(a) Following or concurrent with the decision to establish district-based elections for a legislative body, or following each federal decennial census for a legislative body that is already elected using district-based elections, the districting body shall, by ordinance or resolution, adopt boundaries for all of the election districts of the legislative body so that the election districts shall be substantially equal in population as required by the United States Constitution.

(1) Population equality shall be based on the total population of residents of the local jurisdiction as determined by the most recent federal decennial census for which the redistricting data described in Public Law 94-171 are available.

(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), an incarcerated person, as that term is used in Section 21003, shall not be counted towards a local jurisdiction’s population, except for an incarcerated person whose last known place of residence may be assigned to a census block in the local jurisdiction, if information about the last known place of residence for incarcerated persons is included in the computerized database for redistricting that is developed in accordance with subdivision (b) of § 8253 of the Government Code, and that database is made publicly available.

(b) The districting body shall adopt election district boundaries that comply with the United States Constitution, the California Constitution, and the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965 (52 U.S.C. § 10301 et seq.).

(1) Consistent with the districting body’s existing obligations under the federal Voting Rights Act, the districting body shall determine whether it is possible to create an election district or districts in which a minority group is sufficiently large and geographically compact to constitute a majority in a single-member district, as set forth in Thornburg v. Gingles, 478 U.S. 30 (1986), and as interpreted in case law regarding enforcement of the federal Voting Rights Act with respect to redistricting. The districting body shall publish on its redistricting web page, at a minimum, the results of its analysis within seven days of completing the analysis or prior to adopting election district boundaries, whichever occurs first.

(2) If the districting body, consistent with its existing obligations under the federal Voting Rights Act, conducts an analysis to determine whether “racially polarized voting,” as defined in case law regarding enforcement of the federal Voting Rights Act, exists in the local jurisdiction, the districting body shall publish on its redistricting web page, at a minimum, a summary of its analysis and findings within seven days of completing the analysis or prior to adopting election district boundaries, whichever occurs first.

(c) The districting body shall adopt election district boundaries using the following criteria as set forth in the following order of priority:

(1) To the maximum extent practicable, election districts shall be geographically contiguous. Areas that meet only at the points of adjoining corners are not contiguous. Areas that are separated by water and not connected by a bridge, tunnel, or regular ferry service are not contiguous.

(2) To the maximum extent practicable, and where it does not conflict with the preceding criterion in this subdivision, the geographic integrity of any local neighborhood or local community of interest shall be respected in a manner that minimizes its division. A “community of interest” is a population that shares common social or economic interests that should be included within a single election district for purposes of its effective and fair representation. Characteristics of communities of interest may include, but are not limited to, shared public policy concerns such as education, public safety, public health, environment, housing, transportation, and access to social services. Characteristics of communities of interest may also include, but are not limited to, cultural districts, shared socioeconomic characteristics, similar voter registration rates and participation rates, and shared histories. Communities of interest do not include relationships with political parties, incumbents, or political candidates.

(3) To the maximum extent practicable, and where it does not conflict with the preceding criteria in this subdivision, the geographic integrity of a city or census designated place shall be respected in a manner that minimizes its division. This paragraph does not apply to a city.

(4) To the maximum extent practicable, and where it does not conflict with the preceding criteria in this subdivision, election districts shall be bounded by natural and artificial barriers, by streets, or by the boundaries of the local jurisdiction. Election district boundaries should be easily identifiable and understandable by residents.

(5) To the maximum extent practicable, and where it does not conflict with the preceding criteria in this subdivision, election districts shall be drawn to encourage geographical compactness in a manner that nearby areas of population are not bypassed in favor of more distant populations.

(d) The districting body shall not adopt election district boundaries for the purpose of favoring or discriminating against an incumbent, political candidate, or political party.

(e) The districting body shall not adopt election district boundaries using any criterion that is prioritized over the criteria in subdivision (c) or that, expressly or as applied, conflicts with one of the requirements in subdivisions (a) to (d), inclusive, except as provided in subdivision (g).

(f) Within 21 days of adopting final election district boundaries, the districting body shall issue a report that explains the basis on which the districting body made its decisions in achieving compliance with the requirements and criteria described in this section, including, as to each neighborhood, community of interest, city, or census designated place that was split into two or more districts, the reason for that split. This paragraph does not apply to a special district or small education district. Notwithstanding subdivision (i) of Section 23003, if a local jurisdiction establishes a hybrid redistricting commission to recommend changes to the legislative body’s district boundaries, the report required by this subdivision shall be issued by the districting body, and not by the commission.

(g) Subdivision (c) does not apply to a charter city that has adopted comprehensive or exclusive redistricting criteria in its city charter that includes a requirement to keep whole either communities of interest or neighborhoods. In such a charter city, the report required by subdivision (f) shall explain the basis on which the districting body made its decisions in achieving compliance with the requirements described in this section and the criteria described in the city charter, including, as to each neighborhood or community of interest that was split into two or more districts, the reason for that split. For purposes of this subdivision, “comprehensive or exclusive” means either that the city’s charter excludes consideration of redistricting criteria other than those that are identified in the city charter or that the city’s charter provides two or more mandatory traditional redistricting criteria other than the requirement that districts be equal in population.

(h) If a local jurisdiction establishes an advisory or hybrid redistricting commission to recommend changes to the legislative body’s district boundaries, any recommendation adopted by the commission shall comply with the requirements of subdivisions (a) through (e), inclusive, except as provided in subdivision (g).

(i) The criteria and requirements of this section apply to all election district boundaries adopted after January 1, 2024, including district boundaries adopted when a legislative body transitions from being elected at-large to elected by districts or from districts.

(Added by Stats. 2023, Ch. 343, Sec. 14. (AB 764) Effective January 1, 2024.)