Spring Branch ISD violated Voting Rights Act for diluting the Hispanic vote, federal judge rules

A federal judge has found Spring Branch ISD violated the Voting Rights Act and has told the west Harris County district to overhaul its system so that the voices of Hispanic voters can be heard, but the ruling doesn't come in time for Saturday's pivotal board races.

Seven months after the conclusion of the federal trial against Spring Branch ISD, the judge ruled on Monday that the 33,000-student district has devised a system that diluted the votes of Hispanic residents on the northside of the district, making it virtually impossible for their preferred candidate to win.  

TRIAL: Spring Branch ISD trial pits election experts against each other, trustees deny voter suppression claims

The plaintiff, parent Virginia Elizondo, sued the school district after running twice for the board and losing both times, claiming that the at-large system dilutes the Hispanic vote in a district that has almost twice as many Hispanic students as white students. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 stipulates that a violation by vote dilution would be in a circumstance where minorities had “less opportunity than other members of the electorate to participate in the political process and to elect representatives of their choice.”

Interstate 10 divides the district socioeconomically. The northside is economically disadvantaged and has a large population of Hispanic residents, while the southside, home to Memorial Villages, is a historically white, wealthy area. Currently, all board members are from the southside of the district.

While outgoing board member John Perez is Hispanic, the court found he was not the preferred candidate of the Hispanic community on the northside of the district. Before Perez was elected, a person of color had never served on the Spring Branch ISD board since its inception in 1946. 

"SBISD is a high-functioning school district. But the evidence shows that the District consists of two disparate parts: one located north of I-10, and one located mostly south of I-10," U.S. District court judge Sim Lake wrote. "South of I-10 the students are more likely to be Anglo, affluent, go to college, and more likely to meet or exceed the State’s academic standards. North of I-10 the students are more likely to be Hispanic, economically disadvantaged, dropout, less likely to meet state academic standards, and more likely to be severely disciplined."

BACKGROUND: What to know as Spring Branch ISD goes on trial for alleged violation of Voting Rights Act

The district argued that the past election results where northside Hispanic preferred candidates did not win had more to do with politics than race, as the southside is largely conservative and northside voters lean more democratic, but the judge struck down that notion, finding that the plaintiff had satisfied enough conditions, including the three Gingles conditions and three other factors, to show that, based on the totality of the circumstances, a system of geographic representation was fair and warranted. 

At the conclusion of the opinion, the judge ordered that the district had 20 days to file a plan for single member districts, composed of either seven districts or five districts and two at-large seats. The plaintiff can file objections to the plan, but once they settle on a system, the district is prohibited from conducting at-large elections in the future and must have elected trustees represent single member districts. 

It is not clear whether the district will have to hold a special election after they create the districts or if they can wait until their next scheduled election cycle. District officials did not immediately respond to a request for comment. 

ELECTIONS: 54 candidates are vying for Houston area school board seats. Here are the races to watch.

The judge also ruled that Elizondo is entitled to court costs and attorney's fees if she chooses to seek such relief. 

Lake did find, however, that despite the district being "heavily segregated by ethnicity, economic status and academic achievement," there was "no credible evidence that SBISD has failed to make good faith efforts and expend necessary resources to address the needs of its Hispanic students."

He also ruled that there was not enough evidence to support that there was "a lack of responsiveness" from board members to the Hispanic community. The plaintiffs argued that closing northside schools last year was a decision that might not have been made if there was northside Hispanic representation on the board, and that it adversely impacted the Hispanic community, but the judge wrote that "there was no evidence that that the school closures adversely impacted ... Hispanic students or parents."