BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 277
Page 1
Date of Hearing: March 25, 2015
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS AND REDISTRICTING
Sebastian Ridley-Thomas, Chair
AB 277
(Roger Hernández) - As Introduced February 11, 2015
SUBJECT: California Voting Rights Act of 2001.
SUMMARY: Provides that the California Voting Rights Act of 2001
(CVRA) applies to charter cities, charter counties, and charter
cities and counties. Specifically, this bill:
1)Expressly provides that general law cities, general law
counties, charter cities, charter counties, and charter cities
and counties are "political subdivisions" that are subject to
the CVRA.
2)Makes the following findings and declarations:
a) The dilution of votes of a protected class is a matter
of statewide concern.
b) The provisions of the CVRA are reasonably related to the
issue of vote dilution and constitute a narrowly-drawn
AB 277
Page 2
remedy that does not unnecessarily interfere with municipal
governance.
c) It is the intent of the Legislature that the CVRA shall
apply to charter cities, charter counties, and charter
cities and counties.
d) It is further the intent of the Legislature in enacting
this bill to codify the holding in Jauregui v. City of
Palmdale (2014) 226 Cal.App.4th 781.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Prohibits, pursuant to the CVRA, an at-large method of
election from being imposed or applied in a political
subdivision in a manner that impairs the ability of a
protected class of voters to elect a candidate of its choice
or its ability to influence the outcome of an election, as a
result of the dilution or the abridgement of the rights of
voters who are members of a protected class.
2)Defines "political subdivision," for the purposes of the CVRA,
as a geographic area of representation created for the
provision of government services, including, but not limited
to, a city, a school district, a community college district,
or other district organized pursuant to state law.
3)Defines "protected class," for the purposes of the CVRA, to
mean a class of voters who are members of a race, color or
AB 277
Page 3
language minority group, as this class is referenced and
defined in the federal Voting Rights Act (52 U.S.C. Sec. 10301
et seq.) (VRA).
4)Requires a court, upon finding that an at-large method of
election violates the CVRA, to implement appropriate remedies,
including the imposition of district-based elections, which
are tailored to remedy the violation.
5)Permits any voter who is a member of a protected class and who
resides in a political subdivision where a violation of the
CVRA is alleged to file an action in the superior court of the
county in which the political subdivision is located.
6)Permits a county or a city to provide for its own governance
through the adoption of a charter by a majority vote of its
electors voting on the question.
7)Requires a county charter to provide for a governing body of
five or more members, elected by district, at-large, or
at-large with a requirement that members reside in a district.
8)Permits a city charter to provide for the conduct of city
elections. Grants plenary authority, subject to limited
restrictions, for a city's charter to provide for the manner
in which and the method by which municipal officers are
elected.
AB 277
Page 4
9)Provides that a legally adopted city charter supersedes all
laws inconsistent with that charter with respect to municipal
affairs.
10)Permits a county and all cities within it to consolidate as a
charter city and county. Provides that a charter city and
county is both a charter city and a charter county, and
provides that its charter city powers supersede conflicting
charter county powers.
FISCAL EFFECT: None. This bill is keyed non-fiscal by the
Legislative Counsel.
COMMENTS:
1)Purpose of the Bill: According to the author:
Assembly Bill 277 ensures that voters in charter
cities are granted their fundamental rights and
protections as guaranteed under Section 7 of Article I
and Section 2 of Article II of the California
Constitution.
AB 277
Page 5
There are 121 charter cities in California. Charter
cities have authority over "municipal affairs,"
(California Constitution, Article 11, Section 5) which
supersedes state law in some areas, known as
"municipal affairs." This generally includes the
conduct of municipal elections. However, when a matter
is deemed to be of statewide concern, then state law
may be applicable.
The recent case of Jauregui v. Palmdale determined
that integrity in the municipal electoral process is a
matter of statewide concern, therefore, state law that
addresses an issue such as racially polarized voting
applies regardless of charter status. AB 277 would
codify that decision and clarify all residents of
California have the same fundamental rights and
protections.
2)California Voting Rights Act of 2001: SB 976 (Polanco),
Chapter 129, Statutes of 2002, enacted the CVRA to address
racial block voting in at-large elections for local office in
California. In areas where racial block voting occurs, an
at-large method of election can dilute the voting rights of
minority communities if the majority typically votes to
support candidates that differ from the candidates who are
preferred by minority communities. In such situations,
breaking a jurisdiction up into districts can result in
districts in which a minority community can elect the
candidate of its choice or otherwise have the ability to
influence the outcome of an election. Accordingly, the CVRA
prohibits an at-large method of election from being imposed or
applied in a political subdivision in a manner that impairs
the ability of a protected class of voters to elect the
candidate of its choice or to influence the outcome of an
election, as a result of the dilution or the abridgement of
the rights of voters who are members of the protected class.
AB 277
Page 6
The first case brought under the CVRA was filed in 2004, and
the jurisdiction that was the target of that case-the City of
Modesto-challenged the constitutionality of the law.
Ultimately, the City of Modesto appealed that case all the way
to the United States Supreme Court, which rejected the city's
appeal in October 2007. The legal uncertainty surrounding the
CVRA may have limited the impacts of that law in the first
five years after its passage.
Since the case in Modesto was resolved, however, many local
jurisdictions have converted or are in the process of
converting from an at-large method of election to
district-based elections due to the CVRA. In all, more than
140 local government bodies have transitioned from at-large to
district-based elections since the enactment of the CVRA.
While some jurisdictions did so in response to litigation or
threats of litigation, other jurisdictions proactively changed
election methods because they believed they could be
susceptible to a legal challenge under the CVRA, and they
wished to avoid the potential expense of litigation.
3)Charter City and Charter County Autonomy & the City of
Palmdale: As noted above, the California Constitution gives
cities and counties the ability to adopt charters, which give
those jurisdictions greater autonomy over local affairs.
The Constitution provides that a county's charter may provide
for members of the governing board of the county (commonly
AB 277
Page 7
known as the board of supervisors) to be elected by district,
at-large, or at-large with a requirement that members reside
in a district. Notwithstanding these options, all 58
California counties currently elect members to the boards of
supervisors by district. As a result, this bill is unlikely
to have a significant effect on the governance of counties,
although it could make a county subject to liability under the
CVRA if a charter county chose to move to an at-large method
of election for county supervisors in the future.
The Constitution also gives a great deal of autonomy to charter
cities over the rules governing the election of municipal
officers, granting "plenary authority," subject to limited
restrictions, for a city charter to provide "the manner in
which, the method by which, the times at which, and the terms
for which the several municipal officers and employees?shall
be elected or appointed." The Constitution further provides
that properly adopted city charters "shall supersede all laws
inconsistent" with the charter.
Given the autonomy granted by the California Constitution to
charter cities and charter counties, questions have been
raised concerning whether the CVRA is applicable to those
jurisdictions.
In July 2013, the Superior Court of the State of California
for the County of Los Angeles, Central District, found that
the City of Palmdale's at-large method for electing city
council members violated the CVRA (Jauregui v. City of
Palmdale (2013) Case BC 483039). In the case, in addition to
denying that its elections violated the CVRA, the City of
Palmdale argued that the CVRA was unconstitutional as applied
to the city because it is a charter city, and Article XI,
Section 5(b) of the California Constitution gives charter
cities plenary authority to determine the manner and method in
which their voters elect municipal officers. The court
disagreed, finding that "state law regulating a matter of
statewide concern preempts a conflicting local ordinance if
AB 277
Page 8
the state law is narrowly tailored to limit its incursion into
local interest," and concluding that "[t]here can be no
question that the dilution of minority voting rights is a
matter of statewide concern."
The City of Palmdale appealed to the California Court of
Appeals, Second District, Division Five. In its appeal,
Palmdale again argued that, as a charter city, it was not
subject to the provisions of the CVRA. The appellate court
disagreed, finding that the CVRA addresses an issue of
statewide concern, is narrowly tailored to avoid unnecessary
interference in municipal governance, and is reasonably
related to the resolution of statewide concerns of the right
to vote, equal protection, and the integrity of elections
(Jauregui v. City of Palmdale (2014) 226 Cal.App.4th 781).
Palmdale appealed to the California Supreme Court, and in
August of last year, the Supreme Court denied Palmdale's
request to hear the case.
By explicitly providing that charter cities, charter counties,
and charter cities and counties are subject to the provisions
of the CVRA, this bill would codify the appellate court's
ruling in Jauregui v. City of Palmdale.
4)Arguments in Support: In support of this bill, Californians
for Electoral Reform writes:
By codifying [the] holding [in Jauregui v. City of
Palmdale], [AB 277] will make it easier for plaintiffs
in CVRA lawsuits to achieve timely settlements with
defendant jurisdictions, and not have time wasted on
needless litigation as to whether or not the CVRA
applies in such cases.
AB 277
Page 9
In addition, by making it clearer that the CVRA
applies to charter cities, counties, and cities and
counties, it is our hope that they will be more likely
to consider proportional and semi-proportional
non-district remedies, such as single transferrable
vote, cumulative voting, and limited voting, as
settlement options.
5)Technical Amendments Suggested: Last summer, the federal
Office of the Law Revision Counsel reorganized various
provisions of federal law relating to voting and elections
pursuant to an "editorial reclassification" under which
provisions of law are relocated from one place to another in
the code without substantive change. As part of that
reorganization, the provisions of the federal VRA were moved
to a different area of federal law.
This bill amends an existing provision of state law that
includes outdated cross-references to the federal VRA. In
order to correct those outdated cross-references, committee
staff recommends the following technical amendments to this
bill:
On page 3, lines 9-10, strike out "42 U.S.C. Sec. 1973 et seq."
and insert:
52 U.S.C. Sec. 10301 et seq.
On page 3, line 13, strike out "42 U.S.C. Sec. 1973 et seq." and
insert:
52 U.S.C. Sec. 10301 et seq.
On page 3, line 19, strike out "42 U.S.C. Sec. 1973 et seq." and
insert:
AB 277
Page 10
52 U.S.C. Sec. 10301 et seq.
6)Related Legislation: AB 182 (Alejo), which is pending in this
committee, expands the CVRA to allow challenges to
district-based elections to be brought under the CVRA, as
specified.
AB 278 (Roger Hernández), which is also being heard in this
committee today, requires cities with a population of 100,000
or more, as specified, to elect members of the legislative
body by district.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
Californians for Electoral Reform
Opposition
None on file.
Analysis Prepared by:Ethan Jones / E. & R. / (916) 319-2094
AB 277
Page 11