Schabarum Calls Remap Plan ‘Un-American’ : Politics: Drawing a new district specifically to benefit Latinos is ‘racist,’ supervisor testifies.

Los Angeles County Supervisor Pete Schabarum, testifying in a historic voting rights trial, Tuesday called it “un-American” to fashion a redistricting plan designed to help a Latino win a seat on the county board.

Schabarum’s comments came during 4 1/2 hours on the stand, during which he could recall few details of the discussions leading to adoption of the 1981 redistricting plan.

“The whole lawsuit you’re pursuing makes the allegation that the district lines were drawn with mischief afoot,” Schabarum told his questioner, American Civil Liberties Union attorney Mark Rosenbaum. “I categorically suggest that there is no basis in fact that would demonstrate that.”

The plan adopted by the board is the subject of a lawsuit accusing the supervisors of dividing most of the county’s 2 million Latinos among three districts, thereby weakening their political influence in violation of the federal Voting Rights Act.

The suit by the U.S. Justice Department, the ACLU and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund seeks to create a predominantly Latino district, from which a Latino would have an improved chance of winning a seat on the county board.

During his testimony, Schabarum repeatedly replied, “I don’t recall” when Rosenbaum asked about his role in the redistricting process.

Schabarum said he viewed it as “fundamentally un-American” and “racist” to draft boundaries for supervisorial districts “with the sole interest of making it possible for one ethnic group to be represented” on the board. “You want people . . . to be capable,” he said, adding that a person’s intelligence and desire to serve should be considered, not ethnic background.

Rosenbaum asked the supervisor whether his view of racist redistricting depends on whose district is targeted.

Rosenbaum was referring to earlier testimony by others that Schabarum joined fellow conservative Supervisors Mike Antonovich and Deane Dana in privately drawing up a plan to move Latino voters out of Schabarum’s district and into liberal Supervisor Ed Edelman’s district. That plan did not get the four votes required for approval.

But Schabarum said he could not recall any such effort on his part. Nor, he testified, could he recall conversations that took place in a closed-door meeting before adoption of the redistricting plan. According to the plaintiffs, the meeting was attended by two supervisors at a time, in an effort to circumvent a state law requiring that discussions involving three or more supervisors be conducted in public.

“I do not, nor do I imagine that most people, have the memory to recollect the kind of detail you have tried to put in my mouth,” Schabarum told Rosenbaum.

Schabarum took issue with an effort to portray him as insensitive to Latinos.

The supervisor noted that, during his early campaigns for supervisor, he sent out campaign mail to Latinos “which identified the fact that I have Mexican grandparentage in part.” Schabarum’s paternal grandmother was Mexican, and he has referred to himself as Hispanic.

Outside the courthouse, Rosenbaum said Schabarum had a central role in 1981 redistricting but now his mind is “a complete blank.”

“I find that incredible for an individual who lives and breathes politics,” Rosenbaum said.

He said Schabarum’s testimony “demonstrated, at best, an indifference to the Hispanic community.”

Schabarum, also speaking on the courthouse steps, said the Justice Department has “perpetrated a fraud on the taxpayers” and that the ACLU and MALDEF were just seeking political advantage.

“They’re trying to paint the board, individually and collectively, as racist,” he said, adding that the charge is “patently false.”

The plaintiffs claim that the three conservatives and two liberal supervisors treated Latinos during the remapping as “pawns” in a power struggle for control of the board.