BILL ANALYSIS Ó AB 350 Page 1 ASSEMBLY THIRD READING AB 350 (Alejo) As Amended January 4, 2016 Majority vote ------------------------------------------------------------------ |Committee |Votes|Ayes |Noes | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |----------------+-----+----------------------+--------------------| |Elections |4-2 |Ridley-Thomas, Gatto, |Harper, Travis | | | |Gordon, Mullin |Allen | | | | | | |----------------+-----+----------------------+--------------------| |Judiciary |7-3 |Mark Stone, Alejo, |Wagner, Gallagher, | | | |Chau, Chiu, Cristina |Maienschein | | | |Garcia, Holden, | | | | |O'Donnell | | | | | | | | | | | | ------------------------------------------------------------------ SUMMARY: Expands the California Voting Rights Act of 2001 (CVRA) to allow challenges to district-based elections to be brought under the CVRA, as specified. Specifically, this bill: 1)Prohibits, pursuant to the CVRA, district-based elections from AB 350 Page 2 being imposed or applied in a manner that impairs the ability of a protected class of voters to elect candidates of its choice as the result of the dilution or abridgement of the rights of voters who are members of a protected class. 2)Provides that the fact that a district-based election was imposed on a political subdivision as a result of an action filed pursuant to the CVRA shall not be a defense to an action alleging that the district-based elections violate the provisions of this bill. Provides that a court-ordered district-based election system that is adopted on or after January 1, 2017, as a result of an action filed pursuant to the CVRA, shall be subject to a rebuttable presumption that the system does not violate this bill. Provides that this presumption applies only to the exact district-based election system that was approved by the court. 3)Requires a court, upon finding that a political subdivision's district-based elections violate this bill, to implement an effective district-based election system that provides the protected class the opportunity to elect candidates of its choice from single-member districts. Permits the court, if it is not possible to create a district plan in which the protected class has the opportunity to elect candidates of its choice without increasing the size of the governing body, or if the additional districts alone will not provide an appropriate remedy, to order additional remedies, including any of the following: a) Incrementally increasing the size of the governing body, if approved by the voters in the jurisdiction; b) Approving a single-member district-based election system that provides the protected class the opportunity to join in a coalition of two or more protected classes to elect candidates of their choice if there is a demonstrated political cohesion among the protected classes; or, AB 350 Page 3 c) Issuing an injunction to delay an election. 4)States that the purpose of the Legislature in enacting this bill is to address ongoing vote dilution and discrimination in voting as matters of statewide concern, in order to enforce the fundamental rights guaranteed to California voters under specified provisions of the California Constitution. Requires the provisions of this bill to be construed liberally in furtherance of this legislative intent to eliminate minority vote dilution. Declares the intent of the Legislature that any remedy implemented under this bill shall comply with the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution. Finds and declares that this bill is consistent with a specified court case. 5)Contains a severability clause. FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown. This bill is keyed non-fiscal by the Legislative Counsel. COMMENTS: According to the author, "AB 350 will expand the California Voting Rights Act of 2001 to better protect minority communities across the state. Voter disenfranchisement still persists today. This measure is a means for us to protect voters from being excluded and ensure that we have a working democracy in California for years to come. This bill will allow challenges to district-based elections that are being imposed or applied in a manner that impairs the ability of a protected class of voters to elect candidates of their choice." SB 976 (Polanco), Chapter 129, Statutes of 2002, enacted the CVRA to address racial block voting in at-large elections for local office. 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 AB 350 Page 4 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. This bill expands the CVRA to permit challenges to be brought to district-based election systems that impair the ability of a protected class of voters to elect the candidates of its choice, as a result of the dilution or the abridgement of the rights of voters who are members of the protected class. Challenges to district-based election systems under the CVRA would be subject to the same standards and procedures that currently apply to challenges to at-large election systems that are brought under the CVRA. As is the case with challenges to at-large election systems under the CVRA, prevailing plaintiff parties under this bill would be able to recover attorney's fees, including expert witness fees and expenses. Prevailing defendant parties are not able to recover costs, unless the court finds the action to be frivolous, unreasonable, or without foundation. The primary difference between challenges brought under the CVRA to at-large elections and challenges brought to district-based elections under this bill are the remedies that would be available when a court finds that a violation exists. While existing law does not explicitly limit the remedies that a court may consider in response to an at-large election system that violates the CVRA, it does state that the imposition of district-based elections may be an appropriate remedy for such a violation. By contrast, if a district-based election system were found to violate the CVRA under the provisions of this AB 350 Page 5 bill, the court would be required to devise a single-member district-based election system that provides the protected class of voters the opportunity to elect candidates of its choice from single-member districts. If it was not possible to create such a plan without increasing the size of the governing body, the court would be allowed to consider other appropriate remedies, including increasing the size of the governing body if approved by the voters of the jurisdiction, creating a single-member district-based election system in which a coalition of two protected classes that are politically cohesive can elect the candidates of their choice, or issuing an injunction to delay an election. AB 182 (Alejo) of 2015, which was vetoed by Governor Brown on October 10, 2015, is substantially similar to this bill. Furthermore, AB 182 is similar to SB 1365 (Padilla) of 2014, which was also vetoed by Governor Brown. Governor Brown indicated in his veto messages for AB 182 and SB 1365 that he was vetoing those bills because he believes that the Voting Rights Act and the CVRA already provide safeguards to protect the voting rights of minority communities. There are just two substantive differences between the current version of this bill and the version of AB 182 that was vetoed by the Governor. Those differences are relatively modest, and do not appear to address the Governor's stated reason for vetoing either AB 182 or SB 1365. Please see the policy committee analysis for a full discussion of this bill. AB 350 Page 6 Analysis Prepared by: Ethan Jones / E. & R. / (916) 319-2094 FN: 0002559