1980-01-09 Regular Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

• • 2 • ~ _.. of responsiveness on the part of elected officials to the needs of the black community; depressed socioeconomic conditions in the black community which make participation in the political process difficult; and the presence of majority-vote and de- signated-post requirements for municipal elections. On the basis of our review, it does not .appear that the system adopted by the city would offer black voters a fair opportunity to elect representatives of their choice. At the same time, .the city has rejected alternative systems which would offer such an opportunity. For example, our analysis shows that an alteration of district .lines under the proposed four single-member district system so as to avoid the combination of the widely separated and dissimilar Northside and Fairmont Park areas could produce a district in which the minority population would be substanti-ally larger than that of any district in the submitted plan. Similarly, we note that a plan of six single-member districts was presented to the city which provided for one district in which-black and Spanish-language voters would form a majority of 57 percent, and our own review has revealed that a significantly larger majority (over 62 percent) can be achieved under such a plan without any resort to maximization • of minority voting strength. The selection by the City of La Porte of a system which would retain black voting strength at a minimum level, where alternative options would provide a fair chance for black representation, is relevant to the question of an impermissible racial purpose in its adoption. See Wilkes County v. United States, 450 F. Supp. 1171 (D. D.C. 1978). Under the circumstances we are unable to conclude, as we must under Section 5, that the changes would not have a racially discriminatory purpose or effect. Accordingly, I must, on behalf of the Attorney General, interpose an objec- tion to the charter revisions and to the proposed apportion- ment plan. Of course, as provided by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act you have the right to seek a declaratory judg- ment from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia that these changes have neither the purpose nor will have the effect of denying or abridging the right to vote on account of race, color, or membership in a language minority gorup. In addition, the Procedures for the Adminis- •