Thursday, May 16, 1996

Money main factor in schools following Roscoe lead

By ANTHONY WILSON
Staff Writer

Winters Superintendent T.D. Lancaster still seethes over the day three years ago when a reporter called seeking comment about a lawsuit filed against his district.

Without warning, the League of United Latin American Citizens was charging the school system's at-large scheme of electing trustees discriminated against Hispanics. Lancaster said he felt blind-sided.

"Just bingo ... we were sued," he recalled.

The Winters trustees' dilemma was whether to spend a couple hundred thousand dollars defending a civil rights suit or give in to LULAC's demands for single-member districts.
The board blinked.

Wednesday, the day after the Roscoe school system's victory over LULAC in a similar case, Lancaster insisted he harbors no regrets for agreeing to the settlement.

"The board felt the $200,000 cost wasn't worth it," Lancaster said of Winters' settlement. "We didn't like it, but we felt we had no choice. ... To bring it up and rehash it would be sour grapes. We made the best decision at the time based on the economics."

In the past 14 years LULAC has sued almost 20 Big Country cities and school districts claiming at-large elections prevent minorities from electing their preferred candidates, but the Roscoe ISD was the first to force a courtroom showdown.

A few defendants - the Abilene schools, the city of Abilene, the city of Haskell - successfully rebutted claims until they were dropped. But the vast majority have yielded to LULAC's demands, adopting single-member districts or cumulative voting to avoid spending mounds of tax dollars to defend lawsuits.

In light of Roscoe's victory, how other governmental bodies will react to LULAC lawsuits is uncertain. Howard County is the only Big Country body currently being sued, over how it elects its justices of the peace.

Roscoe's attorney, Chuck Jones, suspects more cities and schools may be willing to fight the suits.
"I hope they would if they believe they're right," Jones said. "They must make LULAC prove their case."

But many past litigants, such as Lancaster, say they would respond to claims no differently, citing the high financial costs involved.

Settling a suit in 1989 cost Colorado City approximately $18,000. Trying the case would have incurred potentially "disastrous" expenses, Mayor Jim Baum explained.

Baum said he believes single-member districts have strengthened his community. He credits the altered election system for reaching out to blacks and Hispanics, regaining their confidence in city government, and giving the council a "good entree" of representatives.

"That's not to say when the suit was filed we didn't feel we had a gun to our heads," Baum added. "That's human nature when you're forced to do something. The sentiment of the council was that it wanted to fight, but the cost became the overriding concern."

Austin attorney Judy Underwood, counsel for several area schools, said the bottom line will continue to dictate legal strategy.

"It's still going to be a function of how they want to spend already limited funds," Underwood said. "They look if they're willing to spend $150,000 to roll the dice. I've had cases I'd love to try, but I respect the decision that they can't justify spending money that way."

Much of the frustration with the cases is aimed at LULAC lawyer Rolando Rios. Rios' critics accused the San Antonio attorney of economic blackmail in harping on the potential costs and forcing governmental bodies to settle his cases, which some have called "assembly line" lawsuits.

Just last week, he collected $7,000 from the Big Spring school district by convincing trustees to adopt cumulative voting for its three at-large seats. Rios negotiated the former election system during a 1982 settlement with the district.

"The credibility of Mr. Rios has come under attack by John Q. Public," Big Spring Superintendent Bill McQueary said. "Others feel he's their savior. All you've got to do is look at the record. The guy's making a fortune."

Rios said he hasn't collected a cent for his work on the Roscoe case. But that's only because he lost. If he had won, the district would have to pay his fees.

However, he won't reimburse Roscoe taxpayers the $200,000 they've spent for attorneys, paying only the court costs of about $100.

"That's our American system," Underwood said with a shrug.