HomeMy WebLinkAboutCA District-Based City Elections____________________________________________________________________________________
FOR CITY CLERK ONLY
File No.: 9-4 (District Elections)
Council Meeting: 1/16/2018
Disposition: Resolution 14453
Agenda Item No: 6.a
Meeting Date: January 16, 2018
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Department: City Attorney
Prepared by: Lisa Goldfien
Assistant City Attorney
City Manager Approval: ______________
TOPIC: DISTRICT-BASED CITY ELECTIONS
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION TO TRANSITION FROM AT-
LARGE ELECTIONS TO DISTRICT-BASED CITY COUNCIL ELECTIONS
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive public comments, deliberate, and vote whether or not to approve a resolution stating the City’s
intention to transition from an at-large to a district-based election method for City Council elections.
BACKGROUND:
In 2002, the Legislature enacted the California Voting Rights Act (CVRA) (Elec. Code §§14025 –
14032), which prohibits California public agencies from imposing or applying an at-large election
method “that impairs the ability of a protected class to elect candidates of its choice or its ability to
influence the outcome of an election.” (Elec. Code §14027) A protected class is defined by the CVRA
as “a class of voters who are members of a race, color, or language minority group, as this class is
referenced and defined in the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965.”
The CVRA defines an at-large method of election to include the election method used by the City of
San Rafael, in which the voters of the entire City elect all the members of the City Council. In a lawsuit
brought pursuant to the CVRA, a plaintiff who establishes a history of “racially polarized voting” under a
city’s at-large election system can require a city to change to a district-based election system.
Since 2015, the City’s Latino Civic Leadership Initiative group has been working to increase minority
representation on San Rafael’s boards, commissions and ultimately the City Council, and the City is
committed to working collaboratively with all of its residents to address any voting or representation
concerns. Despite this work, on November 20, 2017 the City received a letter from Malibu attorney
Kevin Shenkman urging the City to change its at-large voting system to a district-based voting system,
asserting that “San Rafael’s at-large system dilutes the ability of Latinos (a ‘protected class’) - to elect
candidates of their choice or otherwise influence the outcome of San Rafael’s council elections.” (See
Attachment 5.)
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 2
According to the California Elections Code, receipt of this letter starts a 45-day timeline for the City “to
pass a resolution outlining its intention to transition from at-large to district-based elections, specific steps it
will undertake to facilitate this transition, and an estimated time frame for doing so.” (Elec. Code §10010.) A
potential plaintiff may not file a lawsuit under the CVRA until this 45-day period has elapsed. Moreover,
if the City passes such a resolution, it will have a further 90 days to adopt an ordinance implementing
district-based elections before a lawsuit may be filed under the CVRA.
The City Council held a study session on November 20, 2017 at which the City’s outside legal counsel,
Christopher Skinnell, provided a general briefing on the federal and California Voting Rights Acts, as
well as an overview of the City’s voter demographics to set the stage for further conversation on the
subject.
The City Council also held a hearing at its December 4 meeting, at which it received public comments
concerning Mr. Shenkman’s demand that the City transition to district-based elections. On December
6th, 2017, the City Attorney wrote a letter to Mr. Shenkman requesting to toll Section 10010’s 45-day
time period for the City Council’s decision whether to switch to district-based elections for an additional
90 days, through March 19, 2018. The City Attorney also requested any data and analyses developed
by Mr. Shenkman in support of his position that the City’s at-large election has been disadvantageous
to the City’s Latino community.
The City Council intended to take action on Mr. Shenkman’s demand at the December 18 Council
meeting. However, at that meeting City Attorney Rob Epstein reported that in response to the City’s
request for a tolling of the 45-day time period, Mr. Shenkman had agreed to allow the City more time to
deliberate, and extended the 45-day time period to allow the Council to take action at its January 16,
2018 Council meeting. Mr. Shenkman declined to provide any data or analyses that supported his
assertions made in the November 20 letter. Based on the City Attorney’s report, as well as public
comment in support of additional time to decide on whether to convert to district elections, the Council
voted to postpone any decision regarding district elections until January 16, 2018.
ANALYSIS:
The City Council has three options at this meeting, namely: 1) Adopt a resolution stating the Council’s
intention to transition to district-based elections for the 2020 general municipal election, within the 90-
day period provided in Elections Code section 10010; 2) Adopt a resolution stating the Council’s
intention to transition to district-based elections for the 2022 general municipal election, after receiving
results of the 2020 U.S. Census; 3) Decide against transitioning to district-based elections, and not
adopt a resolution of intention. Each option is discussed below:
Option 1: Adopt a resolution stating the Council’s intention to transition to district-based
elections for the 2020 general municipal election, within the 90-day safe harbor period
provided in Elections Code section 10010 (Attachment 1).
Under this option, if the Council adopts a resolution at this meeting, then pursuant to Elections Code
section 10010, the Council is required to hold 5 public hearings within 90 days, or by April 16, 2018,
prior to adopting an ordinance establishing the district-based election system.
The requirements for the meetings are established by the statute:
a. Before drawing a draft map or maps of the proposed boundaries of the districts, the City
must hold at least two public hearings over a period of no more than 30 days, at which the
public is invited to provide input regarding the composition of the districts.
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 3
b. After all draft maps are drawn, the City must publish and make available for release at least
one draft map and, if members of the City Council will be elected in their districts at different
times to provide for staggered terms of office, the potential sequence of the elections. The
City must also hold at least two additional hearings over a period of no more than 45 days,
at which the public is invited to provide input regarding the content of the draft map or maps
and the proposed sequence of elections, if applicable. The first version of a draft map shall
be published at least seven days before consideration at a hearing. If a draft map is revised
at or following a hearing, it shall be published and made available to the public for at least
seven days before being adopted.
Attachment 1 to this staff report is a resolution stating the Council’s intention to immediately start the
transition to district-based elections, and includes an Exhibit with a tentative timetable for accomplishing
the above tasks. As noted in the draft resolution, the City will be required to hire a professional
demographer to assist in the preparation of draft district maps, and staff would also ask the Council to
approve an amendment to the City’s agreement with its outside attorneys on this matter, Christopher
Skinnell and Marguerite Leoni at the firm of Nielsen Merksamer.
Pursuing this option would protect the City from the filing of a lawsuit under the CVRA. By statute, Mr.
Shenkman would be entitled to reimbursement of his documented fees and expenses, not to exceed
$30,000; however, the City would be spared possibly hundreds of thousands of dollars in attorneys fees
required to litigate a CVRA action.
Note that the attached resolution has two revisions to the draft presented at the December 18 meeting:
First, a member of the public pointed out a reference in the proposed resolution to a transition to district
elections for “the mayor and city councilmembers,” suggesting an intention to eliminate the charter
requirement of a separately elected mayor. Because amending the charter to eliminating this
requirement would require a vote of the electorate, unless and until such an election occurs the City is
not able to transition to district elections for mayor; staff has therefore deleted the reference to the office
of mayor in the following section of the resolution:
WHEREAS, although Mr. Shenkman’s letter was not accompanied by any evidence to
support his claim of a CVRA violation, the City Council finds that it is in the best interests
of the City to act within the safe-harbor timeframe provided by Elections Code Section
10010 to transition from an at-large election system to a district-based election system
for electing the mayor and city councilmembers; and
Second, Exhibit A to the draft resolution, the tentative timeline for actions to transition to district
elections, has been updated to reflect that the 90 day time period to act will begin on January 16, 2018,
with final action required by April 16, 2018.
Option 2: Adopt a resolution stating the Council’s intention to transition to district-based
elections for the 2022 general municipal election, after receiving results of the 2020 U.S.
Census.
At the November 20 study session, Christopher Skinnell noted that one option available to the City is to
implement a transition to district-based elections following the next federal Census in 2020; however he
cautioned that this action by the City would not guarantee that litigation will be avoided.
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 4
Mr. Skinnell has advised that there several cases decided under the federal Voting Rights Act that have
declined to grant relief in a challenge to an existing voting system when the Census is imminent, since
redistricting is required after each Census. As one court indicated, such “rapid-fire reapportionment
immediately prior to a scheduled census would constitute an undue disruption of the election process,
the stability and continuity of the legislative system and would be highly prejudicial, not only to the
citizens of [the County], but to the [County] itself.” Maxwell v. Foster, 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23447, *12
(W.D. La. 1999).
Since San Rafael’s next election is in 2020, the district boundaries would have to be reconsidered upon
the release of the Census the following year. Therefore, it is possible that if the City resolved to initiate
the transition to district-based elections after the 2020 Census results become available, a lawsuit
challenging that decision might be dismissed without a trial. Even so, the City would incur attorneys’
fees and costs in defending the lawsuit to that point.
Attachment 2 to this staff report is a resolution stating the City Council’s intention to start the transition
to district-based elections following receipt of the results of the 2020 Census. Note that the resolution
has a revision to the draft presented at the December 18 meeting, deleting the reference to the office of
mayor, for the reasons set forth above, in the following section of the resolution:
WHEREAS, although Mr. Shenkman’s letter was not accompanied by any evidence to
support his claim of a CVRA violation, the City Council finds that it is in the best interests
of the City to transition from an at-large election system to a district-based election
system for electing the mayor and city councilmembers; and
Option 3: Decide against transitioning to district-based elections, and do not adopt a
resolution of intention.
The Council’s final option is to reject Mr. Shenkman’s demand to switch to district -based elections, with
the intention to vigorously fight any ensuing CVRA lawsuit. If successful, the City would be liable only
for its own attorneys’ fees and other litigation costs, which could still amount to hundreds of thousands
of dollars. If unsuccessful, the City would also be liable for payment of the plaintiffs’ attorneys’ fees and
costs, also likely to amount to many hundreds of thousands of dollars.
To follow this option, the City Council would merely decline to adopt a resolution of intention.
COMMUNITY OUTREACH:
The City is partnering with community groups to communicate information throughout the community. A
website, www.cityofsanrafael.org/district-elections has been created to provide information about the
topic, a schedule of meetings, and an online form for public feedback. This meeting was announced via
the City’s website, email notifications, the City Manager’s newsletter and via social media. The City
Council considered this issue at a Study Session on November 20, and at its regular meetings on
December 4 and December 18. The Canal Alliance, Canal Welcome Center, Alcohol Justice, Youth for
Justice, and United Marin Rising organizations have coordinated to schedule a public meeting for
January 13 for the purpose of providing information to and receiving input from interested members of
the public. The City’s attorney, Christopher Skinnell is scheduled to attend as well as City staff.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The fiscal impact of a change to district elections is unknown at this time. However, certain types of
costs can be anticipated for each of the options:
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 5
Option 1: The decision to immediately start the transition to district-based elections would result in the
City having to hire a demographer and incur additional fees for the services of outside counsel during
the transition process. In addition, the City would be liable for the payment of up to $30,000 to Kevin
Shenkman following adoption of the ordinance approving district-based elections.
Option 2: The decision to transition to district-based elections following the 2020 Census would defer
the costs for a demographer until that time; however, if and when a CVRA lawsuit is filed, the City
would still incur costs for outside counsel to defend the City and potentially for the payment of the
plaintiffs’ attorneys’ fees and litigation costs should the City lose the lawsuit.
Option 3: The decision not to transition to district-based elections at all has the most potential exposure
to costs of litigation. In other CVRA cases, these costs have commonly been in the high six figure
range, and were as much as $4.5 million in the City of Palmdale’s unsuccessful defense of the CVRA
suit filed against it.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends that the City Council receive public comments and take one of the optional actions
set forth above.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution of Intention (Elec. Code 10010), with Exhibit A-tentative timeline
2. Resolution of Intention (Delay pending 2020 Census)
3. Questions and Answers
4. Considerations in Switching to District-Based Elections
5. November 10, 2017 letter from Kevin Shenkman
6. Correspondence
RESOLUTION NO. 14453
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO TRANSITION FROM AT-LARGE TO
DISTRICT-BASED ELECTIONS FOR CITY COUNCIL PURSUANT TO
ELECTIONS CODE SECTION 10010(E)(3)(A), EFFECTIVE
FOR THE NOVEMBER 2020 GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION
WHEREAS, the City of San Rafael is a charter city duly organized and existing pursuant
to the Constitution and laws of the State of California; and
WHEREAS, Article VI of the Charter of the City of San Rafael (“City Charter”) provides
for the election of four city councilmembers and a separately elected mayor at the general
municipal election; and
WHEREAS, Article IV of the City Charter provides that all elections to fill public offices
shall be held and conducted as provided by general state law; and
WHEREAS, the City currently uses an at-large election system for electing the mayor
and city councilmembers; and
WHEREAS, on November 20, 2017, the City Clerk received by certified mail a letter
from attorney Kevin I. Shenkman asserting that the City’s at-large election system violates the
California Voting Rights Act of 2001 (Elections Code §§14025-14032) (“CVRA”) and threatening
to sue the City unless the City transitions to a district-based election system for its city council;
and
WHEREAS, a violation of the CVRA is established if it can be proven that “racially
polarized voting” occurs in the City’s at-large election system. Racially polarized voting means
voting in which there is a difference in the choice of candidates or other electoral choices that
are preferred by voters in a “protected class”, an in the choice of candidates or other electoral
choices that are preferred by voters in the rest of the electorate (Elections Code §14026(e));
and
WHEREAS, the City Council has been advised that defending a lawsuit filed pursuant to
the CVRA will require the City to incur legal fees and costs potentially in the hundreds of
thousands of dollars for the City’s own defense, and additional liability of potentially hundreds of
thousands of dollars in legal fees and costs payable to the prevailing plaintiffs if the City is
unsuccessful; and
WHEREAS, California Government Code Section 34886, in certain circumstances,
authorizes the legislative body of a city to adopt an ordinance to change its method of
election from an "at-large" to "district-based" in which each council member is elected only
by the voters residing in the district in which the candidate resides; and
WHEREAS, the California Legislature, in amendments to Elections Code section 10010,
has provided a method whereby a jurisdiction, including a charter city, can expeditiously change
to a by-district election system and avoid litigation under the CVRA; and
WHEREAS, if the City elects to transition to a district-based election system within the
timeframe established in Elections Code section 10010, then the City is protected from the filing
2
of a CVRA lawsuit with its incumbent costs, and its liability to the potential plaintiffs for legal fees
will be capped at $30,000; and
WHEREAS, although Mr. Shenkman’s letter was not accompanied by any evidence to
support his claim of a CVRA violation, the City Council finds that the City should act within the
safe-harbor timeframe provided by Elections Code Section 10010 to transition from an at-large
election system to a district-based election system for electing the city councilmembers; and
WHEREAS, prior to the City Council’s consideration of an ordinance to establish district
boundaries for a district-based electoral system, California Elections Code Section 10010
requires all of the following:
1. Prior to drawing a draft map or maps of the proposed boundaries of the districts,
the City shall hold at least two (2) public hearings over a period of no more than
thirty (30) days, at which the public will be invited to provide input regarding the
composition of the districts;
2. After all draft maps are drawn, City shall publish and make available for release
at least one draft map and, if members of the City Council will be elected in their
districts at different times to provide for staggered terms of office, the potential
sequence of the elections shall also be published. The City Council shall also
hold at least two (2) additional hearings over a period of no more than forty-five
(45) days, at which the public shall be invited to provide input regarding the
content of the draft map or maps and the proposed sequence of elections, if
applicable. The first version of a draft map shall be published at least seven (7)
days before consideration at a hearing. If a draft map is revised at or following a
hearing, it shall be published and made available to the public for at least seven
(7) days before being adopted; and
WHEREAS, the City will retain an experienced demographer to assist the City to
develop a proposal for a district-based electoral system; and
WHEREAS, the adoption of a district-based electoral system will not affect the term of
any sitting Council Member, each of whom will serve out his or her current term;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of San Rafael
as follows:
1. The City Council shall consider an ordinance to change to a district-based election
system for use in the City’s General Municipal Election for City Council Members
beginning in November 2020.
2. The City Council directs staff to work with the City’s retained demographer, and other
appropriate consultants as needed, to provide a detailed analysis of the City’s
current demographics and any other information or data necessary to prepare a draft
map that divides the City into voting districts in a manner consistent with the intent
and purpose of the California Voting Rights Act and the Federal Voting Rights Act.
3. The City Council approves the tentative timeline set forth in Exhibit A, attached to
and made a part of this resolution, for conducting a public process to solicit public
input on proposed district-based electoral maps before adopting any such map.
3
4. The City Council directs staff to institute a program for public outreach and to inform
the residents of San Rafael of this resolution and the process set forth in Exhibit A,
and to facilitate and encourage public participation.
5. The timeline contained in Exhibit A may be adjusted as deemed necessary, provided
that such adjustments shall not prevent the City from complying with the time frames
specified by Election Code Section 10010.
I, LINDSAY LARA, Interim City Clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby certify that the
foregoing resolution was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the
City Council of the City of San Rafael held on the 16th day of January, 2018, by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Bushey, Colin, Gamblin, McCullough & Mayor Phillips
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
Lindsay Lara, Interim City Clerk
EXHIBIT A
TENTATIVE TIMELINE
TRANSITION TO DISTRICT-BASED ELECTIONS PER ELECTIONS CODE §10010
NO. TASK DATE
1 Adopt Resolution of Intention January 16, 2018
2 1ST Public Hearing: Consider
composition of districts
February 5, 2018
3 2nd Public Hearing: Consider
composition of districts
February 20, 2018
4 Publication of draft maps and
proposed election sequence
By February 26, 2018
5 3rd Public Hearing: Consider draft
maps and election sequence
March 5, 2018
6 Publication of any new or revised
draft maps and/or proposed election
sequences
By March 12, 2018
7 4th Public Hearing: Consider draft
maps election sequence, and
introduce ordinance establishing
district elections
March 19, 2018
8 Publication of any new or revised
draft maps and/or proposed election
sequences
By April 9, 2018
9 5th Public Hearing: Adopt ordinance
establishing district
April 16, 2018
10 Day 90 April 16, 2018
11 Effective date of ordinance
12 First district-based election November 3, 2020
RESOLUTION NO. _________
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO TRANSITION FROM AT-LARGE TO
DISTRICT-BASED ELECTIONS FOR CITY COUNCIL FOLLOWING THE
2020 FEDERAL CENSUS, EFFECTIVE FOR THE NOVEMBER 2022
GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION
WHEREAS, the City of San Rafael is a charter city duly organized and existing pursuant
to the Constitution and laws of the State of California; and
WHEREAS, Article VI of the Charter of the City of San Rafael (“City Charter”) provides
for the election of four city councilmembers and a separately elected mayor at the general
municipal election; and
WHEREAS, Article IV of the City Charter provides that all elections to fill public offices
shall be held and conducted as provided by general state law; and
WHEREAS, the City currently uses an at-large election system for electing the mayor
and city councilmembers; and
WHEREAS, on November 20, 2017, the City Clerk received by certified mail a letter
from attorney Kevin I. Shenkman asserting that the City’s at-large election system violates the
California Voting Rights Act of 2001 (Elections Code §§14025-14032) (“CVRA”) and threatening
to sue the City unless the City transitions to a district-based election system for its city council;
and
WHEREAS, a violation of the CVRA is established if it can be proven that “racially
polarized voting” occurs in the City’s at-large election system. Racially polarized voting means
voting in which there is a difference in the choice of candidates or other electoral choices that
are preferred by voters in a “protected class”, an in the choice of candidates or other electoral
choices that are preferred by voters in the rest of the electorate (Elections Code §14026(e));
and
WHEREAS, the City Council has been advised that defending a lawsuit filed pursuant to
the CVRA will require the City to incur legal fees and costs potentially in the hundreds of
thousands of dollars for the City’s own defense, and additional liability of potentially hundreds of
thousands of dollars in legal fees and costs payable to the prevailing plaintiffs if the City is
unsuccessful; and
WHEREAS, although Mr. Shenkman’s letter was not accompanied by any evidence to
support his claim of a CVRA violation, the City Council finds that it is in the best interests of the
City to transition from an at-large election system to a district-based election system for electing
the city councilmembers; and
WHEREAS, California Government Code Section 34886, in certain circumstances,
authorizes the legislative body of a city to adopt an ordinance to change its method of
election from an "at-large" to "district-based" in which each council member is elected only
by the voters residing in the district in which the candidate resides; and
2
WHEREAS, the California Legislature, in amendments to Elections Code section 10010,
has provided a method whereby a jurisdiction, including a charter city, can expeditiously change
to a by-district election system and avoid litigation under the CVRA; and
WHEREAS, if the City Council acts within the timeframe established by Elections Code
section 10010 to transition to district-based elections immediately, to be in place for the City’s
next scheduled general municipal election in November 2020, then City will be required to
conduct a redistricting process again for the very next general municipal election in 2022 to
account for the results of the 2020 United States Census; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that conducting a redistricting process for two
successive elections would cause undue disruption of the City’s election process, and the
stability and continuity of the City’s legislative system, and would be highly prejudicial, to the
City of San Rafael and its citizens;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of San Rafael
as follows:
1. It is the City Council’s intention to consider an ordinance to change to a district-
based election system for use in the City’s General Municipal Elections following
release of the results of the 2020 United States Census, for use in the City’s general
municipal election in November 2022.
2. At the time the 2020 Census data becomes available, the City Council will begin the
transition to district-based elections according to the requirements of the California
Elections Code and any other applicable legal authority.
I, LINDSAY LARA, Interim City Clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby certify that the
foregoing resolution was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the
Council of the City of San Rafael held on the 16h day of January, 2018, by the following vote, to
wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
Lindsay Lara, Interim City Clerk
1
updated: December 19, 2017
ATTACHMENT 3
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS RE DISTRICT-BASED ELECTIONS
The following is a list of questions and answers concerning district-based elections, for
discussion by the City Council and the public.
The questions below were asked of staff prior to the City Council’s November 20 Study Session:
1. Did the City receive a letter from attorney Kevin Shenkman?
RESPONSE: Yes, Kevin Shenkman’s letter dated November 10, 2017, addressed to the
City Clerk was received by her on November 20, 2017.
2. What made the City decide to take proactive action on district elections rather than just
wait for pressure from the various groups? What does the City hope to accomplish?
RESPONSE:
The City began to do research, hired outside counsel, and started to schedule public
hearings on the issue of district-based elections when it learned of the impending receipt
of Mr. Shenkman’s letter. The City hopes to provide an opportunity for all interested
persons to provide input to the City Council on the issue of district-based elections, and
to ensure that the City’s electoral system best serves the entire City, in compliance with
state and federal law.
3. Is the City considering forming a citizens committee to look at the issue?
RESPONSE:
Given the very strict timelines that the Legislature has imposed for this process under
the CVRA, and the substantial number of hearings that must be had in a short time, a
citizen commission is impractical at this point. Nothing would prevent the Council from
appointing such a committee in 2021, when lines are redrawn following the next Census.
4. Assuming the City moves to district elections and set the districts in 2018, what districts
will be open in the next election in 2020? For example, if the Mayor and two
Councilmembers are up for reelection in 2020, will it be the districts the two incumbents
are in that get to vote? What if there is another district with no Councilmembers currently
living there? If the Mayor runs for re-election and he lives in a district that has no
Councilmember, is that district Councilmember seat up for election as well?
RESPONSE: (See response to No. 8.)
2
updated: December 19, 2017
5. Under what circumstances would a vote of the people be required when setting up
districts and at-large versus rotating Mayor?
RESPONSE:
Article IV, Section 2 of the Charter provides that “all elections to fill public offices and
elections on measures shall be made, held and conducted in the manner provided by
law.” Thus, Staff has concluded that under this provision, a vote of the people is not
required to change to district-based elections for the four Councilmember seats. Staff
has not determined whether converting the office of Mayor to a fifth district-based seat
would require a vote.
6. How does the timing of the City’s decision play into likely outcomes?
RESPONSE: If the City transitions to district-based elections within the timeline
established by the CVRA, the City will be liable for the attorney’s fees of the potential
plaintiffs, capped at $30,000. If the City chooses not to make the transition within that
timeline but does so after being sued, it is possible that the City will be liable for
substantially higher litigation costs and attorneys’ fees of the plaintiffs, and the expense
of the City’s own defense attorneys will also likely be higher. The amounts are unknown
but will increase the longer the action is litigated prior to settlement.
Sued in 2008, Madera Unified School District ended up paying plaintiffs’ counsel over
$100,000 for six weeks of uncontested litigation, and that was after a substantial
reduction of the fees that were requested (which exceed $1 million).
An additional consideration is that the Council may have less control over the districting
process if a court is involved.
7. If the City is sued, could the City appeal to the judge to give us a five year period to
come into compliance and demonstrate increased diversity on the Council?
RESPONSE: Once a lawsuit is filed under the CVRA, we do not believe there is any
authority for a judge to stay the case for five years; even if a judge is willing to approve a
five-year transition period, it seems unlikely that this would be a basis for refusing to
award the plaintiffs their attorney’s fees and costs.
8. Do we need to collapse the 2020 and 2022 elections? How does it work when only three
of the 5 positions are up in 2020?
RESPONSE:
No. The seats just rotate in. Each current member of the Council serves out the rest of
the term to which he or she was elected, and then must run for re-election in the
districts. It potentially gets a little more complicated if two councilmembers are paired in
a single district, but everybody still serves out his or her full current term.
3
updated: December 19, 2017
9. Could this process force the City to do a 2018 election under any scenario?
RESPONSE:
Staff is not aware of any circumstance that would require the City to hold an election for
City Council in 2018.
10. Are the districts set by population or registered voters? If population, wouldn’t that create
significant disparity of registered voters over the districts?
RESPONSE:
Districts are set by total population. It can create a significant disparity, but that is the
basis that has been approved by the courts, including—most recently—the Supreme
Court in Evenwel v. Abbott. The chief exception is that prisoners can be excluded from
the population base.
11. The City of Encinitas spent $150K on the attorneys and $45K on the demographer and
$30K to reimburse plaintiff. Should we expect similar costs? Any others?
RESPONSE:
The City’s outside counsel advises that those figures appear to be realistic for the
demographer and the plaintiff. Fees for the City’s attorneys would likely be less, since
minimal travel time would be required.
12. Will attorney Shenkman be required to prove that he spent $30K before the City is
required to reimburse him?
RESPONSE:
Mr. Shenkman must provide documentation to back up the demand, but in past cases
the documentation has not been very specific and the fees have been negotiated.
The questions below were asked by the public at the City Council’s public meetings:
13. The cost of running for office disadvantages certain members, in particular Latino
members, of the community. Will the cost of running for office in either a district or
citywide election be one of the considerations in court and is that something the City will
also consider?
RESPONSE:
This is a matter for further public input and discussion by the City Council.
4
updated: December 19, 2017
14. What sets San Rafael apart from the rest of the County with regard to an at large mayor
as opposed to a rotating mayor? What benefit to the City transition to 5 districts and
rotating mayor vs current to 4 districts and at large mayor?
RESPONSE:
The Mayor’s office in San Rafael is elected pursuant to Article VI, Section 2 of the City’s
Charter, which was approved by the voters in 1912. Other cities in Marin County
governed by general state law, rather than by a charter city; however, general law cities
may also put a measure before their voters to have a separately elected mayor.
Generally speaking, the larger the city, the more likely it is that the city will have a
separately elected mayor, although there is no formal size requirement.
15. Does the City have a choice between 4 or 5 districts? What input can community give
regarding 5 districts? What input can we make to ensure City investigates 5 districts
thoroughly, as opposed to 4 districts?
RESPONSE:
See response to No. 5.
16. Can the City delay creating district voting until the census and can that decision be
negotiated? What would the cost be to delay? Has it been done in other jurisdictions?
How would the Council handle delaying implementing districts and any related cost?
What is the optics of waiting until the 2020 census to create districts? What is the
community opinion? And are there examples of other communities that have done
similar?
RESPONSE:
The City’s outside counsel advises that the City has the option to delay implementing
district-based elections until after the 2020 Census, and a number of jurisdictions took
this approach preceding the last Census (in 2010). However, litigation under the CVRA
has become substantially more active since that time, and this approach would not
necessarily avoid litigation. In the course of litigation, a judge might deem this to be a
reasonable course of action for the City rather than having to redistrict for two
successive elections. There is case law under the federal Voting Rights Act recognizing
that redrawing districts for two successive elections would be confusing and disruptive.
17. What is the real candidate’s cost to run a citywide election vs. a district wide election?
Can we project cost to run for a contested district seat?
RESPONSE:
The costs vary based upon the candidate’s approach. There are no City-mandated costs
under either system.
5
updated: December 19, 2017
18. Is there data that can evaluate the pluses and minuses of a less homogenous council?
For example, data that would show if you have regional or district elections do you have
a much more contentious council advocating for its own district rather than the entire
city?
RESPONSE:
City staff is not aware of any quantitative data that addresses this, though there is
qualitative scholarship and case law recognizing the possibility that districts could lead to
more concern for one’s district at the expense of a “big-picture” view. However, the
extent to which this is true varies by jurisdiction.
19. Can information be translated into Spanish from meetings?
RESPONSE:
Yes, the City is arranging for Spanish translations of written agenda materials on this
matter, and for the presence of a Spanish-speaking translator at the public meetings.
20. Can you provide a summary of pros and cons from the Palmdale decision to go to trial?
Can we apply those to our community?
RESPONSE:
CVRA cases are highly fact- and jurisdiction-specific, so applying the result in one
jurisdiction to another is very difficult. San Rafael has far different demographics and
electoral history, and there were a number of unique aspects to the Palmdale case. This
is especially the case as there is no Court of Appeal decision (on the merits) in Palmdale
that would be binding on any lower court. Staff has developed a preliminary list of the
pros and cons of transitioning to district-based elections as requested by Mr. Shenkman,
which is included in the staff report for the December 4, 2017 City Council meeting. The
City of Palmdale incurred expenses of approximately $4.5 million litigating its case
through trial and appeals. The high cost of litigation is the primary lesson of the
Palmdale case and the argument for making the change during the statutorily allowed
time period.
21. How will the City involve the entire community in the public process and keep them
involved? How will the City ensure people affected, i.e. people of color, have opportunity
to speak and be involved beyond just public comment?
RESPONSE:
The City held a study session on November 20 and has plans for two more public
meetings on December 4 and December 18. Afterwards, if the City Council decides to
transition to district-based elections, the City Council will hold multiple meetings over a
period of not more than 90 days. The City will also be posting informational materials to
its website and on sound recordings, and will be partnering with community
organizations to get the word out.
6
updated: December 19, 2017
22. Will there be an effort in the County to engage the Latino community to become
citizens? i.e. People that may be eligible to become citizens.
RESPONSE:
Such engagement efforts are not a requirement of the CVRA, which only addresses the
change from at-large elections to district-based elections, nor of the decision to be made
by the City Council whether to transition to district-based elections during the time period
allowed by the law. It is a related matter, however, which may be the subject of further
discussion by the City Council either in connection with the current matter, or at a later
date.
23. If the City moves to districts for the 2020 election will the City then have to redraw the
districts in 2021 after the 2020 census data?
RESPONSE:
Yes.The City’s next election is 2020, and the lines would have to be reconsidered upon
the release of the Census the following year. See Elec. Code § 21620 which states
“After the initial establishment of the districts, the districts shall continue to be as nearly
equal in population as may be according to the latest federal decennial census or, if
authorized by the charter of the city, according to the federal mid-decade census.”
ATTACHMENT 4
CONSIDERATIONS IN SWITCHING TO DISTRICT-BASED ELECTIONS
(Revised 12/19/17)
1. Avoidance of litigation expenses likely to
range from hundreds of thousands of
dollars to over a million dollars, because of
liability for payment of prevailing plaintiffs’
attorney’s fees, expert witness fees, and
other costs.
2. Enhancement of impact of minority votes
on election results, making accurate
representation of the community more
likely.
3. Decrease in cost of individual election
campaigns, thus making it somewhat more
likely that minority and non-minority
candidates will choose to run for City
Council. On resident commented that the
average cost for per candidate over three
election cycles from 2009-2013 was
$42,000, and estimated that the cost of a
campaign under a district-based system
would still be in excess of $20,000.
4. Increased minority participation in local
government is more likely.
5. Increased chance for election of minority
Councilmembers.
6. Catering to their own district’s voters,
potential that City Councilmembers will
advocate/vote more for their own districts
rather than acting for the good of the City
as a whole.
7. If Office of Mayor remains separately
elected, potential for enhanced role of
Mayor who can be the swing vote on
issues in any district.
8. If City litigates and loses, districts will be
established by the judge, with input from
plaintiffs and the City, rather than by the
City, possibly resulting in less optimal
districts.
9. Possible negative impact on minority
interests if nonminority candidate prevails
in election in district with the most minority
voters.
SHENKMAN &: HUGHES
.. -~.... ..........., c .. __
VIA CERTIFfEll MA IL
No\~mbt;r 10, 2017
!:stiler Il eime. O ly Clerk
Cny of San Rafael
I ~OO hft .. A,c .. Rln 209
San Rafael . CA 9-1901
U<IOS W 'Ihl R"",t
M.hbu . c .hr"", .. 902 65
f)tOI~$7 -09 1O
l .......... a Wglgypb ... 1g C!III
\\ me 011 behalf of our client. Soulhwl:5l Voter Regislr.llIon Educauon ProJCCI .
The Cily of San Rafael ("San Ihf.,en re lics upon all aI-large elCClioll sySlem for
electing candIdates to its City Council. MorCQver. vOllng wlthm San Rafael is
rnetnlly pola ri1.cd. resultmg in minority vOte dilution. Hnd lherefore San Rarael's
at-large elechons ... iolatc the California Voting Rights Act of2001 ("CVRA ").
The CVRA dlsfaH)f'S lhe usc or so-called "aI-large" mung an dection melhod
that pemliu ... ot.::rs of an cntlfe Jurtsdiclion to .::lcct candidates to cach open scat .
See 1:/!IIcml!y S(lIwloe;: ". Oil' of Modc.~10 (2006) 145 Cl II.App .4 '" MO. 661
("&lIId,,~;:"). For example. If the U.S. Congress were elcctedthrough a nalionwide
Dt-Iarge elcetlon , ralher than lhrough IYP,cal slnglc-member districts. c;u::h voter
could cast up to 435 vOles and vote for any candidate in thc counny. nO{ Just the
candidates III the votcr's district. and the 435 candidate~ rccel ... ing the most
nationwide votes would be cl("'eted. At-large election s thus allow a bare majority of
voters 10 control e,,,,,)' scat . not Just thc $Cats in a p.lnieular distnet o r a
proponionalmajonly of scalS.
Voting fights advocatCJ; have ta rg.::ted "ol -Iorgc" elect ion schem~'S for decades.
because Ihey often rc~uh in ..... ote dll u tioll:' o r Ihe IInpalnncnt or minority groups'
ability to elecl their preferred eandidatCJ; or mnuence thc oulcome or electIons.
which octUTS when Ihe clcelOmlc VOles m a m:ially polan1.cd manner. Sw
TllOnlhur'g ,. GUI!:/!'.'. 418 U.S . 30. 46 (1986) ("Ging/ex") Thc U.S . Supr.::me
Coun "has long recognized Ih01 mu h i-mcmber districts and at-brge vOl ing
schemes may opemte 10 mininme o r cancel oU11he voting strength" of minorities .
/J III 41; St'e IIls Q it!. at 411 , rn . 14 (at-Iartle eil-clions may also cause el~'CK>d
Nov~mbcr 10.2017
I'age 2 of 4
offic ials 10 "ignore [minonl),] inh:reSis WilhOlli fear of pohllc al cOllscqucnCf..'S").
citing Hogers I'. Lodge. 45K U.S. 613. 623 (198 2); While ". Ht'gis/t'r. 412 U.S. 755.
769 (1973). "(T lhe majority , by vinuc of it;; nu merical superiority. will regularly
defeat the chOIces of mU"I(lnt)' \·OIel'S ." GlIIgle.t. at 47 ..... 'hen raCIally polan7.oo
voti ng occurs. dlv ltllng Ihc polltie3 1 unn inlo slIIgle-mcmbe r diS1riets. or somc
other upprop ri alc remedy . may faCI lit ate a mmor lly group's ab ility to elect us
preferred rcprcscntatwes. R"8/>r·s. at 616.
Secllon 2 o f Ihe fedcral VOllllg Rights Act r'FVRA "). 42 U.S.c. ~ 1973. win ch
Congress enac ted m 1%5 and amc nd ... -d in 1982, target s. among other things.
at-large election M:hemcs. Gingh"s at 37; S('(! also Boyd & Markman. The 198]
Amf!mlm/!"'~' to Ille Voli"8 Rlghls .'1("1 . A l.egIS/O/II"e Hi:HUfY (1983) 40 Wash . &
Lec I. Rev. 1347 , 1402 . Although cnforccmcm of the FVRA was successful In
many states. Cahfornla was an e)leep tIOll . By enacting the C VRA. "rtlhe
LegIslature mtended to e~pand protect101\S agamst vUle dlluuon o\"er Ihose
pro vided by the federal VOll ng RIg hts Ac t of 1965:' Jmll'l!gm ". elly o[Pall/llll11e
(2014) 226 Cal. App. 4'" 7K I . ROR. Thus. while Ihe CVRA IS similar to the FVRA
in scveral rcs~ts. il IS also different In sc"emJ key respects. as lhe Legislature
sought 10 remedy whallt conSIdered "reslriell\'e mlerpretallons given 10 the federal
ae1.·· Assem. Com. on Judiciary, Analysis of Sen. Bill No . 976 (2001-2002 Reg .
Scsli.) as amended Apr. 9. 2002. p. 2.
The Califo rnI a Legislature dispensed wilh the requirement in Gingles Ihm a
1Illl1000IIy group dcmonstmle Ihal it IS su nkiently largl' and gcogrnphie~lly oomp.le t
to eQlISllIute a "maJonty -mmo rit), dlstncl." Sllllche:. at 669. Ratocr. the CVRA
requires on l)' Ihal a plaintiff sho" Ihe e~iSlenee of r~eia!ly polari1.l-d "oting 10
es tablish that an at-large melhod of election violates Ihe CV RA . not the
desirab li lly of any particular remedy. See Cal . Eke. Cooe § 14028 r-A \"iolollon
of See ll on 140 27 i.l· nlubli!ih ed if it IS shown that racially polari..(ed ,·oting occurs
..... ) (emp ha sis add ed): al)Q SL'e Asscm. COIll. on Judiciary, Analy sis of Sen. Bill
No. 976 (2001 2002 Reg . Scss.) as amended Apr. 9. 2002. p. 3 ("·Thus. Ih ls bill
puIS the \'Ollog ngllt;; hol"SC (the dlscnmloallon issue) back where it senS ibly
belongs m front of the can (what type of rem edy IS ap propnate ollce raCll llly
[lul;ln7.ed \"Olmg has been shown)."")
To establish I "vIOlation of Ihc CV RA. a plamhff must geneni lly s how that
"ntcially polan/cd voting occurs in elections for members of Ihe governing body
of till' polltleal subd iv iS ion or 111 elecllons ,"corporallng other elcc torJI e hoiee~ by
Ih e voters of the polilieal subdi\'isloo." Eke. Code § 14028(a). The CVRA
specifics the cI~"CIIOnS that arc most prob;\tl\'e: "elections in which III least one
NO\'clnoc"" 10.2017
P:lgc J of4
candidatc is a mcmber of a protec led clus or clectl ons involving ballot measures,
or olher electoml cimices that ll!Tect the nghts :Ind pnvileges of mcmbcni of 11
protected c1HSS." Elec. Cooe § 14028(a). The CVRA abo mak es clcar thai
"[e]leetions conducted prior to the filing of an action ... arc (lIore probativc to
establish the eXis te nce of racl3lly pol3med vOll ng than ek~\lons conducted a fter
Ihe riling of the acllon ." /d.
Factors OIhe r than "rae13l1y polam:ed \·otmg'· tha t arc reqUired to makc out a claim
undcr the FVRA under the "totailly of the circumstances" test "are p roba\lvc.
but not neccssal)' factors to eSlabhsh ~ viola tion of' the CVI<A . lice. Code §
14028(e ). These "other factors" include "the h istory of discrill1mation, the usc of
electoral devices or o thcr \"oting prn c ti cc~ or procedures Ihnt may cnhance the
dilut;\"e effects of m-!;lf ge ek~lIons. denial of access 10 those processes
delermmmg which groups of candidatcs \\ ,II rccCi\e finan c ial or othcr suppon in a
gl\'cn clCClion. the ex tent to which mcmbers of a p ro tected clus bear the e!Tects of
past dlscnmmallon m arcas such as edllCa\lOn ... :mploymcnt. and health. which
hinder theIr ablhty to panl Clpate c!Teeuvcly ill thc political proccss. and the use of
oven o r subtle racilli appeals in political cam pai gns:' Id
San Rafa el's llt -!;Irge systcm dilutes the ability of Lit inos (a "protected class") to
elect c~ndid:lll'S ofthcir c hoice or o therwise Influence the outc01l1e of San Rafael"s
counc il ek'Ctlons.
The enure eh.'Cuon hlstol)' of San Rafael O\'cr §c\'eral decades IS Illustrau\e: nO!. a
slnglc l..allno candld:lle compccc d in any \lrthe eounell COntests . Oppooent~ off31r.
dl~tnct~bascd elections may aCL ribuce the lac k of Latinos v)'mg for City Council
POSl t iOI \S to a lack of Latino mte res t in local gove rnment. On Ihc C011lral)'. the
alarming absence of Latino candidaccs scekin1:\ elcclion to the San Rafael Cit)"
Council reveals vote diluti on . See Wes/Wego Cili:enY jor Heller GOl"I'rIlttl el1l ".
Ctr)" ojWCSI""/!go. 1172 ~'. 2d 1201. 1208-1209. n. 9 (5 '" Ci r. 1989)
Aeeonltng to recent data, Latmos comp rise approximately 3O-~ of the population
of San Rarael. 1I 0we\(:r. there arc currently no latinO reprcse11l311\'es on th e San
Rafa el City Coullcl l Th is lack of La tmo represcntation IS perpctUllted by the C ,ly
of San Rafael -_ ie appeal"li that only IIIII' of the Cily's Xl appointed officials is
Latino. and city coullcil candidates ollen gct their start In municlp.11 1:\ovtm11lCI1I
through such appomlcd positions. Not only is th e eOntmSI bety,cen thc significant
l..atlnO proponlon of the clt.'ClOl1Ite and tht total absenec ofLalillos to be clected to
th e City Counc,1 outward ly dislurbll1g. 11 's also fundamentally hoslilc towards
UlJno poame'pmlOlI .
No'·cmlx:r 10.2017
I'ug.: 4 or4
The overwhelming maJonty or San Rafael's Latinos rcslde m the Canal Area.
which is locmcd in lhe cCnlra l p;m of the clly. As of 2{)13. a sub$13ll1i pl 80'}. o f
rcside111S in the Can a l Area well: La lillO . Hou'lng in the Callal Area has nOl
mell:ased. no r has II bco;ome any less expcnSI\e limn OIher areas III San Rafael:
howel"er. in the Canal All:a. O\·eIl:TOwd mg goes largely Ignl»"Cd and unregulated.
and so low·inoome. l.ati l1 o fanllhes a rc all but force d to live there. T he Can~1
Area has bco;n beel1 hlTgely neglected and. a s a resul t. is !"linked the lowest In
eommumty well-being m Mann County (Muml COlIII/." Hllmull f);: .. cll)pmelll
Heporf 1011). The Cuy Council is simply not reneet,..e orlhe poople of the Canal
Area. the m:IJority of wh om work low-in come. service-ind ustry job~ in ord er to
MJppon their f.l mi lies and afford o\'ercrowd~-d ho mes ill the poorest pan of San
Rafael I Cnnal Area n.:si&nts and the Latino community thaI largely resIdes there
would greatly benefit from a dlstnct-based e leellon. whieh would allow them t()
ciCCI ellll d uhll es that uuder.>land Ihe Issues faemg thei r neighbor hood.
As you may be awall:. m 20 12."e sued the Clly o f l'almd.11c for vlo1atll1g lhe
CVRA. After an cig.ltHiay trial. "e prevailed. After spcndmg milhons of dollars.
a d lstnet-based reme d y WIIS ulu mately imposcd lI pon the ralmda le cny counCil,
wit h d istricts Ih;11 c o mbi ne 311 mcumbcnts mJ() onc of Ihe fo u r distrlel.'i.
GI'·c n the hlston cal lad: of Launo represcnlatlon on the eny council In Ihe contC"1
of racially polari zed elections. ",e u rge Sn n Kaf.le1 to vo lli nt a rily eh3nge its
at-large syslem o f elect ing CO Il IlCII mcmbers. O therwlsc. 0 11 behalf of rcsidents
Within the Junsdiet ioll. we will be forced 10 seek Judicial rehef. I'lcase advise us
no later than December 31. 2017 as 10 "'hether you "ould like to diSC USS 3
volul1131")' chan ge to your CUrTe n t ai-l arge system .
We loolc forw ard to your response
Very lruly yours.
~
K~'·1n I. Shenkman
, C"""",lmon Aotlrcw M<Cull""'" 'pp"'onl ly rc,ode. ,n ".OJ San R.f..,l .• he <10"= """''''' uflhe C.n.1
An: •. 00-.·0'·"', ~ Son IlIf .. 1 e<>mp<i ... 0 .. OI'''U . uDI"r~' pun''''' "rlbe C .... I Arc ... "b"h .. oul • ...-.Jly
ond _ .. lIy dlffCfnK from Ibe mI "flbcC .... 1 Arc •.
Sender Name Description Submitted
The composition of the City Council should resemble the demographics of the City's registered voters. If District elections of
Council members, including the mayor, would achieve that end, then I support District elections. If the mayor's fifth seat on
Alan Zahradnik the Council is needed to create a fifth District to help achieve demographic and geographical balance of the Council, then I 2017-12-0101 :14:08 UTC
support changing the City Charter to have the Mayor's position on the Council rotated between the 5 elected Council
members.
Despite many efforts, particularly councilmember Colin's initiative, SR has not generated Latino or minority representation.
The question is whether district elections would help. I offer the following comments:
1) I do not like the legal pressure to act quickly. I am prepared to have the city assume the legal cost.
Jerry Belletto 2) Given the demographics, Dist. elections could make the situation worse. Minorities are not all in the canal but distributed 2017-12-0517:35 :00 UTC in other areas as well . Dist. elections would fragment their power, not consolidate it.
3) Other options exist and should be explored first, such as ranked voting or spending caps for elections.
We all want to solve the problem and we should do it thoughtfully so we find a real solution.
I live in San Rafael. I am opposed to district election of the City Council members and the elimination of the mayor's position.
Shanna Cronan The city of San Rafael is too small for district elections. It will create greater division on the Council and incredibly slow down 2017-12-1004:46:13 UTC
governmental processes. District elections have caused great damage to the City of San Francisco. It would be worth while to
pay for the lawsuit rather than the long and short term costs of district elections.
Dennis Wulkan District voting is polarizing and unnecessary in a small town like San Rafael. It disenfranchises the average person. No changes 2017-12-1503:29:27 UTC til after the 2020 census.
James Sterling I support transitioning for the 2022 general election after using the results from the 2020 census to draw districts, 2017-12-20 22:48:20 UTC
District elections make sense for San Rafael, particularly given the diversity of its neighborhoods: Central San Rafael is very
Lorenzo different from Terra Linda which is very different from the Canal or Peacock Gap. They all have unique issues . The hope is 2017-12-2022 :49 :43 UTC Ersland that districts would be drawn to reflect the diversity without "gerrymandering." At the same time, I like that the mayor is
elected by the entire city as the mayor represents the entire city.
If the City, after consultation with legal counsel, concludes it's compelled to adopt district elections, that's acceptable. If that
Andrew Downs occurs, the separate at large Mayor's seat should be eliminated with the City adopting the same rotating council-elected 2017-12-2022:53:47 UTC
Mayor position that general law cities use. If that requires a charter amendment, then with a 2020/2022 roll out of district
elections, there should be time to get the charter amendment on the 2018 ballot.
Hello! I think it's very important that we switch to district elections ASAP and not wait until 2022. We have a very large city
and I think it's important for all communities in San Rafael to be represented on city council. In fact, I cannot believe it's taken
us so long to even consider the change. Come on San Rafaelll
Mari Jones 2017-12-2022:54:55 UTC
Less important to me is that I think it would be best if we have an elected Mayor. I like the idea of a rotating seat filled by
council members, however we have a pretty big city and I think we have to have a dedicated Mayor who answers to all of us.
Thank you!
As a 30+ year resident, based on all the information I have received and independently researched and reviewed, moving to
Larry Minikes district elections in 2022 after the 2020 census is best for the city and residents of San Rafael from both an economic and 2017-12-2022:58:51 UTC
representative government standpOint.
Hello,
I believe the city of San Rafael should immediately move to District based voting in future elections. Fair representation is
Grahame Lesh
more important now than ever, and having a system where any 50%+1 of the population can control 100% of the city council 2017-12-2023 :15 :32 UTC seems like as much of a violation as the attorneys challenging it say it is.
Thanks,
-Grahame
This whole thing stinks. The City of San Rafael has much better things to do with our money than fund a lawyer from Malibu.
Paula While I am a staunch supporter of voting rights, it appears from a Google search that the game this attorney is playing isn't 2017-12-2023:18:47 UTC Doubleday resulting is more diverse representation on the cities he has sued.
However, I think SR should cut our losses and not risk more attorney fees, and move to District Elections right away.
I think this is a waste of time and money. San Rafael is a liberal City and I believe all citizens have a voice and are equally &
Sandy Sverdloff fairly represented. We have more important issues to deal with ... homelessness, traffic, SMART expansion, senior services, just 2017-12-2023:23 :36 UTC
to name a few.
Stella 2017-12-2023 :43 :02 UTC
Schoonover District elections are long-overdue, along with the abandonment of the elected mayor position. Democracy now!
Sender Name Description Submitted
I support Option 1 which would move us towards District elections in 2020. I see no substantial reason to wait for new
Alan Zahradnik demographic data from the 2020 census as proposed in Option 2 that would justify delay to 2022 and risk litigation. I also 2017-12-2100:05:51 UTC reject Option 3 which would likely result in costly litigation to defend the City from a progressive action that would benefit the
City and its voting public by helping assure a representative City Council.
Ricky Yee Transition to district elections after 2020 census 2017-12-2100:21:03 UTC
Warren 2017-12-2100:36:24 UTC
Carreiro Yes we need th them if for no other reason that to have fresh leadership at the city.
Robert Leave the current process in place and do not set up districts. The attorney is trying to blackmail the city into a district 2017-12-2103:21:44 UTC MacPherson configuration which would not be good for government.
There is already census data AND you should have a fairly good idea of what is going on. Additionally, 3 council people plus
Anne-Marie the mayor and vice-mayor to rep 58,000 people? Finland has representation. For example, Kotka (53,730) is a little smaller 2017-12-2105:46:48 UTC
Cowsill than San Rafael: there are 51 elected people on it's City Council! The City Council is a public service and I would like to think if
we had more representation, it would be better for all citizens, despite race or income. Also, no more having to sit on every
committee, from homelessness to lack of housing to whatever the rich, entitled people want.
I do not currently support this concept for small townS/cities under population of 100,000. It is racially and culturally divisive.
Dennis Wulkan If required, delay till after 2020 census and use lots of lead time and community input to plan for implementation of this 2017-12-2117:30:29 UTC
change. Don't roll over just because of a nasty lawsuit threat.
If it's difficult for elected representation as well as their counsel to understand the issues and the facts of the situation in San
Rafael regarding at-large compared to district elections, it's going to be at least the same for "ordinary" citizens.
I watched the presentation by Chris Skinnell (?) of Neilsen Mercksamer, the election law specialty attorney, which was quite
good. I'm left with more questions than answers: Who brought the lawsuit and why? Who is this "Mr. Kevin Schenckman?"
Is this an actual lawsuit against the city? Is this a "watchdog" lawsuit? Is he or are his clients suing other similarly-sized cities
over the same subject? Who is the plaintiff? Who benefits if San Rafael is sued over how the city conducts it's· elections?
What, if any, political axe does the plaintiff have to grind? Is there a clearly delineated difference in the way that minority
group(s) vote here compared to "everyone else," whatever that means, in San Rafael? Does this threat of lawsuit have to do
with the Trump victory? Is the at-large voting system a problem in San Rafael? Is San Rafael in fact in violation of the Federal
Voting Rights Act (minority group a majority in a single-member district, minority group politically cohesive, and "white
Dennie majority" votes that, as a bloc, would be enough to outvote minorities' preferred candidates)? What happens if/when there
Mehocich are residency requirements? Wouldn't this be more restrictive? Am I actually stupid for asking these basic questions? I feel 2017-12-2119:20:18 UTC
like I'm waaaay behind some kind of curve here. Coming up with districts sounds like a pretty complex project with potential
for abuse, since you can have a judge shove a "gawdawful district map" down your throat, as we heard. This seems like a
pretty complex subject. Am I crazy, or is this in fact really pretty simple-??? (cuz I don't think it's simple) As far as facts go we
hear that "Latino citizen voting age population is about 11 per cent of the total (voting population)," about 6.5% of the
registered voters in the 2014 elections had Spanish surnames and were about 4.5% of the actual voter turnout.
We need more coverage of this topic in the local dailies and weekly publications using FACTS, not knee-jerk "whatever-isms."
Thank you I
Sincerely,
Dennie Mehocich
I am in favor of district elections and maintaining the election of the mayor at large. San Rafael has diverse neighborhoods so
Suzanne four districts would be my preference. 2017-12-2119:47:06 UTC
Lapides Beittel I am a longtime resident and feel that San Rafael currently has good, steady leadership but the future would probably be
better with more diverse representation.
I absolutely support district elections. I do not understand why the city would not move in this direction. I'm sorry the city
Melissa
had to be sued in order to make this change, but it is the right thing to do. Of course it will increase diversity -we must learn
from the lesson of Harvey Milk. Think of the candidates who would like to run but are discouraged because of the exorbitant 2017-12-2121:31:02 UTC
Rosenstein cost. I see no actual downsides to this change and think a progressive city that wants to actually represent its citizens must
proactively make this change as soon as possible.
Patricia Miller Please retain at-large voting. We are more alike than different. 2017-12-2122:10:41 UTC
Linda Ward Keep at large elections. San Rafael is too small for District elections. 2017-12-2123:31:15 UTC
I have been a corporate gypsy and have lived in 11 jurisdictions. The most effective have been those that have at large
Fred Andrew elections. The least effective have been precinct or ward elections. Please fight the lawsuit and continue with the current
Hajduk voti ng system. 2017-12-2206:36:58 UTC
Fred A. Hajduk
Alina
Shall be waited until 2020 2017-12-2218:58:14 UTC
Rprm"tiP7
Sender Name Description Submitted
I think it's terrible that an attorney from out of the area is causing grief to San Rafael. Given the low number of registered
Hispanic voters whether in the Canal or the City at large, trying to carve a small city into artificial districts is a waste of time
and money. There are more white voters in what would likely be the Canal district anyway so this would likely not support the
assumed goal of ethnic diversity on the Council. Given that the City has been actively seeking more diverse candidates and
Elaine R. works closely with the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, this attorney is just fishing for fees. Given also that he was 2017-12-2818:19 :56 UTC
contacted/contracted by a known local disgruntled troublemaker, his suit has little or no merit and hopefully could be thrown
out as frivolous. One might better ask why other ethnic groups aren't being targeted for indusion : Asian, Pacific Islander,
Indian, African ..... the list could go on and on.
--Elaine R. from Santa Venetia
I am in favor of district elections for several reasons. A local representative would be more visible to the residents of the
district -in the store, at the movies, at church, walking the area. The local representative would be more available to
Dave Bonfilio understand concerns especially because the rep would be experiencing the same concerns. Area residents would get a sense 2018-01-0923 :25:46 UTC
of being heard .
I have thought about a city wide mayor position and, for San Rafael, that probably makes sense. District elections would
balance the power in one office against the needs of the various neighborhoods.
THE CITY WITH A MISSION
Item nurn. 6.a
16 de enero de 2018
REPORTE PARA LA AGENDA DEL CONCEJO MUNICIPAL DE SAN RAFAEL
Preparado por: Lisa Goldfien
Abogada Municipal ~sistente
Aprobado por el Adrninistrador de la Ciudad
TEIVIA:
ASUNTO:
ELECCIONES BASADAS EN DISTRITOS
CONSIDERACION DE UNA RESOLUCION DE INTENCION DE
HACER LA TRANSICION DE ELECCIONES GENERALES A
ELECCIONES DEL CONCEJO MUNICIPAL BASADAS EN
DISTRITOS
RECOMENDACION:
Recibir comentarios del publico, deliberar, y votar si aprobar 0 no una resoluci6n
proclamando la intenci6n de hacer la transici6n de un metodo de elecciones generales
para elegir al concejo municipal a uno basado en distritos.
ANTECEDENTES:
En 2002, la Legislatura promulg6 la Ley de Derechos Electorales de California (CVRA
por sus siglas en ingles -C6digo Electoral §§ 14025 -14032), la cual prohfbe a las
agencias publicas de California imponer 0 aplicar una elecci6n al metodo general"que
afecte la capacidad de una clase protegida de elegir candidatos de su elecci6n 0 su
capacidad para influenciar el resultado de una elecci6n." (C6digo Electoral §14027)
Una clase protegida es definida por la CVRA como "una clase de votantes que son
miembros de un grupo minoritario de raza, color 0 idioma, como definido en la Ley
Federal de Derechos Electorales de 1965.
La CVRA define un metodo general de elecciones que incluye el metodo de elecciones
utilizado por la ciudad de San Rafael, en el cual los votantes de toda la ciudad eligen a
todos los miembros del concejo municipal. En una demanda presentada en virtud de la
CVRA, un demandante que establece una historia de "votaci6n racial mente polarizada"
bajo un sistema de elecci6n en general puede requerir que una ciudad cambie a un
sistema de elecci6n basado en distritos.
Desde el 2015, el grupo de la ciudad Latino Civic Leadership Initiative ha estado
trabajando para aumentar la representaci6n de minorfas en las juntas, comisiones y
eventualmente el concejo municipal; y la ciudad se ha comprometido a trabajar en
colaboraci6n con todos sus residentes para responder a cualquier preocupaci6n
relacionada con asuntos de votaci6n 0 representaci6n. A pesar de este trabajo, el 20 de
2
noviembre de 201 ciudad recibi6 una carta del abogado Malibu, Kevin
Shenkman, instando a la ciudad a cambiar su sistema de votaci6n en general por un
sistema de votaci6n en distritos, afirmando que lIel sistema votaci6n en
general de San diluye la capacidad de los latinos (una protegida ') -para
elegir candidatos su elecci6n 0 de otra manera influenciar resultado de las
elecciones del concejo San Rafael. (vea archivo adjunto 5)
De acuerdo con el Electoral de California, el recibo de comienza un
plazo de 45 dras para ciudad .. apruebe una resoluci6n delineando su intenci6n
de hacer una transici6n generales a elecciones en distritos,
pasos especfficos emprendera para facilitar esa transici6n, y un estimado
para hacerlo". (C6digo § 10010) Un posible demand ante no ..., ...... , .... '"
una demanda bajo la CVRA que haya transcurrido perfodo
Ademas, si la ciudad resoluci6n, tendra 90 dras aOIClcma
una ordenanza basadas en
presente una
EI concejo municipal una sesi6n de estudio el 20 de noviembre 201 en
cuya reuni6n el asesor extemo de la ciudad, Christopher Skinnell, brind6 una
sesi6n informativa federales y estatales del derecho voto en
California, as! como una descripci6n general de los datos demograficos
de la ciudad para para futuras conversaciones tema.
EI concejo municipal tambian celebr6 una audiencia en su reuni6n del 4 diciembre,
en la cual recibi6 comentarios publicos con respecto a la demanda del Shenkman
de que San Rafael transici6n a elecciones basadas en distritos. 6
diciembre de 2017, abogado la ciudad de San Rafael, escribio una al Sr.
Shenkman solicitando un del perfodo de 45 dras contenido en la se(~Clcm
10010 del c6digo electoral que la ciudad haga una decision va a cambiar a
elecciones por distritos por un periodo adicional de 90 dras, hasta 19 marzo de
2018. EI abogado municipal solicito cualquier informacion y
desarrollados por el en apoyo de su posicion
generales de Rafael son desventajosas para la poblacion latina de la
ciudad.
EI concejo municipal tenia la intencion de tomar accion sobre la demanda
Shenkman en reunion del 18 de diciembre. Sin embargo, en esa reunion,
el abogado de la ciudad Rob informo que, en respuesta a la solicitud la
ciudad de un aplazo de Sr. Shenkman acord6 permitirle a la ciudad
tiempo para deliberar, y perfodo por 45 dras para permitirle al tomar
acci6n en su reunion programada para el 16 de enero de 2018. EI Shenkman se
nego a proporcionar datos 0 que respaldaran sus afirmaciones en la
carta del 20 de noviembre. Con en el informe del fiscal de la ciudad, como
comentarios publicos en apoyo del tiempo adicional para decidir se convertira a las
elecciones por distritos, voto para posponer cualquier decision con reS:Decto
a las elecciones por distritos el 16 de enero de 2018.
3
ANAuSIS:
EI ayuntamiento de San Rafael tiene tres opciones en esta reunion, a saber: 1) adoptar
una resolucion que establezca la intencion de efectuar la transicion a elecciones
basadas en distritos para las elecciones municipales de 2020, dentro del perfodo de 90
dfas provisto en la seccion 10010 del Codigo Electoral; 2) adoptar una resolucion que
establezca la intencion del concejo a afectuar la transicion a elecciones basad as en
distritos para las elecciones municipales del 2022, luego de recibir los resultados de la
censo de los Estados Unidos 2020; 3) decidir en contra de la transicion a elecciones
basad as en distritos, y no adoptar una resolucion de dicha intencion. Cada opcion se
analiza a continuacion:
Opcion 1: Adoptar una resolucion que establezca la intencion de efectuar la
transicion a elecciones basadas en distritos para las elecciones municipales
de 2020, dentro del perlodo de 90 dfas provisto en la seccion 10010 del Codigo
Electoral (Adjunto 1).
Bajo esta opcion, si el concejo adopta una resolucion durante en esta reunion,
siguiendo en conformidad con el codigo electoral seccion 10010, se requiere que el
concejo realice 5 audiencias publicas dentro de 90 dfas, 0 antes del 16 de abrH de
2018, antes de adoptar una ordenanza que establezca el sistema de eleccion basado
en distritos.
Los requisitos para las reuniones estan establecidos por la ley:
a. Antes de desarrollar un mapa preliminar 0 mapas de los Ifmites propuestos de los
distritos, la ciudad debe celebrar al menos dos audiencias publicas durante un perfodo
de no mas de 30 dfas, en los cuales el publico es invitado a proporcionar comentarios
sobre la composicion de los distritos.
b. Despues de desarrollar todos los borradores de los mapas, la ciudad debe publicar y
poner a disposicion para su publicacion al menos un borrador del mapa de distritos y, si
los miembros del concejo municipal seran electos en sus distritos en diferentes
ocasiones para proveer terminos escalonados, entonces deslucir la secuencia potencial
de las elecciones. La ciudad tambien debe realizar al menos dos audiencias
adicionales durante un perfodo de no mas de 45 dfas, en que el publico esta invitado a
proporcionar informacion sobre el contenido del mapa 0 los mapas y la secuencia
propuesta de elecciones, si corresponde. La primera version de un mapa preliminar
sera publicado al menos siete dfas antes de que se considere en una audiencia. Si un
mapa preliminar se revisa despues de una audiencia, se publicara y se pondra a
disposicion del publico durante al menos siete dfas antes de ser adoptado.
EI archivo 1 adjunto a este informe es una resolucion de intencion de comenzar
inmediatamente la transicion a elecciones basadas en distritos, e incluye una un
calendario provisional para Ilevar a cabo las tareas necesarias. Como se nota en la
resolucion, la ciudad debera contratar a un demografo profesional para que ayude en la
preparacion de borradores de mapas de distritos, y el personal de la ciudad tam bien
solicitarfa al concejo que apruebe una enmienda al acuerdo de la ciudad con sus
abogados externos sobre este asunto, Christopher Skin nell y Marguerite Leoni, los
cuales son parte del bufete de Nielsen Merksamer.
4
AI seguir esta opcion la ciudad se protege ria de la presentacion de una demanda bajo
la CVRA. Por estatuto, el Sr. Shenkman tendrfa derecho al reembolso de sus
honorarios y gastos documentados, a no exceder $30,000; sin embargo, la ciudad se
ahorrarfa posiblemente cientos de miles de dolares en honorarios de abogados
requeridos para litigar una accion asociada con la CVRA.
Se debe notar que la resolucion adjunta tiene dos revisiones al borrador presentado en
la reunion del 18 de diciembre: primero, un miembro del publico senalo una referencia
en la resolucion propuesta a una transicion a elecciones por distritos para "el alcalde y
los conceJales", sugiriendo una intencion de eliminar el requisito de constitucion de un
alcalde elegido por separado. Debido a que la modificacion del estatuto para eliminar
este requisito requerirfa un voto del electorado, a menos que, y hasta que ocurra tal
eleccion, la ciudad no puede hacer la transicion a las elecciones de alcalde por distrito;
por 10 tanto, el personal ha eliminado la referencia a la oficina del alcalde en la
siguiente seccion de la resolucion:
CONSIDERANDO que aunque la carta del Sr. Shenkman no estaba
acompanada de evidencia que apoyara su reclamo de una violacion de la CVRA,
el concejo municipal encuentra que es en el mejor interes de la ciudad actuar
dentro del marco de tiempo provisto por la seccion 10010 del codigo electoral
para hacer la transicion de un sistema de elecciones en general a un sistema de
elecciones basad as en distritos para elegir el aloalde y concejales; y
En segundo lugar, el Anexo A del borrador de la resolucion, el calendario tentativo para
las acciones de transicion a las elecciones por distritos, se ha actualizado para reflejar
que el periodo de 90 dfas para actuar comenzara el 16 de enero de 2018, y se requiere
una accion final antes del 16 de abril de 2018.
Opcion 2: Adoptar una resolucion que establezca la intencion del concejo
de realizar la transicion a elecciones basadas en distritos para la eleccion
municipal general de 2022, despues de recibir los resultados del censo de
los Estados Unidos de 2020.
En la sesion de estudio del 20 de noviembre, Christopher Skinnell noto que una opcion
disponible para San Rafael es implementar una transicion a elecciones basadas en
distritos luego del proximo censo federal en 2020; sin embargo el advirtio que esta
accion por parte de la ciudad no garantizaria que se evitara un litigio.
EI Sr. Skinnell ha informado que hay varios casos decididos bajo la ley federal de
derechos electorales en los cuales los tribunales se negaron a conceder ayuda en un
desaflo a un sistema de votacion existente cuando el censo es inminente, ya que la
redistribucion de distritos se requiere despues de cad a censo. Como indico un tribunal,
tal "redistribucion extra-rapida inmediatamente antes de un censo programado
constituiria una interrupcion indebida del proceso electoral, la estabilidad y la
continuidad del sistema legislativo y serra altamente perjudicial, no solo para
ciudadanos de [el condado], pero al [con dado] mismo. " Maxwell v. Foster, 1999 U.S.
Dist. LEXIS 23447, *12 (W.D. La. 1999).
Dado que la proxima eleccion en San Rafael es en 2020, los limites de los distritos
tendrfan que ser reconsiderados una vez que los resultados del censo se hicieran
5
el ano siguiente. Por 10 tanto, es posible
a elecciones basadas en distritos
del censo de 2020, una demanda
un juicio. Aun as!, la ciudad incurriria en
iniciar la
disponibles los
podrfa ser
de abogados y los
COSitOS ...... , .......... ;<"' ..... '" con la defensa de la demand a hasta ese punto.
archivo 2 adjunto a este informe es una resoluci6n proclamaria la intencion a
comenzar la transicion a elecciones basadas en distritos recibir los resultados
del censo 2020. Note que la resoluci6n contiene una a la presentada en la
reunion 18 de diciembre, borrando la referencia a la oficina por las
razones expuestas anteriormente, en la siguiente la resolucion:
no
CONSIDERANDO que aunque la carta del Sr. Shenkman no
acompanada de evidencia que apoyara su reclamo de una violacion de la CVRA,
concejo municipal encuentra que es en el mejor ciudad el hacer
la transicion de un sistema de elecciones en general a un elecciones
oa::iaGlas en distritos para elegir el aloalde y y
Decidir en contra de la transici6n a elecciones balsac:ias en distritos, y
una resoluci6n de dicha intenci6n.
ultima opcion del concejo municipal es rechazar la
a elecciones basadas en distritos con la , .... 1'£" ..... ,.,.,., .....
cualquier demanda posterior basad a en
responsable solo por los honorarios
COSilOS de litigio, que aun podrian ascender a I"Ie::>nTf"I
exito, la ciudad tambien serfa responsable por
y de los abogados de los demandantes,
a muchos cientos de miles de dolares.
opcion, el ayuntamiento simplemente declinaria adoptar una
intencion.
ALCANCE COMUNITARIO:
ciudad se ha asociando con grupos comunitarios para comunicar informacion por
toda comunidad. EI sitio web www.cityofsanrafael.org/district~elections side creado
proporcionar informacion sobre el tema, un calendario y un
formulario en linea para comentarios del publico. Esta reunion a traves
la ciudad, noti'ficaciones por correo electronico,
administrador de la ciudad y a traves de las redes sociales. EI municipal
en una sesion de estudio el20 de noviembre y en su reunion
y el 18 de diciembre. Las organizaciones Alliance,
Welcome Center, Alcohol Justice, Youth for y United Marin se han
programar una reunion publica para 13 prop6sito de
proporcionar informacion y recibir aportes de los
ciudad, Christopher Skinnell tiene
un cambio a elecciones basad as en distritos se C>l"f'U'''t''\I''O al
6
momento. Sin embargo, ciertos tipos de costos se pueden anticipar para cada una de
las opciones:
Opcion 1: La decision de comenzar inmediatamente la transicion a elecciones basadas
en distritos resultaria en la ciudad tener que contratar con un demografo e incurrir en
costos adicionales durante el proceso de transicion por los servicios de un abogado
externo. Ademas, la ciudad serra responsable por el pago de hasta $30,000 a Kevin
Shenkman despues de la adopcion de la ordenanza que apruebe las elecciones
basadas en distritos.
Opcion 2: La decision de transicion a elecciones basadas en distritos despues del
censo 2020 aplazarfa los costos asociados con un demografo hasta ese momento. Sin
embargo, si y cuando se presente una demanda basada en la CVRA, la ciudad aun
incurrirfa en costos de asesorfa externa para defender la ciudad, y potencialmente por
el pago de los abogados y costos de los demandantes si la ciudad pierde la demanda.
Opcion 3: La decision de no hacer la transicion a elecciones basadas en distritos tiene
la mayor exposicion posible a los costos de litigio. En otros casos basados en la CVRA,
estos costos han estado comunmente en el rango alto de seis cifras, y fueron tanto
como $4.5 millones en la defensa sin exito de la demanda presentada a la ciudad de
Palmdale.
ACCION SUGERIDA:
EI personal recomienda que el ayuntamiento reciba comentarios publicos y tome accion
siguiendo una de las opciones aquf descritas.
ARCHIVOS ADJlINTOS:
1. Resolucion de intencion (Codigo Electoral 10010), con Anexo A-Cronologfa tentativa
2. Resolucion de intencion (retraso pendiente del Censo 2020)
3. Preguntas y respuestas
4. Consideraciones asociadas con el cambio a elecciones basadas en distritos
5. Carta del 10 de noviembre de 2017 de Kevin Shenkman
6. Correspondencia
ARCHIVO 1
RESOLUCION NO. ___ _
UNA RESOLUCION DEL CONCEJO MUNICIPAL CIUDAD SAN RAFAEL
DECLARANDO SU INTENCION DE ELECCIONES
GENERALES A ELECCIONES BASADAS EN PARA EL CONCEJO
MUNICIPAL CONFORME AL CODIGO DE ELECCIONES SECCION 10010 (E) (3) (A),
EFECTIVO PARA LA ELECCION MUNICIPAL GENERAL DE NOVIEMBRE 2020
VISTO QUE, la ciudad de San Rafael es una ciudad puebla debidamente
y existente, conforme a la constituci6n y las
CONSIDERANDO que el Articulo VI de la carta de la ciudad
elecci6n de cuatro concejales y un alcalde elegido por
generales; y
CONSIDERANDO que el Articulo IV de la carta de la ciudad
leC(:::IDrleS para ocupar cargos publicos se lIevaran a
del estado; y
CONSIDERANDO que la ciudad actualmente usa un
para elegir al alcalde y concejales de la ciudad; y
CONSIDERANDO que el 20 de noviembre 201
por correo una carta del abogado Kevin I.
de California; y
Rafael establece la
a traves de elecciones
quetodaslas
10 dispuesto por la ley
elecci6nes en general
elecci6nes en general de la ciudad viola de
California de 2001 (C6digo Electoral §§14025-14032) ("CVRA") yamenazando
a la ciudad a menos que la ciudad carnbie a un elecciones
en su concejo municipal; y
CONSIDERANDO que se establece una violaci6n
"vo taci6n racial mente polarizada" ocurre en
CVRA si se puede demostrar
ciudad. Votaci6n racialrnente polarizada significa votaci6n en la
diferencia entre la elecci6n de candidatos u otras
por los votantes en una "clase protegida", y la
electorales que son preferidas por los votantes en
(C6digo Electoral §14026 (e)); y
CONSIDERANDO que el concejo municipal informado
una demanda presentada en conformidad con la CVRA
incurra costos legales potencial mente en los cientos miles
responsabilidad adicional por potencialmente cientos
, .... lot, ... """" y costos pagaderos a los demandantes que pretvalez(~an
y
CONSIDERANDO que si la ciudad elige hacer la transici6n a un
en general de
hay una
que son
candidatos u otras
del electorado
que la defensa
que la ciudad
y
en honorarios
ciudad fracasa en
...,g";;>g,\,;,,,, en distritos dentro del tiempo establecido en la 10010
entonces la ciudad estara protegida de
2
la CVRA y sus costos incumbentes, y su responsabilidad por honorarios legales ante
posibles demandantes tendra un maximo de $30,000; y
CONSIDERANDO que aunque la carta del Sr. Shenkman no estaba acompanada de
evidencia que apoyara su reclamo de una violacion de la CVRA, el concejo municipal
encuentra que es en el mejor interes de la ciudad actuar dentro del marco de tiempo
provisto por la seccion 10010 del codigo electoral para hacer la transicion de un
sistema de elecciones en general a un sistema de elecciones basadas en distritos para
elegir concejales; y
CONSIDERANDO que antes de que el concejo municipal considere una ordenanza
para establecer los IImites de los distritos para un sistema electoral basado en distritos,
la seccion 10010 del codigo electoral de California requiere todo 10 siguiente:
1. Antes de desarrollar un mapa preliminar 0 mapas de los Ifmites de los distritos
propuestos, la ciudad tendra al menos dos (2) audiencias publicas durante un perfodo
de no mas de treinta (30) dfas, en los cuales el publico es invitado a proporcionar
comentarios sobre la composicion de los distritos;
2. Despues de desarrollar todos los borradores de los mapas, la ciudad debe publicar y
poner a disposicion para su publicacion al menos un borrador del mapa de distritos y, si
los miembros del concejo municipal seran electos en sus distritos en diferentes
ocasiones para proveer terminos escalonados, entonces deslucir la secuencia potencial
de las elecciones. La ciudad tam bien debe realizar al menos dos (2) audiencias
adicionales durante un perrodo de no mas de cuarenta y cinco (45) dras, en que el
publico esta invitado a proporcionar informacion sobre el contenido del mapa 0 los
mapas y la secuencia propuesta de elecciones, si corresponde. La primera version de
un mapa preliminar sera publicado al menos siete (7) dfas antes de que se considere
en una audiencia. Si un mapa preliminar se revisa despues de una audiencia, se
publicara y se pondra a disposicion del publico durante al menos siete (7) dfas antes de
ser adoptado; y
CONSIDERANDO que la ciudad contratara a un demografo con experiencia para rendir
asistencia a la ciudad con el desarrollo de una propuesta para un sistema electoral
basado en distritos; y
CONSIDERANDO que la adopcion de un sistema electoral basado en distritos no
afectara el plazo de ningun miembro del concejo, cada uno de los cuales cumplira su
termino actual;
AHORA, POR LO TANTO, SE RESUELVE por el concejo municipal de la ciudad de
San Rafael como sigue:
1. EI concejo municipal considerara una ordenanza para cambiar a un sistema de
elecciones basadas en distritos para su usa en la eleccion de la ciudad para miembros
del concejo municipal comenzando en noviembre de 2020.
2. EI concejo municipal instruye al personal de la ciudad a trabajar con el demografo
seleccionado y otros consultores apropiados segun sea necesario, para proporcionar
3
un amilisis detaUado la datos demograficos y cualquier otra informacion 0 datos
necesarios para preparar un mapa preliminar que divida a la ciudad en distritos de
votacion de una manera consistente con la intencion y el proposito de Ley
Derechos Electorales de California y la Ley de Derechos Electorales
3. EI concejo municipal aprueba la linea de tiempo tentativa segun nQc:~,..rIT en el Anexo
A, adjunto y hecho parte resolucion, para lIevar a cabo un oroces;o publico para
solicitar comentarios sobre propuestos mapas electorales en distritos antes
de adoptar dichos
4. EI concejo municipal
publico e informar a los
establecido en el Anexo A,
a su personal a instituir un programa
San Rafael de esta resolucion y
y alentar la participacion
5. La linea de tiempo en el Anexo A se puede ajustar se
necesario, provisto que no impidan que la ciudad cumpla con los plazos
especificados por la seccion 10010 del codigo electoral.
Yo, LINDSAY LARA, secretaria de la ciudad de San Rafael, certifico
anterior resolucion se introdujo y adopto manera adecuada en una reunion
del concejo de la ciudad de Rafaeillevada a cabo el dfa 16 de enero de 2018, por
la siguiente votacion, a
Sf: CONCEJEROS:
NO: CONCEJEROS:
AUSENTE:
Lindsay Lara, Secretaria Municipallnterina
6
4
ANEXO A
CALENDARIO TENTATIVO
TRANSICION A ELECCIONES BASADAS EN nlC!'TnIT"',C!' DE ACUERDO AL
CODIGO ELECTORAL §10010
TAREA
composici6n
nsiderar fa composici6n de
losdistritos
Publicaci6n de borradores de los mapas y la
secuencia de elecciones ro uesta
a vista Pllblica: considerar los borradores de
los ma as la secuencia de elecciones
Publicaci6n de borradores de cualquier mapa
nuevo 0 revisado y/o secuencia propuesta para
las elecciones
para febrero de
2018
5 de marzo 2018
para marzo de
2018
7 418 vista publica: considerar la secuencia de
elecciones de los mapas propuestos, e
introducir una ordenanza estableciendo
elecciones or distritos
19 marzo de 2018
8
9
Publicaci6n de borradores de cualquier mapa
nuevo 0 revisado y/o secuencia propuesta para
las elecciones
vista publica: adoptar la ordenanza
estableciendo distritos
90
"""""r'no,r<:> elecci6n basada en distritos
para abril de 2018
16 8
3
ANEXO A
CALENDARIO TENTATIVO
TRANSICION A ELECCIONES BAsADAS EN DISTRITOS DE ACUERDO AL
CODIGO ELECTORAL §10010
Num. TAREA FECHA
1 Adoptar resoluci6n de intenci6n 16 de enero de 2018
2 1 ra vista publica: considerar la composici6n de 5 de febrero de 2018
los distritos
3 2da vista publica: considerar la composici6n de 20 de febrero de 2018
los distritos
4 Publicaci6n de borradores de los mapas y la para el 26 de febrero de
secuencia de elecciones propuesta 2018
5 3 ra vista publica: considerar los borradores de 5 de marzo de 2018
los mapas y la secuencia de elecciones
6 Publicaci6n de borradores de cualquier mapa para el 12 de marzo de
nuevo 0 revisado y/o secuencia propuesta para 2018
las elecciones
7 4ta vista publica: considerar la secuencia de 19 de marzo de 2018
elecciones de los mapas propuestos, e
introducir una ordenanza estableciendo
elecciones por distritos
8 Publicaci6n de borradores de cualquier mapa para el 9 de abril de 2018
nuevo 0 revisado y/o secuencia propuesta para
las elecciones
9 5ta vista publica: adoptar la ordenanza 16 de abril de 2018
estableciendo distritos
10 Dia 90 16 de abril de 2018
11 Dia efectivo de la ordenanza
12 Primera elecci6n basada en distritos 3 de noviembre de 2020
ARCHIVO 2
RESOlUCION NO. ----
UNA RESOlUCION DEL CONCEJO MUNICIPAL DE lA CIUDAD DE SAN RAFAEL
DEClARANDO SU INTENCION DE HACER lA TRANSICION DE ElECCIONES
GENERALES A ElECCIONES BASADAS EN DISTRITOS PARA El CONCEJO
MUNICIPAllUEGO DEL CENSO FEDERAL 2020, EFECTIVO PARA lA ElECCION
MUNICIPAL DE NOVIEMBRE 2022
VISTO QUE, la ciudad de San Rafael es una ciudad de carta puebla debidamente
organizada y existente, conforme a la constituci6n y las leyes del estado de California; y
CONSIDERANDO que el Artfculo VI de la carta de la ciudad de San Rafael establece la
elecci6n de cuatro concejales y un alcalde elegido por separado a traves de elecciones
generales; y
CONSIDERANDO que el Articulo IV de la carta de la ciudad estipula que todas las
elecciones para ocupar cargos publicos se Ilevaran a cabo segun 10 dispuesto por la ley
general del estado; y
CONSIDERANDO que la ciudad actualmente usa un sistema de elecci6nes en general
para elegir al alcalde y concejales de la ciudad; y
CONSIDERANDO que el 20 de noviembre de 2017, la secretaria de la ciudad recibi6
por correo certificado una carta del abogado Kevin I. Shenkman afirmando que el
sistema de elecci6nes en general de la ciudad viola el ley de derechos electorales de
California de 2001 (C6digo Electoral §§14025-14032) ("CVRA") Y amenazando
demandar a la ciudad a menos que la ciudad cambie a un sistema de elecciones
basado en distritos para su concejo municipal; y
CONSIDERANDO que se establece una violaci6n de la CVRA si se puede demostrar
que "vo taci6n racialmente polarizada" ocurre en el sistema de elecciones en general de
la ciudad. Votaci6n racialmente polarizada significa votaci6n en la que hay una
diferencia entre la elecci6n de candidatos u otras opciones electorales que son
preferidas por los votantes en una "clase protegida", y la elecci6n de candidatos u otras
opciones electorales que son preferidas por los votantes en el resto del electorado
(C6digo Electoral §14026 (e)); y
CONSIDERANDO que el concejo municipal esta informado del hecho que la defensa
de una demanda presentada en conformidad con la CVRA requerira que la ciudad
incurra costos legales potencialmente en los cientos de miles de d6lares, y
responsabilidad adicional por potencialmente cientos de miles de d61ares en honorarios
legales y costos pagaderos a los demandantes que prevalezcan si la ciudad fracasa en
su defensa; y
CONSIDERANDO que aunque la carta del Sr. Shenkman no estaba acompanada de
evidencia que apoyara su reclamo de una violaci6n de la CVRA, el concejo municipal
encuentra que es en el mejor interes de la ciudad el hacer la transici6n de un sistema
de elecciones en general a un
concejales; y
basad as en distritos para elegir
CONSIDERANOO que el municipal de inmediato dentro del plazo
establecido por el codigo ele,ctolra Sl3CCIOn 10010 para hacer la transicion a elecciones
basadas en distritos, y proximas elecciones municipales
programadas para se requerira que la ciudad realice
nuevamente un distritos proxima eleccion general
municipal en censo 2020 de los Estados
Unidos; y
CONSIDERANDO que el nnr,n£>I,n
redistribucion de distritos para
indebida del proceso eleClOira
legislativo de la ciudad, y
Rafael y sus ciudadanos;
AHORA, POR LO TANTO,
San Rafael como sigue:
que lIevar a cabo un proceso de
causarra una internJpcion
ciudad y estabilidad y la continuidad del sistema
perjudicial, para la ciudad de San
, por el concejo municipal de la ciudad
1. Es la intencion del concejo municipal considerar una ordenanza para cambiar a un
sistema electoral basado en para uso en las elecciones municipales de la
ciudad despues de que disponibles los resultados del censo de los
Estados Unidos 2020, para uso en elecciones municipales de la ciudad en
noviembre 2022.
2. AI momento en que los del censo 2020 esten disponibles, el concejo municipal
comenzara la transicion a basadas en distritos de acuerdo a los requisitos
del codigo electoral California y cualquier otra autoridad legal aplicable.
Yo, LINDSAY LARA I interina la ciudad de San Rafael, certifico que la
anterior resolucion se introdujo y adopto de manera adecuada en una reunion regular
del concejo Rafaeillevada a cabo el dia 16 de enero 2018, por
la siguiente V01taCIon
Sf:
NO: CONCEJEROS:
Lindsay Lara, -";o,r"ro'to Municipal Interina
BORRADOR DE PREGUNTAS V RESPUESTAS
SOBRE ElECCIONES BASADAS EN DISTRITOS
ARCHIVO 3
Esta es una lista preliminar de preguntas y respuestas sobre elecciones basadas en distritos,
para discusion par el concejo municipal de San Rafael y el publico.
Las siguientes preguntas fueron dirigidas al personal antes de la sesion de estudio que el
concejo municipal celebro el 20 de noviembre:
1. l Recibio la ciudad una carta del abogado Kevin Shenkman?
RESPUESTA:
Sf, la carta de Kevin Shenkman fechada el 10 de noviembre de 2017, dirigida a la secretaria de
la ciudad, fue recibida por ella el20 de noviembre de 2017.
2. l.Que hizo que la ciudad decidiera tomar medidas proactivas relacionadas a las elecciones
de distrito en lugar de simplemente esperar la presion de los diversos grupos? lQue espera la
ciudad lograr?
RESPUESTA:
La Ciudad comenzo a investigar, contrato asesores externos y comenzo a programar reuniones
pt1blicas sobre el tema de las elecciones basadas en distritos cuando se entero del recibo
inminente de la carta del Sr. Shenkman. La ciudad espera brindar una oportunidad para que
todas las personas interesadas puedan proporcionar informacion al concejo municipal sobre
este tema, y para asegurar que el sistema electoral de la ciudad sirva de manera mejor a toda
la ciudad, en conformidad con ley estatal y federal.
3. lEsta considerando la ciudad farmar un comite de ciudadanos para analizar el tema?
RESPUESTA:
Teniendo en cuenta los plazos muy estrictos que la legislatura ha impuesto para este proceso
bajo la CVRA, y la cantidad sustancial de audiencias pt1blicas que se deben programar en un
corto tiempo, el establecimiento de una comision ciudadana en este momenta no es practica.
Nada impedirfa que el concejo nombrara tal comite en 2021, cuando las Ifneas se vuelvan a
trazar despues del proximo censo.
4. Suponiendo que la ciudad haga el cambio a elecciones de distrito y establezca los distritos
en 2018, l.que distritos estaran abiertos en las proximas elecciones en 2020? Por ejemplo, si el
alcalde y dos de los consejales son candidatos para reeleccion en 2020, seran los distritos a los
que pertenezcan los dos titulares los que pueden votar? lQue pasa si hay otro distrito donde
no vive ningun incumbente? Si el alcalde se postula para la reeleccion y vive en un distrito que
no tiene miembro en el concejo actualmente, l.ese miembro del concejo basado en un distrito
tam bien se puede elegir?
RESPUESTA: (ver respuesta al num. 8)
5. Bajo que circunstancias se requerirfa un voto del electorado para establecer distritos y
decidir si la posicion de alcalde es basada en una eleccion general 0 es una plaza rotativa?
RESPUESTA:
EI Artfculo IV, Seccion 2 de la carta de la ciudad establece que "todas las elecciones para
ocupar cargos publicos y las elecciones sobre medidas se realizaran, celebraran y Ilevaran a
cabo en la forma pre vista por ley". Por 10 tanto, el personal de la ciudad ha conc/uido que,
segun esta disposicion, el voto de las personas no se requiere para hacer el cambio a las
elecciones basadas por distrito para los cuatro escafios del consejal. EI personal no ha
determinado si la conversion de la oficina del alcalde a un quinto asiento basado en un distrito
requerirfa un voto.
6. l,C6mo afecta el momenta de la acci6n de la ciudad a los posibles resultados?
RESPUESTA:
Si la ciudad hace la transicion a elecciones basadas en distritos dentro de la linea de tiempo
establecida por la GVRA, la ciudad sera responsable por los honorarios del abogado de los
demandantes, a un maximo de $30,000. Si la ciudad eJige no hacer la transicion dentro de esa
Ifnea de tiempo, pero 10 hace despues de ser demandada, es posible que la ciudad sea
responsable por costos de litigio sustancialmente mas altos, incluyendo los honorarios de los
abogados de los demandantes, y el gasto de los abogados defensores de la ciudad. Las
cantidades son desconocidas pero aumentara cuanto mas se litigue la accion antes de que se
resuelva.
EI Distrito Escolar Unificado de Madera fue demandado en 2008 y termino pagando a los
abogados de los demandantes mas de $100,000 por seis semanas de litigios no disputados, y
eso fue despues de una sustancial reduccion de las tarifas que se solicitaron (que eran en
exceso de $1 mil/on).
Una consideracion adicional es que el concejo puede tener menos control sobre el proceso de
establecer distritos si un tribunal esta involucrado.
2
7. Si la ciudad es demandada, l,podrfa la ciudad apelar al juez para damos un perfodo de cinco
anos para establecer conformidad y demostrar una mayor diversidad en el concejo?
RESPUESTA:
Una vez que se entabla una demanda bajo la GVRA, no creemos que haya ninguna autoridad
para que un juez mantenga el caso abierto durante cinco afios; inc/uso si un juez esta
dispuesto a aprobar un periodo de transicion de cinco afios, parece poco probable que esto
seria una base para negarse a otorgar a los demandantes los honorarios y los costos de sus
abogados.
8. l,Necesitamos fundir las elecciones de 2020 y 2022? l,C6mo funciona cuando s610 tres de
los cinco puestos estan abiertos en 2020?
RESPUESTA:
No. Las posiciones rotan. Gada miembro actual del concejo sirve el resto de el termino al que
fue electo, y luego debe postularse para la reeleccion en su distrito. Se vuelve un tanto mas
compJicado si dos consejales estan emparejados en un solo distrito, pero todos todavia
cumplen su termino actual.
9. l, Bajo cualquier escenario, podrfa este proceso obligar a la ciudad a realizar una elecci6n en
2018?
Actualizado: 19 de diciembre de 2017
RESPUESTA:
EI personal no tiene conocimiento de ninguna circunstancia que requiera que la ciudad realice
una eleccion para el ayuntamiento en 2018.
10. iLos distritos van a ser establecidos par poblacion a par votantes registrados? Si es par
poblacion, ina serra eso crear una disparidad significativa de votantes registrados entre los
distritos?
RESPUESTA:
Los distritos se establecen por poblacion total. Puede crear una disparidad significativa, pero
asf fue aprobado por los tribunales, incluyendo, mas recientemente, la Corte Suprema en el
caso Evenwel v. Abbott. La principal excepcion es que los presos pueden ser exclufdos de la
base de poblacion.
11. La ciudad de Encinitas gasto $150,000 en abogados y $45,000 en el demografo y
$30,000 para reembolsar al demandante. iDeberfamos esperar costas similares? iOtros
costas?
RESPUESTA:
EI asesor externo de la ciudad informa que esas cifras parecen ser realistas para el
demografo y el demandante. Los honorarios de los abogados de la ciudad probablemente
serf an menores, ya que el tiempo de viaje requerido serf a mfnimo.
12. Se Ie exigira al abogado Shenkman que demuestre que gasto $30,000 antes de que la
ciudad sea requerida a reembolsarlo?
RESPUESTA:
3
EI Sr. Shenkman debe proporcionar documentacion para respaldar la demanda, pero en casos
anteriores la documentacion no ha side muy especffica y las tarifas han side negociadas.
Las preguntas a continuacion fueron proparcionadas par el publico en la sesion de estudio del
20 de noviembre:
13. EI costa para un individuo que se pastula a una posicion es una desventaja a ciertos
miembros de la poblacion, en particular a los latinos en la comunidad. iEI costa para postularse
para un cargo basado en distrito a en general, eso sera una de las consideraciones en el
tribunal y es alga que la ciudad tambien considerara?
RESPUESTA:
Este es un asunto que el concejo de la ciudad seguira debatiendo mientras considera
aportaciones y comentarios del publico.
14. iQue es 10 que distingue a San Rafael del resto del condado can respecto a un alcalde
electo en general a diferencia de un alcalde rotativo? iQue beneficia tiene la transicion de la
ciudad a cinco distritos can un alcalde rotativo en vez de la situacion actual a cuatro distritos y
un alcalde electo en general?
RESPUESTA:
La oficina del alcalde en San Rafael se elige de conformidad con el Artfculo VI, Seccion 2 de la
carta de la ciudad (City Charter). la cual fue aprobada por los votantes en 1912. Otras ciudades
en el con dado de Marin son regidas por la ley estatal general, en lugar de por una carta de
Actualizado: 19 de diciembre de 2017
4
ciudad; sin embargo, ciudades de derecho general tambien pueden poner una medida ante
sus votantes para un alcaJde e/ecto por separado. En tenninos cuanto mas
grande es la es probable que Ja ciudad tenga un alcalde por separado,
aunque no existe un requis/to formal de poblacion.
15. i Tiene la ciudad una opcion entre cuatro 0 cinco distritos? Que onr",,"Q puede dar la
comunidad con a cinco distritos? lQue aporte podemos que la
ciudad investigue distritos a fondo, a diferencia de cuatro distritos?
RESPUESTA:
Ver respuesta al num.
16. i Puede la ciudad ron-""""" r la creacion de la votacion por distritos proximo censo y
puede esa lCual serfa el costa del rot-.. ", ",.,,-;
jurisdicciones? el el retraso en la irn."\II'llml'lntl:l,('iti,n
los costos se verla el esperar hasta el censo de
distritos? iCuili es la comunidad? lHay ejemplos de otras
hecho algo similar?
RESPUESTA:
ciudad aconseja que Ja ciudad tiene la opc/on de
en otras
y
implementacion en distritos hasta despues del y un
numero de jurisdicciones tomaron esa direccion antes del ultimo censo (en 2010). Sin embargo,
ellitigio bajo la CVRA sustancialmente mas activo y numeroso ese tiempo, y esa
direccion no necesariamente evitara litigios. En e/ curso de un litigio, un juez puede
que se trata de un cur so accion razonabfe para fa ciudad en Jugar tener que 1"&>1"1/<::11"''''
los distritos en dos Hay jurisprudencia segun la ley t&>I"I""I"J':i1
electorales que reconoce distritos en dos elecciones sucesivas
situacion confusa y
17. l.,Cual es el costa a un candidato para participar en una eleccion
eleccion a nivel de distrito? iPodemos proyectar el costa para alguien que se L.lV,;> .... "",
plaza que disputada en un distrito?
RESPUESTA:
Los costos
ciudad obligue a un Caj1mUalro
18. iHay datos que ..., ... "' ...... <:.11
homogeneo? Por ejemplo,
que eso resulte en un l"nr't"QI
la ciudad en general?
RESPUESTA:
Ef personal de la ciudad no
aunque hay jurisprudencia y
distritos puede conducir a
"gran perspectiva ". Sin
IUI\..lCUV. Bajo cua/quier sistema, no hay costos que
ventajas y desventajas de un concejo menos
muestren que si hay elecciones regionales 0 de distrito,
polemico abogando por su propio distrito en lugar
conocimiento de ningun dato cuantitativo que aborde esto,
reconocen la posibilidad de que el establecimiento
prE~OC~U{J'aClon por el distrito de uno a expensas de una vista
esto varia segun /a jurisdicci6n.
19. l.,Se puede traducir la informacion reuniones at espanol?
ActuaHzado: 19 de diciembre de 2017
RESPUESTA:
Sf, la ciudad esta organizando traducciones al espanol de los materiales escritos sobre este
asunto, y la presencia de un traductor de habla hispana en las reuniones publicas.
5
20. l.Puede proporcionar un resumen de las ventajas y desventajas de la decision de Palmdale
de ir a juicio? lSe pueden aplicar a nuestra comunidad?
RESPUESTA:
Los casos de la CVRA son altamente especfficos basados en los hechos y jurisdicciones, por 10
que la ap/icaci6n del resultado en una jurisdicci6n a otra es muy diffcil. La demograffa y la
historia electoral de San Rafael es muy diferente y hubo una serie de aspectos unicos en el
caso de Palmdale. Esto es especialmente el caso ya que no hay una decisi6n del tribunal de
apelaci6n en Palmdale que serfa vinculante para cualquier tribunal inferior. EI personal de la
ciudad ha desarrollado una lista preliminar de ventajas y desventajas relacionadas a la
transici6n a elecciones basadas en distritos como 10 solicit6 el Sr. Shenkman, que se incluye en
el informe del personal para la reuni6n del concejo de la ciudad programada para el4 de
diciembre de 2017. La ciudad de Palmdale incurri6 gastos de aproximadamente $4.5 mil/ones
litigando su caso a traves de juicio yapelaciones. EI alto costa dellitigio es la lecci6n principal
de caso de Palmdale y es el argumento para hacer el cambio durante el perfodo de tiempo
pro vis to por la ley.
21. lComo la ciudad involucrara y mantendra a toda la comunidad informada durante el
proceso publico? l.Como garantizara la ciudad que las personas afectadas, es decir, las
personas de color, tengan oportunidades para participar e involucrarse mas alia del simple
comentario publico?
RESPUESTA:
La ciudad celebr6 una sesi6n de estudio el20 de noviembre y tiene planes para otras dos
reuniones el4 de diciembre y el 18 de diciembre. Posteriormente, si el concejo decide hacer la
transici6n a elecciones basadas en distritos, el concejo lIevara a cabo reuniones multiples a
traves de un perfodo de no mas de 90 dfas. La ciudad tambien publicara materiales
informativos en su sitio web y en grabaciones de sonido, y se asociara con organizaciones de
la comunidad para correr la voz.
22. l.Habra un esfuerzo en el condado para involucrar a la comunidad latina a obtener
ciudadanfa? Eso para personas que puedan ser candidatos para obtener ciudadanfa.
RESPUESTA:
Tales esfuerzos no son un requisito de la CVRA, que solo se refiere al cambio de elecciones
generales a elecciones basadas en distritos, ni tampoco es parte de la decisi6n que tomara el
concejo municipal durante el perfodo de tiempo permitido por la ley. Sin embargo, es un asunto
relacionado que puede ser el tema de mas discusi6n por parte del ayuntamiento ya sea en
relaci6n con el asunto actual, 0 en el futuro.
23. Si la Ciudad hace el cambio a elecciones basadas en distritos para las elecciones de 2020,
1.Ia ciudad tendra que volver a trazar los distritos en 2021 despues de recibir los datos del
censo de 2020?
RESPUESTA:
Sf. La pr6xima elecci6n de la Ciudad es en e12020, y las Ifneas tendrfan que ser
Actualizado: 19 de diciembre de 2017
reconsideradas luego de recibir los datos del censo el ano siguiente. Ver el C6digo Electoral §
21620 que establece "Despues del establecimiento inicial de los distritos, los distritos
continua ran siendo casi iguales en poblaci6n segun el ultimo censo federal decenal 0, si asf 10
autoriza el estatuto de la ciudad, de acuerdo con el censo de mitad de la decada".
Actualizado: 19 de diciembre de 2017
6
ARCHIVO 4
CONSIDERACIONES ASOCIADAS CON EL ESTABLECIMIENTO DE
ELECCIONES POR DISTRITOS
(Revisado 12/19/17)
litigio
cientos de
a un mil16n de
d61ares, a la responsabilidad par
el pago de los honorarios del abogado
de a expertos,
electarales,
comunidad.
campanas de
10 que hace mas
probable candidatos minoritarios y
no minoritarios decidan postularse para
el concejo municipal. Un residente
coment6 el promedio por
de
2009-2013 fue
6. Poniendo atencion a votantes de su
propio distrito. el potencial que
los consejales y votaran
mas a favor sus propios distritos en
lugar de actuar par el bien en general
de la ciudad.
seran
aportes de los
Rafael, en lugar
posiblemente
menos 6ptimos.
con
Qnr,QnTCC! y San
San Rafael,
en distritos
4. se aumente la 9. 1-11"1",,1'"\10
participacion minoritaria en el gobierno
local.
5. Mayor uu",,,u,,, que miembros de
al concejo
no
elecciones
de los
votantes "'IO,.,rll"l minoritarios.
LAW
POLITI CAL & ADVOCACY
~~~ ____________ """"""-"-__ ---' GOVER N M EN T LITIGATION
NIELSEN MERKSAMER PAR RINE LLO GROSS & L EO NI LLP
La Ley de Derechos Electorales de
California en la Ciudad de San Rafael
Una Presentaci6n de:
Chris Skinnell
Nielsen Merksamer Parrinello Gross & Leoni, LLP
Patrocinado por:
Cana l AUmance, Ca a Welcome Center, Aleo 01
Ju stic ,Youth for Just i ce, and Unite Marin R~sing
13 de enero de 2018
- --------------"--~ ---
The California Voting Rights Act 1
LAW
POLITICAL & ADVOCACY
~------------------------------------------------' GOVER N M ENT LITIGATION
NIELSEN MERKSAMER PARRINELLO GROSS & LEONI LLP
La Ley de Derechos Electorales de
California de 2002 (CVRA)
------------------------------
The California Voting Rights Act PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL 2
LAW
!POLIT ICAL & ADVOCACY
...........-..-.......--------~----GO VERN ME NT LITIGATION
NIELSEN MERKSAMER PARRINELLO GROSS & LEONI LLP
Antecedentes Hist6ricos
• A fines de la decada de los 19905 y principios de la
decada del 2000, los demandantes de derechos
electorales en todo el pafs, y especialmente en
California, tenfan problemas lIevando a cabo acciones
exitosas en virtud de la Secci6n 2 de la ley federal de
derechos electorales (FVRA por sus siglas en ingles).
• Muchas de las estructuras de votaci6n mas
problematicas habfan sido remediadas, y los grupos del
derecho al voto percibfan que los tribunales federales
eran menDs que hospitalarios a sus reclamos.
---~ ---
The California Voting Rights Act 3
LAW
POLITICAL & ADVOCACY
"""""----~--------' GOVERNMENT LITIGATION
NIELSEN MERKSAMER PARRINELLO GROSS & LEONI LLP
Secci6n 2 de la FVRA
• La Secci6n 2 se aplica en todo el pafs. Prohfbe
cualquier "calificaci6n 0 prerrequisito para votar,
o estandar, practica 0 procedimiento ... que
resulte en una negaci6n 0 limitaci6n del derecho
de cualquier ciudadano de los Estados Unidos a
votar por raz6n de raza 0 color" 0 membresfa en
un grupo minoritario definido por idioma.
---------------- -------
The California Voting Rights Act 4
LAW
POLITICAL & ADVOCACY
~_.-...;:::o,L_-"""",~~""--__________ """",,,--_---, GOVERNM ENT LITIGATION
NIELSEN MERKSAMER PARRINELLO GROSS & LEONI LLP
Antecedentes de la Secci6n 2:
Thornburg v. Gingles, 478 U.S. 30 (1986)
• Un demandante primero debe establecer las tres condiciones
previas para establecerse bajo el umbral de Gingles:
"Primero, el grupo minoritario debe ser capaz de demostrar
que es 10 suficientemente grande y geograficamente
compacta como para constituir una mayorfa en un distrito de
un solo miembro ....
En segundo lugar, el grupo minoritario debe ser capaz de
demostrar que es pollticamente cohesivo ....
-Tercero, la minorfa debe ser capaz de demostrar que la
mayorfa blanca vota suficientemente como un bloque para
permitir ... veneer al candidato preferido de la minorfa."
Id. 50-51 (citas internas y notas al pie de la pagina omitidas).
• Muchos casos fallaron porque los demandantes no pudieron establecer la
primera precondici6n.
----------------------
The California Voting Rights Act 5
LAW
POLITICAL & ADVOCACY
o.............-_~~_~~ ____ ~ GOVERNMENT LITIGATION
NIELSEN MERKSAMER PARRINELLO GROSS & LEONI LLP
Soluci6n ? La CVRA
• Promulgada en 2002 (S.B. 976)
• Tomo effecto el 1 de enero de 2003
• Codigo Electoral §§ 14025 to 14032
• Prohibe sistemas de elecciones generales que deterioren
los derechos al voto de una clase protegida
• Elimina la primera precondicion de Gingles
• Como 10 expreso MALDEF (Fondo Mexicano-Americano de
Defensa Legal y Educacion), "el projecto de ley hace que
sea mas facil para las minorfas de California desafiar las
elecciones genera les."
.-~--~------------------------------------------
The California Voting Rights Act 6
LAW
!POLITICAL & ADVOCACY
~~--------'-----'---""""""~ GOVERNMENT LITIGATION
NIELSEN MERKSAMER PARRINELLO GROSS & LEONI LLP
Eillamado Puerto Segura del CVRA
Elecciones de "Distrito de un Miembro"
• Una ciudad que elige por "distrito de un solo miembro" no
asume responsabilidad legal bajo la ley CVRA .
------------------=-------------------~~~ ~-.
The California Voting Rights Act 7
LAW
POUTICAl & ADVOCACY
..........--~-~-~----.......----...-----' GOVERNMENT LITIGATION
NIELSEN MERKSAMER PARRINELLO GROSS & LEONI LLP
lQue esta prahibida? Respuesta carta
• Buena pregLlnta. EI lenguaje no esta muy claro.
EI Tribunal de Apelaciones en Sanchez v. City of
Modesto remitio el caso al tribunal superior
para determinar los elementos de un reclamo.
EI caso se resolvio antes de que eso sucediera.
• La interpretacion ha side dura mente
impugnada en casos posteriores.
• No hay jurisprudencia de un tribunal de
apelaciones que provea aclaracion.
----------. ---------- --------------- ----
The California Voting Rights Act 8
POU TIC Al & ;~~OCACY
~------~--------'-------~ GOVE RN M E NT LITIGATION
NIELSEN MERKSAMER PARRINELLO GROSS & LEONI LLP
lQue esta prohibido? Respuesta mas larga
Los demandantes al menos necesitan mostrar :
1. Existencia de sistema de elecciones en general
2. Los patrones de votaci6n estan correlacionados
con la raza del votante
3. Deterioro en la capacidad de los votantes de la
clase protegida para elegir al candidato de su
preferencia
4. EI candidato minoritario preferido de la minorfa
pierde (a veces) .
---~ --
The California Voting Rights Act 9
NIELSEN MERKSAMER PARRINELLO GROSS & LEONI LLP
LAW
POLITICAL & ADVOCACY
GOVERNMENT LITIGATION
Costas dellitigio de la ley CVRA
• Los costos razonables de abogados a los demandantes que prevalezcan son obligatorios , pero si la
jurisdiccion soluciona el problema y el caso se desestima como discutible, segun la jurisprudencia
del Tribunal Supremo de California, los costos solo se otorgaran si los demandantes dieron una
oportunidad razonable para "arreglar" el problema antes de presentar una demanda .
• Segun se ha informado, la ciudad de Modesto pago $ 1.7 millones a sus abogados y $ 3.0 millones a
los abogados de los demandantes. EI caso nunca Ilego a juicio, aunque fue litigado a traves de los
tribunales de apelaciones hasta la Corte Suprema de los EE. UU.
• Segun informes, la Ciudad de Tulare pago $250,000 .
• EI Tulare Local Healthcare District pago $500,000
• Ciudad de Escondido: segun informes, $585,000
• Ciudad de Palmdale: segun informes, $4.5 millones hasta resumen legal, no hubo argumento.
• Ciudad de Anaheim: $1.2 millones en asentamiento, mucho antes del juicio.
• Ciudad de Whittier: .... $1 millon, aunque la ciudad derroto la mocion de mandato, yeventualmente
se desestimo el caso por discutible.
• Condado de San Mateo: $650,000
• Consulte "Voting Rights Cases in California & Settlement Costs," Antelope Valley Times (May 7, 2015), en
Hneahttp ://theavtimes.com!wp-co nt e nt!uploads!2015!05!Voting Rights Cases Cost s. pd f.
------------------------------------------------
The California Voting Rights Act 10
NIELSEN MERKSAMER PARRINELLO GROS S & lEONI LLP
LAW
POLITICAL & ADVOCACY
GOVERNMENT LITIGATION
Reforma Legislativa: AB 350
• Ciertas jurisdicciones (City of Whittier, Cerritos Community College District) fueron
demandadas por posibles demandantes, incluso despues de indicar su intenci6n de seguir
adelante con elecciones basad as en distritos. porque si 10 hubieran hecho sin un litigio
pendiente, no se habrfan debido pagar honorarios de abogados.
• En respuesta al cabildeo de la Liga de Ciudades de California y otros, AB 350 adopt6 el
requisito de que los demandantes envfen una carta de demanda a una jurisdicci6n antes de
presentar una demanda, y proporciona a las jurisdicciones un perfodo de gracia (hasta 135
dfas) para adoptar distritos / areas fiduciarias. Si 10 hacen de esa manera, los abogados de
los demandantes pueden exigir el reembolso de sus costos sin presentar una demanda,
pero los costos y tarifas estan limitados a $30,000 .
• Si la jurisdicci6n no toma acci6n dentro del perfodo de gracia, los demandantes pueden
presentar una demanda y solicitar el reembolso de los costos y tarifas sin ellfmite de
$30,000 .
• Si la jurisdicci6n comienza el proceso antes de recibir una carta de demanda, no esta sujeta
al reembolso de los costos y tarifas de los posibles demandantes .
----------------
The California Voting Rights Act 11
LAW POUT~CAl & ADVOCACY _____ ... ~ ............... ----------..---..........--.-------.I GOVERNMENT LITIGATION
NIELSEN MERKSAMER PARRINELLO GROSS & LEONI LLP
Proceso para Cambiar el Sistema
Electoral y Adoptar Elecciones por
Distritos
------~-----------,--~---------------- -----------
The California Voting Rights Act 12
LAW
POLI TIC AL & ADVOCACY
"'""'"--------~-~~-~~------' G O VE R N M lE NT LITIGATION
NIELSEN MERKSAMER PARR INELLO G ROSS & LEO N I LLP
Opciones
• Hacer nada y esperar a que se presente un litigio, y
luego defenderse agresivamente .
• Iniciar el cambio de sistema electoral para ser
implementado en 2018 usando el proceso de AB 350
• Iniciar el cambio del sistema electoral a implementarse
despues del proximo Censo (resultados en 2021).
-Los distritos del consejo deben ser reajustados luego de
cada Censo.
-No hay garantfa de que se evitaran litigios.
-~ -------- ----- --
The California Voting Rights Act 13
LAW
POLITICAL & ADVOCACY
~-""""''''---'--........o...-______________ "''"''"'--_--'----' GOVERN M ENT LITIGATION
NIELSEN MERKSAMER PARRINELLO GROSS & LEONI LLP
Elementos del proceso para cambiar el
sistema electoral
• Contratar con un consultor demografico
• Actualizar los datos demograficos de la ciudad
• Adoptar criterios para definir los distritos
• Obtener aportes de la comunidad a razon de multiples
audiencias publicas
• Desarrollar mapas y determinar la secuencia de elecciones de
los distritos electorales
• Nota: los terminos de los titulares no se acortan
• Audiencias publicas adicionales antes de la adopcion de la
ordenanza que establezca los distritos
• Adoptar ordenanza estableciendo los distritos
- -------~ -- ---------------------
The California Voting Rights Act 14
NIELSEN MERKSAMER PARRINELLO GROSS & LEONI L L P
LAW
IPOLITICAL & ADVOCACY
GOVERNMENT LITIGATION
lEnmienda Necesaria a la Carta de la
Ciudad?
• Carta de San Rafael, art. IV, sec. 2: "Las nominaciones V todas las elecciones para ocupar
cargos plJblicos V elecciones sobre medidas se realizaran, celebraran V lIevaran a cabo de la
manera prevista por la lev general".
• C6digo de Gobierno de California §34886: "No obstante la Seccion 34871 0 cualquier otra
lev, el cuerpo legislativo de una ciudad puede adoptar una ordenanza que requiera que los
miembros del cuerpo legislativo sean elegidos por distrito 0 por distrito con un alcalde
electivo, como se describe en subdivisiones (a ) V (c) de la Seccion 34871, sin que se requiera
que presente la ordenanza a los votantes para su aprobacion. Una ordenanza adoptada de
conformidad con esta seccion incluira una declaracion de que el cambio en el metoda de
eleccion de los miembros del cuerpo legislativo se realiza en cumplimiento de los propositos
de la Lev de Derechos Electorales de California de 2001 (Capitulo 1.5 (comenzando con la
Seccion 14025) de la Division 14 del Codigo de Elecciones). II
• Alcalde elegido por separado: una enmienda aprobada por el electorado a la carta
probablemente sea necesaria para la transicion del actual sistema 4-1, con un alcalde elegido
por separado, a un sistema 5-0.
- --~ ----------
The California Voting Rights Act 15
LAW
POLITICAL & ADVOCACY
GOVERNMENT LITIGATION
NIELSEN MERKSAMER PARRINELLO GROSS & LEONI LLP
Proceso -ejemplo con estimado de tiempo
Resolver formalmente los distritos de un solo miembro; adoptar criterios y
calendario tentativo; pasos relacionados incluyen amplia difusion publica y
desarrollo de un sitio web
Dos audiencias publicas antes de que se desarrollen los mapas
Se publican los borradores de los mapas y la rotacion de las elecciones
Dos audiencias publicas adicionales para recibir aportaciones de la
comunidad
Audiencia publica final para adoptar una ordenanza de distritos
Implementar distritos adoptados de un solo miembro
16 de enero de 2018
No mas de 30 dras de diferencia entre
las audiencias
AI menos 7 dras antes de la proxima
ronda de audiencias publicas
No mas de 45 dras de diferencia entre
las audiencias
AI menos 7 dras despu9s de cualquier
cambio al mapa propuesto para su
adopcion, y dentro de los 90 dras
posteriores a la resolucion inicial
Noviembre 2020*
*Debido al cambio de terminos de alios impares a alios pares, San Rafael no tendra elecciones del concejo municipal en noviembre de 2018
------------------------------------------- ------
The California Voting Rights Act 16
NIE LSEN M ERKSAMER PARR INELLO GROSS & LEONI LLP
LAW
POLI TICAL & ADVOCACY
GO VERNMENT LlTIGATIOI\J
Como se trazan las IIneas
.. . . ~ --~ --------
The California Voting Rights Act PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL 17
LAW
POLITICAL & ADVOCACY
GOVERNMENT LITIGATION
NIELSEN MERKSAMER PARRINELLO GROSS & LEONI LLP
Resumen Demografico
Ciudad of San Rafael-Resumen DemogrMico
Poblacion total (Censo 2010)
Poblacion ciudadana con edad de voto (tabulacion especial 2010-2014 )
CVAP hispano / latino (tabulacion especial 2010-2014 )
CVAP blanco no hispano (tabulacion especial 2010-2014 )
CVAP negro no hispano (tabulacion especial 2010-2014 )
CVAP asiatico no hispano (tabulacion especial 2010-2014 )
CVAP isleiio de las islas del Pacifico no hispano (tabulacion especial 2010-2014 )
CVAP indio no hispanico (tabulacion especial 2010-2014 )
CVAP "Otro" y multirracial no hispano (tabulacion especial 2010-2014 )
Total de votantes registrados (Eleccion general 2014)
Votantes registrados con apellidos hispanos (Eleccion general 2014)
Total actual de votantes (Eleccion general 2014)
Votantes actuales con apellidos hispanos (Eleccion general 2014)
Cuenta Porciento
57,713
36,702
4,132 11.26%
28,709 78.22%
1,232 3.36%
2,153 5.86%
135 0.37%
261 0.71%
81 0.22%
28,223
1,854 6.57%
16,838
781 4.64%
----~------ -------------~---..----~---- -~--------
The California Voting Rights Act 18
LAW
!P OLI T ICAL & ADVOCACY
'-'--.........-.~--'--.=~~'""-=-~--~ GOVERNMENT LITIGATION
NIELSEN IVIERKSAMER PARRINELLO GROSS & LEONI LLP
Trazando las Lfneas -consideraciones
legales: igualdad de poblaci6n
• EI criterio predominante es la igualdad total de la poblaci6n (vease
Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533 (1964); C6digo Electoral §22000).
• A diferencia de los distritos congresionales, los distritos electorales
locales no requieren igualdad perfecta, alguna desviaci6n es
aceptable para servir a los intereses gubernamentales validos.
• Desviaci6n total inferior a110% presuntamente es constitucional.
(Precauci6n: i la presunci6n puede superarse I)
c Poblaci6n total de la ciudad (Censo 2010): 57,713
CJ Tamano ideal de un distrito: 14,429
• Redistribuci6n de los distritos en 2021
-----~-------------_. ------~ ------- -----.--
The California Voting Rights Act 19
NIELSEN MERKSAMER PARRINELLO GROSS & LEONI LLP
LAW
POUT CAL & ADVOCACY
GOVERNMENT LITIGATION
Trazando las Lfneas -considraciones
de la ley federal VRA
• La Seccion 2 de la ley federal de derechos electorales prohfbe los sistemas electorales (incluyendo los
planes distritales), que diluyen los derechos al voto de las minorfas raciales y lingi.Hsticas al negarles la
oportunidad equitativa de nominar y elegir candidatos de su eleccion.
• Las "minorfas lingi.Hsticas" estan espedficamente definidas en la ley federal: se refiere a personas de
ascendencia india americana, asiatica americana, nativos de Alaska 0 de ascendencia hispana . La CVRA
adopta expresamente la definicion de "minorfa lingi.Hstica".
• La creacion de distritos minoritarios se requiere solo si el grupo minoritario puede formar la mayorfa en un
distrito de miembro unico que de otra manera cum pie con la ley. Bartlett v. Strickland, 556 U.S. 1 (2009).
-Casi ciertamente eso no es posible aquf.
• La Ley de Derechos Electorales de California guarda silencio con respecto a la forma de los distritos
electorales.
---. -...... ~------_. -----------------~
The California Voting Rights Act 20
NIELSEN MERKSAMER PARRINELLO G ROSS & LEONI LLP
POUTICA &
GOVE RNM ENT
LAW
ADVOCACY
LITIGATION
Informacion sobre San Rafael
Mnp I>y~n
C~D'U' SiDell
\1"'DI~rAln
9rn~1I
Land.nlam Poinr
Lmdma.k Au.
-ttJpfUnf /Po\\'n Unt
-R..aWoad
{:::: E~m!cboo'
~ _I Nf'.,bbol boodJ
DCh),Bo.dn
Latino ·'0 of Population
0':. 10 25 ~'.
2.5',. to J!' .•
J5':, 10 50 ~.'.
50":,10 (liS';,
65'.',10 75'.',
75'.', 10 lOOt/,
~--------------------
The California Voting Rights Act PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL 21
LAW
POLITICAL & ADVOCACY
~~~~-----"-"""""'----------~-----------' GOVERN M ENT LITIGATION
NIELSEN MERKSAMER PARRINELLO GROSS & LEONI LLP
Trazando las Lfneas -consideraciones legales -
no "gerryma ndering" (manipulaciones)
• La decimocuarta enmienda de la constituci6n restringe el uso de la
raza como el criterio "predominante" en el diseiio de distritos y la
subordinaci6n de otras consideraciones. Shaw v. Reno, 509 U.S. 630
(1993); Miller v. Johnson, 515 U.S. 900 (1995).
• i La apariencia es importante I Los distritos electorales de formas
extraiias pueden ser evidencia de que predominan las
consideraciones raciales.
• Pero no se requiere una forma extraiia para que las consideraciones
raciales "predominen".
• La decimocuarta enmienda, sin embargo, no prohfbe en totalidad la
consideraci6n de raza en la redistribuci6n de distritos. Easley v.
Cromartie, 532 U.S. 234 (2001) .
., EI enfoque es en las comunidades de inten~s .
------------------~---------------------------
The California Voting Rights Act 22
LAW
PO LI TI C AL & ADVOCACY
~----"-'--"""':'~~----""----'----------' GOVE RNM ENT LITIGATION
NIELSEN M ERKSAMER PARR INE LLO GROSS & LEONI LLP
Consideraciones legales -otros
criterios permitidos
• Topograffa
• Geograffa
• Cohesion, contiguidad, e integridad del
territorio
• Comunidades de interes
Ver C6digo Electoral §22000
---- --- -----. --
The California Voting Rights Act 23
LAW
POLITICAL & ADVOCACY
""'--_____ ~-O-;.: ___ ~~~ _____ ___..J GOVERN M ENT LITIGATION
NIELSEN MERKSAMER PARRINELLO GROSS & LEONI LLP
Consideraciones legales: otros criterios
aprobados par los tribunales
• La prevenci6n de una contienda directa entre titulares, de la
manera mas razonablemente posible.
• Respetar los IImites de las subdivisiones pollticas (por ejemplo,
areas de asistencia escolar, IImites de la ciudad, etc.).
• Uso completo de la geografra del censo (por ejemplo, bloques
censales).
• Otros criterios no discriminatorios y aplicados uniformemente (por
ejemplo, ubicaci6n de las instalaciones municipales, desarrollos
p I ani fi cad 0 s ) .
~ -------
The California Voting Rights Act 24
NIELSEN MERKSAMER
. LAW
POLITICAL & ADVOCACY
GOVERNMENT LITIGATION
. r NIELSEN MERKSAMER PARRINELLO GROSS & LEONI LLP
lPreguntas? .
STAFF REPORT APPROVAL
ROUTING SLIP
Staff Report Author: Lisa Goldfien Date of Meeting: 01/16/2018
Department: City Attorney
Topic: District Elections
Subject: Click here to enter text.
Type: (check all that apply) ☐ Consent Calendar ☐ Public Hearing
☒ Discussion Item ☒ Resolution ☐ Ordinance
☐ Professional Services Agreement ☐ Informational Report
*If PSA, City Attorney approval is required prior to start of staff report approval process
Was agenda item publicly noticed? ☐ Yes ☐No Date noticed: ☐Mailed ☐Site posted ☐Marin IJ
Due Date Responsibility Description Completed
Date Initial / Comment
DEPARTMENT REVIEW
FRIDAY
noon
12/1
Director Director approves staff
report is ready for ACM,
City Attorney & Finance
review.
1/5/2018
☒
LG
CONTENT REVIEW
MONDAY
morning
12/4
Assistant City Manager
City Attorney
Finance
ACM, City Attorney &
Finance will review items,
make edits using track
changes and ask questions
using comments. Items will
be returned to the author
by end of day Wednesday.
Click here to
enter a date.
1/5/2018
Click here to
enter a date.
☐
☒
LG
☐
DEPARTMENT REVISIONS
FRIDAY
noon
12/8
Author Author revises the report
based on comments
receives and produces a
final version (all track
changes and comments
removed) by Friday at
noon.
Click here to
enter a date.
☐
ACM, CITY ATTORNEY, FINANCE FINAL APPROVAL
MONDAY
morning
12/11
Assistant City Manager
City Attorney
Finance
ACM, City Attorney &
Finance will check to see
their comments were
adequately addressed and
sign-off for the City
Manager to conduct the
final review.
Click here to
enter a date.
Click here to
enter a date.
Click here to
enter a date.
☐
☐
☒
TUES
noon
12/12
City Manager Final review and approval 12/13/2017 ☐
JS