rights group seeks voice
in FRHSD legal action
NAACP wants Legislature
in on voting points change
Local chapter of civil
rights group seeks voice
in FRHSD legal action
By dave benjamin
Staff Writer
The Freehold branch of the NAACP is concerned that the outcome of a federal case involving the Freehold Regional High School District could have a negative impact on the minority population in Freehold Borough.
The case before U.S. District Court Judge Garrett E. Brown Jr. in Trenton centers on a request by the township of Marl-boro to reapportion the FRHSD Board of Education’s voting points among the eight constituent municipalities.
Under a plan put forth by the attorney representing Marlboro, the school board representative from Freehold Borough would see the value of his or her vote reduced, based on figures reported in the 2000 census.
The NAACP claims that a reduction in the borough’s voting power which could come without legislative review would harm the town’s minority residents, who already saw their voting power on the board reduced in 1998, when the current voting point system was put in place by a different federal court judge.
The NAACP has asked the FRHSD school board to a seek a legislative remedy to the situation.
At present, an injunction issued by Brown prevents the FRHSD board from voting on substantive issues. All parties to the action are due back in court for a mediation session next week.
"We are concerned about the issues," said Julius Ramsey, president of the Freehold branch of the NAACP. "If the injunction is stayed, the Freehold Regional High School District will be without a plan. What’s going to happen to our kids?"
One significant issue of concern to the NAACP is whether the Voting Rights Act is being followed. The use of mathematics (i.e., census figures) in order to politically box in a representative district, Freehold Borough, with a significantly minority concentration is, according to the NAACP, hardly the constitutional test that is appropriate here.
In a press release Ramsey said, "Adding or subtracting voting power would be like adding or taking away representatives without elections. Given that the process set up by the Legislature is already past, and given that mathematics is not the test of constitutionality, the Legislature is a necessary party for any new process."
In a Nov. 27 letter to FRHSD board President Patricia Horvath, attorney Herbert Whitehouse, representing the NAACP, said, "It appears that Marlboro Township is seeking to undo both the municipal representation allocations that formed the basis of the April 2002 elections, and all policy decisions of the board made after this date."
Whitehouse claimed that the focus and objective of the Marlboro lawsuit against the district were to prevent the implementation of the board’s redistricting decision (scheduled to take effect in September 2003 and assign some Marlboro residents to Colts Neck High School) and to tie the hands of the leadership of the school system until the case is adjudicated.
"The branch is very concerned about the Marlboro Township request to undo the results of past elections in the district, especially since Marlboro Township waited until the board approved a redistricting plan in the best interests of all the students in the district," Whitehouse wrote.
Whitehouse said it would be absurd to decrease the small vote of Freehold Borough to the point that it would be irrelevant, making the board representative’s vote have a zero impact.
"Such an allocation would therefore not be constitutional, especially if it included a concentrated minority population," said Whitehouse. "This is why the (NAACP) branch asks that the board insist that the state Legislature be a necessary party to any vote apportionment process. Without legislative involvement, the end run around the Legislature, sought by Marlboro Township, is likely to unfairly reduce the political influence of the minority residents concentrated in Freehold Borough."
Horvath declined to comment on the NAACP’s action at this time.
FRHSD Attorney Nathanya Simon said, "With regard to the litigation, with all of the persons who have expressed interest on behalf of various entities such as the municipalities, I have also said to the attorney for the NAACP that I would not oppose any request to intervene in the litigation so that he can have his voice heard. That would be up to the court to grant.
"Regarding some of the underlying issues, in terms of our diversity within our schools, that is something that we monitor and we encourage. It is one of our principles of redistricting, and we would certainly continue in that direction," the attorney said.
Regarding the involvement of the state Legislature in the voting apportionment process, Simon said, "If that’s a direction they feel is appropriate, certainly that is something they should pursue. We have not pursued it in that regard, at this point. We are going to go through litigation for (a resolution) on this."