Tracy begins multi‑session process to shift to by‑district council elections amid CVRA risk

The Tracy City Council opened a public hearing Oct. 28 to begin a four‑hearing process to transition from at‑large to by‑district elections for council members, a change council adopted as a resolution of intent on Aug. 26, 2025.

City Clerk April Quintanilla told the council the process follows Elections Code section 10010 and the city will hold four public hearings, accept public plans and aim to have draft and revised maps available for consideration so a final ordinance could be adopted in time for the 2026 elections. "During this public hearing, staff recommends that the city council: receive a report from staff and the city's consultant on the districting process, permissible criteria..., provide and receive input from the public on the composition of voting districts before maps are drafted, and request any additional information needed to provide direction on creation of draft plans," Quintanilla said.

Demographic consultant Michael Wagaman described the hearing as the educational session and reviewed the ranked criteria that guide districting under California law: equal population, contiguity, communities of interest, topography and compactness. He emphasized that (1) population targets use adjusted 2020 census data and cannot use registered‑voter counts, and (2) race cannot be the predominant factor in drawing lines though the federal Voting Rights Act may apply in some circumstances. "This is your process, not mine," Wagaman said, explaining the public's role in defining communities of interest and in submitting draft maps using online and paper tools.

Staff detailed the city's outreach: bilingual materials, a districting webpage with an animated video posted Oct. 22, an email blast to 16,779 addresses (68% open rate reported), a newsletter to 16,398 addresses (62% open rate), a direct mailer to 45,774 addresses, in‑person tabling at a farmers market and a Dia de los Muertos event, and distribution of informational flyers in November utility bills. Wagaman demonstrated the online drawing tool and a paper "placemat" that residents can use to sketch a single district or a full plan; staff said paper submissions to the City Clerk will be digitized and treated equivalently to online plans.

Outside counsel Kristin Rogers of Olson Remcho LLP and the city attorney advised councilmembers that voluntarily starting the conversion helps the city control timing and outreach and reduces the risk of being forced into an expedited process after receiving a CVRA demand letter. "By voluntarily converting, staff has been able to assemble resources and marshal them to systematically and intentionally deploy a public outreach strategy," Rogers said; counsel noted jurisdictions that fought CVRA claims have largely been unsuccessful and have incurred high attorney fees.

Councilmembers asked technical and policy questions about census blocks (the consultant confirmed census blocks cannot be split), who draws blocks (U.S. Census Bureau), which local cities currently have district elections (Stockton, Lodi, Manteca), and whether the statewide Proposition 50 special election affects local districting (it does not). Several councilmembers asked staff and the consultant to prepare additional map layers for the next hearing, including school attendance boundaries and named older neighborhood subdivisions, and to review recent growth areas such as Tracy Hills and Ellis for potential undercounting relative to 2020 census figures.

Members of the public raised multiple concerns during public comment: meeting times that may exclude working residents, the currency of population figures in fast‑growing areas, the impact of residency requirements for candidates and safeguards against temporary moves to run for office, and whether districting could reduce voter choice or divide the community. Staff acknowledged those concerns, reiterated reliance on adjusted 2020 census data for equal‑population requirements, clarified the block‑boundary suggestion program applies to the 2030 census (so it will not change 2020 data used for this cycle), and confirmed the deadline for public plan submissions is 6:00 p.m. on Nov. 25 for inclusion at the Dec. 11 hearing; the next public hearing is scheduled for Nov. 18 at 7:00 p.m.

Councilmembers provided mixed views on the policy: some said they opposed districting on principle, while others supported proceeding now to limit legal and financial exposure and to preserve local control of the mapping process. Wagaman summarized next steps: staff will publish baseline maps and layers, accept public‑drawn maps and community‑of‑interest submissions, produce draft maps for hearing 3, and allow live line‑drawing adjustments in hearing 4 as councilmembers work toward an ordinance that could be adopted in early February 2026. "If you provide direction for the draft maps, we'll compile the public input and present draft plans at the next hearings," Wagaman said.

The hearing closed for this evening with direction that staff and the consultant prepare additional layers (school boundaries, named subdivisions, and growth estimates where available) and that the public continue to submit community‑of‑interest testimony and proposed plans.