BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 278
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 22, 2015
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Brian Maienschein, Chair
AB 278
(Roger Hernández) - As Amended April 13, 2015
SUBJECT: District-based municipal elections.
SUMMARY: Requires general law cities with a population of
100,000 or more, as specified, to elect members of the city
council by district, and establishes procedures that these
cities must follow when creating city council districts.
Specifically, this bill:
1)Requires the legislative body of a general law city with a
population of 100,000 or more, as determined by the most
recent federal census, to adopt an ordinance, without
submitting that ordinance to the electors of the city for
approval, that provides for the members of the legislative
body to be elected by district. Requires the ordinance to
provide for members of the legislative body to be elected in
one of the following ways:
a) By districts, in five, seven, or nine districts; or,
b) By districts in four, six, or eight districts, with an
AB 278
Page 2
elective mayor, as specified.
2)Requires a city that is establishing districts pursuant to
this bill to conduct hearings pursuant to the following
requirements:
a) Hold at least four public hearings over a period of at
least 30 days prior to drawing a draft map of boundaries;
b) Hold at least two public hearings over a period of at
least 30 days after a draft map of boundaries has been
drawn and published, but before adopting a final map;
c) Publish a calendar of hearings at least seven days
before the first hearing;
d) Hold hearings consistent with the following:
i) In locations that are accessible to people with
disabilities;
ii) To the greatest extent possible, in numerous
locations to maximize community participation;
AB 278
Page 3
iii) To the greatest extent possible, in locations
accessible by public transportation;
iv) To the greatest extent possible, on different days
of the week and at varying times to maximize community
participation; and,
v) Provide simultaneous translation of a hearing held
pursuant to this bill, if requested at least 24 hours
before the hearing, in any language in which the city is
required to post translated copies of ballots at any
precinct in the city, pursuant to existing law.
3)Requires a city that is establishing districts pursuant to
this bill to encourage public participation in the drawing of
the boundaries of the districts for the legislative body by
doing all of the following:
a) Developing an outreach and education plan, and media and
social media strategy, in partnership with community
organizations and individuals that advocate on behalf of,
or provide services to, non-English-speaking individuals
and individuals with disabilities;
b) For each hearing required by this bill, publicize at
least one public service announcement using a media outlet
that serves English-speaking individuals for purposes of
informing individuals of the boundary-drawing process and
AB 278
Page 4
the hearing date;
c) For each hearing required by this bill, publicize at
least one public service announcement in any language in
which the city is required to post translated copies of
ballots at any precinct in the city, pursuant to existing
law, using a media outlet that serves speakers of that
language, for purposes of informing individuals of the
boundary-drawing process and the hearing date;
d) Publish an Internet Web site (website) that explains the
boundary-drawing process and its significance, that
includes notice of the hearings, and that explains how
public testimony may be submitted. The website must be
available in each language in which the city is required to
post translated copies of ballots at any precinct in the
city, pursuant to existing law;
e) Provide the means for the submission of public testimony
by mail, by telephone, online, and in person at the
hearings; and,
f) Any other outreach or publicity the legislative body
determines will encourage public participation in the
drawing of the boundaries of the districts for the
legislative body.
4)Requires a city that is establishing districts pursuant to
this bill to establish and adjust the boundaries of those
AB 278
Page 5
districts in accordance with provisions of existing law
governing the adjustment of the boundaries of city council
districts, except as provided.
5)Requires a city that is establishing districts pursuant to
this bill to ensure that all of the following criteria are
satisfied in preparing the boundaries of the districts for the
city council:
a) The boundaries are drawn to ensure fair and effective
representation of all city residents including racial,
ethnic, and language minorities;
b) The boundaries conform to the requirements of the United
States Constitution and all applicable federal and state
laws;
c) The boundaries respect communities of interest;
d) The boundaries have substantially equal populations as
determined by the most recent federal decennial census;
e) The boundaries are geographically compact and
contiguous; and,
f) The boundaries are drawn without regard to the advantage
or disadvantage of incumbents, challengers, or any
political party.
AB 278
Page 6
6)Requires communications between any party and the city council
regarding the drawing of boundaries of the districts for the
city council to be disclosed to the public and maintained by
the city in a publicly available log. Communications related
to the dissemination of procedural information about the
drawing of boundaries of the districts for the city council,
including but not limited to, communications regarding the
time and place of meetings or how to submit public testimony,
are exempt from this requirement.
7)Provides that the provisions of this bill do not apply to a
charter city or charter city and county.
8)Makes corresponding changes.
9)Provides that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines
that this bill contains costs mandated by the state,
reimbursement to local agencies and school districts for those
costs shall be made pursuant to current law governing state
mandated local costs.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Permits a general law city that elects its councilmembers
through at-large elections to provide for city council members
AB 278
Page 7
to be elected by districts or from districts. Such a change
shall occur only upon the approval of voters of a measure
submitted to them by the city council or placed on the ballot
through the initiative process.
2)Defines, for the purposes of 1), above, the following:
a) "By districts" to mean the election of members by voters
of the district alone; and,
b) "From districts" to mean the election of members who are
residents of the districts from which they are elected, but
who are elected by voters of the city as a whole.
3)Prohibits, pursuant to the California Voting Rights Act of
2002 (CVRA), an at-large method of election from being imposed
or applied in a political subdivision (including a city) 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.
4)Provides that a violation of the CVRA may be established, if
it is shown that racially polarized voting occurs in elections
for members of the governing body of the political subdivision
or in elections incorporating other electoral choices by the
voters of the political subdivision.
5)Requires a court, upon finding a violation of the CVRA, to
implement appropriate remedies, including the imposition of
district-based elections, which are tailored to remedy the
violation.
6)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.
AB 278
Page 8
7)Requires a general law city that elects councilmembers "by
districts" or "from districts" to adjust the boundaries of the
council districts following each decennial federal census so
that the districts are as nearly equal in population as may
be. The districts must comply with specified provisions of
the federal Voting Rights Act. The city council may give
consideration to the following factors when establishing the
boundaries of districts:
a) Topography;
b) Geography;
c) Cohesiveness, contiguity, integrity, and compactness of
territory; and,
d) Communities of interests of the districts.
8)Permits 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.
9)Permits a city charter to provide for the conduct of city
elections, including the manner in which, the method by which,
the times at which, and the terms for which municipal officers
are elected or appointed.
10)Provides that a legally adopted city charter supersedes all
laws inconsistent with that charter with respect to municipal
affairs.
FISCAL EFFECT: This bill is keyed fiscal and contains a
state-mandated local program.
COMMENTS:
1)Bill Summary. This bill requires general law cities with a
AB 278
Page 9
population of 100,000 or more to elect members of the city
council by district, and establishes procedures that these
cities must follow when creating city council districts.
These procedures are more detailed and extensive than the
procedures that current law requires for cities that use
district elections. Cities that would be subject to this
bill's requirements would have to hold more hearings and would
have to implement comprehensive public outreach and
involvement measures before and during those hearings. This
bill also imposes additional criteria for the drawing of
district boundaries than current law requires. This bill is
sponsored by the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education
Fund.
2)Author's Statement. According to the author, "This bill
creates a practice that is more transparent and inclusive for
participation from community members. District-based
elections offer several benefits. Each geographic area is
represented which helps ensure an even distribution of city
resources. While each voter is represented by all city
council members, each voter has one specific board member to
petition for help.
"The current method of electing city council members at-large
creates a system in which one community is empowered over the
needs of others. City council members can, under this system
of voting, come from only certain neighborhoods in the
district. This outcome could potentially make the city
council members out of touch and less aware of the needs of
other parts of the community. Moreover, there are countless
examples throughout the state that demonstrate another
important weakness of at-large voting.
AB 278
Page 10
"It is important to note the fact that at-large elections have
been the subject of litigation across our state that
challenges this election process as a violation of both the
state and federal Voting Rights Act. Voters in numerous
cities, including Anaheim, Compton, Palmdale and Watsonville
have gone to court to discard the at-large system. Relief for
communities will take a long time if we wait for the judicial
system and will be costly as it is very expensive for cities
in legal costs. AB 278 provides an opportunity to remedy this
problem."
3)Background. The CVRA was enacted 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 usually votes for majority
candidates rather than for minority candidates. In such
situations, breaking up a jurisdiction 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.
The CVRA also allows a prevailing plaintiff to recover
attorney's fees and litigation expenses to increase the
likelihood that attorneys will be willing to bring challenges
under the law.
AB 278
Page 11
More than 140 local government bodies have transitioned from
at-large to district-based elections since the enactment of
the CVRA in 2002. 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.
4)Voter Approval and Waivers. Generally, local government
bodies must receive voter approval to move from an at-large
method of election to a district-based method of election for
selecting governing board members. However, the State Board
of Education (SBE) and the Board of Governors (BOG) of the
California Community Colleges can waive the voter-approval
requirement for school districts and community college
districts. The SBE and the BOG have granted nearly 120
requests for waivers from the voter-approval requirement for
school districts and community college districts that have
sought to move to district-based elections for board members
due to concerns about potential liability under the CVRA.
There is no procedure in statute for cities or special districts
to receive a waiver for the voter-approval requirement to move
from at-large to district-based elections, if those
governmental bodies have concerns about liability under the
CVRA. However, in at least some cases, judges have approved
settlements to CVRA lawsuits that allow the governing body to
transition from at-large to district-based elections without
voter approval. According to information compiled by the
Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay
Area, at least a dozen other local jurisdictions statewide
have transitioned to electing governing board members by
AB 278
Page 12
districts as a result of settlements to lawsuits brought under
the CVRA.
5)General Law vs. Charter Cities. The California Constitution
gives cities the ability to exercise greater control over
municipal affairs through the adoption of a charter by a
majority vote of the city's electors voting on the question.
Cities that have not adopted charters are commonly referred to
as "general law" cities, because such cities are subject to
the state's general laws, regardless of whether those laws
concern a municipal affair.
The California Constitution grants charter cities the plenary
authority, subject only to restrictions contained in specified
provisions of the California Constitution, to provide for the
manner in which municipal officers are elected or appointed.
Because this bill seeks to regulate the manner in which
municipal officers are elected, the provisions of this bill
would not apply to charter cities, but instead, would apply
only to general law cities.
This bill also contains an explicit exemption for charter
cities.
6)Cities Affected. According to the 2010 United States Census,
there are 66 cities in California with a population of at
least 100,000 residents. Of those 66 cities, 41 are charter
cities, and would not be affected by the provisions of this
bill.
Of the 25 general law cities in California with a population of
100,000 or more, 22 (Antioch, Concord, Corona, Costa Mesa,
Daly City, El Monte, Fairfield, Fontana, Fremont, Fullerton,
Garden Grove, Murrieta, Norwalk, Ontario, Orange, Oxnard,
Rancho Cucamonga, Santa Clarita, Simi Valley, Temecula,
AB 278
Page 13
Thousand Oaks, and West Covina) elect city council members
at-large, and one (Elk Grove) elects city council members
at-large from districts. Those 23 cities would be required to
change their method of electing city council members under the
provisions of this bill. (The City of Santa Clarita has
reached a settlement agreement in a CVRA lawsuit, but that
agreement calls on the city to use an alternative voting
method known as cumulative voting in an effort to address the
voting rights issues raised in the lawsuit. Because
cumulative voting would be conducted at large in the city,
this bill would require the City of Santa Clarita to move to
by-district elections, notwithstanding the tentative
settlement.) Based on current population growth rates, as
estimated by the United States Census Bureau, four additional
cities (Rialto, Clovis, Jurupa Valley, and Mission Viejo)
likely would be covered by this bill following the 2020
census.
The City of Escondido previously elected its council members
using an at-large method of election, but it has agreed to
transition to a district-based method of election for city
council elections beginning this year, pursuant to a
settlement reached in a lawsuit brought pursuant to the CVRA.
The City of Moreno Valley was the only general law city in
California with a population of at least 100,000 that elected
city council members by districts prior to this year.
7)New Procedural Requirements. AB 1440 (Campos), Chapter 873,
Statutes of 2014, required any political subdivision that is
switching from an at-large method of election to a
district-based method of election to hold at least two public
hearings on the proposed district boundaries before adopting
those boundaries. This requirement will continue to apply to
any city that changes from an at-large to a district-based
election, and that is not required to do so pursuant to this
bill. For example, if a charter city, or a general law city
with a population of less than 100,000, chooses to transition
from at-large to district-based elections, the hearing
requirements of AB 1440 would apply.
AB 278
Page 14
However, cities that are required to change from at-large to
by-district elections pursuant to this bill would be subject
to much more extensive procedural and hearing requirements
than what is required under existing law. In addition to
having to hold at least six public hearings before adopting
district lines, cities forced to transition to district-based
elections under this bill would face restrictions on the
locations, dates and times of public hearings. Cities would
have to develop extensive outreach and educational plans and
media strategies and could be required to provide real-time
translations of public hearings, potentially in multiple
languages.
Under this bill, cities also would have to meet criteria in
creating district boundaries that differ from the criteria
that generally apply when local government entities draw
district lines. According to the author, these requirements
are intended to ensure that the process that cities follow
when creating district boundaries is open and inclusive, and
to ensure that cities do not undermine the voting rights of
citizens when creating district lines.
These requirements will increase the cost to cities that are
required to transition from at-large elections under this bill
and, in turn, could increase the cost to the state to
reimburse those cities, if this bill is found to impose a
AB 278
Page 15
reimbursable state mandate. Apart from the costs, some of
these requirements could impose significant logistical burdens
to cities that are required to comply. For example, this bill
requires cities, under certain circumstances, to provide
simultaneous translations of public hearings into languages
other than English and to conduct voter outreach and education
and media strategies in languages other than English. Those
requirements could apply if as little as 3% of the voting age
population of a single precinct in a city with a population of
100,000 or more are limited-English proficient and are members
of a single language minority, even if there are very few
members of that language minority in the city as a whole.
8)Operative Date. This bill does not contain an operative date,
a deadline by which cities with a population of 100,000 or
more must adopt an ordinance transitioning to district-based
elections, or a date by which cities must begin conducting
elections using the district-based method of election. The
Committee may wish to consider an amendment to establish a
reasonable timeline for cities to comply with the provisions
of this bill.
9)Related Legislation. AB 277 (Roger Hernández) provides that
the CVRA applies to charter cities, charter counties, and
charter cities and counties.
10)Previous Legislation. AB 2715 (Roger Hernández) and AB 1383
(Roger Hernández) of 2014 would have cities with a population
of 100,000 or more to elect city council members by district.
AB 2715 was held in the Assembly Appropriations Committee and
AB 1383 was held in the Senate Rules Committee.
AB 278
Page 16
AB 1440 (Campos), Chapter 873, Statutes of 2014, required
political subdivisions that change from an at-large method of
election to a district-based election to hold public hearings,
and would have required special districts to hold a public
hearing before adjusting the boundaries of a division.
SB 1365 (Padilla) of 2014, which was vetoed by the Governor,
would have prohibited the use of a district-based election in
a political subdivision, if it would impair the ability of a
protected class to elect candidates of its choice or otherwise
influence the outcome of an election as a result of the
dilution or the abridgment of the rights of voters who are
members of a protected class, and would have required a court
to implement specified remedies.
AB 1979 (R. Hernández) of 2012 would have required the City of
West Covina to elect city council members by districts,
instead of at-large. AB 1979 was held in the Assembly
Elections and Redistricting Committee.
AB 450 (Jones-Sawyer) of 2013 would have required the Los
Angeles Community College District to elect governing board
members by trustee area, instead of at-large. AB 450 was held
in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.
AB 278
Page 17
11)State Mandate. This bill is keyed a state mandate, which
means the state could be required to reimburse local agencies
and school districts for implementing the bill's provisions if
the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill
contains costs mandated by the state.
12)Arguments in Support. The sponsor of this bill, the Mexican
American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, writes:
"Minority representation is affected by the electoral
structure. California is now a minoritymajority state, but
number of minorities alone is no guarantee of political
influence. A lack of fair representation still exists in
cities with atlarge elections.
"An atlarge method of electing a city council can result in
vote dilution for minority residents, impairing their ability
to elect candidates of choice or to influence the outcome of
City elections. In contrast, district based elections can
correct underrepresentation of minority governing board
members, decrease campaign costs, enhance direct neighborhood
representation, promote councilmember accessibility and
responsiveness, and increase voter turnout.
"The provisions of AB 278 that address the process for drawing
the lines of the new districts will enhance voter engagement
AB 278
Page 18
by providing meaningful access through hearings at which
community members will have the opportunity to submit
testimony regarding their neighborhoods and their communities
of interest - testimony that is crucial to the design of
districts that are representative of the economic, racial,
ethnic, educational, linguistic and social diversity of the
jurisdictions. The public will also have the opportunity to
review draft maps and submit proposals of their own prior to
adoption of the final maps. The hearings will be held at
times and in places designed to maximize community input, as
is the outreach that precedes the hearings. Finally, language
access and transparency are built into the provisions
regarding process, and the districting criteria reflect this
State's interest in ensuring effective and fair representation
on local governing boards."
13)Arguments in Opposition. In opposition to this bill, the
League of California Cities writes:
"This measure is a sweeping and costly unfunded state mandate.
Impacted cities would have to hire consultants to draft maps
and analyze election patterns-with costs ranging from $50,000
to $100,000 per city to draw various maps. Attorneys with
specialized expertise in the federal and state election laws
would need to be retained to advise and protect cities from
litigation over how district lines are drawn.
"Additionally, this bill is based around an arbitrary
population threshold and does not take into account that the
affected cities all have unique population and geographic
characteristics. In the event there is an issue of vote
AB 278
Page 19
dilution, the CVRA provides significant legal leverage to any
voter who seeks to challenge an at-large election system of a
city, school district, community college district or any other
district authorized by the state. In fact, under the CVRA it
is easier for plaintiffs to bring and prevail in lawsuits
alleging that their votes are diluted in at-large elections.
"In short, for those who prefer existing at-large election
systems to be closely examined for conformance with the CVRA,
existing law is robust and working. New mandates are
unnecessary."
14)Double-Referral. This bill was heard in the Elections and
Redistricting Committee on March 25, 2015, where it passed
with a 4-1 vote.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund [SPONSOR]
California Immigrant Policy Center
AB 278
Page 20
Opposition
Californians for Electoral Reform
City of Temecula
Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association
League of California Cities
Southwest California Legislative Council
Analysis Prepared by:Angela Mapp / L. GOV. / (916) 319-3958
AB 278
Page 21