Madera was one of 25 districts that received threatening letters from the Lawyers' Committee in March. Rubin would not identify the others, but said the group is negotiating with some and considering more litigation. The group's focus has been on the Central Valley, but districts throughout the state, including some in Southern California, have the same lopsided power balance that could lead to a challenge under the state Voting Rights Act.
A 2006 report by the Latino Issues Forum, a public policy and advocacy group, identified dozens of California districts that had Latino student majorities, used at-large voting and had few, if any, Latino school board members. Among them were the Anaheim City School District, the Compton Unified School District and the Inglewood Unified School District.
Ultimately, it was the threat of a costly legal battle like the one in Modesto that persuaded Madera Unified to give in.
"It's too expensive," Supt. John Stafford said. "We can't afford to take money away from our students to fight this, even though we don't feel we've done anything wrong."
Some school board members said they also believed the switch to district elections was appropriate.
"I can see the advantages of it," said Michael Westley, while adding that he resented the way the districting was forced on Madera by outsiders.
"This is a community," he said. "I think to the lawyers' group, it's just a chess game."
Board President Ray Seibert went further, saying he believes the at-large system ensures that the best candidates are elected. Seibert said the board's educational initiatives are aimed at educating all of Madera's children.
"My wife is Hispanic," said Seibert, a farmer and businessman. "My employees are all Hispanic. I know what they need. They talk to me. . . . They want their kids to learn English and get a good education."
The plaintiffs in the case against Madera acknowledged that the school board has done some good things for Latino children, including building several new schools on the heavily Latino east side. But they argued that the board has sometimes been slow to meet their needs and that Latinos believe they are less than fully represented.
Uranga, a communications technician with AT&T, shares Lopez's passion and has none of his quiet reserve.
To him the issue is simple: Latinos, whether treated well or poorly, had been disenfranchised.
"What we did with this process," he said, "was get rid of the modern poll tax."
--
mitchell.landsberg@latimes.com