211103 Re_ Claim of California Voting Rights Act violation from Southwest Voter Education ProjectFrom:Frances Marquez
To:George Pardon
Subject:Re: Claim of California Voting Rights Act violation from Southwest Voter Education Project
Date:Wednesday, November 3, 2021 10:46:51 AM
George,
Thank you for reaching out to me and sending your feedback.
Sincerely,
Frances
On Oct 27, 2021, at 8:41 PM, George Pardon <georgepardon@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Cypress City Council
Since receiving the letter from the attorney claiming that the city has violated the
California Voting Rights Act, the City Council has held three regular meetings
and one special meeting that included the following item:
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2)
Significant exposure to litigation - one potential case - Claim of California
Voting Rights Act violation from Southwest Voter Education Project
All of these discussions have been held in Closed Session. To my knowledge, the
City Council hasn’t had any public discussion about this. In fact, the only
reference I’ve seen to the letter is in an email that someone sent me that the City
Manager sent to staff (enclosed).
Last Monday, October 25, was the last regularly scheduled meeting of the City
Council prior to the November 7 date that the attorney’s letter set for the city to
move forward with voluntary compliance. When will the residents be informed
of your decision to either voluntarily comply or take the matter up in court and
risk millions in legal costs? I think the residents have a right to know.
I found it interesting that the City Manager indicated that we are being ‘strong
armed’ into compliance. The City Council had a unique opportunity to address
the absence of any representation on the City Council of 35% of our population.
The Cypress School District voluntarily converted to voting districts without
getting a letter from an attorney. I presume the city will have to pay something to
the law firm making this claim even if the city voluntarily complies. It is my
understanding that it could be up to $30,000 which doesn’t include any fees
charged by the city attorney for all the meetings that have been held. Having
complied without an attorney sending a letter, these are costs the school district
avoided and instead invested them into our children’s education, a much worthier
cause.
While I think that at-large districts have some advantages, I think the actions over
the last few years by the City Council have demonstrated a need for voting
districts. Putting racial disparity aside, there are several examples of geographic
disparity including the consideration of a trash transfer station north of Lincoln
and the lack of consideration of the residents living near Lexington Park as just
two such examples. One resident living in the Ovation Park Senior Community
posted the following on-line: ‘I am used to contacting the councilperson from my
district but with this arrangement it seems intended to keep residents at bay. It
seems they want to force you to address them at meetings only, which is only
really really just a joke.’
I look forward to hearing from you.
Respectfully,
George Pardon
<4cc6540f-41ec-453b-856d-541779e23d9e.jpg>