Santa Paula denied the charge that the at-large system violated a section of the Voting Rights Act or diluted Hispanic voting strength, now or in the past. No more Hispanics would be elected under a district system, the city claimed, and that this lawsuit is barred by a disclaimer in the referred section of the Voting Rights Act that ?proportional representation is not required,? stated the settlement. ?Santa Paula also contends that there can be no vote dilution as a matter of law, because Hispanics, who have become a majority of the electorate, have an equal opportunity to elect.?Jumping into the fray was Santa Paula Voters Opposed to Electoral Redistricting, with the acronym of SPVOTER, represented by the Pacific Legal Foundation, a conservative public interest law firm named as an defendent-intervenor who could have brought a suit against the city and/or DOJ in case Santa Paula had voluntarily switched to five districts.The city accepted no liability and the DOJ reserved the right to refile the lawsuit in the future, the latter a door the Pacific Legal Foundation - which called the lawsuit ?racial gerrymandering? - had insisted must be closed.The city and DOJ struck a conciliatory note in the settlement and the stipulation of facts agreed to. Not so Pacific Legal Foundation, whose press release stated that the DOJ attempted to misuse the Voting Rights Act to ?dictate the racial makeup of the this city?s local governing body and proceeded on the demeaning assumption that race determines thinking. . .[the DOJ?s] crusade presumed that minorities are not competent enough to vote for candidates based on color-blind qualifications such as integrity and experience.?The tone was opposite of the meeting on middle-ground exchange of stipulation of facts in the settlement in which the city agreed to let voters decide the district voting issue in November 2002.Within minutes of the unanimous council vote to settle the suit, they gave full support to Councilwoman Laura Flores Espinosa?s future agenda item to allocate $50,000 for voter information and education on district voting.
Department of Justice lawsuit settled for now
September 12, 2001
Santa Paula News
It was complex, some say nebulous, taking years of study, depositions from many people, specialized research, number crunching, mountains of files combed through, and, at least for now, the dust has settled with the settlement of the lawsuit against the city of Santa Paula by the U.S. Department of Justice.
By Peggy KellySanta Paula TimesIt was complex, some say nebulous, taking years of study, depositions from many people, specialized research, number crunching, mountains of files combed through, and, at least for now, the dust has settled with the settlement of the lawsuit against the city of Santa Paula by the U.S. Department of Justice.The city spending more money on the lawsuit, filed in April 2000, and changes in circumstances that could have weakened the DOJ?s case seemed to have helped to turn the tide and opened the way to the settlement reached last week.The cost to the city has topped $500,000 and all the bills aren?t in; public outcry over allocating another $800,000 on the lawsuit brought council pressure. The 2000 election of a second Latino to the council and the rising numbers of Latino registered voters impacted the DOJ?s case.The DOJ?s complaint alleged that the at-large City Council election system has the effect of ?diluting Hispanic voting strength, resulting in Hispanic citizens being denied an opportunity equal to that afforded to other members of the electorate to participate in the political process and elect representatives of their choice,? according to settlement agreement.The DOJ would not have filed the lawsuit if the city had voluntarily switched to a five-district system to assure that at least two Latinos were elected to the council.
