A poor and disconcerting judicial decision on local legislative immunity came
down on May 24 from the U.S. District Court for the District of
Kansas,
Kickapoo
Tribe v. Black.
The tribe made the argument in
its
brief that a watershed district board's members should not be
able to raise a defense of legislative immunity when (1) two of them
owned property in the project area under consideration by the board,
and (2) board members participated in activities that made them
appear to be seriously biased, including, with the aid of the Kansas
Farm Bureau, lobbying trips to Washington, D.C., and letter writing
campaigns to (a) convince local municipal and county governments to
oppose the project, and (b) to sway public opinion against the
project.