The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About03. ( Handout) Presentation given by Dr. Scott Rafferty during Public Comments Item 3. (Handout) Presentation by Scott Rafferty during Public Comments Why Central San is Liable Under the CVRA and what to do about it Dr. Scott J . Rafferty Raffertv(@Rmail.com 202-380-5525 What' s wrongat- large ?with • A suite of reforms designed to entrench MODERN RETURN TO DISTRICTS incumbents after the 1914 Progressive 1975 — Extension of federal VRA landslide • Who was being excluded? • 1971-87 hearings on voter turnout and • Just about everyone except White male district elections Protestant Masons from the best part of city and school district bills town • 1990s — failure of Section 2 suits • Cooption — appointing successors prior to too many minorities election • 2000 "Understanding the Right to Cast an • Self-perpetuating bodies with few Undiluted Vote" by Heather Gerkin competitive elections surviving decades of • Racially polarized voting demographic change • Communities of Interest • At-large officials promote interests of • 2001 — CALIFORNIA VOTING RIGHTS ACT jurisdiction as a whole; flip side - they are isolated from needs and equities of minority neighborhoods Elements of CVRA — California is different • Many minorities — Don't require a majority minority district • Don't JUST try to engineer districts where minorities are guaranteed to win • Think about influence and coalitions • Consider rapid growth, migration and realignment of minority populations; • Polarized voting v. "Block" voting — many bodies do not have a history of minority candidates, let alone defeated minority candidates • "Special circumstances" are the rule in California • Non-Latino Latino candidate of choice: Maxine Waters • Latino candidate of non-Latino choice: many appointed/elected Latinos Confusion from Pico Neighborhood v. Santa Monica • OLD RULE: "A violation of Section 14027 is established if it is shown that racially polarized voting occurs. . ." • NEW SPIN ON Sec. 14027 - ""An at-large method of election may not be imposed or applied in a manner that impairs the ability f protected cl ss t elect candidates impairs ab y. o a po d a o 0 choice or its ability .to influence the outcome of an election, as a result of the dilution or the abridgment of the rights of minority voters • Santa Monia is a compelling case based on RPV + a long history of actual defeats of Latino candidates • New element of "dilution" - not what the Legislature intended �,lu Plain meaning — Latinos are 30% in district, but only 15% citywide. How is that not tion. • Shortland for complex rules borrowed from hard-to-reconcile federal redistricting cases Fair p Maps Act AB 849 v. special district rules • Appropriations Committee convinced Member Bonta to limit to cities and counties • Substantive standards in order of priority • Contiguity, integrity of communities of interest, easily identifiable, compact, no party discrimination • Incumbent is not a community of interests • Hearing requirements — too costly • Section 22000 (1993) — special rules for special districts • Topography; geography; cohesiveness, integrity, & compactness of territory; community of interests • Annexations attached to an existing division • May 12, 2022 deadline Doyou want to build a division around each incumbent ? New Jerusalem 2019 Districting Draft . <Pa A Pett 1 <f�'G �t I Pcnncr PJ R P P �' .tc — AL _ 3 ' 10 t rr'y How does independence add value ? • Elected special districts were designed for efficiency and innovation, but do they still serve these goals? • Consolidation to reflect changing economies of scale and scope • Overlapping jurisdictions of water supply and wastewater utilities • Needs have changed since the historical justification • Growth of multi-function community service districts • Consolidation Assistance Program, Gov. Code 60350-60356 (1984) • Little Hoover Commission (2000) asked if benefits and compensation deterred board members from supporting reorganization. • Most high-compensation boards already elect by-division How do elections renew the Board ? • Are elections even contested? • Does the size of the district make at-large challenges unaffordable? • Do voters have enough information to hold members accountable? • If there a healthy mix of experienced members or just excessive tenure? • Role of general manager v. Board members in recruitment • If Board members live near each other, how did that happen? • Can Citizen Academies recruit a diverse candidate pool? Doyour elections su ortyourion's pp region's political infrastructure ? • At-large voting is indefensible if minority-majority divisions are possible • Section 2 of the federal Voting Rights Act • CVRA is a kindler, gentler way to create minority-majority divisions • CVRA provides greater scope to create opportunities for advancement in elected office. • Renew a cadre of candidates for local, state, and federal elective office • Create sub-majority divisions where minority communities have real influence • Make all elections in your district more competitive Electoral divisions are about voters, not incumbents or their challengers. • Special districts have great flexibility in creating districts compared to cities and counties. No Fair Maps Act • Exception — majority-minority divisions must be created whenever possible • Look for opportunities to coordinate districting with cities and school districts. • If the Board wants to be elected, its members need to accept the risk of competitive elections. • Gerrymandering to advantage reelection of at-large incumbents does not "respect the voters" • Divisions allow grass-roots candidates to compete (at-large elections in districts have low visibility) • Coordinate with overlapping cities and school districts • Share redistricting costs • Consider aligning boundaries, create common high-minority districts • A preference for the disempowered • Look at demographics, voter turnout and create a seat for disadvantaged communities. Look at demographics other than race Hard-to-Count areas may be underrepresented . Contra Costa _ Census hardtocountmaps202O.us County census.ca..Rov/HTC-map/ https://www.contracosta.ca..gov/7527/Hard-to-Count California Hard-to- -Ma ps#:—:text=Contra%2OCosta%2OCounty 20has%2 Count Index by Oprepared%20a%20number%20of.an%20integra1%20 Census Tract part%20of%2OContra%2OCosta%2OCounty%27s%20ec 1 - 16 onomy. 16 -30 30 -47 Contra Costa "Deep Dives" 47 -70 Language M 70 - 136 Immigrants Tracts with Seniors ® highest "o indexes Internet Access CA-HTC Index is 0 . State HTC characteristics can be downloaded at block group level (these data are for Walnut Creek) Race, ethnicity, language Renters, overcrowded, broadband, LEO, nonfamily, public assistance, 150% poverty, moved, unemployed, non-HS grads orare s.z --------------------------------------------------------------------- Hisparift or Latino, - Percent of Total Housing Units: H s anic_Exclus eRace: That are vacant iincludes seasonal -- 5.1% White alone -�_p.2g6 With 3 or more units in a multi-unit ----- ---------------- structure 45.6% Black or African-American alone — 1-3% .....-..-..-..-.._.................._..-.-..-.... ._ _ t ._ American Indian and Alaska Native alone 0.1% - - - - -- -- - --- - - --- -- -- ---- Percent of Occu red HousingUnits or Households : Asian alone 14.7% - -- --- --p -- ---� - - _...... ��_.. That are renter-occu�ed--- 36.2% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific - -- --- - - -- - Islander alone 0.3% That are overcrowded - 0.8% Someothe.-.--------..__............._.----.-_-- -------------2 Without broadband Internet 11.1% Some other race alone 0.2% _.. ------- -------_-- With limited-English speakirx,�ability - 6.4% .......... r............ - That are non-family _ 43.4% Total Limited-English Population .....Ret...... Public assistance income........_..... 1:5% (Persons 5 years and older who do not speak ...-------- -...................................... _.. ._.._. .. .. .__. English`very welly_ I 6,890 Percent of population _.. _ ••` -- •—'•_---_'••—` --t Other Indo-Eur an languages__ Under 5ears old 4.4%23.4% y _._..-._ -. - Chinese incl.Mandarin,Cantonese)___ ! 20.9% That is foreign-born . - _ - _ 23.1% Russian,Polish,or other Slavic languages ! 14.0% Who moved from outside county in _Past year 8.7% With income below 150 percent of poverty level _ 11.4% ................ __..-. Age 16 or older that are unemployed 5.7% Age 25 or older who are not high - - school graduates 1 2.5% Scott J . Rafferty Rafferty@gmail .com • A.B., Princeton University, summa cum laude Thesis: Building the Consensus — the Civil Rights Division in the Kennedy Administration Performed statistical analysis for 1975 Voting Rights Act extension for the Urban League & Joint Center for Political Studies • J.D., Yale Law School • Ph.D., Oxford University (Rhodes Scholar) Dissertation: Legislative Reform of the Telecommunications Industry in the United States and Great Britain • Consultant on privatization to British Labour Party, Polish Industry Minister, Vietnamese Finance Minister (UNDP contract manager) • McKinsey & Co. (management consultants); O'Melveny & Myers (law); Administrative Conference of the United States (federal agency) • Consultant to ten state government agencies regulating utilities