Case 4:19-cv-00284-ALM Document 17 Filed 05/08/19 Page 1 of 13 PageID #: 64

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
SURESH KUMAR,
Plaintiff,

v.
FRISCO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT,
and RENE ARCHAMBAULT, JOHN CLASSE,
DEBBIE GILLESPIE, ANNE MCCAUSLAND,
STEVEN NOSKIN, and CHAD RUDY, in their
official capacities
Defendants.

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:19-CV-00284

DEFENDANTS' ORIGINAL ANSWER
Defendants Frisco Independent School District (''FISD"), and Rene Archambault, John
Classe, Debbie Gillespie, Anne McCausland, Steven Noskin and Chad Rudy, in their official
capacities, (collectively, "Defendants"), file the following original answer to Complaint For
Declaratory and Permanent Injunctive Relief Concerning Violations of Section 2 of the Voting
Rights Act (the "Complaint") [Dkt. 1]:

I.
Preliminary Statement
1.

Defendants admit the allegations in the first sentence ofparagraph 1 of the Complaint,

but deny the remaining allegations in paragraph 1 of the Complaint.
2.

Defendants admit that FISD has an at-large system for electing its seven member

board of trustees, but deny the remaining allegations in paragraph 2 of the Complaint.
3.

Defendants do not know what Plaintiff means by "students of color" as alleged in the

first sentence of paragraph 3 of the Complaint, but admit that "FISD is racially and ethnically
diverse" and that white students comprised 41.49% of the total student body as of mid-January 2019.
Defendants admit the allegations in the second sentence of paragraph 3 of the Complaint.

 Case 4:19-cv-00284-ALM Document 17 Filed 05/08/19 Page 2 of 13 PageID #: 65

Defendants admit the allegations in the third sentence of paragraph 3 of the Complaint, but
affirmatively state that FISD' s current system is set to meet the needs of all students on all campuses
regardless of race, socioeconomic status and location. Defendants deny the allegations in the fourth
sentence of paragraph 3 of the Complaint. Defendants admit, as of the date of this Answer, that
currently all six trustees are white, that five of the six trustees reside west of Preston Road, and that
four of the six trustees reside west of the Dallas North Tollway as alleged in the fifth sentence of
paragraph 3 of the Complaint; however, Defendants affirmatively state that as a result of the recent
May 2019 FISD school board election, beginning June 10,2019, four ofthe seven board members
will live east of the Dallas North Tollway and one board member will be non-white (Indian).
Defendants admit the allegations in the sixth sentence of paragraph 3 of the Complaint, but
affirmatively state that as a result of the recent May 2019 FISD school board election, on June 10,
2019, FISD will have an Indian board member. Defendants admit the allegations in the seventh
sentence of paragraph 3 of the Complaint, but affirmatively state ( 1) the Indian candidate defeated
the white candidate for the Place 1 trustee position in the recent May 2019 FISD school board
election, and (2) in the May 2016 election the two minority candidates for the Place 2 trustee position
received a total of 61% of the overall vote, while the winning white candidate only received 39% of
the overall vote. Defendants deny the allegations in the eighth sentence of paragraph 3 of the
Complaint.
4.

Defendants admit that Plaintiff has asserted violations of the Voting Rights Act of

1965, 52 U.S.C. § 10301 and the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments of the United States
Constitution and seeks judicial relief as alleged in paragraph 4 of the Complaint, but deny that the

DEFENDANT'S ORIGINAL ANSWER 2732833

2

 Case 4:19-cv-00284-ALM Document 17 Filed 05/08/19 Page 3 of 13 PageID #: 66

Voting Rights Act or United States Constitution have been violated or that Plaintiff is entitled to the
relief sought. Defendants deny the allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 4 of the Complaint.
5.

Defendants admit that Plaintiff has asserted violations of the Voting Rights Act of

1965, 52 U.S.C. § 10301 and the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments of the United States
Constitution and seeks declaratory and injunctive relief as alleged in paragraph 5 of the Complaint,
but deny that the Voting Rights Act or United States Constitution have been violated or that Plaintiff
is entitled to the relief sought.
6.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 6 of the Complaint.

II.
Jurisdiction and Venue
7.

Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 7 of the Complaint.

8.

Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 8 of the Complaint.

9.

Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 9 of the Complaint.

III.
Parties
A.

Plaintiff
10.

Defendants lack sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief about the truth

of the allegations in paragraph 10 of the Complaint.
11.

Defendants lack sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief about the truth

of the allegations in paragraph 11 of the Complaint.
12.

Defendants lack sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief about the truth

of the allegations in paragraph 12 of the Complaint.
13.

Defendants lack sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief about the truth

DEFENDANT'S ORIGINAL ANSWER 2732833

3

 Case 4:19-cv-00284-ALM Document 17 Filed 05/08/19 Page 4 of 13 PageID #: 67

of the allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 13 of the Complaint. Defendants admit that
Plaintiffapplied to serve on FISD' s Long Range Planning Committee, but lack sufficient knowledge
or information to form a belief about the truth of the remaining allegations in the second sentence
of paragraph 13 of the Complaint. Defendants admit that Plaintiffwas not selected to serve on either
FISD's Priorities Based Budget Stakeholder Committee or Long Range Planning Committee, but
lack sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief about the truth of the remaining allegations
in the third sentence of paragraph 13 of the Complaint. Defendants deny the allegations in the fourth
sentence of paragraph 13 of the Complaint as stated, but admit that the original Priorities Based
Budget Stakeholder Committee was selected solely by the FISD board while the Long Range
Planning Committee was selected by FISD administration with input from the board. Defendants
deny the allegations in the fifth and sixth sentences of paragraph 13 of the Complaint.
14.

Defendants deny the allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 14 of the

Complaint. Defendants admit the allegations in the third sentence of paragraph 14 of the Complaint.
Defendants lack sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief about the truth of the
allegations in second and fourth sentences of paragraph 14 of the Complaint. Defendants admit, as
of the date of this Answer, the allegations in the fifth sentence of paragraph 14 of the Complaint;
however, Defendants affirmatively state that, as a result of the recent May 2019 FISD school board
election, as of June 10, 2019, one board member will live in a home zoned for Centennial High
School.
15.

Defendants lack sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief about the truth

of the allegations in paragraph 15 of the Complaint.
16.

Defendants lack sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief about the truth

DEFENDANT'S ORIGINAL ANSWER 2732833

4

 Case 4:19-cv-00284-ALM Document 17 Filed 05/08/19 Page 5 of 13 PageID #: 68

of the allegations in paragraph 16 of the Complaint.

B.

Defendants
17.

Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 17 of the Complaint.

18.

Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 18 of the Complaint. However,

Defendants affirmatively state that Mr. Noskin lost his race for re-election as the Place 2 trustee in
FISD' s recent May 2019 election. The winner of the election, Natalie Hebert, will be sworn into her
trustee position on June 10,2019.
19.

Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 19 of the Complaint.

20.

Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 20 of the Complaint.

21.

Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 21 of the Complaint.

22.

Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 22 of the Complaint.

23.

Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 23 of the Complaint.

24.

Defendants do not know what Plaintiff means by the "western portion of FISD's

attendance boundaries" as alleged in the first sentence of paragraph 24 of the Complaint, but admit
that as of the date of this Answer five of the six current trustees reside west ofPreston Road and four
of the six current trustees reside west of the Dallas North Tollway; however, Defendants
affirmatively state that as a result of the recent May 2019 FISD school board election, beginning
June 10, 2019, four of the seven trustees will live east of the Dallas North Tollway. Defendants
admit the allegations in the second sentence of paragraph 24 of the Complaint. Defendants deny the
allegations in the third sentence of paragraph 24 of the Complaint.
25.

Defendants do not know what Plaintiff means by "students of color" as alleged in the

DEFENDANT'S ORIGINAL ANSWER 2732833

5

 Case 4:19-cv-00284-ALM Document 17 Filed 05/08/19 Page 6 of 13 PageID #: 69

first sentence. of paragraph 25 of the Complaint, but admit that non-white students comprised a
majority ofFISD's student enrollment in 2017-18. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in
paragraph 25 of the Complaint.
26.

Defendants deny the allegations in the first and fourth sentences of paragraph 26 of

the Complaint. Defendants admit that two of the six trustees as of the date of this Answer live
within the attendance zone for Wakeland High School, but deny the remaining allegations in the
second sentence of paragraph 26 of the Complaint. Defendants admit the allegations in the third
sentence of paragraph 26 of the Complaint.

IV.
Facts
A.

The Frisco Independent School District
27.

Defendants admit FISD is located in a "'coveted' suburb[]" as alleged in the first

sentence of paragraph 27 of the Complaint, but deny the remaining allegations in this sentence.
Defendants admit that "FISD grew rapidly in recent years" as alleged in the third sentence of
paragraph 27 of the Complaint, but lack sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief about
the truth of the remaining allegations in this sentence. Defendants admit the allegations in the fourth
and fifth sentences of paragraph 27 of the Complaint. Defendants admit the allegations in the second
sentence of paragraph 27 of the Complaint, but affirmatively state that the remainder of the portion
of the website quoted in this sentence states "Many families choose to call Frisco lSD home due to
our outstanding reputation for academic excellence, innovative programs and wealth of
extracurricular opportunities and experiences. At the heart of our success is a student-opportunities
model that has guided the District through three decades of explosive enrollment growth. With the
support of parents and the community, leaders remain committed to creating small, personalized
DEFENDANT'S ORIGINAL ANSWER 2732833

6

 Case 4:19-cv-00284-ALM Document 17 Filed 05/08/19 Page 7 of 13 PageID #: 70

learning environments, as evidenced by our mission to know every student by name and need. This
philosophy drives our day-to-day efforts to understand each child's unique circumstances, his or her
strengths and weaknesses and the role we must play to ensure each student reaches his or her full
potential."
28.

Defendants admit the allegations in the first, second and fourth sentences ofparagraph

28 of the Complaint. Defendant's deny the allegations in the third sentence of paragraph 28 of the
Complaint.

B.

29.

Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 29 of the Complaint.

30.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 30 of the Complaint.

FISD's Current At-Large Election System Discourages Minority Participation in the
Electoral Process
31.

Defendants admit the allegations in the first three sentences of paragraph 31 of the

Complaint, but deny the allegations in the fourth sentence.
32.

C.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 32 of the Complaint.

FISD's White Trustees do Not Represent a Significant Portion of This Diverse
Multiethnic, Multiracial, And Multilingual Community
33.

Defendants admit that the FISD board is responsible for overseeing a system of more

than 70 campuses, with a budget of about $538 million and more than 60,000 students and that the
composition of the FISD student body is significantly diverse as alleged in paragraph 33 of the
Complaint. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in paragraph 33 of the Complaint.
34.

Defendants admit, as of the date of this Answer, the allegations in the first sentence

of paragraph 34 of the Complaint; however, Defendants affirmatively state that, as a result of the
recent May 2019 FISD school board election, as of June 10, 2019 the FISD board will be comprised

DEFENDANT'S ORIGINAL ANSWER 2732833

7

 Case 4:19-cv-00284-ALM Document 17 Filed 05/08/19 Page 8 of 13 PageID #: 71

of six white trustees and one Indian/Asian trustee. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in
paragraph 34 of the Complaint as stated, but affirmatively state that as of the date of this Answer
four of the six current trustees reside in neighborhoods west of the Dallas North Tollway.
35.

D.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 35 of the Complaint.

FISD's At-Large System Fails Voters of Color- And Students
36.

Defendants deny the allegations in the first and second sentences of paragraph 36 of

the Complaint. Defendants admit the allegations in the third sentence of paragraph 36 of the
Complaint, but affirmatively state that the percentage of white FISD teachers has decreased in recent
years. Defendants admit the allegations in the fourth sentence of paragraph 36 of the Complaint, but
affirmatively state that in 2017-18 only 1.6% of all Texas teachers were Asian.
37.

Defendants lack sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief about the truth

of the allegations in paragraph 37 of the Complaint.
38.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 38 of the Complaint.

39.

Defendants admit that Bright Academy and Christie Elementary School were

classified as "economically disadvantaged" campuses in 2017-2018, but deny that "FISD has []
concentrated poverty" at these two campuses as alleged in the first sentence of paragraph 39 of the
Complaint. Defendants deny the allegations in the second and fourth sentences of paragraph 39 of
the Complaint. Defendants admit the allegations in the third sentence of paragraph 39 of the
Complaint.

E.

The Discriminatory Effects of FISD's Electoral System Upon Minority Voters
40.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 40 of the Complaint.

41.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 41 of the Complaint.

DEFENDANT'S ORIGINAL ANSWER 2732833

8

 Case 4:19-cv-00284-ALM Document 17 Filed 05/08/19 Page 9 of 13 PageID #: 72

42.

Defendants deny the allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 42 of the

Complaint. Defendants deny the allegations in the second sentence ofparagraph 42 ofthe Complaint
as stated since available records reflect that no minority candidate ran for the FISD school board
until 2015 and, therefore, no "persons of color" unsuccessfully ran for the FISD school board prior
to 2015 as alleged/implied in the second sentence of paragraph 42 of the Complaint. Defendants
admit the allegations in the third sentence of paragraph 42 of the Complaint, but affirmatively state
that Gopal Ponangi (an Indian, non-white candidate) successfully ran for FISD's Place 1 trustee
position against a white opponent in FISD's recent May 2019 election, obtaining 52.0% of the
overall vote. Mr. Ponangi will be sworn into his trustee position on June 10, 2019.
43.

Defendants admit the allegations in paragraph 43 of the Complaint. However,

Defendants affirmatively state that Gopal Ponangi (an Indian, non-white candidate) successfully ran
for FISD's Place 1 trustee position against a white opponent in FISD's recent May 2019 election,
obtaining 52.0% of the overall vote. Mr. Ponangi will be sworn into his trustee position on June 10,
2019.
44.

Defendants lack of sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief about the

truth of the allegations in first, third and fourth sentences of paragraph 44 of the Complaint.
Defendants admit the allegations in the second sentence of paragraph 44 of the Complaint, but
affirmatively state that minority candidate Anjali Shirvaikar received 36% of the overall vote while
another minority candidate for the same trustee position, Phil Ramirez, received 25% of the overall
vote. The election winner, incumbent Steven Noskin, only received 39% of the overall vote; in other
words, the two minority candidates combined received 61% of the overall vote in the May 2016
election.

DEFENDANT'S ORIGINAL ANSWER 2732833

9

 Case 4:19-cv-00284-ALM Document 17 Filed 05/08/19 Page 10 of 13 PageID #: 73

45.

Defendants admit that in 2017 Grace Wang ran for the Place 5 trustee position and

came in third place, but deny that she only received 16% of the vote as alleged in the flrst sentence
of paragraph 45 of the Complaint. Defendants admit Ms. Wang apparently made the statements
alleged in the second and third sentences of paragraph 45 of the Complaint; however, she also
apparently stated "I would love to see Frisco lSD continue to be as robust as it is now."
46.

F.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 46 of the Complaint.

Absent Judicial Intervention, The Current Discriminatory Electoral System Will
Remain in Place
4 7.

Defendants deny the allegations in the flrst sentence of paragraph 47 of the

Complaint. The remaining allegations in paragraph 47 of the Complaint state legal conclusions,
which do not require an admission or denial. To the extent required, Defendants deny the legal
conclusions alleged in paragraph 47 of the Complaint as applied to the facts of this specific case.
48.

Defendants lack sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief about the truth

of the allegations in paragraph 48 of the Complaint.
49.

Defendants admit the allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 49 of the

Complaint. Defendants lack sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief about the truth of
the allegations in the second sentence of paragraph 49 of the Complaint, but affirmatively state that
FISD's current system is set to meet the needs of all students on all campuses regardless of race,
socioeconomic status and location.
50.

The allegations in paragraph 50 of the Complaint state legal conclusions, which do

not require an admission or denial. To the extent required, Defendants deny the legal conclusions
alleged in paragraph 50 of the Complaint as applied to the facts of this specific case.

DEFENDANT'S ORIGINAL ANSWER 2732833

10

 Case 4:19-cv-00284-ALM Document 17 Filed 05/08/19 Page 11 of 13 PageID #: 74

51.

The allegations in paragraph 51 of the Complaint state legal conclusions, which do

not require an admission or denial. To the extent required, Defendants deny the legal conclusions
alleged in paragraph 51 of the Complaint as applied to the facts of this specific case.
52.

The allegations in paragraph 52 of the Complaint state legal conclusions, which do

not require an admission or denial. To the extent required, Defendants deny the legal conclusions
alleged in paragraph 52 of the Complaint as applied to the facts of this specific case.

v.
Claims
A.

Count 1: Declaratory Relief For Violations Of Section 2 of The Voting Rights Act
53.

Defendants incorporate their answers to the allegations in paragraphs 1-52 of the

Complaint as if fully set forth herein.
54.

The allegations in paragraph 54 state legal conclusions, which do not require an

admission or denial. To the extent required, Defendants deny the legal conclusions alleged in
paragraph 54 of the Complaint as applied to the facts of this specific case.
55.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 55 of the Complaint.

56.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 56 of the Complaint.

57.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 57 of the Complaint.

58.

Defendants admit that Plaintiff seeks the relief stated in paragraph 58 of the

Complaint, but deny that Plaintiff is entitled to the relief sought.

B.

Count 2: Violation of The Fourteenth And Fifteenth Amendments of The Constitution
59.

Defendants incorporate their answers to the allegations in paragraphs 1-58 of the

Complaint as if fully set forth herein.
60.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 60 of the Complaint.

DEFENDANT'S ORIGINAL ANSWER 2732833

11

 Case 4:19-cv-00284-ALM Document 17 Filed 05/08/19 Page 12 of 13 PageID #: 75

61.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 61 of the Complaint.

62.

Defendants admit that Plaintiff seeks the relief stated in paragraph 62 of the

Complaint, but deny that Plaintiff is entitled to the relief sought.

C.

Count 3: Injunctive Relief For Violations of The Voting Rights Act And Fourteenth
And Fifteenth Amendments of The Constitution
63.

Defendants incorporate their answers to the allegations in paragraphs 1-62 of the

Complaint as if fully set forth herein.
64.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 64 of the Complaint.

65.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 65 of the Complaint.

66.

Defendants admit that Plaintiff seeks the relief stated in paragraph 66 of the

Complaint, but deny that Plaintiff is entitled to the relief sought.

D.

Count 4: Request For Attorneys' Fees
67.

Defendants incorporate their answers to the allegations in paragraphs 1-66 of the

Complaint as if fully set forth herein.
68.

Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 68 of the Complaint.

69.

Defendants admit that Plaintiff seeks the relief stated in paragraph 69 of the

Complaint, but deny that Plaintiff is entitled to the relief sought.
VI.

Request for Relief
70.

For these reasons, Defendants ask the Court to enter judgment that Plaintiff take

nothing, dismiss Plaintiff's suit with prejudice, assess costs against Plaintiff, and award Defendants
all other legal and/or equitable relief the Court deems appropriate.

DEFENDANT'S ORIGINAL ANSWER 2732833

12

 Case 4:19-cv-00284-ALM Document 17 Filed 05/08/19 Page 13 of 13 PageID #: 76

Respectfully submitted,

ABERNATHY, ROEDER, BOYD & HULLETT,

P.C.
Is/Charles J. Crawford
CHARLES J. CRAWFORD
State Bar No. 05018900

CHAD TIMMONS
State Bar No. 24060732
LUCAS C. HENRY
State Bar No. 24101901
1700 Redbud Blvd, Suite 300
McKinney, Texas 75069-1210
Telephone: 214/544-4000
Telecopier: 214/544-4040
ccrawford@abemathy-law.com
ctimmons@abernathy-law.com
lhenry@abemathy-law.com
ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that on May 8, 2019 a true and correct copy of Defendants' Original Answer was
served upon Plaintiffs attorney, by the Court's electronic service system.
Is/Charles J. Crawford
Charles J. Crawford

DEFENDANT'S ORIGINAL ANSWER 2732833

13