Greig v. City of St. Martinville Cross-Claim

· UNI~ED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

LAFAYETTE/OPELOUSAS DIVISION

JUN "":~ 2000 /"

"13''1':_ '''''_' '_ ' '~c.~

GREIG, ET AL.,

Plaintiffs, No. 6:2000cv00603

v. Judge Doherty

Mag. Judge Methvin

CITY OF ST. MARTINVILLE, ET AL.,

Defendants.

UNITED STA~rES' ANSWER AND CROSS-CLAIM

Defendant United States respectfully submits the following

Answer, including affirmative defenses, and a cross-claim against

Defendant City of St. Martinville, alleging that the City is

denying the right to vote on the basis of race in violation of

Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended, 42 U.S.C.

1973.

I. United States' Answe~

A. United States' Responses to Plaintiffs' Allegationf~

Defendant United Sta.tes answers the complaint in the abovecaptioned

case as follows:

I. Jurisdiction

No response is required to the two sentences of Paragraph I

regarding jurisdiction because they do not contain allegations of

fact. The United States admits that this Court has jurisdiction

over this claim pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1973j (f) but denies that a

®

Case 6:00-cv-00603-RFD-MEM Document 8 Filed 06/02/00 Page 1 of 13 PageID #: 14

three-judge panel is required to determine this matter pursuant

to the claims raised in the complaint.

II. Venue

Admitted.

III. Parties Plaintiff

The United States lacks knowledge or information sufficient

to form a belief as to the truth of the factual allegations

contained in Paragraph III.

IV. Parties Defendant

Admitted.

Admitted.

VI. Factual Allegations

The United States admits the first sentence of Paragraph VI,

and admits that four of the five present council members were

elected in April 1990 and took office in June 1990. The United

States avers that the fifth council member, District 2 Council

Member Pamela C. Thibodeaux, was appointed to the council in 1997

to,replace her father, Zerben Champagne, who was elected as the

District 2 Council Member in April 1990.

Y1.L..

Paragraph VII is denied, except for the opening clause t:hat

states "[t]he next scheduled election was set for the Spring of

1994," which is admitted.

- 2 -

Case 6:00-cv-00603-RFD-MEM Document 8 Filed 06/02/00 Page 2 of 13 PageID #: 15

VIII.

The United States denies that plaintiffs are entitled to any

relief from the United States on the basis of the factual

allegations in Paragraph VIII, but admits the factual allegations

contained therein.

.IX...

Admitted, except that elections in St. Martinville have not

been conducted according to schedule for six, rather than ten,

years.

X. Causes of Action

Defendant United States denies that plaintiffs are entitled

to any relief from the United States in this action based upon

the provisions cited in Paragraph X. The United States' crossclaim

asserts that the City of St. Martinville is in violation of

Section 2 of the Voting !tights Act of 1965, as amended, 42 U.S.C.

1973. The United States has not yet determined whether the

allegations in Paragraph X with regard to St. Martinville can be

admitted or denied.

XI. Relief Sought

No response is required to Paragraph XI because it does not

contain allegations of fact. Defendant United States denies that

plaintiffs are entitled to any relief from the United States in

this action. The United States asserts that the proper remedial

course for this action is identified in the United States' crossclaim.

- 3 -

Case 6:00-cv-00603-RFD-MEM Document 8 Filed 06/02/00 Page 3 of 13 PageID #: 16

Prayer

In response to the plaintiffs' prayer for relief, Defendant

United States denies that plaintiffs are entitled to any relief

from the United States in this action.

B. First Affirmative Defense; Lack of Subject Matter~

Jurisdiction

This Court lacks jurisdiction over the subject matter of the

plaintiffs' claims against the United States.

C. Second Affirma'tive Defense; Failure to State a Claim

Upon Which Relief Can be Granted

Plaintiffs have failed to state a claim against the United

States upon which relief can be granted.

II. United States' Cross-Claim

Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 7(a), 12(b),

and 13(g), Defendant United States asserts the following crossclaim

against Defendant City of St. Martinville;

1. This claim is made by the Attorney General on behalf of the

United States pursuant to Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act

of 1965, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 1973, and Section 12(d) of

the Voting Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. 1973j (d) .

2. This Court has jurisdiction over this claim pursuant to 42

U.S.C. 1973j (d), (f), and 28 U.S.C. 1345.

3. The City of St. Martinville is a political and geographical

subdivision of the State of Louisiana and of the Parish of

St. Martin.

4. The Clerk of Court of the Parish of St. Martin is the chief

elections authority in the parish.

- 4 -

Case 6:00-cv-00603-RFD-MEM Document 8 Filed 06/02/00 Page 4 of 13 PageID #: 17

5. As the chief elections authority in the parish, the St.

Martin Parish Clerk of Court conducts city council elections

for the City of St. Martinville. Among other duties I t.he

Clerk of Court accepts qualifying papers for city council

candidates and performs other necessary functions for the

proper execution of city council elections.

6. Michael Fuselier, Pamela C. Thibodeaux, Pat Martin, James J.

Charles, Sr., and Douglas J. Francois, Jr., are the current

members of the St. Martinville City Council.

7. Th~ City of St. Martinville is a covered jurisdiction under

Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, 42 U.S.C. 1973c,

which means it must obtain preclearance for any change 'With

respect to voting, either ·from the Attorney General of the

United States or from the United States District Court :Eor

the District of Columbia, before such a change may be

implemented.

8. In 1977, the St. Martinville city council adopted a change

in the method of electing city council members from an atlarge

system to one with five single-member districts.

9. In 1977, the St. Martinville city council adopted a

districting plan with two predominantly white districts

(Districts 1 and 2), two predominantly black districts

(Districts 4 and 5), and a fifth district (District 3) in

which the total population was 51 percent black.

- 5 -

Case 6:00-cv-00603-RFD-MEM Document 8 Filed 06/02/00 Page 5 of 13 PageID #: 18

10. In 1978, the Attorney General of the United States

precleared the City of St. Martinville's 1977 change in

method of election and districting plan.

11. From 1977 to the present, white council members have

represented Districts 1 and 2, black council members have

represented Districts 4 and 5, and both black and whitE:

council members have represented District 3.

12. The City of St. Martinville did not redraw its city council

district lines from 1977 to 1992.

13. City council members are elected to concurrent, four-YE:ar

terms.

14. In the city council elections held in April 1990, voters in

District 3 elected a white council member. After the 1990

election, white council members held three seats on the city

council and black council members held two seats.

15. The 1990 Census revealed that the City of St. Martinville

had a total popUlation of 7,137, of whom 59.2 percent were

black, and a voting age popUlation of 5,013, of whom 5!:;. 7

percent were black.

16. The 1990 Census also revealed that black residents comprised

72, 98, and 89 percent of the total population in Council

Districts 3, 4, and 5, respectively.

17. The 1990 Census also revealed that the existing council

districts in St. Martinville did not comply with the oneperson-

one-vote requirement of the United States

- 6 -

Case 6:00-cv-00603-RFD-MEM Document 8 Filed 06/02/00 Page 6 of 13 PageID #: 19

Constitutio~ bec~use the council districts had a population

deviation substantially in excess of 10 percent.

18. In 1992, the City of St. Martinville submitted to the United

States Attorney General for preclearance under Section S of

the Voting Rights A.ct a redistricting plan adopted in 1991

for its city council in which the total population in

District 3 was 63 percent black, and the black populations

in Districts 4 and'S were 99 percent and 83 percent,

respectively, according to 1990 Census figures.

19. On November 9, 1992, the Attorney General objected to the

city's 1991 plan, stating in a letter that the proposed plan

"occasion [ed] a prohibited 'retrogression in the position of

racial minorities with respect to their effective exercise

of the electoral franchise.'"

20. In 1993, the City of St. Martinville submitted to the

Justice Department a second proposal adopted in 1993 for

redistricting of its city council. Districts 3, 4, and S in

the 1993 plan had total populations that were 64, 98, and 84

percent black, respectively, according to 1990 Census

figures.

21. On January 31, 1994, the United States requested additional

information from the City of St. Martinville regarding the

city's 1993 redistricting plan, and on April 4, 1994, the

United States received additional information from the city.

22. The City did not conduct city council elections as scheduled

in April 1994, and although their four-year terms had

- 7 -

Case 6:00-cv-00603-RFD-MEM Document 8 Filed 06/02/00 Page 7 of 13 PageID #: 20

expired in 1994,' the St. Martinville city council members

held over in office.

23. In May 1994, after informing the United States that the city

was planning a series of annexations that would affect its

1993 redistricting submission, the City of St. Martinville

. withdrew its 1993 submission and the Attorney General made

no determination on the city's 1993 plan.

24. From 1992 to 1997, the City of St. Martinville submitted a

total of six annexations for preclearance, all of which were

precleared by the Attorney General. Only one of these

submissions, however, included the assignment of residents

in a newly-annexed area to a particular city council

district. This designation of residents involved only

District I, and it was precleared by the Attorney General.

25. In March 1997, the City of St. Martinville submitted a third

redistricting plan for preclearance under Section 5 of the

Voting Rights Act. Under this plan, which was adopted over

the objections of the city's two black city council members,

Districts 3, 4, and 5 contained total populations that were

61.4, 98.2, and 85.5 percent black, respectively, according

to 1990 Census figures.

26. On October 6, 1997, 'the Attorney General objected to the

city's 1997 submission, stating in ~ letter that "the

proposed plan, like the 1991 objected-to plan, occasions a

prohibited 'retrogression in the position of racial

minorities with respect to their effective exercise of the

- 8 -

Case 6:00-cv-00603-RFD-MEM Document 8 Filed 06/02/00 Page 8 of 13 PageID #: 21

electoral f~anchise. 1"

27. The City did not conduct city council elections as scheduled

in April 1998. The St. Martinville city council members,

four of whom had been elected in 1990 and a fifth who 'VIas

appointed in 1997, have continued to hold over in office to

this date.

28. The City of St. Martinville submitted a request in August

1998 that the Attorney General reconsider her objection to

the 1997 plan. On October 19, 1998, the Attorney General

continued her objection to the city's 1997 plan, s~ating in

a letter that "a reduction in the black population

percentage in District 3 to 61.4 p~rcent black as the city

suggests (or 60.3 percent black in registration) is likely

to worsen black political participation opportunities in a

manner prohibited by Section 5."

29. On April 17, 2000, the city council of St. Martinville, over

the objections of it:s two black city council members,

approved a resolution calling for the creation of a fourth

redistricting plan in which the total population of District

3 would be 60 percent black.

30. It is possible for the city to draw a redistricting plan

that complies with t~raditional redistricting principles,

adheres to the requirements of the United States

Constitution, does not make black voters worse off with

respect to their effective exercise of the electoral

franchise in the city, and that otherwise fully complies

- 9 -

Case 6:00-cv-00603-RFD-MEM Document 8 Filed 06/02/00 Page 9 of 13 PageID #: 22

wi th federal law".

31. Elections in the City of St. Martinville are racially

polarized.

32. The City of St. Martinville has a history of official a.cts

of discrimination against its African-American residents.

33. City officials have failed to offer a legitimate, nonracial

reason for their failure to enact a redistricting plan that

does not worsen the position of black voters in the city.

34. For racial reasons, the St. Martinville city council is

following a course of action and inaction intended to

benefit itself and to deny all voters in the city the basic

opportunity to vote in city elections, but that is targeted

against and disproportionately disadvantages the city's

black citizens. This course of action and inaction

constitutes a denial of the right to vote on account of race

or color and violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Aci: of

1965, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 1973.

35. Unless enjoined by an order of this Court, the City of St.

Martinville will continue to deny the right to vote on

account of race or color.

WHEREFORE, the United States prays that the Court enter a

judgment:

1) Declaring that the City of St. Martinville is

denying the right to vote on account of race or

color in violation of Section 2 of the Voting

Rights Act of 1965, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 1973;

- 10 -

Case 6:00-cv-00603-RFD-MEM Document 8 Filed 06/02/00 Page 10 of 13 PageID #: 23

2) Affording Defendant City of St. Martinville a

reasonable opportunity to adopt, and obtain Section 5

preclearance for, a redistricting plan for its city

council that complies with federal law, such that the

city may hold a special election for its city council

during the October 7, 2000, and November 7, 2000,

primary and general elections;

3) In the event that Defendant City of St. Martinville

fails to enact a remedial plan that complies with

federal law, ordering a redistricting plan into effect

for the city council of St. Martinville that complies

with Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, 42 U.S.C.

1973, Section:; of the Voting Rights Act, 42 U.S.C.

1973c, and that: otherwise complies with applicable

federal law, in sufficient time for the city to conduct

a special elect.ion for its city council during the

October 7, 2000, and November 7, 2000, primary and

general elections; and

4) Ordering Defendant City of St. Martinville to conduct a

special election for all members of its city council

during the October 7, 2000, and November 7, 2000

primary and general elections under a lawful

redistricting plan.

- 11 -

Case 6:00-cv-00603-RFD-MEM Document 8 Filed 06/02/00 Page 11 of 13 PageID #: 24

III. Joinder of AdditIonal Parties

Pursuant to Rule 19(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure, the United States believes that St. Martin Parish

Clerk of Court Allen Blanchard, Sr., acting in his official

capacity as the chief elE3ctions officer of St. Martin Parish, and

the St. Martinville city council members, acting in their,

official capacities, are necessary parties to effectuate the

prayed-for remedies in this action. These individuals have not

yet been joined in this action because the United States had not

asserted its prayer for relief until today_ If this Court deems

appropriate, the United States is prepared to offer a Motion for

Joinder pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 19(a).

- 12 -

Case 6:00-cv-00603-RFD-MEM Document 8 Filed 06/02/00 Page 12 of 13 PageID #: 25

The United State"s further prays that this Court grant such

additional relief as the interests of justice may require,

together with the costs and disbursements of this action.

WILLIAM FLANAGAN

United States Attorney

JANICE HEBERT

Assistant United States

Attorney

Respectfully submitted:

JANET RENO

Attorney General

Rights

T.A.

20035-61:28

Case 6:00-cv-00603-RFD-MEM Document 8 Filed 06/02/00 Page 13 of 13 PageID #: 26