UC Berkeley

Although Latino students constitute the majority in California schools, Latinos remain significantly underrepresented on school boards. In California, Latinos make up about 30 percent of all school board seats across the state's nearly 950 school districts, even though Latino students make up 56 percent of the student population. This representational gap raises questions about how board members prioritize community needs and whether they consider the needs of Latino students and families. While multiple factors contribute to this underrepresentation, scholars have identified at-large elections as an institutional mechanism that dilutes the voting strength of Latinos, thereby limiting their ability to elect their preferred candidates. Research further shows that Latino candidates are more likely to be elected in district elections, though transitioning and implementing these electoral structures requires a complex political and legal process. However, scholars have largely overlooked the local political and legal work required to challenge the discriminatory effects of at-large elections and institutionalize district elections. This dissertation examines how policy can be leveraged to advance electoral reform, with particular attention to the processes and actors that shape these efforts. Drawing on 40 semi-structured interviews, primary source material, and archival research, this qualitative study uncovers the process and effects of electoral reform in the Fallbrook Union Elementary School District (FUESD) after it was found to violate the California Voting Rights Act (CVRA) of 2001. The analysis reveals that the complexity of the law requires lawyers to activate and drive the reform process, that communities must be prepared to engage and hold governing boards accountable, and that even when electoral reform is achieved, institutional barriers may limit its capacity to produce substantive change. This dissertation extends legal mobilization theory into local education politics, demonstrating how communities leverage legal frameworks to pursue electoral reform and advances the theory by examining the post-reform phase, revealing that electoral reform does not always equate to substantive change.