I. Introduction
The California Voting Rights Act of 2001 (CVRA)
has revolutionized local elections in the state. The
Act was designed to provide fairer representation
for California’s Latinos and other historically
marginalized communities. In recent years, nearly
half of all cities across the state have shifted their
city council election systems from at-large to
district-based contests, significantly changing the
nature of elections and representation in those
communities. Many of the state’s other local
jurisdictions, including school districts and special
districts, have made similar transitions. Before
the CVRA, only 36 cities in California (7.6%) used
some form of district-based elections; now 229
(47.4%) do.
In 2016, the Rose Institute of State and Local
Government published a report that found the
move to district based elections had increased
the number of Latinos elected to city councils
in California, but concluded the change had
been driven by significant gains in a few cities.
Since then, many more California cities have
transitioned to district-based election systems.
As part of the Rose Institute’s ongoing study of
this “quiet revolution” in local government, this
report offers updated information regarding
the shift in California from at-large city council
elections to district elections by region and by city
population. The report is based on information
available as of January 2025 and revised as of
April 30, 2025. While documenting the transition
to district-based elections, this report does not
assess the effects of these changes on representa-
tion or governance.
II. The California Voting Rights Act (CVRA)
Introduced in 2001 and signed by Governor Gray Davis in 2002, the California
Voting Rights Act (CVRA) builds on the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA)
by expanding the ability of Latinos and other groups to challenge at-large
electoral systems and other voting systems that may dilute their voting
strength. The CVRA was introduced by Democratic Senator Richard Polanco,
with backing from the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund
(MALDEF) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).
Under the CVRA, jurisdictions (cities, counties, school districts, and special
districts) can be sued if their voting systems are found to disenfranchise or
impair “the ability of a protected class to elect candidates of its choice or its
ability to influence the outcome of an election.” The CVRA adopts the federal
understanding of “protected class” as groups that have historically faced
voting discrimination on the basis of race, color, or language minority status.
The CVRA makes it easier for litigants to establish voter disenfranchisement
because, unlike under the federal VRA, protected classes are not required to
be “geographically compact or concentrated.” Additionally, litigants need not
establish why a protected class’s preferred candidate lost. Therefore, CVRA
litigation has been described as “purely a statistical exercise.”
In at-large election systems, citizens throughout a city vote for all city
councilmembers. These systems are targets of CVRA lawsuits because they
can make it harder for minority communities to elect representatives of their
choice. Numerous California cities have received demand letters alleging their
at-large systems violate the CVRA, and the threat of litigation has spurred
many of them to switch electoral systems. Many cities have adopted by-district
elections, whereby voters select a councilmember to represent the area of
the city (the district) where they reside. A few cities use a hybrid system. For
example, in Oakland, seven councilmembers represent geographic districts
while an eighth councilmember is elected at large. Similarly, the City of Downey
uses a mixed election system to elect its five-member city council, consisting of
four individual districts and one at-large district. A final, rarely used, system is
called “from district” election. In this system, candidates must reside in and are
elected to represent a district (giving the system a district component) but are
elected by voters citywide (an at-large element).
Revised April 30, 2025
Mapping the Revolution in California City Council Election Systems, Revised April 30, 2025 | 2
III. Transition to By-District Elections
Our analysis shows that the number of cities adopting
district systems has greatly accelerated in recent years.
In 2000, before adoption of the CVRA, only 7.6% of
California cities used district-based election systems. By
2016, that number increased to 13.5%, and as of 2024,
nearly half of all cities in the state—229 of 483 cities or
47.4%—have adopted some form of district-based city
council elections, almost all of which are by-district.
Figure 1 depicts the sharp increase in adoption of
district-based election systems beginning with the 2016
election cycle.
• Between 2004 and 2014, only four cities transi-
tioned from at-large to by-district election systems
(Modesto in 2008, Menifee in 2010, Tulare in 2012,
and Escondido in 2014).
• The change accelerated between 2016 and 2018,
when 63 cities converted to by-district elections.
• Since 2018, 101 more cities have made the switch.
Figure 2 shows that larger cities have been more likely
to adopt district-based city council election systems.
• 65 of 262 (24.8%) of small cities (population less
than 35,000) use district-based systems. All these
cities elect councilmembers by-district, except
one that uses a from-district system.
• 64 of 101 (63.4%) of medium-sized cities (popu-
lation between 35,001 - 75,000) use by-district
election systems.
• 78 of 98 (79.6%) of large cities (population
between 75,001 - 200,000) use district-based
systems. Three of these large cities use from-
district systems or a combination of by-district
and at-large.
• 22 of 22 (100%) of very large cities (population
more than 200,000) use district-based systems.
One very large city (Oakland) uses a hybrid
by-district and at-large system.
197
75.2%
64
24.4%
64
63.4%
37
36.6%
75
76.5%
20
20.4%
3
3.1%
1
4.5%
21
95.5%
1
0.4%
SMALL
≤35,000
MEDIUM
35,001 - 75,000
LARGE
75,001 - 200,000
VERY LARGE
200,000+
FIGURE 2. PROPORTION OF CALIFORNIA CITIES USING AT-LARGE, BY-DISTRICT,
OR OTHER ELECTION SYSTEMS BY CITY SIZE, 2024
Noticing the statewide trend, many cities that have not received
demand letters have preemptively switched to district elections,
often to avoid costly litigation. Some cities have fought the alleged
CVRA violation in court, only to lose their case and millions of dollars.
To date, no city has won a CVRA lawsuit. The California Government
Code has also been amended to make switching election systems
easier. For example, in the past, only cities with populations of less
than 100,000 could switch to district elections through a council-
approved ordinance without placing the question on the ballot for
voter approval. In 2016, AB 2220 (Cooper) amended state law to
allow all cities, regardless of population, to switch to district elections
by ordinance alone.
FIGURE 1. NUMBER OF CALIFORNIA CITIES WITH DISTRICT-BASED
ELECTION SYSTEMS, 1998-2024 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008
2010
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
2022
2024
250
200
150
100
50
0
AT-LARGE BY-DISTRICT FROM-DISTRICT OR HYBRID
CONTINUED | THE CALIFORNIA VOTING RIGHTS ACT (CVRA)
Note: Totals include By-District, From District, and Hybrid election systems.
Mapping the Revolution in California City Council Election Systems, Revised April 30, 2025 | 3
FIGURE 3. CITY COUNCIL ELECTION
SYSTEMS IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
CITIES, 2000
In 2000, the majority of cities in
Southern California elected their city
councilmembers using at-large
election systems. By-district election
systems were mainly limited to the
region’s largest cities, such as Los
Angeles, San Diego, and Long Beach.
Some cities, including Alhambra, Santa
Ana, and Newport Beach, adopted
from-district election systems.
The City of Downey used a hybrid
system with four council members
elected by-district and one at-large
councilmember.
FIGURE 4. CITY COUNCIL ELECTION
SYSTEMS IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
CITIES, 2024
Over the past two decades, a majority
of Southern California cities have con-
verted from at-large electoral systems
to by-district electoral systems. Among
the twenty most populous cities in
Southern California, only Lancaster
continues to use at-large elections.
Since 2000, Santa Ana and Alhambra
voters approved a switch to by-district
elections for all city councilmembers in
2018 and 2020 respectively. Mean-
while, Newport Beach continues to use
a from-district election system. The
City of Downey is actively transition-
ing its hybrid election system to a
by-district system, citing compliance
with the CVRA as the impetus for the
transition, with a goal to complete the
switch by 2026.
Alejo, Luis. “AB-182 California Voting Rights Act of 2001.” California Legislative Information, Sept. 2015, leginfo.legislature.
ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB182.
Aziz, Youstina N., et al. The California Voting Rights Act: Recent Legislation & Litigation Outcomes. League of California Cities,
2018. www.cacities.org/Resources-Documents/Member-Engagement/Professional-Departments/City-Attorneys/Li-
brary/2018/Spring-Conference-2018/5-2018-Spring;-Aziz-Johnson-Markman-California-Vot.aspx.
Ballotpedia. “Alhambra, California, Measure V, Campaign Finance Limits and By-District City Council Elections Charter
Amendment (November 2020).” Ballotpedia, ballotpedia.org/Alhambra,_California,_Measure_V,_Campaign_Finance_Limits_
and_By-District_City_Council_Elections_Charter_Amendment_(November_2020).
Ballotpedia. “Santa Ana, California, Measure AA, By-Ward Elections (November 2018).” Ballotpedia, ballotpedia.org/San-
ta_Ana,_California,_Measure_AA,_By-Ward_Elections_(November_2018).
City of Alhambra. “Frequently Asked Questions on District-Based Elections.” Alhambra, CA | Official Website, www.cityofal-
hambra.org/657/District-Based-Elections.
City of Downey. “Changes to Downey’s Election System.” City of Downey, www.downeyca.org/our-city/departments/city-
clerk/changes-to-downey-s-election-system.
City of Newport Beach. “Government | City of Newport Beach.” City of Newport Beach, 2025, www.newportbeachca.gov/
city-government.
City of Oakland. “City Council.” City of Oakland, 10 Sept. 2018, www.oaklandca.gov/departments/oakland-city-council#:~:-
text=%E2%86%92%20City%20Council-,City%20Council,and%20priorities%20for%20the%20City.
D’Urso, William. “This Malibu Lawyer is Changing How California Votes.” Spectrum News1, 22 May 2021, spectrumnews1.
com/ca/southern-california/local/2021/05/22/the-malibu-lawyer-changing-how-california-votes-.
Goulding, Susan C. “Tale of Two Cities: While Cypress Leaders Decided in Private to Fight District Elections, La Palma Did the
Opposite in Public.” Orange County Register, 5 May 2022, www.ocregister.com/2022/05/04/tale-of-two-cities-while-cypress-
leaders-decided-in-private-to-fight-district-elections-la-palma-did-the-opposite-in-public/.
Rose Institute of State and Local Government. “Quiet Revolution in California Local Government Gains Momentum.” The Rose
Institute of State and Local Government, 3 Nov. 2016, roseinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/CVRA-White-Paper.
