The Orange County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday stepped into a feud between the Orange County Board of Education and a committee that oversees school board election maps, voting 3-2 to give the School Board “exclusive authority” to adjust its own voter redistricting.
A county attorney told supervisors that their vote could lead to the county becoming involved in the Board’s pending litigation over the issue. And one of the supervisors who dissented from the majority, described the county’s vote as symbolic – and political.
A few hours after the Supervisors’ vote, Board of Education members, in an emergency meeting, voted to adopt their own redistricting map, which has been rejected by the County Committee on School District Organization. An attorney for the Board also indicated there would be future legal action.
Greg Rolen, an attorney representing the Board, said after the meeting: “We’re excited the Board of Supervisors exercised their authority to grant us plenary power, allowing the board to conduct its own redistricting.”
Both sides – the Board of Education and the committee – have forwarded their maps to Orange County Registrar of Voters Neal Kelley.
Kelley said Tuesday’s actions by the OCBE are not expected to impact the process already in motion.
“We’re going to continue to process the data received from the county committee,” Kelley said. “Nothing changed from last week to today.”
Kelley said it’s not up to him to decide which map gets approved.
“My role in this is ministerial, accepting the file documents and updating the data,” he said.
Kelley was recently added as a defendant in OCBE’s petition against the County Committee on School District Organization. He declined to comment on the litigation.
The Board filed a legal petition over the issue on Jan. 20, asking the court to prevent the committee from rejecting its preferred map. On Monday, Jan. 31, Orange County Superior Court Judge David A. Hoffer ruled against the Board’s request for a temporary restraining order. A hearing on the matter is scheduled for May 23.
The Orange County Board of Education is an elected board made up of five members who represent different regions of the county. Like other elected governing agencies, the agency’s voting maps are redrawn every ten years to reflect new data from the U.S. Census. The new maps, whatever they eventually look like, figure to come into play during the June 7 primary, when three of the five Board members are expected to seek re-election.
The board approved a redistricting map on Dec. 8 and, two days later, took it for approval to the County Committee on School District Organization.
But instead of approving the map preferred by the Board, the 11-member county committee — which is mandated by state law to help set boundaries for school districts — approved a different voting map submitted by a member of the public. The committee, which is made up of current and former school board members, also hired a demographer to come up with an additional map and offer tweaks to other proposed maps, including the one that was eventually selected.
The county school board does not oversee education or set policy for any of the 28 school districts in Orange County, but it has become a lightening rod for conservatives and liberals alike, particularly since the start of the pandemic. By a 4-1 majority, the board has taken conservative positions on mask mandates, vaccine rules and curriculum related to race, among other issues. And, in their Jan. 20 petition, four of the five OCBE members argue that the committee is biased against them and wants to see incumbents lose when they stand for reelection.
School Board President Mari Barke, a Rossmoor resident, said that under the committee’s voting map, her north county district was gerrymandered into Irvine.
On Tuesday, the Board’s conservative majority received support from three of the five Board of Supervisors: Don Wagner, Lisa Bartlett and Andrew Do.
“This is about local control,” Bartlett said.
Supervisor Katrina Foley, who joined Supervisor Doug Chaffee in voting against the resolution approved Tuesday, questioned if it was appropriate for Supervisors to get involved in the school dispute. She also asked whether their resolution, typically a symbolic move, has any impact on Monday’s court ruling.
Leon Page, Orange County’s counsel, said that once the county’s resolution is approved, “my duty would be to zealously advocate” for the supervisors’ position, and that could mean getting involved in litigation between the OCBE and the county committee. Page added that the resolution opens the door to a county role in the pending litigation “to specify the manner of selection of members of the Board of Education.”
“It would be my obligation to then seek that view is adopted by the court.”
Foley countered: “Where does it say that in this resolution? Because I don’t see us directing you to do anything.” After saying that a judge ruled against the Board this week, and that a vote by the supervisors doesn’t carry weight on this issue, she added “this just feels like politics.”
Meanwhile, in their special meeting on Tuesday, Board of Education member Beckie Gomez – who is usually on the opposite side of the conservative majority– made note that the Supervisors’ resolution, adopted that morning, was included as a given in the Board’s resolution in an agenda posted online Monday. How did that happen, she asked.
“Very simple. It was assumed that the Board of Supervisors would make that vote and decision today, and if they did not approve it, we would not be bringing this resolution today,” board member Ken Williams told her. “It’s as simple as that.”
Register staff writer Sean Emery contributed to this report.