Ruling Delayed in Suit Against County

A federal magistrate Friday delayed ruling on whether Los Angeles County supervisors should be required to disclose their private conversations on a reapportionment plan that allegedly discriminates against Latino voters.

The U.S. Justice Department and two civil rights groups, who have sued the county over the 1981 plan, requested a court order to force the supervisors to reveal details of their private conferences. The plaintiffs are attempting to prove the supervisors secretly fashioned the redistricting to dilute Latino voting power.

They contend that while supervisors were hearing public testimony on the proposed reapportionment in 1981, they took turns filing into a private room to discuss the matter out of earshot.

The private meeting, said Richard Fajardo, attorney with the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, was “an obvious attempt to circumvent the spirit of the state’s Brown Act,” which requires a majority of legislative bodies to conduct public business in open session.

Richard K. Simon, a private attorney hired by the county, argued before U.S. Magistrate Charles F. Eick that supervisors have a privilege, much like that of an attorney and his client, that shield private conversations from public disclosure.

But Fajardo contended that supervisors are “stonewalling” to avoid politically embarrassing questions.