EAST ST. LOUIS – Dozens of citizens challenged a map of St. Clair County board districts at U.S. district court on Nov. 18, two days after the board adopted the map.
Attorney Paul Evans of O’Fallon, counsel for 52 challengers, claimed the board violated the same statutes they violated when they adopted a map in June.
He successfully challenged the June map, which relied on population estimates from census bureau surveys.
County board chairman Mark Kern defended the map in district court for five months, but he presented a replacement to the board on Nov. 8.
Kern told the board he replaced the June map so the county wouldn’t have to use its resources to defend the suit.
The board approved the replacement on Nov. 16, a day before a statutory deadline.
District populations range from 8,643 to 9,782, a spread of 13 percent.
Eighteen Democrats voted for the map.
Eight Republicans and Democrat Curtis McCall Jr. voted against it.
Adoption of the replacement map didn’t end the lawsuit.
Evans amended the complaint, repeating all previous allegations except failure to rely on census data.
“The St. Clair County board did not make an honest good faith effort to construct its districts as nearly of equal population as possible, as compact as possible, or as contiguous as possible,” Evans wrote.
“It is possible to draw county board districts with substantially less deviation under the guidelines imposed by Illinois law.”
He stated he could present a map with deviations close to one percent.
“Large population disparities exist between adjoining districts that can easily be rectified by shifting a district boundary,” he wrote.
He claims some districts have unusual shapes allowing incumbent Democrats to remain barely in their districts.
He claims the board unnecessarily divided townships in violation of law.
For example, he claims they divided both St. Clair and Belleville townships into 13 districts, divided Caseyville township into nine districts and divided Centreville township into eight districts.
Evans added an allegation that didn’t appear in the original complaint, claiming board members didn’t follow their own rules.
He claims the elimination of one seat, from 29 to 28, was improper.
“There was no hearing on the issue of the reduction of board seats, nor was anything on this subject ever posted or noticed to the public,” he wrote.
“This clearly makes the map baseless and entitles the plaintiffs to judgment on the pleadings.”
He claims ordinances must be submitted to the proper committee 10 days prior to the board’s consideration in the judiciary committee.
“The judiciary committee received and reviewed the complained of ordinances, both the new map and the repeal of the old map, one half hour before consideration by the board as a whole,” he wrote.
He wrote that candidates would start circulating petitions on Jan. 13.
District Judge David Dugan ordered the county to respond by Nov. 24.