Boston redistricting fight is back — now in federal court

The City Council’s dirty laundry is back flapping in the wind, this time in federal court, as what will be a multi-day hearing kicked off over whether a judge should step in and scrap the new Boston redistricting map.

City Councilor Michael Flaherty on Tuesday spent around three hours on the stand as a witness for the plaintiffs — who are technically suing him in the case of Walters et al v the Boston City Council in an effort to scuttle the map the body passed in November.

“Basically all the rules were out the door,” said Flaherty of the stretch run of the redistricting process.

The redistricting cycle that will never die continues, for now, in the arguments in this case.

Basically, the plaintiffs — a handful of people who live in the districts around which the two sides are at odds — are arguing that in the deliberations, the council focused on racial makeups in the South Boston, Dorchester and Mattapan districts in a way that was inappropriate and that there were some procedural violations around the state open-meeting law leading up to the passage of the final map.

The council, following a condensed, rancorous process that brought racial, ethnic, sectarian and neighborhood tensions to the fore, passed a map by a 9-4 vote, and Mayor Michelle Wu signed it. The map, which really only makes notable changes at Dorchester’s borders with Southie and Mattapan involving only about a dozen of the city’s 275 voting precincts, is set to go into effect for this November’s local election.

The councilor had reached something of a detente lately as it calmed down and churned through and passed assorted largely mayor-generated proposals this spring, but this case is picking at the scabs from the festering sores of 2022.

From the stand, Flaherty took a handful of shots at City Councilor Ricardo Arroyo, who was in the audience watching the hearing.

“There was talk that District 4 was too Black and District 3 was too white,” Flaherty said, attributing that discussion about the Mattapan and Dorchester districts to Arroyo, the district councilor from Hyde Park. Flaherty made sure to note a couple of times that Arroyo missed what Flaherty characterized as the one productive early meeting before the council began “spinning its wheels” as it pivoted to a focus on race in redistricting.

Flaherty noted that Arroyo had been the redistricting chair, but he said Arroyo didn’t hold enough hearings because he was busy running for Suffolk County District Attorney and so he avoided what would have been “political suicide” for the countywide candidate to hold what would have had to have been tricky redistricting hearings.

“The whole process was put on pause because he was a candidate for Suffolk County DA,” Flaherty said.

Arroyo eventually was removed as redistricting chair after a controversy in the DA race — a decision at the time that further enflamed tensions on the council so much that the following meeting devolved into yelling matches and eventually audience members brawling in the hallway.

Speaking to reporters after the hearing, Arroyo fired back at Flaherty, calling the lawsuit “frivolous.”

“Michael Flaherty had multiple factual errors,” Arroyo said, saying Flaherty was attributing comments to him that aren’t accurate. “I think it’s very telling that not a single expert is on the witness list for the plaintiffs — because they won’t find a single expert who says that this map doesn’t comply with the Voting Rights Act.”

The plaintiffs played a dozen brief clips of city councilors talking about race in the hearings, showing Redistricting Chair Liz Breadon and Councilors Kenzie Bok, Frank Baker, Tania Fernandes Anderson, Kendra Lara, Julia Mejia and Arroyo speaking at council hearings.

Judge Patti Saris will rule likely next week on whether to grant a preliminary injunction that would halt the implementation of the map.

Tuesday was the first court date on this of an expected four, with Flaherty on the stand throughout essentially the whole session in this day one. Flaherty, an at-large councilor from Southie, is not a plaintiff in the suit, but has been in agreement with the community groups suing throughout and following the redistricting process. In the same boat are City Councilor Frank Baker and City Council President Ed Flynn, the representatives from Dorchester and South Boston, respectively, who both vociferously opposed the map and are on the witness list for the plaintiffs.

U.S. Rep Stephen Lynch of Southie is also on the list for the plaintiffs. On Wednesday, lead plaintiff Rasheed Walters — who has written opinion columns for the Herald, but isn’t on staff — and former Dorchester city councilor and city clerk Maureen Feeney are slated to testify for the plaintiffs.

The defense has a redistricting expert on deck, but isn’t calling any officials.

from Boston Herald https://ift.tt/O7p9mkY