HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-04-22 - ORDINANCES - MOVING DATE OF ELECTION (2)' ORDINANCE NO. 14-03
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA
CLARITA, CALIFORNIA, MOVING THE DATE OF THE CITY'S
GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION FROM THE SECOND TUESDAY
IN APRIL IN EVEN -NUMBERED YEARS TO THE FIRST TUESDAY
AFTER THE FIRST MONDAY IN NOVEMBER IN
EVEN -NUMBERED YEARS BEGINNING IN NOVEMBER OF 2016
WHEREAS, the City's general municipal elections are currently held on the second
Tuesday in April of each even -numbered year; and
WHEREAS, Elections Code sections 1301 and 10403.5 authorize the City to reschedule
its general municipal election to the day of the statewide general election; and
WHEREAS, the City was sued in June 2013 in the Los Angeles County Superior Court,
in a case alleging that the City is in violation of the California Voting Rights Act of 2001 by,
among other things, maintaining an "at large" system for electing members of the City Council
("Lawsuit"); and
WHEREAS, the City disputes the allegations in the lawsuit and denies that the City has
' violated the California Voting Rights Act of 2001; and
WHEREAS, to avoid the expense of protracted litigation in the lawsuit, the City has
nevertheless entered into a settlement (the "Settlement Agreement"), which requires, among
other things, that the City Council consider and act on an ordinance to change the day of its
general municipal election from the second Tuesday in April of each even -numbered year to the
first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of each even -numbered year; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to consolidate its elections with the statewide general
election conducted by Los Angeles County on each first Tuesday after the first Monday in
November of even -numbered years, but in the event that the Los Angeles County Board of
Supervisors does not permit the City to consolidate its elections then the City wishes to
nonetheless hold its elections concurrently with the statewide general election; and
WHEREAS, the Settlement Agreement requires that the City seek permission from the
County to alternatively operate the November City Council election as a concurrent, but not
consolidated, election if the ballot style, voting equipment, or computer capability of the County
is such that additional elections or materials cannot be handled; and
WHEREAS, in connection with any future November election, Los Angeles County may
approve the consolidation of the City Council election with the statewide general election, in
' which event the City Council election will be consolidated with the County election; and
WHEREAS, the Settlement Agreement further requires that the term of incumbent City
Council Members who would otherwise be up for election in April of the year that Council '
elections are changed to November shall be extended from April to the date in December of that
year when Council Members elected in November take office; and that this ordinance state that
the ordinance is being considered pursuant to a negotiated settlement of the lawsuit; and that if
the City Council in its discretion does not adopt the ordinance contemplated in the Settlement
Agreement, then the Settlement Agreement shall be null and void and the court with jurisdiction
over the case shall vacate the judgment approving the settlement.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Change of Election Day. Pursuant to sections 1301 and 10403.5 of the
California Elections Code, the day of the general municipal election in the City of Santa Clarita,
California is moved from the second Tuesday in April of each even -numbered year to the first
Tuesday after the fust Monday in November of each even -numbered year.
SECTION 2. Concurrent or Consolidated Election. Pursuant to section 1301 of the
Elections Code, the City hereby requests that the County of Los Angeles approve consolidation
of the City's November City Council election with the statewide general election conducted by
the County in November of each even -numbered year. If the County denies the City's request for
consolidation, the City alternatively requests that, pursuant to section 1301 of the Elections Code,
the County permit the City to conduct its election concurrently with future statewide general '
elections (employing a separate ballot from that of the County election) unless and until such
time as Los Angeles County approves the consolidation of the City Council election with the
statewide general election, in which event the City Council election will be consolidated with the
County election.
SECTION 3. Adiustment of Terns of Office. In accordance with Elections Code sections
1301 and 10403.5(d), because of the change of election date, the terms of office of those
members of the City Council presently serving whose terms would previously have expired in
April 2016, shall instead, continue in their offices until certification of the results and
administration of oaths of office after the November 2016, general municipal election. The terns
of office of those members of the City Council elected in April 2014, prior to the adoption of this
ordinance, whose terms would previously have expired in April 2018, shall instead, continue in
their offices until certification of the results and administration of oaths of office after the
November 2018, general municipal election.
SECTION 4. Notice to Voters. If the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors approves
this ordinance, the City elections official shall cause a notice to be mailed to registered voters
within the City of Santa Clarita as required by Elections Code section 10403.5(e).
SECTION 5. Environmental Review. The City Council finds that this ordinance is not
subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to sections 15060(c)(2) '
(the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the
environment) and 15061(c)(3) (the activity does not have the potential for causing a significant
2
effect on the environment) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14,
' Chapter 3.
SECTION 6. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this
ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of
competent jurisdiction, such decision will not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this
ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance and each
and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional
without regard to whether any portion of the ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or
unconstitutional.
SECTION 7. Effective Date. Pursuant to Elections Codes sections 1301 and 10403.5,
this ordinance shall not become operative until approved by the Los Angeles County Board of
Supervisors ("Effective Date"). Within 30 days of the Effective Date, the City Clerk shall cause
a notice to be mailed to all registered voters of the City informing them of the change in the
election day.
SECTION 8. Date for First City Council Election in November. The first City Council
election to be held in November shall be November 2016 or the first Council election that is at
least one year after Los Angeles County allows the City Council elections to be changed from
April to November, whichever is later.
SECTION 9: Settlement of the Lawsuit. This ordinance is being considered pursuant to
a negotiated settlement of the Lawsuit.
SECTION 10. Publication and Notice to County. The City Clerk shall certify to the
passage and adoption of this Ordinance, cause the same to be published according to law, and
forward a copy of it to the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors requesting approval by
Board resolution.
PASSED, APPRON
ATTEST:
AMi.w_�.�/..,..�
..,i 71 WE - /
IDATEaf'/,
1
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss.
CITY OF SANTA CLARTTA )
I, Armine Chaparyan, Interim City Clerk of the City of Santa Clarita, do hereby certify
that the foregoing Ordinance 14-03 was regularly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a
regular meeting of the City Council on the 25th day of March, 2014. That thereafter, said
Ordinance was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 22nd day
of April, 2014, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Kellar, Acosta, McLean, Boydston, Weste
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
AND I FURTHER CERTIFY that the foregoing is the original of Ordinance 14-03 and ,
was published in The Signal newspaper in accordance with State Law (G.C. 40806).
13
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
This Settlement Agreement ("Agreement") is entered into by Plaintiffs Jim Soliz
and Rosemarie Sanchez -Fraser ("Plaintiffs") and the City of Santa Clarita ("City').
Plaintiffs and the City are collectively referred to herein as the "Parties." This
Agreement shall be effective on the day the Agreement is signed by the City ("Effective
Date").
RECITALS
A. On June 20, 2013, Plaintiffs filed a Complaint in the Los Angeles County
Superior Court against the City designated Case Number BC 512735, which has been
assigned to the Honorable Terry A. Green ("Lawsuit").
B. The Lawsuit alleges that the City is in violation of the California Voting
Rights Act of 2001 (hereafter "CVRA") contained in California Elections Code Sections
14025 through 14032.
C. The City disputed the allegations of the Lawsuit and denied that the City
violated the CVRA.
' D. The City is a General Law City and is governed by the California
Constitution and the laws of the State of California applicable to general law cities.
E. The City is governed by a five member City Council.
F. Currently, Council Members are elected in April of even numbered years
with two Council seats open for election at one election and then two years thereafter
three Council seats are open for election.
G. There will be three Council seats open for election in April 2014.
H. The Council seats are elected "at large" meaning that a Council Member
can live anywhere within the City and be elected to the City Council by voters living
anywhere within the City, as compared to a by -district election system in which Council
Members are elected from designated districts within the City by voters living within
such districts.
I. Voters in City Council elections are entitled to one vote for each of the
Council seats up for election and may only cast one vote per candidate ("Current Voting
Method").
J. Statewide general elections in California are held in November of even
numbered years.
I K. Plaintiffs and the City desire to settle fully and finally all differences
between them with regard to the Lawsuit.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises herein contained, IT IS
AGREED BY THE PARTIES AS FOLLOWS:
1. The Parties hereby incorporate by reference the foregoing Recitals and
agree that said Recitals are true and correct.
2. The City will agendize for City Council consideration an ordinance
changing City Council elections, pursuant to Elections Code section 1301, from April to
November of even numbered years to coincide with statewide general elections
("Ordinance'). The second reading of the Ordinance will be held within 60 days of the
execution of this Agreement by the City. The provisions of the Ordinance will include,
but not be limited to, the following:
A. City Council elections will be changed from April of even numbered
years to November of even numbered years to coincide with statewide general
elections.
B. The City will operate the November City Council election as a
concurrent election unless, in connection with any future November election, Los
Angeles County approves the consolidation of the City Council election with the
statewide general election, in which event the City Council election will be '
consolidated with the County election.
C. The Ordinance will provide that the first City Council election to be
held in November shall be November 2016 or the first Council election that is at
least one year after Los Angeles County allows the City Council elections to be
changed from April to November, whichever is later.
D. The term of incumbent City Council Members who would otherwise
be up for election in April of the year that Council elections are changed to
November shall be extended from the April to the date in December of that year
when Council Members elected in November take office.
E. The Ordinance is being considered pursuant to a negotiated
settlement of the Lawsuit.
F. If the City Council in its discretion does not adopt the Ordinance
contemplated herein, then this Settlement Agreement shall be null and void and
Court shall vacate the Judgment.
3. If adopted by the City Council, the City will submit the Ordinance to the
Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors and request approval of the Ordinance by the
County pursuant to Elections Code Section 1301(b).
4. If the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors does not approve the
Ordinance and asserts that the County is entitled to prohibit City from holding a '
concurrent, but not consolidated, election, then Plaintiffs, at their sole expense, reserve
the right to file a separate legal action against the County seeking to compel the County
to approve the Ordinance which must be filed no later than 180 days from the date of
the County refusal to approve the Ordinance.
5. If the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors approves the Ordinance,
with or without court order compelling Los Angeles County to do so, or otherwise
indicates that the City may hold Council elections in November of even numbered
years, then the City will change the Council elections to November of even numbered
years in accordance with the provisions of the Ordinance and Elections Code Sections
1301(c) and 10403.5.
6. City will implement cumulative voting subject to, and upon, the following
conditions being satisfied and actions taken:
A. The Net Cost for the initial election implementing cumulative voting
does not exceed $400,000. "Net Cost" is defined as the reasonable and
necessary expenditures by the City in order to implement cumulative voting,
including: (1) any increase in cost between the City's Current Voting Method for
the April 2012 Council Election and the least expensive legally permissible
cumulative voting method; and (2) the cost to obtain all necessary Federal and
State Certifications and approvals ("Certifications'), if any such Certifications are
' required under the law and required to be borne by the City.
B. The Parties will cooperate in good faith to estimate the Net Cost
("Estimated Net Cost"). In the event of any dispute between the Parties
regarding the amount of the Estimated Net Cost, the Court shall resolve such
dispute pursuant to its authority under Code of Civil Procedure Section 664.6. If
the Estimated Net Cost is more than $400,000, then there will be no further
action taken by City to implement cumulative voting. If the Estimated Net Cost is
$400,000 or less, then the Parties shall proceed with the actions described below
in this Paragraph 6.
C. The Parties will request the trial court set a hearing limited to the
following legal issue ("Legal Issue"): May a California City adopt a cumulative
voting method pursuant to a settlement of a lawsuit alleging violations of the
California Voting Rights Act?
D. The trial court hearing is completed on the Legal Issue and the trial
court issues an order ("Order") finding that the City may legally change to a
cumulative voting method pursuant to a settlement of a lawsuit alleging violations
of the California Voting Rights Act. The parties shall jointly schedule a hearing
date and briefing schedule with the trial court. The order of the briefing will be
as follows: (1) Plaintiffs will begin by filing an Opening Brief on the Legal Issue.
(2) City will file an Opposition Brief within 20 days of service of the Plaintiffs
Opening Brief. (3) Plaintiffs will file a Reply Brief within 10 days of service of the
City's Opposition Brief, The Briefs of the Parties shall be served by electronic
mail. There will be no declarations filed by the Parties with the trial court on the
Legal Issue. Following the submission of the briefs described herein, the trial
court will hold a hearing on the Legal Issue and there shall be no witnesses
permitted at the hearing. The trial court's determination on the Legal Issue (the
"Order") shall be final and binding on the Parties. In recognition of the fact that
the City is not in any way admitting fault or a violation of the CVRA by virtue of
this Settlement Agreement, the Parties agree that neither party will argue to the
trial court that cumulative voting is not legally permissible based upon a lack of
finding of a vioiation by the City of the CVRA or that any violation of the CVRA
has or has not occurred.
E. If, and once, the trial court issues an Order finding that the City may
legally change to a cumulative voting method, then the City will retain a vendor to
apply to the State of California to obtain any necessary Certifications for
cumulative voting in the event that the California Secretary of State determines
that such Certifications are necessary.
F. All necessary Certifications have been obtained, if Certifications are
required under the applicable law.
G. After any necessary Certifications are obtained, if any such
Certifications are necessary, the Parties will cooperate in good faith to determine
the actual Net Cost ("Actual Net Cost"). In the event of any dispute between the '
Parties regarding the amount of the Actual Net Cost, the Court shall resolve such
dispute pursuant to its authority under Code of Civil Procedure Section 664.6. If
the Actual Net Cost is more than $400,000, then there will be no further action
required to be taken by the City to implement cumulative voting. However, the
City may choose to implement cumulative voting even if the Actual Net Cost is
more than $400,000. If the Actual Net Cost is $400,000 or less, then the Parties
shall be governed by the provisions of Paragraph 11 of this Agreement.
H. If the Actual Net Cost is $400,000 or less and the trial court Order
finds that the City may legally change to a cumulative voting method, then the
City will change to cumulative voting for the next scheduled election that is at
least one year after the later of the following dates: (1) The date the Order is
issued or (2) The date that any and all necessary Certifications are obtained.
7. If there is a lawsuit filed by any person challenging any of the terms of this
Agreement ("Legal Challenge") and the trial court in that Legal Challenge issues a
judgment finding that the City may not legally comply with one or more of the terms of
this Agreement, then the City may, in its sole discretion, comply with such judgment
upon the judgment becoming final or, in the alternative, the City may file an appeal from
that court judgment. The City agrees that if Plaintiffs seek to intervene in the Legal
Challenge, that the City will not oppose such intervention. If the Plaintiffs do intervene
in the Legal Challenge, then such intervention and all costs associated therewith
incurred at the trial court and any appellate court level, including, but not limited to,
attorney fees, shall be borne by Plaintiffs and the City shall have no obligation for ,
payment of any of those costs.
4
8. If the City implements a cumulative voting system pursuant to this
Agreement, then the City reserves the right to change to another voting method at a
future date, no less than ten (10) years following the Effective Date of this Agreement,
without further order from the court.
9. If there is a change by the City to a by -district election system (as that
term is defined in Government Code Section 34871 (a) or (c), whether by legislation or
otherwise, then the City is not required to change to a cumulative voting method or, if
the City has already changed to a cumulative voting method under this Agreement, then
the City may stop using cumulative voting for City Council elections without further order
from this Court.
10. The City will pay attorneys fees to counsel for Plaintiffs in the amount of
$400,000 within 30 calendar days of the earlier of the following two dates:
A. The date that Los Angeles County approves the Ordinance or
otherwise indicates that the City may hold its elections on a date coinciding with
the statewide general elections, whether consolidated with the Los Angeles
County ballot or not, or there is a final judgment by a court of competent
jurisdiction declaring that the City Council elections may be held in November of
t even numbered years notwithstanding any opposition by Los Angeles County, or
B. Any and all necessary Certifications have been obtained for the
change to a cumulative voting system, there is an Order issued by the trial court
finding the City may legally change to a cumulative voting method, and the Actual
Net Cost is determined to be $400,000 or less either by agreement of the Parties
or by the trial court.
11. If payment of attorneys fees to counsel for Plaintiffs is required by
Paragraph 10 of this Agreement and if the Actual Net Cost is $400,000 or less, then the
Parties agree:
A. If the County of Los Angeles approves changing the Council
Elections to November of even numbered years or otherwise indicates that the
City may hold its elections on a date coinciding with the statewide general
elections, whether consolidated with the Los Angeles County ballot or not, or
there is a final judgment by a court of competent jurisdiction declaring that the
City Council elections may be held in November of even numbered years
notwithstanding any opposition by Los Angeles County, then the City will pay
attorneys fees to counsel for Plaintiffs in the additional amount of $200,000 within
30 calendar days of the date an Order is issued by the trial court that the City
may not legally change to a cumulative voting method.
B. If the trial court Order finds on the Legal Issue that the City may
legally change to cumulative voting, then the City shall pay attorneys fees to
' counsel for Plaintiffs in the additional amount of $200,000 less 50% of the Actual
Net Cost as defined above within 30 calendar days of the later of the following
dates: (1) The date the Order is issued by the trial court or (2) The date the
Parties agree in writing on the Actual Net Costs or, if the Parties are unable to
agree on the Actual Net Cost, then the date of the decision by the trial court
setting the amount of the Actual Net Cost.
12. This Settlement Agreement shall be null and void unless at least one of
the following two events occurs:
A. The City Council elections are changed to November of even
numbered years.
B. There is an Order issued by the trial court on the Legal Issue that
the City may legally change to a cumulative voting method (as discussed above),
any and all necessary Certifications are obtained, and the Actual Net Cost is
determined to be $400,000 or less either by the agreement of the Parties or by
the trial court.
13. Except for the attorneys fees payable to counsel for Plaintiffs as provided
in this Agreement, the Parties agree that all other costs incurred both before and after
the Effective Date of this Agreement including, but not limited to, attorney fees and
expert fees, shall be borne by the party who incurred those costs.
14. The Parties agree that this Agreement will be presented to the City '
Council for approval following signature of this Agreement by the Plaintiffs and their
counsel. If the City Council approves this Agreement, then the Agreement will be
signed by the City Manager and the City Council will announce the approval of this
Agreement during an open session of the City Council and present to the public at that
open session a statement regarding the Agreement.
15. Plaintiffs acknowledge and agree that, as a material inducement to the
City to enter into this Agreement that, except as otherwise provided in this Agreement,
this Agreement is intended as a full and complete release and discharge of any and all
claims that Plaintiffs may or might have or had by reason of the happening of the
incidents alleged in the Lawsuit or based upon any other matter between the Parties
arising on or before the Effective Date of this Agreement. Plaintiffs understand and
agree FURTHER, THAT ALL THEIR RIGHTS UNDER SECTION 1542 OF THE
CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE ARE HEREBY EXPRESSLY WAIVED. Plaintiffs
understand that Section 1542 of the California Civil Code provides as follows: "A
general release does not extend to claims which the creditor does not know or suspect
to exist in his or her favor at the time of executing the release, which if known by him or
her must have materially affected his or her settlement with the debtor."
16. Plaintiffs understand and agree that this settlement and the entering into
of this Agreement by the City is not an admission of any liability whatsoever for any
wrongdoing with respect to Plaintiffs, or any other person or entity, by the City or by any
person, firm, officer, official, employee, agent, association, public entity or corporation, I but is in compromise of a disputed claim.
0
17. This Agreement shall be binding upon the individuals and entities signing
below and upon their successors, heirs, administrators, representatives, executors, and
assigns, and shall inure to the benefit of the individuals and entities signing below and
to their heirs, administrators, representatives, executors, successors and assigns.
18. The Changes to Council elections described in this Agreement, including
the change of the election date to November of even numbered years and to cumulative
voting, are intended to increase voter turn out and reduce the vote dilution, if any,
alleged by Plaintiffs in the Lawsuit.
19. This Agreement is made and entered into in the State of California and
shall in all respects be interpreted, enforced and governed under the laws of the State
of California.
20. Any notice to be given hereunder shall be in writing and delivered
personally or sent by first class mail, postage prepaid, to the addresses set forth below,
or to such other address as either party may designate by written notice to the other:
Jim Soliz and
Rosemarie Sanchez -Fraser
City of Santa Clarita
R. Rex Parris
R. Rex Parris Law Firm
43364 10`h Street West
Lancaster, California 93534
and
Kevin I. Shenkman
Shenkman & Hughes
28905 Wight Road
Malibu, California 90265
City Manager
City of Santa Clarita
23920 Valencia Blvd
Santa Clarita, California 91355
and
Joseph Montes, City Attorney
Burke, Williams & Sorensen LLP
444 S. Flower Street, Suite 2400
Los Angeles, CA 94612
21. The language of all parts of this Agreement shall in all cases be construed
as a whole according to its fair meaning, was jointly drafted by the Parties and their
legal counsel and shall not be strictly construed for or against any of the Parties.
7
22. This Agreement will be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be
deemed an original, but all of which, taken together, shall constitute one and the same
Agreement. There shall be three originals of this Agreement with one to be filed with
the Court to be attached to a Judgment Pursuant to Settlement, one for the Plaintiffs
and one for the City.
23. It is further agreed by the Parties that no term or condition of this
Agreement shall be deemed to have been waived, nor shall there be any estoppel
against the enforcement of any provisions of this Agreement, except by an express
written instrument of the party charged with such a waiver or estoppel. No such written
waiver shall be deemed a continuing waiver unless specifically stated therein, and each
such waiver shall operate only as to the specific term or condition waived and shall not
constitute a waiver of such term or condition for the future or as to any act other than
that specifically waived.
24. This Agreement sets forth the entire agreement between the Parties
hereto and fully supersedes any and all prior Agreements or understandings between
the Parties hereto pertaining to the subject matter hereof.
25. This Agreement cannot be amended, altered, modified or superseded
except by a written agreement so stating signed by Plaintiffs and the City. '
SIGNATURES APPEAR ON FOLLOWING PAGES
M
WHEREFORE, the Parties hereby agree to the foregoing terms of this Agreement.
March Y. , 2014
March g , 2014 �-- -
Rosemarie chez- aser
City of Santa Clarita
March, 2014 by
Ken Striplin, CityManager
0
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
March , 2014
March '2014
Counsel for Jim Soliz and
Rosemarie Sanchez -Fraser
R. Rex Parris
R. Rex Parris Law Firm
MON
Kevin I. Shenkman
Shenkman & Hughes
Counsel for
City of Santa Clarita
� � A
March 2014 i r"%
Josh MorSts, City Attorney
City of Santa Clarita
10
r
APPROVED AS TO FORM.
Counsel for Jim Soliz and
Rosemarie Sanchez -Fraser
1
March .2014
ex Parris
R Rex Parris Law Firm
March .2014 r
Kevin 1 Shenkman
Shenkman & Hughes
Counsel for
City of Santa Clarita
March , 2014
Joseph Montes, City Attorney
City of Santa Clarita
10