HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 16 - District Elections RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO
TRANSITION TO DISTRICT ELECTIONS
BACKGROUND
Tustin utilizes an at-large election system to elect its City Council
members.
"At-Large" means that all of the Council members are elected by all voters
City-wide.
Another way to elect City Council members would be by districts.
District elections would divide the City into several regions with roughly
equal numbers of residents in each district.
Only the voters who live in each district would vote for the Council member
from that District.
BACKGROUND
On June 23, 2020, the City received a letter from the Mexican-
American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF)
MALDEF asserts that the City's at-large election system violates
the California Voting Rights Act (CVRA) and threatens litigation if
the City declines to convert to district-based elections.
BACKGROUND
Any voter who resides in a city and is a member of a protected class
may file a lawsuit for a violation of the CVRA.
To succeed, the plaintiff must show that, as a result of an at-large
election, "racially polarized voting" has occurred.
"Racially polarized voting" means there is a difference between the choice of
candidates preferred by voters in a protected class and candidates preferred
by voters in the remainder of the voting population.
Cities throughout the State have increasingly faced legal challenges to
their at-large election systems.
BACKGROUND
If a plaintiff prevails in litigation, the CVRA allows for the recovery
of attorneys' fees and expert witness fees, which can be very high.
On the other hand, even if the city that is sued prevails in the
lawsuit, the city cannot recover either attorneys' fees or costs
unless the case can be shown to be frivolous, which is very
difficult to show.
BACKGROUND
Nearly all the agencies that have fought such CVRA claims have
settled those claims out of court by agreeing to transition to
district-based elections.
Those cities that have attempted to defend their existing at-large
election systems have incurred significant legal costs.
EXAMPLES OF SOME OF THE SIGNIFICANT
CVRA LITIGATION SETTLEMENT COSTS
Palmdale: $4.7 million Whittier: $ 1 million
Modesto: $3 million Santa Barbara: $600,000
Highland: $ 1 .3 million Tulare Hospital: $500,000
Anaheim: $ 1 . 1 million Camarillo: $233,000
Compton Unified: $200,000
* The City of Santa Monica is involved in an on-going CVRA lawsuit in
which the Santa Monica has already spent an estimated $8 million so
far, and the plaintiffs have requested $22 million in attorney and expert
fees and litigation costs in connection with their win in the trial court.
CVRA SAFE HARBOR
The CVRA contains a very narrow "safe harbor" for those
cities that receive demand letters like the one from MALDEF.
In Tustin's case, MALDEF is not allowed to file a lawsuit until
after August 14th
If, by August 14th, the City Council adopts a Resolution
outlining its intention to transition from at-large to district-
based elections, then no lawsuit could be filed within 90 more
days after the Resolution is approved.
CVRA SAFE HARBOR
The 90-day period to adopt an ordinance establishing
district-based elections may be extended by an additional
90 days if MALDEF agrees to the extension.
And if the City Council approves an ordinance establishing
district-based elections within that 90- or 180-day period,
then the City's liability for reimbursement of MALDEF's
costs incurred would be limited $30,000 (adjusted for
CPI).
THE PROPOSED RESOLUTION
Resolution 21 -64 attached to the Staff Report is the Resolution that
would declare the Council's intent to transition to District elections.
The Resolution does not agree that the City violated the CVRA, but it
agrees to start the process to transition to district elections to avoid
the likely high costs of litigating the issues.
If the Resolution is passed, the City would begin the process of public
outreach and public hearings and ultimately consider adoption of
district maps.
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PROCESS
Exhibit to the proposed Resolution sets forth a tentative
timeline for the public process of considering district elections
and district maps. Steps include:
Public outreach and education starting in August
A first public hearing regarding the composition of districts
May include identifying whether to transition to five (5)
districts or to four (4) districts and aCity-wide Mayor.
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PROCESS
Public process steps include:
A second public hearing no more than 30 days after the first one
Posting of draft maps and the potential sequence of elections
A third public hearing to consider the composition of the districts
and draft maps
Posting of any amended maps/sequence of elections
A fourth public hearing to select the final map and to introduce the
ordinance establishing district elections, election boundaries, and
election sequence
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PROCESS
Finally, on or before the 90th day (or the 1801" day, if MALDEF
agrees to extend the deadline) the City Council could adopt the
final ordinance.
If approved, the ordinance establishing district elections would take
effect 30 days later.
If the schedule set forth in the Resolution is followed, the first
district elections would occur at the November 2022 election.
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PROCESS
The Resolution outlines the Council's INTENT to transition to
district-based elections.
It does not bind the City to complete the transition to District
elections.
However, if the City does not complete the transition within
the required timeframe, MALDEF would be allowed to file a
CVRA lawsuit against the City.
SIDE NOTE ON " RANKED CHOICE VOTING "
Some interest has been expressed by members of the public in
adopting a "ranked choice voting" process in Tustin.
Separate issue from District Elections (not directly related)
The State Legislature considered authorizing general law cities like
Tustin to adopt ranked choice voting in 2019 (SB 212).
However, the Governor vetoed that bill.
So ranked choice voting is not an option for Tustin, unless State law
changes or Tustin undertakes to convert to a "charter law" city.
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS
Adopt Resolution 21 -64, entitled "A Resolution Of City Council Of The City
Of Tustin, California, Declaring Its Intention To Transition From At-large To
District-based Elections Pursuant To California Elections Code
10010(e)(3)(a)"; and
Authorize the City Manager to approve and execute an agreement with
MALDEF to extend by an additional 90 days the deadline to adopt an
ordinance establishing district-based elections in a form to be approved by
the City Attorney.
QUESTIONS ?