Johnson v. City of Arcadia, Fla.
| Decision Date | 23 March 1978 |
| Docket Number | No. 76-12 Civ. Ft. M-K.,76-12 Civ. Ft. M-K. |
| Citation | 450 F. Supp. 1363 |
| Parties | Hinton JOHNSON, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF ARCADIA, FLORIDA, E. Coleman Brewer, Mayor of the City of Arcadia, Florida, Eugene Hickson, Sr., Lester Summerall, Walter J. Banull, I. D. Eller, Jr., Councilmen for the City of Arcadia, Florida, their successors and agents, Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Middle District of Florida |
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
David M. Lipman, Paul R. Dimond, Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, Washington, D. C., Joseph J. Levin, Jr., Pamela S. Horowitz, Montgomery, Ala., Michael Masinter, Florida Rural Legal Services, Homestead, Fla., for plaintiff.
John H. Treadwell, III, Arcadia, Fla., for defendants.
The Court, having considered the pleadings, the testimony, exhibits and other evidence adduced in the course of the trial, at the end of which the Court made findings in the record, and having considered the post-trial and proposed findings of fact submitted by each of the parties, and being advised in the premises, makes and finds the following findings of fact and conclusions of law,1 pursuant to Rule 52(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
1. On February 25, 1976, plaintiffs — consisting of a class of all black citizens of Arcadia, Fla. allegedly deprived of equal municipal services — filed a complaint based upon Hawkins v. Town of Shaw, 303 F.Supp. 1162 (N.D.Miss.1969) rev'd 437 F.2d 1286 (5 Cir., 1971) aff'd en banc, 461 F.2d 1171 (5th Cir. 1972) seeking that disparities in the quality and quantity of certain services provided to black and white citizens be ameliorated.
2. Plaintiffs in addition invoked the jurisdiction of this Court pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq. (Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) and 31 U.S.C. § 1242 () and sought to apply the Revenue Sharing Act's anti-discrimination provisions. See, 31 C.F.R. 5152, as amended, 40 Fed.Reg. 50029 (1952). See also, Robinson v. Schultz, 8 E.P.D. ¶ 9832 D.D.C.1974, Robinson v. Simon and United States v. Chicago, 395 F.Supp. 329 (N.D.Ill.1975).
3. At the same time of the filing of the complaint, plaintiffs filed two sets of interrogatories, a request for production of documents and an extensive set of requests for admissions of fact concerning the City's delivery of municipal services and its budgeting mechanisms and practices.
4. On March 26, 1976, defendants filed various "across-the-board" pre-trial motions with supportive memoranda.2 Plaintiffs filed extensive responsive memoranda and this Court heard oral argument on all pretrial legal issues on September 27, 1976, in Tampa, Florida.
5. On October 21, 1976, the Court denied all of defendants' motions and directed plaintiffs' counsel to file a concurrent administrative complaint with the Secretary of Treasury relating to plaintiffs' Revenue Sharing claims. In addition, it granted plaintiffs' motion to certify this proceeding as a class action. Plaintiffs' class consists of all black residents residing in the City of Arcadia.
6. Thereafter, the plaintiffs conducted lengthy and complex pre-trial discovery concerning sophisticated financial and municipal service documents, reports and files. Counsel for plaintiffs with the assistance of their technical experts reviewed a complete inventory of service and financial data relating to the defendant City of Arcadia.
7. On April 11, 1977, trial commenced. The Court heard testimony over a two-day period relating to plaintiffs' claims of racial discrimination in the provision of certain municipal services in the City of Arcadia, Florida. On April 12, 1977, this Court in its bench opinion found that defendants had historically and presently perpetrated racial discrimination against plaintiffs with regard to the following municipal services:
8. After holding that defendants had discriminated against plaintiffs, this Court enjoined defendants from spending any of the approximately $415,000 of revenue sharing funds which it had on hand or any future revenue sharing funds without further order of Court. Pursuant to the Court's direction it has received from the parties comprehensive plans to equalize street paving, water systems, and park and recreational facilities in the black residential area of Arcadia.
9. The Court has received from the parties a stipulated final judgment which this Court has examined and approved as to relief. The final judgment sets forth in detailed fashion the type and quality of improvement works needed to eliminate racial discrimination in the provision of certain municipal services in the City of Arcadia.
10. Hinton Johnson, et al., plaintiffs, are adequate representatives of a class consisting of all of the black residents of the city who are presently and have been discriminated against by the defendants in the provision of municipal services and facilities as hereinafter set forth. (See, Court order certifying class, October 21, 1976).
11. Defendant E. Coleman Brewer is the mayor of the City, defendants Eugene Hickson, Lester Summerall, I. D. Eller and Walter J. Banull are the councilmen, and Margaret Way is the City Recorder. Defendants have complete responsibility for administering the affairs of the town, including the provision, allocation and financing of all municipal facilities and services. Source: Defendants' response to plaintiffs' first interrogatories Nos. 2 and 5.
12. The City of Arcadia is a municipal corporation with a charter adopted pursuant to Chapter 5080, Special Acts of 1901 of the Florida Stat. Annotated. It was originally incorporated on December 8, 1886, and reincorporated in 1901. In area the City is approximately two miles square. Its present population of approximately 7,000 is 32% black and 68% white. Source: Defendants' response to plaintiffs' request for production and inspection of documents (City Charter and Census Reports).
13. The City of Arcadia has developed according to a strict pattern of residential racial segregation. The entire black community is bordered by railroad tracts to the east, north and west. Parker, Jordan, Baldwin, Manatee and Orange Streets, primarily in the black section, extend just one block north of Pine Street (which parallels the east-west railroad track). No blacks reside anywhere outside this small geographical area in the southwest portion of Arcadia. Some white households are located in the black section, where Monroe and Orange Streets between Hargrave and Harris are integrated. Source: City Map of Arcadia, defendants' Exhibit No. 4.
14. The City of Arcadia provides, maintains and improves certain facilities for its residents. It has always been responsible for the construction and maintenance of the public rights of way. The City has undertaken the paving of streets, construction of park and recreational facilities and construction of an underground water system. Construction and/or improvements to these services has been financed wholly from either general revenues, derived from ad valorem tax or various federal monies from the following federal agencies: Department of Treasury (Revenue Sharing), Department of Housing and Urban Development (Low-Income Housing grants and loans) and the Environmental Protection Agency (Water and Sewer System grants). Source: Defendants' responses to plaintiffs' first interrogatories No. 9.
15. Excerpts from entries from the official city minute books of the City of Arcadia, dating back as early as 1950 through the present, reveal a continuing unresponsiveness on behalf of white city elected officials to black citizens' needs. Specifically, City officials continually failed to act upon black citizens' requests to improve or extend various city provided services to black homeowners while at the same time these City officials responded affirmatively to similar requests from white citizens. Source: Plaintiffs' Exhibit No. 25, Excerpts from Official City Minute Books of the City of Arcadia
16. City officials knew that municipal service conditions in the black residential neighborhood of Arcadia were a severe problem. In 1968, Milo-Smith Associates, a Tampa based planning and consulting firm, contracted with the City of Arcadia to produce a Neighborhood Analysis, containing evaluations of municipal services and recommendations for future planning. In this plan, Neighborhood Two, which is the black community, is singled out as being the most severely blighted area of the City. The plan directed that the City of Arcadia invest a majority of its financial resources for needed neighborhood improvements in this area. City officials failed to implement this plan. Source: Milo-Smith Neighborhood Analysis, Plaintiffs' Exhibit No. 4
17. The Milo-Smith plan called City officials' attention to the fact that "The entire street pattern south of Pine Street is chaotic and to a significant degree underdeveloped." (Page 12) City officials did nothing to eliminate this chaotic condition. Source: Milo-Smith Neighborhood Analysis, Plaintiffs' Exhibit No. 4
18. The Milo-Smith report emphasizes the black neighborhood's lack of adequate recreation facilities and underground storm sewerage. While the other (white) neighborhoods analyzed in Arcadia were not completely provided for in all services, Milo-Smith left little doubt that these neighborhoods had been the primary recipients of adequate municipal services. The pressing needs of the black community were underscored in the plan's concluding remarks:
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
NAACP v. Wilmington Medical Center, Inc.
...1978); Larry P. v. Riles, 48 U.S.L.W. 2298 (N.D.Cal. 1979); Jackson v. Conway, 476 F.Supp. 896 (E.D.Mo.1979); Johnson v. City of Arcadia, 450 F.Supp. 1363 (M.D.Fla.1978); Lora v. Bd. of Ed. of City of New York, 456 F.Supp. 1211 (E.D.N.Y.1978); Soria v. Oxnard School District Board of Truste......
-
Ammons v. DADE CITY, FLA.
...and councilmen — acting in their official capacities is conferred by 28 U.S.C. § 1331(a), 1343(3) and (4). Johnson v. City of Arcadia, 450 F.Supp. 1363, 1377 (M.D.Fla.1978); Dowdell v. City of Apopka, 511 F.Supp. 1375, 1382 (M.D. Fla.1981) aff'd 698 F.2d 1181 (11th Cir. 71. The Court has ju......
-
Kessler v. Grand Cent. Dist. Management Ass'n, Inc.
...of street paving, street resurfacing and maintenance, and storm water drainage facilities on the basis of race); Johnson v. City of Arcadia, 450 F.Supp. 1363 (M.D.Fla.1978) (discrimination in street paving, parks and water supply); Selmont Improvement Ass'n v. Dallas County Comm'n, 339 F.Su......
-
Baker v. City of Kissimmee, Fla.
...1971), aff'd en banc, 461 F.2d 1171 (5th Cir.1972); Dowdell v. City of Apopka, 698 F.2d 1181 (11th Cir.1983); and Johnson v. City of Arcadia, 450 F.Supp. 1363 (M.D. Fla.1978). The complaint alleges that the City of Kissimmee, its mayor and four city commissioners, acting in their official c......
-
Addressing the problem: the judicial branches
...and the social impacts on that segment of the population as a result of the siting of a highway in the city of Columbus, Ohio. 50. 450 F. Supp. 1363 (M.D. Fla. 1978). 51. U.S. DOT, Order on Environmental Justice to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populat......
-
Addressing the Problem: The Judicial Branches
...Justice hrough Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 , 13 Stan. Envtl. L.J. 125 (1994). 56. Lazarus, supra note 32, at 839. 57. 450 F. Supp. 1363 (M.D. Fla. 1978). Addressing the Problem: The Judicial Branches Page 369 minority and low-income populations may be taken into account, as wel......
-
Addressing the Problem: The Judicial Branches
...Justice hrough Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 , 13 Stan. Envtl. L.J. 125 (1994). 58. Lazarus, supra note 34, at 839. 59. 450 F. Supp. 1363 (M.D. Fla. 1978). 60. U.S. DOT, Order on Environmental Justice to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populat......
-
Addressing The Problem: The Judicial Branches
...and the social impacts on that segment of the population as a result of the siting of a highway in the city of Columbus, Ohio. 53. 450 F. Supp. 1363 (1978). 54. U.S. DOT, Order on Environmental Justice to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations (1997......