Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022.02.17 - Minutes - Special Meeting.pdfCITY OF DIAMOND BAR MINUTES OF THE CITY COUJ VAGIL SPECIAL MEETING FEBRUARY 17, 2022 CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Low called the Special City Council meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. M/Low stated that consistent with COVID-19 regulations, members of the public were encouraged to participate and address the City Council during the public comment portion of the meeting via teleconference. City Council Members and staff participated telephonically. PLE®G O ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Low led the Pledge of Allegiance ROLL CALL: Council Members Stan Liu, Nancy Lyons, Steve Tye, Mayor Pro Tern Andrew Chou, and Mayor Ruth Low Staff in Attendance: Dan Fox, City Manager; Ryan McLean, Assistant City Manager; Omar Sandoval, Assistant City Attorney; Jason Jacobsen, Finance Director; Marsha Roa, Public Information Manager; Cecilia Arellano, Public Information Coordinator; Kristina Santana, City Clerk. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As presented. 1. PUBLIC COMMENTS: CC/Santana acknowledged receipt of emails from Andrew Wong (who also spoke during the meeting) and Sandra Ybanez, copies of which were forwarded to City Council Members. Dave Reynolds indicated it appears that the City is caught between a rock and a hGil d place and, this looks like another unfunded mandate for the City to be spending money that could be better spent elsewhere. Andrew Wong expressed concerns that redistricting would not be fairly administered and would not accurately represent all constituents within the City, questioned the consultant's conclusion about racially polarized voting and respectfully requested that the consultant's report be made available to the public, and suggested that a 10-person ad hoc committee be appointed to serve as an advisory board. Upon request by Mayor Low, CC/Santana read the email from Sandra Ybanez indicating she was not in support of transitioning to by -district elections. 2. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: 2.1 INTENT OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR TO TRANSITION FROM AT - LARGE TO BY -DISTRICT ELECTIONS PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA ELECTIONS CODE SECTION 10010(e)(3)(A). FEBRUARY 17, 2022 PAGE 2 ACM/McLean presented the staff report. CITY COUNCIL C/Tye thanked ACM/McLean for a very thorough presentation and felt the Council was prepared for this based on the previous Closed Session. While it is to him distasteful and disgusting, he believes there is nothing that can be done to prevent this from going into effect. C/Liu agreed that staff research and the presentation was very thorough. He asked what information would be forthcoming from the consultants. ACM/McLean responded that staff will make information available via the City's website, social media channels, and referred to Schedule A of the Resolution which contains a timeline of the mandatory meetings and Safe Harbor provisions. The City may choose to conduct other public workshops and information would be compiled and presented to the City Council for its decision -making in how the districts are drawn. C/Lyons agreed that this is very distasteful and very unfortunate and agreed with Mr. Reynolds comments. She asked if residents were able to vote on the matter and ACM/McLean responded that the Safe Harbor provisions require five public hearings with the City Council during the 90- day period to make a decision on the map and does not include a public vote. ACA/Sandoval reiterated the State has made it such that a public vote is taken away from the people. If the Council were to adopt the resolution and move forward through the Safe Harbor provision, it gives the City more opportunity for public input and public participation than it would if the City were to get sued which would place the matter in the hands of a judge to resolve. M/Low asked if the CVRA is biased such that cities and districts in the State of California move to district voting as opposed to at -large v©tine and ACA/Sandoval responded yes. M/Low asked if they have done so by making it so expensive for cities to fight and ACA/Sandoval responded that the state legislature eliminated some of the requirements for a plaintiff to overcome in a Voting Rights Act by lowering the threshold to show racially polarized voting and mandates the Court to grant attorneys fees to successful plaintiffs subject to a lodestar based on a particular civil rights case, making settlements and judgements for attorneys fees so high. M/Low asked if in the case of the letter Diamond Bar received, if a particular resident would be named that might sue the City and ACA Sandoval responded that the resident would be identified once litigation is filed. The letter was sent on behalf of the Southwest Voter Registration Education Project because these non -profits or interest groups are used to promote this litigation and if the City Council were to decide to not take advantage of the safe harbor provision, they would identify a plaintiff and file litigation in the name of that plaintiff who, in this case, would be a registered voter of Diamond Bar. FEBRUARY 17, 2022 PAGE 3 CITY COUNCIL M/Low offered that this law as written allows for a non-profit organization or public interest group to hire lawyers and write letters to cities and try to enforce the California Voting Rights Act and then at some point, find a person to be a named plaintiff in a lawsuit making it easy to sue a city, district, school board or any agency and ACA/Sandoval agreed that M/Low was correct in her presumption. M/Low stated that in addition, the legislature has set this up to make it easy for a lawsuit against the city to succeed and making it so hard for the city to win is because of the fees that can be collected by a law firm and ACA/Sandoval stated that M/Low was correct. M/Low asked ACA/Sandoval to explain "Lodestar" and ACA/Sandoval stated that the lodestar method refers to a method of computing attorney's fees whereby a trial court must multiply the number of hours reasonably spent by trial counsel by a reasonable hourly rate. This figure can then be adjusted upward or downward for certain factors known as multipliers, such as contingency and the quality of the work performed, to arrive at a final fee. Under the lodestar method, the most heavily weighted multipliers are the time and labor required. M/Low asked what ratio of disparity would a plaintiff need to show in order to succeed in their suit against the City and ACA/Sandoval responded that all they have to show is that there is evidence of racially pluralized voting. M/Low asked if it was ACA/Sandoval's legal opinion that if the City Council voted to adopt the Resolution that the City would win or lose the lawsuit and ACA/Sandoval responded that there is no way that this case can successfully be defended. In addition, the California Voting Rights Act has been challenged on constitutional grounds in federal court and the federal courts have upheld the law; the law has also been challenged in the State of California as being an overreach by the legislature and the courts have upheld the law which is why some cities have had to pay large amounts of attorney's fees. C/Tye felt that the letter represented an ambulance chaser lawyer who sees an opportunity and will go community to community until everybody is voting by district and then they go find a plaintiff. C/Tye said there is a difference between racially polarized voting and being a racially polarized community and that the Council represented for 24 years by a Hispanic woman and other minority community members. C/Tye stated that if Mr. Shenkman is accurate and Diamond Bar is experiencing racially polarized voting, what he foresees is a possibility that Diamond Bar could have racially polarized voting by district and ACA/Sandoval responded that C/Tye's statement was a fair statement. C/Tye said he wanted it to be clear that taking this opportunity to utilize Safe Harbor is the only real choice. FEBRUARY 17, 2022 PAGE 4 CITY COUNCIL C/Liu asked ACA/Sandoval to elaborate on "safe harbor' and what he would estimate the percentage of a successful challenge might be. ACA/Sandoval explained the safe harbor provisions and timing of the public hearing process to transition to district -based elections and indicated he believes the plaintiff would have a 100 percent chance of winning the case. MPT/Chou agreed with Andrew Wong that a matter as important as fair representation should be in the hands of the people and inquired if the Council would be able to proceed with a two -track solution by moving forward with the resolution for establishing districts and at the same time, consider putting this matter to a vote of the people and ACA/Sandoval reiterated that in terms of the California Voting Rights Act, in order to be able to limit the exposure to attorney's fees, there is no option to consider a vote of the people due to the mandated time limits. C/Tye stated that while he believed the right thing would be to vote "no" he refused to put the City in jeopardy relative to its available resources so he will hold his nose and vote "yes". M/Low said she had similar sentiments on this issue. C/Lyons moved, C/Liu seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 2022-10 State the City's Intent to transition from At -Large to By -District Elections pursuant to California Elections Code Section 10010(e)(3)(A). Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS Liu, Lyons, Tye, MPT/Chou, M/Low NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE ABSFNT: COUNCIL MFMFRS: NONE 2.2 CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH REDISTRICTING PARTNERS, INC. ACM/McLean presented the staff report. C/Tye said he appreciated staff consideration in this matter and said he was comfortable with staff recommendation and Redistricting Partners' reputation throughout the state. C/Liu asked for references from cities similar to Diamond Bar and whether they will participate in outreach. ACA/McLean responded that both proposals are from qualified firms and Redistricting Partners, unlike the other consulting firm, has done more work in the southern part of the state including work for the cities of Santa Ana, LAUSD, Napa, Carpinteria, San Jose and Davis and believes both have the ability to provide redistricting services. The additional items including the base work for public hearings, safe harbor process and a series of public engagements and outreach FEBRUARY 17, 2022 PAGE 5 CITY COUNCIL options were included in a not4o-exceed amount for the contract. C/Lyons complimented ACM/McLean for his research and putting this item together so quickly and thoroughly. She asked ACA/Sandoval if he had worked with either consulting firm and ACA/Sandoval responded that he had not. M/Low said she preferred the contract with Redistricting Partners which includes several benefits to the community and furthers the goals of Council in its efforts toward transparency and public participation. She believes that the community has elected the current Council because they have faith and trust in the members who occupy these positions who hold these values close and would not violate the public trust by selecting a consultant than would doing anything less than what is absolutely fair and within the law. C/Liu moved, MPT/Chou seconded, to: A. Appropriate One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000) from the General Fund reserve to City Manager Professional Services; and, B. Approve and authorize the Mayor to sign the Consulting Services Agreement with Redistricting Partners, Inc. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS Liu, Lyons, Tye, MPT/Chou, M/Low NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE 3. COUNCIL COMMENTS: C/Liu thanked staff for detailed presentations and his colleagues for their diligence on this matter. APT/Chou appreciated M/Love's comments about this being an open and transparent process Ultimately, Councilmembers represent the people of Diamond Bar and do their best to follow the wishes of the people. M/Low said that as members of the City Council, she and her colleagues are often called upon to make very difficult decisions and tonight's decision is particularly difficult because the City has been backed into a corner and has been forced to make a decision between a bad result and a worse result for the City and whether Diamond Bar would be able to prevail in litigation where no other city has ever prevailed. She thanked ACM/McLean, staff and ACA/Sandoval for their advice and participation. FEBRUARY 17, 2022 PAGE 6 CITY COUNCIL ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to conduct, Mayor Low adjourned the Special City Council Meeting at 6:09 p.m. Respectfully submitted: Krrstina Santana, City Clerk The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this 1St day of March, 2022. r Ruth M. Low, 'Mayor