Brent’s Carpet One – Banner
Union Bank – Banner
SCV Senior Center – Touch A Truck 2015 – Banner
Adage IT – Banner
Beyond Harmony – Banner
California High Speed Rail – Palmdale – Banner
Samuel Dixon – Rubber Ducky – 2015 – Banner
Newhall Land – 2015 – Banner
Patterson’s Collision Center – Banner
Hugo Naturals – Banner
College Of The Canyons – Banner
Safety Town – Banner
Gerard Cosmetics – Banner
Disneyland – Diamond Celebration – Banner
Green Convergence – Sun Power – Banner
Santa Clarita Autosound – Banner
Galpin Motors – Banner
Facey – Banner
Nothing Bundt Cakes – Banner
AV Party Rental – Banner
Valencia Town Center – Farmer’s Market – Banner
Santa Clarita Transit – Dump the Pump – Banner
Olive Terrace Bar and Grill – Banner
Academy Swim Club – Banner
Bouquet Gardens – Banner
Newhall Land – Banner
Action Family Counseling – Banner
Oakmont of Santa Clarita – Banner
Simply Taylored – Banner
Santa Clarita Ballet – Little Mermaid – Banner
All Americans Bail Bonds – Banner
IHOP – Banner
It is forecast to be Clear at 7:00 PM PDT on June 02, 2015
Home » Santa Clarita News » Appeals Court Rules Against Palmdale In Voting Rights Act Case
Appeals Court Rules Against Palmdale In Voting Rights Act Case

Appeals Court Rules Against Palmdale In Voting Rights Act Case

Days before a lawsuit against the Santa Clarita Community College District on similar grounds is expected to be begin trial, an appellate court upheld a decision against Palmdale regarding an accusation the Antelope Valley city violates the California Voting Rights Act with its elections.

Don’t miss a thing. Get breaking Santa Clarita news alerts delivered right to your inbox.

“We’re very happy with the Court of Appeals decision confirming Judge (Mark) Mooney’s rulings were correct,” said Kevin Shenkman, the attorney for the plaintiff in the case. “We look forward to the day when the Palmdale City Council members recognize they must comply with the California Voting Rights Act.”

A call to Palmdale officials was not immediately returned Wednesday.

Rosemarie Sanchez-Fraser and Jim Soliz discuss their California Voting Rights Act lawsuits (Click the photo to link to video)

If Palmdale decides to continue to challenge the ruling, the next step would be to ask for a review of the decision from the state’s Supreme Court.

Trial is set to begin Monday in a similar lawsuit against the SCCCD, alleging the governing body for College of the Canyons’s two Santa Clarita Valley campuses are in violation of the California Voting Rights Act with at-large elections.

Related article: Judge Issues Tentative CVRA Ruling On COC Lawsuit; Trial To Start In June

Santa Clarita Community College officials repeatedly expressed a desire to fight the lawsuit.

A judge dismissed a summary motion May 14 requested by the Santa Clarita Community College District, which sought to dismiss the suit.

The law firm of Nielsen Merksamer, which represents the Santa Clarita Community College District, is also a firm listed as one of Palmdale’s attorneys in the CVRA suit.

In the tentative ruling in May for the SCCCD suit, Judge Rolf Treu declares the fact that no Latino candidate has run for the SCCCD board in the last 21 years is irrelevant to the case. He also discounts the need for the plaintiffs to establish a majority Hispanic district in the Santa Clarita Valley, which is a SCCCD contention.

Treu also found fault with experts on both sides, noting the SCCCD’s expert, Jonathan Katz, a Caltech professor, looked at too limited of a sample in denying the existence of racially polarized voting; the data considered by the plaintiff’s expert, Morgan Kousser, who’s also a Caltech professor, did not have a proper foundation establishing its relevance.

Two Santa Clarita Valley entities, the city of Santa Clarita and the Sulphur Springs School District, have already settled similar suits claiming their at-large elections violate the CVRA due to the existence of racially polarized voting.

College of the Canyons's Canyon Country campus (photo by Jessica Boyer)

Both entities noted no such lawsuit has ever been successfully defended, and the cost of such a suit could cost more than $1 million to defend.

Related article: Voting Rights Expert Looks At Conditions For A CVRA Violation

Shenkman, who worked with Lancaster Mayor R. Rex Parris and Milton Grimes in the three Santa Clarita Valley lawsuits, estimated attorney fees in excess of $5 million in the Palmdale case in a court motion due within 30 days of the initial judgment.

The city of Modesto challenged the constitutionality of the law in 2007; however, in that case the state’s Supreme Court refused to hear the case, and the city wound up settling for approximately $3 million in attorney fees after losing two decisions.

Do you have a news tip? Call us at (661) 298-1220, or drop us a line at

KHTS AM 1220 - Santa Clarita News - Santa Clarita Radio

Source: Santa Clarita News

Appeals Court Rules Against Palmdale In Voting Rights Act Case

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

About Perry Smith

Perry Smith is a print and broadcast journalist who has won several awards for his focused, hyperlocal community coverage in several different regions of the country. In addition to five years of experience covering the Santa Clarita Valley, Smith, a San Fernando Valley native, has worked in newspapers and news websites in Los Angeles, the Northwest, the Central Valley and the South, before coming to KHTS in 2012. To contact Smith, email him at
Action Family Counseling – News Banner
AV Party Rental – News Banner
Academy Swim Club – News Banner
Beyond Harmony – News Banner
All American Bail Bonds – News Banner
College Of The Canyons – News Banner
Hugo Naturals – News Banner
Beyond Harmony – Tile
Mannered Mutt – Tile
Adage IT – Tile
Facey – Tile
Wicall’s Carpet
Simply Taylored – Tile