The Spectrum board on Oct. 3 adopted a revised trustee-area map moving the district to by-trustee-area elections and approved a sequencing plan that would shift one newly created area into the presidential election cycle, contingent on a waiver from the State Board of Education.

The board approved the revised map by a 5-0 vote after listening to a presentation on legal and demographic criteria, and later voted unanimously to adopt sequencing Option 2 and a companion resolution combining the map and sequence. Trustee Cortese moved to adopt the revised map; the motion was seconded and passed 5-0. On sequencing, Trustee Lay moved for Option 2 with an amendment from Trustee Chavez and a second from Trustee Herrera; that motion also passed unanimously.

The adoption implements statutory and federal standards the board’s legal counsel said guided map evaluation. Special counsel Dr. Justin Levitt summarized the priorities laid out in the Fair Maps Act of 2024 and federal law, saying, “First and foremost being our federal requirements of population equality that each of the trustee areas has to have more or less the same number of total residents.” He reviewed population deviation, contiguity, compactness, and Voting Rights Act considerations for each draft map and the revised map presented for final action.

The board’s legal adviser, Marguerite Leoni, described the sequencing decisions the district must make now that trustee areas are single-member districts. Leoni told the board the education code requires incumbents to finish their terms and that selections must also consider the purposes of the California Voting Rights Act. To boost turnout in lower-participation areas, she said, the board can pursue a one-time waiver to allow a two-year term so that an area without a resident trustee would move from the 2026 gubernatorial cycle to the 2028 presidential cycle. “The purpose of the 2 years term is to relocate the Elm Rock area election from the gubernatorial year in ’26 to the presidential year in ’28,” Leoni said.

Board members and counsel discussed demographic and turnout differences between trustee areas. Dr. Levitt presented socioeconomic and voting data showing Trustee Area 1 and Trustee Area 3 have higher shares of households earning less than $75,000 and lower voter registration and turnout. For example, he reported that Trustee Area 1 had about 48,700 registered voters versus about 69,540 in Trustee Area 5, and that Areas 1 and 3 had substantially lower turnout rates (around the mid-50s percent range in recent cycles) than other areas (mid-to-high 60s to about 70 percent in the same cycles).

The revised map scored better on some community-cohesion measures: it keeps several high school attendance areas and some elementary school districts together more often than other drafts, and reduces the number of elementary-district splits to nine compared with 15–18 in other maps. Dr. Levitt noted the revised map yields 20 high-school attendance-area pieces versus a high of 28 for Map A.

The board’s approval of sequencing instructs the superintendent to pursue the waiver from the State Board of Education that would permit a single, one-time two-year term for the trustee area currently described as Elm Rock (also referred to in materials as Alum Rock/Elm Rock) so that area would be on the ballot in 2026 for a two-year term and thereafter every four years on the presidential cycle. Counsel advised the waiver is commonly granted when consistent with the law’s purposes but emphasized the approach is contingent on the State Board of Education’s approval.

President Do thanked counsel and community participants after the votes and described the decision as consequential for representation. “This is one of the most momentous decisions we all make collectively as a board,” Do said.

The board recorded three formal actions on the topic: adoption of the revised trustee-area map (item 6.02), adoption of sequencing Option 2 with an amendment and direction to pursue a waiver if necessary (item 6.04), and adoption of a resolution incorporating both the map and the sequence (item 6.05). Each vote was unanimous (5-0). The board’s materials and the slides presented by counsel and the demographer remain part of the record for anyone seeking further detail on the criteria, maps and the waiver process.