On May 19, the plaintiffs challenging Riverside County’s supervisorial maps submitted a request to the Superior Court to prohibit using the maps approved in December 2021 depicting the five county supervisor districts. These supervisorial districts were used for the 2022 elections. In the 2024 elections, voters will be selecting supervisors for the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd districts.

The lawsuit, on behalf of Inland Empire United and six individuals, is challenging the legality of the December 2021 board-approved redistricting plan for supervisorial seats.

In the May filing, the plaintiffs’ attorney requested the court to prohibit the county, the supervisors and the Registrar of Voters “from using the 2021 Redistricting Plan for Board of Supervisor districts in the County of Riverside in any future election and compelling them to comply with their mandatory duties under the Fair and Inclusive Redistricting for Municipalities and Political Subdivisions Act … by adopting a new redistricting plan before the March 2024 election that complies with the requirements of the FAIR MAPS Act, including the requirements that the plan comply with the California Constitution and the federal Voting Rights Act by not unlawfully diluting the voting power of Latinos in Riverside County …”

Both Registrar of Voters Rebecca Spencer and Chief Operating Officer Juan Perez responded and told the court that in order to devise and approve new district boundaries in time for the 2024 primary elections, the county would need to begin by Aug. 1.

“The signature in lieu of filing fee process for the March Primary Election will start on September 14, 2023. The precinct boundaries have to be final and complete prior to this date in order to issue the paperwork for the correct district based on the candidate’s residence address. To meet this deadline, we must receive any new Board of Supervisors map no later than August 1, 2023,” Spencer said in her submission to the court.

On June 23, Perez stated in his response, “It is my understanding that Petitioners in this lawsuit are asking the Court to expedite discovery and briefing in this case in the hope of resolving the litigation in time to potentially have a new map for the 2024 Board of Supervisors election … the County would have already needed to be well into a new line-drawing process by now to comply with the law and to have any possible chance of meeting the Registrar’s August 1, 2023, deadline to receive a new map for the 2024 Board of Supervisors primary election.”

Perez, who chaired the Redistricting Committee in 2021, noted the law’s requirements for public hearings (four minimum) and the time needed to prepare for the hearings and to incorporate comments and ideas into potential supervisorial districts.

“In 2021, the map-drawing process took approximately one year to complete. First, the County assembled an Executive Office Technical Committee (EOTC) that first met on December 18, 2020, and that began planning the subsequent steps of the map-drawing process,” he added.

Currently, the Court has asked for the County’s response to the plaintiff’s request on Aug. 7. Two weeks later a case management conference will be held. Further responses from both the plaintiffs’ legal team and the County on Aug. 28 and Sept. 11. Then a hearing on the motion would be held on Sept. 18.

“Petitioners’ goal is to have this case resolved before the 2024 election. Petitioners’ May 19 motion for issuance of a peremptory writ of mandate is pending before the court … We expect the court will be signing an order formally setting this case schedule shortly,” Matthew J. Murray, attorney at Altshuler Berzon LLP and part of the plaintiff’s team.

If a decision or judgment is not reached before the March 2024 election, the petitioners’ lawyers (the ACLU) told the judge, “Petitioners reserve the right to move for a preliminary injunction before the March 2024 election if a writ petition hearing is not scheduled to be heard and resolved before the pre-election deadlines leading up to that election.”

However, in a recent email, Nicholas Reiner, senior press strategist for the ACLU of Southern California, wrote, “Our goal remains to have a lawful map in place for the March 2024 election, and we are continuing to consider all of our options.”

Brooke Federico, county public information officer, said in June, “We continue to look forward to a resolution to this matter as it moves through the court process.”