*1 the subcontract. breach of by Kalmbach’s was awarded by jury Kalmbach After trial LTD., CO., CONSTRUCTION HYUNDAI supplied $141,020.96 labor and materials for Appellants, Corporation, Surety National of contract. Hyundai’s breach for $100 v. Additionally, returned a verdict jury Appellee. KALMBACH, INC., $5,528on in the amount of Hyundai’s favor No. 1604. its counterclaim. Supreme of Alaska. Court attempted appeal appellants have In this 10, 1972. Nov. specifications of errors. to numerous assert study appellants’ brief and Our left us with record in the case at bar has appellants’ assertions the conclusion that Park, Daiil B. Collins Richard In short of error are without substance. appellants. Anchorage, for entered below judgment we hold that the Harris, & Jensen, of D. Kenneth Jensen should affirmed. be appellee. for Anchorage, Affirmed. OPINION EVANS, participating. J., not RABINOWITZ, J., and C. Before BOOCHEVER,
CONNOR and JJ.
PER CURIAM. of a contract appeal
This arises out in Decem- of Alaska
awarded State Hyundai for
ber to construction Cantwell, Bridge near Hurricane Gulch Alaska, EGAN, William Governor A. together National Hyundai, with Alaska. Petitioners, al., et Corporation, the State Surety furnished v. performance payment and of Alaska with al., Respondents. Jay S. et HAMMOND con- required public for works bonds No. Thereafter struction AS 36.25.010. for Hyundai subcontracted with Kalmbach Supreme of Alaska. Court bridge aspects certain construction. July 21, 1972. Hyundai later found Several months Opinion Sept. 29, 1972. unsatisfactory performance Kalmbach’s its with and terminated subcontract
Kalmbach.
Pursuant Kalmbach AS 36.25.0201 Hyundai against
filed suit and National payment bond
Surety under the contractor’s unpaid
for the amount on the subcontract
at the time of termination. also Kalmba'ch damages
sued for for breach of the sub- equipment for rentals which
contract and
Hyundai alleged have rented after was Hyundai
its termination of the subcontract. asserting damaged it
counterclaimed was project public substantially works similar on a is a contractor may Alaska’s statute payment seq., proceed against bond et the “Miller to 40 270a § U.S.C. provides of the state. that in the name Act.” The state version persons supplying for material labor and
§57
*3
Representatives
House of
would have es-
tablished election districts which failed to
encompass
nearly equal
pro-
"as
portions
practicable.”
as is
To insure com-
pliance
equal protection
with the
require-
Reynolds
ments of
Sims,
533,
v.
377 U.S.
84 S.Ct.
On May appointed the Masters given were the following in instructions pertinent part:2 Gen., Havelock, Atty. Richard E. John By 1. use of the official Census of III, Gen., Garnett, Atty. Juneau, Asst. W. 1970, you should a population establish petitioners. for base for the of State Alaska. popu- This Groh, Benkert, Groh, Clifford of J. lation base per- military should include Walter, respond- Anchorage, Greene & for sonnel who in were enumerated the 1970 ents. Census. IN RE OPINION TO OBJECTIONS 2. inquiry You should make an to de- INTERIM REAPPORTIONMENT termine or not the of whether number PLAN military personnel nonresident included in the 1970 Census can be determined. BONEY, Before and J.,C. RABINO- If a made, determination can be then WITZ, CONNOR, and BOOCH- ERWIN you should subtract the the number from EVER, JJ. you para-
total which have at in arrived RABINOWITZ, graph 1 above. You should state the also Justice. you in methods detail which at arrived May 26, In our Decision and of Order this determination. 1972,1 reapportion- this the court declared receipt Report,3 After of an the Masters’ 30, plan ment embodied in the December Establishing Reappor- “Order an Interim 1971, of Reapportionment Proclamation and Legislative tionment Plan for Elec- 1972 Redistricting the unconstitutional under 14, tions” In was entered on 1972.4 equal protection supremacy clauses of June its part relevant this order stated: the Constitution of of the United States America. reached for By We this conclusion use of the Official Census the proposed plan reason that the in its popu- the Court determines the total that reapportionment overall shall Senate lation base for the Alaska State of part complete 1.This document is attached hereto 2. the The letter of instructions to appendix part opinion. of an to this Also in is the attached hereto as masters appendix appendix. in cluded the are the Reference Masters, Report, to lishing Masters’ Order Estab appendix Report the is included in Reapportionment Plan, an Interim attached hereto. Denying Objections to Order Interim appen- Reapportionment in the included This document is Plan. dix attached hereto. Census, in the enumerated in 302,361. the mili- were figure includes This be 20, 1972,7 in order of we said our residing in the State tary population June part: of the Official Cen- the time Alaska at the available In time April, 1970. sus for no feasible basis could find [We] preparation of the for the the Court to the mili- part or all of the exclusion find no the Court could plan, interim tary population the base population from excluding some all or method of feasible reapportionment. required for interim military personnel total from this base the Alaska Constitution Under Moreover, computa- base. population all residents of must include State changes representa- that tions revealed in the decennial of Alaska as enumerated plan to the in- the interim due tion under The base is not limited voter census. personnel were mini- military clusion of reappor- population. Neither mal. the materials relied plan tionment nor petitioners provide legal upon entry this Subsequent identifying nonresident mili- basis for reap establishing an interim order court’s tary personnel in to eliminate them order objec plan, filed portionment petitioners population from base. grounds: on the stated tions thereto data, In of reliable the absence instructing The Court erred military elimination population base should that masters persons base as class military personnel who all were include *5 equal protection of would be a denial of in census and in al- enumerated the 1970 law, by prohibited the the Fourteenth military personnel lowing nonresident to States Consti- Amendment the United by the census to be counted enumerated (Footnotes omitted.) tution. determining popu- the purpose for the of 678, 1441, Mann, shape particular of dis- Davis v. 377 84 S.Ct. lation size and U.S. 609, 12 L.Ed.2d instructs that (1964), tricts. . . 617 . impermissible to constitutionally it is dis- that the effect of the Petitioners contended against criminate a class of individuals military per- all enumerated inclusion of merely of because the nature of their em- power give greater political sonnel was to Mann, ployment. this Davis v. court Given adjoin which ma- to those communities pursuant duty, is nevertheless under the jor In for military arguing installations. VI, article section of to 3 the Alaska con- preservation population of the civilian con- stitution, employ in to census data deter- cept,5 petitioners legis- state that Alaska’s mining population pur- the total base for presumption against lature established poses formulating reappor- of an interim residency military personnel except of on plan.8 practice tionment The census of person the by affirmation of intent involv- enumeration is as follows: ed that chooses to be an Alaska he resi- overruling petitioners’ objection practice dent.6 In In accordance dat- with census 1790, plan’s ing person the in popu- to inclusion the interim back to each enumerated military in in- personnel lation of all the census was counted as an base who 1970 Const, appendix VI, provides 5. 3 7. This is in at- § Alaska art. in order included part: “Reapportionment tached shall be based hereto. upon population civilian within each elec- supra. 1, reaching In the con- See note reported tion district the census.” data must be em- clusion that census support petitioners ployed, argument, In hold that of we do no more than this fashioning Reappor- purposes interim AS of an cite 15.05.020. The for 1971 plan reapportionment tionment Guard the unconstitutional Plan includes Coast Per- sonnel, 3,752 VI, aliens, in art. 3 of the Alaska § and all limitation resident military dependents. persons is severable. These can- constitution not be classified as citizens of the State urged pe- of test Alaska under titioners.
861
residence,
BOOCHEVER,
place
(dissenting).
his
habitant of
usual
Justice
to mean the
generally
which is
construed
I dissent
so
or-
from much of
court’s
sleeps
place
he
lives and
most
where
petitioners’ objection
der as overrules
to
necessarily
place
This
is not
the time.
inclusion,
reap-
under the court’s interim
residence,
legal
voting
the same as his
portionment plan,
military personnel
of all
residence or domicile.9
who were
in
enumerated
the 1970 Census
for
purpose
popu-
determining
unconstitutionality
In light
of the
shape
lation
particular
size
districts.
civilian-military
in arti-
distinction made
agree
I
majority
with the
it is im-
that
VI,
cle
section 3 of the constitution of
permissible to
against
discriminate
class
purposes
determining
Alaska for
of individuals because of the nature of
requisite population
provi-
base and this
their
employment
being
without more
requirement
sion’s further
that Alaska’s
shown,
Mann,
691,
678,
Davis v.
377 U.S.
population
computed
base be
from census
1441,
84
609,
(1964),
S.Ct.
12 L.Ed.2d
617
data,
fashioning
we concluded that
in
an
just as it
deprive
is
unconstitutional
reapportionment
interim
plan no lawful re-
military
members
such
of a class
as the
quirement or reliable
for
basis existed
iso-
vote,
their right
Carrington
Rash,
v.
lation and
popula-
exclusion from the total
89,
775,
(1965).
U.S.
85 S.Ct.
L.Ed.2d 675
tion
military
base
those
civilians
or
who
Court,
Supreme
how-
United States
living
were
in Alaska and enumerated in
ever,
recognized
problems
has
created
pos-
but did
1970 census
not at the time
by including
population
propor-
counts
sess the
of making
intent
Alaska their
tionately large
military person-
numbers of
requires
home. Alaska’s constitution
that
(and
nel
having
other transients)
few ties
requisite
population
be
total
arrived at
with
they
physically
state
which
are
by use
census
data.
It does not man-
present.
Richardson,
In Burns v.
384 U.S.
date a
composed
base
exclusive-
73,
(1966),
86 S.Ct.
population purposes base for of determin- April The in Alaska of use the 1970 Cen- ing an reapportionment plan interim should figures sus in for civilians effect estab- be overruled.11 lished a population state citizen base for Report (1)-C3, Ap- Alaska, substantially Census PC in ters result would increas- pendix A, App-1. population among at ed variances the elec- comparison in tion districts with 6, supra. 10. See note present in interim minimal variations eliminating plan reapportionment The relative effect of all as it stands. now military personnel, eliminating only example, of For the variation in the Juneau military personnel group quar- present in housed district shift would from the ters, ineluding military personnel or all +10.2; of in to the Matanuska-Susit- -{-4.3 reapportionment in this court’s interim in +7.4; na from to district +1.5 plan, produce only slight —37.3; be to would a from Aleutian district to +3.4 change population figure Yukon-Koyukuk-Kuskokwim in the base in dis- and redrawing —6.5; to some necessitate minor in the Fair- of trict from to and +1.0 lines; change district it would Ex- not banks district to —7.1. +0.1 legislators given any military personnel living group cluding number in of in dis- hand, quarters trict. dis- On the other elimination correct the Ketchikan of would military personnel crepancy quar- group in housed from —22.5 —18.0.
862 work- and transient effec- summer tourists April The date when military. than other numbers, distorted present are in a sum- ers vast large number of tively eliminated counting population would result. The and base construction transient tourists and mer their military personnel regardless of of all leaving to he counted fishing employees, similar voluntarily residency results in a actual state those exceptions with minimal of the intention distortion. living in the with state home.1
making their Alaska above, of 2 As footnote indicated officers, 4,995 enlist- synony- of population not Adak’s are voting statistics While civil- they dependents, 450 citizenship, ed men and and of state with records mous be could 5,445) of a 165 (a only indication ians total of significant a furnish do voters, nexus military group’s as Alaskan register induced to relatively definable 9,818 popula- cam- census registration even an extensive the state. after with Of reap- and em- military personnel civilian interim paign. of the court’s tion Under residing over years age and number ployees portionment plan 18 the ideal bases, legisla- Ft. Richardson people represented by on the and one Elmendorf to be per- approximately 1 persons 7,559. as only 102 or tor In areas such was fixed at in the Adak, relatively as Alaskans November cent voted a embodying the district and Ft. At Eielsen Wain- election. represent- 1970 small be number of voters would 9,997 percent so voted. wright, 1.7 172 or by inequity of legislator. ed one percent and higher figures of 8.8 Slightly military personnel counting is further all Kodiak, while percent Adak voted at illustrated the fact that a decision 1,131 voted. Civilians Shemya’s none of place population Richardson total the Ft. present so 10,751 were also on most the bases including district Eklut- in a new military personnel pеrcentage na, that Birchwood, Chugiak, Eagle River and probability in all voting on the was opposed bases Anchorage to the Northeast Approximately 52 even more minuscule.2 District, change representation would remaining popula- percent Alaskan involving legislator of each one while years age residing off tion over shift of based on the less than voters election. (Masters’ bases same voted 1970 elections.4 Moreover, according to Report, 9) Table plan Even an interim I feel that for Command, there are the files the Alaska is equitable more solution feasible both only “residents of record” 190 Alaskan constitutional. Army personnel Air Force among sta- base I from the would deduct tioned in Alaska. apportionment to be used for those members unaccompanied by military, depend- opinion, my adjustment In ref- some with *7 ents, barracks, ships, living military in on counting military personnel to is erence percent of the etc. 51.9 These constitute necessary accomplish in to sub- order the military personnel total enumer- number of equal purpose establishing stantive of p. Report, (Masters’ ated in the census. population districting nearly prac- “as as 3 military person- of 886) location such The physically ticable.” If those in Alaska forth readily nel is and is set ascertainable were to be in the the counted middle of registered only as fort were to vote 165 1. A small number of aliens who would eligible citizenship June 1972. not be for state are Military in included the count. census Preisler, 526, Kirkpatrick 3. v. 394 U.S. personnel also include some aliens. 519, 528, 1225, 22 523 L.Ed.2d 89 S.Ct. In a to memorandum submitted the court Wesberry Sanders, (1969). v. U.S. 376 the Lieutenant-Governor Alaska stated (1964). 1, 526, 11 481 84 L.Ed.2d S.Ct. military population that the of Adak petitioned 4,995 officers, 4. The to make such was consisted of men court enlisted change change. proposed dependents, was The and 450 De- a civilians. not, however, adopted. spite registration an intensive voter ef- 863 Report reported by Masters’ submitted in Table 7 of the the (Emphasis census.” to this court.5 mine.)6 completely ac-
Admittedly,
agree
there is no
While I
majority
with the
that all
military personnel
disposal
may
for determin-
curate means at our
not be excluded
base,
ing
population
and mili-
from the
the number of both civilian
the
plan
interim
tary
in
who should
persons
closely
enumerated
the census
follow as
as feasible the
readily ap-
by
intent
are not Alaskan citizens. It is
indicated
the Alaska Constitution.
however,
For
parent,
proportion
portion
that
the
that
military
reason the
of the
in
military
group quarters
are
citizens so far
who
not Alaskan
should be excluded as
proportion
representing
nonresident
exceeds the
the minimum number of mil-
itary
in
are
may
who
been included
who
not Alaskan
civilians
have
citizens. As
April
Richardson,
stated in
enumerations,
the
1970
that no dis-
Burns v.
dif-
“The
military
re-
crimination to the
as a class will
ference between exclusion
military
of all
person-
military-related personnel,
eliminating
military
sult from
and exclu-
unaccompanied
sion of
by dependents
meeting,
nel
who re-
those not
a State’s
[sic]
barracks,
por-
requirements
in
residence
ships,
side
on
etc. That
is a difference be-
military personnel
arbitrary
tion of
tween an
constitutionally
who reside
and a
permissible
neither in their
rented
own homes nor in
classification.”
than in all likelihood are citizens. Alaskan OPINION SEPT. that, Alaska Constitution dictates RABINOWITZ, Before J.,C. and CON- permitted extent the United States NOR, BOOCHEVER, Constitution, ERWIN military personnel should not JJ. be population included in the There base. BOOCHEVER, can be no Justice. other reason for stating “[r^ap portionment upon reap- shall be This based case arises out of the 1971 civilian portionment within legislature pur- each election as the Alaska district my colleagues agreed figures, question If had I do not here reach the such a deduction, slight changes some deter would whether some other basis for mining population reapportionment have had to be made the districts for previously may plan. purposes established in the interim be in view of now used unconstitutionality portion With the assistance of the Masters such necessarily agree unduly provision. alterations would not have been I do not *8 accomplish my opinion apparent difficult to and in with the court’s conclusion that decreasing require would have resulted in further the the elimination of “civilian” population present may require the variances in the from the ment be severed reapportionment plan, especially using interim of the as a basis for ment census only may population. with reference to the be substantial It well that the two population variance, provisions separable. Champlin that of the Ketchi- not are Corporation Comm’n, kan District. Ref. 268 Co. v. 210, 234, 559, U.S. 52 76 L.Ed. S.Ct. Const, VI, Dorchy Kansas, 6. 1062, ; (1932) Alaska art. 3.§ Since both v. 1078 plan 323, reapportion- 286, 289-290, the court’s interim of 264 44 S.Ct. U.S. plan (1924). ment 686, and the 1971 utilized census 68 L.Ed. 689-690 804 plaintiffs superior for the the court held The VI of article mandate to the
suant
norms
pro-
population
that the variances from
The constitution
Constitution.
Alaska
invalid;
great
plan
the
as to render
the were so
reapportionment
vides for decennial
power to
the
sub-
authority
that the Governor lacked
The
Representatives.1
House
districts and
existing multi-member
the
divide
vested
House is
reapportion the
to
districts;
designate
within such
to
seats
state,
of a
the advice
with
of the
Governor
premature-
the
not
and that
could
adop-
Governor
the
Since
board.2
reapportionment
elected
ly terminate the terms
senators
the
in 1956
Constitution
the Alaska
tion of
years.
for four
ruled
has
Court
Supreme
States
United
must
legislature
state
of a
that both houses
superior court held for the defend-
The
according
population.3
to
apportioned
be
military
properly ex-
ants that the
were
no
made
the Alaska Constitution
Because
base;
the
population
that
cluded from the
of the Sen-
reapportionment
provision for
Advisоry
prop-
Reapportionment Board was
on an
ate,
v.
that
in Wade Nolan4
we held
constituted;
erly
the
did
that
Governor
Alaska
the
until amendment of
interim basis
possess
power
reapportion
to
the Senate.
the
power
had the
the Governor
Constitution
The
that the matter
trial court directed
man-
in the same
reapportion the
to
Senate
reapportionment
Legis-
Alaska
the
State
for
specified
the constitution
by
ner
be sent
lature
back to
Governor
of the House.
reapportionment
Advisory Reapportionment
for
Board
1971, following the 1970 decennial
In
further consideration in accordance with
census,
having
made
been
amendment
no
plaintiffs
and the
decision. Both the
Constitution, the
to the Alaska
Governor
petitions
defendants below filed
for review
houses of the Alaska
reapportioned both
superior
holdings
from the
court
adverse
Alas
legislature.
members of the
Thirteen
respective positions.
to their
validity
legislature
challenged
ka
then
They
plan.5
urged
for
that
mindful of the need
This court was
percentage
population
variations from the
speedy
decision to enable election offi
legislative districting violated
prepare
norms for
lists and bal
registration
cials to
equal protection
of both the
clauses
lots,
disseminate
and to af
to
information
Constitutions;
and the Alaska
United States
campaigns
for
in the
ford time
election
military
that
the exclusion of the
peti
impending primary
elections.6
equal
was a denial
base
26,
April
tions
filed on
review were
for
Advisory
protection;
Reappor
that
filing
The time for
briefs was ac
1972.
not
tionment Board was
in the
constituted
arguments
celerated and oral
were heard
required by
manner
the Alaska Constitu
23,
During
May
on
the course
1972.
tion;
that the
power
Governor lacked
to
re
arguments,
those oral
counsel were
districts;
subdivide existing multi-member
proce
quested to
this court
recommend fo
that the
power
lacked
Governor
to create
dures to-be followed in
event that
“designated seats” within multi-member dis
constitutionally
tricts;
plan was found to be
that the Governor was without au
thority
require
suggested
It
that the
incumbent Senators
defective.
was
court
elections;
stand for mid-term
and that the
plan,
its
the Attor
fashion
own interim
Governor
his
power
exceeded
constitutional
ney
further
recommended that
General
by reapportioning the Senate.
appointed
be
Masters
court.
Const,
VI,
1. Alaska
§
art.
3.
filing
6.The
date
for
candidacies was
May
Const,
31,
It
VI,
was extended
this
2. Aláska
art.
§ 8.
powers
court
accordance with its
over
Reynolds
Sims,
533,
v.
377 U.S.
84 S.Ct.
reapportionment
15,
first
matters
to June
1362,
(1964).
865 by sparse multiplied problems are s in and Or- Alaska found our Decision Having plan widely population and scattered and the 24, 1972,7that the 1971 May der of inaccessibility portions norms of of the population relative variances from contained changes Surprisingly set forth state. small in dis- meet the criteria which could not Court, Supreme large percentage we create trict boundaries by the States United population.10 from the ideal suggestion variances reluctantly concurred with court fashion an interim that the of counsel Despite belaboring the possibility of this for plan reapportionment of the forthcom- opinion obliged we feel to set forth a few primary general elections. 1972 and ing of it the facts which make difficult to fit appointed court Masters to assist The reapportionment plan Alaska’s into stand- plan. such a formulation of contiguous for ards established the 48 preceded it presented report states which into the Masters a written Union. 586,400 13, Alaska has a total land court on area of and conferred with the June large square as report miles—as the entire Louisi- 1972. The was modified accord- Purchase, one-fifth by ana and the total area ance with determinations made the court. of by parties the continental Its objections After filed were United States. court, boundaries considered an Order Estab- embrace four time zones. The lishing Reapportionment highest state an Interim contains the mountain on the Plan continent, glaciers for the North American that Legislative 1972 Elections was is- ex- Island, sued on ceed the size of the of Rhode report with the State modified June a appended longer and Masters Be- coastline than the total coast- thereto.8 plan merely is line of plan, along cause that an remainder interim continental necessary ranges it United Mountain is to and rule States. which discuss on each equal or length exceed the appeal height raised on issues so that the Gov- the Rockies divide Advisory ernor his Alaska into rela- Reapportionment five tively regions isolated Board will which in guidelines have sufficient turn are systems subdivided devise a river constitutionally acceptable perma- and other plan. geographic nent factors expanses such as broad challenging
of frozen tundra the most ad- roadway engineering. vanced I. POPULATION VARIANCES At recognize difficulty the outset we The 1970 Census population reveals a creating equal population districts 302,361 persons including members while conforming also to the Alaska con- Armed Forces.11 There is population less stitutional mandate that the districts “be in the State of Alaska than in the cities of contiguous formed of compact ter- Omaha, Toledo, Nebraska or Ohio. The ritory containing nearly practicable as as contrasting ethnic backgrounds, in cultural relatively integrated socio-economic terests and economic activities this Alas area.” When Alaska’s geographical, cli- population ka are Report detailed in the matical, ethnic, cultural and socio-economic of the Masters.12 contemplated differences are the task as- proportions
sumes Herculean commensur- When confronted with conditions dif- so ate with Alaska’s enormous land any area. The ferent from those single other state plan 7. change The Order an involving for interim of re- that so of boundaries apportionment Report only people and per- would result in a one opinion Masters are attached this cent variation in the ratio. Appendix (Masters’ Report, I. p. 880) A, Table Appendix 8. Report I. PC(1)-C3, 11. Census Alaska. Const, VI,
9. Appendix I, pp. Alaska art. § 6. 889-891. figures, popu- on Based 1970 census per representative 7,559 lation norm is
800 Although plan represented a sub States, the 1971 it is read- United in continental the rea improvement stantial in the calculus of im- nigh well becomes it ily that apparent plan’s pre- pportionment,17 the new variances mathematical the possible to achieve guidelines still conflict with the set forth is feasible which proportions equal of cision by Supreme the Court. We The situation is more United States states. in those other are, Hawaii, therefore, compelled to hold that the the State of that of analogous to plan recog- violates the United States constitu were difficulties13 unusual whose guarantee equal protection. tional requiring special rem- of potentially as nized Supreme Court States by the edies United cases, reapportionment In the the earlier in v. Richardson.14 Burns Supreme United Court refused to States Nevertheless, to the standard initial required for what articulate a strict test was plan apportionment legislative by equal protection Reynolds which a state In clause. 18 forth set Su must held is that v. noted be Sims that is Court “[w]hat Sims:15 preme Reynolds permissible in v. in marginally may Court one be State another, unsatisfactory depending in on the requires Clause Equal Protection [T]he particular circumstances of the case.” good an honest and that a make State present guidelines Hence the for reappor districts, in both faith effort to construct case-by-case nearly as tionment a legislature, houses of its of evolvedon basis. In practicable.16 equal population isas Adams,19 Swann percentage v. in variances surrounding unique 13. The circumstances corresponding tracts, prepared census reapportionment ably districting in Hawaii plans are de maps various and ac- Judge opinion in cording scribed Pence to the Committee’s criteria. F.Supp. Gill, (D. in Burns v. 316 any 1285 No member Committee or 1970). Hawaii delegate any other was involved in preparation plans. of the various That 90-96, 73, 1286, 14. 384 86 S.Ct. U.S. 16 developed districting team 39 house 376, (1966). L.Ed.2d 390-93 plans covering the several islands 577, 533, 1362, 1390, 15. 377 84 S.Ct. U.S. 506, (1964). 12 L.Ed.2d 536 criterion, course, The foremost was average registered that number of procedure 16. The in followed Hawaii per legislator nearly voters shall be as legislature reapportioning in its is 1968 equal possible. Gill, Burns v. 316 good illustrative “honest and such F.Supp. (D.Hawaii 1285, 1970) 1289 faith effort”. A committee three Sena- (Footnotes omitted.) eight Representatives tors and held 30 hearings submitting before its recommen- legislature 17. The Alaska was first re dations to the entire Constitutional Con- apportioned in 1965. The Governor’s debating vention. hours After 15 over power reapportion the Senate was three-day period apportionment pro- a challenged Nolan, in ease of Wade v. adopted. visions were The committee 1966). (Alaska 414 689 P.2d In that testimony heard from over 53 witnesses case, however, plaintiffs ques did not scientists, —political statisticians, at- validity tion the numerical varia torneys judicial and others —reviewed among By tions districts. the time of analyzed apportionment decisions, and plan years proposed the Governor’s six districting provisions of other state later, engendered plan popula the 1965 and constitutions reviewed numerous ranging tion —(-104.57 variances publications subject. Then, on the percent Repre —65.49 in the House of utilizing resources, all those the Com- -(-26.19 sentatives and from to —23.72 adopted mittee formulated district- engaged percent plan, in the In Senate. the 1971 ing criteria. The Committee population variations were reduced to a independent computer pro- an team of range percent o—45.93 t +23.75 grammers, priate statistician, appro- House, range and to a t +26.14 members, staff and turned over percent o—17.22 Senate. primary to that team the work of form- 577-578, 533, 1362, U.S. 84 377 S.Ct. ulating analyzing districting plans. 1390, 506, (1964). 12 L.Ed.2d 537 computer team, using upon That data gleaned registered from the 1966 443-444, 440, 569, voter 19. 385 U.S. S.Ct. figures precincts, for election (1967). as well as 17 L.Ed.2d *11 justify” implication to 10.56 being from while the Florida Senate +15.09 that —the Representa deviation, it awas controllable and in Florida House of other fac the to held tors “incident to were to effectuation of a tives from —15.27 ra +18.28 policy”22 tional state “for the can be in impermissible be failure advanced justification. However, to present Supreme or the District Court as the State to early Court at cautioned an acceptable Rey reasons the varia in articulate for date Sims, acceptable policies nolds the various v. state among population are tions greatly The limited. legislative degree . . . .” districts requirement equality in rigidity alone, history nor economic [N]either Kirkpatrick v. Preis-l reached its zenith in or interests, other sorts group are population er20 variances from where permissible factors in attempting jus- to percent held to be to —2.84 were +3.13 tify disparities population-based from Assembly The had re invalid. Missouri representation .... Modern de-
jected a
with smaller variances. The
plan
velopments
improvements
in trans-
Court stated:
portation and communications
rath-
make
hollow,
er
in
mid-1960’s,
most claims
argument
that
reject Missouri’s
We
that deviations
population-based
percentage
a fixed numerical or
there is
representation
validly
solely
can
be based
enough to be
population variance small
on geographical
Argu-
considerations.
satisfy
de
and to
considered
minimis
ments for allowing such deviations in
nearly
prac
question
“as
as
without
order to insure
representation
effective
The
thrust
ticable” standard.
whole
for sparsely settled areas and
prevent
to
practicable” approach
nearly
the “as
as
legislative districts from becoming so
adoption
is
of fixed
inconsistent with
large that
availability
of access of
popu
numerical standards which excuse
citizens to their representatives
im-
is
regard
lation variances without
to the
paired
today,
are
for
part,
the most
un-
particular
of each
case
circumstances
convincing.
nearly
prac
“as
as
[T]he
A
appears
consideration that
be of
to
requires
standard
ticable”
that
State
in justifying
more substance
some devia
good-faith
pre
make a
effort
achieve
to
population-based
tions from
representa
equality.
.
cise mathematical
.
. Un
legislatures
in
tion
in
state
is that of
less
among congres
variances
suring
political
some voice to
subdivi
sional districts are shown
have
resulted
sions,
political
as
subdivisions.23
effort,
despite such
justify
must
State
21
variance,
each
no matter
small
how
Only
good-faith
after a
effort has
precise
been made to achieve
mathematical
present
reap
Thus the
for
standard
equality may
permitted;
variances be
portionment
separate justifica
allows two
then the state
justifying
has the burden of
popula
tions for deviation from the ideal
in detail eаch such variance.24
tion figures.
first
The
is that variance
occurring
factors,
Advisory
because of uncontrollable
Report
Governor’s
The
despite good
faith effort to achieve math
some of
Reapportionment Board offers
precision.
ematical
acceptable
percentage
The second
greater
justify
reasons which
deviation is that which
“the State must
“in terms
districts
variations Alaska
526,
1225,
20.
579-580,
394
1391,
Id. at
U.S.
89 S.Ot.
22
12
L.Ed.
23.
at
84 S.Ct.
(1969).
2d 519
L.Ed.2d at 537-538.
530-531,
526,
21.
1228,
Kirkpatrick
Preisler,
394
at
U.S.
89
at
S.Ct.
394
v.
1225,
U.S.
1229,
(citation
519,
22
532,
at
L.Ed.2d
524-525
89
526
S.Ct.
22 L.Ed.2d
omitted).
120,
(1969) ; Kilgarlin
Hill,
v.
386 U.S.
820,
771,
122,
L.Ed.2d
774
87 S.Ct.
17
Reynolds
Sims,
533,
440,
579,
(1967) ;
Adams,
v.
377 U.S.
385
v.
U.S.
Swann
1362,
501,
506,
443-446,
84 S.Ct.
12 L.Ed.2d
L.Ed.2d
87 S.Ct.
(1964).
(1967).
504-506
pol-
of rational state
terms
justification
factors
policy forwarded
state
rational
es-
stringent standards
for
icies to meet
*12
political
community
any
of
depriving that
approaching those of
variances
population
campaigning can-
from
power
attention
or
sub
upheld, while less
plan
the
been
1971
didates.
repeatedly re
been
have
stantial variances
by
Judged
the
jected
however,
unconstitutional.25
districts,
as
the
For other
above,
compelled
are
set out
we
standards
offers
Advisory Reapportionment Board
plan is invalid since
the
to hold that
1971
percentage
for the
explanation
or no
little
offered
justification
adequate
there is no
For ex
were created.
which
deviations
range from
for
which
the variances
+23.35
given
are
for the
explanations
no
ample,
districts,
the
percent
in
House
to —45.93
House
in the Yukon-Kuskokwim
variations
percent
in the
—7.2
19,
and from
to
15,
+26.14
District
District
Nome House
the
districts.26
Senate
and
Senate District
the Yukon-Kuskokwim
percent,
respectively
K
—9.2
which
were
II. MILITARY PERSONNEL
percent
the
percent
from
and —17.29
—16.7
specifies that
The Alaska
population
disparities as exist
norm. Such
Constitution
upon
Hampton
“[rjeapportionment
in
of —28.4
shall be based
the Wade
District 20
dis-
percent,
election
population
and in
District
civilian
within each
the Bethel House
justified
reported by
21
trict
the census.”27 The
percent
of
cannot be
+4.9
validity
provision
questioned
of
simply
pre-exist-
of this
was not
because a combination
Nolan,28
ing
although
the
in
v.
readjustment
parties
districts
district
or a
of
Wade
personnel
plan
military
the
eliminated
produce any
does not
other
1965
lines
“benefits”
reap-
adjustment.
population
than a
need
from the
base. The 1971
numerical
The
portionment plan similarly
pop-
for
adjustment
very
numerical
is the
limited the
focus
plaintiffs
of
to
the
to
ulation base
civilians.29 The
reapportion.
mandate
In too
many
challenged
validity
are
below have
this
districts we
forced to conclude
the
of
disparities
provision, contending
adequate
that
the
constitutional
the
are without
that
g., Kirkpatrick
Preisler,
plans,
Supreme
25. E.
v.
interim
the United
394 U.S.
States
526,
1225,
in
89
22 L.Ed.2d
519
Court has been much more liberal
S.Ct.
(variations
countenancing
might
(1969)
from
not
to — 2.84
variations which
+3.13
percent
;
unconstitutional)
Kilgar
acceptable.
g., Kilgarlin
held
otherwise be
E.
Hill,
820,
Hill,
120,
820,
120,
121,
lin v.
v.
386
386 U.S.
87 S.Ct.
U.S.
S.Ct.
87
(1967)
(variations
771,
(1967).
L.Ed.2d
See
from
17 L.Ed.2d
also
17
771
774
percent
Gill,
F.Supp.
(D.
1285,
to —11.64
held
Burns v.
316
unconsti
1288
+14.84
tutional)
;
Adams,
1970) saying,
particu
v.
Swann
385
Hawaii
one
“[N]o
U.S.
440,
569,
(1967)
17
lar
or
87 S.Ct.
L.Ed.2d 501
area
deviation
variance from the
(variations
voting
per
equality
power,
from
to —10.56
ideal of absolute
+15.09
unconstitutional).
per
se,
apportionment
held
an
cent
Abate
invalidates
Cf.
Mundt,
plan.”
182,
1904,
v.
91 S.Ct.
403 U.S.
(1971)
(variations
L.Ed.2d 399
29
Const,
YI,
27.
§
Alaska
art.
3.
percent upheld).
—4.8 to —7.1
single exception
the Ketchi-
With
(Alaska 1966).
28. 414
P.2d
range
district,
in
kan
of variations
exception
рlan
of members of
29. With the
this court’s
interim
is from +4.3
Guard,
percent
House,
Coast
uniformed
—2.7
in
and from
United States
military personnel
percent
Mili-
were eliminated.
in
to —2.3
the Senate. The
+4.3
part
tary dependents
counted as
in
and
were
Ketchikan
variation
both House
personnel
percent.
Coast Guard
for
civilian base.
Senate is —22.5
reasons
they
explained
because
counted as civilians
variance are
were
Ketchikan
Depart-
operate
Report
p.
under
the control of
at
the Masters
Transportation.
adopting
pressure
ment
Due to
of time
destroyed
day is
precision
cal
achieved one
a class
personnel as
military
elimination
society’s chronic mo-
the next
Alaskan
clauses
equal protection
violated
of a
bility.
the fact that dilution
Given
Alaska
Constitutions.
States
United
completely
voter’s
is not
avoid-
influence
678,
Mann,
84 S.Ct.
377 U.S.
In Davis v.
able,
challenge is
at the best
to arrive
underrepre-
(1964),
12 L.Ed.2d
be
approximation of the
attempted
districts was
of certain
sentation
sight
the fact
losing
counted without
noting-that a sub-
by the
justified
state
to he
equal representation is also
right
that the
personnel re-
military
number of
stantial
personal right.31
an individual
rejecting
In
the deficient districts.
sided in
argument, the
stated:
this
Court
considerations,
light
it be-
In
of these
a class of indi-
against
Discrimination
accuracy
important to
comes
evaluate
viduals,
nature of
merely because of the
on
recency
of the information relied
being
employment,
their
without more
Advisory Reapportion-
by the Governor’s
*13
shown,
impermissi-
constitutionally
is
report
the
ment Board. Their
to
Governor
ble.30
merely
that
stated
89,
Rash,
Carrington
In
v.
85 S.
380 U.S.
military personnel
are
who
[u]niformed
775,
a
(1965),
Ct.
§70 Further, its indicated data, persons. the Court reliable absence of [i]n aas enumeration approval of state citizen pop- military from the of the
elimination
permissible population base.36
persons would
aas
class of
ulation base
law,
of the
equal protection
be a denial
registration
a master voter
Alaska has
Amendment
by the Fourteenth
prohibited
judicial
the court takes
list
States Constitution.
to the United
made
been
that active efforts have
notice
devising an
for
time available
In the short
Upon ade
eligible
to
voters.
register all
majority
a
plan,
reapportionment
interim
register
quate
opportunity
notice and
pos-
it was not
that
this court decided
for
registration list
before use
such
data
compile sufficiently accurate
sible to
appear
it
purposes,
reapportionment
would
excluding
for
basis
provide
a reasonable
plan
cur
apportionment
on
an
based
that
military
popula-
any number of
permissible
registration would be
rent voter
military
all
included
Thus we
tion base.33
Likewise
under the federal constitution.
eye
fact
our
personnel
an
to the
that
with
plans
on
data
state citi
based
accurate
year’s elec-
plan
only apply to this
would
residency
could meet
zenship or state
accurate assessment
tion,
that a more
protection
equal
of the federal
standards
in the
vote can be achieved
military
clause
devising
process
permanent decennial
however,
in-
be
problem,
Another
would
apportionment scheme.34
popu-
but
any
in the
a census
volved
use
military
recognize that the substantial
We
Alaska
above the
lation
As noted
base.
in the
population present
state because
*14
specifies
“Reapportion-
that:
Constitution
military
and without
intention to
orders
upon
popula-
ment shall be based
civilian
easily
an
give
their home can
make Alaska
reported
tion within each election district as
abutting
representation to areas
unbalanced
(Emphasis added.)
the census.”
Since
we
the
their bases. But
are also mindful of
provision is
we
held that the
invalid
have
a
permanent plan
need for a
which achieves
popula-
it is
insofar as
based on “civilian
accuracy
voting participa-
of
of
their
level
tion”,
question
presented
a
to whether
is
including or
tion which is closer than either
separable
provision
the balance of the
is
military
it
excluding all
as a
Thus
class.
so
the
effective,
as to continue to be
or in
upon us
is incumbent
discuss altеrnative
to
provision
the entire
alternative whether
plans
may be
the
which
available
handle
flexibility
leaving
should be stricken
some
problem.35
new,
of
choosing
population base for a
permanent apportionment plan.
Supreme
The
in
United States
Court
73,
Richardson,
Burns
384 U.S.
86 S.Ct.
problems have frequently
v.
Similar
arisen
1286,
permitted
(1966),
Dorchy
871
of the
Con-
on the
members
Constitutional
determining the effect
for
criteria
vention
the fact that
is found
must have
part
considered
when
of a statute
remainder
many
personnel
military
present in Alaska
unconstitutional:
regard
do not
this
home
state as their
necessarily
part
is not
A statute bad
actively
do not
its
participate in
affairs.
within
entirety.
void in its
Provisions
Yet
large
personnel
con-
number
such
sep-
power may
if
legislative
stand
capa-
areas
state is
centrated in small
of the
But a
arable from the bad ....
distorting
ble
the representational
base.
provision,
unobjectionable,
inherently
Although the minutes
Constitutional
ap-
separable
cannot be
unless it
deemed
subject,
ap-
Convention
silent
it
are
on the
alone,
pears
that, standing
legal
both
pears
likely
highly
that this
the reason
was
leg-
given
effect can
to it
that the
be
reapportion-
that the convention limited the
stand,
provision
islature
intended
population.
ment base to civilian
in case
included in the act and
others
held bad should fall.
requirement
If the
to use census
figures
striking
were to be retained after
Champlin
Corporation
Refining
In
v.Co.
provision
which limited the base to
Comm’n,
210, 234,
559,
S.Ct.
U.S.
population,
civilian
apparent
this
intent
565,
76 L.Ed.
the standard
(1932)
might
Only
be
infor
frustrated.
skeletal
phrased
was
as follows:
mobility
mation of
location
charac
The unconstitutionality
part
an
military
extrapolated
of a
teristics of the
can be
necessarily
act does
equal
not
defeat or affect
from
pro
census data. Because the
validity
provisions.
its remaining
tection clause
United
Consti
States
Unless
Legislature
requires
it is evident that
tution
specific
justi
more
factual
provisions
would not have
eliminating portions
enacted those
fication for
of the mili
independent-
tary
which are
its power,
within
base,
we conclude
ly
not,
of that
is
part
which
invalid
that
Board and the
be
Governor should
may be
if
dropped
fully permitted
what is left is
to use
alternates to
census
*15
operative as a law.
provisions
base.40 We thus
that the
hold
portion
VI,
3,
of that
of
section
article
re
These
appеar
apply
criteria would
to
quiring
“reapportionment
that
shall be based
equally
provision
to a state constitutional
upon
civilian
within each elec
to
legislature.
as
an act of the
To enforce
reported
tion
by
district as
the census” is
the balance
question
of the section in
re-
hold,
not
While we
severable.
so
we re
quiring
census,
exclusive use of
the
the
hopeful
permanent
main
that
plan
before a
court should be able to find
the
that
consti-
created,
legislature
is
pro
the
will initiate
provision
tutional
would have been enacted
up-date
reapportionment
cedures to
the
independently
the
of
void reference to
provisions
by
of the Alaska
an
Constitution
“civilian population”.39
appropriate constitutional amendment.41
Springfield
Spring
possibility,
39.
Gas & Elec. Co. v.
also
of
be mindful
this
field,
236,
(Ill.
reapportionment
pro-
292 Ill.
872 ain might result board whose efforts THE ADVI- a OF III. COMPOSITION plan. politically reapportionment motivated BOARD REAPPORTIONMENT SORY that the Plaintiffs have contended it be nec our decision will Under reapportionment board was not constituted reapportion essary to refer this to a matter VI, the 8, of section required permanent as article for formulation of a ment board in Constitution, specifies necessary which for plan. Thus, although Alaska it is not with part: “Appointments be made shall question this the us to rule at time on political There regard out to affiliation.” board reapportionment the 1971 whether to appointed Republican upon members constituted, were no validly it is incumbent was we reapportionment the board. Since de some which we us to set forth criteria reapportionment that the deciding have found 1971 whether applicable termine in unconstitutional, to question as plan regard is the appointed board has been “without become composition affiliation”, the has board to withstand political to so as that not reach outset, recognize moot and we therefore do challenge.43 At the we this time.42 issue at re phrase equivalent is that this not the
quiring “bi-partisan” Neverthe board.44 ap less, reviewing validity the in the parties We also note that the necessarily pointment, (although not some stipulated creating that the Governor following would all) of considerations reapportionment plan acting from was not appear germane: to be affilia political political per- he did considerations and that board; members of the nature tion of if good from his function in faith. Thus particu in partisan politics, their activities composition there error was only; and larly political if from one party harmless, board errоr was rendered such expertise general qualifications purpose the obvious constitutional bring provision prevent members the board. of which appointment was (alternate 41, (E.D.Wis.1968) State, (Alas Supp. 47, 45 v. Doe P.2d 53 487 Cf. Accord, holding). 1971). v. United ka general In that we Gersten case stated the States, proposition 850, 852, F.2d Ct.Cl. that “we will refrain Lord, questions (1966) ; deciding 4 Alaska Nelson v. where the facts (1910). legal have rendered issues moot” 182-83. ex cept grave “where the is one matter Alaska Conven- 44.At Constitutional public concern but is and is recurrent original tion, in draft the discussion of the ” evading capable . . review . . “non- which the word of section 8 partisan” used presently We do not feel that the issue be following explanation was us which fore evinces same elusiveness judgment given: *16 require would Appointments our at this time. was chos- HELLENTHAL: The word Advisory Reappor to the deliberately. an alternative en Now many Board months tionment are made delegate perhaps the that the one and plan by promulgated before a final is the from in mind would be “chosen has Governor, parties and interested have major parties.” al- That the each of ample appeal time to moment from the rejected specifically be- was ternative appointments the are made. placed it felt [the committee] cause emphasis political upon quite properly point considerations 43. defendants The point- reapportionment been as has the board was this board which out that on objective May hoped keep, 20, 1971, out, is as it to on and that ed convened widely publicized hearings possible. the it true and it throughout Now is conducted “nonpartisan” during that the state the summer realized Committee belong you that cannot mean of Hence the doctrine of laches doesn’t parly might questioning political [On] .... the to a well further bar political awaiting contrary composition lan- the to use after the of the board emphasize politics, it involving guage, the would the outcome expenditure its work purpose to article this the is the whole funds and substantial politics. (Emphasis de-emphasize ad- of much There devotion time and effort. ample bring ded.) opportunity a was long to suit p. Minutes, completion board’s before the of the Convention Fowler, functions. 285 F. McCrocklin v. from multi-member districts districts was IV.CREATING SINGLE-MEMBER powers the available to the MULTI-MEM- within Gover- FROM DISTRICTS nor. BER DISTRICTS specifically au-
The Alaska Constitution “by to redistrict thorizes the Governor WITH- V. DESIGNATION OF SEATS of election dis- changing the size and area IN MULTI-MEMBER DISTRICTS ” 45 subject to re- tricts . . . certain plan provided that each seat The 1971 in forth the constitution. It strictions set districts of An- within the multi-member thus that the author- is clear Governor is desig- chorage and should be Fairbanks by changing to ized redistrict boundaries candi- alphabetically, nated and that each single-member creation of areas. The that district should date for office within would districts from multi-member districts particular filing the indicate at the time of appear power to be a concomitant under lettered seat for he seeks election. which the redistrict. Further- authorization to authority plaintiffs challenged the The more, authority gen- this is inherent in the designate seats within the Governor to power reapportion legislature. eral to the multi-member districts. inseparable Redistricting reappor- is general power The to Governor’s should be able tionment and Governor reapportion utilize right to includes to any to authorize constitutional device designated reasoning The tool of seats. accomplish Oregon Supreme the task. The Myers,48 gives sup set forth Hovet v. Court in its review that state’s recent position. problem port An identical to this reapportionment applicable set forth Burkhart,49 v. arose in case of Moss principles as follows: redistricting the Okla wherein court accomplished Apportionment by chang- is designated legislature authorized homa ing in- legislative district lines and an power under seats. If a has such court tegral making part apportionment is reapportion, a general authority Gov its fixing legislative dis- between choice by a specifically state con ernor authorized along trict single-member lines district held reapportion stitution to should be plan. plan or a multi-member district power. similar have the legislature This is a decision that had if it had done
would have to make VI. TERMINATING LEGISLATORS’ reapportioning. It must be made TERMS Secretary body of State or whatever Reapportionment The apportionment.46 makes the provided of all Plan for termination Sena exception terms, tors’ with of two Sen the method or Where motive not altered. ators whose districts were Un districting rather than the mathematical plan represent areas to be precision der the 1971 apportionment being is were remaining ed Senators Supreme challenged, the Court the Unit Anchorage changed, particularly consistently required ed States has that the changes in senatorial had drastic districts challenger proving the burden unc bear run longer that the were to at Senators no onstitutionality.47 plaintiffs below *17 large. terms of in A need to truncate the proof failed this to meet burden of and we may reapportionment when cumbents arise single-member hold that the creation of Const, 820, 120, 121, L.Ed. 17 VI, 87 S.Ct. U.S. 45. Alaska art. 6.§ 771, (1967). 2d 774 Myers, 684, 46. v. P.2d Hovet 489 689 (Or.1971). 684, (Or.1971). P.2d 48. 489 689 (W.D.Okl.1963), 149, E.Supp. g., Chavis, 158 49. 220 47. E. v. Whitcomb 403 U.S. Moss, nom., 378 124, v. 144, 1858, 363, sub Williams aff’d 91 S.Ct. 29 L.Ed.2d 1907, 558, L.Ed.2d 12 Kilgarlin (1971). Hill, 84 S.Ct. U.S. 376 v. 386 Cf. (1964). 1026 874 urge appropriate amend- strongly that an change in district permanent in a
results prepared be ment to the constitution excludes substantial either lines which presented electorate. repre- to the previously numbers of constituents numer- or includes incumbent by the sented superior is af- of the court The decision a voice did have who not ous other voters in part part in in ac- firmed and reversed of that incumbent. selection opin- provisions of this cordance with authority mid-term require to discretionary superior is remanded to the ion. The case necessary is well establish- elections when referring the mat- purpose court for the that the accordingly hold Gov- ed.50 We plan permanent reapportionment ter aof to terminate Senate power ernor had the of an to the with the assistance Governor reappor- general his incidental to terms as by him in advisory appointed be board to powers.51 tionment provisions of the Alas- accordance with
ka Constitution. TO AUTHORITY
VII. GOVERNOR’S REAPPORTION APPENDIX I authority to re The Governor’s 26, May 1. Decision and 1972. Order apportion challenged by was also Senate Masters, 26, May 2. Reference to 1972. plaintiffs In below. Wade v. Nolan detail, question this was discussed Report. 3. Masters’ we that under the Alaska concluded Con Establishing Rеap- 4. an Order Interim stitution the Governor with the assistance portionment Plan. reapportionment of the board had the im plied power reapportion to on Senate Denying Objections to Interim Order an interim has been basis.52 there Since Reapportionment Plan. constitution, no amendment to the de our point cision on that remains unaltered. DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs
that
legis-
below indicated
prepared
lature was
This
matter was
to initiate
constitu-
heard
the court on
24, 1972,
May
tional
pertaining
reappor-
upon petition
amendment
for review and
cross-petition
tionment.
the constitution
not
Since
does
for review. The court rec-
ognizes
specifically provide
reapportion-
difficulty
for
Senate
extreme
of the task
ment
impermissibly
reappor-
confronted
limits
and the Re-
Governor
population,
apportionment
tionment base to civilian
Board in reapportioning
we
Davis,
F.Supp.
(E.D.
geographical
plan
50. Mann v.
238
458
areas under the interim
Va.1964), aff’d,
694,
materially changed
popu
379 U.S.
have
85 S.Ct.
not so
713,
(1965) ;
875 differing plan 3. In an of its order to fashion of Alaska because interim State climates, this or topography, composition, appoint ethnic court will one more masters of to assist it. and distribution socio-economic interests However, relatively sparce population. its Upon report receipt 4. of the under mandate various decisions masters, master or this court will consider Court, Supreme we make United States manner which House and Sen- following determinations and order: ate districts reapportioned. shall be This reapportionment plan proposed 1. The adopt will proceed court then to an interim by the of Alaska in his Proclama- Governor plan which, reapportionment nearly as tion, Redistricting Reapportionment and practicable, considering the allotted 1971, 30, is December unconstitutional time, reflects the standards which have reapportionment
in that its overall binding upon been made the states Representatives and Senate House of re- Supreme United Ely States Court. v. in proposed sults election districts that do 1803, Klahr, 108, 403 S.Ct. 29 U.S. 91 equal pro- not nearly contain as Sims, Reynolds L.Ed.2d 352 (1971); v. 377 portions practicable. Reynolds as is v. 533, 586, 1362, 506, U.S. 12 84 S.Ct. L.Ed.2d Sims, 1362, 533, U.S. S.Ct. 12 377 84 L.Ed. 541 (1964). Nolan, 2d (1964); 506 v. 414 Wade P.2d (Alaska Equal 689 1966). Under the Pro- 5. In the this court event determines tection Supremacy pre- and Clause of the Con- exigencies that of the situation America, stitution United States of fashioning clude the of an interim constitu- 15, reapрortionment plan by tional right every the constitutional to vote of June 1972, court will this enter a further order protected against citizen of Alaska is im- specifying plan under which Lieu- permissible impairments dilutions and flow- tenant Governor shall conduct the 1972 ing from malapportionment either the primary general and for elections the State Representatives House of or the Senate. Legislature, together the dates that with constitutionally In order to effectuate this such elections v. will be held. Connor vote, protected right obliged we are 1760, 690, Johnson, 402 S.Ct. 29 U.S. 91 reapportionment plan declare the of De- (1971). L.Ed.2d 268 30, 1971, Equal cember invalid under the Protection Clause of the Fourteenth discussing opinion A full and deter- to the Amendment United States Constitu- in the mining the issues which were raised tion. petition cross-petition and will be filed due course.
2. To
compliance
insure
Equal
with the
regard
Protection Clause in
to the forth
Alaska,
day
26th
this
Juneau,
at
Dated
coming
primary
general
elections
May,
Legislature
for the State
this court must
Boney
George F.
formulate
reapportionment
an interim
Chief
plan.
redistricting
Germano,
Scott v.
Justice
A,
Jay
Rabinowitz
407,
1525,
U.S.
85 S.Ct.
PERSONAL George Rogers Dr. W. Evergreen Avenue 1790
Juneau, Alaska 99801 Rogers: Dr.
Dear Court the by Supreme Pursuant to your appointment William in case as a Master the special the State of Alaska Egan, 1711, are Jay No. Hammond, al, you et S. et File A. al v. given following instructions: the hereby should you 1. use official Census By This Alaska. base for State establish a population were who base should include personnel population military 70 Census. enumerated in the 19 whether determine should make an to 2. You inquiry military in included or not number of nonresident personnel be can 70 If a determination can be determined. Census which total made, then subtract number should you paragraph also state You should have at in 1 above. you arrived this determination. you the methods which arrived at detail by base, you 3. have Once determined you population give should ideal divide same This will you single'member district. number be included House a persons You should then which will repre- divide base population single sent district. ideal member Senate for You Senate election should then establish House containing formula districts close number as persons feasible. CA6694J *20 establishing districts, In House Senate an correspond, effort be should made to make the districts where feasible, approximate with boundaries set out in the plan. designated reapportionment No will seats be established within multi-member district if multi-member districts are establishing established. should, In you House and Senate districts feasible, contiguous wherever a district create territory compact containing nearly practicable as relatively integrated socio-economic area. any If there are substantial deviations should from the norms, specific express, reasons be set forth. confidential, This letter should be treated as a Supreme internal memorandum of Court Supreme should not be made
public apрroval without Court. Very yours, truly (Note: 26, May Identical letter sent 1972 to Mr. William H. Scott 736 G Street Anchorage, 99501.) Alaska OF OF THE MASTERS
REPORT REPORT OF THE MASTERS OF THE COURT OF THE SUPREME SUPREME OF THE COURT THE STATE OF ALASKA STATE OF ALASKA
In order to in fashioning assist an in- TABLE OF CONTENTS reapportionment terim plan, the Supreme Court of the on May State of Alaska Interim Plan .879 Proposed Masters' I. *21 appointed George Rogers, 1972 W. of Ju- Plan . . 881 a.Summary Proposed Evaluation of neau, Alaska, Scott, and H. of William of Base.882 Population the II. Establishment Alaska, Anchorage, special as Masters to of Sources for Calculation a. Statistical the Court. Instructions were issued the Base.882 Population 1970 Court to establishing both Masters stand- of Characteristics Resident Determination b. .884 Military Personnel of providing guidelines ards and to be fol- .884 Residency of c. Definition assignment. in the discharge lowed of their Mili- of legal and Distribution In Level and The Masters had the editorial Trends d. .884 tary Personnel Hicks, assistance of a law clerk the R. E. Characteristics Mobility and Duty e. Tour Supreme Court, the and carto- statistical Military .885 Listowski, graphic services of Richard a Voting Characteristics Behavior and Other f. analyst, research the clerical and steno- and Military .887 graphic Mary services of Eldemar. Work g. Exclusion Partial of Total and Effects . . 887 immediately upon appoint- Base was commenced Population from the Military the ment of Masters. .888 Conclusions h. proposed plan District .888 interim submitted with Establishment III. Regional .889 History a. Alaska's report the this is in accord with Court’s Districting .891 Evaluation b. General reapportionment specific a standards for Establishing .892 Districts the c. the plan. Arithmetical deviations .892 Ketchikan 1. District House population ideal or “norm” were reduced .892 Ketchikan A. District Senate of Wales- 2. Prince District House given unique to the the minimum feasible Petersburg-Wrangell-Angoon .892 geography, of Alaska’s characteristics .892 Sitka District 3. House B. Alexander-Archl- District Senate population and socio-economic distribution pelago .893 time, development. same the Mas- At the .893 4. Juneau House District .893 plan contains no dis- Juneau C. ters believe that the District Senate William 5. Prince House District crimination, by oversight, against design or .893 Sound region, any party, geographic ur- political 894 6. Matanuska-Susitna House District William D. Prince District Senate racial or ethnic ban or rural interests or .894 Sound-Matanuska-Susltna group. Anchorage .894 Districts 7-10. House Anchorage .894 E. District Senate the outline presenting addition In to Inlet .894 11. Cook District House plan reapportionment of proposed for the F. .895 District Cook Inlet Senate .. . 895 District 12. Kodiak-Central House evaluation of and and an the House Senate District 13. Islands- House Aleutian with the other compared its features as Western of Alaska .895 Gulf . . Court, District G. Kodlak-Aleutlans 895 plans Senate the before alternative Bay District 14. Bristol .895 House obligation to set recognized an Masters District 15. Bethel .895 House Court forth for benefit Bristol Bay-Bethel Senate District H. 895 Yukon-Koyukuk- House 16. District guided which their public considerations Kuskokwlm .895 presented in detail These are decisions. House District 18. Nenana-Mount McKinley .896 evidence, analy- supporting statistical with District I. Interior Alaska ... Senate por- bibliography. This reference sis House District 17. Fairbanks .896 organized into report Senate District J. has been Fairbanks .896 tion of District House 19. North .896 Slope parts presenting considerations main two Bering House District 20. Strait- into the establishment which went and data Sound Norton .897 Senate District K. Slopе- North population (2) base and of (1) Bering Strait .897 districts.
Bibliography .897 represent popula- 20 which will i ideal single tion for a member district. Senate INTER- PROPOSED MASTERS’ 4. You then should House establish PLAN IM REAPPORTIONMENT election containing Senate districts pre- 26, Masters were May On persons number of close to the formula following instructions sented with the as feasible. plan fashioning an interim be followed in In establishing House and Senate consideration: for Court’s districts, an effort be should made correspond, make where districts By the official Census use of feasible, approximate with the bounda- you should establish reapportionment ries set out in the 1971 popu- This of Alaska. base for State plan. designated No seats will be estab- military per- include lation base should lished within a multi-member district if in the 1970 enumerated sonnel were who districts are multi-member established. *22 Census. establishing In House Senate dis- de- inquiry an 2. You should make should, you feasible, tricts wherever not the number termine whether or create a contiguous district of and com- military included personnel nonresident pact territory containing nearly as can be determined. in the 1970 Census practicable relatively integrated a socio- made, then can be a determination If economic area. the number you should subtract any If there are substantial devia- at in you have arrived the total which norms, express, tions population from the paragraph You should also above. specific reasons be set forth. should by in detail which state the methods In accordance with these instructions you arrived at this determination. pre- Masters on submitted a June you liminary proposed reapportion- have determined version of a 3. Once base, population you plan. plan supporting report should divide ment give you the by This will were same reviewed with the and revised Court persons proposed plan incorporating to be included prepared ideal number of single changes suggested House district. You member the Court. The base changes should then divide the are reflected in Tables A and B. §80
8g2 by the indicates although House districts established the Board that the state
The plan identity only slightly, dif- preserve totals differ the local proposed Anchorage nat- in recognized regional entities and local ferences are substantial Illogical The ural and socio-economic units. and Fairbanks areas. use of creating personnel, military combinations districts Board’s statistics on Senate therefore, important is population are also This an results in civilian avoided. plans. improvement existing significantly from the official over which varies population
Census enumeration of civilian by districts. II compares 2 and the Table the Census THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF listings Board’s of members of the Armed POPULATION BASE places. Forces divisions and Census definition, a. Statistical Calculation Sources were due to data Differences for Population Base 1970 nature procedures collection and the basic purpose of each series. VI, Con- of the Alaska Article section 3 definition of members The Census population base requires that stitution “persons is on active the Armed Forces “the reapportionment be purposes for Army, Air duty with the States United population reported by the Unit- civilian Corps Force, Navy, or Coast Marine added.) (Emphasis ed States Census.” their enumerаted at Guard”.3 These were Court is instruction from the The first place and the totals “usual of residence” “by be established population that a base state, reported were for the the Census use of the Census 1970” official divisions, specific and a number of more per- military include that the base “should and enumeration locations. The definition in the 1970 sonnel who were enumerated changed procedures since the have not pre- As a (Emphasis added.) Census.” Census. reappor- interim fashioning an liminary to necessary therefore, it plan, tionment was Cen- not use the official The Board did of the avail- and evaluate all examine Forces, however, the Armed sus count of reports able to review 1970 Census “except na- having time of decided that Reapportion- procedures by which the 1971 oper- emergency, the Coast tional Guard ment “the Advisory (hereinafter Board Department auspices of the under the ates base for Board”) arrived at its Transportation”. A breakdown of reapportionment com- plan. is military population by branch of service ments not intended to which follow are published Census not available Board, be critical of the con- which was computer summary sources or from the immensely difficult task fronted with an *25 require data would tapes. Obtaining this perform spe- guidance without the of the consuming resort expensive and an time provided to cific instructions the Masters questionnaire original, to the individual by plan prepared by the the Court. The reason, the Presumably for this forms. significantly improved vari- Board former Command secured from the Alaska Board population ances from the norm. uni- of of the number and location list the state military personnel within formed compared are in Table 1. The results 1, 1970, arriving in April to be used as of in the two sets of statistics
The differences population.” at its “civilian Uniformed are counts) and the Board’s (the Census in the personnel (included Coast members of the Armed Guard in number of the and Forces) Armed definition of Census comparison the list of mem- A of Forces. personnel, were military dependents of by all as re- bers the Armed Forces areas of base. population in the “civilian” included by list used ported by the and the Census Advisory Report Re- Alaska, App. PC(1)-C3, the Governor’s Report 4. of 15-16. Board, p. apportionment in which of the area counted as residents the of arise because differences Other Dependents were they living.” were case. in each procedures collection data living on census they counted were figures “where tabu- were Alaska Command installation, ‘off day military g., the (e. all de- records for staffing the lated elsewhere, might case base,’ or the bases, stations with- installations fense be).”7 (Emphasis added.) Census April 1970. The as of Alaska in data col- of figures from tabulations were data, on other The Alaska Command the through a com- by questionnaires lected by hand, subject population the allocates in- self-enumeration bined method duty assignment. As the Census location on data by enumerators. Census terviews clear, this is not neces- definitions made civilian (including both employment status living. was sarily where the individual the Armed and members of work force of the two The differences in the nature prior “refer to the calendar week Forces) clearly sets of statistics are most illustrated respondents completed to the date on which by comparisons major the three mil- within interviewed questionnaires or were their itary 2) (Table state. While areas the of enu- the week enumerators. Since perhaps slight, the al- total differences are persons, for all meration not same was per- locations and off-base between on-base is employment data the reference week for simply drastically. This is sonnel differ persons, many For entirely uniform. reports not (Census) because one set of data the 1970 answering the reference week for “place of the of residence” of members employment question was Forces, status Census (Alaska Armed and the other set in reports “place last week March.” If Command) of work.” residence, place of voting is to be relative to Definitions, procedures and collection “place the use of statistical data based on most of the reference dates account for significantly of work” can distort com- mimbers, dif- in hut locational differences puted reapportionment population base. important ferences reflect more basic sourc- differences the nature of the two data in con- The use of Alaska Command primary objective arriving es. data in at Since 1790 nection with Census has been this population decennial census enumerations base differs from civilian every military personnel at to count inhabitant of the Nation that Court’s instruction sleeps place he most be those were enumerated the 1970 where “lives and “who Furthermore, a use of notes that “this combined of the time.” The Census Census.” data is as his Alaska Command data and Census place necessarily not the same is residence, residence, practice legal not statistical because voting or domi- sound cile,” in the nature of the data re- basic differences and the inclusion of criteria primary purposes each sleeps” and in garding he indi- served where “lives and Although differences necessarily set re- cates that residence not statistics. is totals might be minor for place employment.6 (“Place considered state lated divisions, the difference or even for Census is identified and used separately work” particular result in analysis within divisions could pat- Census in the commuters’ significant reapportion- distortion terns.) apparent is ment This base. quite is The nature of “residence” made *26 comparison the for from a of data the specific for Armed Forces. “Mem- the larger military in districts Table 2. of the on mili- living bers Armed Forces If that it was neces- the Board believed tary residents installations were counted as sary adjust definition and to the Census of in the area which the installation was to of of the Armed Forces count members the located. Members Armed Forces of personnel in retain Coast and the Guard not living military on installations were Id., p. 6.. Report PC(1)-C3, Alaska, App. III. 5. Census Id., p. IV. population, analysis investigation the amount of dis- with an
“civilian” concluded by been tortion could have minimized re- and evaluation of the effects of three dif- staffing questing population (civilian population, the data from the De- ferent bases military, partment Transportation plus part rather than of the and total civilian of Department population) upon representa- For the district pres- the of Defense. however, patterns appears reapportion- ent de- tion under purposes, it more the 1971 plan. ment fensible the Census definition and to retain Although person- data. the Coast Guard c. Residency Definition of Department Transpor- of nel are under the attempt The to define nonresident mili- Defense, Department of tation and not the tary necessarily begins with a discussion they automatically come under a unified of what is meant “residence”. In its defense command in times of national emer- sense, legal usually strictest residence re- Furthermore, gency. organization, op- the quires living peri- in the a minimal state for erations, personnel policies rotation and time, generally od year. again, of one Then general personnel relations of Coast Guard residence is sometimes confused the with persons
to in communities other Alaska are quite legal concept different of domicile. Department comparable to those of of the perhaps laymen’s Still another —and the Finally, Defense. the definition Census concept of residence —is defined with em- programs of Armed Forces is used in other phasis person on the intent of the to remain (such grants as the allocation of federal permanent on a more or less in basis the population, to states on a of etc.) basis and hand, state. theOn other the use Census Department is used in Alaska Labor’s the of the term “residence” is defined in terms population annual estimates. of habitation or person where the lives most of Finally, purposes Table 3 summarizes the 1970 total the time. for (Armed population voting, residency civilian) might Forces and defined the be data the requirement which, Census divisions. These divi- durational register, Alaska, grouped approximate in presently sions have been is days. given reap- districts in the House Although concepts residency various
portionment report are used in this and explored, were ultimately we have chosen study plan. in analyzing the 1971 legal definition, strictest assuming that if justices (as lawyers) had us wanted b.Determination Resident Character- to consider domicile, habitation, lay- Census Military istics Personnel men’s “intent” registration or durational is second instruction from Court requirements, the instructions would have that inquire the Masters should “whether specified. so or not military the number of nonresident But legal even the definition of residence personnel included in the 1970 Census can might differ depending upon purpose be (Emphasis added.) determined.” A of requirement licenses, (e. g., taxing, protracted conscientious and effort was divorces). welfare or Thus we have made made to arrive at such a determination from general a assumption residency that for appro- official census data and other present purposes minimally require would
priate investigation sources. This started party that the have in lived the state for at with a consideration of the defini- various year, least one and explored we have residence; tions of study of the trends impact consequences including mili- position and the military as a whole tary personnel duty with various in tours of economy of Alaska Alaska. past over the three inquiry decades: an into d. Trends in Level аnd Distribution length of tour-of-duty mobility and the Military Personnel characteristics military population Alaska; finally comparison II, of mil- Prior to the onset World War *27 itary and voting presence civilian The of military behavior. in Alaska lim- was
885 Finally, major personnel ords). part scat- uniformed of construc- about 500 ited to engaged support in main- tion territory, employment and service can across tered essentially directly military pres- civilian communica- be attributed to taining an (the spite system manning Fort Seward ence in In expan- and Alaska. recent tions of day Chilkoot) industries, Port to defend sion of present natural resource based against boundary possible important defense is still the most part United States of military Since economy larg- contest from Canada. Alaska’s basic and still its is military a domi- “industry.” II the has been World War est economy and element in the Alaska nant 4, data The summarized in Tables 5 and Only in did it population. past decade clearly person- 6 demonstrate military that relative in absolute terms and decline both in significant Alaska have nel been a and population. total
to the popula- stable element in relatively the total mil- 4 summarizes the number of Table tion. The defense establishment has and itary personnel (Department of Defense single continues to constitute most Alaska’s reported by the United Guard) and Coast important Directly economic element. and July in 1 of Alaska as of States Census indirectly associated with the uniformed Immediately after year from each 1950-70. personnel are a further significant group II hostilities in the end of World War of 'civilians whose continuation as residents troops re- an of there was out-movement dependent of is upon Alaska the continued high of drop in sulting from the 1943 presence military personnel. of the 152,000 19,000. low The Cold to a 1946 of Tour and Duty Mobility e. Character- of in an im- and Korean War resulted War Military istics of of trend in 1947 mediate reversal this definitions, According every- to Census annually peak of building up a new 1, in body April enumerated as Alaska o'f 50,000 for in 1952 maintained which was is a “resident” of 1970 the state and years. drop A in six shart occurred 1958 place they living were “most sleeping and to the levels which have been maintained Any adjustment of the time.” numerical only throughout the minor vari- 1970’swith military figure to be would have ations. justified on a modification of the Census compares the distribu- geographic Table 5 definition of resident included a time which 1950, 1960 military personnel tion of in the provided reports dimension. The Census reports. and Census The locational tour-of-duty length indicators of the patterns have been over these two decades at locations military personnel different major remarkably constant con- with facilities, housing different rela- and and together in four centers ac- centrations personnel com- mobility military tive counting military popu- for total 91.2% pared other Alaskans. with 1950, in in in lation 87.1% 89.0% length of the of individual tour Annual data for the decade deter- emphasize members of the Armed Forces is further 1960’s Census district policy policy. official Rotation stability patterns of both mined the locational 6). by an officer the Alaska this is summarized (Table the levels of Department in a review of the Command Directly associated with these uniformed fol- in in Defense activities Alaska personnel and similar resident- sharing lows : the сivilian nonresident characteristics are Department personnel employees Defense The number of military ex- changes response slightly dependents in (averaging and the Coast Guard political consider- 6,500 (national forces annually during more than the 1960’s ternal situation, ation, changes international according Department to Alaska of Labor technology, yet personal dependents groups etc.), and the of both defense records), 40,600 rela- 33,000 group remain characteristics of (ranging in 1964 to static, being by a selec- according to rec- determined tively Alaska Command *28 886 age, sex, range mobility. and This in measured terms of stable is
tive and prac- magnitude because of the relative the movement of patterns occupation dependents 1, population years of rotating personnel April and five 1970 tice place they tours and in tour-of-duty age basis. These over from the resided on a house, 1, personnel April (the on same different 35 months 1965 typically are for house, state, county in the different in the same their accompanied, by families areas, state). and 24 outside the The Census defini- Fairbanks Anchorage and “migrant” person unaccom- is a tion of a who*had respectively and 18 months for county are curtailments residence in a different of the panied personnel. Few 1965 approved. are same state or different state from which given, many extensions a but 1, they April in- resided on data length tour isolated 1970.10 This The normal for Dependents major population are is for the on the is available year. stallations one in for the posts. [Emphasis military Alaska and Census not allowed at isolated bases divisions. Table 8 summarizes for five added]8 published as re- bases for which data are Armed Forces ac- The members of the years age persons lated to all five and having 35 month companied by families and older, comparable with the data for all qualify as tours-of-duty appear to would persons residing other in the Census divi- Furthermore, potential resident Alaskans. sions are located. This in which the bases these dependents accompanying the civilian population on these bases was indicates that residency personnel sharing their and as as the from two to three times mobile in “civil- included characteristics are remaining population of the Census divi- would population ian” base. The Census located, they sions in which but it also are personnel military dependents of list these popu- that between indicates 25-30% of households.” as “members military lation on bases have resided these unaccompanied military remaining The years. Alaska for more than five The in Anchorage personnel tours at have shorter conclusions to be drawn are that all Alas- (18 months) (24 months), Fairbanks degree mobility, high kans a that exhibit months). These (12 isolated installations members of the Armed Forces are more living in “other listed the Census are Alaskans, mobile than other but that also Table classifies mem- group quarters”.9 significant proportion a of members of type in Forces bers the Armed relatively long-term the Armed Forces are by Census divisions living quarters of the residents State. places. In combination with and selected tour-of-duty summary quoted above analyzed two sets data of Census suggest that tabulation would policy, this basis, tour-of-duty aр- that on indicate military number of who the maximum population proximately military half (on might as nonresidents be considered probably would be or had been short-term would dimension) time basis of a strict An- (for residents less than 24 months in military in barracks or living be the chorage, 18 months in Fairbanks and 12 51.9% on the basis of ships. This would be on elsewhere). months in the Aleutians and “resident,” and definition of very loose hand, mobility according the other On challenged on more techni- clearly be could data, long-term resi- between were 20-30% grounds. cal years more). or This would (five dents resi- leave as intermediate-term about of resident-orientation Another indicator 20% It is (between years). dents two to four statistics on is found in Census ” Report tories, Spending . Bowen, . . . Census “Defense 8. Brent R. Alaska, p. PC(1)-C3, IV. Alaska,” of Business Alaska Review Conditions, Till, No. Vol. Economic Census, Bureau 10.United States July 1971, pp. 5-6. p. App. Report PC(1)-C3, Alaska residing persons in mili- include “These college tary ships, barracks, dormi- on *29 allowances, voting rights, travel absentee of resi- group the short-term only within however, figures, These do' not etc.). any supportable nonresident that dents type necessarily represent in- of “resi- without more be defined group could contemplated by dence” the Court’s in- subjective intent of formation about the Navy They structions. do not to include and action claim to take affirmative members Moreover, military Therefore, Coast Guard “residents.” residency. nonresident potentially significant latter are a num- something than half probably be less will ber because the of the Coast Guard policy the total. encourage community participation. is to Character- and Other f. Behavior Voting Finally, incomplete figures pub- even Military istics of general lished for the Alaska election of that, fact, November 1970 indicate in charac- indicator of resident A further personnel military more voted than claimed would military population teristics of the “residence with of record” the Alaska voting actual registration to vote and be sure, (See 9) Command. Table To be complete not data are 'records. Direct registration voter must data be distin- voting available, comparison of but a guished residency from But voter data. (military and population record of the registration is still another per- index o'f major defense bases with on civilian) such, manency Alaska, in and as the data can be made. of Alaskans remainder “residency indicates of record” that per- very voting indicates a low Table 9 figure by military is misleading used as persons as centage among on these bases military per- representing the number of of the state compared with the remainder legal actually sonnel who would claim resi- for population. means available No are dency. on a segregating these statistics further military-civilian discovering of sim- basis or g. Total and Partial Exclu- Effects of for ilar indirect or direct measurements Military Population sion Base of participation. off-base election military of all relevant From the examination military personnel might that surmise One supportable appears that a data available it private dwellings in off-base would have excluding for all case cannot be made in greater participate local incentive military, may be un- although some basis taxation, property lo- elections because of portion of excluding a However, covered for there policies, cal etc. school military. given was tak- vote; Consideration out” there Way is no to “break poll sample person- ing military or a of personnel a voting military are no of records at in in arrive a more nel Alaska order to living off-base. The limited information precise residency than the determination of popu- to reinforce the available would seem unaccompanied that suggestion impression generalized variety for a of reasons lar that ship elsewhere, in barracks or on personnel living rights (protection voting of Forces) of Armed residence, (51.9% total members apathy, Alaska taxa- briefness tion, number be as the maximum military generally do considered the on-base etc.) This not executed be- nonresidents. was participate not or elections. state local difficulty conducting cause of the time Roger met the Masters Col. One of with would taken more poll, and it be a because Koltz, Personnel -for the Alaska Officer the Census enumer- years than two after at Elmendorf Air Force Base. Command sampling be ation and thus would Air Col. Koltz advised that records of the possibly with people different set Army present “Alas- Force and reflect that changed attitudes. ka residents” of two services num- those decisively, analysis an Finally, most respectively. bered 125 and 65 Residence using reapportionment .plan purpose commonly for this es- record is pop- (total bases population three different military members of the for tablished status, less members ulation, various reasons estate total (tax and ships, the Armed Forces in virtually change barracks and on result no in district population) representation. civilian demonstrates that changes upon the effect of in the base dis- III. ESTABLISHMENT OF representation
trict in the House would DISTRICTS insignificant be so to render an such un- dertaking purely academic. remaining the Court instructions of guides relate to the and standards to be population,
Table 10 lists the total *30 used in establishment of the new House population military personnel total less in and Senate election districts. were These group quarters (51.9'% of members of the as follows: population Armed Forces) and civilian all
(excluding members of the Armed persons That (1) the “ideal number of by reapportionment the Forces) districts single to be included in a member House plan, compares of this and the results 1971 district” is by dividing be determined to dividing by each base the ideal or population by the base 40 and the “ideal equal representation. Adding “norm” for population single for a member dis- Senate the members of the in Armed Forces house- by trict” (not group holds in quarters) to civilian the (2) That the new district boundaries be population raising in popula- results the persons established to contain “a number of tion-representative for ratio the Fairbanks as close to the formula as feasible” and 5.642, district from or 5.488 to rounded to express justification that specific and be numbers, whole technically an increase given “any for substantial deviations from representatives. from 5 to 6 No other dis- population the norms.” trict-representation is altered the addi- by (3) That “an effort should be made to tion this portion the Armed Forces. correspond, make the districts where feasi- Adding all back members of the Armed ble, approximate with the boundaries set April Forces using popu- and the total 1970 out in reapportionment plan” the 1971 and lation as the base in the results loss the that the districts “contigu- be created of representative Lynn in Canal-Icy the ous compact territory containing as Straits district (but a mere in decrease the nearly practicable relatively as integrated population-representative from 0.508 ratio socio-economic area.” to 0.484), repre- and the addition of one Using 302,361 population the base of sentative in the Bay Aleutian-Bristol dis- (the population Census total enumeration), trict (from to 1.619). 1.188 single the ideal or norm for a member With each of these three popu- different 7,559 persons House district would be bases, adjustments lation some in district for single 15, member district Senate obviously boundaries required would be in step The first in considering the new order bring to the total of the rounded districting reappor- was to test the 1971 figure to 40 House seats. example, For using tionment districts the total Census only persons Lynn addition of 119 population and the above norms. The Canal-Icy Straits would restore its one using Court’s instructions than (other these representative and the subtraction of 900 however, districts “where feasible”), dras- persons from the Bay Aleutian-Bristol tically population altered both the base and would reduce representation its by one. general procedures by followed h. Conclusion Board in establishing the 1971 districts. The analy- drawn population plan conclusions from this in The base was 1971 sis are (i) that a residency population reported determination of by total the Census other than that by used is a personnel Census less the number military highly subjective process, arbitrary April Depart- reported by and (ii) changes population Defense, that in the base ment of not Ad- Census. would, case, civilian to any total in herence to the Court’s instruction resulted geographic systems and other plan’s by units river changes in the 1971 major in further 1). (Figure features ideal or norm. from an deviations produced topographic features The effec- instructions further The Court’s influenced and geologic evolution Alaska’s Board reasoning of the tively out rule degree controlled the evolution large to a districts are in individual that deviations climate, total natural balancing de- offsetting or environment— compensated accessibility— wildlife, cover, vegetative combination. of others viations human habita- controlled and in turn also the indi- saying that specific is Court not includ- [Figure 7 (Figures 2-6 to the tion. as close districts are to be vidtial significant first At the time ed]) any substan- and that “as feasible” norm 1740), the earlier (circa European contacts justified. Table must be tial deviations established migrations firmly had the Asian applies the total 1970 major cultures and several contrasting plan. two in the 1971 districts established House lived an under which marginal cultures Barrow-Kobuk exception With *31 74,000 Figures persons.11 (See estimated popula- the district, deviations from these Bering up northward the Extending justified 8-9) great be as tion norm are too to of the joining coast and shores Sea being as the best entirely unavoidable or to Greenland Basin from Siberia Arctic it neces- possible. Accordingly, results was of found the Arctic culture was physical dis- sary to at new set of arrive a tricts; 40,000 people many of these Eskimo. As doing so the Masters were In portion in the Alaska probably living were guided by concerns of the Board: the same of the first region at the time of this arithmetically seeking to that in addition located on European contacts. Most were representation, districts should equal land re- marine and the sea costs where geographic expression also an of natural be for a subsistence provided sources the basis units and socio-economic communities as economy, some fishing but hunting and possible. far as following or inter- groups inland moved Regions a. and History Alaska’s great caribou migrations of the cepting the herds, developing distinctive cultural and 586,400square Alaska’s total land area of Estimates linguistic characteristics. and miles is one-fifth the total area of the con- 12,000 in the lived suggest that Eskimos States, equivalent tinental United Yukon and Bay drainage and Bristol West, greater part ap- of the Middle 28,000 deltas, lived and another Kuskokwim quarter proximately two and a times the Peninsula, drainage, on the Kobuk Seward area of Texas. It stretches between the parts Slope, Range Brooks and Arctic degrees degrees latitudes of 51 and 72 interior Alaska. degrees north and the meridians of 130 east; degrees west and major aboriginal and it contains culture was The second four by time zones within its boundaries. on the north- represented Be- the settlements size, cause of con- its subcontinental North American Alaska west coast of the expected single, should extending not be ho- the northern end to be tinent mogeneous region, to Archipelago but southward several distinctive the Alexander regions this differing physical, each with Alaska clima- northern Within California. tological, and natural an estimated represented resources features. culture was 10,000 1,800 topographic The main had features of moun- and Haida who Tlingit systems territory tain Tlingit divide Alaska into five dif- launched an invasion into prior ferent and just well defined Queen “Alaskas” each in from the Charlotte Islands European turn The rela- subregional subdivided into distinct contacts. to the first Ethnology, ten of American : Bureau aboriginal 11. All estimates of Swanton, 1952). from J. R. The Indian Tribes of America, (Washing North Bulletin 145 §90 climate, relatively but minor ing period, in contrast to made mildness of this
tive 10). Figure Arctic, (See the abund- contributions. of the the extremes and life re- and other marine ance salmon only military on forces in Alaska The in one concentrations sulted heaviest 1937, 30, infantry and were 298 men June on aboriginal population found this con- (formerly officers at Chilkoot Barracks highest areas tinent north of the civilization Fort and 134 men and Seward) officers America, and and the in Mexico Central Corps Army Signal an performing remarkably rich in of a culture elaboration essentially maintaining civilian function of art, literature, legal and oral and social territory’s sys- telephone wireless and organization. changed dramatically tems. This on in military eve of repre- World War II. The forest-hunting was The culture 1, 1941, 9,000 increased July Alaska to at groups Indians of sented small employment Athapascan stock, 5,200 construction rose from probably scattered 1,255 average of along systems monthly during calendar river interior 10,521 year Military during to plateau region, Copper 500 in the River 1946, 1,200 personnel 152,000 1, reached basin, July in on the Kenai-Illiamna area. 19,000 dropped to then rose remaining group was the cultural 50,000 Aleut, 16,000 during the at occupying some the Aleutian 1950’s and stabilized 33,000 during (Refer Islands and the when about the 1960’s. Alaska Peninsula B, military Russians people above) arrived. These discussion in Part were closely parts pop- related and in In addition to the to the Eskimo introduction of new ulation, period of southwest they this of defense southcentral Alaska resulted *32 appeared major improvements to be expansion and of inter-mixed. which, transportation surface and air in period The of and American Russian greatly past turn has modified the influence occupation up of Alaska until the outbreak upon of geography separation both of the of World War II was one of limited and centers of settlement and economic devel- fluctuating narrowly spe- settlement and opment. (Figure 11) cialized but intensive natural ex- resource ploitation.12 past the explorations During The two has during the decades there Century been Eighteenth prepared way a definite shift in the the for basic Alaska economy military extension from the of the Russian the to natural resources. and British expenditures fur trades into Annual defense an occupation Alaska fell from and the by of Alaska estimated in varying periods Russia. For million 1953 to $512.9 $333.4 of million in 1970 while exploitation, whaling destructive annual value of nat- (1847- and the 53) harvesting products ural resource of fur seal and rose from sea $101.6 pelts years. otter million for (1760-1911) together million the $671.7 with a same variety of The in products land furs set the increase natural and resource economic population patterns. primarily values was due expansion After to the transfer to the United of primary products industry States the forest economic in southeastern base shifted petroleum to other Alaska in the resources 1950’s and the beginning with in of the canned Cook industry salmon Inlet-Kenai area in the (1878 in The 1960’s. southeastern and announcement of the Bay 1882-82 in central and Prudhoe dis- 1968, plans western Alaska), discovery coveries in gold for the ex- further deposits pansion southeastern, products lode in southeastern of forest in (1878- Alaska 80) and gold placers Alaska, pros- at southcentral and interior Nome and in pect Interior (1898-1906), copper, iron production and the ore and other mineral copper development petroleum from the and Kennecott in (1911-38). development mines Other exploited give natural other all regions promise resources con- were dur- of a remaining IIop- (Baltimore: 12. The historical discussion is The Alasku Johns upon Rogers, 1962) pp. based G. W. The Future kin’s Press 60-102. plicated importance by relatively popula- of a natural small total tinuing growth in apportioned tion base economy. (e. g. to be a nu- resource based persons change merical of a hundred creates con- history of Alaska can be most The percent a 1.3 variation), the vast total area in terms of a review veniently summarized population over spread, which this and was major and population trends race highly irregular pattern distribution regions regions. found (using Table (57% population located in two com- Figures historical evidence of on 2 and pact urban centers and the remainder early population, and the decennial census in scattered varying communities of sizes presents enumerations 1880-1970) over a land area one-fifth that of the entire population changes by and non- Native states). continental patterns in and Native The races. shifts keyed chronology can all be to the trends spite problems, In of these assign- development. drop of economic The given by ment the Court has been accom- population mid-century is Native until plished in accordance with these standards attributable to the traditional fate of ab- only with major one variation from the original peoples periods initial con- population norm in a (Ketchikan) total forces; peoples tact with alien and and 40 House and 20 Senate districts. In the the more recent rise is to the attributable context region of the natural in which this public effectiveness of health other located, however, district is the variation social services. is minimized. maps The report in the 1970 Census geographic pattern of the districts number of inhabitants locate the centers results in combinations which conform to present population by sym- and indicate major regions into which Alaska nat- approximate population bols the range of urally logically in geographic divides place. each The boundaries of the Census and socio-economic terms. The first three major divisions reflect geographic Senate districts form the region, Southeast features of Alaska as slightly modified with the centers at Juneau political organization. Except for the ma- comprising Ketchikan each dis- a Senate jor population concentrations in An- eight-member Anchorage trict. The Senate *33 chorage and the Fairbanks North Star population district embraces a core around Borough (together accounting for of 57% which larger three rural districts Senate of Alaska’s total population) population the is area to combine include the total of Gulf in scattered small and isolated cities and drainage Alaska and the outer Aleutian towns along the system, interior river along Islands. Bay-Bethel The Bristol district the coasts of the state and the islands of is identical region with the and Southwest the chain, Aleutian the Gulf of Alaska and the Slope-Bering North Strait district is the Alexander Archipelago. (Figures 12- region. identical with the Northwest The 15) Fairbanks districts the define urban-mili- tary core large around which the Interior b. General Evahiation Districting of naturally district belongs. development The reapportionment of the districting product was the adhering of to regard preservation In to of established different, two and' at conflicting times regional entities, proposed plan repre- this principles achieving the mathematical important improvement sents an over exist- — ideal of preserv- “one-man-one-vote” while plans ing Bering which the up break Sea ing as possible far as the identity and in- region, part and combine with the Interior. tegrity system of natural and socio- exception the borrowing With of minor economic regions and local boundaries Anchorage from the and Fairbanks which are the result geography of Alaska’s boroughs population raise to the of con- history. and The task, mathematical which tiguous districts, proposed plan the does was primary consideration, the modify government not com- local boundaries. was Cordova, region, miles). is 225 Districts southcentral Establishing the
c. a growing This is area.13 An immediate boundary precise at to arrive In order comple- population in will increase follow use of to maximum definitions and make airport. tion the Moreover of Ketchikan data, done redistricting was the Census prospects copper mining are of and there divisions, Census the basis of on Hyder gate- the town revival of of districts as listed and enumeration areas way northern into British Columbia. lists Census published MED and on the Senate District A. Ketchikan: This is are defined in units well maps. tract These the same as House District 1. documents; are broken down the official enough permit satis- small units into House District 2. Prince Wales- of flexibility adjusting factory degree Petersburg-Wrangell-Angoon: is a This approximate popula- larger units by one-member district formed the Prince ideals; upon tion-representation are based Division, Petersburg- Census Wales by factors arrived at sound socio-economic Wrangell Angoon Census Division and the long study joint of the staff of and work population Census Division. The total — Bureau of Census the United States only this combination is below 0.5% n advisory committee of Alaskans and an representation. for To norm Governor; appointed are by the and an gether principal these divisions cover the evolutionary outgrowth of divisions similar fishing harvesting and forest areas of the manageable Alaska into local units ex- southern half the southeast region. tending to the first official Census back principal fishing-fish communities are short, in 1880. these units Alaska In processing city Petersburg and virtually reflect all the forces which have fishing-fish lumbering processing and produced contemporary Alaska. city important places of Wrangell. Other Tlingit villages Kake, are the Klawock House District 1. Ketchikan: This is a Angoon and primarily and the Haida vil two-member district formed a combina- lages of Craig Hydaburg. and Other set tion of the Ketchikan Census Division and tlements are engaged logging fishing or the Outer Ketchikan Census Division. and fish processing. The is tied district Gateway This includes the Ketchikan Bor- together by transportation air and water ough, Station, (Coast Annette Island Guard transportation. Airfield and the Tsimshian town of Met- lakatla) surrounding areas. The econ- House District 3. Sitka: This is a one- omy is upon processing, based fish wood member district formed the Sitka Census manufacture, pulp lumbering, transporta- (which Division is also the Greater Sitka tion and communications. The area of the Borough) Yakutat area district compact is strongly integrated. Skagway-Yakutat Census Division. The *34 The however, 1970 population, falls short population only is person one short of of the population representa- set for norm population 7,559. the ideal splitting The by tion a variation of This could Skagway-Yakutat the ~22.5%. Census Division be made up by areas, attaching other but is separation a natural of two centers that the merely result would be to shift this already are geographically and economical- over-representation elsewhere within the ly separated from by one another the southeast region. It is not feasible to reach Division, Haines Census portion a beyond the region southeast because of the nothеrn British and Columbia 155 miles of separation clear region the from the some of highest the and rugged most balance of (the Alaska air miles from the country mountain on the continent. The population northwestern-most region in the most remote place inhabited in the South- at Yakutat to the population nearest eastern Tlingit area is the village of Department Labor, Manpower Alaska 11, Alaska’s Outlook —1970’s. Issue # March supported by Yakutat is fishing which ex- ect which will serve area). the A road is tending Straits, Icy southward to logging being pushed southward from Haines to for both pulp export, the Sitka and for connect with the rnill area a short Juneau game and big hunting. major ferry Hoonah ais run Bay. to Berners present At these Tlingit and, community with the mixed areas are linked ferry. air and Skag- racial way communities of Elfin Cove and Peli- is primarily a railroad terminus for can, its engage inhabitants in fishing in Yukon Territory and Northwest Terri- Icy Gustavus, Straits and elsewhere. a tories in Canada. Haines and Port Chil- former transportation center and home- koot highway are a terminus for same area, steading is gateway now a to Glacier Canadian provides areas and access to the Bay National provides Monument. Sitka Alaska Highway and interior Alaska. This major population hub of the district also logging is and lumber center with with health, an economy upon based edu- some fishing and industry. an active tourist cation and social services for the Native capítol is the government state and Juneau people at Edgecumbe, pulp Mt. the second is primary business. There has been Alaska, mill in fishing processing, and fish some lumbering past and presently Home, the first Pioneers’ transportation there is the prospect of a revived and ex- and communications. panded products industry. forest Fishing, processing fish and tourism round out its Senate District B. Alexander Archi economy. The total district was one of pelago: composed This is of House Dis principal gold producing areas in Alaska tricts 2 and 3 and its variation from the — heavily and is mineralized. The most population norm is This district 0.3%. promising short-range prospects are iron virtually includes all of the islands of the mining ore processing and at Klukwan at Alexander Archipelago which are tied to the northern end of the district and simi- gether naturally by protected waters lar developments mineral at Snettisham at Passage Inside and other channels. Skagway the southern end. Near there is It also includes aboriginal all the tribal prospect development of the of the areas of Tlingit people except those Taiya-Yukon hydro-electric power com- Ketchikan, located at Juneau-Douglas, plex. quite The whole district distinc- is Haines and Klukwan. Sitka is the admin tive region from the rest of the southeast istrative and programs service center for present potential develop- because of its operated by government the federal for entirely ment and it the fact that is almost people. these composed portions of the mainland. Hoitse District Juneau-: This ais Senate District C. This is the Juneau: two-member composed district same as House District 4. Census (which Division is also Juneau City and Borough Juneau), House the Haines District 5. Prince William Census Division and Skagway of Sound: district area This is a one-member Skagway-Yakutat the . composed Cordova-McCarthy, Census Division. Val- population dez-Chitina-Whittier, is above the norm. Census Seward +4.3% It is possible logical not Portage, devise and Divisions and the Girdwood natural means to population reduce the as Bird enumeration districts. The variation the main concentration is in the central from the norm is To- —1.6%. part of the borough gether and the Haines these drain- units embrace the total *35 .and Skagway centers up age are tucked in the into the Prince and con- William Sound region northwest corner of the physical remote from stitute one natural The dis- unit. population other develop- districts. The trict also of high degree demonstrates a ment of the area has been north- economic homogenity. Cordova was es- Juneau ward to Bay (site planned Berners Copper of a tablished as a rail terminus for the pulp and lumber center) developments and southward to River copper and will soon (site Snettisham hydro-electric a proj- gateway community resume its role as a Copper High- scrutiny population characteris- of the River Close completion with clearly important prospects Anchorage of an in do not reveal tics way and the development ghettoes. (See, Greater minerals delineated ethnic and tourism Valdez, Office, Anchorage Planning and Peo- tapped. Borough Whittier being area transportation ple Anchorage, 1972). com- some rela- gateway all Seward are While tively high areas of the income to the inland low income and areas munities linked identified, railway they compact the interconnected and can be are not so district via they contiguous permit drawing appor- form the or as to highway systems of which along has a well estab- port Cordova tionment lines such a divide. terminals. economy fishing processing and fish lished attempt an has Nonetheless been made similar diversi- developing is a and Seward to Anchorage make the subdivisions coin- present base. its economic fication of rough cide with communities interest Anchorage Matanuska-Susitna: which House District 6. Area Greater Plan- composed ning has “planning district Office defined This is a one-member as dis- tricts”. the Matanuska-Susitna Census These districts in turn are Area II of derived Eklutna, from Birchwood and Fire census tracts Division and and enumerator dis- districts from tricts. Lake enumeration Census Census Its variation
Anchorage Division. attempts Initial to form districts of uni- norm is This population from the +1.5%. representatives form numbers of and drainage most of the of the district includes by inability senators was frustrated to systems, the Matanuska River Susitna and break populations out exact numerical areas, important agricultural Alaska’s most resorting arbitrary without block-by- an Highway connecting and the Glenn block count. The Masters decided to form Anchorage High- district to the Richardson varying districts of representa- numbers pros- way Highway. Alaska The and the tives in accomplish order to both the nu- development pects future of the for the precision merical preserve and boundaries further and recrea- district include urban of “communities” which be can identified. development tional related the Anchor- The proposed result was the plan for a district, products age forest and minerals. Northwest representatives district of 5 with population a +2.7%; variance of a D. Prince Senate District William Spenard representatives district with three This is com- Sound-Matanuska-Susitna: and population a +1.9%; variance of a posed and Districts 5 6 and has House Northeast district representatives with 5 a population from the norm of variation population and a +2.1%; and, variance of are linked The two House districts —2.0%. a South district with representatives and highway inter-connected common a variance of +2.8%. system. Senate Anchorage: Districts E. These Anchorage: House Districts 7—10. The are formed from the House Districts. composed of Anchorage District is less the House District Anchorage Census Division Census 11. Cook Inlet: is This composed districts with House two-member enumeration included district dis- Districts 5 6. The multi-member Kenai-Cook Inlet Census and Division the Lake trict has a combined from Illiamna Lake Clark Census enu- variation population Bay The Anchor- norm of meration districts from the Bristol +2.6%. age largest population District is the con- Census The Division. variation high has centration in the state but de- norm is This district “2.3%. gree despite portions its size. How- includes all the northern-most compactness but ever, it Inlet drainage it is not advisable to constitute Cook most large one district because of the number of area defined the boundaries of the representatives unwieldy Region and the ballot Cook Inlet Association. Native petroleum which producing would result. current fields of *36 the district. Senate District G. within Kodiak-Aleutian: all located Alaska are fishing composed with This district is. important area House districts an It is also and other popu crab and 13. The variation from the diversified growing and of the Together they end lation norm is at the lower fisheries shell fish —1.3%. air, high- combine is the Naval installations in Alaska The district served Inlet. Tourism, many posts. systems. They outdoor and of the Coast ferry Guard ways and frontier, share a common agriculture region. add further insular and recreation economy. its basic House District Bay: 14. Bristol This composed is a one-member district of the is Cook This Senate District F. Inlet: Bay (less Bristol Census Division District. the House same as Illiamna and Lake Clark districts trans- House District 12. Kodiak-Central: plus ferred to the district), Cook Inlet composed This is a one-member district Islands, Peninsula, Pribilof por- Alaska Kodiak, City Navy of the the U. S. tions of the Aleutian Islands from the Station, portions other the main Island Division, Aleutian Census and the lower Alaska, draining into the and Gulf Bay Kuskokwim area from the Bethel Cen- Afognak The from the Island. variation sus Division. The variation from the norm population norms is It contains here, is As defined the district +0.1%. —2.6%. major Navy and Coast Guard installations naturally and logically combines areas and and is important fishing the center for and people who have a common orientation to activities, processing primarily king fish pursuits marine and major to the fisheries and other varieties of crab. forest Some Bay. the Bristol population The is products harvesting developing is and there dominantly a mixture of Eskimo and Aleut prospects expansion. are for further The with a military personnel few and non- is tied district to the mainland scheduled persons Native engaged trade, in fishing, air ferry system. traffic and the mining and transportation activities.
House House District 13. Aleutian Islands- District 15. Bethel: This is a Western Alaska: This is a one- one-member composed district of the Bethel Gulf of composed member district of the Census bаlance Division (less Bay the Kuskokwim of the Kodiak plus Census area) Division and that Bering drainage Sea area portion of the Aleutian Islands Census Di- south of the Yukon Delta from the Wade- vision to the west Hampton of Atka Island. The Census Division. The variation variation population from the norm is population norm is The +1.5%. The principal population centers town of Bethel highest population is the ~2.7%. of this district are the Naval stations at concentration in many and District Shemya. portions Adak 'places scattered, of the other being (rang- small Aleutian Census Division ing transferred to from 30-250) and isolated communities. Bay (District Bristol 14) are oriented There are the beginnings of commercial fishing on both sides of the Alaska fishing Penin- and processing in the district and sula people and their migrate Bay possible into the some developments, minor mineral in search of Despite salmon. separa- their but on the economy whole the local is a tion, the remainder of the marginal two Census di- population one. The is domi- visions have a common nantly orientation to Naval Eskimo. operations Coast Guard because the Bay-Bethel: Senate District H. Bristol islands form a natural barrier across the composed This is districts 14 of House Bering Sea and the western end of the population 15. The variation from the Gulf of Alaska. This district is unavoid- — norm is 0.6%.
ably farflung because of the chain-like na- islands, ture of Yukon-Koyukuk- these sparseness House District 16. population and district the isolation principal of the Kuskokwim: This is one-member up-stream portion centers. composed of the *37 popula- and its variation from the above 18 and
Wade-Hampton Census Division tion norm is Village, the Kuskokwim Cen- Mountain —0.4%. Yukon-Koyukuk Division, Census the sus This is a House District 17. Fairbanks: inter- area served the Division less that the Fair- composed district six-member system and the Alaska highway connected Murphy less the banks Census Division Railroad, Upper midsection and the was ex- Dome enumeration district which including the Yu- Division Yukon Census primarily tracted to achieve constitu- Porcupine River drain- kon River and the precision. tionally required mathematical population from the age. The variation population from the It has a variation This district combines norm is area includes all norm of The +1.0%. +0.7%. and, of Alaska the main communities river Borough except the Fairbanks North Star Islands, they the Aleutian as in the case of Murphy transportation, Dome and is the along lines over vast distances. strung are for In- communications and trade center huge include this terri- necessary It is It terior Alaska and most of the north. tory popula- sufficient in order to achieve Alaska, University also is the site single-mem- comprise the base for a tion to facilities, major its and the related research All of the communities share ber district. military (Fort for Alaska bases Northern interests, and common characteristics how- Air Wainwright, Base). Eielson Force ever, These despite the distances involved. attempt No been made to divide this has fishing, hunting, are sub- combination into smaller member districts because interspersing with an sistence economies military location of the two reservations trading outposts. The military and compactness and the of the urban center transport and communication are forms of permit any logical do or not natural divi- river travel and air. sions or combinations. 18. Nenana-Mt. McKin- House District Senate District J. Fairbanks: Same district
ley: This is a one-member com- House District 17. posed of the Southeast Fairbanks Census House Slope: District North This District, Upper and remainders of is a composed one-member district of the Yukon-Koyukuk and Census Yukon Division, Barrow Census Area I of the Districts, I Area Matanuska- Upper Division, Yukon Census the Kobuk District, Murphy Susitna and the Census tip Division Census and of Seward Dome district from the Fair- enumeration Peninsula northward from In- Shishmaref banks The variation from the Division. let. It combines geographic two natural population district norm is This —1.9%. provinces approximates and the boundaries combines all of the interior of Alaska inter- proposed Slope Borough. North by highway transporta- connected and rail population The variation from the is norm urban-military tion outside the center of people Slope of the North +2.7%. It contains Fairbanks. two centers of are dominantly greatest Eskimos with the population, trade, transportation, one population concentration at Barrow and the power coal and mining generating area remainder in other smaller settlements. Suntrana, from Nenana to and the other Bay-Deadhorse The Prudhoe area is the lo- military transportation center between petroleum activity cation current Greely Fort and Tok. It also includes the which eventually will spread across the total McKinley Mt. National Park and the district. The Kobuk River-Kotzebue Highway linking Denali the mid-Railbelt drainage Sound is the geo- second natural area to the Highway Richardson and the graphic province included in the district. Alaska Highway. Developments and set- greatest Kotzebue has population tlements in the district are together by tied is the trade and service center for the re- road and rail as well as air. gion. Its is dominantly also Senate District I. Interior Alaska: Eskimo, many leading ways still subsistence is This a combination of House Districts 16 of life upon hunting based of marine mammals, hunting up-river. 1970’s, fishing Projections, Data Base and *38 copper po- region promising This contains (undated). Publication No. 4 prospects. tentials and other mineral (D) Labor, Department Alaska of Cur- Population rent Bering House District 20. Strait-Norton Estimates Elec- Alaska, District, tion published Sound: This is a one-member district an- composed nually Census and Nome Division available from 1960 to portion less a small of Peninsula date. Seward 19, District and the Norton
transferred to (D), Labor, (E) Department Alaska of Sound Portions of the Yukon Delta Population 1970 Alaska and Work- Wade-Hampton The Census Division. Estimates Race (undated). force population variation for the norm is +1.3%. Babb, D., (D) “Age and Sex Char- James composed It is a region natural of the drain- Population,” acteristics of Alaska’s ages Bering into the and Norton Strait Alaska Review Business and Eco- of It also Sound. includes St. Lawrence Is- Conditions, nomic Social, Institute of land, King Island and Little Diomede Is- Economic and Research, Government City population land. The of is Nome 1972, IX, March Vol. No. 1. center and transporta- serves as trade and (H) Bancroft, H., Hubert History of tion center for the district and a back- Alaska, Co., (The History 1730-1885 up supply center for the more northern Francisco, San 1886). population dominantly districts. The is (G), (D) A., Cooley, R. Alaska: A Chal- living way Eskimo subsistence of life. lenge in (University Conservation of region This was once major one of the Madison, Press, Wisconsin 1962). gold producing regions in and is Alaska (AN) Covarrubias, Miguel, The Eagle, the highly still mineralized. There are im- Jaguar, the Serpent and A. (Alfred prospects development mediate of tin and Knopf, York, New 1954). range longer prospects for other minerals including petroleum. (AN) Drucker, Philip, Cultures of North (Chandler Coast Pub- Senate District K. North Slope-Bering Pacific Francisco, Co., lishing San 1965). composed Strait: This is of Dis- House tricts 19 and 20 and has a variation from The (AN) Federal Field Committee for De- ideal velopment Alaska, Planning Alas- +2.0%.
ka Natives and the (USGPO, Land Washington, 1968). SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY (G), Field (E) The Federal Committee (Keyed topics: Development Planning for in Alas- Alaska, ka, Economic Outlook for (E) Economics Alaska, Anchorage, 1971. (G) Geography (D) (E) The Federal Field for Demography Committee Alaska, (H) History Development Planning A (AN) Subregional Natives) Analysis Alaska Economic Alaska, August 1968. (G), Department Alaska La- (E), (D) bor, Alaska, (D), (AN) Anchorage Presentation Greater Bor- Geographic Area Counts, ough Population Planning Department, People Census In Alaska, Anchorage (January 1972). 1971. Juneau (E) Labor, Ernest, Department (H) Alaska Alaska Alas- Gruening, State of Estimates, by Industry History ka: A Ameri- Definitive Workforce Area, published annually (Ran-
and and ca’s Northernmost Frontier York, House, 1968). available from 1961 to dom New date. Lantis, ed., Ethnohistory
(G), (E), Department Margaret, of La- (D) (AN) Alaska bor, Outlook, Manpower and the Alaska’s in Southwestern Alaska Research, Decem- University (The Government Yukon
Southern 1970, VII, Press, No. ber Vol. Kentucky 1970). George (G), (E) Rogers, with (D), W. Lin, C., Popu- “Alaska’s Peter
(E), (E) A., Poptdation Cooley, R. Alaska’s Enrollments,” and School lation 1950-1980, Regional Economy, Eco- Review Business Alaska Growth, Development and Future Conditions, Institute So- nomic Outlook, II— Analysis, Vol. Vol. I— cial, Re- Economic and Government Handbook, Economic Statistical No, IX, search, March Vol. 1, 1963, No. Uni- Series: Publication *39 Alaska, Resources Com- (E), (D) College, National Alaska. (G), versity of mittee, Planning, Part VII Regional W., (H), George (G), (E) Rogers, Resources and Devel- —Alaska—Its The Economic Future Alaska: Washington, opment (USGPO, Consequences (The Statehood 1938). Baltimore, Press, Hopkins Johns 1962, 1969). Oswalt, H., Eski- Alaskan (AN) Wendell W., (D), George (E), (AN) Rogers, Co., Publishing San (Chandler mos Population, “Alaska Native Trends Francisco, 1965). 1950-1985,” Statistics, Re- and Vital W., Re- Alaska (G), (D) Rogers, George Social, Notes, search Institute Employment, gional Population and Re- Economic and Government 1967, Report No. December SEG search, 1971. Social, Economic and Institutes of (G), R., (E), (D) Snodgrass, Alas- John Research, College, Alas- Government Review, 1970, ka Depart- Statistical ka. Development, ment of De- Economic cember 1970. Rogers, George, Alaska in (H), (G), (E) Transition, Region The Southeast (D) Census, pub- U. S. Bureau of the all Press, Hopkins Balti- (The lications on Alaska from 1880 to Johns more, 1960, 1967). Williams, W., (G) Howel, ed., Landscapes Rogers, George (E) “Alaska’s Econ- Alaska, 1960’s,” Their omy Geologic in the Alaska Review Evolution Press, (University and Economic Condi- California Business Social, Berkeley, tions, 1958). Institute Economic TABLE 1 OP CIVILIAN POPULATION CALCULATION
COMPARISON BUREAUOF THE CENSUS AND GOVERNOR'S ADVISORY BOARD *40 Commerce,. Department Bureau United States SOURCE: Alaska, PC(1)-C3, Census, Report Table and official announcements, "Report Governor's correction Board," "Military Nov. 1971 and tabulation Advisory Personnel - submitted Board. 4/1/70" CA67243
TABLE 2 FORCES," OF ARMED
"MEMBERS CENSUS COUNT FIGURES, AND GOVERNOR'S ADVISORY BOARD BY AREA AND PLACE 1970 *43 TABLE 3 - BY DIVISION AND POPULATION CENSUS CIVILIAN
TOTAL
TABLE 4
MEMBERS OF ARMED IN FORCES ALASKA (AS 1) OF JULY SOURCE: United States Census, Population Bureau Current Estimate, (Published Series P-25 data"róünde<3 to- thousand). nearest CA6702]
TABLE 5 OF ARMEDFORCES OF MEMBERS ENUMERATIONS CENSUS WEEK) (AS REFERENCE OR CENSUS OF APRIL 1 *46 «5 <3 n O
TABLE 7 *47 QUARTERS BY TYPE OF LIVING FORCES MEMBERSOF ARMED
TABLE 8 MIGRANT OF RESIDENTS
COMPARATIVE STATUS - MAJOR MILITARY BASES OF *48 SOURCE: Census, United Alaska States - Bureau Report PC(1)-C3, [A6706] Tables
TABLE 9
COMPARISON OF RELATIVE ELECTION PARTICIPATION OF POPULATION OF VOTING AGE *49 =
N.A. Not Available. adjusted Military Reservations
1/ 1, 1970, Armed July Forces Count. Ft. included voting Greeley
y "Remainder оf State" because records not segregated available on population. SOURCE: Population data from United States Bureau Census, PC(1)-B3, Report Alaska, Tables 19, State of Alaska, Official Returns Precinct, Election General Election, November 3, 1970. Armed Forces, 1, 1970, July from Table «©I—kO
913 *53 Alaska,
Generalized Areas of Agricultural Challenge Alaska, A Cooley, R. Figure A. Source (Madison; Univer- in Conservation 1967), Press, Wisconsin sity CA61113 p« 140. *54 Alaska, 1965
Forests cit., op. p. Cooley, Source: R. A. Figure [A61123 *55 Areas, Goat, 1965: and Bear Game
Critical Sheep, Big op. p. Cooley, Figure cit. A. R. Source: CA61133 *56 Areas,
Critical Game 1965: Moose and Caribou Big op. cit., Figure p. Source: R. A. Cooley, CA6114]
919 *58 (San Oswalt, Eskimos Figure Alaskan W. H. Source: 8. Company, Publishing Chandler Francisco: p. map 1967),
[A6116]
Figure lBO, p. facing clt., op. *59 Rogers, W. G. Sourc.e: Figure *60 Change Figure Rogers, 10. G. ed. Source':: W. (College In Alaska University Seattle: University Press, Alaska 1970) Washington Press, CA6118] p. 17. Alaska, Routes in
Transportation Figure op. cit., Source: R. A. Cooley, p. CA61193 *61 Figure Census Source: U. S. Bureau Census, Population, PC(1)-A3 Inhabitants, Alaska, Number of (Washington: 1971), Alaska, USGPO,
ttusn D. 3-19. *62 Figure Source: U.S. Bureau the Census, Census Population. Number of Inhabitants, Alaska, PC(1)-A3 Alaska,(Washington: 1971), USGPO, [“ml p. 3-20.
Figure Census, Source: U. S. Bureau Census Population, Inhabitants, Alaska, Number of PC(1)-A3 Alaska, (Washington: USOPO, 1970), p. 3-22. establishing In House Senate INTER- AN ESTABLISHING ORDER districts, an effort should be made PLAN IM REAPPORTIONMEN.T correspond, where make the districts ELEC- 1972 LEGISLATIVE FOR feasible, approximate bounda- with the TIONS reapportionment ries set out in the 1971 Reapportion- declared This Court plan. designated No seats will be estab- dated Redistricting Proclamation ment and if *65 lished within a multi-member district by 30, its 1971, unconstitutional December established. multi-member districts are 26, May 1972. entered Decision and Order dis- establishing In House and Senate Order, the and Pursuant to that Decision feasible, you should, tricts wherever cre- and George Rogers appointed W. Court Dr. contiguous compact ate a district of and it in to assist Masters H. Scott William territory containing nearly prac- as plan reapportionment fashioning interim an relatively integrated socio-eco- ticable Elections.1 Legislative for Alaska the 1972 nomic area. 26, the Court, gave May The on any there substantial devia- 6. If are instructions: following written the Masters norms, express, population tions the of official census By specific the should set forth. use of reasons be 1. 1970, population establish you should report The Masters submitted a on June popu- This of Alaska. the State
base for 12, Thereafter, met with 1972. the Masters per- military should include base lation 1972, 13, on at time the Court which June in the 1970 enumerated sonnel who were amended to reflect deter- report the was Census. by concerning the minations made Court de- inquiry to an should make 2. You plan. reapportionment the of the number or not whether termine Court, included in military personnel being fully The now advised nonresident be determined. Census can the 1970 hereby the premises, makes and orders the made, you then can be If a determination plan for following reapportionment interim to- number from should subtract legislative elections: the 1972 para- inat you have arrived tal which of (1) By state use of Official Census also You should graph 1 above. you ar- by 1970, in detail which the methods determines that the total the Court at this determination. rived of Alaska population base for State 302,361. figure This includes the shall be pop- determined you have 3. Once residing population in the State military base, same you divide the ulation should of the Official Census Alaska at time num- give you the ideal This will 40. In the time аvailable to April, 1970. single in a persons ber of to be included interim preparation of the You should then Court for the House district. member which population base divide the meth- find no feasible plan, could the Court for a population represent the ideal will military or all of the excluding some od of member district. single Senate population base. personnel from total Moreover, that computations revealed then establish House You should interim representation under the changes in containing a election districts and Senate per- military plan to the inclusion due the formula persons as close to number minimal. sonnel were as feasible. Listowski, cartographic and sta Rogers, George Richard Pro
1. We commend W. assistant, University for the excellence tistical at fessor Economics executing performance in the Court’s Scott, O.P.A., Alaska, their and Mr. H. William Hicks, legal instructions. and Mr. their assistant R. E. ideal The Court establishes eleven (5) that the Sen- Court determines (2) The member of ate election districts as follows: norm for each population should be Representatives House State norm
7,559, population that the ideal should State Senate
for each member of 15,118.
be districts election
(3) House Senate de- indicated are
with their boundaries Appendix are
picted maps, on the Appendix geographically
described district, num- each seats, percentages of varia-
ber of and the *66 in norms are set forth
tions from the Report the Master’s con- Tables A and B of elected in 1970 shall (6)Senators their terms until the end of tinue in office 881, (pages supra). 880 and following dis- represent and shall twenty House The Court establishes (4) 3: tricts 2 as Election Districts follows: legis- (7) purposes of the 1972 For designated elections, shall be no lative there or House seats within multi-member district. Senate completion registra- (8) The time for of lists, designation precincts of and dis- tion in material as set forth AS tribution of extended 15.07.140 and 15.10.080 is AS forty days prior primary to the (40) from twenty (20) days prior to said election to election. Report in anees is available the Master’s districts,
2. The variances of the House with through 897, supra). (pages exception District, 892 of the Ketchikan range +4.3%, and the from to —2.7% preferable plan an it is not 3.For interim from the norm of the variations districts, Senate Senators, particu- of to shorten the terms exception with necessity upon may larly as this become District, range to Ketchikan from —2.3% plan. permanent The aof the formulation geographical +4.3%. or substitutions additions The Ketchikan and dis- House Senate plan not so have under the interim areas vary tricts from the norms —22.5%. changed population materially base available, was Within the time the Court to as each of Senators which elected substantially to this vari- unable reduce representing adequately prevent them from ance and still meet the mandate of comparison designated A districts. their requiring a district Alaska Constitution by these Sena- received the actual vote territory compact contiguous and con- of taining the new election with tors in the 1970 practicable nearly they a rela- population as that can reveals also base properly represent dis- tively integrated their A area. to socio-economic continue explanation tricts. the vari- more extensive 929 noon, petitioners’ objection which until parties shall have (9) The in require designation of seats multi- to this would 17, file objections 1972 to June plan is in districts the interim member Order, the Clerk in the Office accept cannot the assertions denied. Juneаu, Alaska. We Supreme at Court bound, petitioners that was court retained, an is (10) Jurisdiction fashioning plan, an to in interim use those in opinion filed due course. will he Reapportion- employed the methods Anchorage, 14, at DATED: June plan, interim fashioning ment Plan. In an Alaska. may techniques use the court such ef- appropriate as it finds remedies TO ORDER DENYING OBJECTION “one-man, princi- fectuate the one-vote” INTERIM REAPPORTIONMENT ple. PLAN objection designa- to the 3. Petitioners’ 19, 1972, on met The court June incumbent Senators elected tion of reap- objections to the interim considered representatives of the districts as the portionment plan. they next two were elected for the which It is ordered: years, is denied. objection the inclu- 1.Petitioners’ plan preferable not In an interim it is military all sion in the base of Senators, particu- the terms to shorten personnel in the who were enumerated foreshortening may larly as such terms be- Alaska, census of is denied. necessity upon come a the formulation *67 find basis The court could no feasible plan. permanent sub- The additions or part mil for all of the the exclusion or geographical areas under the stitutions of base itary population population from the plan materially changed not interim have so required Un reapportionment. for interim population base which each of the elected der base must the Alaska Constitution this prevent as to from ade- the them Senators Alas include all residents the State of representing designated dis- quately their ka in the enumerated decennial census.1 as comparison tricts. A of the actual vote popula The base is not limited voter to by these in the elec- received Senators 1970 reapportionment the tion. Neither 1971 population tion with new base reveals by plan upon nor the materials relied they rep- properly that can to continue petitioners provide legal basis iden for resent their districts. in military personnel tifying nonresident population them order to eliminate Objections from some of 4. received base .2 River, Birchwood, Eagle the residents of data, Creek, Chugiak elim- have In Peters Fire Lake and the absence reliable considered, unable military been but court is population from the ination of plan, fulfilling consti- a de- to a feasible persons base a class of be devise as would law, place protection pro- requirements tutional would equal nial of which district and to this area in the same hibited the Fourteenth Amendment election in the permit proper representation Constitution.3 still United States per- practice plan Guard 1. The census is as fol includes Coast described 1971 sonnel, 3,752 and those resident aliens lows : living dependents practice military not In who were accordance with census dat- persons ing 1790, military person cannot each bases. These back to enumerat- on under as citizens of the State ed census as an classified 1970 was counted be petitioners. urged place inhabitant of Ms usual resi- the test dence, generally which is construed to 691, 678, Mann, 84 S. v. 377 U.S. place 3. Davis mean the where he lives (1964). 609, 1441, 617 12 L.Ed.2d sleeps Ct. place most of the time. This is Rash, Carrington generally, v. necessarily See legal not the same as his 775, 13 L.Ed.2d 85 S.Ct. U.S. residence, voting residence or domicile. (1965). (Census Report Alaska, Aр- PC(1)-C3, pendix p. App-1) A at the total number percent of constitute 51.9 the Prince area and Matanuska-Susitna in the military personnel enumerated area, com- of have been which Sound William My p. 886) rea- Report, (Master’s pro- All census. District D. to form Senate bined be will position this adopting in the sons for posed combinations dissenting opinion. separate set forth in a area cause serious Eagle River-Birchwood This adjoining districts. dislocation Robert Boochever constitutionally permissible be not would Associate Justice the United States under the standards of Establishing Appendix In- II to Order to fol- we are bound Supreme Court which Interim terim Plan consists two low.4 Redistricting Maps. Respondents’ objection concerning APPENDIX III-A an Don designation Young as Senator de- CENSUS AND GEOGRAPHICAL from District incumbent is Senator J OF BOUNDARY OUTLINES plan designates Elec- The interim nied. HOUSE DISTRICTS compose tion Districts 16 18 to Senate election of a Senator District I. The 1972 v Ketchikan HOUSE DISTRICT 1: provide representation from this area will (CD- of Ketchikan The census divisions rural area of urban Fair- this outside as (CD-190), 130) and Outer Ketchikan Young resided in the elec- banks. Senator census, form the defined for the 1970 tion district from he was elected which geo- 1. The boundary of House District and had been a resident of that district graphical boundary House Ketchikan required by the Alaska Constitution.5 Inter- extends to the District U. S.-Canada properly He elected dis- was from such Boundary east and south national on the trict, majority had the of its voters which Entrance, along the east into Dixon north providing In in- urban Fairbanks. an Island, into north coast of Prince of Wales plan, power terim the court broad has Sound, Ernest Clarence as far as Strait represented determine to be those districts peaks the mountain following and north by incumbents. drainage. (Pop. that form the Unuk River *68 11,717) Alaska, DATED Juneau, at this 20th
day June, of 1972. of 2: Prince Wales- HOUSE DISTRICT Petersburg-Wrangell
George Boney F. of The census division of Prince Wales Chief Justice (CD-200), Wrangell-Petersburg (CD-280), Jay A. Rabinowitz by Angoon the (CD-030), and defined as Associate Justice boundary census, of House form the Roger G. Connor of geographical boundary District 2. Associate Justice along the S.- this house district extends U. Erwin Robert C. east, Boundary on the Canada International Associate Justice the peaks south to the that form mountain para- along Ernest except drainage, I concur the order as to Unuk River west graph and 1, Meyers I eliminate from of Chuck just thereof. would north Sound Prince the of the on the side of base those members Clarence Strait east Entrance, military, by through of unaccompanied dependents, Island, Wales Dixon barracks, living They of out to the ships, etc. west Prince of Wales Island on permit normally represent eral, their We have relaxed our rules the who would to filing objections reappor- interest, public im- of the interim and the obvious to plan by Eagle portance to tionment the were considered residents of the of issue River-Chugiak-Birchwood representa- area were of formal who override the lack parties litigation. not to this The short- tion. filing objections, ness of time the for of inability Jackson, Pendleton v. 256 So.2d of residents in the area to dis- Cf., (Ct.App.La.1972). Attorney cuss the matter the Gen- with along tip Boundary through Stephens Passage, the of and across International Water Admiralty in the Island defined for districts of Baranof Island as the east coast 3, only 2 Range and аnd across the Chilkat end- the inclusion of with Chatham Strait 15,- ing at the Tenakee Inlet from international border. Springs (Pop. and Tenakee Island, Ad- tip to the of 768) north Baranof of following a line east miralty Island HOUSE DISTRICT 5: Prince William and then down and Funter Hawk Inlet Sound Passage east to Stephens south into (CD-210), The census division of Seward along the mountain
the international border (CD-260), Valdez-Chitina-Whittier Cor- drainage the peaks form the which dova-McCarthy (CD-808), and the Gird- 7,522) (Pop. south of Endicott Arm. side (020-09) wood district taken enumeration 3: Sitka HOUSE DISTRICT division, de- Anchorage from the census as census, by bound- (CD-220) and fined the 1970 form the The census of division Sitka 04, 05, ary geographical the of House 5. The (030-03, enumeration districts District 07, 08, boundary 09, 10) Skagway- the of the Prince William Sound taken from the division, de- House District is Alaska on the Gulf of (CD-230) Yakutat census peaks census, Point the south, along bound- inland to fined the 1970 form the Gore to a ary extending of the Kenai geographical of House 3. The Mountains District point along Hope, to the across boundary this shore west house district extends Rainbow, Turnagain point Arm the on to a west of U. International Border S.-Canada Vancouver, Muir, peaks of the east to Mt. across the along peaks east the of Mt. NNE Hubbard, Armour, Chugach crossing the Seattle, Hay the Mountains Glenn and Fair- Highway above Tazlina and east weather, turning Lake at Mt. Fairweather NNE Harris, Tazlina north along Lodge, Glacier to source Mt. ESE to the Chilkat SE River, northeast point directly tip of the Fork Range to a west West Gulkana Paxson, point to a south of northeast Admiralty Island, tip of northern down point Creek, peaks Admiralty point along north Slate Island at a west of Mountains, Range of the into the Mantasta eastern shore as defined the census enu- follow- district, tip Wrangell into the Mountains meration south west to island range to the U. ing peaks S.-Can- Tenakee Inlet and east to mouth Border, along Inlet, along south the east ada International Tenakee south Augusta, Mt. across coast border to following of Baranof Island Sound, Alaska. Malaspina into the Glacier Gulf Chatham Straits into Christian along (Pop. 7,435) northeast the International Water Boundary on the north Pacific Ocean and Matanuska-Susit- DISTRICT 6: HOUSE *69 Malaspina the to
across Glacier the Canada na Augusta. International Border at Mount 02, (EDO20-01, enumeration The district (Pop. 1,449) 17, 10-14, 03, 170-12,09, 20, 78) (ED 04 and 4: HOUSE DISTRICT 01, 04) the Matanuska-Susitna Juneau 19 and of divisions, defined Anchorage as and census (CD-110) The of census division Juneau boundary of the census, form by and and the the 1970 (CD-100), Haines enumeration bound- Skag- geographical District The from House (EDO30-01) district taken the along Cook by flows way-Yakutat division, of this house district ary census defined point to south census, boundary of north of Fire Island a the form the Inlet peak Grants, Mount the of of west across geographical House District 4. The bound- Range at ary peaks to of the Alaska Spur of District to the the House extends Juneau River, Chilligan north point the a north of the on U. International Border S.-Canada Dali, range Mt. boundary peaks the to along the the of from Mt. Foster to the NE Creek, cross- Peters point of just line En- at a south for House District 2 east of SSE south Island, point at along ing Alaska Railroad up peaks trance the north the Talkeetna, Talkeetna Arm, into the then west drainage the which form into Endicott Louise, along nue, Mountains to Lake south the along and west 36th Avenue to the boundary formed with House to Corporate District 5 and boundary Urban Limits and point Hope, west of then northwest to a (Pop. NW Knik into Arm. 23,102) point 7,670) Fire (Pop. north of Island. HOUSE (An- DISTRICT 9: Northeast (An- HOUSE DISTRICT 7: Northwest chorage) chorage) 1-6, 7, 2-7, 3, The census tracts (2-29, 1-5, 17, 16, 16-77A, 8-50, 17-105) 15 and the 5, 12, 9, 11, (4, census tract 8-48 Anchorage Greater Borough, Area as de- and the 8-49A) Anchorage Greater Area fined by census, the 1970 form the bound- Borough by census, as defined the 1970 ary of geographical House District 9. The form House geographical District 7. The boundary of the Northeast District House boundary of Northwest House District runs boundary follows the House District along boundary separating south the set from its point northern Knik Arm to Elmendorf Air Force Base from Fort Rich- intersection Chester and Creek Old ardson between Mile Lake and Otter Six Highway, Seward along south Old Seward Road, Lake to Oil Well east on Oil Well Highway Avenue, to 41th 41th Ave- east on straight point Road on a line course to a Ingra Street, nue to Ingra south on to 42nd where it would intersect with a line extend- Avenue, east line on 42nd Avenue to the ed from running of Muldoon end Road Street, extended south from north north, point south this to the Glenn Juneau along Avenue, the extended line 40th to east Highway, along west Highway Glenn to along 40th following Avenue the Anchor- Street, Pine along south Pine to East Street age Corporate Boundary, turning Limits Avenue, 6th along east East 6th Avenue along north Boundary the Limits and fol- Parkway, Boniface south along Boniface lowing boundary to the line extended Road, Parkway to DeBarr continuing west Street, south along from Pine north this along DeBarr Road until it becomes 15th boundary line it until intersects with the continuing Street, Avenue and west to Orea Anchorage (established Precinct 31No. south on a line extended from Orea Street 1969) Lights at Northern Boulevard and Creek, to Chester and continuing along west Street, along Pine east precinct bound- boundary natural by formed Chester ary following boundary to 32nd Creek into Knik (Pop. 38,818) Arm.
Avenue, east on the An- 32nd Avenue to Spenard HOUSE (Anchor- DISTRICT 8: chorage Limits, Corporate turning north age) following Corporate Anchorage Limits to the intersection of Baxter Road (13, 14, 19, 20, 21, The census tract 22 and Road, and Tudor west Road along Tudor 24-32) Anchorage Greater Area Bor- following reserva- Fort Richardson ough, census, as defined the 1970 form boundary, tion continuing north follow geographical House District 8. The bound- boundary in- Fort Richardson to its ary Spenard House District runs SE tersection with the natural divide between following out of Knik Arm the natural Ship Eagle Creek and South River drain- boundary formed Creek to the Chester age, southeasterly along the divide to the crossing of Chester Creek and the Old ridge Mountains, Chugach north to Highway, Seward along south the Old *70 the Eagle natural divide and between River Highway Road, Seward to west Tudor northwesterly along drainage, Peters Creek along Tudor Road continuing and into the divide to the intersection of Glenn Railroad, West 44th Avenue to the Alaska Road, Highway Loop fol- and Birchwood south along railroad to International Air- Creek, Loop low Mink Birchwood Road to port Road, along west Air- International 38,- (Pop. Mink to Arm. and Creek Knik port Road, Road to Lake north on Jewel 595) Drive, Lake Road to Lake Shore Jewel (Anchor- along west HOUSE DISTRICT 10: South Lake Drive to Aero Ave- Shore nue, age) north on Aero Avenue 36th to Ave-
933 23, 18, geo- form the House 17-105, Kodiak District. The (16-77A, tracts The census graphical of this boundary house district 27, 28, 020-80) of the 26, 31 Greater 25, and point runs from a north of as Two Headed Borough, defined Anchorаge Area going to boundary point of Island north a west of Old census, the form the 1970 peaks the Harbor at which the drain- geographical define The District House along age area the eastern of the runs SW side District 10 boundary of House Island, tip and of Lake NNE to the northern of Arm north Hood just from Knik Spruce along Dis- Island and the International boundary the of House and follows again Anchorage returning Two Boundary, Water the to the of trict 8 to intersection (Pop. Headed boundary 7,568) Old Island. and Corporate Limits the and then follows Highway, Seward 13: HOUSE DISTRICT Aleutian Islands 9 from the Old boundary of House District (See Appendix The enumeration districts the point to Highway intersection Seward 3-B) of the Aleutian Islands Kodiak and crossing, Road Baxter Road and Tudor divisions, census defined as the 1970 until the Fort Rich- Tudor Road along west census, form the Aleutian Islands House south, boundary along south ardson turns of boundary District. The geographical west, it military boundary until turns the along House District Alaska 13 extends the until it military boundary along the west point from Peninsula a west of Weasel with a line extended south intersects following peaks and Mountain of ex- north this Parkway, along Boniface to coastal mountains NE the mountains Road, along and line Tudor west tended to Kaguyak, of west east to the north side the Fort Rich- following Road and Tudor gulf, the Barren out into the down Islands boundary. 23,310) (Pop. ardson along the east of Island Kodiak Inter- Boundary tip to of the national Water 11: Cook Inlet DISTRICT HOUSE turning (Attu Island), Aleutian Islands Inlet of Kenai-Cook The census division going along east at Attu and the In- Island 070-02, (ED districts and the enumeration Boundary, turning ternational south Water Bay 03B, 04, the Bristol 06) and along the through the Fenimore Pass and division, by the 1970 defined census along the coast of Aleutian SE Chain boundary In- census, form the of the Cook Shumagin and south Islands side geographical let House District. at Islands, turning again Aanak inland run from boundaries this House district Bay. along Chignak Mountain Weasel point Cook north of Fire Island across (Pop. 7,352) boundary of following Inlet the southern Range, House District to the Alaska Bay 14: Bristol HOUSE DISTRICT along range Tela- south peaks Bay, The enumeration districts Bristol point quana Mountain then and SW to (See and census divisions Aleutian Bethel Illiamna, encircling west of then west II- Bay 3-B) Bor- Appendix and the Bristol easterly liamna Lake to line between an division, by the 1970 ough census as defined Lake Nonvianuk Lake Kukalek census, Bay Dis- form the Bristol House Range point then into Aleutian at a SE geographical boundary of House trict. The Strait, Kaguyak west of on Shelikof in the point from a District extends Doug- point Cape east to a south of directly Mountains on the head waters Kilbuck the Bar- las, along east the waters between goes along the Kipchuk east River Islands, Chugach inland ren Islands and chain, includes peaks the mountain which Point, peaks along at and north Gore Range Mountain, into the Alaska Butch Island. of the Kenai Peninsula Fire in- just Village, Hungry and Old south (Pop. 14,770) boundary House tersecting the western 12: HOUSE DISTRICT Kodiak Mountain, at follow- Talaquana District 11 to a District 11 ing boundary of House (ED150-01-02, The enumeration districts *71 intersects point District 13 07, where House and the 17) 10 of Kodiak census along the census, southwest Kaguyak, west of division, the 1970 defined 934 McKinley just east of Kan- Cape National Park 13 to House District
boundary of tisna, boundary following west the Park the Island, along out In- Atka Kiqun on turning skirting north Kantisna and west the of Boundary to include ternational Water interior, running into across Islands, the Pаrk SW returning to the mainland Pribilof crossing the head waters the Park between then Quinhaqak, of point just at a north River and Mt. a of Foraker Range at Herron and along peaks of the the Great exiting the Park McKinley, Forker and to the Mt. point Eek Lake back north of and Russell in- boundary just east of Mt. and (Pop. 7,361) Kipchuk River. source of the District tersecting boundary the of House Bethel 15: HOUSE DISTRICT Dali, following the bound- just NE of Mt. Appendix (see The enumeration districts of ary point this of House District 6 from Hampton, Nome, of Bethel and Wade 3-B) intersection south to the intersection census, form the by the 1970 as defined and House District 11 and 6 boundaries of geographical Bethel District. The House along boundary of continuing south the 15 extends boundary House District of point of Mt. House District 11 to a SE on in the Kilbuck Mountains point a Telaquana, turning point at this and west Kipchuk River and the the head waters of District following boundary the of House goes Mt. Hamil- point north to a north of boundary at 14 to the of House District 15 ton, the Kuskokwim turning west across Kipchuk in the the head the River waters of continuing Tuluksak, just River of north Mountains, at this turning north Kilbuck Big just south of west to the Tundra River point following the House District and Fritz, point turning to a on latitude NW Mt. boundary point a north of north to Point across the just 62° west of Pitkas Hamilton, Hamilton turning west at Mt. River, along Yukon from latitude 62° south following and House District 15 bound- the of Aphrewn point the River to a south of ary point just to on west a latitude 62° River, in- from Chevak Shevak on the NW turn- River, Pitkas Point across Yukon Bering point Cape to the at a north of Sea peaks ing following NE of and of boundary The extends SW Romanzof. range just the Andreaf- mountain west of point in the Kilbuck Mountains follow- range, sky tip that River to the northern of boundary 14 into ing the of House District peak the mountain south to the northern Bering to the Water Sea International River, just East Fork range running Boundary including St. Nunviak and range running to the west west mountain (Pop. 7,671) Mathew Islands. River, turning along this Anuik NE following run- range a course mountain and 16: Yukon-Kusko- HOUSE DISTRICT Ten just Cabin and ning east of Old Women kwim-Koyukuk Cabin, directly a turning north at Mile Hamp- The enumeration district of Wade extending and point east of Ten Mile Cabin ton, Kuskokwim, Upper Yukon and Yukon- Peak, from Traverse to Traverse north Koyuku (See Appendix 3-B), as defined Mountain, Purcell point Peak to south of a census, in the form House District Hogatza east from Purcell Mountain to geographical Boundary this house on Hog River, NE just north River point district extends from at the a U. S- Lake and Siruk course Noautak a between Canada the Taton- International Border on Creek, east side of Walker north on along runs line north duk River and west Mountains, and Lake into Schawatka High- Springs of Chena Hot to the Steese Schwatka, Endi- peaks following the NE Ryan way crossing Mount south of Moun- cott, Phillip Davidson and Smith Highway point directly at a Elliott west International S.-Canada tains to U. Ryan, running Mount between SW Rapid (Pop. River. Boundary just north of the Tatalina River the Tolovana River 7,635) point just on the east of Tolovana Fairbanks 17: DISTRICT River, Yukon HOUSE turning south into the Alaska Range along Appendix running a line of Toklat (See east district The enumeration division, as census the Fairbanks boundary 3-B) Mt. Nineteen Mile
935 census, graphical boundary Slope House of the North form the 1970 defined the point House District extends a on the boundary. from geographical The District 17 just Rapid U. S.-Canada Border north of House District boundary of the Fairbanks boundary boundary of River and the of Housе follows on the point a extends from point District 16 to a Point west at which it inter- of just 16 north West District House boundary sects with the of House District Chena along line north of and runs west Peak, just 20 at Traverse of the which is east Highway Springs to the Hot Steese Peninsula, west from Traverse turning and Seward Ryan, SW south Mount of Peak to the Fox South Fork of the Buckland Highway of crossing south the Alaska River, Hay- turning point to a north SW Happy between continuing SW cock, along Koyuk the on the the west River Cache on College Ester to and west of side, passing north Kuzitrin Lake Railroad, crossing the between Tanana Alaska south Lake, going just and Imurak north NW River SE following the Wood River and point just Serpentine of Aurora to east drainage the foot at to the River Wood Springs, turning Hot just west of Mid- foot of SW Range, along the of the Alaska east night Mountain, going west to the Highway- headwa- Range the Alaska to the Alaska following ters of Arctic the River, just west Crossing, River NE Tanana the River north into to directly east Shishmaref Inlet Charley River Shaw Creek to Boundary. 144°, U. 144° S. R.-U. S. International longitude following longitude S. (Pop. 7,666) just directly of West point north to a east Point, Dis- intersecting the House and NW Bering 20: Strait- HOUSE DISTRICT Point. boundary just
trict 16 north of West Norton Sound (Pop. 45,664) the The census division of Nome and HOUSE 18: Nenana-McKin- DISTRICT Hampton enumeration districts of Wade ley (See by the Appendix 3-B), as defined census, boundary 1970 of House form Fairbanks The census division of southeast boundary geographical District 20. The Fair- and the of the enumeration districts Dis- Bering Strait-Norton Sound House and Matanuska- Yukon-Koyukuk banks tricts Inter- extends S.-U. S. S. R. (See Appendix census districts U. Susitna 3- the bound- census, Boundary national and follows form the B) as defined the 1970 point ary of 19 east to the House District boundary. geo- House District 18 boundary of at it which intersects with graphical boundary of the Nenana-McKin- Peak, at turn- House 16 Traverse ley point District House District from a on extends ing Dis- boundary south of line of House U. 'S.-Canada Border and follows point 16 a which it intersects with trict at boundary of House 5 District NW boundary 15 Lati- of House District at point boundary at it which intersects the just tude River and Louise, 62° south Yukon just House District west of Lake Point, the bound- west of Pitkas and follows continuing along boundary west ary line of District 15 to the U. S.- House point House 6 to a at which it in- District Boundary. R. St. S. International U. S. boundary tersects the of House District 16 in this House Dali, Lawrence Island is included along just north of Mt. and north 7,660) (Pop. District. boundary of House District 16 follow- ing boundary to the U. S.—Canada In- Maps: Reference (Pop. 7,419) ternational Border. Department of Interior United States E,Map Survey, Geographical Alaska— Slope DISTRICT 19: North HOUSE The census districts Barrow and Kobuk 11-20) Districts 1-6 and (House Upper and the enumeration districts of Highways Aeri- Department Alaska Appendix 3-B), (See Yukon census division Map, September, 1969 census, Photography al form the 1970 defined 7-10) geo- (Anchorage House Districts boundary of District 19. The House
941 *78 to «0
DISTRICT 7,635 POPULATION HOUSE TOTAL cN^rrooomTfcvjoo o h voJcj in o t-* m n *co ^ © 57 55 36 rj«(m co o m 85 r-h r- o» ro co 174143 279 206124 168308 147411261 302 rl rH ¾* H|H HH HMHM POPULATION .
CENSUS Springs A.F.Báse Outskirts & Mission A.F.Base Springs Village & Point Hot A.F.Base Name] Station Yukon Yukon & Marys DISTRICT Eagle HughesKaltag Campton Koyukuk RampartRuby Chalkyitsik Remainder Manley St. Stevens PilotPitkas Beaver Fort Marshall Russian Evansville Galena Remainder CentralCircleCircle Fort Allakalet GalenaHuslia Nulato Tanana Arctic Venetie Minto number [Code 29Q-20 270-04 250— 270-05270-07270-06270-01 290-38D 250-06 250-22250-18250-20250-10250-08 290-3290-01290-15 290-14290-25290-31290-12290-24290-21290- 250-09250-17250-15- 14250-13
ENUMERATION 290-15B290-05290-10 290-06 POPULATION 2,306 CENSUS
DIVISION
CENSUS Kuskokwim *79 Name] &
DISTRICT Koyukuk YukonKuskokwim [Number
HOUSE notes report to Alaska.” unique Supreme by the United States local tablished isolated areas some example that in be- Court. necessarily be divided population would districts, nu- achieving contiguous tween in no note that significant is It expense of grave at the precision merical have Supreme Court coming before case