Loading...
CAC 20121213_PacketCITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT AGENDA Thursday, December 13, 2012 6:30 p.m. Trident Education Center 1800 W. Ball Road, Anaheim, CA 92804 1. Call meeting to order 2. Flag Salute 3. Committee Procedures Action: Approve Procedures. 4. Approve CAC minutes of the November 8, 2012 meeting Action: Approve minutes. 5. Public Comments (Individual audience participation is limited to three (3) minutes per speaker) Action: Public comments on any agenda items or subject matter within the jurisdiction of the Citizens Advisory Committee. 6. Receive and file the report on Community Outreach efforts Action: Receive and file community outreach report, upon staff presentation of outreach efforts. 7. Overview and presentation on California Voting Rights Act Action: Presentation by Justin Levitt, Associate Professor of Law, Loyola Law School. 8. Presentation on city comparisons Action: Presentation by City of Vista and City of Modesto. 9. Committee meeting calendar Action: Approve January CAC meeting dates/locations (January 10 and January 31, 2013) and consider approval of any future meetings dates/locations. 10. Committee Communications Action: Closing comments. 11 . Adjournment ***** Agenda related writings or documents provided to the Citizens Advisory Committee on Elections and Community Involvement are available for public inspection in the Office of the City Clerk, at www.anaheim.net/CACElections, and in the binder located in the meeting room while the Committee is in session. Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda (other than writings legally exempt from public disclosure) will be made available for public inspection in the Office of the City Clerk, located at 200 S. Anaheim nd Blvd., 2 Floor, Anaheim, CA 92805, during regular business hours. Any person who requires a disability-related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services, in order to participate in the public meeting may request such modification, accommodation, aid or service by contacting the City Clerk’s Office at 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, California, or by telephone at (714) 765-5166, no later than 10:00 AM on the day preceding the scheduled meeting. Upon request, this agenda will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability, as required by Section 202 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. POSTING STATEMENT: On December 10, 2012, a true and correct copy of this agenda was posted on the kiosk outside City Hall, 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Internet Access to the City’s CAC agendas and related material is available prior to CAC Meetings at www.anaheim.net/CACElections ¢Ì¸·­°¿¹»´»º¬·²¬»²¬·±²¿´´§¾´¿²µ¢ ÒÑÎÛÐÑÎÌýï ¢Ì¸·­°¿¹»´»º¬·²¬»²¬·±²¿´´§¾´¿²µ¢ ÒÑÎÛÐÑÎÌýî ß¹»²¼¿×¬»³Ò±òí Memorandum TO: CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT DATE: DECEMBER 13, 2012 SUBJECT: MEETNG PROCEDURES FOR THE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT ______________________________________________________________________________ ACTION: Consider and approve meeting procedures for the Citizens Advisory Committee on Elections and Community Involvement (CAC). DISCUSSION: This items was continued from the November 8, 2012 CAC meeting. The intent of the procedural rules is to assist in guiding the conduct of the CACs public meetings to fulfill its mission. Anaheim City Council Resolution No. 2012-090 establishes and outlines the purpose, function, and general rules of the Citizens Advisory Committee on Elections and Community Involvement. Pursuant to this Resolution, the CAC consists of ten (10) voting members, and one ex-officio member, for a total of eleven (11) members. The Committee is charged with providing recommendations to the City Council by May 13, 2013 on promoting the full participation of all ethnic and racial groups in local elections. CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT Procedural Rules Section 1: General 1.1 Anaheim City Council Resolution No. 2012-090 establishes and outlines the purpose and function of the Citizens Advisory Committee on Elections and Community Involvement (“CAC”). Pursuant to this Resolution, the CAC consists of ten (10) voting members, and one ex- officio member for a total of eleven (11) members. The Committee is charged with providing recommendations to the City Council by May 13, 2013 on promoting the full participation of all ethnic and racial groups in local elections. The CAC adopts these procedural rules to guide the conduct of its public meetings while attempting to fulfill its mission. Section 2: Officers 2.1 The officers of the CAC shall be a Chair and Vice Chair. 2.2 Officers shall be elected by the voting members of the CAC. A voting member may nominate any voting member, including him/herself, for an officer position. No second is necessary. A nominee receiving a majority of votes of the present members has been elected. If no nominee receives a majority, the CAC may vote upon the two nominees receiving the most votes until one is elected. 2.3 The Chair shall preside at meetings of the CAC. In the absence of the Chair, the Vice Chair shall preside. If both officers are absent from the same meeting, and a quorum is present, the remaining CAC members may select a Chair Pro Tem to preside over that meeting. Section 3: Meetings 3.1 At least one regular meeting shall be held each month at such times and places, throughout different areas of the city of Anaheim, to be selected by the CAC, or by staff as directed by the CAC. 3.2 Special meetings may be called by the Chair or by a majority of the CAC, which would be at least six members. 3.3 Emergency meetings may be held by the CAC, if any, only in the time, place and manner and for the specified purposes allowed by law, including but not limited to Government Code Section 54956.5, or any successor provision thereto. 3.4 Meeting notices, agendas, and other matters required to be publicly posted pursuant to any applicable provision of law for regular, special and emergency meetings shall be posted for each meeting as required by law. 3.5 Six voting members of the CAC shall constitute a quorum for the purpose of conducting CAC business. 3.6 Except as specifically provided by law, all meetings of the CAC shall be open and public. Section 4: Rules of Order 4.1 Report: If an agenda item calls for a report or presentation to the CAC, the Chair shall initiate such item by calling for the appropriate presentation. 4.2 Public Comment:Every agenda shall provide an opportunity for public comment on issues noticed on the agenda or within the subject matter jurisdiction of the CAC. Unless extended by the CAC, the amount of time for each individual speaker during public comment shall not exceed three minutes. 4.3 Obtaining the Floor: Following presentation, if any, the Chair may initiate or invite discussion amongst the CAC. Any member of the CAC wishing to speak must first obtain the floor by being recognized by the Chair. The Chair must recognize any CAC member who seeks the floor when appropriately entitled to do so. 4.4 Motions: The Chair or any voting member of the CAC may make a motion for action. Before a motion may be considered or debated, it must be seconded by another voting member. Once a motion has been made and seconded, the Chair shall open the motion up for debate among the CAC, offering the first opportunity for debate to the moving member, and thereafter to any member properly recognized by the Chair. Once the matter has been fully debated and the Chair calls for a vote, no further debate will be allowed, provided however, CAC members will be briefly allowed to explain their vote. 4.5 Voting: If voting is by voice vote or visual display, the Chair shall declare the result and the number of aye or no votes. The CAC may also vote by roll call. Only those members present at the meeting may vote. Votes cast at previous meetings are not counted. Proxy voting is not permitted. The results of the ayes and noes shall be clearly set forth in the minutes. 4.6 Voting results: A motion shall carry only if a majority of voting members present at the meeting vote in favor. A tie vote results in the failure of the motion. 4.7 Matter Not On The Agenda: No formal action shall be taken on any matter not appearing on the posted agenda, except as otherwise permitted by law. 4.8 Procedures During Consideration of Motions: Once a main motion is properly placed on the floor, several subsidiary motions may be employed in addressing this main motion. A second, competing motion, other than an amendment, subsidiary motion, or motion of order or convenience as discussed below, is out of order any may not be considered while the main motion is still on the floor. : The CAC may make procedural motions in order to 4.9 Motions of Order or Convenience insure orderly conduct of the meeting, or for the convenience of CCC members. Procedural motions are listed below in descending order of precedence. 4.9.1 Recess: Any CAC member may move for a temporary recess. The motion must be seconded and then passed by a majority vote. 4.9.2 Division of Motion: Any CAC member may move to divide the subject matter of a motion made up of several parts in order to vote separately on each part. The motion to divide must be seconded and then passed by a majority vote. 4.9.3 Point of Order: Any CAC member may require the Chair to enforce the rules of the CAC by raising a point of order. The point shall be ruled upon by the Chair. 4.10 Subsidiary Motions: Subsidiary motions take precedence over the main motion, and if properly made and seconded, must be disposed of before the main motion can be acted upon. Even where the main motion under consideration requires a super majority vote for adoption, a subsidiary vote requires only a majority vote for adoption. The following motions may be made by any voting member at any appropriate time during the discussion of the main motion. Subsidiary motions are listed below in descending order of precedence. 4.10.1 Table: A member may move to table a motion or an issue being discussed. If seconded and passed by majority vote, it suspends any further discussion.In order to bring the question back before the CAC at the same meeting at which it was tabled, a voting member must move to take it back from the table, which must be seconded and passed by majority vote. Any issue tabled at one meeting may be raised at a subsequent meeting if noticed on the agenda. 4.10.2 Amend: A voting CAC member may move to amend the main motion or a pending amendment to the main motion. More than two amendments to the main motion are not permitted. Before the main motion, or earlier amendment, may be acted upon, the most recent amendment must first be acted upon. A motion to amend must be seconded to be considered and requires a majority vote to pass. An amendment must be related to the main motion or amendment to which it is directed. A motion which would substitute a new motion rather than simply amend the pending main motion may be declared out of order by the Chair. 4.10.3 Move Previous Motion: Any voting member recognized by the Chair may move to immediately bring the motion being debated by the CAC to a vote, suspending further debate. If seconded and passed by two thirds of the voting members present, further debate should cease and the Chair will call for an immediate vote on the pending motion. Section 5: Applicability of Rules 5.1 In the event of any conflict between the rules, procedures, and other provisions specified herein and any law or other legal requirement applicable to the conduct of any business before the CAC, the provisions of any such law, other legal requirement, or Resolution No. 2012-090 shall supersede and take precedence over conflicting provisions of these rules. 5.2 The rules, procedures and other provisions specified herein shall be deemed directory and not mandatory. Failure of the CAC to comply with any rule, procedure, or other provision specified herein shall not affect the validity of any action taken by the CAC, nor be a basis for contesting the validity of the CAC’s actions, findings, or final report. 5.3 The procedures of the CAC may be amended at any noticed meeting of the CAC by a majority vote. Such amendments shall become effective upon approval by the CAC. 92270 ß¹»²¼¿×¬»³Ò±òðì CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT MINUTES Thursday, November 8, 2012 7:00 p.m. Katella High School, Crown Royal Theater 2200 E. Wagner Ave., Anaheim, CA 92806 COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Anthony Armas John Woodhead, Ex Officio Member Bill Dalati David Diaz Joseph Karaki Larry Larsen Martin Lopez Gloria Ma’ae Vivian Pham Vic Real COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT: Peter Agarwal STAFF PRESENT: Robert J. Tyson, Deputy City Attorney Caroline Morey, Recording Secretary 1. Call meeting to order. The meeting of the Citizens Advisory Committee on Elections and Community Involvement (CAC) was called to order at 7:03 p.m. 2. Flag Salute 3. Chair and Vice Chair (continued from October 18, 2012 meeting) Action: Nominate and appoint a Chair and Vice Chair. Commissioner Ma’ae nominated David Diaz to Chair, seconded by Commissioner Armas. Commissioner Lopez nominated Vivian Pham to Chair, seconded by Commissioner Larsen. Commissioner Karaki motioned that the process to consider appointments be considered first, seconded by Commissioner Real. After a brief discussion, the process of appointments were considered before nominations. Ex-officio commissioner Woodhead took a roll call vote: AYES – 2 (Commissioners Karaki, Real), NOES - 7 (Armas, Dalati, Diaz, Larsen, Lopez, Ma’ae, Pham). ABSENT – 1 (Agarwal). Motion failed. Regular Meeting of the Citizens Advisory Committee, Elections and Community Involvement November 8, 2012 Page 2 of 6 Roll Call vote for Commissioner David Diaz: AYES – 4 (Armas, Diaz, Ma’ae, Real). NOES – 5 (Dalati, Karaki, Larsen, Lopez, Pham). Motion Failed. (Note: Ex-officio Commissioner Woodhead incorrectly indicated the votes as AYES: 3, NOES - 6 during the meeting; motion still failed). Roll Call for Commissioner Vivan Pham: AYES – 5 (Armas, Dalati, Larsen, Lopez, Pham). NOES – 4 (Diaz, Karaki, Ma’ae, Real). Motion Passed. (Note: Ex-officio Commissioner Woodhead incorrectly indicated the votes as AYES: 6, NOES - 3 during the meeting; motion still passed). Vivian Pham was appointed Chair. Upon appointment, Chair Pham requested Ex-officio Commissioner continue leading the remainder of the meeting. Nominations for Vice-Chair were received with Chair Pham nominating Commissioner Bill Dalati, seconded by Commissioner Dalati. With no other nominations received, the committee unanimously approved the appointment. Bill Dalati was appointed Vice Chair. 4. Public Comments Action: Public comments on any agenda items or subject matter within Please note: the jurisdiction of the Citizens Advisory Committee. Individual audience participation is limited to three minutes per speaker. Michael Dresser, Anaheim resident, explained he was trying to understand the purpose of the committee. Mr. Dresser provided information on Anaheim’s population, voter registration and voting trends and expressed his opposition to districting. Ron Bengochea, Anaheim resident, provided his opposition to redistricting and provided information regarding voter turnout. He supported any decision by the commission should be voted upon by the citizens of Anaheim. Brian Chuchua provided comments about the process. Council Member Kris Murray congratulated Chair Pham and Vice Chair Dalati on their appointments and expressed her appreciation to the committee for their commitment and energy to the CAC. She spoke to the committee about their charge, including the election system, citizen engagement, and voter registration. She underscored the value and importance of the tasks before the committee and encouraged them to take advantage of available resources to ensure they obtain information necessary to make their recommendation to the City Council. Council Member Gail Eastman spoke of the charge placed on the CAC and explained that she was interested in hearing about how the community felt about the city’s representation. She thanked the committee for their service and encouraged them to reach out to the public and staff to meet their goals. Regular Meeting of the Citizens Advisory Committee, Elections and Community Involvement November 8, 2012 Page 3 of 6 Stephen Faessel, Anaheim resident, spoke about his community involvement and hope that the committee could sift through the different competing agendas to arrive at what would be best for the Anaheim community. He provided his support. With no further public comments, Ex-officio Commissioner Woodhead closed the public comment period. 5. Receive and file a report on Community Outreach efforts and minutes of the October 18, 2012 CAC Meeting Action: Motion to receive and file. Motion to receive and file by Chair Pham, seconded by Commissioner Dalati. AYES – 9. NOES – 0. ABSENT – 1 (Agarwal). Motion passed. Before addressing the remainder of the agenda, Ex-officio Commissioner Woodhead introduced Anaheim Deputy City Attorney, Robert Tyson who provided an update on the lawsuit filed against the city by the ACLU. Mr. Tyson advised that Moreno vs. City of Anaheim was filed on June 28, 2012 in Orange County Superior Court, where the plaintiffs brought a single cause of action alleging that the single at large system electing city council members violated the California Voting Rights Act. The complaint alleged that an analysis of the election history in Anaheim showed what is called “racially polarized voting,” specifically alleging that Latino voters, a very significant portion of the city and electorate, have been unable to elect their candidate of choice to the City Council as a result of racially polarized voting. Plaintiffs further alleged that changing the election of council members to by-district would provide the chance to influence elections which would thereby resolve the alleged violation of the California Voting Rights Act. He informed that the city hired outside counsel to handle the lawsuit and the City Council would direct outside counsel on important decisions as the case proceeded. Currently, he provided, the City filed a Motion to Stay to give the City Council time to discover the findings and recommendations of this committee as part of any possible legislative solution to the case, which is scheduled to be heard in December 2012. Mr. Tyson stressed that the Committee’s work must be independent from the voting rights lawsuit and advised that the Council was not asking this committee to fix any legal problems, evaluate the merits or cost of the lawsuit, and was not asking the committee to base the final recommendations on how their recommendations might affect the lawsuit. Rather, he added, pursuant to the City Council resolution, the committee was charged to provide advice to the City Council on how they could achieve the full participation of all ethnic and racial groups in local elections. 6. Overview and Discussion of election systems Action: Presentation by Justin A. Tucker, Ph.D. Director of Center for Public Policy, California State University Fullerton “ Printed copies of presentation made available during meeting, titled Local Elections Primer.” Dr. Tucker confirmed that his presentation was verified by California State University Fullerton. He encouraged the committee to review the presentation with him, take notes, and ask Regular Meeting of the Citizens Advisory Committee, Elections and Community Involvement November 8, 2012 Page 4 of 6 questions. Dr. Tucker provided information about at large elections vs. district-based elections and advised that he had no position on either system; rather, he was present to provide data and information for the committee to base their recommendations upon. He provided a general outline of his presentation: voting methods, how a mayor is elected, and how rules determine the outcomes. He advised that his information was standard finding in political science research and added that his expertise was not in the subject matter of the Voting Rights Act and he therefore recommended the committee seek an expert to discuss such topic. Commissioner Diaz asked if Dr. Tucker had data on whether the shift in voting systems increased voter participation with Dr. Tucker responding that he did not have the information available, but could provide more information at a later date. Dr. Tucker responded, in response to Commissioner Armas, that the Voting Rights Act did not consider the type of system a jurisdiction had, instead it looked at the outcomes and opportunities. He added that if any group could prove exclusion, then there would be a possible violation. Dr. Tucker added that he could not provide any legal advice providing that every option had varying impacts. Commissioner Dalati asked which election system was preferred with Dr. Tucker stating none. From a theoretical perspective, Dr. Tucker elaborated, each system had pros and cons with varying trade-offs, adding that there was no way to say that one system was the very best. He concluded stating that there was a reasonable trade-off for each community where diversity could be incorporate while not slowing down the impact of efficiency on the city’s work. At the request of Commissioner Real, Dr. Tucker provided the highlights of Resolution No. 2012-090 and further recommended a roadmap plan for the committee to consider which would assist in accomplishing their tasks. Commissioner Dalati inquired about the city’s budget with Ex-officio Commissioner Woodhead advising that the matter in which a member is elected is separate from how money is spent, which is directed by the City Council. After further discussion with Dr. Tucker reminding the committee about their charge to make a recommendation to Council by May 31, 2013, not necessarily the drawing of lines, Commissioner Diaz motioned to re-open public comments with a two minute limitation, seconded by Commissioner Dalati. Ayes – 9. Noes – 0. ABSENT – 1 (Agarwal). Motion passed. Grant Henninger asked Dr. Tucker to share the roles a mayor could have in a city. Dr. Tucker explained different forms of mayoral systems, however added this information may not be relevant since such was not the charge of this committee. He added that any changes to the mayoral system would require significant changes to the city’s charter. Ron Bengochea, resident, spoke about his experience at council meetings and that he felt represented by council with the current at-large system. Abe Ibrahim asked for additional facts, such as gender and financial income. Regular Meeting of the Citizens Advisory Committee, Elections and Community Involvement November 8, 2012 Page 5 of 6 Brian Chuchua expressed his understanding that the committee was charged with putting something proper before the voters to vote upon. An unidentified individual complemented Dr. Tucker’s presentation and spoke of his concern that the committee would get caught up with the election process instead of increasing voter participation, which he felt was most significant. Dr. Patricia Adelekan, resident and a retired educator, thanked Dr. Tucker for his presentation and posed several questions as to what type of information she would be interested to learn about and believed would be helpful to this committee, such as why certain cities varied in the number of districts they had and how those cities arrived at their decision. Nat Villa Palma, resident, thanked Dr. Tucker for his presentation and provided supporting words to the committee. With no further public comments, Ex-officio Commissioner Woodhead closed the public comment period. Chair Pham requested a presentation on the California Voting Rights Act and update on the lawsuit. Deputy City Attorney Tyson stated that it was likely that he would be able to provide the committee with an update on the December 6 hearing at the committee’s next meeting. Mr. Tyson further responded to Commissioner Dalati that the cost of the lawsuit was being managed by the City Council. Additional discussion regarding the litigation took place, with ex- officio Commissioner Woodhead adding that the committee should think of the litigation and the committee’s responsibilities existing in parallel universes. He reminded the committee that they were charged with looking at the electoral systems and enhancing citizenry participation. Commissioner Ma’ae asked for information on what other cities were doing, their process, outcome, and why they came to that decision. 7. Agenda setting and Committee meeting calendar Action: Discuss and set an agenda for the next regular meeting and consider future meeting dates through May 31, 2013. After some discussion regarding meeting dates and locations the Chair requested a brief recess. The meeting was called back into session at 9:03 p.m. by Ex-officio Commissioner Mr. Woodhead. Ex-officio Commissioner Woodhead recommended the committee consider moving their th meetings to an earlier start time. Chair Pham motion to start the December 13 meet at 6:30 p.m., seconded by Commissioner Armas. AYES – 9; NOES – 0; ABSENT – 1 (Agarwal). Motion passed. th The committee unanimously agreed to have staff select the December 13 meeting facility, to be held in South Anaheim. Regular Meeting of the Citizens Advisory Committee, Elections and Community Involvement November 8, 2012 Page 6 of 6 Motion by Commissioner Diaz, seconded by Chair Pham to accept the agenda as presented in Dr. Tucker’s roadmap and to include a presentation from other cities who have gone through a similar process. AYES – 9; NOES – 0; ABSENT – 1 (Agarwal). Motion passed. 8. Committee Procedures Action: Approve Procedures. Motion by Commissioner Dalati to continue this item to the next meeting, seconded by Commisioner Lopez. AYES – 9; NOES – 0; ABSENT – 1 (Agarwal). Motion passed. 9. Committee Communications Action: Closing comments. (Commissioner Larsen excused himself from the meeting at 9:00 p.m.) Chair Pham thanked audience and staff for their participation. Commissioner Real thanked all in attendance. Commissioner Dalati thanked all for attending and added this process was good for Anaheim, ensuring that no one would be left out as the committee worked together. Commissioner Ma’ae looked forward to the next meeting and learning more about the process. Commissioner Armas thanked those in attendance and encouraged attendees to take Dr. Tucker’s handout and share it with their neighbors. He asked the community to attend future meetings and provide their feedback. 10. Adjournment. 9:16 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Caroline Morey Recording Secretary ¢Ì¸·­°¿¹»´»º¬·²¬»²¬·±²¿´´§¾´¿²µ¢ ÒÑÎÛÐÑÎÌýë ß¹»²¼¿×¬»³Ò±òê Memorandum TO: CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT DATE: DECEMBER 13, 2012 SUBJECT: COMMUNITY OUTREACH REPORT ______________________________________________________________________________ ACTION: Receive and file this report relating to community outreach efforts for the meetings of the Citizens Advisory Committee on Elections and Community Involvement (CAC). DISCUSSION: A responsibility of this committee, as outlined in Resolution No. 2012-090, is to “identify and engage community groups that can assist the City with encouraging resident participation.” To ensure that all members of the public are fully informed about future meetings and discussion, the City has pursued a number of efforts as well as identifying a Community Outreach consultant to further enhance public awareness. To date, the following community outreach efforts have been launched and will continue to be carried out for each CAC meeting: Placement of large banners at various locations surrounding each meeting location Information slide on the Anaheim local access channel, ACTV Channel 3 Flyers placed throughout city hall public counters, Anaheim West Tower, and all city libraries Attendance at local community group meetings to share meeting date/location and purpose Public Utilities quarterly newsletter, distributed to approximately 150,000 customers, both residential and businesses (first issue January/February) Utility bill print message distributed to all utility customers (scheduled to go out to 150,000 customers in December 2012) Easy reference tri-fold brochure outlining the CACs purpose and related information Anaheim magazine, Fall Edition. Half-page advertisement to build awareness and inclusion on master calendar (distribution of 116,000 in mid-November) Press Releases distributed to more than 3,000 contacts as well as over 10,000 e-subscribers. Partnership with local media to highlight upcoming meetings/press releases in regular publications Facebook postings (approximately 3,400 followers) Twitter (approximately 500 followers) Meeting information placed on the City’s online community master calendar located on the homepage of www.anaheim.net Continual partnership with community partners to further communicate CAC efforts and meetings (including the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce and the Anaheim/Orange County Visitors and Convention Bureau, who will forward meeting information to their members and partners, and various community groups, including but not limited to the Anaheim Religious Community Council and Neighborhood Councils) In addition to pre-meeting outreach, a webpage has been dedicated to the CAC to provide access to recorded meetings, agendas and all CAC related materials and press releases (www.anaheim.net/CACElections). Residents may also view all CAC meetings on ACTV Channel 3, 7 days/week (M/W/F/SU at 7pm and T/TH/SA at 12pm). As previously mentioned, the city will continue to pursue greater outreach efforts throughout Anaheim by pursuing a partnership with a skilled consultant. ß¹»²¼¿×¬»³Ò±òé Memorandum TO: CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT MEMBERS DATE: DECEMBER 10, 2012 SUBJECT: CALIFORNIA VOTING RIGHTS ACT ____________________________________________________________________________ At the November 8, 2012 meeting, the CAC requested to hear from a speaker on the California Voting Rights Act. Justin Levitt, Associate Professor from Loyola Law School will be presenting a brief overview of the law. Justin Levitt’s complete bio is attached. Justin Levitt, Associate Professor of Law Justin Levitt is an Associate Professor of Law at Loyola Law School, Los Angeles, teaching constitutional law and the law of democracy. Professor Levitt is a national expert in election law, with particular focus on election administration and redistricting. His work has included extensive research into pressing issues of election law and practice; the publication of studies and reports for public and scholarly audiences; assistance to federal and state administrative and legislative bodies with responsibility over elections; participation as amicus curiae in significant cases around the country; and litigation as counsel for parties seeking to compel states to comply with their obligations under federal law and the Constitution. Professor Levitt is the author or co-author of articles in both law reviews and peer-reviewed journals, including the Harvard Law Review, the Yale Law and Policy Review, the Georgetown Law Journal, the William & Mary Law Review, and the Election Law Journal. He has also authored multiple monographs, including the Citizen’s Guide to Redistricting, as well as extensive additional shorter research pieces and commentaries for a more public audience. His research and testimony has been cited extensively in the media and the courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court. In this redistricting cycle, Professor Levitt also maintains the website All About Redistricting, http://redistricting.lls.edu, tracking the redistricting process and pertinent litigation for state legislative and congressional redistricting around the country. Professor Levitt has served in various capacities for several presidential campaigns, including most recently as the National Voter Protection Counsel in 2008, helping to run an unprecedented effort ensuring that tens of millions of citizens could vote and have those votes counted. Before joining the faculty of Loyola Law School, he was counsel at the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law for five years. He has also worked as in- house counsel to the country's largest independent voter registration and engagement operations, and at several nonprofit civil rights and civil liberties organizations. Professor Levitt served as a law clerk to Judge Stephen Reinhardt of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. He graduated magna cum laude with a law degree and a masters degree in public administration from Harvard University, where he was an articles editor for the Harvard Law Review; he also earned a bachelor’s degree magna cum laude from Harvard College. He is admitted to the bar in California, New Jersey, New York, and the District of Columbia, and to the U.S. Courts of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit and Eleventh Circuit, and the U.S. District Courts in the Central District of California and Northern District of Florida. ß¹»²¼¿×¬»³Ò±òðè Memorandum TO: CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT MEMBERS DATE: DECEMBER 10, 2012 SUBJECT: CITY’S COMMISSIONS ON ELECTORAL SYSTEMS ____________________________________________________________________________ ACTION: Receive and file this report relating to other city’s citizens commissions on electoral systems for the Anaheim Citizens Advisory Committee on Elections and Community Outreach (CAC). DISCUSSION: At the November 8, 2012 meeting, the CAC requested to hear from other cities that have created similar citizen commissions on electoral systems and have gone through a process where the community has studied and implemented recommendations. The two speakers on this agenda item are Mr. Wayne Dernetz from the city of Vista and Mr. George Petrulakis from the city of Modesto. City of Vista The city of Vista established an Ad Hoc Committee on Community Involvement in 2003 in order to gather community input on whether voting districts would benefit the city of Vista. The committee heard from speakers, studied related materials and developed recommendations which were presented to the city council. As a result of the recommendations, the city council created the Community Outreach Committee in 2004 with a mission to increase citizen participation in the community in regard to voter education and voter outreach. Wayne Dernetz served as the city attorney for the city of Vista and assisted the committee throughout the process. Wayne Dernetz completed his college education at U.C. Berkeley in June, 1964, with a degree in economics. He later earned a graduate degree in public policy at the Goldman School of Public Policy, U.C. Berkeley, in 1971. In May 1991, Mr. Dernetz graduated with honors from the California Western School of Law in San Diego. He was admitted to the California State Bar later that year. Mr. Dernetz’s entire career has been devoted to public service. In June, 1994, Mr. Dernetz accepted an offer from the Vista city council to work full time as Vista’s city attorney, a post he held until his retirement in June 2005. Throughout his career, Mr. Dernetz has been active in community affairs, volunteer and community organizations, as well as professional and peer organizations. Upon retirement, Mr. Dernetz reopened his municipal consulting practice and provided occasional services to several cities and private interests until 2008. Most recently, he has become an active supporter and friend of the University of California, San Diego. He is a Chancellors Associates donor to the University and served three years as chair of its Faculty Excellence Awards committee. Additionally, Mr. Dernetz currently sits as the chair of the Chancellors Associates. A complete bio of Wayne Dernetz is attached. City of Modesto The city of Modesto City Charter requires that the city council shall review the charter at least every ten years. In 2006, the city council appointed members to the Charter Review Committee and tasked them with reviewing any changes that might be needed to the city’s charter including but not limited to their election system. The Charter Review Committee decided to conduct extensive research on election systems and different forms of government in order to recommend changing the manner in which the city council is elected. The Charter Review Committee delivered their recommendations to the city council in 2007 and a vote was subsequently put on the ballot. The Charter Review Committee was chaired by George Petrulakis. George Petrulakis is a graduate of Harvard University, with honors (A.B.), where he was a John Harvard Scholar, and of the U.C.L.A. School of Law (J.D.). He is a former Chairman of the Board of the Modesto Chamber of Commerce. Mr. Petrulakis is a director of the Building Industry Association of Central California and previously was awarded the Associate of the Year Honor for 1995 and 1996. He serves on the Legal Action Committee of the California Building Industry Association. Mr. Petrulakis served as Chairman of the City of Modesto Charter Review Commission which led to the most significant revisions to Modesto city government since 1962. He is a member of the State Bar of California, and serves as a vice-chair of the Land Use Subsection (Real Estate Section), and is a member of the Stanislaus County Bar Association. ß¹»²¼¿×¬»³Ò±òç Memorandum TO: CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT DATE: DECEMBER 13, 2012 SUBJECT: MEETING DATES AND LOCATIONS ______________________________________________________________________________ ACTION: Approve January meeting dates, scheduling January 10, 2013 at the East Anaheim Community Center, Canyon/Oak Room (east Anaheim) and January 31, 2013 at Orangeview Junior High School (far west Anaheim), for the upcoming Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) meetings, both to commence at 6:30 p.m. and consider approval of any future meeting dates/locations. DISCUSSION: Section 7 of City Council Resolution 2012-90 requires the CAC to hold monthly public meetings, at a minimum, throughout different areas of the City. To date, the CAC has held meetings in West Anaheim, Central Anaheim and South(west) Anaheim. At a previous CAC meeting, the CAC agreed to hold meetings on the second Thursday of each month, at a minimum, so long as meetings would not conflict with Neighborhood Council meetings. It is suggested that CAC approve the following meeting dates for January 2013: January 10, 2013 at the East Anaheim Community Center, Canyon/Oak Room and January 31 at Orangeview Junior High School. Both dates do not conflict with Neighborhood Council meetings and achieves moving the CAC meetings throughout Anaheim. ¢Ì¸·­°¿¹»´»º¬·²¬»²¬·±²¿´´§¾´¿²µ¢ ÒÑÎÛÐÑÎÌýïð