I believe the lack of Green Party representation on the Redistricting Commission was due to a misinterpretation of state law and the city charter by the Charter Commission. (It doesn't really matter what their motivation was in this case, the flawed result is the same either way). This does get into some technical issues of how charter language is to be interpreted properly--it is understandable that there has been confusion on this issue.
Chapter 1, Section 3(B) of the Minneapolis Charter states: "The Charter Commission shall select by a majority vote of all of its members, two members from each major party to serve on the Redistricting Commission." Minnesota Statute, 200.02 Subdivision 7 defines a "major political party" as, "...a political party that maintains a party organization in the state, political division or precinct in question and: (a) Which has presented at least one candidate for election to a partisan office at the last preceding state general election, which candidate received votes in each county in that election and received votes from not less than five percent of the total number of individuals who voted in that election..." In the 2000 general election to choose presidential electors, Ralph Nadar, the Green Party candidate, received 5.2% of the statewide vote and he received votes in all counties of the state. (Not a legal point but of interest is that in the City of Minneapolis the percentage was 10.42%). A separate provision in the Minneapolis charter talks about criteria for the Charter Commission to request nominees from the major parties. That chapter specifies that parties to be asked for nominations to the Redistricting Commission should have had candidates for governor or senator in the previous election who received at least 5% of the vote in the city of Minneapolis. The Green Party's status did not require the Charter Commission to request a list of nominees from the party. The Charter Commission apparently confused this provision, which only dealt with the process for receiving nominations, with the language in Chapter 1 3(B). That earlier section makes no specific definition of "major party." Thus, the plain meaning of "major party" must be used. In any case, requirements as to submission of lists does not bear on the status of the Green Party as a major party entitled to two seats on the Redistricting Commission. Nominations were made but the Charter Commission chose not to accept them. In my opinion, this was a violation of the city charter. Bruce Shoemaker Holland Neighborhood REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
