A Viewer Writes: WILL WICOMICO COUNTY DECIDE TO SETTLE THE VOTING RIGHTS LAWSUIT?

The agenda for the County Council meeting on February 4, which starts at 6:00 PM, includes the attached resolution regarding the pending lawsuit by the NAACP and others against the County, the Board of Education, and other defendants that challenges the membership structure of both the Council and the Board. Each is composed of five members elected from five separate districts within the County and two members who are elected countywide (“at-large”).

This structure dates from 1990, when it was adopted to resolve a lawsuit against the County by the U.S. Department of Justice. At that time and for many years before, the County Council was composed of five members, all of whom were elected countywide (at-large).

The Board of Education membership has been structured with this 5-2 system since the appointment of Board members by the Governor was changed to the election process a few years ago.

In the lawsuit, the NAACP and other plaintiffs argue that the 5-2 system substantially dilutes the voting power of the Black and other racial minority residents and thereby violates the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965, which prohibits any “standard, practice or procedure” that “results in a denial or abridgment of the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race or color.” Congress passed this Act to promote and facilitate the Fifteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, adopted shortly after the Civil War to protect the voting rights of African American citizens.

The NAACP et al. have asked the U.S. District Court to order that in the future, starting with the next County election in 2026, the Council and Board will have 7 members, each elected from a separate district and no at-large seats. By a proposed consent judgment and decree, the U.S. District Court Judge would provide that order. The judge, Matthew Maddox, was appointed by then-President Biden in 2023.

Of the 7 separate districts, there are 2 so-called minority-majority districts, in which the Black residents are over 50% of the population. These include much of the City of Salisbury, as well as areas to the northwest. Each district would have about 15,000 residents.

The NAACP and other plaintiffs have also asked the Court to award their costs and attorney’s fees, to be paid by the defendants. Under the terms of a proposed Settlement Agreement and Release, the County would pay $125,000 and the Board $10,000 to “Plaintiffs’ Counsel” (attorneys).

There have been no rulings in the lawsuit, which Judge Maddox referred to a magistrate judge for settlement discussion in August 2024; since then proceedings in the case have been stayed and there have been 2 settlement conferences before the magistrate judge.

According to an affidavit (“Declaration”) by Monica Brooks, the President of the Wicomico County Branch of the NAACP, in 2021 (before Ms. Giordano became the County Executive) she was a member of the County’s “Redistricting Committee” that recommended no significant change should be made in the 5-2 seat system. Ms. Brooks also states that in the Committee’s proceedings, Ms. Giordano argued in favor of maintaining the 5-2 seat system and that she will not speak with her. Her affidavit is attached; see parts 13, 20 and 22.

Also of note: in 2013, by the attached letter, the ACLU asked then Assistant Attorney General Thos. Perez (under then-President Obama) for the Department of Justice to reopen its investigation of Wicomico County’s council structure that resulted in the earlier lawsuit and establishment of the 5-2 system.  Apparently, this fell on deaf ears in Washington, DC – nothing happened.

Currently, the Maryland ACLU’s primary attorney (Deborah Jeon) is representing the NAACP and others in the lawsuit against the County and the Board of Education, along with a group of attorneys from the mega law firm Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLC, which has over 1000 attorneys nationwide and in several other countries – former members of this firm include Justice Abe Fortas and Attorney General Merrick Garland.

Interestingly, the County is being represented in the lawsuit by Kevin Karpinski, who was fired by Ms. Giordano as the County’s “special legal counsel” shortly after she was elected – then she tried to appoint Daniel Cox, who she campaigned with during the 2022 election, when he was defeated by now Gov. Moore, to that position, but the Council refused to confirm him.