Castorena

Castorena v. City of Los Angeles

Good Law
110 Cal. Rptr. 569·1973 Cal. App. LEXIS 858·34 Cal. App. 3d 901
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 29, 1973Civ. 41084California6,992 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kaus, J.

In this original proceeding for a writ of mandate, petitioners seek to enjoin the City of Los Angeles (“City”) from using a councilmanic redistricting plan adopted in September 1972. They also ask that we order the City to adopt a redistricting plan proposed by petitioners or any other “constitutionally valid reapportionment plan.” We granted an alternative writ in January 1973. The city council elections, in which the challenged districting plan was used, were held as scheduled in April 1973.

Background

In Calderon v. City of Los Angeles, 4 Cal.3d 251, 271 [ 93 Cal.Rptr. 361 , 481 P.2d 489 ], filed March 2, 1971, our Supreme Court held that the City’s charter provision for councilmanic districting based on registered voters, rather than population, was unconstitutional.

The City’s charter (art. II, § 6, subd. 2(a)) was then amended to provide: “Between July 1 and September 15 of each tenth year, commencing with the year 1972, the Council shall, by ordinance, which shall be effective upon publication, redistrict the City into fifteen (15) districts, . . . [containing] as nearly as practicable, one-fifteenth of the total population of the City of Los Angeles. . . .

“In…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.