Anaheim, California, has a population of 336,265, and is the largest city in California that still elects its city council entirely at-large. Last June a lawsuit was filed in state court, arguing that the at-large system violates California law that outlaws at-large local elections when it appears the at-large system results in poor representation for racial and ethnic minorities. Anaheim has only had three Hispanic city councilmembers in the last twenty years, but Hispanics are a slight majority of the population.
The case has a hearing on March 26. It is Moreno v City of Anaheim, 30-2012-579998, Superior Court, Orange County. The result of this hearing may be that the case is delayed while the city decides whether to abandon at-large elections. Plaintiffs want election by city council districts.
Meanwhile, Escondido, California, has settled a similar lawsuit and will switch from at-large elections for city council to districts. See this story.
Districts = automatic indirect minority rule.
1/2 votes x 1/2 districts = about 1/4 indirect minority rule.
—-
P.R. and nonpartisan App.V.
Around 100 years ago, the City of Los Angeles switched from at-large to District voting for the City Council. With the annexation of the San Fernando Valley the City was rightly recognized as being to big GEOGRAPHICALLY for it to continue at-large elections for City Council. At that time it’s population was similar to Anaheim’s current level.
Second, with nearly 10 MILLION California residents not even born anywhere in the United States there exists many areas with a lot fewer voters than others. So even with HALF the population being Latin, the percentage of White voters is likely to be a lot higher than it first appears.
Third, since a few Latin candidates HAVE been elected on its face one CANNOT justifiably argue that at-large elections have overtly discriminated against the Latin population. Also just how many people, in total, have served on the Anaheim City Council in the past 20 years?
Finally, when this issue is brought up of discriminatory at-large elections, I have NEVER once seen a comparison of just how much money each candidate spent on their campaign. It is far easier to get elected to office if a candidate at least spends a similar amount as their leading opponents. Rarely does a candidate whose out-spent by 5-10 times or more get elected. Generally, it would be someone either personally or their family is well-known in the area for decades.
I think the hearing has been continued to April 9th.