Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Proposition 50 Redistricting topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council deadlocks on position to oppose California Proposition 50; motion fails to gain majority
Summary
The council debated whether to take an official position opposing California Proposition 50, with concerns focused on potential fragmentation of Stanton into multiple congressional districts; a motion to oppose failed after a 2‑2 vote with one abstention, leaving no council position recorded.
The Stanton City Council debated and failed to adopt an official position opposing California Proposition 50 at its Sept. 23 meeting.
Mayor Dave Schauber urged the council to oppose Proposition 50, saying the measure would split the city across congressional districts and dilute a single point of contact for federal representation and grants. He said he preferred Stanton remain entirely within one congressional district, and cited outreach and past relationships with the city’s current congressman as a reason to oppose the change.
Other councilmembers argued the opposite: some said multiple congressional representatives could increase chances of federal funding and attention; others described the proposal as a broader state response to gerrymandering. Councilmembers exchanged competing views about whether splitting the city would hurt or help Stanton’s ability to attract federal grants.
The mayor moved that the council oppose Proposition 50. Following public‑comment opportunity (no public testimony was recorded on the item that night), the motion produced a roll‑call result of two yes votes, two no votes and one abstention, which did not achieve a majority. City rules of decorum were later cited in council discussion as allowing reconsideration of tie votes but no successful reconsideration occurred; a subsequent re‑vote produced the same result. Because the motion failed to receive a majority, the council did not adopt an official position on Proposition 50 at the meeting.
Councilmembers who opposed taking a formal position cited concerns about partisanship and the limits of local influence on statewide redistricting; proponents cited continuity of representation and relationship with the current congressman. Staff offered to survey other cities and return draft language for council consideration if the council provided direction.
