04 - Laserfiche WebLink

proof the plaintiff needs to prove Pleasanton is a racially polarized voting City, as examples can extend to elections from many years ago. In response to Councilmember Balch, Mr. Willis stated the data to draw the districts would come from the State, including the 2020 census data and voter registration data. Other jurisdictions have attempted to reach out to plaintiffs to find alternative remedies and have not been successful. He confirmed no city in the State has prevailed in court. Several cities raised strong legal questions which have all been answered against the cities. In response to Councilmember Arkin, Mr. Willis stated the districts would be in place for the entire decade and confirmed the districts are set until the next census. City Attorney Sodergren confirmed in Pleasanton there would be a special election if no candidate ran from a particular district. This provision of the Pleasanton Municipal Code was adopted by the City Council and not the electorate so there would be some flexibility to adjust through City Council action. In response to Councilmember Arkin, Mr. Willis said they should be looking at traditional criteria for redistricting such as keeping communities whole. Shapes and compactness are important criteria for the districts. He noted a map can look ugly yet still be reasonable due to holes within a community. In response to Mayor Brown, Mr. Willis said the term protected class only applies to race and ethnicity. It is the City Council's decision whether to align districts to the residences of the current Councilmembers. He advised the State's new Fair Maps Act does not include consideration of incumbents in its order of priorities. It could be considered but should not be a primary consideration. In response to Councilmember Testa, Mr. Willis advised if this matter went to litigation, the lawyers would have to name a plaintiff, but they do not have to do so now. Should the plaintiffs win a lawsuit, the penalty would be awarded by a judge and can be very large. Mayor Brown opened public comment. Olivia Sanwong stated her name was mentioned in the letter but she did not give approval to be part of the letter and is not a client. She advised she has run for office three times in Pleasanton and reported she was harassed while campaigning. The comments were offensive but the letter is not a remedy. Mayor Brown closed public comment. Councilmember Testa stated the thought of not representing the entire community is difficult and unpalatable. Councilmember Narum stated there are cities where this does make sense but noted there are a lot of unintended consequences. She expressed concerns over district -elected Councilmembers being more concerned about their district than doing what is best for the City as a whole. Councilmember Narum moved to begin the process to move towards district elections. She noted she is not happy about it, but the chances of legal success are too slim to make fighting it worthwhile. Councilmember Balch expressed displeasure at the situation and advised that all Councilmembers have encouraged residents to become active in the City. He also questioned how districting will impact decisions by councilmembers less devoted to the City as a whole and thinks it will bring risk for future strife and divisiveness when it is meant to bring people together. He does not want a judge or attorney from Malibu drawing Pleasanton's maps. Councilmember Balch seconded the motion. Councilmember Arkin stated encouraging diversity and representation is a good thing, but sees the same unintended consequences as Councilmember Narum of people not truly representing the whole City Council Minutes Page 9 of 14 September 21, 2021