Panel redraws Charles Mix districts

By Chet Brokaw, Associated Press Writer | Wednesday, November 16, 2005

Previous Page

Share

• del.icio.us
• Digg
• NewsVine
• Fark

Print

Email

PIERRE — The Charles Mix County Commission on Tuesday started the process of redrawing its commissioner district boundaries to comply with a federal court ruling.

In two weeks, the commissioners intend to give final approval to a redistricting plan prompted by a lawsuit alleging that the current districts harmed American Indians’ voting rights.

U.S. District Judge Lawrence Piersol of Sioux Falls ruled last month that the existing districts are unconstitutional because there is too large a deviation in the population of the three districts.

In documents filed Monday in federal court, the county commission proposed not only to equalize the population but also to create a district with a majority population of Indians.

The commission held an open forum in Lake Andes on Tuesday to explain three options for redrawing the commissioner districts and take public comments, Sara Frankenstein, a Rapid City lawyer who represents the commission said. Only one person testified, supporting one of the plans and calling for all three commission seats to be up for election next year, she said.

The commission will take more testimony Monday before taking its initial vote, Frankenstein said, and is to give final approval Nov. 29. The current district lines divide the California-shaped county into thirds along north-south boundaries that run in straight lines. Plans being considered would create a district with a majority population of Indians in an area that runs from Lake Andes to Wagner and south to the Missouri River.

A lawyer for the ACLU, which filed the lawsuit on behalf of Indian voters, said one of the three options appears to be a plan the ACLU submitted earlier. The other proposals are flawed, lawyer Bryan Sells said. The county plan appears to call for delaying an election in the district with a majority population of Indians until 2008, Sells said, adding that all three districts should have elections next year.

The lawsuit said the county commissioner districts were improper because they violated the constitutional requirement for one-person, one-vote; violated a federal law by diluting Indian voting strength; and violated constitutional provisions because they were drawn to harm Indians’ voting rights.

The boundaries have not been changed for decades, officials have said. Supporters of the lawsuit have said no Indian has ever been elected to the Charles Mix County Commission even though 30 percent of the county’s population is Indian.

Sells said he understood that Judge Piersol had ordered the county to submit a redistricting plan by Monday, but that the county will not finish that process for two weeks.

The ACLU lawyer also noted that state law calls for staggered elections of county commissioners, with those in even-numbered districts to be elected in years with presidential elections and those in odd-numbered districts to be chosen in election years when there is no presidential race on the ballot.

The proposed district with a majority population of Indians is District 2, which could mean the current commissioner could remain in office until early 2009 after the 2008 election, Sells said.

“I have a hard time seeing how it’s fair under any circumstances to allow someone who is elected under an unconstitutional plan to remain in office until 2009,” Sells said.

Frankenstein said the dispute could have been settled earlier if the ACLU had cooperated with county officials. But Sells said the ACLU has been willing to settle the issue from the beginning.