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