The City Council voted unanimously in a special meeting Thursday afternoon, July 18, to contract with a consulting firm that will be tasked with providing the city information on San Clemente’s demographics before moving forward with a proposal to transition the town to a by-district voting model.
The approval of the $60,000 contract with the National Demographics Corporation comes after the city received a letter by Dana Point lawyer Michelle Jackson, on behalf of an undisclosed client, claiming San Clemente’s at-large elections violated the California Voting Rights Act (CVRA) and diluted the votes of minority votes.
“It is my client’s position that San Clemente’s system of at-large elections dilutes the ability of Latinos, a protected class, to elect candidates of their choice or otherwise influence the outcome of San Clemente’s elections for its City Council Members,” Jackson said in the letter.
Jackson also claimed that a review of the city’s system proved the existence of racially polarized voting, which the CVRA is intended to end, and pointed to a small number of Latino candidates on the council in the last 20 years.
The June 15 letter requested San Clemente adopt a by-district system, with the threat of seeking “judicial relief” if action is not taken by Aug. 10.
At Thursday’s meeting, after councilmembers and staff met in closed session for over an hour, City Attorney Elizabeth Mitchell informed the public the city only had a short time to respond to the letter.
“It was necessary that staff introduced the item and received direction from the council about whether we should hire a consultant to give information to the council that could inform its decision about whether to go to district elections,” Mitchell said.
Councilmembers Victor Cabral, Mark Enmeier and Rick Loeffler both stated they wanted to hear from the public, as well as from NDC, and that the council wouldn’t make a decision at the June 22 meeting.
Cabral also named numerous cities that faced similar threats of litigation and chose to fight the lawsuits, including Anaheim, Palm Desert and Whittier, and were forced to settle in addition to switching to a by-district system.
“All of them had to pay significant attorney’s fees,” Cabral said. “That’s what we’re facing. That’s (why) we want information and feedback (on) how much should we spend, if anything, to defend this?”
He also referred to the city of Santa Barbara, which is involved in an ongoing case with the Pico Neighborhood Association regarding the city’s own at-large system. The case is part of a second oral argument session that the California Supreme Court will hear on Tuesday, June 27.
“Maybe once we get a better idea of if the California Supreme Court (will) rule against the city, then there will be no cities that have ever won this,” said Cabral. “Then we have to weigh whether it’s worth fighting or going to district elections, and whether the city wants to spend millions of dollars doing it.”
Loeffler added that he was confident the council will be able to decide in the best interests of San Clemente.
Mayor Pro Tem Steve Knoblock called the situation “disappointing,” saying he didn’t recall many Latinos running for council even as other people or color have ran and placed somewhat high in the final results.
“I think this is a strong-arm tactic by the state, to compel district elections when the local citizens have consistently said, ‘We will elect our representatives in the way we choose, that best fits our community,’ ” said Knoblock.
Speaking with the San Clemente Times, City Manager Andy Hall referenced that NDC has previously completed work for San Clemente and is one of only a few companies in the state that does election-related services.
Hall, who previously worked in the same role for Imperial Beach in San Diego County, said the $60,000 figure was similar to what Imperial Beach contracted NDC to do when it was faced with similar litigation.
The state only gives cities 45 days from receiving letters or threats of litigation to respond, according to Hall, before moving forward under another deadline.
“They give you 90 days of safe harbor to complete that work, and that work includes five public hearings, preparation of all the maps, all the public education and everything,” said Hall. “It’s almost impossible to do in 90 days.”
With the council not holding a regular meeting in early July in observance of Independence Day, it will next meet on July 18 in the Council Chambers at City Hall, at 910 Calle Negocio.