SACRAMENTO REGION, CA (MPG) - The San Juan Unified School District (SJUSD) Board of Education held a special meeting on July 1, to resume the transition from at-large elections to trustee-area elections. They heard public input and discussed their preferred criteria for the creation of a trustee-area map, which will be used in the November 2022 election.

The process began in February 2020, when the SJUSD received a demand letter from attorney Scott Rafferty alleging that the current at-large election system could violate the California Voting Rights Act (CVRA) by impairing the ability of minority voters to influence the outcome of board elections. The CVRA has a “safe harbor” provision, which gives the agency 45 days to voluntarily decide to transition the election system; a lawsuit cannot be filed during that time. Safe harbor allows another 90 days after the resolution for potential maps to be drafted and to conduct the necessary public hearings.

On March 10, 2020, the SJUSD board adopted a resolution stating their intention to transition to trustee-area elections. They held the first required public hearing on March 31, 2020, through teleconference in accordance with the stay-at-home order in effect at that time. An executive order from the governor in April 2020 allowed agencies to pause the transition timeline in an effort to ensure public safety during the pandemic. The board chose to pause the transition until public meetings could be held in person, citing low engagement at the March 31 meeting.

Folsom Cordova Unified School District (FCUSD) also received a demand letter from Mr. Rafferty in February 2020. Despite the executive order allowing a paused timeline, FCUSD instead voted to continue their process by holding the public hearings through teleconferences. FCUSD approved a trustee-area map last summer that was used in the November 2020 election.  

As a result of the SJUSD board’s decision not to move forward with the transition ahead of the 2020 election, Rafferty filed a lawsuit in Sacramento County Superior Court in October 2020. The lawsuit alleges that the SJUSD never intended to comply within the safe harbor timeframe because even while holding the first hearing through teleconference they were also submitting a letter to the governor requesting the timeline be paused on the assertion that compliance wasn’t possible due to COVID restrictions. The lawsuit stipulates that the executive order did not prohibit teleconferenced public hearings and that SJUSD should have moved forward as planned. Among other allegations, the lawsuit states that the board wanted to wait until after the 2020 election in order to protect the incumbents who were up for reelection.

The transition timeline restarted when the governor’s order expired on June 30, 2021. The demographer explained that draft maps will be drawn using 2010 census data, and then later adjusted when the 2020 data is released. When drafting the trustee-areas maps, certain criteria must be met. Areas must be compact, contiguous, and nearly equal in population. The boundaries cannot be gerrymandered to dilute minority votes. Boundaries should also respect geographical features, neighborhoods, and communities of interest (those who share economic and political interests).

At the July 1, 2021, public hearing, many community members spoke in support of expanding the board from five trustees to seven as part of the transition process. They argued that in a school district as large as SJUSD, lower income areas—such as Arden Arcade and Citrus Heights—are underserved, resulting in low rates of student achievement. Proponents of a seven-trustee board stated that having local representation would allow those areas most in need to have a stronger voice in board decisions.

Others spoke in favor of maintaining the five-trustee board, asserting that too many cooks in the kitchen can make it more difficult for the board to make decisions. They worry that with seven trustees, each might put the interests of their own area ahead of what is best for the district as a whole.

Some even stated they believe the expansion effort is driven by individuals who have run failed campaigns for seats on the board, viewing it as a way for disgruntled would-be politicians to further their own political agendas. Such comments could be a reference to Magali Kincaid, a vocal supporter of expanding the board, who unsuccessfully ran for a seat in 2018. She is also one of the plaintiffs in the CVRA lawsuit filed by Mr. Rafferty against SJUSD. “We need seven trustee areas,” said Kincaid at the July 1 meeting. “It’s time to put aside your personal interests…and bring greater accountability and empowerment into the hands of the community.”

Proponents of board expansion believe that it will create more fair and equitable governance. If each trustee serves a smaller area, they say it will improve focus on the concerns of that area—giving greater representation to those in underserved neighborhoods. Many residents from Citrus Heights support the expansion, pointing out that the city makes up approximately 25% of the district population but hasn’t had a representative on the board in almost 20 years. The Citrus Heights City Council also recently passed a resolution supporting the expansion of the board to seven seats.

Attorney Scott Rafferty spoke at the meeting as well, stating that if the board agreed during the meeting to move forward with seven seats, “we’ll settle the lawsuit; it’ll be over.”

Board members thanked everyone for their input and assured the audience that draft maps for both five and seven trustee areas would be created for consideration. Through board consensus, they advised that each trustee area should have at least one high school within its boundaries. They also removed residency of current incumbents as a consideration, stating that should not be a factor.

Draft maps will be presented at a special meeting on July 13, for review by the board and more public input on the trustee-area boundaries.