League of Women Voters of Moore County Fair Representation/Redistricting Committee Report, Findings and Recommendations LWVNC State Convention May 21,

1

League of Women Voters of Moore CountyFair Representation/Redistricting Committee

Report, Findings and Recommendations

LWVNC State Convention May 21, 2011

2

SCOPE OF STUDY

The study focused on determining if there is a current need to redistrict the five Board of County Commissioners/Board of Education residency voting districts in Moore County, and if it is so determined, to make appropriate recommendations for change.

3

Reasons for Instituting the Study• Leagues work for equitable apportionment

and redistricting of all elected governmental bodies, using every technique from public education and testimony to monitoring and litigation.

• Behind the League position on apportionment is a conviction that a population standard is the most equitable way of assuring that

4

Reasons for Study (Continued)

each vote is of equal value in a democratic and representative system of Government. (LWVUS Where We Stand, promoting Democracy in America.)

• Voting is one of our most cherished rights and responsibilities. Redistricting gives meaning to the right to vote by creating plans that afford all voters an equal opportunity to take meaningful part in this process.

5

Reasons for Study (Continued)

• Enabling legislation required districts to be established in counties for local elections in 1965, and five residency districts were established in Moore County. (Residency District means a district in which the candidates reside and represent the district, but the candidates are voted on in the primaries and general elections by the qualified voters of the entire county. It includes districts established either by local act or under G.S. §153A-58 (3) d. (§153A-22.1 (a)). Redistricting in Moore County was not done until 1995, at which time it was determined that the populations of the districts were substantially unequal. That same reason exists today – the populations of the districts are substantially unequal.

6

Reasons for Study (Continued)

• There is a question of fairness with respect to the inequity of some of the residency voting district populations that currently differ substantially. Opportunities for candidates would be more equitable in districts with more equal populations.

• In order to assure accurate oversight and administration of the county’s legal responsibilities with respect to voting districts, clearly identifiable accurate coordinates for each of the five districts need to be established.

7

Reasons for Study (Continued)

• The North Carolina and United States Supreme Courts have said with respect to representative voting districts that plus or minus five percent from the ideal district population legally comports with one person one vote. Currently, three of the five districts vary from the ideal district population by more than five percent, and two by more than 30 percent.

8

Reasons for Study (Continued)

• Although there is a Legislative requirement for counties with representative districts to redistrict after the Census every 10 years, there is no similar requirement for counties with residency districts to redistrict, regardless of voting district population inequalities. Therefore, redistricting for residency districts is currently left to political whim.

9

Types of Voting Districts

• There are three basic types of voting districts, in North Carolina:– At Large: Candidates may reside anywhere, and voters

from all districts vote for all candidates. – Representative: Candidates must reside in their

district, and voters vote only for candidates from their district.

– Residency: Candidates must reside in a district, but voters vote for all candidates.

Note: Districts in North Carolina are comprised of one or some combination of those types of voting districts.

10

Historical Background

Five residency voting districts were established by Legislative authority in Moore County in 1965 by G.S. §153A-58. The residency voting districts applied to Board of County Commissioner elections. These districts were subsequently adopted for Board of Education elections as well. In addition to residency candidates, the Board of Education has three at-large candidates.

11

Notes of Interest

• District populations are determined based on gross populations provided by Census data and not on voting populations.

• (G.S. §153A-58-22.1(b)) Legislation controls the voting districts in Moore County. G.S. Chapter 215, Senate Bill 717, was ratified in the 1995 Session. Teena Little was the State Senator representing Moore County at that time and was the driving force for the legislation.

12

Note: Adoption of Current District Lines

• In 1995, the Board of County Commissioners adopted a resolution in the form of a legal description of the boundary description and an accompanying 8.5 X 11 paper map with those boundaries sketched onto the paper map. Staff took that non-digital information and created a digital GIS layer that represents, to the best of their ability, a digital version of the boundary description. It should be noted that when this GIS layer was created based on that legal description, discrepancies were identified. Staff worked to the best of their ability to ensure the accuracy of the information; however, it is not free of discrepancies.” (Communication from Moore County Planning and Community Development Director, Andrea Surratt, May 2, 2007.)

13

Notes

• Coordinates with reference to mathematics maps are each of a set of numbers that together describe the exact position of something such as a place on a map with reference to a set of axes.

• Ideal district population means the total population divided by the number of voting districts.

• GIS (Geographic Information System) is a collection of computer hardware, software, and geographic data for capturing, managing, analyzing, and displaying all forms of geographically referenced information.

14

Other Residency Voting District Counties Surveyed

In 2007 Members of the committee surveyed other counties with residency voting districts to see if they had undergone redistricting, and if they had, to ask what their experience had been. Of the counties contacted, only one other district had gone through a redistricting process within the past 10-12 years, and they had experienced population growth similar to Moore County. A few others reported that they were looking into it, but the majority had

15

Other Residency Voting District Counties Surveyed (Continued)

• not made any changes since the voting districts were originally established. It should be noted, however, that in some cases, there was no historical knowledge by the current administration as to whether their county had undergone redistricting. In other words, if it didn’t happen on their watch, and they simply didn’t know. In other cases, voting district population variations from ideal populations had not changed substantially.

16

Minority Concerns• Committee members met with attorney Anita

Earls, Director of Advocacy, UNC Center for Civil Rights to discuss this project, and more specifically to address minority population concerns in the redistricting process. She told committee members about a 1989 lawsuit filed on behalf of a number of clients against the Town of Southern Pines and the Board of Education in Moore County. The clients were trying, under The Voting Rights Act to require that single voting districts be established instead of voting “at large.”

17

Minority Concerns (Continued)

• The case was not heard until 1994, at which time it was dismissed. It was found that neither the town, nor the Board of Education was in conflict with The Voting Rights Act because after the 1990 Census, it was determined that it was not possible to draw any of the five districts in a way that a minority candidate could be elected. Because you couldn’t draw one out of five, it couldn’t be required.

18

NC Legislative Office Assistance

• Committee members discussed at length legal ramifications and approaches to redistricting with the legal staff at the North Carolina Legislative Office in Raleigh.

• Committee members also discussed the project at length with members of the North Carolina Legislative GIS Office staff there prior to spending the day with them working on a sample model for proposed new districts. Their expertise and assistance were invaluable to this project, and they assisted League committee members in producing sample computer generated maps. Whereas in 2007, this GIS capability was not available to the public in Moore County, it now is and can be done locally.

19

Moore County Board of Elections• Committee members met with the local Glenda Director of

the Moore County Board of Elections, Glenda Clendenin. Director Clendenin was very helpful in providing background and historical information about redistricting in Moore County and also offered valuable advice for our project. Director Clendenin said, “The Board of Elections has to use what was adopted by the Board of Commissioners.” At the time the districts were developed, the Commissioners had the option to adopt a map or coordinates, and they opted to adopt a visual map. Currently, there are no official coordinates, which, according to Director Clendenin, can make administration of election law very difficult at times.

20

District Criteria• At the time the voting districts were first established

in 1965, they were required to meet certain criteria, and these criteria apply today:

•

– One person, one vote– Conformation to requirements of the Voting Rights Act of

1965 and other state and federal precepts– Considerations of

• Compactness• Contiguity: districts must be contiguous• Division of counties must be minimized. Respect for

political subdivisions or communities of interest is to be maintained.

21

Applicability of Enabling Legislation(Pertinent Provisions of

G.S. §153A-58-22.1)

• Redefining residency district boundaries. (b) If a county is divided into residency districts, the

board of commissioners may find as fact whether there is substantial inequality of population among the districts. If the board finds that there is substantial inequality of population among the districts, it may by resolution redefine the residency districts to make them more nearly equal. The test for compliance with this section is a reduction in the relative overall range of deviation

22

To Effect Change:

According to this legislation, in order to effect change, the following actions would be necessary:

• First, the Board of County Commissioners would have to

determine that there is substantial inequality of population among the five voting districts, and if they so determine;

• The Board of County Commissioners would then have to

pass a resolution to redefine the voting districts to make them more equal.

23

Historical View of Moore County Voting District Populations Census Years 1990-2010

24

District Ideal Population

Actual Population

Difference % Difference

I 11,806 9,105 -2,701 -22.87

II 11,806 15,427 3,621 30.67

III 11,806 7,942 -3864 -32.73

IV 11,806 13,655 1,849 15.66

V 11,806 12,884 1,078 9.13

MC Voting District Populations ~ Based on 1990 Census Total Population = 59,031

25

MC Voting District Populations ~ Based on 2000 Census – Total Population = 74,770

District Ideal Population

Actual Population

Difference % Difference

I 14,954 12,949 -2,005 -13.41

II 14,954 19,437 4,483 29.98

III 14,954 12,226 -2,728 -18.24

IV 14,954 16,397 1,443 9.65

V 14,954 13,760 -1,194 -7.98

26

MC Voting District Populations Based on 2010 Census Total Population = 88,247

District Ideal Population

Actual Population

Difference % Difference

I 17,649 17,858 +209 1.18II 17,649 24,283 6,634 37.58

III 17,649 11,978 -5,671 -32

IV 17,649 17,621 -28 .01

V 17,649 16,507 1,142 -6.48

27

Findings and RecommendationsGiven the consistent deviation in a number of voting districts from

the ideal district populations since 1995, and currently and most notably in Voting Districts II and III, as well as other considerations including the lack of official voting district coordinates, the League of Women Voters of Moore County respectfully requests the Moore County Board of County Commissioners to:

1. Find as fact that there is a substantial inequality of population among the

Districts. 2. Adopt a resolution to redefine the residency districts in accord

with established criteria to make them more equal, with the requirement that there be a reduction in the relative overall range of deviation of no more than 5% from the ideal district population.

28

Findings and Recommendations (Continued)

3. Consult with the Board of Elections in establishing new voting district lines and clearly define the voting district lines from coordinates that can be accurately identified on a digital GIS map.

4. Establish a process by which redistricting would be done on a consistent basis, either after every Census or at such time as the deviation of one or more of the voting district populations exceeds 10 percent from the ideal district population.

29

Sample ResolutionWHEREAS, voting is one of our most cherished rights and

responsibilities; and WHEREAS, redistricting gives meaning to the right to vote by

creating plans that afford all voters an equal opportunity to take meaningful part in this process; and

WHEREAS, according to GS 153a-22-1:(b) If a county is divided into residency districts, the board of commissioners may find as fact whether there is substantial inequality of population among the districts. If the board finds that there is substantial inequality of populations among the districts, they may be resolution redefine the residency districts to make them more equal; and

30

Sample Resolution (Continued)WHEREAS, the ideal voting district population equals

the total district populations divided by the number of districts; and

WHEREAS, based on the 2010 Census the ideal voting district population is 17,649; and

WHEREAS, based on the 2010 Census information, there exists a substantial inequality of voting district populations, most notably between District II and District III; and

31

WHEREAS, there is a question of fairness with respect to the inequality of voting district populations that currently differ substantially in that opportunities for candidates would be more equitable in districts with more equal populations; and

WHEREAS, the current voting districts were established by the Moore County Board of Commissioners in 1995 when the Commissioners adopted a resolution in the form of a legal description of the boundary description and an accompanying map with those boundaries sketched onto the paper may, but no legal coordinates were established at that time, and

32

Sample Resolution (Continued)WHEREAS, the enforcement and administration of election law

depends on the ability to accurately determine the voting district lines, which is difficult without clearly defined legal coordinates;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Moore County Administrative Offices shall consult with the Moore County Board of Elections in establishing the new voting district lines to be drawn from clearly defined coordinates that can be accurately identified on a digital GIS map.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED on this __________ day of ___________, 2011, The Moore County Board of Commissioners hereby finds as fact that a substantial inequality of voting district populations currently exists; and

33

Sample Resolution (Continued)BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that pursuant to GS 153A-22.1(b), new

voting districts be established that would be more equal in population than the current voting districts, with the requirement that there be a reduction in the relative overall range of deviation so that no more than 5% deviation from the ideal voting district population exists; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the new voting district lines shall be established no later than April 30, 2012; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that redistricting of the residency districts shall be done after every Census or at such time as the voting district populations vary from the ideal voting district population by more than 10 %; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution shall become effective immediately.

34

Summary of Process

1. Check to see what your League has done in the past with respect to redistricting. Would they be willing to take on redistricting as a study?

2. Contact your County Attorney to see if there are any current plans to redistrict.

3. Do your homework! – Identify your enabling legislation to find out what is

required to affect change in your county;– Identify minority concerns and how those concerns apply

in your county;– See what other counties with similar districts have done

and are doing with respect to redistricting;

35

Summary of Process (continued)

– Research:• the legal ramifications of redistricting; (enabling

legislation, NC Board of Elections, NC legislative attorneys)• the history of redistricting in your county; (Local Board of

Elections, news articles)• what stumbling blocks you may encounter – for example,

a possible stumbling block for Moore County would be that the most logical solution for redrawing the district lines would result in two current commissioners residing in the same district

• Willingness of responsible parties to redistrict• Support of local news media (can be very helpful in• Meet with local GIS office with respect to producing maps

36

Summary of Process (continued)

4. After your committee has completed its research and prepared its report with findings and recommendations, you will need to gain your League’s support in order to take further action. Following our committee’s report to our local League, the members reached unanimous consensus to support presenting our findings and recommendations to the Moore County Board of County Commissioners.

5. The committee presented its original findings and recommendations via PowerPoint presentation to the Moore County Board of Commissioners in February 2008. At that time the commissioners decided to postpone taking action until after the 2010 Census was completed and more accurate voting district population information could be obtained.

37

Questions?

38

DISTRICTS BY PRECINCT BASED ON 2010 CENSUS INFORMATION

Note: Ideal Voting District Population = 17,649

39

District 1 District II District III District IV District V

Carthage 7093 Pinehurst A 5597 Robbins 2923 Eastwood 2137East Aberdeen 3398

PinehurstB-1 3056 West Moore 2982 Eureka 4164

West Aberdeen 5447

Cameron 3877Pinehurst B-2 2539 Bensalem 3319

North Southern Pines 3081 Pine Bluff 3486

Little River 3760 Pinehurst C 4426Deep River/High Falls 2754

South Southern Pines 4347 Pinedene 4176

Vass 3128 Taylortown 808 Knollwood 3892

West End 3016

Seven Lakes 4841

Total Population 17858

Total Population 24283

Total Population 11978

Total Population 17621

Total Population 16507

40

Current Moore County Voting Districts

• District I: Carthage -7093; Cameron - 3877; Little River – 3760; Vass 3128; Total Population 17858

• District II: Pinehurst A 5597; Pinehurst B-1 3056; Pinehurst B-2 2539; Pinehurst C 4426; Taylortown 808; West End 3016; Seven Lakes 4841; Total Population 24283

• District III:Robbins 2923 West Moore 2982 Bensalem 3319 Deep River/High Falls 2754 Total Population 11978

• District IV: Eastwood 2137; Eureka 4164; North Southern Pines 3081; South Southern Pines 4347; Knollwood 3892; Total Population 17621

• District V: East Aberdeen 3398; West Aberdeen 5447; Pine Bluff 3486; Pinedene 4176; Total Population 16507

41

Summary of Process (continued)

3. Our league is currently in the process of regrouping and has requested permission to present updated findings and recommendations to the current Board of Commissioners.

4. Other steps anticipated if the recommendations are not favorably acted upon by the Board of Commissioners include preparation of educational handouts to be given out at League presentations to civic organizations; articles and letters to the editor in local media and an educational campaign to encourage grassroots support of redistricting.

It should be noted that good press coverage is extremely helpful in gaining public support. Our League has been very fortunate to have received favorable coverage from our local news media, and this has been invaluable in getting redistricting information to the public.

42

Summary of Process (continued)

STILL TO BE DONE: We are currently working with the following schedule:

• March – June 2011: Review and update research and reports from 2007. (completed)

• July 2011: Meet with Director of Moore County Board of Elections to get her views on best ways to redistrict.

• August: Meet with Moore County Board of Commissioners and present findings and recommendations.

• Prepare brochures and advertising materials for local media to gain grassroots support. Present report, findings and recommendations to as many civic organizations as possible.

• November 2011—March 31, 2012: If new voting districts are not approved by the County Commissioners, continue efforts to have district lines changed so that voting district populations do not vary from the ideal population by more than five percent.