HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 3a - Transition to By-District Elections
DATE: October 17, 2017 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Stephen P. Deitsch, City Attorney
By: Lisa Mussenden, Chief Deputy City Clerk/Records Manager SUBJECT: ORDINANCE NO. 2350 ADDING SECTION 1704 TO CHAPTER 7 OF
ARTICLE I OF THE ARCADIA MUNICIPAL CODE ESTABLISHING BY-
DISTRICT ELECTIONS, DEFINING DISTRICT BOUNDARIES, AND
SCHEDULING ELECTIONS WITHIN THE DISTRICTS Recommendation: Adopt
SUMMARY
At its regular meeting on October 3, 2017, the City Council, by a vote of 3-2, introduced
Ordinance No. 2350 adding Section 1704 to Chapter 7 of Article I of the Arcadia Municipal Code establishing by-district elections, defining district boundaries, and
scheduling elections within the districts. Attached is Ordinance No. 2350 and the
October 3, 2017, City Council staff report (without attachments).
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt Ordinance No. 2350 adding Section 1704
to Chapter 7 of Article I of the Arcadia Municipal Code establishing by-district elections,
defining district boundaries, and scheduling elections within the districts.
Attachments: 1. Ordinance No. 2350 (including Purple Map)
2. October 3, 2017, City Council Staff Report (without attachments)
DATE: October 3, 2017 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Stephen P. Deitsch, City Attorney
SUBJECT: ORDINANCE NO. 2350 ADDING SECTION 1704 TO CHAPTER 7 OF ARTICLE I OF THE ARCADIA MUNICIPAL CODE ESTABLISHING BY-
DISTRICT ELECTIONS, DEFINING DISTRICT BOUNDARIES, AND
SCHEDULING ELECTIONS WITHIN THE DISTRICTS
Recommendation: (1) Receive additional input regarding the proposed district maps and the sequence of elections; and (2) Introduce Ordinance No. 2350, read Ordinance by title, and waive
further reading of the Ordinance
SUMMARY
On August 1 and August 9, 2017, the City Council held its first and second public
hearings regarding the process of transitioning to district based elections. Six maps
were created by the City’s demographer and 12 maps were proposed by members of
the public. All maps were made available on the City’s website for public review on
August 30, 2017. On September 7 and September 19, 2017, the City Council held its third and fourth public hearings, at which the public was invited to provide input
regarding the content of the draft maps and the sequence of elections. The City Council
reviewed the draft maps submitted by the public and the City’s demographer and
provided additional guidance on proposed district boundaries. Following these public
hearings, the City Council directed staff to return with a draft ordinance transitioning to a by-district election system, using the Purple Map as the district boundaries.
These meetings are in response to threatened litigation regarding alleged non-
compliance with the California Voting Rights Act (“CVRA”), and in furtherance of the
City Council’s adopted resolution of intention to transition from at-large to district-based elections.
It is recommended that the City Council receive any additional public input regarding the
proposed Ordinance, introduce the Ordinance, read the Ordinance by title only, and
waive further reading of the Ordinance.
Introduce Ordinance 2350 – Transition to By-District Elections October 3, 2017
Page 2 of 10
BACKGROUND
In 2003, the CVRA became law. The CVRA, in an attempt to prevent the
disenfranchisement of protected classes of persons, establishes a low bar for attorneys seeking to force cities to convert from at-large to by-district elections.
Numerous public agencies in California have been sued under the CVRA. Plaintiffs
challenging at-large elections of legislative bodies such as city councils have typically
prevailed in litigation (the City Attorney is unaware of any public entity prevailing). Several cities, school districts, and hospital districts have settled with challengers, either prior to or in the midst of litigation brought pursuant to the CVRA.
Cities and other public entities have had a statutory obligation to reimburse successful
challengers for their attorneys’ fees pursuant to the CVRA. For example, the City of Palmdale incurred $4.7 million in legal fees in unsuccessfully defending in court its at-large city council election system, and the Cities of Santa Barbara, Whittier, Anaheim,
and Modesto incurred legal fees of between $600,000 and $3 million in settling such
challenges after adopting by-district elections.
At least 55 California cities have transitioned, or are in the process of transitioning, from at-large to by-district elections as a result of the CVRA. In addition, there are at least
146 school districts, 27 community college districts, and eight water or other special
districts which have done or are doing so under the CVRA.
Last year, the California legislature adopted AB 350 amending Elections Code Section 10010 to cap the attorneys’ fees a prospective plaintiff may recover if a public agency
adopts a resolution of intention to change to a by-district system of elections within 45
days after the receipt of a letter from that prospective plaintiff alleging a CVRA violation.
On June 6, 2017, the City received a letter from Kevin Shenkman, Esq., alleging that the City’s at-large City Council election system diluted the ability of certain protected
classes of persons within the City to elect candidates of their choice and demanding the
City notify him of its intent to change to a by-district election system by July 21, 2017, in
accordance with AB 350. While the City Council did not in any way concede to Mr. Shenkman’s allegations, in an
effort to avoid costly litigation, on July 21, 2017, the City Council adopted Resolution
No. 7179, a resolution declaring the City’s intention to transition from at-large to district-
based elections pursuant to Elections Code Section 10010. On August 1, 2017, the City held its first public hearing to obtain input on any proposed
district boundaries. A summary of public comments provided is listed below.
Introduce Ordinance 2350 – Transition to By-District Elections October 3, 2017
Page 3 of 10
Richard McDonald – Chinese American Equalization Association: Mr. McDonald
recommended that the City obtain a minimum of three maps from the City’s
demographer. Mr. McDonald recommended that the City Attorney be involved in the
drawing of the maps to ensure acceptable legal criteria are considered in the drafting of district boundaries. Mr. McDonald recommended two options of which three Asian majority districts would be created. The first includes one south of Duarte Road, a
second south of the 210 freeway, and another east of Santa Anita Racetrack using El
Monte Boulevard as a dividing line in the south, Baldwin Avenue as the dividing line in
the north, and Huntington Boulevard as the primary southern boundary for the two northern districts. The second option for consideration is to have five districts, one in the northeast, one in the northwest, one in the southeast, one in the southwest, and a
horizontal central district connecting north and south.
Paul Van Fleet: Mr. Van Fleet agreed with Council’s decision to avoid costly litigation by transitioning to district based elections. Mr. Van Fleet questioned how the district elections would be staggered under the upcoming election cycle. Mr. Van Fleet
recommended that in addition to ethnicity, resident’s socioeconomic status be taken into
consideration when drafting districts. Finally, Mr. Van Fleet questioned how the rotation
of the Mayor position would be determined under the new district model and suggested that each Mayor be appointed for 9 months instead of a year.
Roger Nemrava – Board Member of the Highland Oaks Homeowner Association: Mr.
Nemrava was opposed to districting. Should the City move to district-based elections,
Mr. Nemrava suggested that Santa Anita Boulevard be the dividing line between east and west Arcadia. Mr. Nemrava recommended that the Highlands Homeowners Association be one district as it represents a cohesive community of interest. Mr.
Nemrava suggested that the Oaks and Upper and Lower Rancho Home Owners
Associations be a separate district as they too represent separate communities of
interest. Mr. Nemrava suggested that Camino Real be the dividing line between north and south Arcadia. Using Camino Real as the dividing line, the Village area should be combined with the area north of Camino Real and west of Santa Anita Boulevard. The
fourth district would include east Arcadia with areas east of Santa Anita Boulevard and
then south to Camino Real. All areas south of Camino Real would be the final district.
Sheng Chang: Dr. Chang congratulated the City Council for changing the City’s voting system from at-large to district-based voting. Dr. Chang expressed his desire for
straightforward, simple, and fair districts with emphasis placed on population and
demographic considerations. Dr. Chang also requested that the City Council consider
term limits as part of their deliberations.
Introduce Ordinance 2350 – Transition to By-District Elections October 3, 2017
Page 4 of 10
Burton Brink: Mr. Brink was opposed to districting and is supportive of the City’s current
voting system. Nevertheless, Mr. Brink recommended that the homeowners
associations in the City be considered during the drafting of district maps as a cohesive
community of interest. Gary Kovacic: Mr. Kovacic stated reasons for opposing going to district elections. Mr.
Kovacic recommended that City Council carefully draft the district boundaries and
should take into consideration communities of common interest within each district,
including homeowners associations and other traditional neighborhoods that exist throughout the City. Mr. Kovacic cautioned the City Council to avoid gerrymandering in order to preserve a current Council Member’s seat. Mr. Kovacic posed several
questions to the City Council which include how will the district-based system be
implemented in the upcoming election? How will incumbency be factored in to the
process? Mr. Kovacic recommended that an independent committee be created to study and recommend proposed district boundaries.
Laurie Thompson: Ms. Thompson was not present but submitted an email to be
included in the official record for the August 1, 2017, meeting. Ms. Thompson stated the
Highlands is in a category by itself for many reasons. Also, the Village has had a different flavor and set of circumstances ever since its inception in 1937. The Village would be better represented in district with R-1 zoned homes. The Upper Rancho,
Lower Rancho, and Oaks are zoned R-0. Overall, she stated her position of keeping the
HOA’s intact and not clumping them into only one or two districts.
On August 9, 2017, the City held its second public hearing to obtain input on any proposed district boundaries. A summary of public comments provided is listed below.
Mike Vercillo: Mr. Vercillo applauded the City Council for moving toward district based
elections instead of spending millions of dollars in litigation; he indicated that he was a little concerned with some of the comments made by the City Council about drawing up districts, and in particular, gerrymandering; he provided the City Council with his own
map and a summary of those neighborhoods; he had several “what if” questions that he
shared with the City Council; and thanked them for the public hearings and allowing the
residents to share their comments and concerns. Richard McDonald – Chinese American Equalization Association: Mr. McDonald
reiterated some of the same suggestions he provided at the August 1, 2017, City
Council meeting regarding the creation of at least 3 Asian majority districts, and more
simple districts such as north, northeast, northwest, south, southeast, southwest, and central; he presented 2 maps that he spoke about regarding his first and second suggestion (Submission A and Submission B); he suggested creating an independent
task force; he indicated that in 2021 the district lines would have to be redone, because
of new census data; he further indicated that there was discussion about the dates
Introduce Ordinance 2350 – Transition to By-District Elections October 3, 2017
Page 5 of 10
regarding going to a June or November, and suggested keeping an eye on Senate Bill
568 (Lara) which the legislature is going to change the June primary to March, but was
recently amended to allow the governor the discretion to go even earlier in the year.
Caroline Blake: Ms. Blake indicated that her comments may change in the future because it is so early in the process, but that her neighborhood is made up of all ethnic
groups that seem to get along, which she is pleased about; she is opposed to
combining all the HOAs into one district; she proposed that the Village be combined
with other R-1 single-story homes; she is in favor of making the population in each of the districts equal; she favors a City Council residency for those running for City Council at 5 years, one year seems short to her; and regarding the under representation of any
one ethnic group, she feels that voter records could show the percentages of ethics
groups, if there is a problem; she is not in favor of any one specific ethnic group living in
any one district, and that she would not want to be represented by 98% of any one specific ethic group; that all neighborhoods in Arcadia have a variety of ethnic groups; and thanked the City Council for allowing her to provide comments.
On September 7, 2017, the City held its third public hearing to obtain input on the draft
maps submitted by the public and the City’s demographer for proposed district boundaries. A summary of public comments provided is listed below.
Richard McDonald – Chinese American Equalization Association: Mr. McDonald spoke
on his recommendations for Council criteria in determining which maps should be
considered for a final map. He indicated that he supports maps A, B, and L, and demographer maps Teal and Maroon, and provided the reasons. Additional discussion ensued.
Mike Vercillo: Mr. Vercillo stated that he supports the Green Map as it keeps most of the
HOAs together and does an excellent job of maintaining the integrity of the remaining neighborhoods by using major thoroughfares in the City. The Green Map is also the only proposal that helps promote a new Asian candidate to run for City Council as it
creates a new district (District #2) where no current City Council Member resides.
Brett Mitulski: Mr. Mitulski spoke about neighborhood unity and indicated that he supports the Orange Map. He stated that the Orange Map does not gerrymander, it gives representation to parts of Arcadia with a high sense of unity, and it respects the
City’s long-standing boundary of Santa Anita Ave.
Sheng Chang: Mr. Chang thanked the City Council for coming up with proposed districts. Mr. Chang indicated that he supports Public Maps B and L.
Peter Olson – Representative of the Santa Anita Oaks Homeowner Association: Mr.
Olson indicated that he supports the Orange Map. He expressed concern with the
Introduce Ordinance 2350 – Transition to By-District Elections October 3, 2017
Page 6 of 10
Green Map because it would combine all the HOAs north of the freeway into one district
and eliminate one current Council Member that is currently representing north Arcadia.
The Orange Map would provide two representatives to address the concerns on the
HOAs on the City Council. Roger Nemrava – Board Member of the Highland Oaks Homeowner Association: Mr.
Nemrava appeared and indicated that he supports the Orange Map because it ensures
that the HOAs interests are maintained.
Gary Kovacic: Mr. Kovacic shared his recommendations to the City Council about how to approach deciding district boundaries. These include incumbency, ensuring that
communities of interests like HOAs and traditional neighborhoods are maintained, and
selecting a proposal with demographics that would foster more Asian representation.
Mr. Kovacic recommended that a proposal similar to Public Map K be considered where there are two districts in the north, two in the south, and a central district.
Noreen McLennan: Ms. McLennan questioned which district her street represents as
she lives on Orange Grove. She also asked about the process if no one is seeking the
district seat. City Manager Lazzaretto provided a response on the process. Howard Ursetti: Mr. Ursetti indicated that he submitted a map and split it up based on
school districts, but it didn’t qualify because of population. Mr. Ursetti indicated that he
supports Map L, which was updated by Mr. McDonald and supports any map similar to
L which is based around school district boundaries. Julie Lim: Ms. Lim indicated that she supports the Orange Map. The boundaries are
simple and have the fewest issues related to gerrymandering. Ms. Lim discussed the
other maps and expressed her concerns with the Green Map, Maroon Map, Purple
Map, Teal Map, and Yellow Map. Tim Burch: Mr. Burch said he supported Mr. Mitulski’s and Ms. Lim’s comments, and
urged the City Council to look at the whole picture. He indicated that he favored the
Orange Map.
On September 19, 2017, the City held its fourth public hearing to obtain input on the draft maps submitted by the public and the City’s demographer for proposed district
boundaries. A summary of public comments provided is listed below.
Richard McDonald, Esq., representing the Chinese American Equalization Association: Mr. McDonald commented on the proposed 7 maps; he recommended the City Council choose at least 3 maps tonight; he indicated that the Chinese American Equalization
Association favors the modified Map K, but feels that it needs a little more tweaking; he
indicated that Maps B and L remain viable maps, and recommended that Maps Green,
Introduce Ordinance 2350 – Transition to By-District Elections October 3, 2017
Page 7 of 10
Purple, Orange and Map A be dropped; and indicated that if one map is selected tonight
that they favor the modified Map K, because he feels it is a step in the right direction
based on the criteria he previously mentioned.
Roger Nemrava: Mr. Nemrava indicated that the revised Map K is a definite improvement from the original Map K, and indicated that he is in favor of the Orange
Map, and provided his reasons.
David Hokanson: Mr. Hokanson indicated that he supports the Green Map and provided his reasons.
Marci Schultz: Mrs. Schultz indicated that she supports the Orange Map and provided
her reasons.
Tim Burch: Mr. Burch indicated that he supports the Orange Map, and indicated that the colored maps should be given deference; and provided his reasons.
Gary Kovacic: Mr. Kovacic indicated that he supports Council Member Beck’s request
to continue this public hearing due to his absence from the meeting; and indicated that his preference is the revised Map K.
Olga Hasler: Ms. Hasler indicated that she supports the Orange Map, and provided her
reasons.
DISCUSSION
Procedure Under AB 350
Elections Code Section 10010 provides a specific process for the adoption of an ordinance to transition to district-based elections. The process includes a series of public hearings at which the public is invited to provide input regarding the composition
of the districts.
The maps for Council districts have been drawn by a professional demographer with extensive experience in the CVRA and drafting Council districts. Before drawing a draft map or maps, the City held at least two public hearings over a period of no more than
30 days as required by the CVRA, at which the public was invited to provide input
regarding the composition of the districts. The first hearing was on August 1, 2017, and
the second hearing was held on August 9, 2017. Six maps were created by the City’s demographer and 12 maps were proposed by members of the public. All maps were made available on the City’s website for public review on August 30, 2017 per the
CVRA requirement that after the draft maps are drawn, the City shall publish at least
one draft map. The City also published the potential sequence of elections, if the City
Introduce Ordinance 2350 – Transition to By-District Elections October 3, 2017
Page 8 of 10
Council Members will be elected at different times to provide for staggered terms of
office on each map. In accordance with the CVRA, the City has held two additional
public hearings, at which the public was invited to provide input regarding the content of
the draft maps and the proposed sequence of elections. Those hearings were held on September 7 and 19, 2017.
The anticipated schedule for the transition remains as follows:
Aug. 1, 2017 Public Hearing No. 1 – Completed Aug. 9, 2017 Public Hearing No. 2 – Completed
Aug. 30, 2017 Publication of Draft Map(s) – Completed
Sep. 7, 2017 Public Hearing No. 3 – Completed
Sep. 19, 2017 Public Hearing No. 4 - Completed
Oct. 3, 2017 Introduction of Ordinance – This agenda item Oct. 17, 2017 Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance
Public comments on the transition and the proposed district maps are very important
and all residents within the City are encouraged to participate in these hearings. Criteria for Establishing Districts
The drawing of City Council districts is regulated by both state and federal law, including
the CVRA and the Federal Voting Rights Act. For example, under federal law, council districts may not be drawn with race as the predominate factor. (Shaw v. Reno (1993)
509 U.S. 630.) The professional demographer retained by the City to draw Council
districts will ensure the districts are compliant with these standards.
Under Elections Code Section 21620, districts must be drawn as nearly equal in population as may be according to the latest federal decennial census. In establishing the boundaries, the City Council may give consideration to the following factors:
(1) Topography;
(2) Geography; (3) Cohesiveness, Contiguity, Integrity, and Compactness of Territory; and (4) Community of Interest of the Districts.
Introduce Ordinance 2350 – Transition to By-District Elections October 3, 2017
Page 9 of 10
Based on public input and City Council guidance received at the public hearings on
August 1 and 9, 2017, the City’s demographer generated six maps. The public also
submitted 12 maps. These maps were made available on the City’s website
at www.ArcadiaCA.gov/districts for public review on August 30, 2017. On September 7, 2017, the City Council discussed the proposed maps submitted by the public and the demographer, and considered each as a possible final district boundary map or
recommend further changes. While all the maps submitted by the demographer met the
legal standards of the CVRA, it should be noted that of the public maps submitted, only
maps A, B, and L comply with constitutional requirements relating to the population deviation between proposed districts. The remaining public maps are not legally defensible.
At the September 7, 2017, meeting, the City Council directed staff to return at the next
scheduled public hearing with seven (7) maps for consideration. These included public maps A, B, L, a revised map K, and demographer maps Green, Orange, and Purple, each of which were included as Attachments to the Staff Report.
At the September 19, 2017 meeting, the City Council reviewed the remaining seven (7)
maps in detail. After much deliberation between the Council Members regarding the merits of the Orange and Purple Maps, the City Council selected the Purple Map for inclusion in a draft Ordinance to transition to by-district elections. The proposed
Ordinance using the Purple Map has been drafted by the City Attorney’s Office and is
ready to be considered for introduction at this meeting. If introduced, it will be
scheduled for adoption on October 17. The City has subsequently received additional feedback from Mr. Mitulski who
suggested that a compromise map be drawn between the Purple Map and Orange Map
and offered proposed boundaries demonstrating the potential compromise. That map
has been included as Public Map M – Mitulski. Based on the feedback provided by Mr. Mitulski, the City’s demographer applied the appropriate criteria to make it legally defensible. Public Map M is attached to this Staff Report and posted on the City’s
website.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS The transition from at-large to district-based elections is exempt from environmental
review under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) (Pub. Resources Code,
§ 21000 et seq.) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15000
et seq.) Sections 15061(b)(3), 15320, and 15378(b)(3). The transition process is an organizational and administrative activity of the City, does not have the potential to result in either a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the
environment, and is therefore not a project for purposes of CEQA. (State CEQA
Guidelines, §§ 15061(b)(3); 15378(b)(5).) In the event the transition process does
Introduce Ordinance 2350 – Transition to By-District Elections October 3, 2017
Page 10 of 10
constitute a project, it is categorically exempt under the Class 20 (Changes in the
Organization of Local Governments) categorical exemption. (State CEQA Guidelines, §
15320.) None of the exceptions to the exemptions found in State CEQA Guidelines
section 15300.2 apply. FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with the public hearing. Transitioning to district
based elections will have a negligible effect on elections costs. RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council (1) receive additional input regarding the
proposed district maps and the sequence of elections; and (2) introduce Ordinance No. 2350 adding Section 1704 to Chapter 7 of Article I of the Arcadia Municipal Code establishing by-district elections, defining district boundaries, and scheduling elections
within the districts.
Attachments: 1. Ordinance No. 2350 (including Purple Map)
2. September 19, 2017, City Council Staff Report and Maps
3. Public Map M (Mitulski) 4. Public Map M Demographics