Senate advances large, midcycle redistricting amendments after heated debate over urgency and process

SACRAMENTO — The California State Senate on Monday advanced a 338-page package of amendments to AB 604, a midcycle redistricting measure, after sharp debate about whether the amendments should be considered without more public review. Senators repeatedly clashed over the bill’s urgency clause, how the amendments were published and whether the chamber was following constitutional and procedural rules.

The amendments were published online earlier in the day and were presented to the Senate for adoption in committee and on the floor. Senator Strickland repeatedly argued the urgency language was improper, saying, "This amendment has no immediate threat to public peace, health, or safety as required by article 4 section 8 d of our constitution." Pro Tem McGuire and other supporters said the amendments were published and that the Senate was following standard practice to bring them forward for the body to act on and for members of the public to review before committee hearings.

Why it matters: The package would enable mid-decade adjustments to congressional maps and removes or waives parts of existing redistricting criteria that, critics say, protect communities and limit partisan influence. Supporters called the move necessary to respond to redistricting actions in other states and to bring the proposed maps before California voters and committees for public review; opponents said the process was rushed and risked undermining the nonpartisan redistricting framework voters previously established.

Most important facts: After a point-of-order challenge to the presiding officer’s ruling on germaneness, Senator Strickland appealed the chair’s decision. The Senate voted 27 to 10 to uphold the presiding officer’s ruling. Later roll calls on the amendments showed the same margins: the amendments were adopted by a 27–10 vote. A separate motion by Senator Choi to lay the amendments on the table failed, 10 ayes to 27 noes. The Senate also voted to suspend joint rule 62(a) so that related bills and hearings can proceed in committee; that motion passed on the same 27–10 margin.

What senators said: Senator McGuire, the president pro tempore, framed the action as a way to ensure the public could see and comment on the proposed maps, saying the bill had been "published, not formally amended" and therefore was being presented to the body for action and public review. Senator Valadares called the amendments a "political power grab" and criticized the maps included in the package, citing splits of cities and counties and disputed compactness and community integrity. Senator Ochoa Bog and others argued the amendments conflict with timing and criteria set out in Article XI of the state constitution, which governs decennial redistricting and protections against partisan gerrymandering.

Procedure and next steps: Senators approved motions to allow committee hearings on the amendments and to let the appropriations committee take up the revised measure. Committee hearings were set or cleared to proceed so the public can comment on the proposed maps and language. Senators repeatedly noted that the amendments will be on future committee agendas and that the public will have opportunities to submit comments and testify before final floor action.

Points of contention and context: Opponents pressed two related points repeatedly: that the amendments were too voluminous (a number of senators referred to a 338-page package) for members to read before voting, and that posting the text online shortly before the floor session did not satisfy the constitutional intent of giving members and the public adequate time to review changes before adoption. Supporters countered that publishing the text on the legislative website and bringing it to committee and floor action is an accepted practice and that the public will have hearings and the final say if a constitutional amendment or ballot measure is involved.

Ending: With the floor votes completed, the Senate advanced the amendments back through committee and set hearings to gather public testimony. The next scheduled floor session is Thursday, Aug. 21, when members said they expected additional debate and votes on associated measures.