City of Rome, Ga. v. United States

• Citation: 472 F. Supp. 221
• Decision Date: 09 April 1979
• Docket Number: Civ. A. No. 77-0797.
• Parties: CITY OF ROME, GEORGIA, et al., Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES of America et al., Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — District of Columbia

472 F. Supp. 221

CITY OF ROME, GEORGIA, et al., Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES of America et al., Defendants.

Civ. A. No. 77-0797.

United States District Court, District of Columbia.

April 9, 1979.

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

Robert M. Brinson, City Atty., City of Rome, Ga., and William E. Sumner, Atlanta, Ga., for plaintiffs, with whom was Joseph W. Dorn, Washington, D. C.

Paul F. Hancock, Atty., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., for defendants, with whom were Drew S. Days III, Asst. Atty. Gen., Gerald W. Jones, Frederick J. McGrath, and Carmen L. Jones, Attys., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C.

Before McGOWAN, Circuit Judge, and GASCH and RICHEY, District Judges.

OPINION

McGOWAN, Circuit Judge:

This is a declaratory judgment action brought under the Voting Rights Act of 1965, 42 U.S.C. § 1973 et seq. It is before the Court on pleadings styled cross-motions for summary judgment, based on evidence developed in a stipulated record. Although the parties recognize that the record presents genuine issues of material fact, they are willing for us to resolve these issues and reach final judgment. This we have done in the following opinion, which shall constitute the Court's Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as required by the Federal Rules.

I

A.

Plaintiff City of Rome (Rome or the City) is a municipality situated in Floyd County, northwestern Georgia. Its 1970 population was 30,759, of whom 23,543, or 76.6%, were white and 7,216, or 23.4%, black. Of its total 1970 voting age population, 79.4% were white and 20.6% black; as of 1975, its 13,097 registered voters were 83.9% white and 15.5% black. The City is administered by a council-manager form of government. Plaintiff Bruce Hamler is the Rome City Manager and plaintiff H. F. Hunter, Jr. is Chairman of the Rome City Commission.¹

The basic structure of the City's government was established by a Charter enacted in 1918 by the Georgia General Assembly. The charter provided for a Commission of seven members, one from each of seven wards, elected concurrently, at large, and by plurality vote. The same Charter established a Board of Education, consisting of five members elected concurrently, at large, and by plurality vote; unlike the City Commission, however, there was no residency requirement for the Board of Education. In 1929 two additional wards were annexed to the City, making a total of nine, and seats for these wards were provided in the City Commission. Election rules, however, remained substantially unchanged.²

Beginning in 1966, and after the November 1, 1964 coverage date of the Voting Rights Act, the Georgia General Assembly through Charter amendment made a number of changes in Rome's election procedures. It enacted a majority vote requirement for Commission and Board of Education general and primary elections and provided for the conduct and timing of runoff elections;³ reduced the number of wards from nine to three;⁴ provided that the Commission was to consist of one Commissioner from one of three numbered posts in each of three wards;⁵ increased the size of the Board of Education from five to six;⁶ provided that the Board of Education was to consist of one member from one of two numbered posts in each of three wards and that each candidate had to be a resident of the ward in which he ran;⁷ instituted staggered terms in the Commission and Board of Education;⁸ eased restrictions on voter qualifications;⁹ and transferred voter registration responsibility to the County.¹⁰ In addition to these changes in voting procedures, some sixty annexations were effected after November 1, 1964 either by state law or by local ordinance.¹¹

B.

The parties have developed voluminous evidence bearing on the history and present condition of black political affairs in the City of Rome. On the City's side of the balance sheet, we find that no literacy test or other device has been employed in Rome as a prerequisite to voter registration during the past seventeen years. While registrants were technically required to pass the state literacy or character tests, the affidavits of the City officials responsible for voter registration, supported by the unanimous testimony of black deponents, are to the effect that such tests have never been applied discriminatorily and have not been administered at all in recent years.¹² Similarly, the City has not employed other barriers to registration with respect to time and place, registration personnel, purging, or reregistration.¹³ Also probative of the lack of discrimination in registration is the fact that black registration remained at a relatively high level throughout the period 1963-74.¹⁴

Further, at least in recent years there have been no other direct barriers to black voting in Rome. Blacks have not been denied access to the ballot through the location of polling places, the actions of election officials, the treatment of illiterate voters or similar means. Nor is there any evidence of obstacles to black candidacy with respect to slating of candidates, filing fees, obstacles to qualifying, access to voters at polling places, or the like.¹⁵ Indeed, whites, including City officials, have encouraged blacks to run for elective posts in Rome.¹⁶ A black, Elgin Carmichael, was appointed to the Board of Education when a vacancy occurred in that body.¹⁷

The white elected officials of Rome, together with the white appointed City Manager, are responsive to the needs and interests of the black community.¹⁸ The City has not discriminated against blacks in the provision of services and has made an effort to upgrade some black neighborhoods.¹⁹ The City transit department, with a predominantly black ridership, is operated through a continuing City subsidy.²⁰ And the racial composition of the City workforce approximates that of the population, with a number of blacks employed in skilled or supervisory positions.²¹

In Rome politics, the black community, if it chooses to vote as a group, can probably determine the outcome of many if not most contests.²² Thus, many white candidates vigorously pursue the support of black voters.²³ Several present Commissioners testified that they spent proportionally more time campaigning in the black community²⁴ because they "needed that vote to win."²⁵

On the other hand, most black voters would prefer to have a black official representing their interests.²⁶ Yet there has never been a black elected to political office in the City of Rome. Indeed, only four blacks have ever sought such office. Two of them, M. D. Whatley and Dr. John W. Houser, Jr., ran for the Board of Education in the 1950's and early 1960's, respectively; neither did well.²⁷ Another black, Samuel Stubbs, ran in the 1972 Republican primary election for City Commission, and received only 79 votes out of the 276 cast.²⁸

By far the strongest black candidate in Rome's history was Rev. Clyde Hill, who ran for the Board of Education in 1970 under the numbered-post, residency ward, majority-win system instituted in 1966.²⁹ Rev. Hill ran a vigorous campaign against three white opponents, and, with the strong support of the black community, received a plurality of the votes cast in the general election.³⁰ Because he did not receive a majority, however, he was forced into a runoff election with the runner-up and was defeated.³¹

In the years since the failure of Rev. Hill's candidacy, the black community in Rome has been politically apathetic.³² It is widely believed among blacks that a black will never be elected to public office in Rome as long as the present majority-win system remains in effect.³³ A number of qualified blacks will not run for office because in their judgment they could not get a majority of the votes.³⁴

Underlying this perception in the black community is a belief that bloc voting by race exists in the City of Rome. Racial bloc voting is a situation where, when candidates of different races are running for the same office, the voters will by and large vote for the candidate of their own race.³⁵ Unfortunately, a statistical demonstration of the existence vel non of racial bloc voting is impossible in the present case.³⁶ There is, however, other evidence of record probative of the existence of racial bloc voting.

First, the virtually unanimous testimony of black deponents was that, given a choice, voters in Rome will tend to vote for the candidate of their own race.³⁷ However, some deponents also opined that a given black candidate could pick up significant white support, although not enough to win.³⁸ White officials, on the other hand, unanimously testified that racial bloc voting does not exist in Rome.³⁹ Much of this opinion testimony, of course, is based on inferences drawn from the results in previous elections, particularly that involving Rev. Hill—facts which more effectively speak for themselves. However, the testimony would also appear to reflect inferences drawn from these long-time residents' knowledge of the racial atmosphere in Rome.⁴⁰See Fed.R.Evid. 701. To this extent, the inference that bloc voting does exist is the more credible and rational one, because the white officials testifying to the contrary are "interested witnesses," see City of Richmond v. United States, 422 U.S. 358, 377, 95 S.Ct. 2296, 45 L.Ed.2d 245 (1975), because a belief in racial bloc voting was the predicate for decisions by a number of black deponents not to run for elective office, and because other relevant evidence interacts with and supports the conclusion that a substantial degree of racial bloc voting exists.

Rev. Hill's campaign is perhaps the clearest indication of the extent of racial bloc voting in Rome. With the solid support of the black community, Rev. Hill, as we have noted, achieved a plurality of the votes cast in the general election. In his losing runoff campaign, however, he picked up only 221 additional votes while his opponent gained 500. Moreover, although a lower turnout might have been expected for a...