City Offers to Place Council Expansion on June Ballot to Settle Latino Lawsuit

The San Diego City Council, facing the possibility that a federal court judge might postpone next month’s local elections in response to a lawsuit by the Chicano Federation, offered to settle the case Tuesday by giving voters a chance to expand the council next June.

But an attorney for the federation virtually rejected the city’s offer, saying that allowing voters to decide on expanding from 8 to 10 council districts does not meet all of the organization’s demands for enhancing minority political power.

Offer Lacks Scope

“I haven’t had a chance to talk to my client, but (the proposal) doesn’t address most of the issues involved in the suit,” said Patricia Meyer, attorney for the Chicano Federation.

Specifically, the group also wants voters given the chance to decide whether an independent redistricting commission should handle the politically sensitive issue of redrawing council boundaries, a process now handled by the council. It also wants redistricting accomplished by May, 1991, using 1990 census data, in time for September, 1991, elections.

The council offer came a day after U.S. District Judge John S. Rhoades allowed the Chicano Federation to amend its lawsuit aimed at altering the city’s electoral system. Rhoades also scheduled an Aug. 28 hearing on whether he has the authority to order the city to place the election changes sought by the Chicano Federation on the November ballot.

If Rhoades agrees to do that, the Chicano Federation probably will ask to postpone the Sept. 19 council election until June, on the grounds that the current election system is unconstitutional.

Filed in January, 1988, the Chicano Federation lawsuit claimed that the city’s two-step council elections--primaries within council districts, followed by citywide run-offs between the top two finishers in each district--unconstitutionally diluted Latino political power.

Voters’ approval of district-only elections in November accomplished one of the suit’s goals by eliminating the second stage. But the federation argued that other electoral changes must also be instituted to give Latinos electoral equality.

Promise Was Broken

Voters might have had that opportunity this November if the council had placed recommendations by the Charter Review Commission on the ballot calling for a council expansion from 8 seats to 10 and the creation of an independent commission to redraw district boundaries to make up for imbalances due to population growth over the past 10 years.

The council in 1988 promised to place all Charter Review Commission recommendations directly on the ballot. But in a 5-3 vote June 12, the council reneged on that promise, with the council’s Republican majority saying it wanted to review each recommendation individually this summer.

Rhoades took a dim view of that move in his ruling Monday, saying that the broken promise allowed the lawsuit, which had been placed on hold, to be re-activated and raising the possibility of a delayed election. He also mentioned the possibility of invalidating the election results sometime in the future.

Hoping to head off that possibility, the council voted 7-1 in closed session to offer a June, 1990, vote on the council expansion from 8 seats to 10. If voters approved the move, it would take effect in 1993. The council also offered to pay up to $10,000 in legal fees to Chicano Federation attorneys.

Mayor Maureen O’Connor revealed the vote after Tuesday’s council session. The offer was given to U.S. Magistrate Harry McCue, who is attempting to help both sides settle the case. McCue is scheduled to meet with Chicano Federation attorney Meyer this morning.

Move Called a Decoy

Democratic Councilman Bob Filner, who favors expanding the council to 10 seats, was the only council member to vote against making the offer, calling it a “smoke screen” intended to eliminate the lawsuit so the council can redraw the current 8 districts in a way that favors the council’s Republican majority.

Under the current City Charter, the council must redraw district boundaries by 1990 to account for population imbalances due to uneven growth in the 8 districts. How that is accomplished could determine voting patterns and thus council representation for the next 10 years.

“They want to redistrict with eight seats, without current information (from the census) and without an independent commission,” Filner said. He also predicted that most council members would oppose the expansion next June, perhaps even placing competing initiatives on the ballot.