We are not ready, however, to agree that multi-member districts, wherever they exist, overrepresent their voters as compared with voters in single-member districts, even if the multi-member delegation tends to bloc voting. The theory that plural representation itself unduly enhances a district's power and the influence of its vote remains to be demonstrated in practice and in the day-to-day operation of the legislature. Whitcomb v. Chavis, 403 U.S. 124 at 147, 91 S.Ct. 1858 at 1871, 29 L.Ed.2d 363.
(W)here a minority can demonstrate a lack of access to the process of slating candidates, the unresponsiveness of *599 legislators to their particularized interests, a tenuous state policy underlying the preference for multi-member or at-large districting, or that the existence of a past discrimination in general precludes the effective participation in the election system, a strong case is made. Such proof is enhanced by a showing of the existence of large districts, majority vote requirements, anti-single shot voting provisions and the lack of provision for at-large candidates running from particular geographical subdistricts. The fact of dilution is established upon proof of the existence of an aggregate of these factors. (Footnotes omitted.) Id. at 1305.
APPENDIX I | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
WINN PARISH SCHOOL BOARD | |||||||
1974 COURT-ORDERED PLAN | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
----------------------- | |||||||
1970 | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Voting | Black | District | |||||
District | Members | Population | Population | % Black | % Variation | Plan | |
1 | 1 | 1639 | 1639 | 100 | + .18 | 1 | |
2 | 1 | 1693 | 465 | 27 | +3.14 | 1 | |
3 | 1 | 1678 | 816 | 45 | +2.57 | 1 | |
4 | 1 | 1688 | 0 | 0 | +3.17 | 1 | |
5 | 1 | 1691 | 458 | 27 | +3.36 | 1 | |
6 | 1 | 1819 | 125 | 7 | +11.19 | 5 | |
7/8 | 2 | 2627 | 374 | 14 | -19.68 | 2 | |
9 | 1 | 1594 | 295 | 19 | -2.57 | 4 | |
10 | 1 | 1931 | 744 | 39 | +18.03 | 3 | |
TOTAL | 10 | 16,360 | 4916 | 30 | 37.71 | ||
1970 School Board Plan, ordered in Sanders v. Winn Parish School Bd. was same as above, except districts 1-5 of the present plan were consolidated into one five person multi-member district and districts 6-10 were numbered districts 2-5 (see column 7 above). |
APPENDIX II | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
WINN PARISH POLICE JURY | ||||||
1974 COURT-ORDERED PLAN | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Voting | Number of | Black | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
District | Representatives | Population | Population | % Black | % Variation | |
1 | 1 | 1639 | 1639 | 100 | + .18 | |
2 | 1 | 1693 | 465 | 27 | +3.48 | |
3 | 1 | 1678 | 816 | 45 | +2.57 | |
4 | 1 | 1688 | 0 | 0 | +3.17 | |
5 | 1 | 1691 | 458 | 27 | +3.36 | |
TOTAL | 5 | 8389 | 3378 | 40.27 | ** | |
6-10* | 5 | 7971 | 1538 | 19.29 | -2.57 | |
1970 COURT-ORDERED PLAN IN ALLEN v. WINNPARISH POLICE JURY | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A * | 6 | 8389 | 40.27 | |||
B ** | 6 | 7971 | 19.29 | |||
TOTAL | 12 | 16,360 | ||||
End of Document | © 2024 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. |