Cypress changes how residents will vote for councilmembers ahead of November 2024 election

The way Cypress voters choose who represents them on the council dais will change this year.

The city is moving to a by-district election system, where voters will choose only one councilmember who lives in their district every four years, starting with the November 2024 election. Races will be staggered, with two seats up for election in 2024 and three in 2026.

Five public hearings will be held through March where residents can participate in the drawing of maps that break up the city into five districts, said city attorney Fred Galante.

The City Council approved the change during a contentious special meeting on Wednesday, Jan. 10, following years of rebuffing efforts to transition to by-district elections, which ultimately resulted in a lawsuit against the city.

“The recommended agreement gives the city the ability to work with the community to establish the boundaries of the five districts rather than have a court dictate the districts,” Galante said.

The last public hearing would be on March 11, and the City Council would then adopt the ordinance officially changing its election system.

The settlement agreement the council OK’d Wednesday, which resolves the lawsuit, requires the plaintiffs to participate in the map selection process, according to a staff report, and allows the city to transition back to at-large districts should California law change to permit that. It does not change councilmembers’ term limits.

The agreement also provides the city with protections against uncontested elections, Galante said. If three of the seven races to elect councilmembers through 2028 are uncontested or five of the races through 2030 are uncontested, the city could switch back to an at-large election system.

Cypress now has an at-large election system, where voters decide on all five council seats, and has resisted legal efforts to change — even as a growing number of Orange County cities made the switch in recent years.

In 2022, Malibu-based attorney Kevin Shenkman sued on behalf of Southwest Voter Registration Education Project and residents Kathryn Shapiro and Malini Nagpal, who routinely speak at City Council meetings. The lawsuit alleged that racially polarized voting occurs in Cypress elections and the at-large system impairs the ability of Asian Americans in Cypress to elect candidates of their choice.

“District voting enables closer relationships and improved responsiveness between communities and their representatives,” Shapiro said. “That means I have a more balanced, stronger, pronounced voice.”

City leaders on Wednesday voted to settle the lawsuit with most councilmembers saying it is the best foot forward for the city, regardless of how they felt about by-district elections.

“My yes vote is not a vote in favor of districting,” said Councilmember Anne Mallari. “This law takes away four of my five votes. I’m concerned that this could result in councils being divided into an equivalent number of special interests vying for resources to complete projects in their district.”

“But the possibility of moving to ranked-choice or cumulative voting systems if we have uncontested elections a certain number of times,” she said, “would not be afforded to us if we take this all the way and lose.”

Councilmember Bonnie Peat, who also voiced disapproval of by-district elections, said her vote was the hardest one she’s taken in the last 14 months and is based on what she feels is best for the city.

“We need to figure out how to settle this and move on,” she said.

But Councilmember Frances Marquez, who has supported by-district elections in the past, pointed to the California Voting Rights Act, noting its importance in a city where demographics have evolved.

Signed by Gov. Gray Davis in 2002, the CVRA disallows at-large elections that dilute the voting power of minority populations in local government elections.

“Cypress is now a majority-minority city. Asians are over 37% of the population. Latinos are almost 21% of the population,” she said, citing census data. “The California Voting Rights Act exists to make sure underrepresented groups have a fair opportunity to elect their candidate of choice.”

“I’m no purveyor of identity politics,” said Councilmember David Burke. “I think it’s wrong to assume that you know what someone thinks or how they’re going to vote based on their race, their age, their gender.”

While Burke said he believes there are many positives to by-district elections, including a heightened opportunity for candidates to knock on every door and connect in-person with voters, ultimately, his “yes” vote came down to the legal situation.

“I think it’s the smart, fiscally responsible thing to do for our city,” he said.

During a particularly heated portion of the evening Wednesday, Mayor Scott Minikus implied that Marquez and Burke had played a role in initiating the lawsuit against the city.

Minikus also accused both councilmembers of having a close relationship with the plaintiffs and leaking the city’s legal strategy. He said Burke’s move to Cypress was “a calculated move to run for office” and did not allow Marquez or Burke to respond.

In a phone interview Thursday morning, Burke said he plans to fully respond to those allegations at an upcoming City Council meeting.

“I have never leaked any information pertaining to the city’s legal strategy in this case, and there’s no basis for anyone to believe that I have,” Burke said. “He made a number of false statements about me. … I was absolutely shocked and blindsided.”

“Ethics, accountability and transparency have been core tenets of my political, professional and personal life. Mayor Minikus’ accusations are simply false and damaging to my personal and professional reputation,” Marquez said. “It is unfair for him, as mayor, to make such defamatory accusations and then not allow me and my fellow councilmember, David Burke, the opportunity to respond.”

The city’s decision to weigh the transition to by-district elections was prompted by a ruling involving Santa Monica. The California Supreme Court in August ruled against the city’s fight to keep its at-large voting system and handed it back down to the Court of Appeals for reconsideration, saying that the appeals court misconstrued the CVRA when it ruled in favor of the city.

“The Santa Monica ruling reduces the likelihood that Cypress’ at-large elections could be found to comply with the CVRA,” Galante said.

Minikus was the lone vote against transitioning to by-district elections and settling the lawsuit, although he voted in favor of a $50,000 agreement with the National Demographics Corporation to establish City Council electoral districts.

“I’m disgusted by this lawsuit for many reasons, solely because you, the residents of the city, don’t get a choice in this matter,” Minikus said. “If we had the ability to put this issue to a vote of our residents, I would be ok with it.”

Some residents had implored the council to allow voters to decide whether to make the transition, but doing so would not make the lawsuit go away or prevent a court decision forcing Cypress to convert to by-district elections, irrespective of voters’ desires, Galante said.

Ahead of the meeting, Shenkman said a vote against the transition would cost the city millions of dollars. He said he hopes the productive dialogue he’s had with a majority of the councilmembers continues and the public feels like they have a say in what the district boundaries are.

“If the process works, the public embraces it, and at the end of it, feels like this is a system — even if they wanted to hold on to the at-large system, even if they wanted the district lines to be a little different than what they end up with — that they can live with because they were heard,” he said.