Council votes to begin district‑based election process; authorizes consultant contract

The council adopted a resolution of intention to study transitioning to district‑based elections after receiving a demand letter alleging a potential California Voting Rights Act claim. City special counsel explained the demand letter and the law's ‘‘safe harbor’’ provision: if the city passes a resolution of intent and completes the districting process within the statutory window, the plaintiff's attorney’s fees are capped at a reduced amount. Counsel also explained that if the city is sued and loses, attorney fee exposure can be substantially higher.

Council voted to adopt the resolution and, at the same meeting, authorized the city manager to enter a consultant agreement (not to exceed $80,000) to provide demography and mapping services and to run the public hearings process. Counsel described the typical process: a demographer will produce multiple map options for council and public review, and the city will hold a series of hearings (staff said five meetings were planned) to solicit public input before the council acts. Counsel and staff emphasized that adopted maps must respect legal constraints including equal population, contiguity, communities of interest and applicable state and federal requirements; staff also noted that the mayoral office could remain an at‑large position if council prefers.

Public comment included questions about whether small city size affects the law (the attorney said it does not) and about the effect on staggered council terms, vacancy filling, and parcels owned by nonresidents; counsel provided clarifications. Council approved the resolution and separately authorized the manager to engage a consultant; both votes were by roll call and passed.