Updated: Lawsuit claims election process deprives Latino voters

Health care district officials are vowing to implement district elections in the wake of a lawsuit claiming the process used to choose hospital board members is illegal.
Residents represented by former District Attorney John Sarsfield’s law firm sued the San Benito Health Care District pursuing district elections to prevent “vote dilution” of the Latino population, according to the document filed at the San Benito County Courthouse. The suit requests district elections and to have all five directors elected in the same cycle as opposed to staggered terms.
Local plaintiffs named in the suit are Gregory Rivera, Maryanne Conroy and Teresa Adams. They were represented by the Visalia-based Melo-Sarsfield law firm – with former county D.A. John Sarsfield as a partner – in the suit against the San Benito Health Care District over the election process for its five-member board of directors.
The lawsuit points out that the California Voting Rights Act is established to prevent such dilution. It contends the at-large system deprives Latinos of an “ability to voice preferences meaningfully” and calls for district elections as a remedy.
The lawsuit points out that Latinos make up 57.9 percent of the county population. It claims that at-large systems, as used by the district to elect the five members, “disempower non-majority voters” and has contributed to racially polarized voting locally. That document also mentions how there is just one Latino member of the current board who describes himself as half-Portuguese, half-Latino. It goes on to claim only three Latino residents have served on the hospital board in its entire history, a number disputed by health care district officials.
“This, combined with a history of voting and other discrimination within the County of San Benito that still impacts the Latino community, reveals a lack of meaningful access for Latinos to the political process,” the lawsuit contends.
San Benito Health Care District Board President Gordon Machado responded to the lawsuit by pointing out hospital officials already had plans to change to district elections. He said district officials were aware of 2010 census data showing a population imbalance and a need for district seats.
“That’s something that we’re moving forward on but not in a formal manner,” Machado said. “It’s kind of a mindset.”
Machado said the hospital board expects to have three open board positions elected to district seats in 2016, with the other two members – elected this November – elected to district seats in 2018. The hospital board can legally make the change without going to voters, but there wasn’t enough time to make it onto this year’s ballot, Machado said.
The health care district, which oversees Hazel Hawkins Memorial Hospital and related clinics, responded in a statement as well.
The district claims the “only explanation for that filing is a greed – this law firm, Melo and Sarsfield, wants to generate profits for itself in the form of attorneys’ fees for bringing a case without any merit whatsoever.”
The hospital district went on to point out recent actions by the board at the end of August to change over to district elections.
“The District decided to change the way in which its board members are elected,” according to the statement. “Specifically, the Board determined that it would move to zone elections from the current at-large system and has begun taking steps to implement the change.”