1 2
J
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 DRAFT
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
Complaint for Violation of the
California Votin&: Ri&:hts Act of 2001
Aeainst the City of Burbank
1 ATTACHMENT 4
A4-1
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
1 1
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 Plaintiffs, by and through their counsel of record, hereby bring this action against defendant City of Burbank, California , and Does 1 through 25 (collectively "Defendants" or "the defendants"). In support of their complaint , Plaintiffs allege as follows:
I. INTRODUCTION
1. This action is brought by Plaintiffs for injunctive relief against Defendants for their violation of the California Voting Rights Act of 2001, California Elections Code Sec.s 14025, et seq. (the "CVRA). The imposition of the City of Burbank's at-large method of election has resulted in vote dilution for residents of protected classes and has denied them effective political participation in elections to the City of Burbank City Council. The City of Burbank's at-large method of election for electing members to its City Council prevents reside.nts of protected classes from electing candidates of their choice in City of Burbank City Council elections.
2. The effects of the City of Burbank's at-large method of election are apparent and compelling. Notwithstanding that approximately 43% of the population of City of Burbank are members of protected classes, apparently only three members of protected classes have been elected to the City of Burbank City Council since 2001. The deficiency of members from protected classes as candidates elected to the City of Burbank City Council reveals the lack of access to the political process.
3. The City of Burbank's at-large method of election violates the CVRA. Plaintiffs bring this action to enjoin the City of Burbank's continued abridgment of the voting rights of members of protected classes. Plaintiffs seek a declaration from this Court that the at-large method of election currently employed by the City of Burbank violates the CVRA. Plaintiffs seek injunctive relief enjoining the City of Burbank from further imposing or applying its current 2 ATTACHMENT 4
A4-2
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
at-large method of election. Further, Plaintiffs seek injunctive relief requiring the City of Burbank to design and implement district-based elections to remedy its violation of the CVRA.
II. THE PARTIES
4. At all material times, Plaintiffs are and have been registered voters residing in the City of Burbank and are eligible to vote in the City of Burbank's elections.
5. At all material times, defendant City of Burbank, California, is and has been a political subdivision of the State of California subject to the provisions of the CVRA.
6. Plaintiffs are unaware of the true names and capacities of the defendants sued herein as Does 1 through 25, inclusive, and therefore sue these defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiffs will amend this complaint to allege the true names and capacities of these defendants when their true names are ascertained. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on . that basis allege, that the acts and conduct alleged herein of each defendant was known to, authorized by, and/or ratified by the other defendants. Does 1 through 25, inclusive, are individuals or entities that have caused the City of Burbank to violate the CVRA, failed to prevent the City of Burbank's violation of the CVRA, and/or are otherwise responsible for the acts and omissions alleged herein.
7. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and allege on that basis, that each defendant named herein, at all times mentioned in this complaint, was the agent, employee, partner, joint venturer, and/or employer of the other defendants and was at all times herein mentioned acting within the course and scope of that agency, employment, partnership, ownership, or joint venture.
3 ATTACHMENT 4
A4-3
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
8. All parties hereto are within the unlimited jurisdiction of this Court. The unlawful acts subject to this complaint occurred in the County of Los Angeles.
9. Venue is proper in this court because the City of Burbank is a public entity located within this county.
IV. GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
A. Political Background on the City of Burbank
10. The City of Burbank is governed by a City Council. The City of Burbank City 11 Council serves as the governmental body responsible for the operation of the City of Burbank. 12 The City Council is comprised of five members .
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
11. The City Council of the City of Burbank is elected at-large. ~11 of the voters of the City of Burbank elect all of the members of the City Council.
12. Vacancies to the City Council are elected on a staggered basis. Every two years, the electorate elects two or three City Council members, each of whom serves a four-year term.
13. Apparently only three members of a protected class have been elected to the City of Burbank City Council since the year 2001.
B. Racial Polarization's Impact on the City of Burbank
14. Elections held within the City of Burbank are characterized by racially polarized voting.
15. Racially polarized voting occurs when members of a protected class -- as defined by California Elections Code Sec. 14025(d) -- vote for candidates or other electoral choices that differ from the rest of the electorate.
4 ATTACHMENT 4
A4-4
1 2
J
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 16. Racially polarized voting exists within the City of Burbank. There is a clear difference between the choice of candidates and other electoral choices that are preferred by voters from protected classes and the choice of candidates and other electoral choices that are preferred by voters in the rest of the electorate.
17. Racially polarized voting consists of both voter cohesion on the part of members of protected classes and voter cohesion by the non-protected class electorate against the choices of protected class voters.
18. Patterns of racially polarized voting and vote dilution have the effect of impeding opportunities for protected class voters to elect candidates of their choice to the at-large City Council positions in the City of Burbank. The non-protected class electorate dominates elections.
19. Voters from protected classes are harmed by racially polarized voting.
20. At least three members of protected classes would have been nominated for or elected to the City Council in the City of Burbank since 2001: John Dominguez in 2001, Juan Guillen in 2015, and Tamala Takahashi in 2020.
21. There is evidence of racially polarized voting and vote dilution in the City of Burbank on state ballot measures since 2008, including:
2008 Proposition 9, Crime Victim Rights
2010
2012
2016
Proposition 19, Legalization of Recreational Marijuana
Proposition 26, Legislative Tax Vote Requirements
Proposition 34, Abolishes Death Penalty
Proposition 61, Prescription Drug Prices
Proposition 66, Death Penalty Procedures
5 ATTACHMENT 4
A4-5
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 2020 Proposition 16, Affirmative Action
Proposition 18, 17-Year-Olds Vote
Proposition 21, Rent Control
22. There is also evidence of racially polarized voting and vote dilution in the City of Burbank on ballot measures at the local level in recent years, and for candidates for local and state office in the City of Burbank. It is estimated that, since the year 1997, it would be possible to demonstrate as many as 30 or more instances of racially polarized voting, vote dilution, or differential voting in the City of Burbank on elections to the City Council, on state ballot measures, on local ballot measures, and on candidates for state and local office. 12 c.
13 Impact of Polarization on Protected Classes
23. Members of protected classes in the City of Burbank bear the .. effects of past 14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 discrimination in areas such as education, employment, and health. Members of protected classes have graduated at a lower rate from high school and college than whites, have lower per capita income, are more likely to have experienced poverty in the past 12 months, and have higher percentages of individuals without health insurance. There are marked differences in the educational performance of white and Latino students in the Burbank Unified School District in California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (CAASPP) testing.
24. The at-large method of election voting has caused the dilution of protected class votes in the City of Burbank. Protected class voters and the rest of the electorate regularly express different preferences on candidates and other electoral choices, which has been to the detriment of protected class voters.
6 ATTACHMENT 4
A4-6
1 2
J
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 1 5
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 25. The obstacles posed by the City of Burbank's at-large method of election impairs the ability of protected class voters to elect candidates of their choice in elections held in the City of Burbank.
26. An alternative method of election exists -- district-based elections -- that will provide an opportunity for the members of protected classes as defined by the CVRA to elect candidates of their choice in City of Burbank elections .
27. All allegations made in this complaint are based upon information and belief, except those allegations which pertain to the named Plaintiffs, which are based on personal knowledge . The allegations of this complaint are stated on information and belief and are likely to have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery.
V. CAUSES OF ACTION
First Cause of Action
(Violation of California Voting Rights Act of 2001)
(Against All Defendants)
28. Plaintiffs hereby reallege and incorporate by reference each and every allegation stated in paragraphs 1 through 27 above as though set forth fully herein.
29. Plaintiffs are registered voters and reside within the City of Burbank.
30. Plaintiffs are members of a protected class of voters under the CVRA.
31. Plaintiffs are over the age of 18 and are eligible to vote in the City of Burbank's elections.
32. 33.
The City of Burbank is a political subdivision within the State of California.
The City of Burbank employs an at-large method of election. 7 ATTACHMENT 4
A4-7
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 34. Racially polarized voting has occurred, and continues to occur, in elections in the City of Burbank and in elections incorporating other electoral choices by voters in the City of Burbank. As a result, the City of Burbank's at-large method of election is imposed in a manner that impairs the ability of a protected class as defined by the CVRA to elect candidates of its choice in City of Burbank elections.
35. An alternative method -- district-based elections -- exists that will provide an opportunity for the members of a protected class as defined by the CVRA to elect candidates of their choice in City of Burbank City Council elections.
36. An actual controversy has arisen and now exists between the parties relating to the legal rights and duties of Plaintiffs and Defendants, for which Plaintiffs desire a declaration of rights.
37. Defendants' wrongful conduct has caused and, unless enjoined by this Court, will continue to cause, immediate and irreparable injury to Plaintiffs, and those similarly situated.
38. Plaintiffs, and those similarly situated, have no adequate remedy at law for the injuries they currently suffer and will otherwise continue to suffer.
VI. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment against Defendants, and each of them, as follows:
1. For a decree that the City of Burbank's current at-large method of election for its 24 City of Burbank violates the California Voting Rights Act of 2001; 25 26
27 28
2. For preliminary and permanent injunctive relief enjoining the City of Burbank from imposing or applying its current at-large method of election; 8 ATTACHMENT 4
A4-8
1 2
J
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 3. For injunctive relief mandating that the City of Burbank design and implement single-member district-based elections, as defined by the California Voting Rights Act of 2001, to remedy the City of Burbank's violation of the California Voting Rights Act of 2001;
4. For an award of Plaintiffs' attorney fees, costs, and prejudgment interest pursuant to the CVRA, California Elections Code Sec. 14030, and other applicable law; and
5. For such further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
Dated: December 1, 2022
9 ATTACHMENT 4
A4-9