Home>Articles>3-Measure Legislative Package on Redistricting Released

California State Capitol. (Photo: Kevin Sanders for California Globe)

3-Measure Legislative Package on Redistricting Released

The package includes SB 280, AB 604, and ACA 8

By Chris Micheli, August 18, 2025 3:04 pm

At 8am on Monday, August 18, the 3-measure package on Congressional redistricting was released by the Legislature. The package includes SB 280, AB 604, and ACA 8.

SB 280 – Elections 

SB 280 was an existing bill by Senator Cervantes. On August 18, it was amended and is now jointly authored by Senator Cervantes and Assembly Member Pellerin, and co-authored by 19 Senators and 36 Assembly Members. Ir requires a 2/3 vote as it is an urgency clause, so it would take effect immediately once signed into law.

Section 1 of the bill would add Part 1 to Division 8 of the Elections Code. Chapter 1.5 applies only to the June 2, 2026 primary election.

  1. This bill would require the Secretary of State to prepare a calendar of key election dates and deadlines and requirements for the nomination of candidates by the date that the in-lieu-filing-fee petition forms are made available.
  2. This bill would require the Secretary of State to determine, by December 19, 2025, whether it is feasible to include in the statewide list described above the number of voters by party preference in each congressional district with respect to all voters who are registered voters on the 154th day before the June 2, 2026, statewide direct primary election.
  3. This bill, for the June 2, 2026, statewide direct primary election, would prohibit a candidate for the office of Representative in Congress from choosing the word “incumbent” as a designation to appear on the ballot.

Section 2 of the bill would call a special election to be held throughout the state on November 4, 2025. It could be consolidated with specified local elections. It makes exceptions to the current Elections Code deadlines. It would be designated as Proposition 50 on the November 2025 ballot.

  1. The public shall be permitted to examine the condensed ballot title and summary of the measure. A voter may seek a writ of mandate for the purpose of requiring the condensed ballot title and summary, or portions thereof, to be amended or deleted only within that eight-day period.
  2. The ballot label for the measure cannot include a list of supporters and opponents.
  3. The LAO analysis must include a link to AB 604, visual depictions of the maps of the congressional districts that were certified by the Citizens Redistricting Commission in 2021, and those maps of the congressional districts that are created by Assembly Bill 604.

Section 3 says that this section applies only to the statewide special election held on November 4, 2025. Mail ballot drop-off locations must be provided in some counties. There are rules for voter centers. There can be consolidated polling places.

Section 4 contains a statement of Legislature intent to ensure counties have sufficient funding to effectuate the November 4, 2025, statewide special election. Also, an amount is appropriated from the General Fund to the Controller for the actual and reasonably necessary costs, as determined by the Director of Finance, for the counties to conduct the November 4, 2025, statewide special election. A cost report is required by April 1, 2026.

Section 5 contains a severability clause.

Section 6 provides an urgency clause so that it would take effect immediately.

AB 604 – Redistricting – Congressional districts

AB 604 was an existing bill by Assembly Member Berman. On August 18, it was amended and is now jointly authored by Assembly Member Aguiar-Curry and Senator Lena Gonzalez. There are no co-authors. It requires a 2/3 vote as it is an urgency clause, so it would take effect immediately once signed into law.

This bill would specify the elements that define the congressional districts if ACA 8 is adopted by the voters on November 4. These provisions would become operative only if specified provisions of ACA 8 become operative, and would remain in effect only until a new map of congressional districts is certified by the Citizens Redistricting Commission.

Section 1 of the bill would add Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 21400) to Division 21 of the Elections Code. Chapter 5 would be titled Congressional Districts. It would set forth the congressional districts from District 1 through District 52 by listing the actual census tracts for each congressional districts.

In addition, proposed Section 21453 would provide:

In the event that a census tract or census block is not listed, is listed more than once, or is only partially accounted for, and, as a result, an ambiguity or dispute arises regarding the location of a boundary line, the Secretary of State and the elections official of each county shall rely on the detailed maps prepared by the Assembly Committee on Elections and the Senate Committee on Elections and Constitutional Amendments.

Proposed Section 21454 would provide that this chapter only becomes operative if ACA 8 is approved by the voters.

Proposed Section 21455 would provide this chapter remains in effect only until a new map of congressional districts is certified by the Citizens Redistricting Commission.

Section 2 of the bill provides a severability clause.

Section 3 of the bill provides an urgency clause so it takes effect immediately.

ACA 8 – Congressional Redistricting

ACA 8 was an existing constitutional amendment by Assembly Member Pellerin. On August 18, it was amended and is now jointly authored by Speaker Rivas and Pro tempore McGuire, and co-authored by 19 Senators and 42 Assembly Members. It would require a 2/3 vote by the Legislature to place the measure on the ballot pursuant to Article 18 of the Constitution.

This Assembly Constitutional Amendment would place before the statewide voters an amendment to the Constitution by adding Section 4 to Article XXI. ACA 8 states: “Notwithstanding the authority of the Citizens Redistricting Commission, it would require the state to temporarily use the congressional districts reflected in AB 604 for every congressional election until the new congressional boundary lines are drawn by the Commission in 2031.”

In addition, this measure would make the congressional districts reflected in AB 604 operative only if Texas, Florida, or another state adopts a new congressional district map that takes effect after August 1, 2025, and before January 1, 2031, and such redistricting is not required by a federal court order.

Finally, this measure would authorize the Legislature to enact a statute providing that if an incumbent judge of the Supreme Court or a court of appeal files a declaration of candidacy, the judge’s name will not appear on the ballot and the judge will instead be deemed elected, unless a petition is filed by a requisite number of voters requesting that the judge’s name appear on the ballot for a vote.

Section 1 of the ACA provides: “This measure shall be known, and may be cited, as the “Election Rigging Response Act”.”

Section 2 of this ACA provides 14 findings and declarations from the People.

Section 3 of this ACA would add Section 4 to Article 21 to:

  1. Call on Congress to pass federal legislation and amend the US Constitution to require fair, independent, and nonpartisan redistricting commissions nationwide.
  2. Temporarily use the Congressional districts in AB 604 for the 2026, 2028, and 2030 elections.
  3. Only use these alternative districts if Texas, Florida, or another state adopts a new congressional district map that takes effect before January 1, 2031.
  4. Authorize only the Attorney General to defend any action regarding a congressional district map adopted.
  5. Give the California Supreme Court original and exclusive jurisdiction in all proceedings in which a congressional district map adopted.
  6. Have the Citizens Redistricting Commission continue to adjust the boundary lines of the congressional, State Senatorial, Assembly, and Board of Equalization districts in conformance with the standards and process set forth in Section 2 in 2031.

Section 4 of this ACA contains a severability clause.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Latest posts by Chris Micheli (see all)
Spread the news:

 RELATED ARTICLES

9 thoughts on “3-Measure Legislative Package on Redistricting Released

  1. ACA 8 was originally written to allow automatic retention for judicial offices. California’s Leginfo indicates that such language was deleted.

  2. Hi Chris,
    am I understanding this correctly? the law is only operative if Texas, Florida or another state redistrict, and “such redistricting is not required by a court order”? is this a poison bill reducing this to just a publicity stunt?
    per Katy Grimes’ reporting, Texas redistricting is required in light of a recent court decision:
    “Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon sent a letter to Gov. Abbott and AG Paxton, identifying four Texas congressional districts as “unconstitutional racially based” gerrymanders. These so-called coalition districts (combining minority groups like Blacks and Hispanics) were found not protected under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act based on the 2024 5th Circuit ruling in Petteway v. Galveston County, Hans Von Spakovsky explains.”

    thanks for your legal breakdown!
    also since when are major sponsors NOT required to disclose their funding on a ballot measure? are we just tossing all of the protocols so dark money groups can go hog wild?

    1. Oh, the text states “and such redistricting is not required by a federal court order” which apparently only applies to United States Federal Courts, and not State Supeme Courts.

  3. Your gerrymandering maps cross county lines and deliberately place communities together with very few similarities. A trigger clause based on the actions of another state further shows your indifference to the representation of Californians. Texas has to redistrict because of court order yet you tie our two states together. Are you calling for an updated California census that just counts citizens so our new districts will represent citizens? Funding sources should be disclosed no exceptions…transparency from our elected officials is required. The estimated cost of this forced election is 250 million where are those funds coming from? Our state is in debt. And in callinng on the US to ammend the constitution to stop what you are advocating is not only party politics above people but blatant hypocrisy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *