AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY AUGUST 20, 2026

AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY AUGUST 13, 2026

AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY JULY 2, 2026

AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY JUNE 24, 2026

AMENDED IN SENATE MAY 14, 2026

AMENDED IN SENATE APRIL 27, 2026

AMENDED IN SENATE APRIL 14, 2026

AMENDED IN SENATE MARCH 25, 2026

CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE— 2025–2026 REGULAR SESSION

91

Introduced by Senator Cervantes

(Coauthors: Senators Rubio and Weber Pierson)

February 18, 2026

An act to amend Sections 10010, 14026, 14027, 14028, 14029, 14030, and 21130 of, to add Sections 14033 and 14034 to, to add Article 1.5 (commencing with Section 19219.5) to Chapter 3 of Division 19 of, and to repeal Section 14032 of, the Elections Code, relating to elections.

Vote: majority   Appropriation: no   Fiscal committee: yes   Local program: yes

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL’S DIGEST

The California Voting Rights Act of 2001 (CVRA) prohibits a political subdivision from imposing or applying an at-large method of election for members of the political subdivision’s governing body in a manner that impairs the ability of a protected class to elect candidates of its choice or its ability to influence the outcome of an election, as specified. Existing law requires courts to implement appropriate remedies, including the imposition of district-based elections, for violations of the CVRA.

This bill would revise the CVRA. The bill would prohibit a political subdivision or state agency from implementing, imposing, or enforcing any election policy or practice, as defined, that results in, or is likely to result in, voter suppression. An election policy or practice would result in voter suppression if it (1) causes a material disparity in voter participation, access to voting opportunities, or the opportunity or ability to participate in the political process for members of a protected class, which is defined as any race, color, or language-minority group; or (2) based on the totality of circumstances, causes an impairment of the equal opportunity or ability of members of a protected class to participate in the political process. An election policy or practice would not violate the prohibition on voter suppression if the political subdivision or state agency demonstrates, by clear and convincing evidence, that the election policy or practice is necessary to significantly further a compelling and particularized governmental interest and there is no reasonable alternative that comparably furthers the governmental interest and results in a smaller disparity between members of a protected class and other members of the electorate.

The bill would also prohibit a political subdivision from employing any method of election, as defined, that has the effect, or will likely have the effect, of diluting the vote of protected class members. Vote dilution would be established if there is an impairment of the equal opportunity or ability of protected class members to nominate or elect candidates of their choice, as provided, and another method of election or a change to the existing method of election would likely mitigate the impairment.

The bill sets forth various factors that courts could, and could not, consider when evaluating whether voter suppression or vote dilution exists within a political subdivision. The Attorney General, or any voter who is a member of a protected class and who resides in a political subdivision where a violation is alleged, would have standing to bring an action, and those actions would be given priority over other civil matters. action in a superior court of competent jurisdiction or any county in which the Attorney General has an office.

The bill would require a potential plaintiff, before filing an action alleging voter suppression or vote dilution, to send a notice letter to the political subdivision identifying the potential violation and how the party’s proposed remedy would address it. For allegations of voter suppression, the bill would permit the potential plaintiff to file an action if the political subdivision has not enacted a remedy within 45 days of receipt of the notice letter or if the political subdivision’s remedy would not redress the alleged violation. For allegations that a political subdivision’s method of election results in vote dilution, the bill would permit the potential plaintiff to file an action if the political subdivision has not, within 60 days, passed a resolution outlining its intention to make changes to its method of election or petitioned a court for authorization to implement a different, appropriate remedy.

Notwithstanding the notice requirement, the bill would authorize a potential plaintiff to file an action against a political subdivision at any time if the action is for a preliminary injunction with respect to an election that will occur within 180 days, another party has already submitted a notice letter alleging a substantially similar violation arising out of the same set of facts and the required number of days have passed, or the prospect of obtaining relief would otherwise be futile. If the political subdivision provides some or all of the relief sought in a potential plaintiff’s notice letter, the bill would authorize the potential plaintiff to recover their costs, which would be capped at an amount equal to the present value of $30,000 in 2016, subject to an annual inflation adjustment.

The bill would prohibit any political subdivision from enacting or administering any covered practice without obtaining preapproval from the Attorney General, if the political subdivision, within the previous 10 years, has entered into a settlement agreement admitting liability for a violation of, or been found by a court to have violated, this bill, the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965, or any other state law concerning the right to vote for protected class members. Under the bill, covered practices would include new or modified methods of election, annexations and deannexations, or reductions in language assistance. The bill would authorize the Attorney General to grant preapproval to a political subdivision only if the covered practice will not diminish the equal opportunity or ability of members of the protected class to participate in the political process or elect candidates of choice and the covered practice is unlikely to violate the provisions of the bill.

The bill would require any law, regulation, charter, ordinance, or other enactment of any political subdivision relating to voting to be construed liberally in favor of the right to vote.

Existing law generally prohibits using a voting system unless it has been certified or conditionally approved by the Secretary of State before any election at which it is to be used.

This bill would require the Secretary of State to examine and test a voting system and, if the Secretary of State determines that it meets the applicable requirements, certify or conditionally approve the system for use in an election conducted using a method of election adopted to remedy a violation of the CVRA, as provided.

Existing law requires the adoption of new election district boundaries for a legislative body that is elected using district-based elections following each federal decennial census.

This bill would require a districting body responsible for the adoption of new election district boundaries to comply with the requirements of this bill when adopting new boundaries following the decennial census.

By increasing the duties of local elections officials, the bill would create a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

SECTION 1.

(a) The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:

(1) Election practices, procedures, and methods that deny or impair the equal opportunity of voters based on their race, color, or as a member of language minority groups to participate in the political process and elect candidates of their choice are inconsistent with the fundamental right to vote and the rights and privileges guaranteed by the California Constitution.

(2) The State has the power to organize elections and political subdivisions in a manner of the state’s choosing:

(A) In California, as elsewhere, cities, counties, and other political subdivisions are creatures of the state and exist only at the state’s sufferance. Bd. of Supervisors v. Loc. Agency Formation Com., 3 Cal. 4th 903, 914, 838 P.2d 1198, 1205 (1992). Com. (1992) 3 Cal. 4th 903, 914.

(B) The California Supreme Court recognizes that “Municipal corporations are political subdivisions of the State, created as convenient agencies for exercising such of the governmental powers of the State as may be entrusted to them.... The number, nature and duration of the powers conferred upon these corporations and the territory over which they shall be exercised rests in the absolute discretion of the State.... The State ... at its pleasure may modify or withdraw all such powers.” Fullerton Joint Union High Sch. Dist. v. State Bd. of Educ., 32 Cal. 3d 779, 810, 654 P.2d 168, 189 (1982). Educ. (1982) 32 Cal. 3d 779, 810.

(C) The United States Supreme Court has also recognized that municipal corporations derive their authority from the State and that the states have “extraordinarily wide latitude ... in creating various types of political subdivisions and conferring authority upon them.” Holt Civic Club v. Tuscaloosa (1978) 439 U.S. 60, 71, 99 S.Ct. 383, 390, 58 L.Ed.2d 292; 71; United Bldg. & Const. Trades Council of Camden Cnty. & Vicinity v. Mayor & Council of City of Camden, 465 U.S. 208, 215, 104 S. Ct. 1020, 1026, 79 L. Ed. 2d 249 (1984). Camden (1984) 465 U.S. 208, 215.

(D) Courts in California have held that implementation of the California Constitution’s equal protection clause and voting rights provisions are issues of statewide concern. The Legislature has a greater interest in ensuring vote dilution and voter suppression do not occur than any political subdivision has in their electoral method of election. Jauregui v. City of Palmdale, 226 Cal. App. 4th 781, 800 (2014). Palmdale (2014) 226 Cal. App. 4th 781, 800.

(E) Courts in California have also held that integrity in the electoral process is an issue of statewide concern, and that local “[e]lectoral results lack integrity where a protected class is denied equal participation in the electoral process because of vote dilution.” Jauregui v. City of Palmdale, 226 Cal. App. 4th 781, 800 (2014). Palmdale (2014) 226 Cal. App. 4th 781, 800.

(F) In Rucho v. Common Cause, 588 U.S. 684 (2019), Cause (2019) 588 U.S. 684, the United States Supreme Court recognized that the states are actively able to address issues of voting rights and redistricting and can provide standards and guidance for state courts to apply.

(G) The Legislature enacts this bill pursuant to its power to reconfigure and control the methods of election utilized by the political subdivisions of the state. See City of Emeryville v. Cohen, 233 Cal. App. 4th 293, 312, 182 Cal. Rptr. 3d 578, 592 (2015) Cohen (2015) 233 Cal. App. 4th 293, 312 (“The Legislature is free, within the confines of the California Constitution, to reconfigure and redistribute authority to its subdivisions as it chooses.”; chooses.”); Star-Kist Foods, Inc. v. County of Los Angeles (1986) 42 Cal.3d 1, 6, 227 Cal.Rptr. 391, 719 P.2d 987; 6; Mallon v. City of Long Beach (1955) 44 Cal.2d 199, 209, 282 P.2d 481.) 209.

(H) Courts have recognized that “remedial legislation is to be liberally [and] broadly construed.” Jauregui v. City of Palmdale, 226 Cal. App. 4th 781, 807-08 (2014). Palmdale (2014) 226 Cal. App. 4th 781, 807–08. The voter suppression, vote dilution, and pre-approval provisions of this act are remedial legislation. Consistent with California’s aforementioned powers and interest over issues of statewide concern, it is the intent of the Legislature that this act provide a broader basis for relief from vote dilution and voter suppression than available under the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965.

(b) (1) It is the intent of the Legislature to resolve concerns raised by political subdivisions regarding the potential financial implications of receiving a notice letter under the California Voting Rights Act of 2001, while strengthening that act’s effectiveness and ensuring equitable enforcement.

(2) It is the intent of the Legislature, unless expressly stated otherwise, that this act not be construed to abrogate, invalidate, or otherwise diminish the precedential effect or applicability of cases interpreting the California Voting Rights Act of 2001 prior to the enactment of this act, including, but not limited to, Sanchez v. City of Modesto (2006) 145 Cal.App.4th 660; Higginson v. Becerra (9th Cir. 2019) 786 Fed.Appx. 705, Jauregui v. City of Palmdale (2014) 226 Cal.App. 4th 781, and Pico Neighborhood Association v. City of Santa Monica (2023) 15 Cal. 5th 292.

SEC. 2.

Section 10010 of the Elections Code is amended to read:

10010.

(a) A political subdivision that makes changes to its method of election in response to a notice letter pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 14027, shall do all of the following before a public hearing at which the governing body of the political subdivision votes to approve or defeat an ordinance establishing or modifying a method of election:

(1) Hold at least two public hearings over a period of no more than 45 days, at which the public is invited to provide input regarding the method of election to be adopted. Prior to and at such hearings, the political subdivision shall provide a specific description of how elector votes shall translate into candidate selection under any method or methods of election being considered, including, if a district-based method of election is being considered, the composition of the districts. Before these hearings, the political subdivision shall conduct outreach to the public, including to non-English-speaking communities, to explain the election methods being considered, to explain the implementation process, and to encourage public participation.

(2) After receiving public input, the political subdivision shall publish and make available for release a draft Change to Method of Election Plan that includes, but is not limited to, all of the following:

(A) A detailed analysis of the political subdivision’s voter registration and turnout statistics among voting age citizens in categories measured by the United States Census Bureau’s American Community Survey.

(B) An explanation of the method of election the political subdivision plans to adopt, how it will impact any voter registration and turnout disparities identified by the prior analysis, and how it accounts for any such disparities in determining whether the proposed change will remedy the alleged violation of the California Voting Rights Act of 2001 (Chapter 1.5 (commencing with Section 14025) of Division 14).

(C) For district-based methods of election, at least one draft map.

(D) A comprehensive voter outreach and education plan for the new method of election for a minimum of two election cycles.

(E) A timeline and plan for implementation of the new method of election.

(F) If members of the governing body of the political subdivision will be elected in their districts at different times to provide for staggered terms of office, the potential sequence of the elections.

(3) The political subdivision shall also hold at least two additional hearings over a period of no more than 60 days, at which the public is invited to provide input regarding the content of the Change to Method of Election Plan and the proposed sequence of elections, if applicable. The Change to Method of Election Plan, including a first version of a draft map, if applicable, shall be published at least seven days before consideration at a hearing. If the Change to Method of Election Plan, including any applicable draft district map, is revised at or following a hearing, it shall be published and made available to the public for at least seven days before being adopted.

(4) If a public hearing held pursuant to this section is consolidated with a regular or special meeting of the governing body of the political subdivision that includes other substantive agenda items, the public hearing shall begin at a fixed time regardless of its order on the agenda, except that the governing body of the political subdivision may first conclude any item being discussed or acted upon, including any associated public comment, when that time occurs. The governing body shall provide notice of the public hearing to the public.

(b) In determining the final sequence of the district elections conducted in a political subdivision in which members of the governing body will be elected at different times to provide for staggered terms of office, the governing body shall give special consideration to the purposes of the California Voting Rights Act of 2001 (Chapter 1.5 (commencing with Section 14025) of Division 14), and it shall take into account the preferences expressed by impacted community members.

(c) A court may, at its discretion, apply the requirements of this section to a court-imposed change to a political subdivision’s method of election. This section does not prevent a court from ordering the implementation of a change to a method of election regardless of whether a political subdivision has complied with the requirements in this section.

(d) For purposes of this section, “method of election” and “political subdivision” have the same meanings as set forth in Section 14026.

(e) (1) Except as provided in subparagraph (5), before filing an action against a political subdivision under subdivision (b) of Section 14027, a party described in subdivision (a) of Section 14029, except for the Attorney General, shall send a notice letter to the political subdivision, which includes all of the following:

(A) A detailed description of how the political subdivision’s method of conducting elections may violate subdivision (b) of Section 14027.

(B) A detailed description of the remedy that the party proposes and how the proposed remedy would address the violation.

(C) If the proposed remedy employs a method of election other than a district-based method of election, how that method of election will translate elector votes into candidate selection.

(2) A party shall not commence an action to enforce subdivision (b) of Section 14027 within 60 days of the political subdivision’s receipt of the written notice described in paragraph (1). The party may file an action in court if the political subdivision has not taken any of the actions described in subparagraph (A) of paragraph (4) within 60 days of the political subdivision’s receipt of the written notice.

(3) A political subdivision that receives a notice letter pursuant to this subdivision shall do both of the following:

(A) Transmit a copy of the notice letter to the Statewide Database within 30 days of receipt. Upon receipt, the Statewide Database shall promptly post the letter in a centralized location on its public website.

(B) Include a copy of the notice letter in the next agenda or public notice of a meeting of the governing body of the political subdivision.

(4) (A) A political subdivision may take the following actions:

(i) Before receiving a written notice described in paragraph (1), or within 60 days of receipt of a notice, pass a resolution outlining its intention to make changes to its method of election, specific steps it will undertake to facilitate the changes, and an estimated timeframe for doing so.

(ii) If the political subdivision intends to make any change to the method of election that is not authorized under the laws of this State, the governing body of the political subdivision shall petition a court with jurisdiction pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 14029 for an order authorizing it to enact and implement the proposed remedy. The court may consider the petition unopposed, or the prospective plaintiff or plaintiffs may submit evidence and argument concerning the proposed remedy and appear at the hearing on the petition, and the court shall consider that evidence in determining whether to approve the proposed remedy. An order authorizing the political subdivision to enact and implement the proposed remedy shall issue if the remedy complies with paragraph (1) of subdivision (e) of Section 14029. An admission of liability is not required for court approval and the political subdivision is not required to submit the remedy to voters for approval.

(iii) A political subdivision that elects its governing body by district with a citywide elective mayor authorized by Section 34886 of the Government Code may cure an alleged violation of subdivision (b) of Section 14027 by adopting one or more additional districts through the process in this section while retaining the citywide elective mayor, so long as that remedy adequately resolves the alleged violation. A remedy adopted pursuant to this clause satisfies the requirements of the California Voting Rights Act of 2001 (Chapter 1.5 (commencing with Section 14025) of Division 14), without the need for a court order or judicial determination and without an admission of liability.

(B) If a political subdivision passes a resolution pursuant to subparagraph (A), a party shall not commence an action to enforce subdivision (b) of Section 14027 within 120 days of the resolution’s passage. The party may file an action if the political subdivision has not enacted or implemented a remedy within 120 days or if the political subdivision has enacted or implemented a remedy that would not redress the violation identified in the party’s notice letter.

(C) (i) A political subdivision and the party who first sends a notice pursuant to paragraph (1) may enter into a written agreement to extend the time period described in subparagraph (B) for up to an additional 90 days in order to provide additional time to conduct public outreach, encourage public participation, and receive public input. The written agreement shall include a requirement that the final Change to Method of Election Plan be established no later than six months before the political subdivision’s next regular election to select governing board members. However, in a political subdivision that holds a primary election as part of its process for selecting governing board members, the written agreement shall include a requirement that the final Change to Method of Election Plan be established no later than six months before the political subdivision’s next regular primary election.

(ii) No later than 10 days after a political subdivision enters into a written agreement pursuant to clause (i), the political subdivision shall prepare and make available on its internet website a tentative schedule of the public outreach events and the public hearings held pursuant to this section. If a political subdivision does not maintain an internet website, the political subdivision shall make the tentative schedule available to the public upon request.

(5) Notwithstanding this subdivision, a party with standing pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 14029 may file an action against a political subdivision under subdivision (b) of Section 14027 if any of the following conditions are met:

(A) The party is seeking a preliminary injunction to secure relief with respect to an election that will occur within 180 days.

(B) Another party has already submitted a notice letter alleging a substantially similar violation, the actions arise out of the same set of facts, and that party is eligible to file an action under this section.

(C) The prospect of obtaining relief under this subdivision would be futile because the political subdivision has indicated that it will not adopt the proposed remedy, otherwise indicated that it will not comply with subdivision (b) of Section 14027, or has taken action within the previous 150 days inconsistent with such compliance. the governing body of the political subdivision, by majority vote, formally adopted position, conclusive statements by a majority of the governing body, or a conclusive statement by an official who has the authority under the political subdivision’s charter or applicable law to unilaterally prevent the governing body from adopting or implementing the proposed remedy, has indicated that it will not adopt the proposed remedy or that it will not comply with subdivision (b) of Section 14027, or the political subdivision has taken formal action within the previous 150 days inconsistent with such compliance. An expression of opinion or a statement by an individual member of the governing body who lacks the authority described in this subparagraph does not, by itself, establish that relief would be futile.

(6) During the periods described in paragraph (2), subparagraph (B) of paragraph (4), and clause (i) of subparagraph (C) of paragraph (4), a subsequent notice letter alleging a substantially similar violation shall be consolidated into the pending process and shall not commence a new response period. The timelines for commencing any enforcement actions identified in this subdivision shall bind all such prospective plaintiffs with respect to such substantially similar alleged violations.

(f) (1) If a political subdivision adopts an ordinance making changes to its method of election pursuant to subdivision (a), a party who sent a written notice pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (e) before the political subdivision passed its resolution of intention may, within 30 days of the ordinance’s adoption, demand reimbursement for the cost of the work product generated to support the notice. A party shall make the demand in writing and shall substantiate the demand with financial documentation, such as a detailed invoice for demography services. A political subdivision may request additional documentation if the provided documentation is insufficient to corroborate the claimed costs. A political subdivision shall reimburse a prospective plaintiff for reasonable costs claimed, or in an amount to which the parties mutually agree, within 45 days of receiving the written demand, except as provided in paragraph (2). In all cases, the amount of the reimbursement shall not exceed the cap described in paragraph (3).

(2) If more than one prospective plaintiff is entitled to reimbursement, the political subdivision shall reimburse the prospective plaintiffs in the order in which they sent a written notice pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (e), and the 45-day time period described in paragraph (1) shall apply only to reimbursement of the first prospective plaintiff who sent a written notice. The cumulative amount of reimbursements to all prospective plaintiffs shall not exceed the cap described in paragraph (3).

(3) The reimbursement required by this section is capped at an amount equivalent to the value of thirty thousand dollars ($30,000) at the time of the enactment of Chapter 737 of the Statutes of 2016 (Assembly Bill 350 of the 2015–16 Regular Session), as adjusted annually in accordance with changes in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers, United States city average that is published by the United States Department of Labor.

SEC. 3.

Section 14026 of the Elections Code is amended to read:

14026.

As used in this chapter:

(a) “At-large method of election” means any of the following methods of electing members to the governing body of a political subdivision:

(1) One in which the voters of the entire jurisdiction elect the members to the governing body.

(2) One in which the candidates are required to reside within given areas of the jurisdiction and the voters of the entire jurisdiction elect the members to the governing body.

(3) One that combines at-large elections with district-based elections.

(b) “District-based elections” means a method of electing members to the governing body of a political subdivision in which the candidate must reside within an election district that is a divisible part of the political subdivision and is elected only by voters residing within that election district.

(c) “Election policy or practice” means any qualification to be a voter, prerequisite to voting, method of election, or any other law, statute, ordinance, resolution, charter or code provision, regulation, rule, policy, practice, procedure, standard, or any other action with respect to voting, electoral or jurisdictional boundaries, or the administration or schedule of elections.

(d) “Governing body” means the entity with official authority to make or enforce decisions, policies, and laws for a political subdivision.

(e) “Limited English proficient individuals” or “LEP individuals” means individuals who speak, read, or understand the English language less than “very well,” according to United States Census Bureau data or comparable data reflecting English language ability collected by a governmental entity, including as self-reported by such persons to a governmental entity.

(f) “Material disparity” means nontrivial variance that is supported by validated methodologies and, where relevant, is statistically significant.

(g) “Method of election” means the manner or mechanism by which candidates are elected to a governmental body of a political subdivision, and includes, but is not limited to, any at-large, district-based, mixed election systems consisting of both district-based and at-large components, or share-based methods of election, as well as any districting or redistricting plan used to elect candidates to the governmental body. A share-based method of election is one in which more than one candidate is to be elected and different groups of voters may each elect their preferred candidates to the seats to fill based on their relative share of the votes cast.

(h) “Political subdivision” means a geographic area of representation created for the provision of government services, including, but not limited to, a general law city, general law county, charter city, charter county, charter city and county, school district, community college district, or other district or governmental entity organized pursuant to state law in which elections are conducted or that administers elections, or any of its staff or agents.

(i) “Protected class” means any group of eligible voters who are members of any race, color, or language-minority group, including, but not limited to, two or more such groups, and includes eligible voters who are members of a minimum reporting category that has been officially recognized by the United States Census Bureau.

(j) “Racially polarized voting” means voting in which there is a divergence in the candidate preferences, political preferences, or electoral choices of members in a protected class, including the combined preferences of a protected class comprised of two or more groups of voters, from the candidate preferences, political preferences, or electoral choices of members of another protected class or set of protected classes.

(k) “Vote” or “voting” means all action necessary to make a vote effective in any primary, special, or general election, including, but not limited to, registration or other action required by law prerequisite to voting, casting a ballot by any method permitted by law, including any method available as a remedy under this chapter, and having the ballot counted properly and included in the appropriate totals of votes received for propositions or by candidates for public or party office.

(l) “Voting location” means any location designated by elections officials for the casting of ballots, including, but not limited to, polling places, vote centers, mobile voting units, elections offices, satellite locations of elections offices, ballot drop box locations, and any election day or early voting site.

SEC. 4.

Section 14027 of the Elections Code is amended to read:

14027.

(a) (1) A political subdivision or state agency shall not engage in voter suppression as set forth in this subdivision.

(2) A political subdivision or state agency shall not implement, impose, or enforce any election policy or practice that results in, or is likely to result in, voter suppression. A violation of this paragraph is established if either of the following is present:

(A) A material disparity affecting protected class members in voter participation, access to voting opportunities, or the opportunity or ability to participate in any stage of the political process, as a result of the policy or practice.

(B) Based on the totality of circumstances, an impairment of the equal opportunity or ability of protected class members to participate in any stage of the political process given the policy’s or practice’s interaction with the relevant surrounding circumstances.

(3) There is no violation under subparagraph (A) of paragraph (2) if the political subdivision or state agency demonstrates both of the following by clear and convincing evidence:

(A) The election policy or practice is necessary to significantly further a compelling and particularized governmental interest.

(B) There is no reasonable alternative election policy or practice that comparably furthers the compelling and particularized governmental interest and results in a smaller disparity between protected class members and other members of the electorate.

(4) A violation of paragraph (2) may also be established if an eligible voter faces an undue burden on their opportunity or ability to participate in any stage of the political process as a result of their incarceration or a prior criminal conviction.

(5) Evidence of intentional discrimination is not required to establish a violation of paragraph (2).

(b) (1) A political subdivision shall not engage in vote dilution as set forth in this subdivision.

(2) A political subdivision shall not employ any method of election that has the effect, or will likely have the effect, of diluting the vote of protected class members pursuant to this subdivision.

(3) A violation of paragraph (2) is established if both of the following are satisfied:

(A) Either of the following conditions exist:

(i) Elections in the political subdivision exhibit racially polarized voting resulting in an impairment of the equal opportunity or ability of protected class members to nominate or elect candidates of their choice.

(ii) Based on the totality of circumstances, the equal opportunity or ability of protected class members to nominate or elect candidates of their choice is impaired.

(B) Another method of election or a change to the existing method of election that could be constitutionally adopted or ordered pursuant to Section 14029 would likely mitigate the impairment.

(4) Evidence of intentional discrimination is not required to establish a violation of paragraph (2).

(5) The use of any particular method of election does not, by itself, establish a prima facie violation of paragraph (2).

(c) This chapter is subject to the guidelines and rules enumerated in this subdivision.

(1) To evaluate the totality of circumstances under subparagraph (B) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) or clause (ii) of subparagraph (A) of paragraph (3) of subdivision (b):

(A) The following factors may be relevant:

(i) The history of discrimination with respect to the relevant protected class.

(ii) The extent to which members of the relevant protected class are disadvantaged or otherwise bear the effects of public or private discrimination in areas such as education, employment, health, criminal justice, housing, transportation, land use, or environmental protection.

(iii) The use of any election policy or practice that may enhance the discriminatory or diluting effects of the election policy or practice or method of election at issue in the political subdivision.

(iv) The extent to which members of the relevant protected class vote or register or reregister to vote at lower rates.

(v) The extent to which members of the relevant protected class have historically made campaign contributions at lower rates.

(vi) The extent to which candidates who are members of the relevant protected class have faced hostility or barriers with respect to campaigning, qualifying for the ballot, receiving financial support, or receiving any other support for an election.

(vii) The use of overt or subtle racial appeals, whether in the course of political campaigns or by government officials, including racial appeals made in public discourse or in connection with the adoption or maintenance of the election policy or practice.

(viii) The extent to which the members of the relevant protected class have been elected to local office in that jurisdiction.

(ix) The lack of responsiveness by elected officials to the particular needs of members of the relevant protected class or a community of members of the relevant protected class.

(x) Any other factor deemed relevant.

(B) There is no set number or combination of the factors described in subparagraph (A) that is required to be met to determine that a violation occurred.

(C) There is no requirement that evidence is required to affect all subgroups within a protected class to be relevant.

(D) For alleged violations pertaining to a particular political subdivision, evidence of the factors described in subparagraph (A) may be deemed more probative if it relates to the political subdivision in which the alleged violation occurred, but evidence related to the state or the geographic region in which that political subdivision is located may also be probative. The fact that similar or worse circumstances may exist in other political subdivisions does not reduce the probative value of the evidence relevant to the particular political subdivision.

(2) To determine whether elections in the political subdivision exhibit racially polarized voting under clause (i) of subparagraph (A) of paragraph (3) of subdivision (b):

(A) Racially polarized voting is assessed based on the relevant election results, which may include, but are not limited to, elections for offices of the political subdivision; elections held in the political subdivision for other offices, such as state or federal offices; elections in which at least one candidate is a member of the relevant protected class; and other electoral choices that bear on the rights and privileges of the protected class.

(B) (i) There is no set number or combination of elections that is required to establish the existence of racially polarized voting. Homogenous precincts are not required to exist within a jurisdiction for purposes of establishing racially polarized voting.

(ii) Proof of nonpolarized voting in elections for offices outside the political subdivision does not preclude a finding of racially polarized voting based on elections for offices of the political subdivision.

(iii) Statistical certainty or any similar statistical metric is not necessary to show the existence of racially polarized voting. Nonstatistical or nonquantitative evidence does not preclude a finding of racially polarized voting based on statistical or quantitative evidence.

(iv) Low or high turnout or registration rates among protected class members does not preclude a finding of racially polarized voting.

(v) Elections conducted before the filing of an action alleging vote dilution pursuant to subdivision (b) are more probative to establish the existence of racially polarized voting than elections conducted after the filing of the action. The absence of racially polarized voting in elections conducted after the filing of the action shall not impact a finding of racially polarized voting where elections conducted before the filing of the action exhibit racially polarized voting.

(C) When assessing the combined candidate preferences, political preferences, or electoral choices of a protected class composed of two or more groups of voters, there is no requirement that each group or subgroup be separately polarized from the preferences or choices of other voters.

(D) The causes of, or alternative explanations for, racially polarized voting are not relevant and shall not be considered.

(E) In elections in which voters choose more than one candidate for election to a political body at a time, a finding that some candidates are preferred among both majority and minority voters does not defeat a finding of racially polarized voting.

(F) For purposes of this section, voters may use, but are not limited to, any racially polarized voting methods approved of in applicable cases to enforce this chapter.

(3) When evaluating whether a violation of this section is present, all of the following apply:

(A) The following circumstances are not relevant:

(i) The absolute number or share of protected class members on whom the election policy or practice imposes a material burden is small.

(ii) The degree to which the election policy or practice has a long pedigree or was in widespread use at some earlier date.

(iii) The use of an identical or similar election policy or practice in other states or political subdivisions.

(iv) The availability of forms of voting unimpacted by the election policy or practice.

(B) A state interest in preventing voter fraud or bolstering voter confidence in the integrity of elections is not relevant unless there is substantial evidence that criminal activity by individual electors has occurred in the political subdivision in substantial numbers and the connection between the election policy or practice and a state interest in preventing that type of criminal activity or bolstering voter confidence in the integrity of elections is supported by substantial evidence.

(C) Whether protected class members typically elect candidates of their choice to the governing body in approximate proportion to their total number or share of the population may be relevant under subdivision (b).

(D) For the purpose of establishing a violation of subdivision (b), including in particular satisfying subparagraph (B) of paragraph (3) of subdivision (b), it is not necessary for the total number or share of protected class members to exceed any numerical threshold in any district or in the political subdivision as a whole.

(d) Notwithstanding any other provision of law in this chapter, ongoing civil actions filed prior to the effective date of this section shall, for the purpose of establishing liability, continue to be governed by the legal standards set forth in this chapter, as it read prior to January 1, 2027. “Racially polarized voting,” as defined in Section 14026 as that section read prior to January 1, 2027, shall be interpreted consistent with federal case law prior to Louisiana v. Callais, 146 S.Ct 1131 (2026). Any injunction or judgments already entered pursuant to this chapter shall continue to be governed by this chapter as it read prior to January 1, 2027, notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter.

SEC. 5.

Section 14028 of the Elections Code is amended to read:

14028.

Any provision of law, regulation, charter, home rule ordinance, or other enactment of any political subdivision relating to voting or the right to vote shall be construed by state courts liberally in favor of the right to vote.

SEC. 6.

Section 14029 of the Elections Code is amended to read:

14029.

(a) (1) An action to cure a violation of this chapter may be brought by the Attorney General or by any voter who is a member of a protected class and who resides in a political subdivision where a violation of this chapter is alleged.

(2) This subdivision shall be construed liberally to confer standing as broadly as the California Constitution permits.

(b) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (5), before filing an action against a political subdivision pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 14027, a party described in subdivision (a), except for the Attorney General, shall send a notice letter to the political subdivision with a detailed description of how the political subdivision’s election policy or practice may violate subdivision (a) of Section 14027 and a detailed description of the remedy the party proposes and how the proposed remedy would address the violation. The party shall not file an action within 45 days after sending the notice letter.

(2) A political subdivision that receives a notice letter pursuant to this subdivision shall do both of the following:

(A) Transmit a copy of the notice letter to the Statewide Database within 30 days of receipt. Upon receipt, the Statewide Database shall promptly post the letter in a centralized location on its public website.

(B) Include a copy of the notice letter in the next agenda or public notice of a meeting of the governing body.

(3) If, under the laws of this State, the governing body of a political subdivision lacks authority to enact or implement a remedy responsive to the notice letter, the political subdivision may petition a court with jurisdiction under subdivision (c) for an order authorizing it to enact and implement the proposed remedy. The court may consider the petition unopposed, or the prospective plaintiff or plaintiffs may submit evidence and argument concerning the proposed remedy and appear at the hearing on the petition, and the court shall consider that evidence in determining whether to approve the proposed remedy. An order authorizing the political subdivision to enact and implement the proposed remedy shall issue if the remedy complies with paragraph (1) of subdivision (e). An admission of liability is not required for court approval.

(4) Following the party’s submission of a notice letter, the party may file an action if the political subdivision has not enacted or implemented a remedy within 45 days or if the political subdivision has enacted or implemented a remedy that would not redress the alleged violation identified in the party’s notice letter.

(5) Notwithstanding this subdivision, a party with standing pursuant to subdivision (a) may file an action against a political subdivision pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 14027 if any of the following conditions are met:

(A) The party is seeking a preliminary injunction to secure relief with respect to an election that will occur within 180 days.

(B) Another party has already submitted a notice letter alleging a substantially similar violation, the actions arise out of the same set of facts, and that party is eligible to file an action under this section.

(C) The prospect of obtaining relief under paragraph (2) would be futile because the political subdivision has indicated that it will not adopt the proposed remedy, otherwise indicated that it will not comply with subdivision (a) of Section 14027, or has taken action within the previous 150 days inconsistent with such compliance. the governing body of the political subdivision, by majority vote, formally adopted position, conclusive statements by a majority of the governing body, or a conclusive statement by an official who has the authority under the political subdivision’s charter or applicable law to unilaterally prevent the governing body from adopting or implementing the proposed remedy, has indicated that it will not adopt the proposed remedy or that it will not comply with subdivision (a) of Section 14027, or the political subdivision has taken formal action within the previous 150 days inconsistent with such compliance. An expression of opinion or a statement by an individual member of the governing body who lacks the authority described in this subparagraph does not, by itself, establish that relief would be futile.

(c) An action to enforce this chapter may be brought in a superior court of suitable jurisdiction. Commencing January 1, 2029, an action to enforce this chapter may also be brought in the Superior Court of the County of Sacramento or pursuant to paragraph (1) of Section 401 of the Code of Civil Procedure. competent jurisdiction or in a superior court in any county or city and county in which the Attorney General has an office.

(d) Actions brought pursuant to this chapter shall proceed expeditiously and shall have priority over all other civil matters. expeditiously. This may include expedited briefing and, for appeals, preference in setting the date of oral argument.

(e) (1) Upon finding a violation of this chapter, notwithstanding any other law, both of the following apply:

(A) The court shall order appropriate relief tailored to best remedy the violation.

(B) The court has authority to order any appropriate relief, including any and all forms of preliminary and injunctive relief. The court may consider, among others, changes to the method of election, changes to any election policy or practice, reasonable increases in the size of the governing body of a political subdivision that are not in conflict with subdivision (a) of Section 25000 of the Government Code or Section 4 of Article XI of the California Constitution, and any remedy that is available to a federal court or the court of another state jurisdiction, including through a court-approved consent decree or settlement adopted in the context of similar facts or to remedy a similar violation.

(2) In assessing potential remedies to the violation, the court shall consider any record evidence related to historic differences in voter registration and turnout rates and how a proposed remedy may affect such disparities.

(3) The court shall not give deference or priority to a remedy proposed by the political subdivision.

(4) A remedy ordered under this section shall be implemented promptly, including in the next relevant election scheduled or ordered for such purpose, provided that implementing the remedy in the next relevant election will not substantially interfere with the conduct of the election. The court may order modifications to the election calendar of a political subdivision to implement prompt relief.

(5) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), to the extent that a new method of election or change to the existing method of election is necessary to remedy a violation alleged under paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) of Section 14027, that remedy shall comply with the following criteria:

(A) If the court orders a district-based remedy, the court shall consider only the districting criteria set forth in subdivisions (a) to (e), inclusive, of Section 21130, and may consider relevant electoral, demographic, and other data only to determine whether the proposed district-based plan will fully remedy the violation.

(B) If the court orders a share-based method of election, the court shall ensure that no fewer than three candidates are elected at the same time from the same district or at-large body. To effectuate this subparagraph, the court may add seats to the legislative body of the political subdivision subject to its authority in paragraph (1) or combine the election of existing seats by removing staggered elections. The court may consider relevant electoral, demographic, and other data only to determine whether the method of election will fully remedy the violation.

(6) A political subdivision is not required to submit a remedy ordered under this section to voters for approval.

(f) This chapter provides rights and remedies under state law to enforce state constitutional rights or statutory rights and does not enforce any rights established under the United States Constitution or federal law. This chapter does not create a cause of action under federal law. Persuasive use of relevant federal legal standards, precedents, or evidentiary frameworks to aid in the interpretation or application of this chapter shall not be construed to give rise to a federal question. Use of federal legal standards, precedent, or evidentiary frameworks may be persuasive but is not necessary to the interpretation or application of this chapter.

(g) A defendant in an action brought pursuant to this chapter shall not assert the doctrine of laches as a defense to claims brought under this chapter. A political subdivision shall not assert that the plaintiff has failed to comply with any notice, exhaustion, or other procedural requirements under state law, other than the requirements in this section or Section 10010, as a defense to claims brought under this chapter.

(h) (1) In any action to enforce any provision of this chapter, a prevailing plaintiff, other than the state or a political subdivision, is entitled to recover all reasonable costs and fees from the defendant consistent with the standards established in Serrano v. Priest (1977) 20 Cal.3d 25, 48-49. Costs and fees include, but are not limited to, attorneys’ fees, expert witness fees, and all other litigation or prelitigation fees and costs.

(2) For purposes of this subdivision, a plaintiff prevails in an action when, as a result of a suit or notice letter pursuant to subdivision (b), the defendant party provides some or all of the relief sought.

(3) When a plaintiff prevails solely as a result of a notice letter issued under subdivision (b), the plaintiff’s recovery of attorneys’ fees and associated costs shall be limited to an amount equivalent to the value of thirty thousand dollars ($30,000) at the time of the enactment of Chapter 737 of the Statutes of 2016 (Assembly Bill 350 of the 2015–16 Regular Session), as adjusted annually in accordance with changes in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers, United States city average that is published by the United States Department of Labor.

(4) If the state or a political subdivision prevails in an action under this chapter, the court shall not award the defendant any fees or costs unless the court finds the action to be frivolous, unreasonable, or without foundation.

(i) The provisions of this chapter are severable. If any provision of this chapter or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, that invalidity shall be applied as narrowly as possible and the remaining provisions and applications shall remain in effect to the fullest extent possible.

(j) To the extent any provision of this chapter, including any legal standard, requirement, or any part thereof, may be construed or applied in a manner that is unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, the provision shall be construed or applied in the manner that preserves its validity and is most consistent with the purposes set forth in Section 14028.

(k) This chapter shall not be construed to create a cause of action against any state agency or official for creating, enforcing, or administering Senate, Assembly, Congress, or State Board of Equalization electoral or jurisdictional boundaries, nor is it intended to affect the provisions of Section 3(b)(6) of Article I of the California Constitution regarding legislative deliberations, including inquiry into an individual legislator’s intent.

SEC. 7.

Section 14030 of the Elections Code is amended to read:

14030.

(a) Any political subdivision that has entered into a court-approved settlement agreement admitting liability for, or been subject in any court to a judicial finding of, a violation of this chapter, the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965, or any other state law or constitutional provision concerning the right to vote for protected class members within the previous 10 years shall obtain preapproval from the Attorney General before enacting or administering any covered practice described in this section.

(b) A covered practice includes any of the following:

(1) A new or modified method of election, including changes to districting plans, or maintenance of a method of election following a decennial census. A court-ordered change to a method of election is not a covered practice and is not subject to preapproval.

(2) An annexation or deannexation that affects a jurisdiction’s population or its distribution.

(3) A reduction in language assistance.

(c) A request for preapproval for a covered practice submitted by a political subdivision shall be granted only if both of the following are satisfied:

(1) The covered practice will not diminish, in relation to the status quo before the enactment or implementation of the covered practice, the equal opportunity or ability of members of the protected class or classes who provided a basis for coverage under subdivision (a) to participate in the political process or elect candidates of choice.

(2) The covered practice is unlikely to violate any of the provisions of this chapter.

(d) The Attorney General shall establish a process and timeline for political subdivisions that are subject to this section to submit requests for preapproval for covered practices. The process shall include, at a minimum, procedures for public comment and transparency regarding preapproval requests and procedures for emergency or expedited review of covered practices. The political subdivision bears the burden of demonstrating the covered practice complies with standards for preapproval as described in this section.

(e) The Attorney General shall annually review which political subdivisions are subject to the preapproval requirements of this section pursuant to a qualifying violation and publish a list on its official website.

(f) The Attorney General shall maintain and publish on its official website all requests for preapproval submitted by political subdivisions subject to this section, including a description of the covered practice and all relevant materials, the timeline for public comments for each request for preapproval, all public comments that have been submitted regarding each request for preapproval, and any dispositions by the Attorney General as to the request for preapproval.

(g) Any denial of preapproval by the Attorney General under this section may be appealed only by the political subdivision within 30 days of the denial in accordance with state law governing challenges to agency action, including the applicable standard of review for those actions. Such actions may only be filed by the covered political subdivision and intervention is not permitted.

(h) Any party described in subdivision (a) of Section 14029 that is aggrieved by a determination by the Attorney General to grant preapproval to a covered practice under this section may file an action against the political subdivision to challenge the determination to grant preapproval. A court shall review the determination to grant preapproval under a de novo standard of review review, and, notwithstanding Section 389 of the Code of Civil Procedure or any other law, the Attorney General shall not be joined as an indispensable a party.

(i) A determination by the Attorney General to grant preapproval is not admissible in, and shall not be considered by, a court in any subsequent action challenging the covered policy. The preapproval does not preclude, bar, or limit in any way any other claims that may be brought regarding the covered policy.

SEC. 8.

Section 14032 of the Elections Code is repealed.

SEC. 9.

Section 14033 is added to the Elections Code, to read:

14033.

(a) A political subdivision that makes or has made any change to its method of election pursuant to a court order, settlement, or judgment in an action under this chapter, or as a result of a resolution or ordinance enacted in furtherance of this chapter or pursuant to Section 34886 of the Government Code, paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 5020 of the Education Code, Section 72036 of the Education Code, or Section 10650 of the Elections Code, shall not revert to any method of election previously in use in the political subdivision without first petitioning the superior court in the county in which the political subdivision lies for an order certifying that the reversion will not violate any section of this chapter or retrogress the electoral opportunities of any protected class that was the subject of the potential violation motivating the change. In determining whether to permit a reversion pursuant to this section, the court shall liberally permit intervention so as to allow the full consideration of all evidence relevant to the proposed reversion. Upon seeking such order, a political subdivision shall comply with the requirements of subdivision (a) of Section 10010. A court shall not issue an order pursuant to this section until the political subdivision certifies that all of the requirements of subdivision (a) of Section 10010 have been satisfied. Subsequent to securing the order, a political subdivision may revert to a prior method of election upon the approval of its voters.

(b) A political subdivision that made any change to its method of election pursuant to a court order, settlement, or judgment in an action under this chapter, or as a result of a resolution, ordinance, or ballot measure enacted in furtherance of this chapter, or pursuant to Section 34886 of the Government Code, paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 5020 of the Education Code, Section 72036 of the Education Code, or Section 10650 of the Elections Code, in 2016 or later shall not be subject to subdivision (b) of Section 14027 until 2030 federal decennial census redistricting data described in Public Law 94-171 is available; except that a political subdivision that made such a change between January 1, 2016, and the release of the 2020 federal decennial census redistricting data described in Public Law 94-171 shall be subject to subdivision (b) of Section 14027 by a showing that the population of any protected class in the jurisdiction has changed by at least 5 percent since the change to its method of election.

SEC. 10.

Section 14034 is added to the Elections Code, to read:

14034.

(a) The Legislature finds and declares that this chapter addresses a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair as that term is used in Section 5 of Article XI of the California Constitution. Therefore, this chapter applies to all cities, including charter cities.

(b) This section shall take effect only if Senate Bill 1360 of the 2025–26 Regular Session does not take effect on or before January 1, 2027.

SEC. 11.

Article 1.5 (commencing with Section 19219.5) is added to Chapter 3 of Division 19 of the Elections Code, to read:

Article 1.5. Voting System Approval for Methods of Election Adopted as Voting Rights Remedies

19219.5.

This article applies to any method of election adopted pursuant to a notice letter, court order, consent decree, settlement agreement, or other legally enforceable agreement to remedy a violation of the California Voting Rights Act of 2001 (Chapter 1.5 (commencing with Section 14025) of Division 14).

19219.6.

(a) Upon application by a person seeking certification or conditional approval under this article, the Secretary of State shall examine and test, in accordance with the applicable requirements of this division, a voting system, voting system configuration, software, procedure, or supplemental process for use in an election conducted using a method of election described in subdivision (b), and shall certify or conditionally approve the submission, in whole or in part, if the Secretary of State determines that the submission meets the applicable requirements for certification or conditional approval under this division. Within 180 days after determining that the application is complete, the Secretary of State shall complete the examination and testing and shall certify, conditionally approve, or deny the submission.

(b) For purposes of subdivision (a), a method of election is described in this subdivision if any of the following apply:

(1) The method has been used in a public election in this state.

(2) The method has been ordered or approved by a court, including through a consent decree or settlement agreement, to resolve or remedy a claim under the California Voting Rights Act of 2001 (Chapter 1.5 (commencing with Section 14025) of Division 14).

(3) The United States Election Assistance Commission has certified a voting system capable of conducting the method.

(c) In examining and testing a submission under subdivision (a), the Secretary of State shall apply the applicable requirement of this division and may only impose any additional conditions or require any additional procedures or testing when strictly necessary to determine whether the submission can support the accurate, secure, accessible, and auditable conduct of an election using a method of election described in subdivision (b), including, as applicable, requirements relating to ballot format, vote capture, vote counting and tabulation, vote transferability, vote accumulation, cast vote record production, public reporting, recounts, and audits.

(d) A voting system shall not be used to conduct an election using a method of election described in subdivision (b) unless the Secretary of State has certified or conditionally approved the voting system for use with that method of election pursuant to this article.

19219.7.

The Secretary of State may adopt regulations and issue any necessary guidance to implement this article. The adoption of regulations or issuance of guidance is not a prerequisite to the examination, testing, certification, or conditional approval of a submission pursuant to Section 19219.6.

SEC. 12.

Section 21130 of the Elections Code is amended to read:

21130.

(a) Following or concurrent with the decision to establish district-based elections for a legislative body, or following each federal decennial census for a legislative body that is already elected using district-based elections, the districting body shall, by ordinance or resolution, adopt boundaries for all of the election districts of the legislative body so that the election districts shall be substantially equal in population as required by the United States Constitution.

(1) Population equality shall be based on the total population of residents of the local jurisdiction as determined by the most recent federal decennial census for which the redistricting data described in Public Law 94-171 are available.

(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), an incarcerated person, as that term is used in Section 21003, shall not be counted towards a local jurisdiction’s population, except for an incarcerated person whose last known place of residence may be assigned to a census block in the local jurisdiction, if information about the last known place of residence for incarcerated persons is included in the computerized database for redistricting that is developed in accordance with subdivision (b) of Section 8253 of the Government Code, and that database is made publicly available.

(b) The districting body shall adopt election district boundaries that comply with the United States Constitution, the California Constitution, and the California Voting Rights Act of 2001 (Chapter 1.5 (commencing with Section 14025) of Division 14). If the districting body, consistent with its existing obligations under the California Voting Rights Act of 2001, conducts an analysis to determine whether racially polarized voting exists in the local jurisdiction, the districting body shall publish on its redistricting web page, at a minimum, a summary of its analysis and findings within seven days of completing the analysis or prior to adopting election district boundaries, whichever occurs first.

(c) The districting body shall adopt election district boundaries using the following criteria as set forth in the following order of priority:

(1) To the maximum extent practicable, election districts shall be geographically contiguous. Areas that meet only at the points of adjoining corners are not contiguous. Areas that are separated by water and not connected by a bridge, tunnel, or regular ferry service are not contiguous.

(2) To the maximum extent practicable, and where it does not conflict with the preceding criterion in this subdivision, the geographic integrity of any local neighborhood or local community of interest shall be respected in a manner that minimizes its division. A “community of interest” is a population that shares common social or economic interests that should be included within a single election district for purposes of its effective and fair representation. Characteristics of communities of interest may include, but are not limited to, shared public policy concerns such as education, public safety, public health, environment, housing, transportation, and access to social services. Characteristics of communities of interest may also include, but are not limited to, cultural districts, shared socioeconomic characteristics, similar voter registration rates and participation rates, and shared histories. Communities of interest do not include relationships with political parties, incumbents, or political candidates.

(3) To the maximum extent practicable, and where it does not conflict with the preceding criteria in this subdivision, the geographic integrity of a city or census designated place shall be respected in a manner that minimizes its division. This paragraph does not apply to a city.

(4) To the maximum extent practicable, and where it does not conflict with the preceding criteria in this subdivision, election districts shall be bounded by natural and artificial barriers, by streets, or by the boundaries of the local jurisdiction. Election district boundaries should be easily identifiable and understandable by residents.

(5) To the maximum extent practicable, and where it does not conflict with the preceding criteria in this subdivision, election districts shall be drawn to encourage geographical compactness in a manner that nearby areas of population are not bypassed in favor of more distant populations.

(d) The districting body shall not adopt election district boundaries for the purpose of favoring or discriminating against an incumbent, political candidate, or political party. A districting body adopting election district boundaries for any nonpartisan offices shall not rely upon party affiliation data in any way, including as a proxy for any other demographic characteristic, and shall not offer or rely on partisan advantage, party affiliation, political ideology, or any similar goal or criterion as an asserted interest or defense in any legal action challenging whether its adopted district boundaries are lawful under state or federal law.

(e) The districting body shall not adopt election district boundaries using any criterion that is prioritized over the criteria in subdivision (c) or that, expressly or as applied, conflicts with one of the requirements in subdivisions (a) to (d), inclusive, except as provided in subdivision (g).

(f) Within 21 days of adopting final election district boundaries, the districting body shall issue a report that explains the basis on which the districting body made its decisions in achieving compliance with the requirements and criteria described in this section, including, as to each neighborhood, community of interest, city, or census designated place that was split into two or more districts, the reason for that split. This paragraph does not apply to a special district or small education district. Notwithstanding subdivision (i) of Section 23003, if a local jurisdiction establishes a hybrid redistricting commission to recommend changes to the legislative body’s district boundaries, the report required by this subdivision shall be issued by the districting body, and not by the commission.

(g) Subdivision (c) does not apply to a charter city that has adopted comprehensive or exclusive redistricting criteria in its city charter that includes a requirement to keep whole either communities of interest or neighborhoods. In such a charter city, the report required by subdivision (f) shall explain the basis on which the districting body made its decisions in achieving compliance with the requirements described in this section and the criteria described in the city charter, including, as to each neighborhood or community of interest that was split into two or more districts, the reason for that split. For purposes of this subdivision, “comprehensive or exclusive” means either that the city’s charter excludes consideration of redistricting criteria other than those that are identified in the city charter or that the city’s charter provides two or more mandatory traditional redistricting criteria other than the requirement that districts be equal in population.

(h) If a local jurisdiction establishes an advisory or hybrid redistricting commission to recommend changes to the legislative body’s district boundaries, any recommendation adopted by the commission shall comply with the requirements of subdivisions (a) through (e), inclusive, except as provided in subdivision (g).

(i) The criteria and requirements of this section apply to all election district boundaries adopted after January 1, 2024, including district boundaries adopted when a legislative body transitions from being elected at-large to elected by districts or from districts.

(j) The amendments to this section made in the act adding this subdivision do not constitute a change in, but are declaratory of, existing law.

SEC. 13.

If the Commission on State Mandates determines that this act contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement to local agencies and school districts for those costs shall be made pursuant to Part 7 (commencing with Section 17500) of Division 4 of Title 2 of the Government Code.