## Facts

- African-American voters in Chicago Heights challenged the City’s and Park District’s nonpartisan, at-large election systems under § 2 of the Voting Rights Act.
- In an earlier phase, the court found that the at-large systems unlawfully diluted African-American voting strength.
- During the remedial phase, multiple remedies were proposed by the City, the Park District, the plaintiff class, and individual plaintiffs.
- The City had adopted a 1994 remedial structure featuring six single-member council districts (including two majority-Black districts) combined with a strong mayor elected at-large with substantial executive authority (including veto and appointment powers) and a three-fifths council vote required to override vetoes.
- Individual plaintiffs argued the strong-mayor structure preserved an at-large, majoritarian point of control that could continue to limit minority voters’ effective political power.
- Individual plaintiffs proposed replacing the City’s approach with an aldermanic form of government and using cumulative voting for at-large elections, where each voter receives as many votes as seats to be filled and may allocate votes among candidates in any distribution.
- The proposals were evaluated for their ability to fully remedy the previously found § 2 violations and for consistency with Illinois law.

## Issues

1. What remedial election structure for the City of Chicago Heights and the Park District is appropriate to cure previously adjudicated § 2 Voting Rights Act vote-dilution violations caused by nonpartisan, at-large elections?
2. Whether the City’s 1994 six-district, strong-mayor plan adequately remedies the § 2 violation.
3. Whether an aldermanic form of government using at-large cumulative voting for council and park-board seats is a lawful and effective § 2 remedy consistent with Illinois law.

## Decision

- The court rejected the remedial proposals submitted by the City, the Park District, and the plaintiff class.
- The court accepted the individual plaintiffs’ approach in part but modified it by ordering an aldermanic structure with at-large cumulative voting for both the city council and the park board.
- The court ordered that seven city council members and park-board members be elected at-large using cumulative voting.
- The court ordered that the park board president be selected by the board.
- The court retained at-large elections for mayor, city treasurer, and city clerk, while adopting an aldermanic model that reduced the concentration of executive power reflected in the strong-mayor plan.

## Legal Principles

- A § 2 remedy must fully and durably cure the vote dilution found under the totality of circumstances, not merely make incremental changes that preserve functional barriers to minority voters’ equal opportunity to elect candidates of choice.
- A remedial plan may be rejected if it retains an at-large, majoritarian control point (such as a strong, at-large mayor with veto and appointment powers) that can neutralize gains in minority electoral opportunity elsewhere in the structure.
- Cumulative voting in at-large elections can be an appropriate § 2 remedy where it enables a cohesive minority electorate to concentrate support and elect candidates of choice, and where the system is authorized by state law.
- Federal courts have equitable authority to impose a remedial electoral structure that best cures the § 2 violation, even if it differs from proposals advanced by local governmental defendants.

## Conclusion

The court held that the prior at-large election systems violated § 2 and, at the remedial stage, ordered an aldermanic form of government with at-large cumulative voting for city council and park-board elections, concluding this structure more effectively cured minority vote dilution than the City’s strong-mayor district plan and other proposed remedies.


McCoy v. City of Chi. Heights, 6 F. Supp. 2d 973 (N.D. Ill. 1998)