Unequal Denver School Board districts raise concerns of fairness in upcoming election

CBS News Colorado has uncovered concerns with the fairness of the upcoming Denver school board race. Sources tell CBS News Colorado the school board districts may currently be of illegal size. 

Elections officials say because the school board districts have unequal populations, the results could be challenged in court, and if a judge determines a new election is necessary, that could cost Denver taxpayers an additional $2 million.

For example, Denver Public Schools records show district four in the northeast corner of the city has about 33,000 more people than district two in the southwest. 

Experts tell us that means the smaller districts' votes will count more than the larger districts', and if the board had approved a redistricting measure, school board districts one and five would have changed sizes, with a different amount of voters. 

Some board members say the changes would not have changed districts one and five significantly enough to impact the upcoming election, however sources tell CBS News Colorado there still would have been some different voters choosing candidates in the upcoming election, had the board approved any of the proposed district changes in the spring. 

Milo Marquez, Chair of the Latino Education Coalition, says the school board was supposed to approve new district lines after the 2020 census, but even after four years, still hasn't come to an agreement. 

"They didn't redistrict, and we really believe that there's just some of the school board members are holding it up," he said. "We want equity in the elections, and we want to make sure that that the Latino voice is being heard and their votes are being considered."

Denver Elections Division Director Todd Davidson says the issue is concerning, as well. 

"It is concerning and perhaps more concerning to us than it was to the Board of Education," Davidson said. 

Davidson says this kind of situation is rare, but it has happened before with the Denver Board of Education. 

"It's unusual to have districts with this balance. It's not particularly unusual for Denver Public Schools," Davidson said. "Ten years ago, they had the same timeline in redistricting, so they waited until after their second election after the census."

Denver Public Schools Board of Education Vice President Auon'tai Anderson says the elections back then were not challenged. 

"I want to assure everyone that we are following a process that was clearly laid out to us a decade ago by the reform-backed Board of Education when the Board had to redistrict after the 2010 census," Anderson said in a written statement. "The decision to delay the redistricting process was made to prioritize fairness and compliance."

However, sources say just because it happened before, doesn't make it any better now. 

The Denver Clerk and Recorder wrote a letter to the school board earlier this year, not mincing words about the issue. 

He wrote that state law requires districts to be "as equal in population as possible" and "the current district map is in violation of this requirement by a significant margin."

That violation could mean the election results could be challenged in court, according to elections officials. 

"That would be up to a judge. It certainly would not be up to us. We count the ballots, we certify the results," Davidson explained. "A judge could rule either to accept the results of this election or to throw this election out, and in that case, we would need to hold another election for the district, and that'd be about $2 million... big cost to the taxpayer, big cost to the school district."

With the school board race having been as heated as it's been so far, experts say a legal challenge certainly isn't out of the question. 

No matter what, Davidson says his office is operating business as usual for the upcoming election, and he encourages citizens to vote early.  

"We run this election just like we run every other election, every voter gets a mail ballot in the mail, and of course, we have the options to come in person and vote as well," Davidson said. 

Meanwhile, Marquez hopes the election results aren't contested, and he says he doesn't plan to challenge the outcome himself, but he says in the future, board members shouldn't be tasked with drawing the very lines that could determine their own election wins. 

"I think that there is a conflict of interest. I think that the board shouldn't decide that," Marquez said. "Having board members vote on the maps to help them win elections is probably not the right direction to go."

Denver Public Schools officials deferred to the Board of Education for comment since it was the board's decision not to approve new lines. 

The board's president, Xochitl Gaytán, says she can't comment on behalf of the board, since it wasn't something they voted on, but says it's unfortunate they couldn't come to an agreement before the election. 

"It's really unfortunate that we didn't follow through as a board to finalize our vote on the redistricting of the DPS Board of Education districts. We do have 5 districts, and they right now are inequitable in terms of the number of constituents," Gaytán said. "I wanted to move forward with a vote to equalize these districts through the redistricting effort that we were looking at. Unfortunately, that did not happen, and so right now the elections are taking place, and unfortunately, we don't have those numbers equalized throughout the districts across the city."

She says the board will go back to the drawing board to try to approve more equitable district lines after the November election. 

"Hopefully, we can move forward as a board when the new board comes on after the Nov. 7 election," she said. "Hopefully, we're able to take a look at the redistricting maps. Once again there may be some additional or new research that has to take place so that we are redrawing some maps, reviewing them, and we can determine which maps which map will equalize the districts and bring more equity into voting across the city."

Denver School Board Vice President Auon'tai Anderson issued the following statement in full Friday regarding the redistricting issue:

"Community, I've been following the concerns and discussions surrounding the upcoming Denver School Board election and feel it's essential for me to address them directly. First, let me share that when I and the board set forth to design new district maps, we did so with a sincere commitment to fairness and equity. We approached this task transparently and actively sought feedback from community organizations. Yet, despite our best intentions and efforts, certain groups, including the Latino Education Coalition, labeled our maps as racially biased. They did this in an attempt to keep certain Board members in "safe districts." I, along with Directors Esserman and Quattlebaum, disagreed with this process because we should not be drawing lines to benefit incumbents; that is a form of gerrymandering. I want to assure you all that there was never any intention or design on our part to sideline any community or group. My goal has always been to represent the diverse voices of Denver fairly. It's essential for everyone to know that the two districts (Districts 2 & 4) currently under significant scrutiny for non-compliance are not part of the 2023 election. The decision to delay the redistricting process was made to prioritize fairness and compliance. The threats of a lawsuit to challenge the election in an attempt to overturn our free and fair election by some draws parallels to the misleading narratives of the 2020 Presidential election, famously termed the "Big Lie." We as a country have been here before; when individuals do not like the outcome of an election, they challenge it and cast doubt on our electoral process. This ultimately led to the domestic terrorist attack on the United States Capitol on January 6th, 2021. We are better than that in Denver. I want to assure everyone that we are following a process that was clearly laid out to us a decade ago by the reform-backed Board of Education when the Board had to redistrict after the 2010 census. My primary focus remains on the education, safety, and welfare of our students. Any attempts to undermine or sow distrust in our election process distract from this primary objective. I urge our community to get out and vote to ensure that we have a School Board that will continue the good work we began four years ago."