, said Melissa Warren, Eu’s press secretary, the state could be forced to hold a bifurcated primary election: a presidential and U.S. Senate primary June 2, and a congressional and legislative primary no later than Aug. 4.

The aide stressed, however, that Eu was not urging a divided primary. “We do not want to see an Aug. 4 primary,” Warren said. “The $40 million it costs to have an election is an expense this state can ill afford.”

At Wilson’s request, the state Supreme Court agreed Sept. 25 to take over the task of redrawing legislative and congressional districts after the governor and state legislators failed to agree on a plan.

The high court appointed a special panel of retired state judges to review reapportionment proposals and make a recommendation to the court by Nov. 29. The justices set Dec. 29 as the deadline for legal briefs to be filed, with arguments to be held later before the court. The court did not say formally when it would adopt a final plan but indicated it could come as late as Feb. 19.

Warren said, however, that Eu believes a plan must be adopted by Jan. 28 to avoid a split primary and thus maintain “the integrity of the elections process.”

Meanwhile, the panel appointed by the state high court announced that six days of public hearings will be held to consider proposed plans for both houses of the Legislature, congressional districts and State Board of Equalization districts.

The panel asked that all written presentations be filed “as soon as possible” so it can make its recommendation to the state high court as required by Nov. 29.

The hearings are scheduled for Oct. 24 in Sacramento, Oct. 25 and 26 in San Francisco, Oct. 30 in San Diego and Oct. 31 and Nov. 1 in Los Angeles.

Retired Appellate Justice George A. Brown of Fresno announced the appointment of Paul McKaskle, professor of law at the University of San Francisco, as director and chief counsel to the panel. McKaskle served in a similar capacity when the high court designed a reapportionment plan in 1973.