Correspondence from Carraway to Stein and Delinger Re: Cromartie Exhibits

Correspondence
October 12, 2000

Correspondence from Carraway to Stein and Delinger Re: Cromartie Exhibits preview

307 pages

Correspondence from Carraway to Stein and Delinger Re: Cromartie Exhibits with Enclosed Transcript Excerpts, Proposed Discovery Plan, Final Pretrial Order

Cite this item

  • Case Files, Cromartie Hardbacks. Correspondence from Carraway to Stein and Delinger Re: Cromartie Exhibits, 2000. 5259a917-d90e-f011-9989-0022482c18b0. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/56c03419-5404-4213-b4fc-4dfef5587641/correspondence-from-carraway-to-stein-and-delinger-re-cromartie-exhibits. Accessed July 13, 2025.

    Copied!

    State of North Carolina 
MICHAEL F. EASLEY Department of Justice REPLY TO: Fran Caraway, CLAS 

Special Litigation 
ATTORNEY GENERAL P.O. BOX 629 (919) 716-6900 

RALEIGH FAX: (919) 716-6903 

27602-0629 

MEMORANDUM 

TO: Adam Stein 

Walter Dellinger FERGUSON STEIN, | WALLAS, =! 

  

PR nam ssp 2a Bak 

FROM: Fran Carraway, CLAS 
Law Office Administrato \ OCT | 3 2000 

  fia ts 
DATE: October 12, 2000 | GRESHAM & SUMTER, Pi 

    
  

SUBJECT: Cromartie Exhibits, etc. 

Enclosed please find “a bunch of stuff’. There are copies of trial transcript pages, 

deposition transcript pages, exhibits, the Proposed Discovery Plan as filed, and the Final 

Pretrial Order as filed. All of these and more were referenced in Everett's brief, but these 

items weren't included in any appendix filed with the Court to date. We thought you might 

want them handy when reading the brief. 

There are 3 exhibits not included in the package, two of which we will be sending as soon 
as we have them. Those are exhibits 109 and 237. You will remember that 109 is Exhibit P 

from McGee's affidavit, the map of Mecklenburg County that has been used repeatedly. 

Exhibit 237 is a Map of Davidson County with Black Voting Age Population and Precinct 

Names. The third exhibit, number 31, which we do not plan to send, is the spreadsheet that 

was produced at the deposition of Linwood Jones. It is 2 oversized sheets, showing 

election and registration data for District 2. We do not feel the content itself is relevant since 

it does not pertain to District 12 and similar data was not generated for D-12 or any other 

district according to Linwood'’s testimony. 

Tiare requested that | include enough of the trial and deposition transcripts to give you the 

context in which a statementwas made. Primarily in Peterson’s deposition that meant that 

we copied a “chunk” instead of discreet pages as cited in the brief. Most other segments 
are restricted to a page or two before and/or after the reference. She also requested that 

| include the excerpt from the trial transcript that quoted McGee using, in his closing 

argument, the 1998 Plan as an example of a more compact Democratic voting district. That 

is at the back of the trial transcript pages. 
  

If you have any questions or need any additional material, please do not hesitate to call us 

at 919-716-6900.  



  

  

  

  

  

PRI 
ASSOCIATES 

Discovery 
Printed 09/01/99 10:28:52 

N:\ CLIENTS \N C_REDISTRICT \ 
PROGRAMS \ BASCORR 
02/24/98 01:01:08 PM       

Rte sn E/ 2) 

 



    

  

  

25 

26 

27 

28 

23 

30 

31 

32 

36 
37   mamma— 

1 
The SAS System 

NOTE: Copyright (c) 1989-1996 by SAS Instit nc., Cary, NC, USA. NOTE: SAS (r) Proprietary Software Release 6.12 TS020 
Licensed to PRI ASSOCIATES, INC., Site 0001701002. 

Nora 

RR Na RN 
NNN ARERR RRR ett SUNREAN 

  

RRS 
  

ieee TT TL TTT TTT TT TOS 

** PURPOSE: USE BORDER DATA AND MERGE WITH ORGINAL DATA TO GET COUNTS** 
** INSIDE AND OUTSIDE DISTRICT 12. COMPUTE PERCENTAGES AND PRINT ed 
** FREQS ON THESE. THIS STUDY WILL BE DONE FOR THREE BASE i 

POPULATIONS: TOTAL POPULATION, VOTING AGE POPULATION, REGISTERED *= 
BR cael et Bl SE ERR YE EE PRR i i pe Se Ee 

“* PROGRAMMER: MOR DATE ORIGINALLY WRITTEN: 02/18/98 ~ -w 

* * 

** REVISIONS (BY/DATE): "e dh MOR / 2-20-98 CHANGED BORDER DATA MERGE TO GET TOTALS VIA*+ “- NEW IN AND OUT PRECINCT VARIABLES, ADDED FLAG ALL ne *e ORTHOGONAL RACE AND PARTY MEASURES. oh RR ww vin mm Sik gw me wma we ns Ssssssssnasisssenneowssecesmeeaese. 2 

** INPUT FILES : FNAME FTYPE ~ TYPE CREATED BY ae "= BORDERS  SD2 SAS ~~ BORDRFI2.SAS an *e PRECINCT SD2 SAS ~~ PRECINCT1.SAS "e Shasta 
uk bens Lr EM ee GAT HEE TS TO L2 

** OUTPUT FILES : FNAME FTYPE TYPE CREATED BY ne 

8 

        

rita oddadobudulnfodobod death shod ddd de ddd LE 

**---PROGRAM OPTIONS, PRINT DATA INFORMATION; 
options mprint sasautos=‘n:\apps\sasutils\sasautos’ errors=1; 

libname nc ‘n:\clients\nc_redistrict\data’; 
NOTE: Libref NC was successfully assigned as follows: 

Engine: V612 
Physical Name: n:\clients\nc_redistrict\data 

title °*NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING"; 

%datinfo(data=NC.BORDERS,0bs=25) 
MPRINT (DATINFO) : PROC CONTENTS DATA=NC .BORDERS; 
MPRINT (DATINFO): TITLE2 "CONTENTS OF DATA SET NC.BORDERS*; _ iT(DATINFO): RUN; 

77 The PROCEDURE CONTENTS used 0.14 seconds. 

NOTE: The PROCEDURE CONTENTS printed page 1. 

MPRINT (DATINFO): PROC PRINT DATA=NC.BORDERS (0BS=25): 
MPRINT (DATINFO) : TITLE2 "25 OBS FROM DATA SET NC .BORDERS *; 
MPRINT (DATINFO) : RUN; 1 

NOTE: The PROCEDURE PRINT printed page 2. 
NOTE: The PROCEDURE PRINT used 0.02 seconds. 

%datinfo(data=NC.PRECINCT,obs=24) 
MPRINT (DATINFO): PROC CONTENTS DATA=NC.PRECINCT; 
MPRINT (DATINFO): TITLE2 °CONTENTS OF DATA SET NC.PRECINCT®; 
MPRINT (DATINFO): RUN; 

NOTE: The PROCEDURE CONTENTS used 0.07 seconds. 

NOTE: The PROCEDURE CONTENTS printed pages 3-4. 

MPRINT (DATINFQ): PROC PRINT DATA=NC.PRECINCT (0BS=24); 
MPRINT (DATINFO): TITLE2 °24 0BS FROM DATA SET NC.PRECINCT"; 
UPRINT (DATINFO) : RUN; 

NOTE: The PROCEDURE PRINT printed pages 5-6. 
NOTE: The PROCEDURE PRINT used 0.19 seconds. 

**...BEGIN PROGRAM OUTLINE 
!. MERGE SEGMENT DATA WITH INSIDE AND OUTSIDE PRECINCT DATA - KEEP 2. SET UP DATA SET WITH ALL PERCENTAGES AND FLAGS NEEDED FOR PRINTS A. PRINT ANY PROBLEM RECORDS (MISSING COUNTS, ETC) 
3. PRINT FREQS ON FLAGS FOR EACH GROUP OF COMPARISONS 

A. POPULATION, MINORITY COMPARISONS 
B. VOTING AGE, MINORITY COMPARISONS 

POPULATION COUNTS 

  Printed 09/01.99 10:28:52 Discovery 

  

   



  
  

38 C. REGISTERED, MINORITY COMPARISONS 
39 D. COA 1988, DEMOCRAT COMPARISONS 
40 E. LTG 1988, DEMOCRAT COMPARISONS 
Si F. SENATE 1990, DEMOCRAT COMPARISONS 

G. ALL ELECTIONS, DEMOCRAT COMPARISONS 
*---END PROGRAM OUTLINE; 

Qe 

45 WH ymin wna ow wimnin mms ides iin iain Siew vin nn nnn oie aes es ae a dl oie 

46 we 1. MERGE SEGMENT DATA WITH INSIDE AND OUTSIDE PRECINCT DATA - KEEP POPULATION COUNTS; 47 proc sql; 
48 create table pair as 
49 select b1.segment, 
50 b1.vtdkey, 
S1 bi.oprecnct, 
52 bi.iprecnct, 
53 p1.totpop as itotpop, 
54 p1.totwht as itotwht, 
55 p1.totblk as itotblk, -._ 
56 p1.whtvot as iwhtvot, 
57 p1.blkvot as iblkvot, 
58 p1.asivot as iasivot, 
59 p1.amivot as iamivot, 
60 p1.othvot as iothvot, 
61 : p1.regvot as iregvot, 
62 p1.regwht as iregwht, 
63 p1.regblk as iregblk, 
64 pil.regoth as iregoth, 
65 p1.coadem88 as icdem8s, 
66 p1.1ltgdem88 as ildem8s, 
67 pl.sendem90 as isdem90, 
68 p1.coarep88 as icrep8s, 
69 p1.ltgrep88 as ilrep8s, 
70 p1.senrep90 as isrep9o0, 
71 pl.democrat as idea, 
72 pl.republic as irep, 
73 p2.totpop as ototpop, 
74 p2.totwht as ototwht, 
Chi p2.totblk as ototblk, 

: p2.whtvot as owhtvot, 
p2.blkvot as oblkvot, 

bri p2.asivot as oasivot, 
79 pP2.amivot as oamivot, 
80 p2.othvot as oothvot, 
81 p2.regvot as oregvot, 
82 p2.regwht as oregwht, 
83 p2.regblk as oregblk, 
84 p2.regoth as oregoth, 

i 85 : p2.coadem88 as ocdem8s, 
86 p2.ltgdem88 as oldem88, 

i 87 P2.sendem90 as osdeam90, 
88 p2.coarep88 as ocrep8s, 
89 p2.ltgrep88 as olrepss, 
90 p2.senrep90 as osrep90, 
91 p2.democrat as odes, 
92 p2.republic as orep r= 
93 from nc.borders bil left join nc.precinct pi 
04 on bi.iprecnct=p1.precinct 95 left join nc.precinct p2 
96 on bi.oprecnct=p2.precinct 
97 order by segment; 
NOTE: Table WORK.PAIR created, with 234 rows and 44 columns. 

98 

99 “check data after sql merge; 

  

The SAS System 

NOTE: The PROCEDURE SQL used 1.73 seconds. 

100 data probs; set pair; by segment; 
101 if not (first.segment and last. segment) then output; 
102 

TT. The data set WORK.PROBS has 0 observations and 44 variables. 
The DATA statement used 0.27 seconds. 

| 103 proc print; 
104 title2 “LIST OF ALL DUPLICATES BY SEGMENT“ ; 

© 108 run; 

12:00 Tuesday, February 24, 

    
1998 

  Printed 09/01/99 10:28:52 Discovery 

 



3 NONE NPS Shs a RL SHEOTRANIIR RAR 
ate 8) 3 HEN 3 3 ES 

NN cv 
  

The SAS System 12:00 OO Tueuney February 24, 1998 

NOTE: No observations in data set WORK. PROBS. 
NOTE: The PROCEDURE PRINT used 0.14 seconds.   

SET UP DATA SET WITH ALL PERCENTAGES AND FLAGS NEEDED FOR PRINTS; 
data final; set pair; 

format iblkpct ivblkpct irblkpct iminpct ivainpct irminpct ipdemltg ipdemcoa ipdemsen 
ipctdea oblkpct ovblkpct orblkpct ominpct ovminpct orminpct opdemltg opdemcoa opdemsen 
opctdem 5.2; 

itotvot = ee nt] 

if itotpop > 0 then iblkpct = itotblk/itotpop; 
if itotvot > 0 then ivblkpct = iblkvot/itotvot; 
if iregvot > 0 then irblkpct = iregblk/iregvot; 

itotmin = itotpop-itotwht; 
if itotpop > 0 then iminpct = itotmin/itotpop; 
iminvot = itotvot-iwhtvot; 
if itotvot > 0 then ivminpct iminvot/itotvot; 
iminreg = iregvot-iregwht; 
if iregvot > 0 then irainpct = iminreg/iregvot; 

if (idem+irep) > 0 then ipctdem = idea/(idem+irep); 

11tg88 = ildem88+ilrepss; 

icoa88 = icdem88+icrepss; 

isen90 = isdem90+isrep90; 
if iltg88 > 0 then ipdealtg = ildem88/iltgss; 
if icoas8 > 0 then ipdeacoa icdem88/icoasgs; 
if isen90 > 0 then ipdeasen isdem90/iseng0; 

"calculations for precincts outside border of district 12; 
ototvot = owhtvot+oblkvot+oazivot+oasivot+oothvot; “total number of voters out of border; 

if ototpop > 0 then oblkpct = ototblk/ototpop; 
if ototvot > 0 then ovblkpct = oblkvot/ototvot; 
if oregvot > 0 then orblkpct = oregblk/oregvot; 

ototamin = ototpop-ototwht; 
if ototpop > 0 then ominpct = ototmin/ototpap; 
ominvot = ototvot-owhtvot; 
if ototvot > 0 then ovainpct ominvot/ototvot; 
ominreg = oregvot-oregwht; 
if oregvot > 0 then orainpct = ominreg/oregvot; 

if (odem+orep) > 0 then opctdem = odea/ (odea+orep); 

oltgss = oldem88+0lrep8s; 

0coa88 = ocdem88+ocreps8s; 

0sen90 = osdemS90+osrep90; 

if oltg88 > 0 then opdemltg = olusnsnselions: 
if ocoa88 > 0 then opdemcoa = ocdem88/0coa8s; 
if osenS0 > 0 then opdemsen = osdem90/0seng0; 

“now create comparison flags (gradient is coded toward inside district 12); 
*---black comp flags; 

“population; 

if iblkpct ne . and oblkpct ne . then do; 
gtblkpop = (iblkpct>oblkpct); 

1tblkpop'= (iblkpct<oblkpct); 

eqblkpop = (iblkpct=oblkpct); 
end; 

“voting age population; 
if ivblkpct ne . and ovblkpct ne . then do; 

gtblkvot = (ivblkpct>ovblkpct); 
1tblkvot = (ivblkpct<ovblkpct); 
eqblkvot = (ivblkpct=ovblkpct); 

end; 

“registered; 
ih if irblkpct ne . and orblkpct ne . then do; 
176 gtblkreg = (irblkpct>orblkpct); 
177 1tblkreg = (irblkpct<orblkpct): 
178 eqblkreg = (irblkpct=orblkpct);   
  Printed 09/01/99 10:28:52 Discovery  



  

12:00 Tuesday, February 24, 1998 

*---minority comp flags; 

*population; 

if iminpct ne . 

gtminpop 

ltminpop 

eqminpop 
end; 

*voting age population; 
if ivminpct ne . and ovminpct ne . then 

gtminvot = (ivainpct>ovainpct); 
ltminvot = (ivainpct<ovainpct); 
eqminvot = (ivainpct=ovaminpct); 

end; 

*registered; 

if irminpct ne . and orminpct ne . then 
gtminreg = (irminpct>orminpet); 
ltminreg = (irminpct<orminpct); 
eqminreg = (irminpct=orminpct); 

end; 

and ominpct ne . then do; 
(iminpct>ominpct); 
(iminpct<ominpct); 
(iminpct=ominpct); 

®---democrat comp flags; 

"COA 1988 Election; 
if ipdemcoa ne . and opdemcoa ne . then 

gtdemcoa = (ipdescoa>opdeacoa); 
ltdemcoa = (ipdemcoa<opdescoa); 
eqdemcoa = (ipdemcoa=opdenmcoa); 

end; 

"LTG 1988 Election; 
if ipdemltg ne . and opdemltg ne . then 

gtdemltg = (ipdealtg>opdenltg); 
ltdemltg = (ipdealtg<opdealtg); 
eqdemltg = (ipdealtg=opdealtg); 

  
end; 

“SEN 1990 Election; 

if ipdemsen ne . and opdemsen ne . then 
gtdemsen = (ipdeasen>opdeasen); 
ltdeasen = (ipdeasen<opdeasen); 
eqdemsen = (ipdeasen=opdeasen); 

end; 

"Registered Voters; 
if ipctdem ne . and opctdem ne . then do: 

gtdemreg = (ipctdea>opctden); 

ltdenmreg = (ipctdem<opctdea); 

eqdemreg = (ipctdem=opctdea); 
end; 

*All democratic - when every measure of democratic points inside; 
1f gtdemcoa ne - and gtdemltg ne . and gtdeasen ne . and gtdemreg ne . and 

gtblkpop ne 

demntblk 

blkntdea 

. and gtblkvot ne . and gtblkreg ne 
((gtdemcoa and gtdeamltg and gtdemsen and gtdemreg) and 

. then do; 

(not gtblkpop and not gtblkvot and not gtblkreg)); 
((not gtdemcoa and not gtdealtg and not gtdemsen and not gtdemreg) and (gtblkpop and gtblkvot and gtblkreg)); 

end; 
”Z 

array check _NUMERIC_; 

do over check; 

prflag= (check=.); 
end; 

run; 

The data set WORK.FINAL has 234 observations and 111 variables. 
The DATA statement used 0.95 seconds. 

proc print data=final (where=(prflag)); 
title2 “LIST OF RECORDS WITH MISSING DATA“; 

The PROCEDURE PRINT printed page 7. 
The PROCEDURE PRINT used 0.45 seconds. 

245 proc print data=final (obs=100) ; 
246 title2 “LIST OF 100 08S FROM FINAL DATA SET - CHECK COMPARISONS®; 

  Printed 09/01/99 10:28:53 Discovery  



247 

eet 

249 

250 

251 

252 

253 

254 

255 

256 

257 

258 

259 

260 

261 

262 

263 

264 

page 
page 
page 
page 
page 
page 
page 
page 
page   

268 

page 

page 

page 

- page 

page 

page 

page 

page 

page 

269 

270 

27 

272 

273 

page 
page 
page 
page 
page 
page 
page 
page 
page 
page 
page 
page   

AN HENES S 
S Gal A ANCERE 

NOTE: The PROCEDURE PRINT printed pages 8-27. 
MATE: The PROCEDURE PRINT used 1.22 seconds. 

A. POPULATION, MINORITY COMPARISONS 
B. VOTING AGE, MINORITY COMPARISONS 
C. REGISTERED, MINORITY COMPARISONS 
D. COA 1988, DEMOCRAT COMPARISONS 
E. LTG 1988, DEMOCRAT COMPARISONS 
F. SENATE 1990, DEMOCRAT COMPARISONS 
G. ALL ELECTIONS, DEMOCRAT COMPARISONS; 

The SAS System 

title2 "FREQS ON FLAGS FOR PERCENT COMPARISONS BETWEEN PRECINCTS ON BORDER OF DISTRICT 32%; 

proc freq; 

tables gtblkpop ltblkpop egblkpop gtblkvot ltblkvot eqblkvot gtblkreg ltblkreg egblkreg; 
title3 °*FREQUENCIES FOR COMPARISONS OF BLACK PERCENTAGES ON BORDER OF DISTRICT 2% 

28 

28 

28 

28 

28 

28 

28 

28 

29 

for 

for 

for 

for 

for 

for 

for 

for 

for 

NOTE: For table location in print Tile, see 
GTBLKPOP 

LTBLKPOP 

EQBLKPOP 

GTBLKVOT 

LTBLKVOT 

EQBLKVOT 

GTBLKREG 

LTBLKREG 

EQBLKREG 
NOTE: The PROCEDURE FREQ printed pages 28-29. 
NOTE: The PROCEDURE FREQ used 0.34 seconds. 

proc freq; 

tables gtainpop ltminpop eqminpop gtainvot ltminvot eqminvot gtminreg ltainreg eqainreg; 
title3 "FREQUENCIES FOR COMPARISONS OF MINORITY PERCENTAGES ON BORDER OF DISTRICT 12°; 

30 

30 

30 

30 

30 

30 

30 

30 

31 

for 

for 

for 

for 

for 

for 

for 

for 

for 

NOTE: For table location in print tile, see 

GTMINPOP 

LTMINPOP 

EQMINPOP 

GTMINVOT 

LTMINVOT 

EQMINVOT 

GTMINREG 

LTMINREG 

EQMINREG 
NOTE: The PROCEDURE FREQ printed pages 30-31. 
NOTE: The PROCEDURE FREQ used 0.16 seconds. 

proc freq; 

tables gtdemltg ltdemltg eqdemltg gtdemcoa ltdemcoa eqdemcoa gtdemsen ltdemsen eqdemsen 

32 

32 

32 

32 

32 

32 

32 

33 

33 

33 

33 
33 

gtdemreg ltdemreg eqdemreg; 
title3 "FREQUENCIES FOR COMPARISONS OF DEMOCRAT PERCENTAGES ON BORDER OF DISTRICT 12%; 

for 

for 

for 

for 

for 

for 

for 

for 

for 

for 

for 

for 

NOTE: For table location in print file, see 
GTDEMLTG 

LTDEMLTG 

EQDEMLTG 

GTDEMCOA 

LTOEMCOA 

EQDEMCOA 

GTDEMSEN 

LTOEMBEN 

EQDEMSEN 

GTDEMREG 

LTOEMREG 
EQDEMREG 

NOTE: The PROCEDURE FREQ printed pages 32-33. 
NOTE: The PROCEDURE FREQ used 0.33 seconds. 

12:00 Tuesday, February 24, 1998 

  Printed 09/01/99 10:28:53 Discovery  



  

    
  

    

   

3 3 EE nS 
id I RE) gay w f INET A Se - See A NR : 

The SAS Systema 

  

    12:00 Tuesday, February 24, 1998 

274 proc freq; 
2" tables demntblk blkntdem; 

title3 "FREQUENCIES ON FLAGS FOR CELLS WHERE ALL PARTY AND RACE VECTORS ARE OPPOSED*; 

NOTE: The PROCEDURE FREQ printed page 34. 
NOTE: The PROCEDURE FREQ used 0.4 seconds. 

278 proc freq; 
279 tables gtblkpop*(gtdemltg gtdemcoa gtdemsen gtdemreg) 
280 gtblkvot*(gtdemltg gtdemcoa gtdemsen gtdemreg) 
281 gtblkreg*(gtdemltg gtdemcoa gtdemsen gtdemreg); 
282 title2 "CROSS TABS ON RACE AND PARTY COMPARISON FLAGS®; 
“83 titled; 
284 

NOTE: For table location in print file, see 
page 35 for GTBLKPOP*GTDEMLTG 
page 35 for GTBLKPOP*GTDEMCOA 
page 36 for GTBLKPOP*GTDEMSEN 
page 36 for GTBLKPOP*GTDEMREG 
page 37 for GTBLKVOT*GTDEMLTG 
page 37 for GTBLKVOT*GTDEMCOA 
page 38 for GTBLKVOT*GTDEMSEN 
page 38 for GTBLKVOT*GTDEMREG 
page 39 for GTBLKREG*GTDEMLTG 
page 39 for GTBLKREG*GTDEMCOA 
page 40 for GTBLKREG*GTDEMSEN 
page 40 for GTBLKREG*GTDEMREG 

NOTE: The PROCEDURE FREQ printed pages 35-40. 
NOTE: The PROCEDURE FREQ used 0.28 seconds. 

  

285 proc print data=final (where = (blkntdes or deantblk)); 
rg title2 “LIST OBS WHERE ALL PARTY AND ALL RACE VECTORS ARE OPPOSED"; 

NOTE: The PROCEDURE PRINT printed pages 41-42. 
NOTE: The PROCEDURE PRINT used 0.34 seconds. 

MOTE: SAS Institute Inc., SAS Campus Orive, Cary, NC USA 27513-2414 

or 

  ’ninted 09-01.99 10:28:53 Discovery 

 



  

  

  

MANS ER NN CX N SN ~ IS BA d \ ANN nN \¢ DE WN SUES SP ae ETA RAEN HRR NN SN NN NCIRES Nan RRR NRW is ALAMLBNANN Sal 2 RN : 

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 12:00 Tuesday, February 24, 1998 1 
CONTENTS OF DATA SET NC.BORDERS 

CONTENTS PROCEDURE 

£575 Data Set Name: NC.BORDERS Observations: 234 
Member Type: DATA Variables: 6 
Engine: V612 Indexes: 0 
Created: 12:00 Tuesday, February 24, 1998 Observation Length: 280 
Last Modified: 12:00 Tuesday, February 24, 1998 Deleted Observations: 0 
Protection: Compressed: NO 
Data Set Type: Sorted: YES 
Label: 

cee-- Engine/Host Dependent Information----- 

Data Set Page Size: 8704 
Nuaber of Data Set Pages: 8 

File Format: 607 

First Data Page: 1 

Max Obs per Page: 31 

Obs in First Data Page: 27 

cee-- Alphabetic List of Variables and Attributes----- 

# Variable Type Len Pos 

2 ANSADPI Char 33 12 

4 BORDR Char 28 53 

5 IPRECNCT Char 200 61 

6 OPRECNCT Char 19 261 

3 SEGMENT Num 8 45 

1 VTDKEY Char 12 0 

cee-- Sort Information----- 

Sortedby: SEGMENT 
Validated: YES 

Character Set: ANSI 

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 12:00 Tuesday, February 24, 1998 2 
25 0BS FROM DATA SET NC.BORDERS . 

08S VTDKEY ANSADPI SEGMENT BORDR IPRECNCT OPRECNCT 

1 377.119.1002 LC2 1 119.1401 12.119.1002 09.119.1401 
2 37.119.0116 Charlotte Pct. 16 = 2 119.1401 112.119.0116 09.119.1401 
3 37.119.0141 Charlotte Pct. 41 = 3 119.1401 112.119.0141 09.119.1401 { 4 37.119.0141 Charlotte Pct. 41 = 4 119.0189 12.119.0141 09.119.0189 
5 377.119.0181 Charlotte Pct. 81 * S 119.0189 12.119.0181 09.119.0189 
6 37.119.0181 Charlotte Pct. 81 = 6 119.0180 12.119.0181 09.119.0180 
7 37.119.0181 Charlotte Pct. 81 = 7 119.0179 112.119.0181 099.119.0179 
8 37.119.0153 Charlotte Pct. 53 = 8 119.0179 112.119.0153 09.119.0179 
9 377.119.0153 Charlotte Pct. 53 + 9 119.0301 112.119.0153 09.119.0301 

10 37.119.0139 Charlotte Pct. 39 * 10 119.0301 112.119.0139 09.119.0301 
11 37.119.0139 Charlotte Pct. 39 * 11 119.1801 12.119.0139 09.119.1801 
12 37.119.0178 Charlotte Pct. 78 * 12 119.1801 112.119.0178 09.119.1801 
13 37.119.0177 Charlotte Pct. 77 * 13 119.1801 112.119.0177 09.119.1801 
14 37.119.0177 Charlotte Pct. 77 * 14 119.0177 112.119.0177 09.119.0177 
15 37.119.0177 Charlotte Pct. 77 * 15 119.1601 112.119.0177 09.119.1601 
16 37.119.0197 Charlotte Pct. 97 + 16 119.1601 112.119.0197 09.119.1601 
17 37.119.0197 Charlotte Pct. 97 + 17 119.0192 112.119.0197 09.119.0192 
18 37.119.0197 Charlotte Pct. 97 + 18 119.0176 112.119.0197 09.119.0176 
19 37.119.0197 Charlotte Pct. 97 * 19 119.0158 12.119.0197 09.119.0158 
20 37.119.0198 Charlotte Pct. 98 * 20 119.0158 12.119.0198 09.119.0158 
21 37.119.0198 Charlotte Pct. 98 * 21 119.0159 112.119.0198 09.119.0159 
22 37.119.0198 Charlotte Pct. 98 * 22 119.0150 12.119.0198 09.119.0150 
23 37.119.0198 Charlotte Pct. 98 * 23 119.0137 112.119.0198 09.119.0137 
24 37.119.0152 Charlotte Pct. 52 + 24 119.0138 12.119.0152 09.119.0138 
25 37.119.0152 Charlotte Pct. 52 * 25 119.0151 12.119.0152 09.119.0151 

  Printed 09/01/99 10:28:53 Discovery  



  

  

AB SARIN NENA S TAR AN 

ING 
CONTENTS OF DATA SET NC.PRECINCT 

ARREARS AAS Na 

12:00 Tuesday, February 

CONTENTS PROCEDURE 

  

i Data Set Name: NC.PRECINCT 

  

Observations: 2217 
! Member Type: DATA Variables: 57 

Engine: V612 z Indexes: 0 
Created: 15:46 Thursday, February 19, 1998 Observation Length: 498 
Last Modified: 15:47 Thursday, February 19, 1998 Deleted Observations: 0 
Protection: Compressed: NO 

A Data Set Type: Sorted: NO 
Label: 

“ee-- Engine/Host Dependent Information----- 

Data Set Page Size: 15360 

Number of Data Set Pages: 75 

File Format: 607 

First Data Page: : 

Max Obs per Page: 30 

Obs in First Data Page: 15 

“eee Alphabetic List of variables and Attributes----- 

# Variable Type Len Pos Format Informat 

44 AIR Char 10 362 

16 ANMIVOT Num 8 131 1. 11 
17 ASIVOT Num 8 139 11 11 

15 BLKVOT Num 8 123 11 11 

39 CNTY Char S 315 

6 COADEMSS Num 8 S1 1¥. 11 

7 COAREPS88 Num 8 59 11 11 

56 CONGRESS Num 8 482 6. 6 

46 COUNTY Char 12 382 

49 COUSUBCE Char 12 414 

SO COUSUBFP Char 12 426 

36 DEMOCRAT Num 8 291 3. 11. 
52 H0010001 Num 8 446 BEST12. 12. 
31 HSGUNITS Num 8 251 11. 171. 
54 HS_A Num 8 "488 6, 6. 
85 HS_AO Num 8 474 6. 6. 

4 LTGOEMS8 Num 8 35 1¥. 11. 
5 LTGREPSS Nua 8 43 35. {HB 

42 MCO Char 10 342 

43 MCDKEY Char 10 352 

22 NSAMI Nua 8 179 :. 11. 

28 NSAMIVOT Num 8 227 1. TY. 

23 NSASI Nua 8 187 131. 11. 

29 NSASIVOT Num 8 235 11. 5 I 
21 NSBLK Nua 8 171 i. 11. 

27 NSBLKVOT Num 8 219 1. 131. 
24 NSOTH Num 8 195 11. 31. 
30 NSOTHVOT Num 8 243 11. 1Y. 
20 NSWHT Nus 8 163 1y. 131. 
26 NSWHTVOT Num 8 a2 atl 11. 
57 OLDCONG Num 8 490 6. 6. 
18 OTHVOT Num 8 147 11. 13. 
51 P0010001 Num 8 438 BEST12. 12. 
45 PLACECE Char 10 372 

53 PLACEFP Char 12 454 

1 PRECINCT Char 19 0 

34 REGBLK Num 8 275 11. 11. 
35 REGOTH Num 8 283 p & 19 11. 
32 REGVOT Num 8 259 11. 11. 
33 REGWHT Num 8 2687 11. 11. 
37 REPUBLIC Num 8 299 19. 11. 
48 SAC3 Char 12 402 

2 SENDEMS0 Num 8 19 11. 11. 
3 SENREPSO Nua 8 27 171. 11. 

25 SPAVOT Num 8 203 1Y, 11. 
1 TOTAMI Num 8 91 11. 11. 
12 TOTASI Num 8 99 11. 11. 
10 TOTBLK Num 8 83 11. 11. 
13 TOTOTH Num 8 107 11. 11. 

8 TOTPOP Nus 8 67 it. 11. 
19 TOTSPA Nus 8 185 11. 11. 

9 TOTWHT Nus 8 75 11. 11. 
38 UNAFFIL Nus 8 307 33. 11. 

  

24, 1998 3 

  Printed 09/01/99 10:28:53 Discovery 

  

 



  

    

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING © 12:00 Tuesday, February 24, 1998 
CONTENTS OF DATA SET NC.PRECINCT 

CONTENTS PROCEDURE 

Variable Type Len Pos Format Informat 
  

Vv1D Char 10 320 
VTDS0 Num 8 394 BEST12. 
VTDKEY Char 12 330 

WHTVOT Num 8 115 11. 

  Printed 09/01/99 10:28:53 Discovery  



08s 

01 

Bb | 

01 

01 

01 

01 

01 

01 

01 

01 

01 

01 J nN
 

= 

o & 
O
N
O
O
O
M
E
 

L
O
N
 

= 
OO
 
N
O
O
N
E
 

L
N
 

= 

SAC3 

PRECINCT 

.013.010 

.013.025 

.013.030 

.015.0005 

.015.0010 

.015.0015 

.015.0020 

.015.0025 

.015.0030 

.015.0035 

.015.0040 

.015.0045 

TOTASI 

3 

3 

(2
) 

-
 

- 
N
O
 
O
O
O
O
O
 
—
 

3 

3 

1 

1 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

7 

1 

REGBLK 

704 

389 

1471 

453 

403 

389 

207 

450 

464 

365 

1520 

735 

010 

025 

030 

00S 

045 

013 

020 

023 

  

COUSUBCE 

SENDEMSO 

735 

408 

1535 

258 

237 

207 

124 

237 

259 

213 

816 

335 

TOTOTH 

C
O
 
A
~
A
O
O
C
O
O
D
O
O
W
O
 

= 
O
O
S
»
,
 
O
D
O
—
-
~
0
O
0
O
N
 

O
-
+
-
0
0
0
0
0
C
O
O
0
O
W
M
W
O
 =
 

906684 

92664 

93904 

90712 

SENREP90 

1160 

636 

2428 

235 

6 

122 

101 

134 

72 

275 

792 

105 

WHTVOT 

3554 

1468 

6448 

488 

23 

294 

348 

393 

245 

650 

1730 

243 

SPAVOT 

A
s
d
a
 
N
O
O
D
O
O
O
W
 

DEMOCRAT 

2302 

1268 

4845 

833 

416 

604 

375 

714 

580 

764 

27386 

930 

COUSUBFP 

= X SN 

RED 

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 
24 OBS FROM DATA SET NC.PRECINCT 

LTGDEMSS 

1000 

559 

2097 

275 

NSWHTVOT 

3545 

1458 

6419 

488 

23 

294 

348 

392 

245 

649 

1727 

242 

REPUBLIC 

699 

387 

1459 

72 

3 

20 

22 

43 

21 

72 

26 

P0010001 

6489 

3543 

13684 

3428 

1737 

1144 

2766 

1569 

1204 

1578 

8322 
1737 

LTGREP8S8 

1060 

589 

2237 

200 

9 

98 

72 

100 

S1 

182 

552 

47 

U
Y
 

N
O
O
N
 

N
O
O
O
 

=
N
 

NSBLKVOT 

1231 

1178 

3489 

603 

438 

S06 

416 

720 

572 

541 

2191 

904 

UNAFFIL 

90 

COADEMSS COAREPS8S 

1059 

589 

2236 1852 

278 139 

248 3 

187 65 

131 48 

266 48 

242 40 

263 120 

921 359 

393 26 

887 

489 

ASIVOT OTHVOT 

10 

1 

—- 
M
O
 

O0
OO
0O
DO
0O
DO
O 

= 
W
O
W
 

nN
 

H
o
 

O
C
 
O
0
O
O
0
O
O
0
O
O
0
D
O
0
O
O
0
O
O
0
 =
 

NSAMIVOT 
N
E
O
N
 

N
O
—
=
-
O
=
N
 

- 
N
O
O
O
 

O0
OD

O0
OD

O0
O 

= 
LL
 
W
L
U
W
 

VTDKEY 

37.013. 

37.013. 

37.013. 

0005 37.015. 

0010 37.015. 

0015S 37.015. 

0020 37.015. 

0025 37.015. 

0030 37.015. 

0035 37.015. 

0040 37.015. 

0045 37.015. 

PLACEFP & > 
-
t
 

e
d
 

e
h
 

e
d
 

e
d
 

e
d
 

e
d
 

e
d
 

e
d
 

o
d
 

w
d
 

o
d
 

TOTPOP 

6489 

3543 

13682 

1528 

640 

1144 

1105 

1569 

1204 

1578 

5389 

1737 

TOTSPA 

23 

16 

110 

FS
 

N
O
D
A
 
W
W
O
-
0
O
0
 

NSOTHVOT 

O
0
0
 
0
0
0
0
0
0
 

O
0
O
N
O
O
 

MCDKEY 

.013.010 

.013.025 

.013.030 

.015.005 

.015.045 

.015.015 

.015.020 

.015.025 

.015.030 

.015.035 

.015.040 

.015.045 

TOTWHT 

4565 

1852 

8242 

599 

30 

382 

435 

493 

317 

798 

2161 

312 

NSWHT 

4552 

1838 

8202 

599 

30 

382 

435 

492 

317 

797 

2158 

310 

HSGUNITS 

2968 

2088 

S703 

699 

248 

482 

427 

643 

456 

660 

2255 

665 

AIR PLACEC 

AO CONGRESS 

h
h
 

ed
 

w
h
 

e
d
 

e
d
 

e
d
 

e
d
 

e
d
 

e
h
 

e
d
 

d
h
 

o
h
 

o
h
 

o
d
 

o
d
 

o
d
 

o
d
 

o
d
 

o
d
 

a
d
 

a
d
 

(
)
 

=
A
 

=
 

IR 
RY >: tk d 
ae D Rd 

TOTBLK 

1906 

1686 

5356 

925 

610 

760 

666 

1071 

883 

776 

3200 

1421 

NSBLK 

1906 

1685 

5324 

923 

610 

760 

666 

1063 

880 

773 

3199 

1421 

REGVOT 

3111 

1709 

6479 

910 

421 

630 

399 

762 

607 

843 

2956 

963 

E COUNTY 

Beaufort 

Beaufort 

Beaufort 

Bertie. 
Bertie 

Bertie 

Bertie 

Bertie 

Bertie 

Bertie 

Bertie 

Bertie 

OLDCONG 

l
h
 

e
d
 

e
d
 

e
d
 

e
d
 

e
d
 

e
d
 

w
d
 

e
d
 

e
d
 

a
d
 

o
h
 

nN
 

W
2
0
0
,
 

U
N
L
N
O
—
-
=
-
O
 

i
n
 

=
 

d £ — 
nN
 

W
O
O
L
 

U
N
N
L
M
N
O
 
=
O
 

= 
& 

REGWYHT 

2397 

1312 

5004 

457 

18 

241 

192 

312 

143 

478 

1435 

228 

3 Oo
 

w
 
o
 

t
h
 

o
h
 

w
h
 

w
h
 

e
d
 

e
h
 

w
h
 

-
m
o
-
 

OD
O 
O
O
 

  Printed 09/01/99 10:28:53 Discovery  



      

  

     
    

     

  

  

¥ SIAR asa 

NERNEY BERRIEN \ 

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 
24 OBS FROM DATA SET NC.PRECINCT 

0BS PRECINCT SENDEMS0 SENREP90 LTGDEMSS LTGREPSS COADEMSS COAREPS8 TOTPOP TOTWHT TOTBLK TOTAMI | 

011.015.1005 392 98 419 112 400 75 1900 637 1256 7 
01.015.1020 233 211 261 147 277 70 1661 722 934 0 

~ , 01.015.1040 23 253 112 188 104 135 . 933 904 29 0 
16 01.049.0102 119 30 106 40 103 26 1106 751 353 2 
17 01.049.0301 317 331 249 267 249 197 1338 786 544 7 
18 01.049.0302 133 170 160 131 148 89 834 473 © 356 3 
19 01.049.0303 155 191 177 124 173 75 1255 792 461 1 
20 01.049.0801 599 207 454 224 449 165 2664 974 1676 7 

| 21 01.049.0802 449 188 401 183 384 140 2345 781 1545 5 
22 01.049.0803 109 557 484 513 516 387 3464 2247 1197 13 

i 23 01.049.0804 407 322 353 362 357 300 2753 1908 815 13 
| 24 01.049.0805 576 258 486 217 478 175 2439 1075 1348 5 

{| 08S TOTASI TOTOTH WHTVOT BLKVOT AMIVOT ASIVOT OTHVOT TOTSPA NSWHT NSBLK NSAMI 

13 0 0 509 878 4 0 0 2 636 1256 6 | 14 5 0 574 542 0 4 0 0 722 934 0 
15 0 0 657 27 0 0 0 2 904 27 0 16 0 0 583 257 2 0 0 4 747 353 2 
17 1 0 608 381 5 y 0 0 786 544 7 
18 2 0 354 264 2 2 0 1 473 355 3 
19 0 1 626 325 1 0 1 5 788 460 1 
20 4 3 840 1146 5 4 3 19 964 1670 7 
21 4 10 640 961 5 2 5 12 781 1540 5 
22 3 4 1846 820 6 3 3 36 2226 1184 13 
23 12 5 1481 510 7 10 3 27 1885 815 13 
24 10 1 823 889 4 8 1 9 1069 1345 5 

| 08S NSASI NSOTH SPAVOT NSWHTVOT NSBLKVOT NSAMIVOT NSASIVOT NSOTHVOT HSGUNITS REGVOT REGWHT 

13 0 0 2 508 878 3 0 0 779 1064 371 
14 5 0 0 574 542 0 4 0 650 765 423 

[ 15 0 0 2 657 25 0 0 0 367 501 493 
SERS 0 0 4 579 257 2 0 0 444 267 153 
PAE 1 0 0 608 381 5 1 0 518 927 554 
x 2 0 1 354 263 2 2 0 345 521 334 
ORE 0 1 4 622 325 1 0 1 515 526 333 

TiZ0 4 0 14 831 1144 5 4 0 1386 1483 648 
21 4 3 8 640 958 5 2 0 1111 1309 529 | 
22 3 2 25 1831 812 6 3 1 1393 1659 1329 
23 12 1 fs 7 1467 510 Z 10 0 1305 1402 1008 
24 10 1 6 819 887 4 8 1 1118 1427 605 

08S REGBLK REGOTH DEMOCRAT REPUBLIC UNAFFIL CNTY VID VTDKEY MCD  MCDKEY AIR PLACECE COUNTY VTD90 

i 13 693 0 975 72 17 015 1005 37.015.1005 005 37.015.005 Bertie 1 
: 14 342 0 705 56 4 015 1020 37.015.1020 020 37.015.020 Bertie 1 

15 8 0 447 48 6 015 1040 37.015.1040 040 37.015.040 Bertie 1 
16 114 0 237 23 7 049 0102 37.049.0102 005 37.049.005 Craven 1 
17 373 0 733 173 21 049 0301 37.049.0301 015 37.049.015 Craven 1 
18 187 0 436 68 17 049 0302 37.049.0302 015 37.049.015 Craven 1 
19 193 0 459 ER 14 049 0303 37.049.0303 015 37.049.015 Craven 1 
20 833 2 1165 239 79 049 0801 37.049.0801 035 37.049.035 1770 Craven 1 
21 779 1 1074 168 67 049 0802 37.049.0802 035 37.049.035 1770 Craven 1 
22 329 1 1253 333 73 049 0803 37.049.0803 035 37.049.035 1770 Craven 1 
23 389 5 915 390 97 049 0804 37.049.0804 035 37.049.035 1770 Craven 1 
24 820 2 1174 190 63 049 0805 37.049.0805 035 37.049.035 1770 Craven 1 

0BS SAC3 COUSUBCE COUSUBFP P0010001 H0010001 PLACEFP HS_A HS_AO CONGRESS OLDCONG 

13 005 90712 3428 1478 1 1 1 1 
14 020 92096 2766 10786 1 1 1 1 
15 040 94064 8322 2622 1 1 1 1 
16 0102 005 93256 5938 2443 1 1 3 1 
17 0301 015 93360 3427 1378 1 1 1 1 
18 0302 015 93380 3427 1378 1 1 1 1 
19 0303 015 93360 3427 1378 1 1 1 1 

20 0801 035 93592 28793 12709 46340 1 1 1 1 
‘1 0802 035 93592 28793 12709 46340 1 1 1 1 

0803 035 93592 28793 12709 48340 1 1 1 1 
.3 0804 035 93592 28793 12709 46340 1 1 1 1 

24 0805 035 93592 28793 12709 48340 1 1 1 1   
  Printed 09/01/99 10:28:54 Discovery 

 



      
  

  

Ne - 

aD 1208 0 N N Na ? NN RD X NRE v3 
RERRRANRRA RN ORRRINR JSR > SERRE Sad RRS 

0 NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTIN 12:00 Tuesday, February 24, 1998 7 Al SY /MVG IMF LIST OF RECORDS WITH MISSING DATA 

0BS SEGMENT  VTDKEY OPRECNCT IPRECNCT ITOTPOP ITOTWHT ITOTBLK IWHTVOT IBLKVOT IASIVOT IAMIVOT 

14  37.119.0177 09.119.0177 12.119.0177 3460 439 2987 350 1928 
72 37.159.1112 06.159.06X2 12.159.1112 3659 2138 1489 1787 937 
76 37.159.1108 06.159.11X6 12.159.1108 2673 1673 978 1398 659 
77 37.159.1109 06.159.11X6 12.159.1109 1089 292 796 251 572 
78 37.159.1101 06.159.11X6 12.159.1101 2056 E37 1735 259 1152 

19 

10 

11 

0 

0 

IOTHVOT IREGVOT IREGWHT IREGBLK IREGOTH ICOEM88 ILDEMSS ISDEM90 ICREP88 ILREP88 ISREPS0 

1586 227 1355 446 515 997 197 217 
1583 1088 492 557 582 489 407 420 
1242 952 288 377 415 333 350 346 
S03 190 313 241 247 240 70 74 

1099 172 925 523 528 515 42 

IREP oTOoTPOP OTOTWHT OWHTVOT OBLKVOT OASIVOT 

157 

466 

390 

83 

66 

0 

17 

12 

12 

12 

OCREP88 

IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVMINPCT IRMINPCT IPDEMLTG IPDEMCOA IPDEMSEN IPCTDEM OBLKPCT OVBLKPCT ORBLKPCT OMINPCT OVMINPCT 

0.86 . 0.85 0.87 . 0.86 
0.41 ‘ 0.31 0.42 v 0.31 
0.37 ‘ 0.23 0.37 : 0.23 
0.73 . 0.62 0.73 . 0.62 
0.84 . 0.84 0.85 ’ 0.84 

.90 

.68 

.66 

.83 

.94 

ORMINPCT OPDEMLTG OPDEMCOA OPDEMSEN OPCTDEM ITOTVOT ITOTMIN IMINVOT IMINREG ILTG88 ICOA88 ISENSO OTOTVOT OTOTMIN OMINVOT OMINREG 

14 p . : . . 2308 3021 1958 1359 732 643 1060 1 0 0 71 : : . g . 2745 “1521 958 495 1002 964 901 55 29 23 75 4 . . . : 2074 1000 676 290 761 727 659 13 25 12 78... ‘ ; 2 . 824 797 S73 313 321 311 299 13 25 12 77 . ‘ . ’ . 1412 1739 1183 927 578 565 554 13 25 12 

OBS OLTG88 0COA88 OSENS0 GTBLKPOP LTBLKPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EQBLKVOT GTBLKREG LTBLKREG EQBLKREG GTMINPOP LTMINPOP EQMINPOP 

14 

71 

75 

76 

77 

0BS GTMINVOT LTMINVOT EQMINVOT GTMINREG LTMINREG 

14 

71 

75 

76 

77 

EQDEMSEN GTODEMREG LTDEMREG EQDEMREG   
  Printed 09/01,99 10:28:54 Discovery  



  

    

  
  

      e3 3 £) 03 AN FEIN AN ATNRR 0 2 REGS: ANN NATE : SIENTSERNC a REOGKA Nh ae FES TL RES DRURY AN DN A SR NY AN NE RAIN NCR RRR AANA RRREN nN NS ANN RNR ; 
NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 12:00 Tuesday, February 24, 1998 8 

LIST™ 100 OBS FROM FINAL DATA SET - CHECK COMPARISNNS 

OBS SEGMENT  VTDKEY OPRECNCT IPRECNCT ITOTPOP ITOTWHT ITOTBLK IWHTVOT IBLKVOT IASIVOT IAMIVOT 

a 137.119.1002 09.119.1401 12.119.1002 3357 1252 2098 983 1534 3 2 2 37.119.0116 09.119.1401 12.119.0116 2522 32 2485 24 1846 1 0 3 37.119.0141 09.119.1401 12.119.0141 3875 1239 2517 915 1681 47 24 4 4 37.119.0141 09.119.0189 12.119.0141 3875 1239 2517 915 1681 47 24 5 5 37.119.0181 09.119.0189 12.119.0181 4372 3478 831 2756 526 24 15 

0BS IOTHVOT IREGVOT IREGWHT IREGBLK IREGOTH ICDEMSS ILDEMSS ISDEM90 ICREPSS ILREPSS ISREP90 

1 0 1881 625 1254 2 750 878 1090 209 280 274 2 2 2236 18 2216 2 1012 1212 1661 17 32 12 3 5 1189 407 780 2 331 384 589 119 150 135 4 5 1189 407 780 2 331 384 589 119 150 135 5 8 2278 1937 338 3 499 572 635 656 780 789 

0BS IDEM IREP OTOTPOP OTOTWHT OTOTBLK OWHTVOT OBLKVOT OASIVOT OAMIVOT OOTHVOT OREGVOT 

1 1579 240 2537 2444 75 1915 58 0 6 5 1434 2 2165 45 2537 2444 75 1915 58 0 6 5 1434 3 974 173 2537 2444 75 1915 58 0 5 5 1434 4 974 173 3773 3691 38 2990 27 10 12 5 1721 5 1327 850 3773 3691 3s 2990 27 10 12 5 1721 

08S OREGWHT OREGBLK OREGOTH OCDEMSS OLDEMSS OSDEMI0 OCREPS88 OLREP88 OSREPS0 ODEM OREP 

1 1395 38 1 243 251 279 463 694 644 848 521 2 1395 38 1 243 251 279 463 694 644 848 521 3 1395 38 1 243 251 279 463 694 644 - 848 521 4 1699 19 3 263 371 295 660 799 868 933 701 5 1699 19 3 263 371 295 660 799 868 933 701 

OBS IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVMINPCT IRMINPCT IPOEMLTG IPDEMCOA IPDEMSEN IPCTDEM OBLKPCT OVBLKPCT ORBLKPCT OMINPCT OVMINPCT 

1.50.82 0.61 0.67 0.63 0.61 0.67 0.76 0.78 0.80 0.87 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.03 2 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.97 0.98 0.99 0.98 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.03 4 0.68 0.63 0.66 0.68 0.66 0.66 0.72 0.74 0.81 0.85 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.65 0.63 0.66 0.68 0.66 0.66 0.72 0.74 0.81 0.85 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.19 0.16 0.15 0.20 0.17 0.15 0.42 0.43 0.45 0.61 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 

0BS ORMINPCT OPDEMLTG OPDEMCOA OPDEMSEN OPCTDEM ITOTVOT ITOTMIN IMINVOT IMINREG ILTG88 ICOA88 ISEN9O OTOTVOT OTOTMIN OMINVOT OMINREG ~ 

1 0.03 0.27 0.34 0.30 0.62 2522 2105 1539 1256 1158 959 1364 1984 93 69 39 2 0.03 Q.27 0.34 0.30 0.62 1873 2490 1849 2218 1244 1029 1673 1984 93 69 39 3 0.03 0.27 0.34 0.30 0.62 2672 2636 1757 782 534 450 724 1984 93 69 39 4 0.01 0.32 0.28 6.25 0.57 2672 2636 1757 782 534 450 724 3044 82 54 22 5 0.01 0.32 0.28 0.25 0.57 3329 894 573 341 13582 1155 1424 3044 82 54 22 

OLTG88 0OCOA88 OSENSO GTBLKPOP LTBLKPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EQBLKVOT GTBLKREG LTBLKREG EQBLKREG GTMINPOP LTMINPOP EQMINPOP 

1 945 706 923 

2 945 706 923 

3 945 706 923 

4 1170 923 1163 

5 1170 923 1163 d
h
 

od
 

wh
 

O
O
 
O
0
O
O
0
O
O
0
O
0
o
 

OO
 
0
O
O
0
O
0
O
0
o
 

C
O
 
O
0
O
O
0
0
O
0
o
 

O
O
 
O
0
O
O
0
0
O
0
o
 

h
d
d
 

eh
 
-
 

O
O
0
O
O
0
O
O
0
O
0
o
 

O
O
 
O
0
O
O
0
O
0
O
0
o
 

-
—
 

e
d
 

e
d
 

w
h
 

w
h
 

OO
 
0
O
0
O
o
0
O
o
 

0
0
0
0
 O

o 
OBS GTMINVOT LTMINVOT EQUMINVOT GTMINREG LTMINREG EQUINREG GTDEMCOA LTDEMCOA EQDEMCOA GTDEMLTG LTDEMLTG EQDEMLTG GTDEMSEN LTDEMSEN 

N
h
s
 
O
N
 

=
 

a
h
 

wh
 
i.
 

O
O
0
O
O
0
O
O
0
O
o
 

O
O
0
O
O
0
O
o
0
O
o
 

E
S
 

| 

O
O
0
O
O
0
O
O
o
0
O
o
 

O
O
0
O
O
0
o
o
 

-
h
 

e
h
 

w
h
 

bh
 

bh
 

0
0
0
0
 O

0o
 

O
O
0
O
0
O
O
0
O
o
 

-
—
h
 

e
d
 

w
d
 

e
d
 

bd
 

O
0
0
 

O
0
O
o
 

O
0
0
 

O
0
O
o
 

TS
 

O
0
0
 

0
O
0
o
 

0BS EQDEMSEN GTDEMREG LTOEMREG EQDEMREG DEMNTBLK BLKNTDEM  PRFLAG 

A
E
 

O
N
 

= 

0
0
0
0
0
 

- 
eh
 

eh
 

wh
 

eh
 

O
O
0
O
0
O
0
O
o
 

CO
C 
O
0
O
0
O
0
O
0
 

C
o
0
o
0
o
0
o
 

0
0
0
0
 
O0

o 

0
0
0
0
0
 

  Printed 09/01/99 10:28:54 Discovery  



  

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 
LIST 100 0BS FROM FINAL DATA SET - CHECK COMPARINS 

SEGMENT  VTDKEY OPRECNCT IPRECNCT ITOTPOP ITOTWHT ITOTBLK IWHTVOT IBLKVOT IASIVOT TAMIVOT 

37.119.0181 09.119.0180 112.119.0181 4372 3478 831 2756 526 
37.119.0181 09.119.0179 12.119.0181 4372 3478 831 2756 526 
37.119.0153 09.119.0179 12.119.0153 4582 3036 1358 2507 929 
37.119.0153 09.119.0301 12.119.0153 4582 3036 1358 2507 929 
37.119.0139 09.119.0301 12.119.0139 5468 786 4496 564 2753 

24 15 

24 15 

83 34 

83 34 

86 20 

IOTHVOT IREGVOT IREGWHT IREGBLK IREGOTH ICDEM88 ILDEMSS ISDEMI0 ICREP8S ILREP8S ISREPS0 

8 2278 1937 338 3 499 572 635 656 780 2278 1937 338 3 499 572 635 656 780 15 1985 1435 540 10 412 474 608 413 482 18 1985 1435 540 10 412 474 608 413 482 8 2014 222 1790 2 S45 630 1083 72 96 

IDEM IREP oToTPOP OTOTWHT OTOTBLK OWHTVOT OBLKVOT OASIVOT OAMIVOT O0THVOT OREGVOT 

1327 850 4007 3350 568 2512 384 
1327 850 2836 2449 339 1931 228 
1261 598 2836 2449 339 1931 228 
1261 598 2299 2017 271 1584 211 
1825 144 2299 2017 271 1584 211 

2005 

1516 

1516 

1015 

1015 

OREGWHT OREGBLK OREGOTH OCDEM88 OLDEM88 OSDEMSO OCREP88 OLREP88 OREP   1685 305 397 496 583 618 680 647 798 1350 162 311 415 409 457 551 559 856 S71 1350 162 311 415 409 457 551 559 856 571 872 141 220 268 272 292 320 362 597 361 872 141 220 268 272 292 320 362 597 361 

IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVMINPCT IRMINPCT IPDEMLTG IPDEMCOA IPDEMSEN IPCTDEM OBLKPCT OVBLKPCT ORBLKPCT OMINPCT OVMINPCT 

-19 0.16 -15 . 0.17 0.15 0.42 3 0.45 .61 .14 .13 15: .16 15 .19 0.16 .18 . 0.17 0.15 0.42 . 0.45 .61 .12 .10 33 .14 32 

.14 22 

-32 -312 .14 12 «32 

12 .12 .14 .32 -32 

.30 0.26 -27 . 0.30 0.28 0.50 0.58 .68 

.82 0.80 .89 . 0.84 0.89 0.87 . 0.95 .93 

0 

0 .30 0.26 27 . 0.30 0.28 0.50 : 0.58 .68 0.12 30 «11 
0 

0 

ORMINPCT OPDEMLTG OPDEMCOA OPDEMSEN OPCTDEM ITOTVOT ITOTMIN IMINVOT IMINREG ILTG88 ICOA88 ISENSO OTOTVOT OTOTMIN OMINVOT OMINREG 

.18 .42 0.39 .47 . 3329 894 573 341 1352 11585 1424 2958 657 446 320 Th .43 0.40 .42 1 3329 - 894 573 341 1352 1155 1424 2188 387 257 166 <I .43 0.40 .42 : 3568 1546 1061 550 956 825 1057 2188 387 257 166 .14 .46 0.43 .43 : 3568 1546 1061 550 956 825 1057 1803 282 219 143 14 .46 0.43 .43 . 3431 4682 2867 1792 726 617 1135 1803 282 219 143 

OLTG88 OCOA88 OSEN9SO GTBLKPOP LTBLKPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EQBLKVOT GTBLKREG LTBLKREG EQBLKREG GTMINPOP LTMINPOP EQMINPOP 

1176. 1015 1230 : ~~ 966 768 968 
966 768 968 
588.512" 634 
588 512 634 

GTMINVOT LTMINVOT EQMINVOT GTMINREG LTMINREG EQMINREG GTDEMCOA LTDEMCOA EQDEMCOA GTDEMLTG LTDEMLTG EQDEMLTG GTDEMSEN LTDEMSEN 

EQDEMSEN GTDEMREG LTDEMREG 

  
  Printed 09/01,99 10:28:54 Discovery  



SF AENEAN SE 

  

   
   

     

   

  

HERE Wh ENN REESE 3 
NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING ruary 24, 1998 10 

LIST © 00 OBS FROM FINAL DATA SET - CHECK COMPARISONS 

0BS SEGMENT VTDKEY OPRECNCT IPRECNCT ITOTPOP ITOTWHT ITOTBLK IWHTVOT IBLKVOT IASIVOT IAMIVOT 

11 37.119.0139 09.119.1801 12.119.0139 5458 786 4496 564 2753 86 20 
12 37.119.0178 09.119.1801 12.119.0178 5335 2534 2682 1976 1680 25 33 
13 37.119.0177 09.119.1801 12.119.0177 3460 439 2987 350 1928 19 S 

14 14 377.119.0177 09.119.0177 12.119.0177 3460 439 2987 350 1928 19 5 
15 35 37.119.0177 09.119.1601 112.119.0177 3460 439 2987 350 1928 19 S 

08s IOTHVOT IREGVOT IREGWHT IREGBLK IREGOTH ICDEMSS ILDEMSS ISDEMS0 ICREP88 ILREP88 ISREP90 

1 8 2014 222 1790 2 545 630 1083 72 96 . 52 
12 17 2269 1129 1125 15 683 778 1003 386 447 460 
13 6 1586 227 1355 4 446 515 997 197 217 63 
14 6 1586 227 1355 4 446 515 997 197 217 63 
15 6 1586 227 1355 4 446 515 997 197 217 63 

08S IDEM IREP OTOTPOP OTOTWHT OTOTBLK OWHTVOT 0BLKVOT OASIVOT OAMIVOT O0THVOT OREGVOT 

1 1825 144 5405 4645 592 3462 362 57 16 28 2894 
12 1680 472 5405 4645 592 3462 362 57 16 28 2894 
13 1370 157 5405 4645 592 3462 362 57 16 28 2894 
14 1370 157 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 
15 1370 157 6006 5655 280 4612 218 35 11 11 2875 

08s OREGWHT OREGBLK OREGOTH OCDEMSS8 OLDEMSS8 OSDEMS0 OCREP88 OLREP88 OSREPS0 ODEM OREP 

11 2522 359 13 533 631 854 921 659 944 1501 1164 
12 2522 359 13 533 631 854 921 659 944 1501 1164 
13 2522 359 13 533 631 854 921 659 944 1501 1164 
14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
15 2752 112 11 393 548 704 991 1052 751 1174 1363 

OBS IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVMINPCT IRMINPCT IPDEMLTG IPDEMCOA IPDEMSEN IPCTDEM OBLKPCT OVBLKPCT ORBLKPCT OMINPCT OVMINPCT 

13 0.82 0.80 0.89 0.86 0.84 0.89 0.87 0.88 0.95 0.93 0.11 0.09 0.12 0.14 0.12 
12 0.50 0.45 0.50 0.53 0.47 0.50 0.64 0.64 0.69 0.78 0.11 0.09 0.12 0.14 0.12 
*1 0.86 0.84 0.85 0.87 0.85 0.86 0.70 0.69 0.94 0.90 0.11 0.09 0.12 0.14 0.32 

0.86 0.84 0.85 0.87 0.85 0.86 0.70 0.69 0.94 0.90 0.00 0.00 . 0.00 0.00 
0.86 0.84 0.85 0.87 0.85 0.86 0.70 0.69 0.94 0.90 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.06 0.06 

08S ORMINPCT OPDEMLTG OPDEMCOA OPDEMSEN OPCTDEM ITOTVOT ITOTMIN IMINVOT IMINREG ILTG8S ICOA88 ISEN9O OTOTVOT OTOTMIN OMINVOT OMINREG ~ 

1 0.13 0.49 0.37 0.47 0.56 3431 4682 2867 1792 726 617 1135 3925 760 463 372 
12 0.13 0.49 0.37 0.47 0.56 3731 2801 1755 1140 1225 1069 1463 3925 760 463 372 
13 0.13 0.49 0.37 0.47 0.56 2308 3021 1958 1359 732 643 1060 3925 760 463 372 
14 » x : . . 2308 3021 1958 1359 732 643 1060 1 0 0 0 
13 " 0.04 0.34 0.28 0.48 0.46 2308 3021 1958 1359 732 643 1060 4887 351 275 123 

OBS OLTG88 0COA88 OSENSO GTBLKPOP LTBLKPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EQBLKVOT GTBLKREG LTBLKREG EQBLKREG GTMINPOP LTMINPOP EQMINPOP 

11 1290 1454 1798 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 
12 1290 1454 1798 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 
13 1290 1454 1798 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 
14 0 0 0 1 0 0 FR 0 0 . 4 1 0 0 
15 1600 1384 1455 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 

0BS GTMINVOT LTMINVOT EQMINVOT GTMINREG LTMINREG EQMINREG GTDEMCOA LTDEMCOA EQDEMCOA GTDEMLTG LTOEMLTG EQDEMLTG GTDEMSEN LTDEMSEN 

11 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 
12 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 
13 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 
14 1 0 0 . > . . . . . . 
15 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 

08S EQDEMSEN GTDEMREG LTOEMREG EQDEMREG DEMNTBLK BLKNTDEM PRFLAG   11 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 
12 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 
13 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 
14 . . . . . . 1 
*9 0 1 0 0 0 0   
  Printed 09/01,99 10:28:54 Discovery  



  

      
  

  

   
    

    

ERIN 

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 
LIST OF 100 OBS FROM FINAL DATA SET - CHECK COMPARISONS 

  

   

  

  

0BS SEGMENT  VTDKEY OPRECNCT IPRECNCT ITOTPOP ITOTWHT ITOTBLK IWHTVOT IBLKVOT IASIVOT IAMIVOT 

16 37.119.0197 09.119.1601 112.119.0197 5917 4066 1664 3436 1080 108 8 | 17  37.119.0197 09.119.0192 12.119.0197 5917 4066 1664 3436 1080 108 8 18  37.119.0197 09.119.0176 12.119.0197 5917 4066 1664 3436 . 1080 108 8 I 19 19  37.119.0197 09.119.0158 12.119.0197 5917 4066 1664 3436 1080 108 8 20 20 37.119.0198 09.119.0158 12.119.0198 5384 2756 2421 2287 1669 80 27 

08S IOTHVOT IREGVOT TREGWHT IREGBLK IREGOTH ICDEM88 ILDEM8S ISDEM90 ICREP8S ILREPSS ISREPS0 : 
I 

16 19 2153 1621 518 14 401 508 768 634 683 304 17 19 2183 1621 518 14 401 508 768 634 683 304 18 19 2153 1621 518 14 401 508 768 634 683 304 19 19 2153 1621 518 14 401 508 768 634 683 304 20 31 2282 1297 969 16 642 742 911 283 312 278 

0BS IDEM IREP OTOTPOP OTOTWHT OTOTBLK OWHTVOT OBLKVOT OASIVOT OAMIVOT O0THVOT OREGVOT 

16 980 955 6006 5655 280 4612 218 35 11 11 2875 17 980 955 5894 5532 220 4120 160 90 6 4 3867 18 980 955 4379 4199 86 3329 47 S57 S 3 3103 19 980 955 2032 1723 188 1334 93 71 9 8 1642 20 1406 694 2032 1723 188 1334 93 n 9 8 1642 

08s OREGWHT OREGBLK OREGOTH OCDEM8S OLDEM88 OSDEMSO OCREP88 OLREP88 OSREPS0 ODEM OREP 

16 2752 112 11 393 548 704 991 1052 751 1174 1363 17 3708 133 26 431 : 702 1075 1490 1466 1101 1094 2322 18 3053 36 14 419 703 868 1295 1314 995 1136 1700 19 1496 131 15 306 388 487 484 521 493 806 709 20 1496 131 15 306 388 487 484 521 493 806 709 

08S IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVMINPCT IRMINPCT IPDEMLTG IPOEMCOA IPDEMSEN IPCTDEM OBLKPCT OVBLKPCT ORBLKPCT OMINPCT OVMINPCT 

16. 0.28 0.23 0.24 0.31 0.26 0.25 0.43 0.39 0.72 0.51 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.06 0.06 ~37 0.28 0.23 0.24 0.31 0.26 0.25 0.43 0.39 0.72 0.51 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.06 0.06 : 0.28 0.23 0.24 0.31 0.26 0.25 0.43 0.39 0.72 0.51 0.02 0.01 Q.01 0.04 0.03 0.28 0.23 0.24 0.31 0.26 0.25 0.43 0.39 0.72 0.51 0.09 0.06 0.08 0.15 0.12 0.45 0.41 0.42 0.49 0.44 0.43 0.70 0.69 0.77 0.67 0.09 0.06 0.08 0.18 0.12 

08S ORMINPCT OPDEMLTG OPDEMCOA OPDEMSEN OPCTDEM ITOTVOT ITOTMIN IMINVOT IMINREG ILTG88 ICOA88 ISENSO OTOTVOT OTOTMIN OMINVOT OMINREG 

16 0.04 0.34 0.28 0.48 0.46 4651 1851 1215 532 1191 1035 1072 4887 351 275 123 17 0.04 0.32 0.22 0.49 0.32 4651 1851 1215 532 11971 1035 1072 4380 362 260 159 18 0.02 0.35 0.24 0.47 0.40 4651 1851 1215 532 1197 1035 1072 3441 180 112 50 19 -0.09 0.43 0.39 0.50 0.53 4651 1851 1215 532 1191 1035S 1072 1515 309 181 146 20 0.09 0.43 0.39 0.50 0.53 4094 2628 1807 985 1054 925 1189 1515 309 181 146 

08S OLTG88 OCOA88 OSEN90 GTBLKPOP LTBLKPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EQBLKVOT GTBLKREG LTBLKREG EQBLKREG GTMINPOP LTMINPOP EQMINPOP 

16 1600 1384 1455 

17 2168 1921 2176 

18 2017 1714 1863 

19 909 790 980 

20 909 790 980 -—
 

wh
 

od
 

wh
 

wa
 

O
0
0
 

O
0
O
0
O
0
o
 

C
0
0
0
0
 1 

1 
i 2 

1 
1 O

O
O
O
 
Oo

 

O
O
 
O
0
O
o
0
o
o
o
 

PT
 
CP

 
G
e
 
Gy
 

es
 

| 

O
0
0
 

O
0
O
0
O
o
 

O
o
 
O
0
0
0
 

-
—
h
 

e
d
 

e
h
 

d
h
 

bh
 

O
O
0
O
O
0
0
O
o
 

O
O
 
O
0
O
O
0
O
0
O
o
 

0BS GTMINVOT LTMINVOT EQMINVOT GTMINREG LTMINREG EQMINREG GTDEMCOA LTDEMCOA EQDEMCOA GTDEMLTG LTDEMLTG EQDEMLTG GTDEMSEN LTDEMSEN 

16 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 17 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 | 0 0 1 0 18 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 19 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 20 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 

08S EQDEMSEN GTDEMREG LTDEMREG EQDEMREG DEMNTBLK BLKNTDEM PRFLAG 

16 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 
17 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 
18 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 
9 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 

0 1 0 0 0 0 0 

  Printed 09/01.99 10:28:54 Discovery 

 



  

  

    

m - TINTS ES LSS SSN an, NANA A 9 NER SNE Sd SARE 0g DONSUE HS x] esa nc x NRERIEN EDISTR RR RSCOR \ UIEORORP 
> DORRIT RY DORR PERRIN RAN NN 4 N N N x 

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 12:00 Tuesday, February 24, 1998 
LIS 100 OBS FROM FINAL DATA SET - CHECK COMPARIS 

0BS SEGMENT VTDKEY OPRECNCT IPRECNCT ITOTPOP ITOTWHT ITOTBLK IWHTVOT IBLKVOT IASIVOT IAMIVOT 

01 21 37.119.0198 09.119.0159 12.119.0198 5384 2756 2421 2287 1669 80 27 22 37.119.0198 09.119.0150 12.119.0198 5384 2756 2421 2287 1669 80 27 23 37.119.0198 09.119.0137 12.119.0198 5384 2756 2421 2287 1669 80 27 4 24 37.119.0152 09.119.0138 12.119.0152 4296 166 4109 135 3063 6 0 25 25 337.119.0152 09.119.0151 12.119.0152 4296 166 4109 135 3063 6 0 

08s IOTHVOT IREGVOT IREGWHT IREGBLK IREGOTH ICDEMSS ILDEMSS ISDEM90 ICREPSS ILREPS88 ISREPS0 

21 31 2282 1297 969 16 642 742 911 283 312 278 22 31 2282 1297 969 16 642 742 911 283 312 278 23 31 2282 1297 969 16 642 742 911 283 312 278 24 8 2340 80 2258 2 1097 1199 1600 35 69 56 25 8 2340 80 2258 2 1097 1199 1600 35 69 56 

08S IDEM IREP OTOTPOP OQTOTWHT OTOTBLK OWHTVOT 0BLKVOT OASIVOT OAMIVOT OOTHVOT OREGVOT 

21 1406 694 2606 2153 307 1677 196 78 6 12 1542 22 1406 694 3373 2759 388 2304 272 124 12 35 1913 23 1406 694 2620 2479 52 2035 32 57 6 4 1763 24 2247 69 3457 2936 397 2576 299 57 14 28 2086 25 2247 69 3420 2936 319 2554 223 85 8 24 2253 

08s OREGWHT OREGBLK OREGOTH OCDEMS8 OLDEMSS OSDEM90 OCREP88 OLREP88 OSREPS0 ODEM OREP 

21 1442 94 6 281 366 487 540 597 476 781 641 22 1787 115 11 386 487 575 680 753 601 979 778 23 1713 30 20 370 496 557 609 688 608 941 709 24 1895 176 15 410 534 634 598 654 533 1081 822 25 2092 147 14 423 594 750 686 766 616 1164 877 

08S IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVMINPCT IRMINPCT IPDEMLTG IPDEMCOA IPDEMSEN IPCTODEM OBLKPCT OVBLKPCT ORBLKPCT OMINPCT OVMINPCT 

21 0.45 0.41 0.42 0.49 0.44 0.43 0.70 0.69 0.77 0.67 0.12 0.10 0.06 0.17 0.15 22 0.45 0.41 0.42 0.49 0.44 0.43 0.70 0.69 0.77 0.67 0.12 0.10 0.06 0.18 0.16 ,—~23 0.45 0.41 0.42 0.49 0.44 0.43 0.70 0.69 Q.77 0.67 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.05 : 0.96 0.95 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.97 0.95 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.13 0.10 0.08 0.15 0.13 0.96 0.95 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.97 0.95 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.14 0.12 

OBS ORMINPCT OPDEMLTG OPDEMCOA OPDEMSEN OPCTDEM ITOTVOT ITOTMIN IMINVOT IMINREG ILTG88 ICOAS88 ISENSO OTOTVOT OTOTMIN OMINVOT OMINREG 

21 0.06 0.38 0.34 0.51 0.55 4094 2628 1807 985 1054 925 1189 1969 453 292 100 22 0.07 0.39 0.36 0.49 0.56 4094 2628 1807 985 1054 925 1189 2747 614 443 126 23 0.03 0.42 0.38 0.48 0.57 4094 2628 1807 985 1054 925 1189 2134 141 99 50 24 0.09 0.45 0.41 0.54 0.57 3212 4130 3077 2260 1268 1 13132 1656 2974 521 398 191 25 -0.07 0.44 0.38 Q.S5 0.57 3212 4130 3077 2260 1268 1132 1656 2894 484 340 161 

OBS OLTG88 0COA88 OSEN90 GTBLKPOP LTBLKPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EQBLKVOT GTBLKREG LTBLKREG EQBLKREG GTMINPOP LTMINPOP EQMINPOP 

21 963 821 963 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 
22 1240 1066 1176 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 23 1184 979 11658 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 
24 1188 1008 1167 1 0 0 i 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 25 1360 1109 1366 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 

08S GTMINVOT LTMINVOT EQMINVOT GTMINREG LTMINREG EQUINREG GTDEMCOA LTDEMCOA EQDEMCOA GTDEMLTG LTDEMLTG EQDEMLTG GTDEMSEN LTDEMSEN 

21 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 
22 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 
23 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 24 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 25 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 

OBS EQDEMSEN GTDEMREG LTOEMREG EQDEMREG DEMNTBLK BLKNTDEM PRFLAG 

21 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 
22 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 
23 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 
24 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 
25 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 

12 

  Printed 09/01/99 10:28:55 Discovery 

  

 



  n HERTS TTR REE NST = A a ERR 

AERHEIIRIEERRTIRNS NR NS : 3 

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTIN 12:00 Tuesday, February 24, 1998 LIST OP 100 0BS FROM FINAL DATA SET - CHECK COMPARISO 

SEGMENT  VTDKEY OPRECNCT IPRECNCT ITOTPOP ITOTWHT ITOTBLK IWHTVOT IBLKVOT IASIVOT IAMIVOT 

26 37.119.0122 09.119.0121 12.119.0122 4443 174 4255 167 2882 27 37.119.0122 09.119.0110 12.119.0122 4443 174 4255 167 2882 28 37.119.0109 09.119.0110 12.119.0109 3241 2558 559 2244 521 29 37.119.0109 09.119.0120 12.119.0109 3241 2558 559 2244 521 30 137.119.0109 09.119.0108 12.119.0109 3241 2558 559 2244 521 

2 

2 

14 

14 

14 

IOTHVOT IREGVOT IREGWHT IREGBLK IREGOTH ICDEMSS ILDEMSS ISDEM90 ICREP88 ILREPSS ISREPS0 

2005 130 1871 714 774 1082 43 S50 2005 130 1871 - 714 774 1082 43 50 2388 2047 333 638 913 1071 455 350 2388 2047 333 638 913 1071 455 350 2388 2047 333 638 913 1071 455 350 

IDEM IREP oTOTPOP OTOTWHT OTOTBLK OWHTVOT 0BLKVOT OASIVOT OOTHVOT OREGVOT   1902 75 3139 2683 330 2282 51 1902 75 2248 2006 155 1647 11 1355 621 2248 2006 155 1647 11 1555 621 2124 2096 11 1732 5 1555 621 2940 2841 72 2437 14 

1793 

1483 

1483 

1692 

2114 

OREGWHT OREGBLK OREGOTH OCDEMSS8 OLDEM88 OSDEMS0. OCREP88 OLREP88 ODEM OREP 

1667 118 425 553 663 455 504 1066 612 1409 64 410 714 325 342 941 407 1409 64 410 714 325 342 941 407 1682 8 341 665 554 570 514 931 2 643 2096 17 322 724 806 801 716 1036 955 
IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVMINPCT IRMINPCT IPDEMLTG IPDEMCOA IPDEMSEN IPCTDEM OBLKPCT OVBLKPCT ORBLKPCT OMINPCT OVMINPCT 

0.96 .94 0.93 ‘ 0.95 0.94 
0.96 .94 0.93 . 0.95 0.94 
0.17 .18 0.14 . 0.22 0.14 

.96 3 - . 0.15 

.96 . . ‘ 0.11 
+ 7 . . : 0.13 

: . 0.01 
wll .02 . .01 0.03 

20.17 .18 0.14 . 0.22 0.14 . . 2 71 > 0.37 .18 0.14 : 0.22 0.14 

ICOA88 ISENSO OTOTVOT OTOTMIN OMINVOT OMINREG 

52 ; .60, .64 3057 4269 2890 1875 817 746 1132 2577 456 295 126 .63 ‘ : .70 3057 4269 2890 1875 817 746 1132 1808 242 161 74 .63 a : «70 2878 683 634 341 1368 1115 1421 1808 242 161 74 S50 . v . 59 2878 683 634 341 1368 1115 1421 1752 28 20 10 .01 .43 . . «52 2878 683 634 341 1368 1115 1421 2512 99 75 18 

OLTG88 0COA88 OSEN90 GTBLKPOP LTBLKPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EQBLKVOT GTBLKREG LTBLKREG EQBLKREG GTMINPOP LTMINPOP EQMINPOP 

1057 880 1103 

916 735 978 

916 735 978 

1133 895 1179 

1394 1128 1440 

GTMINVOT LTMINVOT EQMINVOT GTMINREG LTMINREG EQMINREG GTDEMCOA LTDEMCOA EQDEMCOA GTDEMLTG LTOEMLTG EQDEMLTG GTDEMSEN LTDEMSEN 

EQDEMSEN GTDEMREG LTDEMREG EQDEMREG 

  Printed 09/01.99 10:28:55 Discovery  



  SE 
- 0} 

12:00 Tuesday, February 24, 1998 14 oe OBS FROM FINAL DATA SET - CHECK COMPARISSS 

OBS SEGMENT  VTDKEY OPRECNCT IPRECNCT ITOTPOP = ITOTWHT ITOTBLK IWHTVOT IBLKVOT IASIVOT IAMIVOT 
31 37.119.0102 09.119.0101 12.119.0102 5898 4520 1213 4062 32 337.119.0117 09.119.0147 12.119.0117 3801 970 2763 33 37.119.0117 09.119.0135 12.119.0117 3801 970 2763 34 37.119.0117 09.119.0107 12.119.0117 3801 970 2763 35 37.119.0117 09.119.0134 12.119.0117 3801 970 2763 

934 69 
830 1797 24 
830 1797 24 
830 1797 24 
830 1797 24 

IOTHVOT IREGVOT IREGWHT IREGBLK IREGOTH ICDEM88 ILDEMSS ISDEMS0 ICREP88 ILREPSS ISREPSO 

2 3609 3070 S519 853 1111 1575 689 719 484 1618 505 1110 508 596 836 166 185 109 1618 505 1110 508 596 836 166 185 109 1618 505 1110 S08 596 836 166 185 109 1618 505 1110 508 596 836 166 185 109 

IDEM IREP QToTPOP OTOTWHT OWHTVOT OBLKVOT OASIVOT OAMIVOT O00THVOT OREGVOT 

2225 986 1758 1716 1488 35 1329 209 2039 2000 1665 28 1329 209 1901 1461 1212 287 1183 1329 208 2460 1991 1729 318 23 1383 1329 209 3662 3163 2725 270 40 1817 

1427 
1610 

OREGWHT OREGBLK OREGOTH OCDEM8S OSDEMIO OCREP88 OLREP88 OSREP90 ODEM OREP 

1421 6 262 528 478 486 386 732 z 598 1592 17 234 440 530 621 641 597 798 732 1088 102 236 376 479 382 385 321 634 476 1206 181 295 383 487 306 345 300 756 511 1667 143 398 485 495 489 565 515 992 642 
IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVMINPCT IRMINPCT IPDEMLTG IPDEMCOA IPDEMSEN IPCTDEM OBLKPCT OVBLKPCT ORBLKPCT OMINPCT OVMINPCT 

.18 0.14 ‘ . ‘ .61 .55 .69 0.02 0.02 . 0.02 .02 -57 .69 : . s .76 75 . .86 0.02 0.02 . 0.02 .02 .67 : . . ; .76 75 . .86 0.22 0.19 . 0.23 .20 .67 : . % . .76 75 . .86 0.17 0.15 . 0.19 «17 -67 0. . ; «B .76 -75 . .86 0.1 0.09 . 0.14 «13 
ORMINPCT OPDEMLTG OPDEMCOA OPDEMSEN OPCTDEM ITOTVOT ITOTMIN IMINVOT IMINREG ILTG88 ICOA88 ISENSO OTOTVOT OTOTMIN OMINVOT OMINREG ~~ 

.45 0.35 : ‘ 5118 1378 1056 539 1830 1542 2059 1526 42 38 6 .41 0.27 . > 2667 2831 1837 1113 781 674 945 1698 39 33 18 .49 0.38 . . 2667 2831 1837 1113 781 674 945 1511 440 299 10S .53 0.49 : . 2667 2831 1837 1113 781 674 945 2088 469 359 187 .46 0.45 : . 2667 2831 1837 1113 781 674 945 3068 499 343 180 

OLTG88 OCOA88 OSENSO GTBLKPOP LTBLKPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EQBLKVOT GTBLKREG LTBLKREG EQBLKREG GTMINPOP LTMINPOP EQMINPOP 

888 740 914 

1081 885 1127 

761 618 800 

728 601 787 

1050 887 1010   GTMINVOT LTMINVOT EQMINVOT GTMINREG LTMINREG EQUINREG GTDEMCOA LTDEMCOA EQDEMCOA GTDEMLTG LTDEMLTG EQDEMLTG GTDEMSEN LTDEMSEN 

EQDEMSEN GTDEMREG LTDEMREG   
  Printed 09/01/99 10:28:55 Discovery  



  

  

ITOTWHT 

2850 

2675 

3386 

3386 

3386 

ICD EM88 

459 

440 

401 

401 

401 

OWHTVOT 

2767 

1823 
1823 
2346 

4839 

0SD EMS0 

598 

512 

512 

565 

1400 

RRR RR 

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTI NG 
100 0BS FROM FINAL DATA SET - CHECK COMPAR} 

ITOTBLK 

1 608 

781 

573 

573 

573 

ILDEMSS 

S75 

607 

497 

497 

497 

OBLKVOT 

335 

404 

404 

432 

1024 

OCREP88 

617 

308 

308 

565 

879 

IWHTVOT 

2383 

2173 

2759 

2759 

2759 

ISDEMSO 

OAS 

805 

648 

675 

675 

675 

IVOoT 

86 

S83 

S53 

108 

144 

OLREP88 

691 

357 

357 

646 

997 

12:00 Tuesday, February 24, 1998 

IBLKVOT 

1135 

538 

398 

398 

398 

ICREP88 

448 

556 

623 

623 

623 

OAMIVOT 

13 

4 

4 

8 

23 

OSREPS0 

573 

335 

335 

622 

780 

IASIVOT 

74 

80 

59 

59 

59 

ILR EP88 

508 

621 

680 

680 

680 

OOTHVOT 

33 

10 

10 

28 

41 

ODEM 

1164 

803 

803 

1140 

1981 

IAMIVOT 

22 

1 

(T
oT

 
Vo 

I 
Vo 

Is
 

ISR 

ORE 

EP90 

426 

540 

653 

653 

653 

GVOT 

2089 

1408 

1408 

1929 

3707 

OREP 

741 

463 

463 

670 

1344 

IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVMINPCT IRMINPCT IPDEMLTG IPDEMCOA IPDEMSEN IPCTDEM OBLKPCT OVBLKPCT ORBLKPCT OMINPCT OVMINPCT 

1291 

652 

468 

‘468 

468 

0.65 

0.55 

0.53 

0.51 

6.51 

495 

326 

305 

305 

305 

0
0
0
0
0
 

1083 

1228 

1177 

1177 

1177 

.67 

.64 

.62 

.62 

.62 ©
O
O
0
O
O
0
O
O
0
O
 «13 

18 

.18 

.16 - 

.19 o
c
o
o
o
o
 .10 0.09 

.18 0.17; 

.18 0.17 
«15. 0.10 
17 ~~<:0.19 

0.16 

0.22 

0.22 

0.22 

0.23 

ICOA88 ISENSO OTOTVOT OTOTMIN OMINVOT OMINREG 

907 

996 

1024 

1024 

1024 

1231 

1188 

1328 

1328 

1328 

3234 

2294 

2294 

2922 

6071 

611 

575 

575 

802 

1781 

467 

471 

471 

576 

1232 

21 

252 

252 

206 

756 

OLTG88 0COA88 OSENSO GTBLKPOP LTBLKPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EQBLKVOT GTBLKREG LTBLKREG EQBLKREG GTMINPOP LTMINPOP EQMINPOP 

--
 
-
-
-
0
0
 

O
0
0
 

0
O
o
 

-_
 

ed
 

wh
 

a 
OO
 

BLKNTDEM 

O 
«=
 
O
0
0
 =
 

O
0
0
 

O
0
O
o
 

PRFLAG 

ANA LRIIUL LACT : « RHE LCR REDHS: FRIIS DEER 3 ean 

i 
0BS SEGMENT  VTDKEY OPRECNCT IPRECNCT ITOTPOP 

28 36 37.119.0146 09.119.0133 12.119.0146 4666 
37 37.119.0129 09.119.0105 12.119.0129 3615 
38 37.119.0161 09.119.0105 12.119.0161 4067 

: 39 37.119.0161 09.119.0145 12.119.0161 4067 
40 40 37.119.0161 09.119.0184 12.119.0161 4067 

0BS IOTHVOT IREGVOT IREGWHT IREGBLK IREGOTH 

36 60 2189 1694 485 10 
37 16 2005 1679 313 13 
38 2 2201 1896 291 14 
39 2 2201 1896 291 14 
40 2 2201 1896 291 14 

08S IDEM IREP OTOTPOP OTOTWHT OTOTBLK 

36 1344 662 3931 3320 439 
37 Wu: . 1175 666 2645 2070 488 
38 1274 786 2645 2070 488 
39 1274 786 3673 2871 589 
40 1274 786 7719 5938 1487 

08S OREGWHT OREGBLK OREGOTH OCDEMS8 OLDEMSS 

36 1878 192 19 389 540 
37 1156 244 8 280 362 
38 1156 244 8 280 362 
39 1723 194 12 410 535 
40 2951 718 38 766 926 

08S 

386 0.34 0.31 0.22 0.39 0.35 0.23 0.53 
37: 0.22 0.19 0.16. 0.26 0.23 0.16. 0.49 
an 0.14 0.12 0.13 0.17 0.15 0.14 0.42 

0.14 0.12, 0.13 0.17 0.15 0.14 0.42 
0.44% ---0.12 . . 0.13 0.17 0.15 0.14 0.42 

0BS ORMINPCT OPDEMLTG OPDEMCOA OPDEMSEN OPCTDEM ITOTVOT ITOTMIN IMINVOT IMINREG ILTG88 

36 0.10 0.44 0.39 0.51 0.61 3674 1816 
37 0.12 0.50 0.48 0.60 0.63 2825 940 
38: 0.18 0.50 0.48 0.60 0.63 3227 681 
39 0.13 0.45 0.42 0.48 0.63 3227 681 
40 - 0.20 0.48 0.47 0.64 0.60 3227 681 

08s 

36 1231 © 1006 117) 1 0 0 1 
az. 719 588 847 1 0 0 1 
38 719 588 847 0 1 0 0 
39 1181 975° 1137 0 1 0 ‘0 
40 1923 1645 2180 0 1 0 0 

08S GTMINVOT LTMINVOT EQMINVOT GTMINREG LTMINREG 

36 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 
37 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 
38 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 
39 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 
40 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 

08S EQDEMSEN GTDEMREG LTDEMREG EQDEMREG DEMNTBLK 

36 0 © 0 0 0 
37 0 1 0 0 0 
38 0 0 1 0 0 
39 0 0 1 0 0 
‘a 0 1 0 0 0 ©

O
O
0
O
0
O
0
O
o
 

C
0
0
0
 
O0

o 

-~ 

0 

1 

1 

0 

1 » 

O
O
O
O
 
=
 

-_
 

eh
 
h
o
 
O
 

0
0
0
0
0
 

O
O
O
 

= 
=
 

0
0
0
0
 
O0

 

c
b
h
o
o
=
 

- 
- 

- 
0
0
 

-
 

OO
 

=
 

-4
 

0
 

O
O
0
O
O
0
O
0
O
o
 

EQUINREG GTDEMCOA LTDEMCOA EQDEMCOA GTDEMLTG LTDEMLTG EQDEMLTG GTDEMSEN LTDEMSEN 

15 

  Printed 09/01/99 10:28:55 Discovery  



  

  

ES EgIALESy ENS CHIEN TSI CURE DIS TRICEARROGRAMS 2 EGR X R N\ Soe AR BAe N AN LON 241g Hix ERR BIE ERNE AI RR TR RR ERR SONA BN RH DRE NI 

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 12:00 Tuesday, February 24, 1998 16 LI 100 0BS FROM FINAL DATA SET - CHECK COMPAR $ 

0BS SEGMENT  VTDKEY OPRECNCT IPRECNCT 1TOTPOP ITOTWHT ITOTBLK IWHTVOT IBLKVOT IASIVOT IAMIVOT 
~~" 41 37.119.0161 09.119.0195 12.119.0161 4067 3386 573 2759 398 59 9 42 37.119.0103 09.119.0104 12.119.0103 4613 2018 2393 1596 1555 109 10 44 37.119.0602 09.119.0104 12.119.0602 10599 8831 1463 7481 1176 193 23 4 45 37.119.0602 09.119.0601 12.119.0602 10599 8831 1463 7481 1176 193 23 45 46 37.119.0602 08.025.0101 12.119.0602 10599 8831 1463 7481 1176 193 23 

08S IOTHVOT IREGVOT IREGWHT IREGBLK IREGOTH ICDEMSS ILDEMSS ISDEM90 ICREPS8 ILREP8S ISREPS0 

41 2 2201 1896 291 14 401 497 675 623 680 653 42 14 2171 1211 949 11 544 633 866 449 489 421 43 23 2957 2576 347 34 1114 732 1114 850 846 850 44 23 2957 2576 347 34 1114 732 1114 850 846 850 45 23 2957 2576 347 34 1114 732 1114 850 846 850 

08S IDEM IREP OTOTPOP OTOTWHT OTOTBLK OWHTVOT OBLKVOT OASIVOT OAMIVOT OOTHVOT OREGVOT 

41 1274 786 7442 5837 1400 4506 927 105 18 20 3773 42 1506 549 4056 3438 533 2704 366 44 9 6 1934 43 1418 1222 4056 3438 533 2704 366 44 9 6 1934 44 1418 1222 1054 940 104 720 77 5 2 1 2027 45 1418 1222 3635 3238 360 2260 245 19 7 1 2091 

08S OREGWHT OREGBLK OREGOTH OCDEMS8 OLDEMSS OSDEMS0 OCREP8S OLREPSS OSREP90 ODEM OREP 

41 3092 654 27 513 649 1365 668 702 881 1904 1501 42 1624 300 10 474 615 778 768 845 725 1054 742 43 1624 300 10 474 615 778 768 845 725 1054 742 44 1741 281 5 362 486 696 613 664 712 1039 835 45 1909 175 7 392 467 575 796 815 793 886 1003 

0BS IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVMINPCT IRMINPCT IPDEMLTG IPDEMCOA IPDEMSEN IPCTDEM OBLKPCT OVBLKPCT ORBLKPCT OMINPCT OVMINPCT 

41 0.33. 0.12 03.0 0.47 0.15 0.14 0.42 0.39 0.51 0.62 0.190 0.17: Fo.17 0.22 0.19 42° 05277 "0.47 0.44 0.56 0.51 0.44 0.56 0.55 0.67 0.73 0.13 0.12 0.16 0.15 0.14 43 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.17 0.16 0.13 0.46 0.57 0.57 0.54 0.13 0.12 0.16 0.15 0.14 ei 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.17 0.16 0.13 0.46 0.57 0.57 0.54 0.10 0.10 0.14 0.11 0.11 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.17 0.16 0.13 0.46 0.57 0.57 0.54 0.10 0.10 0.08 0.11 0.11 

OBS ORMINPCT OPDEMLTG OPDEMCOA OPDEMSEN OPCTDEM ITOTVOT ITOTMIN IMINVOT IMINREG ILTG88 ICOA88 ISENSO OTOTVOT OTOTMIN OMINVOT OMINREG ~ 

0.18 0.48 0.43 0.61 0.56 3227 681 468 305 1177 1024 1328 5576 1605 1070 681 42 0.16 0.42 0.38 0.52 0.59 3284 2595 1688 S60 1122 993 1287 3129 618 425 310 43 0.16 0.42 0.38 0.52 0.59 8896 1768 1415 381 1578 1964 1964 3129 618 425 310 44 0.14 0.42 0.37 0.49 0.55 8896 1768 1415 381 1578 1964 1964 805 114 85 286 45 - 0.09 0.36 0.33 0.42 0.47 8896 1768 1415 381 1578 1964 1964 2532 397 272 182 

0BS OLTG88 0COA88 OSENSO GTBLKPOP LTBLKPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EQBLKVOT GTBLKREG LTBLKREG EQBLKREG GTMINPOP LTMINPOP EQMINPOP 

41 1351 1181 2246 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 * 0 0 1 0 42 1460 1242 1503 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 43 1460 1242 1503 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 44 1150 975 1408 1 0 0 “1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 45 1282 1188 1368 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 

0BS GTMINVOT LTMINVOT EQMINVOT GTMINREG LTMINREG EQMINREG GTDEMCOA LTDEMCOA EQDEMCOA GTDEMLTG LTDEMLTG EQDEMLTG GTDEMSEN LTDEMSEN 

41 0 1 0 0 1-- 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 42 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 43 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 44 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 45 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 

0BS EQDEMSEN GTOEMREG LTOEMREG EQDEMREG DEMNTBLK BLKNTDEM PRFLAG 

41 0 A p 0 0 0 0 0 42 0 rq 0 0 0 0 0 43 0 0 R 0 0 0 0 44 0 0 ; 0 0 0 0 as 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 

  Printed 09/01,99 10:28:55 Discovery  



ING 
LIS 00 OBS FROM FINAL DATA SET - CHECK COMPARIS 

OBS SEGMENT  VTDKEY OPRECNCT IPRECNCT ITOTPOP ITOTWHT ITOTBLK IWHTVOT IBLKVOT IASIVOT IAMIVOT 

—48 47 37.119.0602 08.025.0103 12.119.0602 10599 8831 1463 7481 1176 
48 37.119.0602 08.025.0203 12.119.0602 10599 8831 1463 7481 1176 
49 37.119.1101 08.025.0203 12.119.1101 6429 5344 90S 4055 626 S50 37.119.1101 08.025.0204 12.119.1101 6429 5344 905 4055 626 
51 37.119.0801 08.025.0301 12.119.0801 5069 4305 725 3316 524 

193 23 

193 23 

[0 19 

90 19 

10 20 

IOTHVOT IREGVOT IREGWHT IREGBLK IREGOTH ICDEMSS ILDEM8S ISDEMS0 ICREP8S ILREPS8 ISREPS0 

2957 2576 347 1114 732 1114 850 846 850 2957 2576 347 1114 732 1114 850 846 850 4493 3700 765 767 1006 1421 1250 1380 1258 4493 3700 765 767 1006 1421 1250 1380 1258 2837 2475 .359 541 653 822 792 891 948 

IDEM IREP OTOTPOP OTOTWHT OTOTBLK OWHTVOT OBLKVOT OASIVOT OAMIVOT OOTHVOT OREGVOT 

1418 1222 2273 2204 41 1728 
1418 1222 2041 2002 1514 
2284 1807 2041 2002 1514 6 
2284 1807 1373 1322 995 36 
1537 1142 3001 2602 1978 263 

S 1347 

1 919 

1 919 

0 746 

6 1470 

OSREPSO ODEM OREP 
OREGWHT OREGBLK OREGOTH OCDEM88 OSDEMI0 OCREP8S8 OLREP88 

1319 23 303 282 524 567 631 668 575 908 6 184 215 191 353 370 : 397 383 ; 475 908 6 184 215 191 353 370 397 383 475 718 21 149 175 171 287 300 344 282 398 1336 134 343 396 310 579 587 673 731 651 

IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVMINPCT IRMINPCT IPDEMLTG IPDEMCOA IPDEMSEN IPCTDEM OBLKPCT OVBLKPCT ORBLKPCT OMINPCT OVMINPCT 

.14 «13 «12 lg .16 “13 0.46 . «57 .54 

.14 .13 -12 “17 «16 .13 0.46 ¥ -57 .54 

.14 .13 17 «17 .16 .18 0.42 . 53 -56 

.14 «13 17 «17 .16 18 0.42 . .53 -56 

.14 .14 .13 +15 .14 .13 0.42 . .46 +57 

0.02 

0.01 

0.01 

0.03 . 

0.09 . oh 

ORMINPCT OPDEMLTG OPDEMCOA CPDEMSEN OPCTDEM ITOTVOT ITOTMIN IMINVOT IMINREG ILTG88 ICOA88 ISENSO OTOTVOT OTOTMIN OMINVOT OMINREG 

.02 .38 .37 . 0.54 8896 1768 1415 381 1578 1964 1964 1785 69 57 28 +0 -37 .34 ! 0.45 8896 1768 1415 381 1578 1964 1964 1541 39 27 1 +01 Wg .34 ; 0.45 4805 1085 750 793 2386 2017 2679 1541 39 27 11 .04 “37 .34 2 0.41 4805 1085 750 793 2386 2017 2679 1036 51 41 28 +09 .40 .37 . 0.53 3872 764 556 362 1544 1333 1770 2282 399 274 134 

  
OLTG88 0COA88 OSEN9SO GTBLKPOP LTBLKPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EQBLKVOT GTBLKREG LTBLKREG EQBLKREG GTMINPOP LTMINPOP EQMINPOP 

910 827 913 

585 537 588 

585 S37 588 

475 436 S515 

983 922 983 

GTMINVOT LTMINVOT EQMINVOT GTMINREG LTMINREG EQMINREG GTDEMCOA LTDEMCOA EQDEMCOA GTDEMLTG LTDEMLTG EQDEMLTG GTDEMSEN LTDEMSEN 

EQDEMSEN GTDEMREG LTDEMREG 

  | 
Printed 09/01/99 10:28:55 Discovery    



  

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 12:00 Tuesday, February 24, 1998 18 LI 100 OBS FROM FINAL DATA SET - CHECK COMPARINE® 

OBS SEGMENT  VTDKEY OPRECNCT IPRECNCT ITOTPOP ITOTWHT ITOTBLK IWHTVOT IBLKVOT IASIVOT IAMIVOT 

52  37.119.0501 08.025.0301 12.119.0501 3706 3041 626 2279 441 S3  37.119.0701 08.025.0301 12.119.0701 4280 3529 669 3099 510 54 37.097.0404 08.025.0301 12.097.0404 4228 4064 140 3066 100 55 37.097.0403 08.025.0301 12.097.0403 4246 3750 458 2944 306 56  37.097.0403 06.159.0102 12.097.0403 4246 3750 458 2944 306 

16 6 

12 

S 

1 

11 

IOTHVOT IREGVOT IREGWHT IREGBLK IREGOTH ICDEMSS ILDEMSS ISDEMSO ICREP88 ILREPSS ISREPS0 

1809 1537 269 380 479 S36 525 622 564 2203 1885 312 491 692 961 512 544 447 1668 1616 50 377 390 300 606 636 641 1920 1817 102 492 524 460 696 755 681 1920 1817 -102 492 524 460 696 755 681 

IDEM IREP 0TOTPOP OTOTWHT 0TOTBLK OWHTVOT OBLKVOT OASIVOT OAMIVOT OOTHVOT OREGVOT 

1078 628 3001 2602 384 1978 263 1413 613 3001 2602 1978 263 
890 687 3001 2602 384 1978 263 

1129 710 3001 2602 384 1978 263 
1129 710 5688 5635 24 4299 16 

1470 
1470 
1470 
1470 
2435 

OREGWHT OREGBLK OREGOTH OCDEMSS OLDEMSS OSDEM90 OCREPS8 OLREP8S OSREP90 ODEM OREP 
1336 134 343 396 310 579 587 673 731 651 1336 134 343 396 310 579 587 673 731 651 1336 134 343 396 310 579 587 673 731 651 1336 134 343 396 310. 579 587 673 731 651 2424 8 435 506 297 1072 1057 1132 1068 1244 

  
IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVMINPCT IRMINPCT IPDEMLTG IPDEMCOA IPDEMSEN IPCTDEM OBLKPCT OVBLKPCT ORBLKPCT OMINPCT OVMINPCT 

0.17 0.18 0.15 0.18 «17 0.15 ‘ 0.42 0.49 
0.16 0.14 0.14 0.18 .16 0.14 . 0.49 0.68 

0.63" 0.13 0.12 } 13 32 
0. 0.03 _ 0.03 0.03, 0.04 .04 0.03 A 0.38 0.32 0. 
0. 
0. 

0.13 0.12 . «13 12 
0:33 032. 0.0 a3 12 0,11 ,...0.00 :. 0.08, 0.42 .10 0.05 Al ere limon 0.40, 0 0. 0.130.137" “008 .13 .12 0.11 0.09 0.05 0.12 .10 0.05 4 0.41 0.40 61 0.00 0.00 ; .01 .01 

ORMINPCT OPDEMLTG OPDEMCOA OPDEMSEN OPCTDEM ITOTVOT ITOTMIN IMINVOT IMINREG ILTG88 ICOAS8 ISENSO OTOTVOT OTOTMIN OMINVOT OMINREG -° 

0.37 . ‘ 2743 665 464 272 1101 90S 1100 2252 399 274 134 0.37 : . 3675 751 S76 318 1236 1003 1408 2252 399 274 134 0.37 . . 3187 164 121 52 1026 983 941 2252 399 274 134 .0.37 vii le .83 , 3275 496 331 103 1279 1188 1141 2252 399 274 134 0.29 : .46 3275 496 331 103 1279 1188 1141 4339 53 40 11 

OLTG88 0COA88 OSEN9O GTBLKPOP LTBLKPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EQBLKVOT GTBLKREG LTBLKREG EQBLKREG GTMINPOP LTMINPOP EQMINPOP 

922 

922 

922 

922 

1563 1507 1429 

GTMINVOT LTMINVOT EQMINVOT GTMINREG LTMINREG 

fr 

1 

EQDEMSEN GTDEMREG LTDEMREG EQDEMREG   
  Printed 09/01/99 10:28:56 Discovery  



  
    

    

No} 

12:00 Tuesday, February 24, 1998 
LIST #100 0BS FROM FINAL DATA SET - CHECK COMPARISC 

0BS SEGMENT  VTDKEY OPRECNCT IPRECNCT ITOTPOP ITOTWHT ITOTBLK IWHTVOT IBLKVOT IASIVOT TAMIVOT 

S57  37.097.0403 06.159.0101 12.097.0403 4246 3750 458 2944 306 
58 37.097.0101 06.159.0901 12.097.0101 4070 3620 435 2700 297 
59 37.097.0301 06.159.0901 12.097.0301 8121 6858 1168 5114 766 
60 37.159.0301 06.159.0901 12.159.0301 1955 1461 485 1097 348 
61 37.159.0301 06.159.1301 12.159.0301 1955 1461 485 1097 348 

11 

6 

12 

2 

2 

IOTHVOT IREGVOT IREGWHT IREGBLK IREGOTH ICDEM88 ILDEM88 ISDEMSO ICREP88 ILREP8S ISREPS0 

9 1920 1817 102 492 524 460 696 755 681 
1 1372 1227 144 372 361 313 562 488 

3608 3368 235 782 782 877 1582 1342 
972 733 239 330 368 319 275 277 
972 733 239 330 368 319 275 277 

IREP 0TOTPOP OTOTWHT OTOTBLK OWHTVOT OBLKVOT OASIVOT OOTHVOT OREGVOT 

710 3004 2890 83 2133 
497 1013 103 755 

1547 1013 103 755 
269 1013 103 755 
269 1134 102 832 

2 1095 

0 515 

0 515 

0 515 

0 665 

OREGBLK OCDEMSS8 OLDEM8S OSDEMS0 OCREP88 OLREP88 OSREPS0 ODEM OREP 

15 258 306 209 482 491 511 535 493 
31 155 157 122 194 203 213 286 201 
31 155 157 122 194 203 213 286 201 
31 155 157 122 194 203 213 286 201 
56 164 186 146 269 263 294 315 307 

  
IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVMINPCT IRMINPCT IPDEMLTG IPDEMCOA IPDEMSEN IPCTDEM OBLKPCT OVBLKPCT ORBLKPCT OMINPCT OVMINPCT 

«31 . .05 9.12 0.10 . : 0.41 ‘ .51 
«31 . “10 6.1} 0.10 : . 0.42 . .62 
.14 . 07 0.16 0.14 . : 0.35 . .35 
“25 : +25 0.25 0.24 . ¢ 0.53 . .71 
.25 . J25 0.25 0.24 . . 0.53 : <7 

ORMINPCT OPDEMLTG OPDEMCOA OPDEMSEN OPCTDEM ITOTVOT ITOTMIN IMINVOT IMINREG ILTG88 ICOA88 ISENSO OTOTVOT OTOTMIN OMINVOT OMINREG 

.03 .38 .35 5 .52 3275 496 331 103 1279 1188 1141 2272 114 79 15 

.06 .44 .44 . -59 3007 "450 307 145 923 891 801 824 103 69 31 

.06 .44 .44 : .59 5943 1263 829 240 2364 2247 2219 824 103 69 31 

.06 .44 .44 . -59 1449 494 352 239 643 619 596 824 103 69 31 

.08 .41 .38 . «51 1449 494 352 239 643 619 5396 909 102 77 56 

OLTG88 0COA88 OSENSO GTBLKPOP LTBLKPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EQBLKVOT GTBLKREG LTBLKREG EQBLKREG GTMINPOP LTMINPOP EQMINPOP 

797 740 720 1 
360 349 335 1 
360 349 335 ie 
360 349 335 1 
449 433 440 1 

GTMINVOT LTMINVOT EQMINVOT GTMINREG LTMINREG EQMINREG GTDEMCOA LTDEMCOA EQDEMCOA GTOEMLTG LTDEMLTG EQDEMLTG GTDEMSEN LTDEMSEN 

EQDEMSEN GTDEMREG LTDEMREG 

  
  Printed 09/01/99 10:28:56 Discovery  



  

SHRINE 

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 12:00 Tuesday, Februar 24, 1998 20 100 OBS FROM FINAL DATA SET - CHECK COMPARIMN 

OBS SEGMENT  VTDKEY OPRECNCT ~~ IPRECNCT ITOTPOP ITOTWHT ITOTBLK IWHTVOT IBLKVOT IASIVOT ~~ rAMIvOT 
~ 7%. 62  37.159.1401 06.159.1301 12.159.1401 1756 1381 358 63 37.159.1401 06.159.1104 12.159.1401 1756 1381 358 64  37.159.0401 06.159.1104 12.159.0401 4589 3808 725 65 37.159.1107 06.159.1104 12.159.1107 2598 2237 

66 37.159.1115 06.159.1104 12.159.1115 2296 15 

1038 263 

1038 263 

2977 529 
331 1952 281 

2278 1 1726 

IOTHVOT IREGVOT IREGWHT IREGBLK IREGOTH ICDEMS8 ILDEM8S ISDEM90 ICREP88 ILREP88 

708 135 269 286 241 254 278 708 135 269 286 241 254 278 2181 727 761 624 861 899 1143 334 397 366 384 392 
2 619 606 522 13 27 

IDEM oTOTPOP OTOTBLK OWHTVOT 0BLKVOT OASIVOT OAMIVOT 00THVOT OREGVOT 

498 1236 102 832 77 0 0 498 4680 835 3083 527 40 10 1428 4680 835 3083 527 40 10 600 4680 835 3083 527 40 10 1141 4680 835 3083 527 40 10 

665 

2624 

2624 

2624 

2624 

  
OREGWHT OREGBLK OREGOTH OLDEM88 OSODEMS0 OCREP88 OLREP88 OSREPS0 ODEM OREP 

609 56 0 164 186 146 269 263 294 315 2291 315 : 18 713 789 746 882 880 798 2291 315 18 713 789 746 882 880 798 2291 315 18 713 789 746 882 880 798 2291 315 18 713 789 746 882 880 798 

  307 
1392 1041 

1392 1041 

1392 1041 

1392 1041 

IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVMINPCT IRMINPCT IPDEMLTG IPDEMCOA IPDEMSEN IPCTDEM OBLKPCT OVBLKPCT ORBLKPCT OMINPCT OVMINPCT 

0.20 0.20 0.16 0.21 0.21 0.16 0.51 0.51 0.47 .62 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 .08 0.20 0.20 0.16 0.21 0.21 0.16 0.51 0.51 0.47 .62 0.18 0.14 8.12 0.19 .16 0.18... 8,15...10.13 0.17 0.16 0.13 0.46 0.46 0.40 .60 0.18 0.14 0.12 0.19 .16 0.13  ..0.12.. -0:05~ 0.14 0.13 0.05 0.50 0.47 0.49 .53 0.18 0.14 0.12- 0.19 .16 0.99 0.99 1.00 0.99 0.99 1.00 0.96 0.98 1.00 .96 0.18 0.14 0.12 0.19 .16 
ORMINPCT OPDEMLTG OPDEMCOA OPDEMSEN OPCTDEM ITOTVOT ITOTMIN IMINVOT IMINREG ILTG88 ICOA88 ISENSO OTOTVOT OTOTMIN OMINVOT OMINREG ~ 

.08 .41 .38 0.33 -51 1309 375 271 136 564 523 513 909 102 77 56 «V3 .47 .45 0.48 «57 1309 375 27% 136 564 523 513 3667 S09 584 333 +13 .47 .45 0.48 57 3545 781 568 335 1660 1588 1573 3667 909 584 333 -13 .47 .45 0.48 .57 2255 361 303 64 789 718 743 3667 909 584 333 .13 .47 .45 0.48 +57 1738 2281 1727 1256 633 632 523 3667 S09 584 333 

OLTG88 0COA88 OSEN90 GTBLKPOP LTBLKPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EQBLKVOT GTBLKREG LTBLKREG EQBLKREG GTMINPOP LTMINPOP EQMINPOP 

449 433 440 i 
0 1669 1595 1544 
0 1669 1595 1544 
1 1669 1595 1544 

Xe a bd 1669 1595 1544 
0 

GTMINVOT LTMINVOT EQMINVOT GTMINREG LTMINREG EQUINREG GTDEMCOA LTDEMCOA EQDEMCOA GTDEMLTG LTOEMLTG EQDEMLTG GTDEMSEN LTDEMSEN 

EQDEMSEN GTDEMREG LTDEMREG DEMNTBLK BLKNTDEM 

1 
1 

a 
0 
1 

  
  Printed 09/01/99 10:28:56 Discovery  



  
  

   

  

   
OBS SEGMENT 
  

LIS 

ITOTWHT 

15 

1222 

1222 

2138 

2138 

ICD EM88 

619 

365 

365 

§57 

857 

OWHTVOT 

0SD 

3927 

3927 

1894 

1894 

2930 

EM90 

554 

554 

410 

410 

259 

    

      

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 
100 OBS FROM FINAL DATA SET - CHECK COMPARINS 

ITOTBLK 

2278 

702 

702 

1489 

1489 

ILDEM8S 

606 

414 

414 

S582 

582 

0BLKVOT 

207 

207 

282 

282 

542 

OCREP88 

1 

1067 

067 

517 

517 

551 

IWHTVOT 

11 

1051 

1051 

1787 

1787 

ISD 

OAS 

OLR 

EMS0 

522 

410 

410 

489 

489 

IvVoT 

EP88 

1045 

1045 

S70 

570 

561 

IBLKVOT 

1726 

496 

496 

937 

937 

ICREPSS 

13 

264 

264 

407 

407 

OAMIVOT 

999 

551 

551 

S530 

IASIVOT 

0 

18 

18 

10 

10 

  

ILREP8SS 

27 

267 

OOTHVOT 

1096 

1096 

943 

943 

685 

  

IAMIVOT 

[
o
)
0
~
 

IE
 
_ 

] 

   

  

ISREP90 

1 

273 

273 

412 

412 

OREGVOT 

2574 

2574 

1634 

1634 

1445 

OREP 

1241 

1241 

584 

584 

658 

IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVMINPCT IRMINPCT IPDEMLTG IPDEMCOA IPDEMSEN IPCTOEM OBLKPCT OVBLKPCT ORBLKPCT OMINPCT OVMINPCT 

© 
0 
O
0
0
 O
O 

ITOTVOT ITOTMIN IMINVOT IMINREG ILTGSS 

1727 

520 

520 

958 

958 

1 256 

248 

248 

495 

495 

633 

681 

681 

1002 

1002 

.96 

.87 

.67 

.68 

.68 OO
 
O
0
O
O
0
0
o
O
o
 .05 

.05 

15 

15 

14 

0.0S 

.05 

.13 

.13 

-135 O
O
 

O0
OO

0o
 

0.07 

0.07 

0.16 

0.16 

0.15 0 
O
0
0
 
0
0
 .06 

.06 

.14 

.14 

17 

ICOA88 ISENSO OTOTVOT OTOTMIN OMINVOT OMINREG 

632 

629 

629 

964 

964 

523 

683 

683 

901 

901 

4189 

4189 

2192 

2192 

3514 

390 

390 

438 

438 

665 

262 

262 

298 

298 

584 

9 

9 

15 

15 

S 

3 

3 

0 

0 

7 

OLTG88 0COA88 OSENS0 GTBLKPOP LTBLKPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EQBLKVOT GTBLKREG LTBLKREG EQBLKREG GTMINPOP LTMINPOP EQMINPOP 

VTDKEY OPRECNCT IPRECNCT ITOTPOP 

is 67 37.159.1115 06.159.0701 12.159.1115 22386 
68 37.159.1113 06.159.0701 12.159.1113 1964 
69 37.159.1113 06.159.1114 12.159.1113 1964 od 70 37.159.1112 06.159.1114 12.159.1112 3659 

70 71 37.159.1112 06.159.0702 12.159.1112 3659 

0BS IOTHVOT IREGVOT IREGWHT IREGBLK IREGOTH 

66 1 1258 2 1255 1 
67 2 1158 910 245 3 
68 2 1158 910 245 3 
69 5 1583 1088 492 3 
70 5 1583 1088 492 3 

08S IDEM IREP oTOTPOP OTOTWHT OTOTBLK 

66 1141 44 5763 5373 309 
67 718 353 5763 5373 309 
68 718 353 2766 2328 412 
69 1007 466 2766 2328 412 
70 1007 466 4370 3705 609 

08s OREGWHT OREGBLK OREGOTH OCDEMS8 OLDEMSS 

66 2481 87 6 539 639 
67 2481 87 6 539 639 
68 1484 148 2 491 509 
69 1484 148 2 491 509 
70 1348 89 8 281 327 

08S 

66 0.99 0.99 1.00 0.99 0.99 1.00 0.96 
67 0.36 0.32 0.21 0.38 0.33 0.21 0.61 
=a. 20.38 0.32 0.21 0.38 0.33 0.21 0.61 

al I 0.34 0.3 0.42 0.35 0.33% 0.58 
0.41 0.34 0.31 0.42 0.35 0.31 0.58 

OBS ORMINPCT OPDEMLTG OPDEMCOA OPDEMSEN OPCTDEM 

66 0.04 0.38 0.34 0.36 0.47 1738 2281 
87 "0.04 0.33 0.34 0.36 0.47 1571 742 
63 0.09 0.47 0.49 0.43 0.62 1571 742 
69 0.09 0.47 0.49 0.43 0.62 2745 1521 
70 0.07 0.37 0.34 0.33 0.51 2745 1521 

08S 

66 1684 1606 1553 1 0 0 1 
67 1684 1606 1553 1 0 0 1 
68 1079 1008 961 1 0 0 3 
69 1079 1008 961 1 0 0 { 
70 888 832 789 1 0 0 1 

08S GTMINVOT LTMINVOT EQMINVOT GTMINREG LTMINREG 

66 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 
87 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 
68 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 
69 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 
70 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 

OBS EQDEMSEN GTDEMREG LTDEMREG EQDEMREG DEMNTBLK 

66 0 1 0 0 0 
67 0 1 0 0 0 
6s 0 1 0 0 0 
69 0 1 0 0 0 
Re 0 1 0 0 0 

©
 

O
0
O
O
0
O
O
0
O
0
o
 

O
0
0
 

O
0
O
0
 

©
0
0
0
0
 O

0o
 

0
O
O
0
O
O
0
0
O
o
 

O
O
 
O
0
O
O
0
O
O
0
O
0
 

PRFLAG 

O
O
0
O
O
0
O
0
O
0
 

J 
N
T
 

A 
S
G
 

—y
 

O
O
 

O
0
O
O
0
O
o
 

l
h
 

w
d
 

w
h
 

w
h
 

bh
 

(=
 
«
e
e
e
 

0
0
.
0
.
0
 

h
t
 

e
d
 

wd
 

w
h
 

a
 

C
0
0
0
0
 

l
h
 

e
d
 

e
d
 

a
d
 

hd
 

O
O
 
O
0
O
O
0
O
O
0
O
0
o
 

O
0
0
 

O
0
O
0
 

O
O
0
O
O
0
O
O
0
O
0
o
 

  Printed 09/01,99 10:28:56 Discovery 

 



  

  
  

  

  

X WN A ER NR 3 2 R NaN SNERIRN SNARE x _: NTP PE EEN NSE A TT re SN oo > TTT YC EEREAS ln LS MCEIENTSENC REDISTRICENEROGRAMSNEASEOR 02538 NN SRN DIN RD N WN == REI > SA A RE RRA RE 

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 12:00 Tuesday, February 24, 1998 22 
LIS 100 08S FROM FINAL DATA SET - CHECK COMPARISH 

OBS SEGMENT VTDKEY OPRECNCT IPRECNCT ITOTPOP ITOTWHT ITOTBLK IWHTVOT IBLKVOT IASIVOT TAMIVOT 

"i 72 37.159.1112 06.159.06%X2 12.159.1112 3659 2138 1489 1787 937 10 6 73 37.159.1112 06.159.0602 12.159.1112 3659 2138 1489 1787 937 10 6 74 - 37.159.1112 06.159.1102 112.159.1112 3659 2138 1489 1787 937 10 6 4 75 37.159.1108 06.159.1103 12.159.1108 2673 1673 978 1398 659 11 5 75 76 37.159.1108 06.159.11X6 12.159.1108 2673 1673 978 1398 659 11 5 

08S IOTHVOT IREGVOT IREGWHT IREGBLK IREGOTH ICDEMS88 ILDEMSS ISDEMS0 ICREPS8S ILREPSS ISREPS0 

71 5 1583 1088 492 3 557 582 489 407 420 412 
72 5 1583 1088 492 3 557 582 489 407 420 412 
73 8 1583 1088 492 3 557 582 489 407 420 412 
74 1 1242 952 288 2 377 415 333 350 346 326 75 1 1242 952 288 2 377 415 333 350 346 326 

oBsS IDEM IREP OTOTPOP QTOTWHT OTOTBLK OWHTVOT OBLKVOT OASIVOT QAMIVOT OOTHVOT OREGVOT 

7 1007 466 67 38 20 32 17 0 0 6 0 72 1007 466 2641 2540 82 1882 60 11 2 0 1367 
73 1007 466 4194 3815 345 2805 270 21 5 1 2279 74 757 390 3584 3222 318 2447 219 1 5 28 1616 75 757 390 26 1 25 1 12 0 0 0 0 

| 

08s OREGWHT OREGBLK OREGOTH OCDEMSS OLDEMSS OSDEMS0 OCREP88 OLREPS8 OSREPS0 ODEM OREP 

71 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
72 1363 6 1 301 g 360 275 589 592 604 554 730 
73 2046 232 1 525 594 557 828 832 831 1071 1052 
74 1513 99 4 327 386 285 661 650 637 722 790 
75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

0BS IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVMINPCT IRMINPCT IPDEMLTG IPDEMCOA IPDEMSEN IPCTDEM OBLKPCT OVBLKPCT ORBLKPCT OMINPCT OVMINPCT 

71 0.41 0.34 0.31 0.42 0.35 0.31 0.58 0.58 0.54 0.68 0.30 0.31 . 0.43 0.42 
72 0.41 0.34 0.31 0.42 0.35 0.31 0.58 0.58 0.54 0.68 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.04 0.04 
id | 0.41 0.34 0.31 0.42 0.35 0.31 0.58 0.58 0.54 0.68 0.08 0.09 0.10 0.09 0.10 

0.37 0.32 0.23 0.37 0.33 0.23 0.55 0.52 0.51% 0.66 0.09 0.08 0.06 0.10 0.09 
0.37 0.32 0.23 0.37 0.33 0.23 0.55 0.52 0.51 0.66 0.96 0.92 . 0.96 0.92 

0BS ORMINPCT OPDEMLTG OPDEMCOA OPDEMSEN OPCTDEM ITOTVOT ITOTMIN IMINVOT IMINREG ILTG88 ICOA88 ISENS0 OTOTVOT OTOTMIN OMINVOT OMINREG™— 

71 : ; ; : ; 2745 1521 958 495 1002 964 901 55 29 23 0 72 0.00 0.38 0.34 0.31 0.43 2745 1521 958 495 1002 964 901 1955 101 73 4 73. 0.10 0.42 0.39 0.40 0.50 2745 1521 958 495 1002 964 901 3102 379 297 233 74 0.06 0.37 0.33 0.31 0.48 2074 1000 676 290 761 727 659 2700 362 253 103 75 Aoki, k : ’ 2074 1000 676 290 761 727 659 13 25 12 0 

OBS OLTG88 0COA88 OSENSO GTBLKPOP LTBLKPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EQBLKVOT GTBLKREG LTBLKREG EQBLKREG GTMINPOP LTMINPOP EQMINPOP 

71 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 72 952 890 879 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 73 1426 1353 1388 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 74 1036 988 922 1 0 0 i i 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 75 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 i 0 1 0 

0BS GTMINVOT LTMINVOT EQMINVOT GTMINREG LTMINREG 

71 0 1 0 . . . . 72 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 
73 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 
74 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 
75 0 1 0 . 

083 EQDEMSEN GTDEMREG LTDEMREG EQDEMREG DEMNTBLK BLKNTDEM PRFLAG 

71 . . . . 1 
72 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 
73 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 
74 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 
Ts . . . 1 

  Printed 09/01/99 10:28:56 Discovery  



     

08s 

——— 

08S 

08s 

08s 

SEGMENT 

7 

  

VTDKEY OPRECNCT 

37.159.1109 06.159 
78 37.159.1101 06.159 
79  37.159.1101 06.159 
80 337.159.1101 06.159 
81 37.159.1105 06.159 

IOTHVOT IREGVOT 

0 503 

0 1099 

0 1099 

0 1099 

1 1644 

IDEM IREP 

401 83 

1010 66 

1010 66 

1010 66 

1187 387 

OREGWHT OREGBLK 

0 0 

0 0 

1513 99 

714 126 

714 126 

   
  

NRE 

   
NORTH CAROLI 

LIST © 

IPRECNCT ITOTPOP 

.11X6 112.159.1109 1089 

.11X6 12.159.1101 2056 

.1103 12.159.1101 2056 

.1106 12.159.1101 2056 

.1106 12.159.1105 3546 

IREGWHT IREGBLK IREGOTH 

190 313 0 

172 925 2 

172 925 2 

172 925 2 

1501 143 0 

OTOTPOP OTOTWHT OTOTBLK 

26 1 25 

26 1 25 

3584 3222 318 

1845 1543 290 

1845 1543 290 

OREGOTH OCDEMSS OLDEMS8S8 

0 0 0 

0 0 0 

4 327 386 

0 252 267 

0 252 267 

NA REDISTRICTING 

ITOTWHT 

292 

317 

317 

317 

2704 

ICDEM88 

241 

523 

523 

523 

627 

2447 

1226 

1226 

OSDEM90 

0 

0 

285 

206 

206 

ITOTBLK 

796 

1735 

1735 

1735 

815 

ILDEMSS 

247 

528 

528 

528 

645 

OBLKVOT 

12 
12 

219 
244 
244 

OCREP88 

294 

100 OBS FROM FINAL DATA SET - CHECK COMPARISONS 

IWHTVOT 

2 

251 

259 

259 

259 

211 

ISDEM90 

240 

515 

515 

515 

489 

OASIVOT 

N
N
-
-
O
O
 

OLREP88 

650 

298 

298 

IBLKVOT 

S72 | 
1152 

1152 

1152 

483 

ICREP88 

70 

42 

42 

42 

406 

OAMIVOT 

637 

349 

349 

IASIVOT: 

+
d
 
O
O
O
O
 

ILREPS8 

74 

50 

50 

50 

453 

OOTHVOT 

722 

487 

487 

IAMIVOT 

DO
 

=
 

od
 

cd
 

oa
 

ISR 

ORE 

12:00 Tuesday, February 24, 1998 23 

EPS0 

59 

39 

39 

39 

483 

GVOT 

790 

315 

315 

IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVMINPCT IRMINPCT IPDEMLTG IPDEMCOA IPDEMSEN IPCTDEM OBLKPCT OVBLKPCT ORBLKPCT OMINPCT OVMINPCT 

0.69 0.62 

0.82 0.84 

0.82 0.84 

0.82 0.84 

0.18 0.09 

.73 

.85 

.85 

.85 

.24 0
0
0
0
0
 0.70 0.62 

0.82 0.84 

0.82 0.84 

0.82 0.84 

0.18 0.09 

0.80 0 

0.93 0 

0.93 0 

0.93 0 

0.50 0 

OBS ORMINPCT OPDEMLTG OPDEMCOA OPDEMSEN OPCTDEM ITOTVOT ITOTMIN IMINVOT IMINREG ILTG8S 

76 

0.06 

RE 1 iP 

0.15 

0.37 0.33 

0.47 0.46 

0.47 0.46 

824 

. 1412 

0.48 1412 

0.61 1412 

0.61 2708 

797 
1739 
1739 
1739 
842 

873 

1153 

1153 

1153 

497 

313 

927 

927 

927 

143 

321 

S78 

578 

578 

1098 

.83 

.94 

.94 

.94 

5 

0.96 

0.96 

0.09 

0.16 

0.16 

0.92 

0.92 

0.08 

0.17 

0.17 

0.06 

0. 

0. 

15 

15 

0.96 

0.96 

0.10 

0.16 

0.16 

0.92 

0.92 

0.09 

0.17 

0.17 

ICOA88 ISENSO OTOTVOT OTOTMIN OMINVOT OMINREG 

1 

311 

565 

565 

565 

033 

299 

554 
554 

554 

972 

13 

13 

2700 

1478 

1478 

25 

25 

362 

302 

302 

12 

12 

253 

252 

252 

0 

0 

103 

126 

126 

OLTG88 0COA88 OSEN90 GTBLKPOP LTBLKPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EQBLKVOT GTBLKREG LTBLKREG EQBLKREG GTMINPOP LTMINPOP EQMINPOP 

0 

0 

1036 

565 

565 

GTMINVOT LTMINVOT EQMINVOT GTMINREG LTMINREG 

- 
=
 
0
0
 

EQDEMSEN 

C
0
 

O
o
:
 

0 0 0 

0 0 0 

988 922 1 

546 555 1 

546 555 1 OC
 
O
O
 = 

=
 

1 0 

1 0 . 

0 0 1 

0 0 1 

0 0 0 

GTDEMREG LTDEMREG 

o 

O
0
0
 

O
0
O
0
O
0
o
 0 

0 

1 

1 

1 

| 
0 0 1 

1 0 1 

EQDEMREG DEMNTBLK 

0 0 

0 0 

0 0 

OO
 
O
O
 = 

=
 

o
 

O
O
0
O
O
0
O
O
0
O
o
 

(=
 

J 
= 

J 
= 

J 

-h
 

OO
 
O
O
 

= 
=
 

EQUINREG GTDEMCOA LTDEMCOA EQDEMCOA GTDEMLT 

o
 

-
_
e
e
-
-
-
0
0
 

OC
 
O
O
 

= 
=
 

C
O
0
O
O
0
O
O
0
O
0
o
 

G LTDEMLTG EQDEMLTG GTDEMSEN LTDEMSEN 

  Printed 09/01,99 10:28:56 Discovery   

 



    

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 
LIST 100 OBS FROM FINAL DATA SET - CHECK COMPARISONS 

SEGMENT  VTDKEY OPRECNCT IPRECNCT ITOTPOP ITOTWHT ITOTBLK IWHTVOT IBLKVOT IASIVOT IAMIVOT 

82 37.057.0401 06.159.1106 112.057.0401 3383 3236 121 2404 93 
83 37.057.0401 06.057.0601 12.057.0401 3383 3236 121 2404 93 
84 37.057.1104 06.057.0601 12.057.1104 2054 2007 34 1531 21 
85 37.057.1106 06.057.0601 12.057.1106 3114 2612 425 2100 262 
86 37.057.1105 06.057.0601 12.057.1105 2777 80S 1942 649 1389 

IOTHVQT IREGVOT IREGWHT IREGBLK IREGOTH ICDEMSS ILDEMSS ISDEMS0 ICREP88 ILREP8S8 ISREPSO 

10 1470 1406 64 457 455 311 528 553 619 10 1470 1406 64 457 455 311 528 553 619 2 952 941 11 225 245 163 458 464 408 12 1494 1368 125 407 423 366 299 307 440 7 1558 437 1117 581 597 827 378 393 126 

IDEM IREP OTOTPOP OTOTWHT OTOTBLK OWHTVOT OBLKVOT OASIVOT OAMIVOT OOTHVOT OREGVOT 

946 483 1845 1543 290 1226 244 
946 483 4475 3807 628 2779 451 
463 434 4475 3807 628 2779 451 
975 453 4475 3807 628 2779 451 

1354 16S 4475 3807 628 2779 451 

2 840 

10 1998 

10 1998 

10 1938 

10 1998 

OREGWHT OREGBLK OREGOTH OCDEM8S OLDEM8S OSDEMSO OCREP88 OLREP88 OSREPSO ODEM OREP 

714 126 252 267 206 294 298 487 1700 296 746 766 542 485 S03 1253 1700 296 746 766 542 48S 503 1253 1700 296 746 766 542 485 503 628 1253 1700 296 746 766 542 485 503 628 1253 

IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVMINPCT IRMINPCT IPDEMLTG IPDEMCOA IPDEMSEN IPCTDEM OBLKPCT OVBLKPCT ORBLKPCT OMINPCT OVMINPCT 

0.04 - 4- 0.04 0.04 : 0.04 : 0.45 ; : .66 6 <= 0.17 + 0215 0.16 7 0.04 ° 0.04 0.04 - : 0.04 . 0.45 : . .66 .14 --0.14 "~~ 0.15 0.15 15 0.02 .0 0.01 : 0.02 2 0.35 . : .52 140 0.14 0.15 0.15 .15 0.14 M1 0.08-.- oO. 0.13 : 0.58 : : .68 34. = 0.147 0.15 0.15 18 0.70 : 0.72 7 0.68 ! 0.60 .89 A4. 0.14 0.15 0.15 15 

ORMINPCT OPDEMLTG OPDEMCOA OPDEMSEN OPCTDEM ITOTVOT ITOTMIN IMINVOT IMINREG ILTG88 ICOA88 ISENSO OTOTVOT OTOTMIN OMINVOT OMINREG - 

-15 .47 .46 0.37 .61 2514 147 110 64 1008 98S 1478 302 252 126 
$15 .60 .61 0.46 .66 2514 147 110 64 1008 985 3251 668 472 298 215 .60 +81 0.46 .66 1563 47 32 11 709 683 3251 668 472 298 ii 8. .60 .B1 0.46 .66 2405 502 305 126 730 706 3251 668 472 298 -15 .60 .61 0.46 .66 2055 1972 1406 1121 990 959 3251 668 472 298 

  
OLTG38 0COA88 OSENSO GTBLKPOP LTBLKPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EQBLKVOT GTBLKREG LTBLKREG EQBLKREG GTMINPOP LTMINPOP EQMINPOP 

565 546 555 

1269 1231 1170 

1269 1231 1170 

1269 1231 1170 

1269 1231 1170 

1 

1 

1 

1 

0 

GTMINVOT LTMINVOT EQMINVOT GTMINREG LTMINREG EQMINREG GTDEMCOA LTOEMCOA EQDEMCOA GTDEMLTG LTDEMLTG EQDEMLTG GTDEMSEN LTDEMSEN 

EQDEMSEN GTDEMREG LTDEMREG 

  
  Printed 09/01/99 10:28:56 Discovery  



  

  

   

        

  

3 MS\\BZ 5 Chon Na N LF d WW : SER: HT > RRTR N AN a 
TRICTING 12:00 Tuesday, February 24, 1998 25 LIST OF 100 08S FROM FINAL DATA SET - CHECK COMPARISONS 

0BS SEGMENT  VTDKEY OPRECNCT ~~ IPRECNCT ITOTPOP ITOTWHT ITOTBLK IWHTVOT IBLKVOT IASIVOT TAMIVOT 
ig 87 37.057.1105 06.057.1110 12.057.1105 2777 805 1942 649 1389 8 2 88 37.057.1106 06.057.1110 12.057.1106 3114 2612 425 2100 262 21 10 89 37.057.1109 06.057.1110 12.057.1109 2448 807 1610 620 1040 10 7 89 90 37.057.1109 06.057.0502 12.057.1109 2448 807 1610 620 1040 10 7 90 91 37.057.1109 06.057.1101 12.057.1109 2448 807 1610 620 1040 10 7 

08S IOTHVOT. IREGVOT IREGWHT IREGBLK IREGOTH ICDEMSS ILDEMSS ISDEM90 ICREPSS ILREP8S ISREP90 
86 7 1558 437 1117 4 581 597 827 378 393 126 87 12 1494 1368 125 1 407 423 366 299 307 440 88 1 1205 383 821 1 509 506 518 87 97 91 89 1 1205 383 821 1 509 506 518 87 97 91 90 1 1205 383 821 1 509 506 518 87 97 91 

08s IDEM IREP OTOTPOP OTOTWHT OTOTBLK OWHTVOT OBLKVOT OASIVOT OAMIVOT 0OTHVOT OREGVOT 
86 1354 165 2896 2502 363 2031 247 11 5 6 2021 87 975 453 2896 2502 363 2031 247 11 5 6 2021 88 1070 102 2896 2502 363 2031 247 1 5 6 2021 89 1070 102 3586 3425 139 2606 137 4 12 4 1575 90 1070 102 2122 2000 100 1582 65 7 9 1 811 

08S OREGWHT OREGBLK OREGOTH OCDEMSS OLDEMSS OSDEMIO OCREP88 OLREP88 OSREP90 ODEM OREP 
86 1851 165 5 754 775 644 491 509 626 1398 547 | 87 1851 165 5 754 775 644 491 509 626 1398 547 | 88 1851 165 5 754 775 644 491 509 626 1398 547 | 89 1566 6 3 405 415 287 662 678 704 776 876 1 90 785 25 1 219 225 144 320 324 337 411 351 

08S IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVMINPCT IRMINPCT IPDEMLTG IPDEMCOA IPOEMSEN IPCTDEM OBLKPCT OVBLKPCT ORBLKPCT OMINPCT OVMINPCT 
86 0.70 0.68 0.72 0.71 0.68 0.72 0.60 0.61 0.87 0.80: 0.13 Gis 0.08 0.14 0.12 87 0.14 0.11 0.08 0.16 0.13 0.08 0.58 0.58 0.45 0.68 0.13 0.11 0.08 0.14 Q.12 oo i068 0.82 0.68 0.67 0.83 0.68 0.84 0.85 0.85 0.91 0.13 0.11 0.08 0.14 0.12 : 0.66 0.62 0.68 0.67. 0.63 0.68 0.84 0.85 0.85 0.91 0.04 0.05 0.00 0.04 0.06 | 0.66 0.62 0.68 0.67. 0.63 0.68 0.84 0.85 0.85 0.91 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.06 0.05 

08S ORMINPCT OPDEMLTG OPDEMCOA OPDEMSEN OPCTDEM ITOTVOT ITOTMIN IMINVOT IMINREG ILTG88 ICOA88 ISENSO OTOTVOT OTOTMIN OMINVOT OMINREG 

86 .08 0 0.60 0.61 0.5%. 0.72 2055 1972 1406 1121 990 959 853 2300 394 269 170 87 0.08 0.60 0.61 0.51 0.72 2405 502 305 126 730 706 806 2300 394 269 170 88 0.08 0.60 0.61 0.51 0.72 1678 1641 1058 822 603 596 609 2300 394 269 170 89 0.01 0.38 0.38 0.29 0.53 1678 1641 1058 822 603 596 609 2763 161 157 S 90 0.03 0.41 0.41 0.30 0.54 1678 1641 1058 822 603 596 609 1664 122 82 26 

08s OLTG88 0COA88 OSEN90 GTBLKPOP LTBLKPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EQBLKVOT GTBLKREG LTBLKREG EQBLKREG GTMINPOP LTMINPOP EQMINPOP 

86 1284 1245 1270 

87 1284 1245 1270 

88 1284 1245 1270 

89 1093 1067 991 

90 549 539 481 —
 

dh
 

e
d
 

d
h
 

eh
 

O
O
O
O
 
O
o
 

[
e
e
e
 
l
e
o
]
 

i
h
 

c
e
 

c
o
c
o
o
o
 

O
O
 
0
0
0
0
 

a
 

Ta
 

ou
 

o
c
o
o
o
o
 

O
O
 
O
0
0
 
Oo

 

-—
hd

 
e
b
 

o
d
 

o
b
 

o
b
 

o
c
o
o
c
o
o
 

c
o
o
o
o
 

08S GTMINVOT LTMINVOT EQMINVOT GTMINREG LTMINREG EQUINREG GTDEMCOA LTDEMCOA EQDEMCOA GTDEMLTG LTDEMLTG EQDEMLTG GTDEMSEN LTDEMSEN 

86 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 ; 0 1 0 87 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 ki 0 0 1 88 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 89 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 90 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 

0BS EQDEMSEN GTDEMREG LTDEMREG EQDEMREG DEMNTBLK BLKNTDEM PRFLAG 

86 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 87 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 88 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 89 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 

  *nnted 09/01/99 10:28:57 Discovery 

 



  

  
  

  

  

  

  

\ = SRE 1 RSG RAMS NBA SRESHRN TN & 20 Y ARTHRE.. ERR RY = SRN = 3 FERN ORSNY MON D 
NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTIN 12:00 Tuesday, February 24, 1998 26 

LIST 100 OBS FROM FINAL DATA SET - CHECK COMPARISO 

0BS SEGMENT  VTDKEY OPRECNCT IPRECNCT ITOTPOP ITOTWHT ITOTBLK IWHTVOT IBLKVOT IASIVOT IAMIVOT 

7. 92 37.057.1108 06.057.1101 12.057.1108 2403 1906 426 1567 299 22 18 / 93 37.057.1107 06.057.1102 12.057.1107 2954 2684 150 2188 97 66 7 
94 37.057.1103 06.057.1102 112.057.1103 950 940 0 735 0 S 0 y4 95 37.057.1401 06.057.1102 12.057.1401 3563 3531 25 2636 16 2 4 95 96 37.057.1401 06.057.1111 12.057.1401 3563 3531 25 2636 16 2 4 

08S IOTHVOT IREGVOT IREGWHT IREGBLK IREGOTH ICDEMSS ILDEMSS ISDEM90 ICREP8S ILREP88 ISREPS0 

91 4 1283 1149 132 2 437 459 408 323 336 328 92 0 1732 1674 47 11 578 593 480 540 563 608 93 0 560 558 2 0 138 146 103 279 275 273 94 0 1425 1419 3 3 261 268 170 685 707 732 95 0 1425 1419 3 3 261 268 170 685 707 732 

08s IDEM IREP OTOTPOP OTOTWHT OTOTBLK OWHTVOT 0BLKVOT OASIVOT OAMIVOT 00THVOT OREGVOT 

91 882 335 2122 2000 100 1582 65 7 9 1 811 92 1088 555 2278 2202 34 1664 19 16 3 5 1015 93 266 262 2278 2202 34 1664 19 16 3 5 1015 94 565 778 2278 2202 34 1664 19 16 3 5 1015 95 565 778 4723 4576 124 3501 78 4 9 4 2487 

08S OREGWHT OREGBLK OREGOTH OCDEM8S8 OLDEM8S OSDEMS0 OCREP88 OLREP8S OSREPS0 ODEM OREP 

91 785 25 1 219 225 144 320 324 337 411 351 92 1009 6 0 295 314 248 386 385 405 560 398 93 1009 6 0 295 314 248 386 385 405 560 398 94 1009 6 0 295 314 248 386 385 405 560 398 95 2429 56 2 598 639 436 1087 1081 1177 1215 1172 

OBS IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVMINPCT IRMINPCT IPDEMLTG IPDEMCOA IPDEMSEN IPCTDEM OBLKPCT OVBLKPCT ORBLKPCT OMINPCT OVMINPCT 

91 ‘0.18 0.16 0.10 0.21 0.18 0.10 0.58 0.58 0.55 0.72 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.06 0.05 
92 0.05 0.04 0.03". 0.09 0.07 0.03 0.51 0.52 0.44 0.66 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.03 m7 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.35 0.33 0.27 0.50 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.03 

0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 G.27 0.28 0.19 0.42 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.03 
40.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.27 0.28 0.19 0.42 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 

0BS ORMINPCT OPDEMLTG OPDEMCOA OPDEMSEN OPCTDEM ITOTVOT ITOTMIN IMINVOT IMINREG ILTG88 ICOA88 ISENS0 OTOTVOT OTOTMIN OMINVOT OMINREG - 

91 0.03 0.41 0.41 0.30 0.54 1910 497 343 134 795 760 736 1664 122 82 26 
82 0.01 0.45 0.43 0.38 0.58 2358 270 170 58 1156 1118 1088 1707 76 43 6 
93 0.01 0.45 0.43 0.38 0.58 740 10 5 2 421 417 376 1707 76 43 6 
94 0.01 0.45 0.43 0.38 0.58 2658 32 22 6 975 946 902 1707 76 43 6 
95. "0.02 0.37 0.35 0.27 0.51 2658 32 22 6 975 946 902 3596 147 95 58 

CBs OLTG88 OCOA88 OSEN90 GTBLKPOP LTBLKPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EQBLKVOT GTBLKREG LTBLKREG EQBLKREG GTMINPOP LTMINPOP EQMINPOP 

91 549 539 481 

92 699 681 653 

93 699 681 653 

94 699 681 653 

95 1720 1685 1613 - 
-
-
-
 
0
0
 

O
0
0
 

O
0
O
o
 

o
g
o
 

~
~
 

- 
-
-
 

0
0
 

O
O
0
O
O
0
O
O
0
O
o
 

OO
 
O
O
 

= 
=
 

-
 

ee
 

4 
O
0
0
 

C
O
O
 = 

= 

c
o
o
o
o
 

O
0
0
 = 

= 

n
O
 

c
o
o
o
o
 

0BS GTMINVOT LTMINVOT EQMINVOT GTMINREG LTMINREG EQMINREG GTDEMCOA LTDEMCOA EQDEMCOA GTDEMLTG LTDEMLTG EQDEMLTG GTDEMSEN LTDEMSEN 

1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 
92 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 
93 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 
94 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 
95 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 

0BS EQDEMSEN GTDEMREG LTDEMREG EQDEMREG DEMNTBLK BLKNTDEM PRFLAG 

91 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 
92 0. 1 0 0 0 0 0 
93 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 
94 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 
gi, 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 

    Printed 09.01/99 10:28:57 Discovery  



  

  

    

  

  

NERY 

ITOTWHT 

6148 

9116 

9116 

3753 

852 

ICDEMSS 

672 

845 

845 

345 

697 

OWHTVOT 

3501 

3501 

2032 

2032 

2032 

OSDEMS0 

436 

436 

175 

175 

175 

LIST OF 100 0BS FROM FINAL DATA SET - CHECK COMPARISONS 

ITOTBLK 

184 

751 

751 

13 

2039 

ILDEM88 

736 

929 

929 

414 

707 

0BLKVOT 

78 

78 

51 

51 

S1 

OCREP88 

1087 

1087 

626 

626 

626 

  

IWHTVOT 

4594 

6901 

6901 

2942 

683 

ISDEMSO 

544 

603 

603 

276 

701 

OASIVOT 

a
n
n
e
 
a
 

OLREP88 

1081 

1081 

614 

614 

614 

IBLKVOT 

124 

570 

570 

7 

1409 

ICREP8S 

1357 

2263 

2263 

1033 

171 

OAMIVOT 

W
o
w
o
w
o
u
o
 

OSREPS0 

1177 

1377 

676 

676 

676 

IAS 

  

IvoT 

2 

W
-
=
 

0
 

o
w
 

ILREP8S 

1406 

2294 

2294 

1000 

173 

OOTHVOT 

PE
 
U
E
 

N
E
 

SU
 
G
N
 

ODEM 

1215 

1215 

578 

578 

578 

    

    

IAMIVOT 

17 

14 

14 

14 

3 

ISREPS0 

1346 

2218 

2218 

1017 

159 

OREGVOT 

2487 

2487 

1402 

1402 

1402 

OREP 

1172 

1172 

758 

758 

758 

IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVMINPCT IRMINPCT IPDEMLTG IPDEMCOA IPOEMSEN IPCTDEM OBLKPCT OVBLKPCT ORBLKPCT OMINPCT OVMINPCT 

O
O
 

O
0
0
 

OO
 

.44 0.03 

.42 0.03 

.42 0.03 

.38 0.03 
VITRO AL 

.84 0.0 

.02 0.02 

.02 0.02 
02 0.01 
02. 0.m 
02 oof 

0 

0 

0. 

0 

0 

.03 

.03 

03 

.03 

.03 

ICOA88 ISEN9S0 OTOTVOT OTOTMIN OMINVOT OMINREG 

168 94 2142 

596 276 3223 

596 276 3223 

40 6 1414 

1417 1114 880 

2029 1890 

3108 2821 

3108 2821 

1378 1293 

868 860 

3596 

3596 

2092 

2092 

2092 

147 

147 

86 

86 

86 

85 

95 

60 

60 

60 

58 

58 

16 

16 

16 

OLTG88 0COA88 OSEN90 GTBLKPOP LTBLKPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EQBLKVOT GTBLKREG LTBLKREG EQBLKREG GTMINPOP LTMINPOP EQMINPOP 

0 

O
O
 
O
0
O
O
0
O
O
0
O
O
o
 

-
—
 

OD
 

b
h
 

e
d
 

NORTH CAROLI 

0BS SEGMENT  VTODKEY OPRECNCT IPRECNCT ITOTPOP 

of 97 37.057.0301 06.057.1111 12.057.0301 6400 
98 37.057.1201 06.057.1111 12.057.1201 9897 

: 99 37.057.1201 06.057.1606 12.057.1201 9897 
99 100 37.057.1607 06.057.1606 12.057.1607 3811 

100 101  37.057.1603 06.057.1606 12.057.1603 2910 

08S I0THVOT IREGVOT IREGWHT IREGBLK IREGOTH 

96 4 3147 3053 87 7 3 
97 3 4610 4334 271 5 
98 3 4610 4334 271 5 
99 18 1986 1980 4 2 

100 2 1482 368 1112 2 

08S IDEM IREP OTOTPOP OTOTWHT OTOTBLK 

96 1291 1668 4723 4576 124 
} 297 1851 2521 4723 4576 124 

98 1851 2521 2703 2617 74 
99 712 1141 2703 2617 74 

100 1224 227 2703 2617 74 

08S OREGWHT OREGBLK OREGOTH OCDEM88 OLDEMSS 

96 2429 56 2 598 639 
97 2429 56 2 598 639 
98 1386 12 4 265 305 

' “ogg 1386 12 4 265 305 
© 100 1386 12 4 265 305 | 

| oss 

| 95 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.34 
97 0.08 0.08 0.06 0.08 0.08 0.06 0.29 

7 0-08 0.08 0.06 0.08 0.08 0.06 0.29 
Pst 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.29 
Eig 0.70 7 "0.67 0.75 0.71 0.67 0.75 0.80 

| OBS ORMINPCT OPDEMLTG OPDEMCOA OPDEMSEN OPCTDEM ITOTVOT ITOTMIN IMINVOT IMINREG ILTGSS 
| 

i 98s 9.07 0,27 0.35 0.27 0.51 4762 “252 
97 0.02 0.37 0.35 0.27 0.51 7497 781 
98 0.01 0.33 0.30 0.21 0.43 7497 781 
99 . 0.01 0.33 0.30 0.21 0.43 2982 58 

100. 0.01 0.33 0.30 0.21 0.43 2100 2058 

08S 

96° 1720. 16385 1613 1 0 0 1 
97 1720 - 1685 1613 1 0 0 1 
98 919 891 851 1 0 "0 % 
99 919 891 851 0 ao 0 0 

100 919 891 851 1 0 0 1 

0BS GTMINVOT LTMINVOT EQMINVOT GTMINREG LTMINREG 

96 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 
97 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 
98 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 

I 99 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 
100 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 

08S EQDEMSEN GTDEMREG LTDEMREG EQDEMREG DEMNTBLK ; 
; 

i 98 0 0 1 0 0 
97 0 0 1 0 0 
98 0 0 1 0 0 
29 0 0 1 0 0 

0 1 0 0 0 

1 0 

1 0 

1 0 

1 0 

0 0 

BLKNTDEM PRFLAG 

0 0 

1 0 

0 0 

0 0 

0 0 

-“
 

O
0
0
 
O
O
 

O
O
 

w
b
 

o
d
 

o
b
 

4
 

O
0
0
 

O
0
O
O
0
O
o
 

-’
 

OD
 

bt
 

eb
 

a 

O
O
0
O
o
0
o
0
o
 

o
-
0
D
O
 

1 

0 

1 
pr ad 

1 O
0
0
 

-
=
+
0
 

OO
 
O
0
O
O
0
O
O
0
o
O
o
 

EQMINREG GTDEMCOA LTDEMCOA EQDEMCOA GTDEMLTG LTDEMLTG EQOEMLTG GTDEMSEN LTDEMSEN 

  Printed 09/01,99 10:28:57 Discovery 

 



  

FREQS ON FLAGS FC 

  

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 
PERCENT COMPARISONS BETWEEN PRECINCTS ON BORDER OF DISTRICT 12 

12:00 Tuesday, February 24, 

FREQUENCIES FOR COMPARISONS OF BLACK PERCENTAGES ON BORDER OF DISTRICT 12 

GTBLKPOP 
Cumulative 

Frequency Frequency Percent 

Cumulative 

Percent 

  

0 

1 

LTBLKPOP 

49 : 49 

185 . 234 

Cumulative 

Frequency Percent Frequency 

20.9 

100.0 

Cumulative 

Percent 

  

EQBLKPOP 

185 79.1 185 

49 20.9 234 

Cumulative 

Frequency Frequency Percent 

79.1 

100.0 

Cumulative 

Percent 

  

0 

GTBLKVOT 

234 100.0 234 

Cumulative 

Frequency Frequency Percent 

100.0 

Cumulative 

Percent 

  

LTBLKVOT 

47 20.1 47 

187 79.9 234 

Cumulative 

Frequency Frequency Percent 

20.1 

100.0 

Cumulative 

Percent 

  

EQBLKVOT 

187 79.9 187 

47 20.1 234 

Cumulative 

Frequency Percent Frequency 

79.9 

100.0 

Cumulative 

Percent 

  

0 234 100.0 234 

*v 
Cumulative 

Frequency Percent Frequency 

100.0 

Cumulative 

Percent 

  

47 20.5 47 

182 79.5 229 

Frequency Missing = § 

Cumulative   Frequency Percent Frequency 

20.5 

100.0 

Cumulative 

Percent 

  

182 

47 
79.5 

20.5 
182 

229 

Frequency Missing = 5 

79.5 

100.0 

  Printed 09/01/99 10:28:57 Discovery   

1998 28 

 



  

  

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 12:00 Tuesday, February 24, 1998 29 
FREQS ON FLAGS FOR PERCENT COMPARISONS BETWEEN PRECINCTS ON BORDER OF DISTRICT 12 

FREQUENCIES FOR COMPARISONS OF BLACK PERCENTAGES ON BORDER OF DISTRICT 12 

Cumulative Cumulative 
EQBLKREG Frequency Percent Frequency Percent 
  

0 229 100.0 229 100.0 

Frequency Missing = 5 

  

    
  

Printed 09/01/99 10:28:57 Discovery  



  

  
  

FREQS ON FLAGS FOR PERCENT COMPARISONS BETWEEN PRECINCTS ON BORDER OF DISTRICT 12 

  

I ONS 

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 

  

A SNORE 

12:00 Tuesday, 

FREQUENCIES FOR COMPARISONS OF MINORITY PERCENTAGES ON BORDER OF DISTRICT 12 

GTMINPOP 
Cumulative 

Frequency Frequency Percent 

Cumulative 

Percent 

  

LTMINPOP 

47 20.1 47 

187 79.9 234 

Cumulative 
Frequency Frequency Percent 

20.1 

100.0 

Cumulative 

Percent 

  

EQMINPOP 

187 187 

47 234 

Cumulative 
Frequency Frequency Percent 

79.9 

100.0 

Cumulative 

Percent 

  

0 

GTMINVOT 

234 100.0 234 

Cumulative 
Frequency Frequency Percent 

100.0 

Cumulative 

Percent 

  

LTMINVOT 

48 20:5 48 

186 79.5 

Cumulative 

Frequency Frequency Percent 

20.5 

100.0 

Cumulative 

Percent 

  

EQMINVOT 

186 79.5 

48 20.5 
186 

234 

Cumulative 

Frequency Frequency Percent 

79.5 

100.0 

Cumulative 

Percent 

  

GTMINREG 

234 100.0 234 

- 

Cumulative 
Frequency Frequency Percent 

100.0 

Cumulative 

Percent 

  

LTMINREG 

46 20.1 46 

183 79.9 229 

Frequency Missing = 5 

Cumulative 

Frequency Frequency Percent 

20.1 

100.0 

Cumulative 

Percent 

  

183 79.9 

46 20.1 
183 

229 

Frequency Missing = § 

79.9 

100.0 

  Printed 09/01/99 10:28:57 Discovery   

February 24, 1998 30 

 



  

  

   

  

   

     
NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 12:00 Tuesday, February 24, FREQS ON FLAGS FOR PERCENT COMPARISONS BETWEEN PRECINCTS ON BORDER OF DISTRICT 12 

FREQUENCIES FOR COMPARISONS OF MINORITY PERCENTAGES ON BORDER OF DISTRICT 12 

Cumulative Cumulative 
EQMINREG Frequency Percent Frequency Percent 
  

0 229 100.0 229 100.0 

Frequency Missing = 5 

rd 

  
  Printed 09/01/99 10:28:57 Discovery 

 



  EE ER RANA       

  

  
  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

SNRER 

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 12:00 Tuesday, Februa 
FREQS ON FLAGS FOR PERCENT COMPARISONS BETWEEN PRECINCTS ON BORDER OF DISTRICT 12 

FREQUENCIES FOR COMPARISONS OF DEMOCRAT PERCENTAGES ON BORDER OF DISTRICT 12 

Cumulative Cumulative 
GTDEMLTG Frequency Percent Frequency Percent 

os 0 49 21.4 49 21.4 
1 180 78.6 229 100.0 

Frequency Missing = 5 

| 
Cumulative Cumulative 

LTDEMLTG Frequency Percent Frequency Percent + 

0 180 78.6 180 78.6 : 
1 49 21.4 229 100.0 

Frequency Missing = 5 

Cumulative Cumulative 
EQDEMLTG Frequency Percent Frequency Percent 

0 229 100.0 229 100.0 

Frequency Missing = 5 

Cumulative Cumulative 
GTDEMCOA Frequency Percent Frequency Percent 

0 44 19.2 44 19.2 
1 185 80.8 229 100.0 

Frequency Missing = 5 

Cumulative Cumulative 
LTDEMCOA Frequency Percent Frequency Percent 

0 185 80.8 185 80.8 

1 44 19.2 229 100.0 

Frequency Missing = 5 

Cumulative Cumulative 
EQDEMCOA Frequency Percent Frequency Percent 

0 229 100.0 229 100.0 

Frequency Missing = § 

; Cumulative Cumulative 
GTDEMSEN Frequency Percent Frequency Percent 

0 44 19.2 44 19.2 

1 185 80.8 229 100.0 

Frequency Missing = 5 

  Printed 09/01/99 10:28:58 Discovery 

 



  
    

REINA Aha a 8 
BRE oy AJ     NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 12:00 Tuesday, February 24, 1998 33 FREQS ON FLAGS FOR PERCENT COMPARISONS BETWEEN PRECINCTS ON BORDER OF DISTRICT 12 

FREQUENCIES FOR COMPARISONS OF DEMOCRAT PERCENTAGES ON BORDER OF DISTRICT 12 

Cumulative Cumulative 
LTDEMSEN Frequency Percent Frequency Percent 

  

185 80.8 185 80.8 
1 44 19.2 229 100.0 

Frequency Missing = § 

Cumulative Cumulative 
EQDEMSEN Frequency Percent Frequency Percent 
  

0 229 100.0 229 100.0 

Frequency Missing = 5 

Cumulative Cumulative 
GTDEMREG Frequency Percent Frequency Percent 
  

36 15.7 36 15.7 
1 193 84.3 229 100.0 

Frequency Missing = 5   
Cumulative Cumulative 

LTDEMREG Frequency Percent Frequency Percent 
  

0 193 84.3 193 84.3 
1 36 15.7 229 100.0 

Frequency Missing = 5 

Cumulative Cumulative 
EQDEMREG Frequency Percent Frequency Percent 

  

0 229 100.0 229 100.0 

Frequency Missing = 5 

  Printed 09/01/99 10:28:58 Discovery  



  

  

Caan 

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 12:00 Tuesday, February 24, FREQS ON FLAGS FOR PERCENT COMPARISONS BETWEEN PRECINCTS ON BORDER OF DISTRICT 12 
FREQUENCIES ON FLAGS FOR CELLS WHERE ALL PARTY AND RACE VECTORS ARE OPPOSED 

Cumulative Cumulative 
DEMNTBLK Frequency Percent Frequency Percent 
  

223 97.4 223 97.4 
6 2.6 229 100.0 

Frequency Missing = 5 

Cumulative Cumulative 
Frequency Percent Frequency Percent 
  

225 98. 225 98.3 
1 

3 
4 7 229 100.0 

Frequency Missing = 5 

  

  
    Printed 09/01/99 10:28:58 Discovery  



NCEREDISTRIC 
IREMBIIAINN Ha S ND RRR 

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 12:00 Tuesday, February 24, 199 
0SS TABS ON RACE AND PARTY COMPARISON FLAGS 

TABLE OF GTBLKPOP BY GTDEMLTG 

GTBLKPOP GTDEMLTG 

Frequency 

Percent 

Row Pct 

Col Pct 

  

  

        
21.40 

Frequency Missing = 5 

TABLE OF GTBLKPOP BY GTDEMCOA 

GTBLKPOP GTDEMCOA 

Frequency 

Percent 

Row Pct 

Col Pct 
  

  

  

        
va) 

Frequency Missing = 5 

  
| 
| 
  Printed 09/01/99 10:28:58 Discovery  



  

  

SNARES 0 0 FARADAY 

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 12:00 Tuesday, February 24, 1998 36 0SS TABS ON RACE AND PARTY COMPARISON FLAGS 

TABLE OF GTBLKPOP BY GTDEMSEN 

GTBLKPOP GTDEMSEN 

    
  

        

Frequency 

Percent 

Row Pct 

Col Pct 0 1 Total 

= 0 29 17 46 | 
12.66 7.42 20.09 
63.04 36.96 

65.91 9.19 

1 15 168 183 

6.55 73.36 79.91 

8.20 91.80 

34.09 90.81 

Total 44 185 229 
19.21 80.79 100.00 

Frequency Missing = 5 

TABLE OF GTBLKPOP BY GTDEMREG 

  

GTBLKPOP GTDEMREG 

Frequency 

Percent 

Row Pct 

Col Pct 0 1 Total 

0 23 23 46 

10.04 10.04 20.08 

50.00 50.00 

63.89 11.92 

  

1 13 170 183 

5.68 74.24 79.91 

7.10 92.90 

36.11 88.08 

        
Total 36 193 229 

15.72 84.28 100.00 

Frequency Missing = 5 

  Printed 09/01/99 10:28:58 Discovery 1  



  
  

  

  _r SERRATE 
oye > 0) -3, [Q { OGRAM 

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 

TABLE OF GTBLKVOT BY GTDEMLTG 

  

  

        

GTBLKVOT GTDEMLTG 

Frequency 
Percent 
Row Pct 

Col Pct 0 1 

0 27 17 

11.79 7.42 
61.36 38.64 
55.10 9.44 

1 22 163 

9.61 71.18 
11.89 88.11 
44.90 90.56 

Total 49 180 

21.40 78.60 

Frequency Missing = 5 

Total 

44 

19.21 

185 

80.79 

229 

100.00 

TABLE OF GTBLKVOT BY GTDEMCOA 

  

  

        

GTBLKVOT GTDEMCOA 

Frequency 
Percent 

Row Pct 

Col Pct 0 1 

0 27 17 

131.79 7.42 

81.36 38.64 

61.36 9.19 

1 17 168 

7.42 73.36 

9.19 90.81 

38.64 90.81 

Total 44 185 

19.21 80.79 

Frequency Missing = 5 

Total 

44 

19.23 

185 

80.79 

229 

100.00 

ROSS TABS ON RACE AND PARTY COMPARISON FLAGS 
12:00 Tuesday, February 24, 1998 37 

  
Printed 09/01/99 10:28:58 Discovery 

   



   
   
   

  

  

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 

TABS ON RACE AND PARTY COMPARISON FLAGS 

TABLE OF GTBLKVOT BY GTDEMSEN 

  

  

        

GTBLKVOT GTDEMSEN 

Frequency 

Percent 

Row Pct 

Col Pct 0 1 

0 28 16 

12.23 6.99 

63.64 36.36 

63.64 8.65 

1 16 169 

6.99 73.80 

8.65 91.33 

36.36 91.35 

Total 44 185 

19.21 80.79 

Frequency Missing = 5 

Total 

44 

19.21 

185 

80.79 

229 

100.00 

TABLE OF GTBLKVOT BY GTDEMREG 

  

  

        

GTBLKVOT GTDEMREG 

Frequency 

Percent 

Row Pct 

Col Pct 0 1 

0 24 20 

10.48 8.73 

54.55 45.45 

66.67 10.36 

1 12 173 

5.24 75.55 

6.49 93.51 

33.33 89.64 

Total 36 193 

15.72 84.28 

Frequency Missing = § 

Total 

44 

19.21 

18S 

80.79 

229 

100.00 

   

  

12:00 Tuesday, February 24, 1998 38 

  

  Printed 09/01/99 10:28:58 Discovery 

 



Eh GE 0 2 OED 

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 12:00 Tuesday, February 24, 1998 39 
TABS ON RACE AND PARTY COMPARISON FLAGS 

TABLE OF GTBLKREG BY GTDEMLTG 

GTBLKREG GTDEMLTG 

Frequency 

Percent 

Row Pct 

Col Pct 

  

  

        
21, 

Frequency Missing = § 

TABLE OF GTBLKREG BY GTDEMCOA 

GTBLKREG GTDEMCOA 

Frequency 

Percent 

Row Pct 

Col Pct 

    20 

8.73 

42.55 

10.81 
  

165 

72.05 

90.66 

89.19   
      

44 185 

19.21 80.79 

Frequency Missing = 5 

  Printed 09/01/99 10:28:58 Discovery  



    

NORTH CAROLI 

TABS ON RACE AND PARTY COMPARISON FLAGS 

TABLE OF GTBLKREG BY GTDEMSEN 

GTBLKREG GTDEMSEN 

Frequency 

Percent 

Row Pct 

Col Pct 

  

0 

  

169 

73.80 

92.86 

91.35         
185 

19.21 80.79 

Frequency Missing = 5 

TABLE OF GTBLKREG BY GTDEMREG 

GTBLKREG GTDEMREG 

Frequency 

Percent 

Row Pct 

Col Pct 

  

26 

11.35 

55.32 

13.47 
  

167 

72.93 

91.76 

86.53 

        
193 

15.72 84.28 

Frequency Missing = 5 

12:00 Tuesday, Feb 

NW 

ruary 24, 

DN 

199 8 40 

  Printed 09/01/99 10:28:59 Discovery   

 



    I 
~ . 

  

   
   

NNRINRW RRBNN 

STRICTING 
      LIST OY WHERE ALL PARTY AND ALL RACE VECTORS ARE OPPOED 

0BS SEGMENT VTDKEY OPRECNCT IPRECNCT ITOTPOP " ITOTWHT ITOTBLK IWHTVOT IBLKVOT IASIVOT IAMIVOT 

55.0 37.097.0403 08.025.0301 112.097.0403 4246 3750 458 2944 306 5 11 88.0 37.057.1106 06.057.1110 112.057.1106 3114 2612 425 2100 262 21 10 98.0 37.057.1201 06.057.1111 12.057.1201 9897 9116 751 6901 570 9 14 141 142.0 37.081.0118 06.081.0117 12.081.0118 3276 2784 391 2229 242 48 16 151 152.0 37.081.0219 06.081.0802 12.081.0219 1485 1420 53 1228 33 5 2 

08S I0THVOT IREGVOT IREGWHT IREGBLK IREGOTH ICDEMSS ILDEM8S ISDEMS0 ICREP88 ILREP8SS ISREP90 

54 9 1920 1817 102 1 492 524 460 696 755 681 87 12 1494 1368 125 1 407 423 366 299 307 440 97 3 4610 4334 271 5 845 929 603 2263 2294 2218 141 2 1864 1691 163 10 430 487 414 524 562 705 151 1 825 800 24 1 197 239 174 248 263 284 

08S IDEM IREP OTOTPOP OTOTWHT OTOTBLK OWHTVOT OBLKVOT OASIVOT OAMIVOT OOTHVOT OREGVOT 

54 1129 710 3001 2602 384 1978 263 1 4 6 1470 87 975 453 2896 2502 363 2031 247 11 5 6 2021 97 1851 2521 4723 4576 124 3501 78 4 Cc] 4 2487 141 1087 652 3552 3021 323 2673 266 123 13 2 2365 151 516 265 2436 2271 128 1849 98 13 13 1 1555 

08S OREGWHT OREGBLK OREGOTH OCDEMS8 OLDEMSS OSDEMSO OCREPS88 OLREPS88 OSREPS0 ODEM OREP 

S54 1336 134 0 343 396 310 579 587 673 3 651 87 1851 165 5 754 775 644 491 509 626 1398 547 97 2429 56 2 598 639 436 1087 1081 1177 1215 1172 141 2174 180 11 604 713 777 434 443 417 1463 677 151 1480 62 13 314 393 293 622 624 642 795 663 

08S IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVMINPCT IRMINPCT IPDEMLTG IPDEMCOA IPDEMSEN IPCTDEM OBLKPCT OVBLKPCT ORBLKPCT OMINPCT OVMINPCT 

54. 0.11 0.09 0.05 0.12 0.10 0.05 0.41 0.41 0.40 0.61 0.13 0.12 0.09 0.13 0.12 87 0.14 0.11 0.08 0.16 0.13 0.08 0.58 0.58 0.45 0.68 0.13 0.11 0.08 0.14 0.12 0.08 0.08 0.06 0.08 0.08 0.06 0.29 0.27 0.21 0.42 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.12 0.10 0.09 0.15 0.312 0.09 0.46 0.45 0.37 0.63 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.15 0.13 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.48 0.44 0.38 0.66 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.07 0.06 

OBS ORMINPCT OPDEMLTG OPDEMCOA OPDEMSEN OPCTDEM ITOTVOT ITOTMIN IMINVOT IMINREG ILTG88 ICOA88 ISENSO OTOTVOT OTOTMIN OMINVOT OMINREG 

S54 .09 0 0.40 0.37 0.32 0.53 3275 496 331 103 1279 1188 1141 2252 399 274 134 87 0.08 0.60 0.61 0.51 0.72 2405 502 305 126 730 706 806 2300 394 269 170 97 0.02 0.37 0.35 0.27 0.5y 7497 781 596 276 3223 3108 2821 3596 147 95 58 141 0.08 0.62 0.58 0.65 0.68 2537 492 308 173 1049 954 1119 3077 531 404 13 151 0.05 0.39 0.34 0.31 0.55 1269 6S 41 25 502 445 458 1974 165 125 75 

08S OLTG88 0COA88 OSEN9O GTBLKPOP LTBLKPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EQBLKVOT GTBLKREG LTBLKREG EQBLKREG GTMINPOP LTMINPOP EQMINPOP 

54 983 922 983 

87 1284 1245 1270 

97 1720 1685 1613 

141 1156 1038 1194 

151. 1017 936 935 OQ
 

= 
= 

= 
0 

- 
O
0
0
 
=
 

O
0
0
 

o
0
o
0
O
o
 

O 
= 

= 
= 

O 

- 
O
0
0
 
=
 

O
O
0
O
O
0
O
O
0
O
o
 

O 
= 

= 
2
0
 

- 
OO

 
O
O
 
—
 

O
O
0
O
O
0
O
O
0
O
o
 

O
 

= 
= 
2
0
 

O
E
D
 

0
0
0
0
 

08S GTMINVOT LTMINVOT EQMINVOT GTMINREG LTMINREG EQMINREG GTDEMCOA LTDEMCOA EQDEMCOA GTDEMLTG LTDEMLTG EQDEMLTG GTDEMSEN LTDEMSEN 

54 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 87 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 97 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 141 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 151 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 

08S EQDEMSEN GTOEMREG LTDEMREG EQDEMREG DEMNTBLK BLKNTDEM PRFLAG 

54 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 
87 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 
97 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 

141 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 
0 1 0 0 1 0 0 

  Printed 09/01/99 10:28:59 Discovery  



   

  

    
    

08S 

z14 

223 

08s 

203 

204 

205 

214 

223 

08s 

203 

204 

205 

214 

223 

08s 

  

SEGMENT 

  

VTDKEY OPRECNCT IPRECNCT 

202.0 37.057.1302 05.059.020 112.057.1302 
202.1 37.057.1302 05.059.025 12.057.1302 
203.0 37.057.0401 05.059.025 112.057.0401 
210.0 37.097.0301 10.097.1401 12.097.0301 
219.0 37.097.0101 10.097.0901 112.097.0101 

IOTHvOT IREGVOT IREGWHT IREGBLK 

3 1822 1721 98 
3 1822 1721 98 

10 1470 1406 64 
24 3608 3368 235 

1 1372 1227 144 

IDEM IREP OTOTPOP OTOTWHT 

920 815 1631 1502 
920 815 4636 4068 
946 483 4636 4068 

1879 1547 3859 3269 
822 497 S386 4499 

OREGWHT OREGBLK OREGOTH OCDEM8S 

797 61 0 201 
2274 185 1 590 
2274 185 1 590 
2219 143 6 643 
2835 365 3 764 

ITOTPOP 

4023 

4023 

3383 

8121 

4070 

IREGOTH 

-“
 
N
o
 

W
w
w
 

OTOTBLK 

118 

538 

538 

S03 

862 

OLDEMSS 

210 

612 

612 

616 

741 

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 
B WHERE ALL PARTY AND ALL RACE VECTORS ARE OPH 

ITOTWHT ITOTBLK 

3865 144 

3865 144 

3236 121 

6858 1168 

3620 435 

ICDEMSS ILDEMSS 

455 471 

455 471 

457 455 

782 782 
372 361 

OWHTVOT 0BLKVOT 

1135 94 

3116 389 

3116 389 

2671 345 

3471 567 

OSDEMI0 OCREP88 

180 400 

508 1144 

508 1144 
644 892 

778 1263 

IWHTVOT 

2906 

2906 

2404 

5114 

2700 

ISDEM90 

395 

395 

311 

877 

313 

OASIVOT 

-
 
O
O
 

OLREPS88 

412 

1188 

1188 

970 

1369 

        

IBLKVOT 

120 

120 

93 

766 

297 

ICREP88 

707 

707 

528 

1465 

519 

OAMIVOT 

10 

10 

8 

OSREPS0 

411 

1183 

1183 

893 

1256 

  

IASIVOT 

W
N
W
O
O
o
 

ILREPSS 

727 

727 

553 

1582 

562 

OOTHVOT 

1884 

   

  

IAMIVOT 

ISREPS0 

757 

757 

619 

1342 

488 

OREGVOT 

863 

2464 

2464 

2368 

3203 

OREP 

492 

1410 

1410 

785 

1172 
IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVMINPCT IRMINPCT IPOEMLTG IPDEMCOA IPDEMSEN IPCTDEM OBLKPCT OVBLKPCT ORBLKPCT OMINPCT OVMINPCT 

0.04 

0.04 

0.04 

0.14 

0 

0 

0. 

0 

0.11 0 

.04 0.05 

.04 0.05 

04 0.04 

-13 0.07 

+10 ¢.10 

0.04 

0.04 

0.04 

0.16 

0.11 

0.04 0.06 0.39 

0.04 0.06 0.39 

0.04 0.04 0.45 
0.14 0.07 0.33 
0.10 0.11 0.39 

0.39 0.34 a. 

0.39 0.34 0 

0.46 0.33 0. 

0.35 0.40 0 

0.42 0.39 0 

ORMINPCT OPDEMLTG OPDEMCOA OPODEMSEN OPCTDEM ITOTVOT ITOTMIN IMINVOT IMINREG ILTG8S 

.08 0 

.08 0 

.08 0 

.06 0 

11 0 Q
O
 

OO
. 
0
0
 .34 0.33 

.34 0.34 

.34 0.34 

.39 0.42 

.35 0.38 

0.30 
0.30 
0.30 
0.42 
0.38 

0.40 3035 158 

0.40 3035 158 

0.40 2514 147 

0.65 5943 1263 

0.62 3007 450 

129 101 

129 101 

110 64 

829 240 

307 145 

1198 

1198 

1008 

2364 

823 

53 

«53 

66 

«55 

.52 

.07 

-12 

12 

13 

.16 C
0
0
0
0
 0.08 0. 

0.11 0. 

0.11 

0.11 0. 

0.14 0. 

.08 

«12 

. 42 

-15 

.16 C
O
 
0
0
0
 .08 

«13 

i i 

.13 

.14 0
.
0
0
0
0
 

ICOA88 ISENSO OTOTVOT OTOTMIN OMINVOT OMINREG 

1162 1152 

1162 1152 

985 930 

2247 2219 

891 801 

1234 

3520 

3520 

3063 

4056 

129 

568 

568 

590 

887 

99 

404 

404 

392 

585 

OLTG88 0COA88 OSENI0 GTBLKPOP LTBLKPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EQBLKVOT GTBLKREG LTBLKREG EQBLKREG GTMINPOP LTMINPOP 

622 601 

1800 1734 

1800 1734 

1586 153S 

2110 2027 

GTMINVOT LTMINVOT EQMINVOT GTMINREG LTMINREG 

oO
 

- 
0
0
0
 

EQDEMSEN 

O
0
0
 

O
0
O
o
 

591 

1691 

1691 

1537 

2034 

—_
 

OD
 

db
 

eh
 

a 

O
O
 
O
0
O
O
0
O
0
O
0
o
 

GTDEMREG 

-
_
 

OD
 

bh
 

e
h
 

a
 

o
O
 

-
 
0
0
O
0
 

-_
 

OO
 

= 
oh
 

oO
 

- 
0
0
0
 

LTOEMREG 

O
-
+
-
 
0
0
0
 

O
O
 

O
0
O
0
O
0
o
 

-
_
 

OD
 

e
b
 

wd
 

a
 

EQDEMREG 

C
0
0
0
 
Oo
 

OO
 

«+
 
0
O
0
O
0
o
 

0 1 

0 1 

0 1 

0 0 

0 1 

DEMNTBLK 

1 

1 

1 

0 

1 

t
O
 

w
d
 

e
d
 

a
 

O
0
0
 

O
0
O
O
0
O
0
o
 

©
 

- 
0
0
O
0
 

0 0 

0 0 

0 0 

1 0 

0 0 

BLKNTDEM PRFLAG 

0 0 

0 0 

0 0 

1 0 

0 0 

-—
 

OD
 

bh
 

bh
 

a 

-_
 

OD
 
h
o
 

oO
 

-=
- 
0
0
0
 

O
O
 

O
0
O
O
0
O
o
 

OO
 

= 
0
0
0
 

(
=
=
 
e
e
e
]
 

PT
R 

oo 
TT
 

SP
 
S
Y
 

-—
_ 

OD
 

tb
 

ed
 

66 

120 

130 

149 

368 

EQMINPOP 

C
O
O
 

0
C
 

EQUMINREG GTDEMCOA LTDEMCOA EQDEMCOA GTDEMLTG LTDEMLTG EQDEMLTG GTDEMSEN LTDEMSEN 

O
-
 
0
0
0
 

  Printed 09/01/99 10:28:59 Discovery 

  

 



  

  

  

Nan 
WN 

ARN 
RNIN 

Discovery 

Printed 09/01/99 10:28:59 

  

N:\ CLIENTS \ NC_REDISTRICT \ PROGRAMS \ BASCORR 

02/24/98 01:01:08 PM   

  

Total number of one-sided sheets printed (including title page and end page): 49 

  

   



  

   

   hi sual, 

NORTH 

  
CAROLINA REDIS NG 

Ad 0d AJIULLALLD LINU 

LIST OF FINAL OATA SEY - CHECK COMPARISONS 

IToTveT eo VIDKEY ~~ OPRECNCT  IPRECNGT ITaTPop 

.+) 162.0 157.057.1802 08.057.1604 12.057.1603 2910 
102 109.0 397.057.1602 08.057.1604 12.057.1602 2709 
103 104.0 37.057.1802 06.057.1605 12.057.1602 2703 
104 103.0 37.057.1601 06.057.1605 12.057.1601 3417 
105 106.0 37:057.1601 06.151.0414 12.057,1601 3417 

08s IOTHVOT ~~ IREGVOT IREGWNT  IREGSLK IREGOTH 

101 2 1482 368 1112 2 
102 7 1216 846 369 1 
103 y 2 1216 846 389 1 
104 4 1753 1401 34a 4 
105 « 1753 1401 Ma p 

083 IoEM IREP  QTOTPOP  OQTOTWHT  OTOTBLK 

104 1224 227 as77 3034 307 
102 781 £07 arr 1034 307 
103 781 407 1523 3149 353 
104 835 752 asz3 3148 353 
10S 235 752 4332 48a? 88 

0S  OREGMWT  OREGBLK OREGOTH  oCOEWGR OLDENSS 

101 1315 103 2 ase ara 
102 1315 103 2 386 373 
103 1482 79 3 as4 390 - 
104 1482 79 3 a54 398 
105 734 0 0 85 109 

! N 

jo   
0.70 

0.1 

0.31 

0.26 

0.28 

0.07 
0.07 

0.05 

0.08 
ag,00 

0.67 0.78 0.71 0.67 

0.28 0.30 0.32 0.30 
0.28 0.30 0.32 0.30 
g.223 0.20 0.27 0.24 
0.23 0.20 0.27 0.24 

0.43 0.43 0.23 0.55 

0.43 0.43 0.33 0.55 

0.40 0.37 0.29 0.55 
0.40 0.37 0.28 0.35 

0.23 0.21 0.21 0.33 

862 834 748 1 0 
102 862 8634 749 1 0 
103 996 957 881 1 0 
104 990 957 881 1 a 
105 471 452 407 1 0 

083 

101 1 0 0 1 0 
102 1 0 0 1 0 
103 1 ag a y | 0 
104 1 0 Q 1 0 
108 1 a 0 1 0 

OBS EQDEMSEN GTDEMREG LTDEUREG 

101 [0] 1 [4] 0 
102 a | 0 6 
1038 0 1 0 0 
104 0 1 0 0 
105 0 1 Q 0 

C
0
0
0
 
Oo

 

0.75 

0.30 

0.30 

0.20 

0.20 

2100 

2025 

2025 

2685 
288s 

O
O
O
O
 
O
0
O
0
O
0
 

2 

ld
 

od
 

eh
 

ed
 

wd
 

[=
 M

l «
=
 

J 
= 
J
]
 

058 

873 

8738 
311 

911 

EQGDEMREG DELNTBLK 

e
d
 

w
d
 

e
d
 
o
d
 

0BS ORMINPCT OFDEMLTG OPDEMCOA OFDBMSEN OPCTDEM ITOTVOT ITOTMIN IMINYOT 

14417 

£99 

599 

649 

649 

O
0
0
 
O
0
O
0
O
 

(=
 

J 
= 

J 
= 

J 
= 

J 
=}

 

BLKNTDEM 

[-2
E 

1 
~
~
 

I 
-}
 

SER 

ITOTBLK IWHTVOT 

2039 683 

843 1426 

843 1426 

878 2036 

B78 2038 

ILDENBS 18DBEMS0 

707 701 

3a? 364 

aa7 364 

3Q7 410 

307 410 

0BLKVOT DASIVOT 

212 2 

212 2 

246 S 

246 5 

79 a 

OCREPES OLREP88 

478 489 

478 489 

603 600 

603 600 

357 362 

0.82 

0.54 

0.5¢ 

0.339 

0.339 

0.84 

0.66 

0.66 

0.88 
0.55 

0.08 
0.038 
0.10 
0.410 

0.02 

002,028 

1BLKVOT IASTVOT 

1409 3 

576 4 
S76 4 

82? 2 
827 ? 

ICREPAS 1LREPES 

171 173 
322 354 

322 354 

627 633 

627 g33 

CAUTVOT OOTHVOT 

13 4 
13 4 

8 4 
a 4 

a5 a 

0SAEPS0 oDEM 

504 744 
504 744 

624 B18 
624 B18 
323 23s 

0.07 
Q.07 
0.05 

0.05 

0.00 

0.10 

-9.10 

0.11 

0.11 

0.03 

IAUIVOT 

0.08 

0.08 

0.03 

0.09 

0.03 

1564 
1564 

734 

DREP 

612 
612 
671 

671 

438 

08S IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVMINACT TAMINPET IPDEMLTG IPDEWCOA TPDEMSEN IPCYDEM OBLKPET OVELKPCT ORBLKPCT OMINPCT CVUINPCT 

IMINRED ILTG88 ICOAB8 ISENS0 OTOTYOT OTOTMIN OMINVOT OMINREG 

1 

O
o
0
o
o
0
o
0
O
0
 

114 

370 

370 

352 

352 

880 868 860 

741 707 869 

741 707 669 

1140 1089 1063 
1140 1089 1083 

(= 
J 

=R
 

= 
o
l
]
 

PRFLAG 

(=
I 

=J
 
=
e
 

Rye)
 

-
h
 

a
d
 

o
b
 

ab
 

=
A
 

h
h
 

ed
 

e
d
 

e
b
 

o
d
 

o
o
o
 

o
C
c
o
 

O
0
0
 

0
O
0
 

(
«
J
 

« 
J
o
 

J 
= 

JY 
=]
 

343 

343 

J74 

374 

158 

-
l
 

w
d
 

w
d
 

w
d
 

4
 

(«
 
Je
 
H
o
l
e
 

lo
] 1 

1 

1 

1 
1 

231 

231 

263 
263 

123 

Q
o
O
0
0
o
0
o
o
0
 

C
0
0
0
0
 

C
0
0
 

O
0
O
D
 

GTMINVOT LTMINVOT EQWINVOT GTMINREG LTMINREG EQMINAEG GTDEMCOA LTOEMCOA EQDENCOA GTDEMLTG L7DEuiTc £anFui TA GTDEMSEN LTDEMSENW 

0BS OLTGAs 0COAZa OSEN9O GTELKPOP LTBLKPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTELXVOT EQBLKVOT GTBLKREG LTBLXREG EQBLKREG GTMINPOP LTUINPOP EDMINPOP 

  Printad 09/07/99 15:09:23 Discovery 

  

Fofegon LJ 21 

      

   

 



PRI ASSOCIATES INC @o003,028 

  

  

15:06 Tuesday, Septeaber 7, 1993 23 
Of FINAL DATA SET - CHECK COMPARISONS 

'SEGUENT VTDKEY OPRECNCT IPRECNCT ITOTPOP 1AMIVOT 

107.0 37.057.1607 006.151.0414 12.057.1607 3e11 
108.0 37.007,0219 06.191,0414 12,081,021S 21a 
109.0 37.081.0215 06.081.0214 12.081.021S 2172 

110.0 387.081.0211 06.081.0214 12.081.0211 1838 
111.0 337.081.0213 06.081.0214 12.081.0213 2565 

1QTHVOT IREGYQY IAEGMHT IREGALK IREGOTH ILREPaR 

1986 1980 4 

183 

183 

$54 
141 

1000 

269 

269 

$7 
200 

OOTHVOT 

1
.
 

I 
: 

U
N
D
 

NS 

OLREP8S OSREPQQ 

357 3682 323 

357 362 323 
362 1 43 124 138 128 208 
362 11 48 124 138 129 209 132 
382 11 49 124 138 129 208 132 

YBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRGLXPCT IMINPCT IVMINPCT JAMINPCT IPDEMLTG IPDEMCOA IPOEMSEN IPCTOEM OSLKPCT OVBLKPCT ORABLKPCT OUINPCT OVMINPCT 

0 0.25 0.38 0.02 0,02 . a.03 
0 0.45 0,82 0.02 0,02 3 © 0,03 
a. 5 - 0.45 0.62 0.03 0.03 0.07 
0. 0.84 0.89 0.03 Q.03 d 0.07 
4 0.41 : 0.84 0.03 0.03 . 0.07 

0.0 

0.18 
0.18 

0.71 

0.1 

0.23 

0.23 

0.38 
0,38 
0.38 

6 1414 1378 1293 3923 123 0 

185 482 462 387 3923 123 go 
198 482 462 aa7 S97 63 13 

336 380 3 308 997 oA 13 
144 847 358 288 997 e3 13 

OLTGBA OCOAS8 OSENSO GTBLKPOP LTBLXPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLXVOT LTBLKVOT EQBLKVOT GTBLKREG LTBLKREG EQBLKREG GTMINPOP LTMINPOP EQWINPOP 

471 407 
471 407 

221 178 

221 178 
221 178 

GTMINVOT LTMINVOT EQUINVOY GTUINREG LTMINAEG EGMINAEG GTDEMCOA LYDEMCOA EQDENMCOA GTDBMLTG LTDEWML.TG EQDEMLTG GTDEMSEN LTOEMSEN 

EQDEMSEN GTDEMAEG LTDEMREG EQDEMREG DEMNTBLK BLINTDEM       Printed 09/07/99 15:09:23 Discovery  



@oo4/028 

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 
LIST OF FINAL DAYA 8ET - CHECK COMPARISons 

  

  

SEGMENT  VTDKEY OPRECNCT IPRECNCT ITOTPOP IToTHT ITOTBLK IBLKVOT 

112.0 3a7.081.0213 04.081.0218 12.081.0213 2563 1940 J22 ass 
143.0 37.081.0212 06.081.0218 12.081.0212 5418 835 4424 2884 
114.0 37.081.0212 08.081.0221 112.081.0212 5416 83s 4424 2084 
115.0 37.081.0222 06.081.0221 112.081.0222 2887 a3s 1088 1374 
1168.0 37.081.1101 06.081.1103 12.081.1101 2606 20S 153 

IOTHVOT IREGVOT IREGWHT IREGBLK IREGOTH ICREP8S ISREPS0 

5 773 629 141 139 197 173 
2048 437 1608 764 188 138 
2048 437 1608 764 148 136 
1411 432 979 587 187 168 

1630 as 3158 652 B47 

IDEM aToTPaP OTOTWHT OWHTVOT DREGVOT 

459 4335 337 2573 1611 1708 4385 3337 2573 1611 1708 238 4197 3329 2402 474 1807 
1152 205 4187 3329 .2402 1807 
774 810 3726 3642 2920 20 1703 

OREGHIT OREGBLK OREAOTH OCDEuas oLpEMaR QSDEM9Q OCREPES OREP 

1387 220 268 278 192 548 773 710 
1387 220 268 275 192 548 773 710 
1548 25% 338 as2 357 618 626 815 831 
1548 255 33a 382 357 618 626 815 831 1683 16 161 180 14S 483 484 87s 47% 

IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPGCT IVMINPCT IRNMINPCT IPDEMLYG IPDELCOA IPOEMSEN IPCTDEM OBLKFCT OVBLKPCT ORBLKPCT OMINPCT OVMINPCT 

0.18 0.12 0.24 0.22 0.18 0.42 Q,40 0.1% 
0.78 0.79 0.83 0.79 0.78 
0.78 0.78 0.83 0.79 0.79 
a.a7 0.639 0.71 0.68 0.63 

o.o8 0.05 9.10 0.10 0.06 

Q.14 0.24 0.17 
7 . 0.83 . 0.15 0.14 0,24 0.17 
7 0.83 . 0.18 0.14 0.21 0.18 
74 | 0.78 . 0.16 0.14 0.21 0.18 
.4 . 0.38 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 

ORMINPCT OPOEMLYG OPOEWMCOA OPDEMSEM OPCTDEM ITOTVOT ITOTWIN IMINVOT ININREG ILTGS8 ICOAS8 ISENSO OTOTVAT OTOTMIN OMINVAT OMINAEG 

0.33 0.27 0.52 2036 625 445 144 347 336 J 1058 538 224 
0.33 0.27 0.52 3697 4481 29139 1611 966 952 3 1058 S38 224 
0.38 0.38 0.50 3687 4484 2818 1811 966 952 2943 868 841 259 
0.35 0.38 0.50 2046 2002 1384 878 737 754 2049 868 841 259 
0.26 0.16 0.44 1971 273 200 100 1078 9&7 2978 84 LY: 20 

OLTGS8 OCOA88 OSENSO GYALKPOP LTBLKPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EQBLKVOT GTBLKAEG LTBLKREG EQBLXAEG GTMINPOP LTMINPOP EQMINPOP 

816 707 
816 707 

936 931 
956 $31 

624 880 

GTMINVOT LTMINVOT EQMINVOT GTMINAEG LTMINREG EOMINREG GTDEMCOA LTDEMCOA EQDEMUCOA GYDEMLTG LTDEML.TG EQDEMLTG GTDEMSEN LTDEMIEN 

EQDEMSEN AaTOeuREG LTDEWREG     
  Primed 09/07/99 15:09:26 Discovery  



08-07/99 15:36 FAX 819 544 49801 PRI ASSOCIATES INC do0s5-028 
  

15:06 Tuesday, Saptaadar 7, 1999 31 
* LIST OF FINAL DATA 8ET - CHECK COMPARISONS 

eau VTDKEY OPRECNCT xPRecncY ITOTPQP IBLKVOT IASIVATY LANIYVOQT 

116 117.0 37.081.1102 08.081.1103 112.081.1102 44 17 
117 118.0 37.081.1102 06.081.1602 12.081.1102 : a4 17 
118 119.0 J37.081.1801 06.081.1602 12.081.160% aa1 14 
118 120.0 37,081,16801 Q€,001.0702 12.061.1601 3a 14 
120 121.0 37.081.0108 068.081.0702 12.081.0108 3892 9 

OBS IOTHVOT IREGYOT IREGWT IREGBLK ICREPS8 ILREPaH ISREPSO 

116 2885 2744 132 1105 1085 "1060 
117 2885 2744 132 1105 1085 1060 
118 1364 1187 228 425 403 479 
118 1384 1137 226 425 403 479 
120 3320 317 2996 132 149 98 

10€u QTOTFOF OTOTWHT QTOTBLK 0QTHVOT 

1362 3728 3642 30 
1362 3850 5747 182 
741 53850 S747 152 
741 4472 4236 - 138 

3023 4472 4298 139 

OREGWHT OREGOTH OCDEMSS OLDENSS OLREP8S ODEY 

1683 161 180 48a 879 
2862 480 538 1186 1408 1329 
2862 480 598 1186 1408 1329 
2751 12€ 494 624 1044 140a 1227 
2731 126 454 624 1044 1488 1227 

IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVUINPCT IRMINPCT IFDENLTG IPOEMCOA IPOEMSEN IPCTDEM GBLKPET OVRLKPCY QRBLXPCT OMINPCT OVMINFCT 

0.02 0.02 0.05 . . 0.01 . 0.02 0.02 
0.02 0.02 0.05 0. . . 0.03 . . 0.03 0.03 
0.21 0.20 0.17 0.03 . 0.03 0.03 
0.24 0.20 0.17 0.04 . . 0.04 0.03 
0.93 0.92 0.90 . . 0.03 5 4 0.04 0.03 

OFMINPCT OPDEMLTG OPDEMCDA OPOEMSEN OPCTCEM ITOTVOT ITOTMIN IMINVOT IMINREG ILTGEE ICOASE ISENSO OTOTVOT OTOTUIN OWINVOT OMINREG 

.18 .44 J142 69 141 1784 1604 1617 84 s8 20 
-19 «59 3142 * B89 141 1784 1604 1647 160 72 
.19 -51 2008 406 227 758 741 822 160 72 
.28 .88 2008 406 227 735 711 822 118 133 
.28 .55 4026 3705 3003 1785 1723 2108 118 133 

OLTGAA OCOA88 OSEN9O GTBLKPOP LTBLKPOP EOBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EQBLKVOT GTBLKREG LTBLKREG EOBLKAEG GTLOINPCP LTMINPOP EQUMINPOP 

664 880 
1794 1689 
1794 1689 
1868 1678 
1668 1678 

GTMINVOT LTMINYOT EQUMINVOT GTMINREG LTMINREG EQMINREG GTDEMCOA LTDEMCOA EODEWCOA GTOEWLTG LTDEMLTG EQDEMITG GTDEMSEN LTDEMSEN 

EQDEMSEN GTDEMREG LTDEMREG     
  

  
Primed 09/07/99 15:09:26 Discovery  



08/07/88 15:36 FAX 819 544 4801 PRI ASSOCIATES INC 006/028 

Er RAY 4 SR 15 . =~ — “ Tr. - : ; - ; 5 2 

or SE a WEYL ot ne Ter LL i op EIA £3 

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING September 7, 1900 32 
LIST OF FINAL DATA SET - CHECK COMPARISONS 

to 

  
| SEGUENT  VTDKEY OPRECNCT IPRECNCT ITOTPOP ITOTWHT ITOTBLK TWHTVOT IBLKVOT IASTIVOT IAMIVOT 

122.0 37.081.0108 06.081.1202 12.081.0108 5186 321 3692 123.0 37.081.0129 088.081.1201 12.081.0129 3067 8 2364 124.0 J7.081.0108 068.081,1201 12.081.0106 4363 84 2863 123.0 37.081.0145 06.081.1201 12.081,0143 1571 481 747 126.0 37.081.0119 06.081.1201 12.081.0119 4008 144 2547 

I0THVOT IREGYOT TREGWT IREGBLK IREGATH ISDEUSO ICREPBS ILREPBS ISREPSO 

3320 2906 2013 
2227 2210 1507 
2312 20282 926 
1297 044 

336 1924 1798 1424 

OASIVOT 

1 

QLREPS8 

121 

122 
123 

124 

125 a11 

08S IBUKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVMINPGT IRMINPGT IPDEMLTG IPDEMCOA IPDEMSEN IPCTDEM OBLKPCT OYBLKPCT ORBLKPCT QNINPCT QYMINFCT   hy 0.83 0,52 0.90 0.82 0.13 0.18 0,14 oe 1.909 1.00 0.99 0.57 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.97 0.96 : 0.99 0.97 : 0.15 » 0.18 0.18 0.87 0.85 . 0.73 . 0.91 ; .0. 0.15 ; 0.18 0.18 0.85 0.54 0.54 3 0.94 : : 0.15 : : 0.18. 0.18 

ORMINFCT OFDEMLTG OPDEMCUA OPDEMSEN OFCTOEM ITOTVOT ITOTMIN IMINVOT IMINREG ILTGBS8 ICOAS8 ISENSO OTOTVOT OTOTMIN ONINVAOT OMINREG 

0.23 0.53 0.52 0.46 : 4026 4818 3705 3008 1795 669 521 486 0.16 0.45 0.45 0.31 .61 2393 3057 2385 2211 813 638 418 0.18 0.45 0.45 0.31 2377 4255 2883 813 638 418 0.18 0.45 0.45 0.31 1150 1084 763 948 813 gaa 41a 0.16 0.45 0.45 0.31 : 2744 3928 2800 1793 813 83a 418 
OLYGEE OCOABD OSENSO GTBLKPOP LTBLKPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EQBLKVOT GTELKREG LTBLKREG EGBLKREG- GTUINPOP LTWINPOP EQMINPOP 

1263 1150 1288 

EQDEMREG DELNTRLK BLIKNTDEUY     
  

  Printed 09/07/99 15:09:26 Discovery  



   Us/Ui/ BY 

  

  

    

"\ SEGMENY VIDKEY  OPREGNGT  IPREGNCT 

«8 127.0 
127 128.0 
128 129.0 
129 130.0 
130 131.0 

397.081.0119 06.081.1402 12.081.0119 
37.081.0103 06.081.1402 12.081.0103 
37.081.0101 06.081.1402 12.081.0101 

40:46 rAL 819 544 48ul 

37.081.0133 06.081.1402 12.081.0133 
37.081.0133 06.081.3135 12.081.0133 

08s IOTHVOT 

126 

127 

128 
129 
130 

0BS 

126 0.85 
v0.8 

: 0.28 
Sid 0.31 

130 0.31 

2233 

2283 
2283 

2293 
552 

0.94 
0.57 

0.26 
0.30 

0.30 

InEavaT 

1824 

2021 

2706 

2642 
2642 

IREP 

91 

283 
719 

718 
718 

OREGBLK 

231 

221 
231 

231 

417 

0.83 

0.S8 

0.24 
0.29 

0.28 

I REGWHT 

125 
. Bas 
2036 
1871 
1871 

OTaTpPop 

o 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

5140 

S140 

5140 

5140 

2421 

REGOTH 

N
o
 
o
o
o
 

.98 

-€3 

-30 

33 

.a3 

PRI ASSOCIATES INC 

  

    

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 

LIST OF FINAL DATA 8ET « CHECK COMPARISONS 

ITOTPOP 

4006 
380s 
4715 

5732 

5732 

THEGBLK IREGOTH 

1758 1 

1130 S 

657 13 

758 12 

759 12 

OTOTWHT OTOTBLK 

4480 608 

4489 803 
£489 809 

44829 809 

1234 1050 

ocDEMsR OLDEuRE 

333 611 

553 611 

533 611 

333 611 

175 247 

Sg 

5 

2 

32 

32 

. 0.4 

0.56 

0.25 
0.29 

0.29 

CPS DAMINPCT OPDEMLTG OPDEMCOA OPDEMSEM QPCTREW ITOTYVOT ITOTMIN 

126 0.09 

127 0.09 

128 . 0.09 

129 0.09 
-130 0.43 

08S 

126 1430 

127 1430 
128 1430 
128 1430 

130 S04 

oBS 

128 1 

127 1 

128 1 

129 1 

130 0 

0.43 

0.43 

0.43 
0.43 
0.49 

1301 1415 

6.43 

8.43 

0.43 

0.43 

0.38 

© 
wb

 
wb
 

wb
 

= 

0.33 

0.33 

0.33 

0.33 
0.88 

- 
0D
 
0
0
0
 

Q
O
0
O
0
O
0
0
O
0
 

2744 

2933 
3724 

4426 
4426 

3828 

2447 
1434 

1000 

1800 

O
0
O
D
D
O
 

ITOTYHT 

0.54 

0.78 
0.50 

0.50 

0.30 

IMINVOT IMINAEG ILTGB8 ICOABB ISENSO OTOTVOT OTOTMIN OMINVOT OMINAEG 

2600 

1734 
1055 
1418 
1416 

463 
328 

1 

1 

ITOTBLK 

3806 
2363 

1326 

1796 

1796 

0.96 

0.74 

0.43 

0.48 

0.48 

799 

135 
670 

yi 
71 

O
0
O
0
0
0
0
 

I LOEvAEs 

1333 

1006 
1421 
1007 
1007 

IWHTVOT 

1288 1481 

948 1143 
14316 18338 

835 123138 
835 123s 

144 
1219 

2669 
3010 

3010 

OLREP28 

813 

81s 

813 

818 
257 

0.12 

0.12 

0.12 
0.12 

0.43 

IBLKVQOT 

2587 
1683 

sat 
1347 
1347 

Ich EPBA 

83 
213 

635 

464 

464 

oAMIVAT 

OSA 

0.10 

0.10 

0.10 

0.10 

0.40 

3887 

3887 
3887 
3687 
1710 

23 

23 

23 

23 
1 

EPS0 

852 
$52 

852 
852 

166 

IASIVOT 

1187 

@o07/028 

1449 

1449 

1448 

1443 

643 

0.123 

0.13 

0.13 

0.13 

0.49 

438 

438 

438 

439 
755 

IAMIVOT 

IELKPCT IVBLKPCT IRGLKPCT IMINPCT IVMINPCT IRMINPCT IPDEMLTG IPOEMCOA IPDEMSEN IPCTOEU DBLKPCT OVBLKPCT ORBLKPCT OMINPCT OVUINPCT 

D.11 

0.11 

0.11 

0.11 

0.44 

37 

237 

237 

237 
418 

OLTGR8 OCOA88 OSENQU GTELXPOP LTHLKPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLXVOT LTBLKVOT. EQBLKVOT GTBLXRER LTELKRES EOBLXHEG GTMINPOP LTWINPOP EQMINPOP 

  

   

OREP 

8286 
828 

928 

928 

246 

        Printed 09/07/99 15,609.26 Discovery 

 



08/07/88 13:36 FAX 818 544 4801 PRI ASSOCIATES INC . d@oo08-028 

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 
LIST OF FINAL DATA SET - CHECK COMPARISONS 

A SEGMENT  VTDKEY OPRECNCT IPRECNCT IToTPOR ITOTWHT ITOTBLX DYNTVOT TAMIVOT 

132.0 37.081.0101 068.081.3135 12.081.0101 4715 3281 1326 
133.0 37.081.0101 06.081.2135 12.081.0101 4715 3281 1326 
134.0 37.081.0102 06.081.0128 12.081.0102 3667 2817 756 
135.0 237.081.0102 06.081.0112 12.0681.0102 3667 2817 756 
136.0 37.081,0104 06.081.0112 12.001.0104 2380 1446 1083 

26 

26 

12 

12 

13 

JOTHVOT IREGVOT TREGWHT IREGBLK IREGOTH 1CDEMAA TLDEMaA ICREPBS IsAEPa0 

16 2706 20886 657 13 861 732 655 16 2706 2038 857 732 
2240 1844 389 S60 
2240 1844 389 S60 
1456 1230 

870 
855 870 

468 60? 

4638 607 
287 206 

IREP OTOTPOP 
CANIVOT 0QTHvOT OREGVAT 

718 2421 1234 
1 S71 719 2402 2100 

1617 $14 264% 2461 
2018 814 2887 2835 

383 2897 2835 

OREGBLK ~~ OREGOTH OCDEMER OLREPBS OSREPSO 

£17 178 257 166 1432 178 281 429 508 1362 31 aa7 
634 713 1145 2263 22 438 
6892 822 1380 2263 22 4339 652 822 1380 

IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINACT IVMINPCY YAMINPCT IPDEMLTG IPDEMCOA IPDEMSEN IPCTDEM OBLKPGY OYELKPCT ORSLKPGT OMINPGT OYUINPCT   0.28 . 6.30 0.28 0,25 0.50 . 0.43 0.40 0.43 0.26 ; 0.30 0.28 a,25 0.30 0.11 0.10 0.11 0.19 . 0.23 0.21 0.18 0.52 . 0.06 0.0% 0.03 0.19 0.23 0.21 0.18 0.52 . : 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.38 ” 0.44 0.42 0.34 0.85 : .78 0.02 0.02 0.01 

0.439 0.38 : 3724 1055 ‘670 1421 1538 1710 0.49 0.38 3724 10S3 670 1421 1538 1787 0.51 0.39 3096 638 396 1054 1115 2085 . 0.38 3086 S 396 1054 1115 2287 0.35 ‘ . 2182 911 886 928 22387 

CODERS EN GTDEMREG LTDEMREG   
      
  

Priated 09/0749 15:09:46 Discovery  



08/07/89 13:37 FAX 919 544 4801 PRI ASSOCIATES INC @oog/028 

NORTH CAROLI 
LIST OF FINAL DATA SET - CHECK COMPARISONS 

\ 
SCGMENT  VTOKEY OPRECNCT IPRECNCT 1TaTROP ITOTANT ITOTBLK IWHTVOT 

136 137.0 37.081.0104 06.081.0111 12.081.0104 2380 1446 1063 1271 
137 138.0 37.081.0109 06.081.0111 12.081.0109 48 2n 4638 
138 139.0 437.081.0108 06.081.0114 12,081,.0109 4871 27 4638 
139 140.0 387.081.0115 06.001.0114 12.081.0115 3811 2687 838 
140 141.0 37.001.0115 06.081.0117 12.081.0115 3811 2887 838 

10THVOT IREGVOT IREGWHT ICDEuBE ILDEUSS 

1858 1230 £27 624 
2508 180 1138 
2598 180 1138 
1886 1562 S24 
1886 1562 S24 

IREP OTOTPOP "© OBLKVOT 

383 327 
106 

106 
496 

4968 
123 

OREGBLK OLREPSS 

154 505 279 1.41 
154 508 279 25 
776 1434 45S 2056 
776 1434 455 2058 
180 11 77 443 1483 677 

IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IABLKPCT IMINACT IVMINPCT IAMINPCT IPORATG IPOEMCOA IPREMSEN IPCTDEM OBLKPCT OVBLKPCT ORBLKPCT QMINPCT QVMINPGT 

0.44 0.38 0.42 
0.83 0.582 : 0.83 
0.93 0.92 0 0.93 

0.23 0.20 0.25 

0.23 0.20 0.16 0.25 

0.18 0.18 0.19 0.20 
0.18 0.13 C0 0.20 
0.15 8.15 . . 0.17 
0.15 0.15 . 0.17 
0.09 0.09 . 15 0.13 

ORMINPCT OPDENLTG OPDEMCOA OPDEMSEN OPCTDEM ITOTVOT ITOTMIN IMINVOT IMINREG ILTGE8 JCOAR8 ISEN30 OTOTVOT OTOTMIN OMINVOT OMINREG 

a.11 0.62 2182 1134 811 626 B86 814 829 1828 330 362 158 
Q.11 0.82 3121 4700 2804 2436 1211 1130 1342 1828 aso 3s2 158 
9.23 0.66 . 321 4700 2904 2438 1211 1180 1342 S307 939 922 729 9.23 0.66 2351 1124 74 324 935 a7 998 5307 939 922 799 0.08 0.62 . . 2851 1124 741 324 935 871 998 3077 $31 404 191 

OLTGS8 OCOASS GSENOO GTBLKPOP LTELKPOP EGBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTELXVOT EQBLKVOT GTBLKREG LTBLKREG EQBLKREG GTMINPCP LTMINPOP EQMINPOP 

728 655 748 

728 655 748 

1325 1214 1650 

1323 1214 1650 
1156 1038 1194 

GTMINYOT LTMINVOT EQMINVOT GTMINREG LTMINREG EOMINAEG GTOZMCOA LTDEMCOA EQDEMCOA GTDEMLTG LTDEMLTG EQDEMLTG GTOEMSEN LTDEMSEN 

EQDEMSEN GTDEMAEG LTDEMREG   
        Printed 09/07/99 15:09:26 Discovery  



08/07/88 13:37 FAX 918 544 4801 PRI ASSOCIATES INC @do10-028 
  

  
NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 13:08 Tuesday, Bepteaber 7, 1883 

LIST OF FINAL DAYA SET - CHECK COMPARISONS 

SEGMENT  VTDKEY OPRECNCT IPRECNCT ITaTPOP ITOTWHT ITOTBLK IWHTVOT IsLkvor IASTIVOT TAMIVOT 

142.0 37.081.0118 086.081.0117 12.081.0118 3276 2784 301 2229 16 143.0 337.081.0118 06.081.0123 12.081.011& 3276 2784 391 2229 16 144.0 237.081.2124 06:081.0123 12.081.2124 4654 3444 1020 2874 © 38 145.0 237.081.0124 048.081.0123 12.0871.0124 3182 2081 935 1732 14 146.0 37.081.0138 066.081.0123 12.081.0136 5607 4172 1303 3026 g 

IQTHVOT IREGYOT IREGWYHT IAEGALK IREGOTH ILDEMBS ISDEMSO ICREF886 ILAEF88 ISRERSQ 

1864 183 487 414 S524 562 70S 1884 163 487 414 524 562 705 2520 S04 43% 763 480 477 620 1522 318 275 371 301 300 399 2784 557 852 814 829 830 

IREP O0BLKVOT QASIVOT QAUIVOT 

266 123 13 

836 124 

836 126 

838 126 

836 126 

QCAREPSS QLAEPEB 

604 443 6r7 
484 518 455 678 454 S18 455 678 
464 £16 455 678 
464 5186 455 678 

IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVMINPGCT IRIONPCT IPDEMLYG IPDEMCOA IPOEMSEN IPCTDEM OBLKPCT QVBLKPCT ORBLXPCT ONINPCT OVMINPCT 

0.12 0.09 0.15 0.12 0.37 0.03 0.08 0.12 0.09 0.14 0.12 0.37 : 0.21 0.21 0.22 ; 0.20 0.26 0.23 0.55 0.21 a. 0.31 : 0.20 0.3% 0.a1 0.48 0.21 8.21 0.23 ; 0.20 0.28 0.23 ‘ . : 0.54 : . a,21 0.21 

CRUINPCT OPDEMLTG OPDEMCOA OPOEMSEN OPCTDEW ITOTVOT ITOTMIN IMINVOT IMINREG ILTGBE ICOAZS ISENSO OTOTVAT OTOTMIN OMINVOT OMINREG 

0.08 0.62 0.58 0.65 0.68 2537 432 308 173 1049 BS4 1119 3077 $31 404 191 . 0.22 0.52 0.51 0.51 0.668 2537 492 308 173 1049 954 1118 4047 1412 1024 486 0.22 0.52 0.51 Q.51 0.68 3754 1210 880 527 916 849 1383 4047 1412 1024 486 0.22 0.52 0.51 0.51 0.68 2528 1111 785 326 575 533 770 4047 1412 1024 486 0.22 0.52 0.51 0.51 Q.68 3915 1435 8839 572 1882 ° 1568 1503 4047 1412 1024 486 

OLTOa8 0COAGA DSENSO GTBLKPGP LTALKPGP EcAlkrop ETBLKVOT LTBLKYOT EQBLKYOT GTBLKAEQ LTBLKAEG EQELKAEG GTMINPOP LTWINPOP EQWIXPOP 

1156 1032 1184 

203 1020 

1020 
1020 

803 1020 

  
GTMINVOT LTMINVOT EQUINVOT GTMINREG LYMINREG EQMINREG GTDEMCOA LTDEMCOA EQDEMCOA GTDEMLTG LTDEM.TG EQDEMLTG GTDEMSEN LTDEUSEN 

    
  
  Printed 09/07/99 15:09:26 Discovery  



  

  

08/07/88 15:37 FAX 919 544 4801 

| SEGMENT  VTDKEY  OPRECNGT  IPREGNCT 

37.081.0136 06.081.3124 12.081.0136 
87.081.0136 06.081.0462 12.081.0136 
97.081.1601 046.081.0802 12.081.1601 
97.081.1102 046.081.0802 12.081.1102 
87.081.1102 06.081.2124 12.081.1102 

146 

147 
148 
149 

150 

147.0 

148.0 
149.0 
150.0 
1561.0 

IoTHvOT IREGVOT IREGAHT 

16 

16 
2764 

2764 
1364 
26835 

2683 

2192 

2192 
137 
2744 

2744 

oToTPOP 

2133 
2436 
2438 
2438 
2133 

OREGOTH 

S21 

1480 

1480 

1480 

821 

10 
13 

13 
13 
10 

PRI ASSOCIATES INC 

TRL a XY RN.” 2 

NORTH CARO LIKA REDISTRICT 
LIST OF FINAL DATA SET - CHECK COMPARISONS 

IToTPOP 

IREGBLK 

J14 

34 

146 

5607 

Seo? 

2552 
4000 

4000 

IREGOTH 

15 

15 
1 

OTOTBLK 

132 
128 

128 
128 

132 

OLDEMAS 

173 

383 
383 

383 
173 

ITOTWHT 

4172 

4172 

2018 
3504 

4301 

ICDEMBS 

737 

737 
286 

293 
2383 

283 

362 

ITOoTBLK 

1303 
1303 

428 

. 61 

61 

ILDEMBS 

852 

252 

352 

708 

703 

OBLKYOT 

IwHTVOT 

OASIYOT 

IBLKVOT 

ICREPSB 

IASIVOY 

ILR 

OOTHYOT 

@oi11/028 

TAMIVOT 

EPan ISAEPQO 

830 

830 
403 

10835 

1085 

694 

694 

4739 

1080 

1060 

OREGYOT 

7 8385 

1 1855 

; (PP 1855 
1 158% 

7 8938 

ODEM OREP 

327 

795 

785 

785 

a27 

§38 

663 
663 
663 
338 

IBLKPCT IVELKPCT IABLKPCT IMINFCT IVWINPGT IRMINPCT IFOEULTG IPDEMCOA IPDEMSEN IPCTDEM OBLKPCT OVBLKPCT ORELKPCY GUINPCT OVMINPCT 

0.20 

0.20 

0.19 

0.07 

0.01 

0.28 

0.26 

0.21 

0.02 

0.02 

0.48 

0.359 

0.39 

0.38 

0.48 

0.57 

0.31 
Q.31 

0.31 
0.57 

OLTGE8 0COABE OSENSO GTBLKPOP 

361 

1017 

1017 

1017 

361 

335 

936 
836 

836 

335 

640 

835 

833 

833 

840 

21 

21 

17 

05 
.05 

a. 

0. 

a. 

0. 

0 

3315 
3815 
2008 

3142 
3142 

1435 
1435 
53 
oh 
09 

88s 

ass 

406 

69 
68 

S72 

S72 

227 

141 

141 

0.57 

0.57 

0.58 

0.54 

0.51 

1682 

1882 

755 

1794 
1794 

1366 

1566 

711 

1604 

1604 

1526 
1974 

1974 
1974 

1328 

147 
125 

123 
123 

147 

LTBLKPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EOALKVOT GTELKREG LTBLKREG EQBLKREG GTMINPOP LTMINPOP EQMINPOP 

GTMINVOT LTMINVOT EQMINVOT GTMINREG LTMINAREG COMINASG GTDEMCOA LTDEMCOA EQDEMCOA GTDEMLTG LTDEML.TG EDOEMLTO GQTDEMSEN LTDEMSEN 

  Priated 09/0749 13:09-27 Diacovery      



   

   
Uus/ui/ 99 

  

sewn VTOKEY 

  
151 0.05 0.39 0.34 
52 0.12 0.36 0.30 
153 . 0.03 0,37 0.32 
154 0.18 0,47 0.44 

155 0.18 0.47 0.44 

151 1017 938 93s 

  
7 
47 
47 

0 1 
152 goa 851 879 0 1 
153 $%0 $20 94g 1 0 
154 1481 1617 13s8 0 1 
1565 1481 1417 1338 1 0 

08S 

151 0 1 0 0 
152 0 1 0 0 
153 0 1 0 1 
154 0 1 0 0 
155 1 0 0 1 

08S CQUEMSEN GTDEMREG LTODEUREG 

151 0 1 1] 
152 Q 1 0 
153 [0] 1 0 
154 0 1 0 

3 0 1 0 

13:37 FAX 818 544 4801 

O
O
0
O
0
O
0
O
0
O
 

1268 
1268 

1268 

1268 
2046 

PRI ASSOCIATES INC 

2002 

O
O
 

0
0
 

NORTH CAROLI 

ITOTWHT 

1420 
1420 
1420 
1420 
833 

KA REDIS 

ICoEMR8 

197 

197 

197 
197 

567 

OovTvVOoT 

1848 

1966 

2126 
2578 

2578 

OSDEMQO 

6.44 

0.44 

0.44 

0.44 

0.75 

a1 

a1 

41 

41 

1384 

293 

383 

as7 

663 

863 

TRICTING 
LIST OF FINAL DATA SET - CHECK COMPARISONS 

ITOTBLK 

0.38 

0.38 

0.58 

0.58 

0.78 

25 

25 
23 

25 
979 

0
0
0
0
0
 

OPRECNCT IFRECNCT ITOTPORP 

131 132.0 37.081.0219 06.081.0802 12.081.0218 1483 
132 133.0 937.061.0218 06.081.0220 12.081.0213 1485 
133 154.0 37.081.0218 06.081.0223 12.081.0219 1485 
134 155.0 937.001.0219 06.061.0217 12.067.021% 1485 
13% 136.0 37.001.0222 06.001.0217 12.0081.0222 2837 

08s IOTHVOT IREGVOT IREGMHT TREGBLK TREGOTH 

151 1 R2s gao 24 1 
182 1 82s 200 24 1 
1583 1 82s 800 24 1 
154 1 825 BOO 24 1 
155 1 1411 432 ‘979 0 

08S IDEM IREP OTOTPOP OTOTWHT OTaTBLK 

131 916 265 2436 2271 128 
1§ Jie 2685 3189 2685 469 
153 316 265 2682 2564 40 
184 S16 265 4471 3167 1260 
185 1152 205 4471 3167 1260 

08S OREGWHT OREGBLK OREGOTH OCDEMAS OLDEMBS 

151 1480 62 13 314 393 
152 1404 184 5 253 326 
153 1734 42 3 285 363 
154 2121 a72 2 61d 83S 
155 2121 472 2 618 633 

08S IBLKPCT IVELKPCT IRBLKPET IMINPCY IVMINPCT IRMINPCT IPOENLTG IPDEWCOA IPOEMSEN 

5 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.48 
Lo 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.48 
SRR 7! 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.48 

2.24 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.48 
155 0.70 0.67 0.68 0.71 0.68 0.69 0.74 

EMCOA 

IWMHTVOT 

1228 
1228 

1228 

1228 
662 

ISDENSO 

174 

174 

174 

792 

@o12/028 

I[BLKVOT IASIVOT 

33 J 

33 J 

33 5 

33 L] 

1374 3 

ICREPSR ILREPAR 

244 283 

248 263 

248 263 

248 263 

187 201 

OAUTVOT OOTHVOT 

13 1 

3 2 

2 3 

¢ 4 qa 

7 4 

OSREPQO O0EM 

642 795 

5396 660 

801 763 

7335 1376 

73S 1376 

TAUIVOT 

  

a
A
 

N
N
 

ISREPSQ 

IPCTDEM OBLKPCT OVBLKPCT OQRBLKPCT ONINPCT OVMINPCT 

0.88 
0.86 
0.88 
0.86 
0.85 

302 

502 

S02 

S02 

797 

443 
445 

44S 
443 

74 

0,05 
0,15 
0.03 
0.2a 
0.28 

458 

4358 

458 

458 

774 

0.03 
0.13 
0.03 
0.24 
0.24 

1874 

2355 

2210 

3426 
3426 

0.04 
0.12 
0.02 
0.18 
0.18 

163 

314 

124 
1304 

1304 

123 

389 

84 
848: 

848 

75 
189 
45 

474 
474 

OLTGRS 0COAS8 OSENSO GTBLKPOP LTBLKPOP EQBLKDOP GTHLXVOT LTELKVOT EQBLKVOT GTBLKREG LTBLKREG EQBLKREG GTMINFOP LTWINPOP EQUINPOP 

    Printed 09/07/99 15:09-27 Discovery 

  

 



  

        
09,07/98 15:38 FAX 819 544 4801 PRI ASSOCIATES INC @o13/028 

    
   
   
   

  

Rp eT age 

  

     
  

  

>i 3 oy ETT TY dE 

Es Be DES 
NOCATH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 

— LIST OF FINAL DATA SET « CHECK COMPARISONS 

| sgoueNT VTDKEY OPRECNCT IPRECHCT ITOTPOP ITOTWHT ITOTBLK INHTYOT IBLKVOT IASIVOT TAMIVOT 

156 157.0 87.081.0208 06.081.0217 12.081.0205 4102 1710 2333 1838 1776 29 7 
157 158.0 37.081.0205 06.081.0209 12.081.0205 4102 1710 2333 18386 1776 28 
138 159.0 387.081.0203 06.081.0209 12.081.0203 1699 1184 474 1025 351 11 1" 
199 160.0 37.081,0202 06.081.0204 112.081.0202 1068 821 128 820 107 8 3 160 161.0 837.081.0201 606.081.6204 12.081 .06201 1550 1521 15 1243 14 ? 0 

08S IOTHVOT IREGVOT IREGMHT IREGBLK IREGOTH ICogEuaa ILDENMAS ISOEMSQ ICREPAH ILREPER ISREPSQO 

156 6 2088 8672 1373 4 250 961 a37 § 2a1 «88 . 208 157 6 2055 672 1373 4 859 961 957 261 28s 20a 
158 2 04S 748 195 2 243 230 234 251 234 238 
150 1 450 418 30 2 101 101 7 159 170 150 
160 0 1212 1203 4 5 276 357 304 455 484 470 

08S IDEM IREP. QTOTPOP QTOTWHT QTOTBLK QWHTYOT QBLKYOT 0ASIVOT OAMTYOT QQTHVOT QREGYQT 

156 1689 287 4471 3187 1280 2578 822 15 7 4 2595 157 1680 287 3103 2447 533 2034 365 18 1 6 1494 158 893 274 31 2447 593 2034 365 18 11 6 ‘ 1454 15¢ 281 163 2733 2722 27 2104 17 4 1 2 2114 
160 644 502 273% e722 27 2104 17 4 1 2 2114 

08s OREGAHT OREGBLK OREGOTH OCDEURSG Ol.DEMER OSDEMSO OCREPRA OLREPSR OSREPSO ODEN OREP 

196 2121 472 2 618 899 ged : 799 792 738 1376 9339 
157 1309 187 4 76 411 288 434 467 433 3826 S70 158 1303 137 4 378 411 288 454 487 453 826 570 
139 2107 7 0 412 S79 431 88S 849 838 967 1023 
160 2107 7 0 41Z 373 431 8635 849 638 S67 1023 

088 IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVWINPCT IRMINPCT IPDEMLTG IPDENMCOA IPDEMSEN IPCTDEM OBLKPCT OVEBLKPCT ORBLKPCT GMINPCT OVMINPET 

+58 .. 0.87 0.53 0.67 0.58 0.54 0.67 0.77 0.78 0.82 0.85 0.28 0.24 0.48 0.29 0.25 20.57 0.53 0.67 0.58 0.54 0.67 0.77 0.78 0.82 0.85 0.19 0.15 0.13 0.21 0.16 
Ti 0.28 0.28 Q.21 0.30 0.27 0.21 0.35 0.43 0.30 0.68 0.18 0.15 0.13 0.21 0.16 ..99 0.12 0.11 0.07 0.14 0,13 0.07 0.97 0.39 0.32 0.61 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 180 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.42 0.38 0.39 0.56 0.01 0.01 . 6.00 0.0 0.01 

08s CRAMINPCT OPDEMLTG OPOEMCUA OPDEWSEN OPCTDEM ITOTVOT ITOTMIN IMINVOT IMINREG ILTG88 ICOA88 ISENSO OTOTVOT OTOTUIN OMINVOT OMINREG 

158 0.18 0.47 0.44 0.47 0.58 3353 2392 1818 1983 1246 1211 116% 426 1304 848 474 157 "0.13 0.47 0.45 0.39 0.59 3355 2392 1818 1383 1246 1211 1165 2434 656 400 191 
158. 0.13 0.47 0.45 0.39 0.58 1400 505 375 197 524 494 472 2434 656 400 181 159 0.00 0.41 0.32 0.34 0.43 33s 144 119 az 271 260 221 2128 37 24 7 180 0.0 0.41 0.32 0.34 0.49 1233 23 20 S 836 731 774 2128 a7 24 vi 

08s OLTGBS OCOASB OSENSO GTELXPOP LTBLKPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EGBLKVOT GTBLKAEG LYBUKAEG EQBLXAEG GTWINPOP LYMINPOP EOMINPOP 

136 1491 1€17 1388 

197 878 830 741 
158 878 830 744 

158 1428 1277 1289 

160 1428 1277 1261 O 
A 

= 
ot
 

-
0
O
0
O
0
Q
 

o
C
 

o
 

J 
S
E
 

SP
 
G
y
 

O
0
0
 

O
0
O
0
 

O
0
0
 

o
O
o
0
 

OQ
 

= 
od
 

ad
 

oa
d 

“A
 
0
0
 
0
0
 

0
0
0
0
0
 

hh
 

wh
 

wh
 

wd
 

wh
 

o
o
n
 

o0
O0
o 

(
=
=
 

ol
 
=
=
]
 

OBS GTMINVOT LTMINVOT EQMINVOT GTMINREG LTMINRCG EQMINREG GTDEMCOA LTDEMCOA EQDEMCOA GTDEMLTG LYDEMLTG EQDEMLTG GTDEMSEN LTDEMSEN 

156 1 0 o 1 0 0 1 0 a 1 0 0 1 0 157 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 i] 1 0 0 1 0 158 1 Q Q 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 139 1 Q 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0. 1 0 0 1 180 1 a 0 i 0 0 1 0 0 1 Q 0 1 0 

0BS EQDEMSEN GTDEMREG LTDEMAEG EQDEMREG DEMNTBLK BLKNTDEM PRFLAG   156 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 
157 0 1 0 0 0 a 0 158 0 1 0 0 0 a 0 
139 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 
“4g 0 1 0 0 0 0 0     

Printed 09/07/99 13-09:27 Discovery 

 



    
08/07/88 13:38 FAX 819 544 4801 PRI ASSOCIATES INC @o14/028 

  

   
    

    

   

  

    

   

  

   
    

    
3 pi ag) hes POI ILL Ea   

y A 3 "w oa LY EE TE x ’ vd . By per TO j 3 TET 

      

  

  

NORTH CARQLINA RERISTRICYING 
LISY of FINAL DATA SET - CHECK COMPARISONS 

SEGUENT  VTOKEY OPRECNCT ~~ IPRECNCT LTOTPOP TTOTWHT ITOTBLK IWHTVOT 1aLxvoT IASIVOT IANIVOT 

161 162.0 137.057.1807 06.067.0204 412.057.1607 3811 3753 13 2842 7 1 1¢ 162 163.0 137.057.0101 06.081.0208 12.057.0101 6285 6117 145 4689 99 10 x 163 164.0 37.057.0101 06.081.0224 12.057.0101 6205 6117 145 4683 99 10 a 
164 165.0 37.057.0101 05.067.0102 12.057.0101 6283 6117 145 48483 99 10 a 165 166.0 037.067.0402 0S.067.0102 12.067.0402 4842 3671 1107 2054 725 18 8 

QBS IQTHYOT IREGVOT IREGWHT IREGBLK IREGOTH ICDEMBS ILDEMAR ISDEMSO ICREP8S ILREPRS ISREPSO 

161 18 1888 1980 4 2 345 414 276 1033 1000 1017 162 2 3180 3128 41 3 492 S14 367 1601 1673 1530 163 2 3180 3126 a1 3 492 514 367 1601 1673 1530 
164 2 3180 3126 31 3 452 514 A687 1601 1673 1530 
16S 16 2014 1772 238 4 478 509 370 733 730 724 

088 IDEU IREP OTOTPOP OTOTWHT OTOTBLK OWHTVOT OBLKVOT OASIVOT CAMTVOT COTHVOT OREGYOT 

161 T12 1141 2759 2722 27 2104 17 4 1 2 2114 162 1126 1880 4156 3808 272 3098 190 32 12 10 2228 163 1126 1880 3363 3221 106 2418 80 19 4 4 © 2175 164 1126 1880 4037 3873 132 2932 108 13 10 2 1599 | 185 1078 788 4037 33873 132 2932 108 13 10 2 1599 

| OBS OREGWHT OAEGBLK OREGATH OCDEMES QLLEMSS OS0EM30 OCREF88 OLREPSS8 OSREPS0 ODEM OREP 

181 2107 r 0 412 §7¢ 431 86s 849 838 9687 1023 162 2118 105 5 332 486 422 770 754 736 998 1033 163 2087 82 6 us 450 481 803 809 aa7 890 1051 164 1575 19 Ss 239 330 203 732 776 764 612 828 165 1575 19 5 299 130 203 732 776 204 812 828 

08s IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVNINFCT IRMINPCT IPDEMI TA IPOELCDA IPOEUSEN IPCTDEM OBLKPCT OVBLXPCT ORELXPCT ONINPCT OVWINPCT 

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.2% 0.25 . 0.21 0.33 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.24 0.24 0.19 9.37 0.07 0.06 0.0s 0.08 0.07 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.24 0.24 0.13 0.37 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04 184 0,02 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.24 0.24 0.19 0.37 0.03 0.04 0.01 0.04 0.04 185 0.23 0.19 0.12 0.24 0.21 0.12 0.39 0.39 0.34 0.57 0.03 0.04 0.01 0.04 0.04 

CBS ORMINPCT OPDEMLTG OPDEMCOA OPDEMSEN OPCTDEM ITOTVOT ITOTUIN IUINVOT IMYNAEG ILTGBR ICOASS ISENSO OTOTVOT oToTuIN OMINVOT QUMINREG 

161 0.00 0.41 0.32 0.34 0.49 2982 58 40 6 1414 1378 1283 2128 a7 34 7 1€2 ~0.0s 0.38 0.33 0.36 0.48 4802 168 119 34 2187 2093 1897 3342 34a 244 119 163 0.04 0.33 0.28 0.30 0.45 4802 168 118 34 2147 2083 1897 2828 142 107 88 164 0.02 0.30 0.29 0.22 0.43 4802 168 119 3a 2137 2083 1897 306s 164 133 24 165 0.02 2.30 0.29 0.22 0.43 3721 1n 767 242 1288 1217 1094 3065 164 133 24 

08s OLTAA4 ocoasg QSEN9Q GTBLKPOP LTELKPOP CEBLKFOP GTBLXYOT LTBLKVOT EQBLKVOT GTBLKREG LTBLKREG EQBLKREG GTMINPOP LTMINPOP EQWINFOP 

161 1428 1277 126% o 1 Q 0 1 Q 0 1 0 1 0 0 162 1240 1152 1158 0 1 Q Q - 1 0 0 1 o Q 1 0 163 1350 1248 1268 0 1 0 0 1 Q 0 1 0 0 1 v 164 1106 1031 907 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 165 1108 1031 807 1 0 0 3 0 0 1 ) 0 1 0 0 

08S GTMINVOT LTMINVOT EQUINVOT GTMINREG LTMINREG EQUTNREG GTDEMCOA LTDEMCOA EQDELCOA GTDELL TG LTDEMLTG ECDEULTG GTDEMSEN LTDEMSEN 

161 1 0 a 0 1 0 0 1 i] 0 1 0 0 1 162 Q 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 | 163 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 184 0 1 0 - 0 1 0 0 1 0 a 1 0 0 1 165 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 a   08S EQDEMSEN QTDEUREG LTDEWREG EQDEMAES DEWHTBLK BLKNTDEM PRELAG 

161 0 0 1 0 °o 0 0 
| 162 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 

163 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 ~q 0 0 1 0 0 0 ) 
| o 1 0 0 0 0 0     

Printed 09/07/99 15:09:27 Dizcovery 

 



    
08/07,88 15:38 FAX 8189 544 4801 PRI ASSOCIATES INC @o15/028 

      

I Tees Toa _ NE, ET SE 
n 3} HE By pias 2 EY : F Fi D407 wie: 1:8 £3 

FS ERS A it fire hte CRE GRR» 19.28 = A MIC iis 1 yg Var 

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 15:06 Tuesday, Scptember 7, 1999 41 
| LIST OF FINAL DATA SET - CHECX COMPARISONS 

SEQGMENT  VTDKEY OPRECNCT IPRECNCT IToTPOP ITOTWHT ITOTBLK IRHTVaT I8LKVOT IAsYvar TIAMTVOT 

166 167.0 337.067.0402 0S5.067.0401 12.0687.0402 4842 3671 1107 2954 72% 16 8 
167 168.0 37.0687.1424 D5.087.0401 13.067.4424 2624 1457 1134 1214 rah 3 10 
188 {89,0 A7.087.1448 05.087.0401 12.087.4448 4101 1610 2451 1335 1816 9 0 
189 170.0 87,087.1448 05.067.0808 12.067.1446 £101 1610 2451 1335 1616 9 0 
170 171.0 37.0687.1448 05.067 .0801 12.07.1446 £101 1610 2451 1335 18186 9 0 

083 IOTHVOT IREGVQT IREGWHT IREGBLK IAEGOTH ICDEURA ILDEUAR ISDEMS0 ICREPa8 ILREPBS ISRERQO 

166 18 2014 1772 238 a arn s09 370 738 780 724 
167 : 2 1155 740 412 3 438 439 386 235 263 307 
168 15 1829 770 1058 3 543 555 783 266 312 315 
168 15 1828 770 1056 3 543 555 783 266 312 3S 
170 15 1828 770 1056 3 543 555 783 266 312 31S 

08s IDEM IREP OTaTPQP OYOTWHT QTOTBLK aHTVaY QBLKYQT oAsIVoT OAMIVOT QOTHVOT OREGYOT 

186 1078 798 3128 2457 813 2023 482 1 6 2 1574 
167 870 220 3128 2497 818 2023 482 1 € 2. 1874 
168 1456 287 9128 2497 818 2023 482 1 8 2 1574 
169 1456 287 5530 5196 279 3772 188 21 9 [<] 2843 
170 1456 | 287 3449 2426 1004 1961 714 11 2 0 1048 

08S OREGWNT OREGBLK OREGOTH OCOEMSS OLDEMBS OSDEMSO OCREPER OLREPAA OSREPSO one OREF 

166 1398 174 2 386 419 281 647 633 701 822 B42 
167 1338 174 2 286 419 281 647 683 701 822 B42 
168 1398 174 2 © 386 419 281 647 683 701 822 842 
169 2720 118 5 601 705 S27 1326 1383 1060 1164 1403 
170 1419 525 4 627 659 967 673 758 730 1171 §72 

0BS IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVMINPCT IRMINPCT IPDEULTG IPDEMCOA IPDEMSEN IPCTDEM OSLKPCT OVBLKPET ORBLKPET OUINPCT OVMINFCT   
“6 0.23 0.19 0.12 0.2¢ 0.21 0.12 0.39 0.30 0.34 0.57 0.20 0.19 0:1. 0.20 0.19 +1 0.43 0.39 0.36 0.44 0.39 0.36 0.63 0.65 0.56 0.80 0.20 0.19 0.11 0.20 0.15 £4 0.60" 0.54 0.58 0.61 0.55 0.58 0.64 0.67 0.71 0.84 0.20 0.19 0.11 0.26 0.19 169 0.60 0.54 0.58 0.61 0.55 0.58 0.64 0.67 0.71 0.84 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.06 0.06 170 0.60 0.34 0.58 0.617 0.53 0.58 0.654 0.67 0.71 0.84 0.29 0.27 0.27 0.30 0.27 

08S ORMINFCT OPDEMLTG OPDEMCOA OPDEMSEN OPCTDEM ITOTVOT ITOTMIN IMINVOT IMINAEG ILTGBS ICOAS8 ISENSO OTOTYOT OTOTWIN OMINVOT OMINREG 

166 0.11 0,38 0.37 0.29 0.88 A121 nn 767 242 1299 1217 1034 2484 631 471 176 187 0,11 0.38 0.37 0.29 0.56 2000 1164 736 415 702 673 693 2404 631 471 176 188° 0.11 0.38 0.37 0.29 0.58 2975 2491 1640 1059 867 808 1088 2494. 639 471 176 189 0.04 0.34 0.31 0.33 0.45 2975 2481 1640 1059 867 808 1088 3580 234 227 123 170 0.27 0.47 0.48 0.45 0.64 2075 2451 1640 1058 867 800 1088 2628 1023 727 829 

08S OLTGB8 OCOAB8 OSENSO GTBLKPOP LTBLKPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLIVOT LTBLXVOT EQBLKVOT GTBLICREG LTELKREG EDBLXREG GTLONPOP LTMINPOP EQMINPOP 

166 1102 1033 082 

167 1102 1033 882 

168 1102 1033 882 
168 2088 1827 1587 
170 1417 1300 1317 o

d
 

o
d
 

w
b
 

«b
d 

o
b
 

a
n
o
o
0
o
o
o
 

o
o
o
o
o
 

- 
oh
 

wd
 

ed
 

od
 

O
D
O
 
O
0
O
O
O
 

[=
 

= 
J 

= 
J 

= 
J 

= 
| 

J 
S
P
 

G
y
 

0
0
0
0
0
 

O
0
0
 

O
0
0
 

J 
GT
 
G
G
 gp

 
| 

O
0
0
 

0
o
 

O
C
O
0
o
0
0
O
0
 

QBS GTMINVOT LTMINVOT EQMINVOT GTMIMAEG LTMINAEG EoMINAEG GYDEMCOA LTOEMCOA EQDEMCOA GTDEMLTG LTDEMLTG EQDEMLTG GTREMSEN LTDREMSEN 

1 0 o 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 167 1 i] 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 
168 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 ol 0 1 0 0 1 0 
169 1 0 a 1 0 Q 1 i} 0 1 0 0 1 0 170 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 

08S CODEMSEN GTDEMREG LTDEMAEG EQDEMREQ DEMNTBLK BLKNTDEM PRFLAG   0 1 0 [¢] 0 0 0 
167 0 1 0 Q 0] °] 0 
168 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 
189 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 

0 0 1 0 a o] [0] 0     Printed 09/07/99 15:0927 Discovery 
: 

 



  

  

VTDKEY OPRECNCT 

        

FAL JAY J44 4HUL FKL ASSOCIATES INC 

NORTH CAROLINA 

  

r A ALS ak Lr 

SEN NIN eet Tae aA “a Roe CAR Ta 
REDISTRICTING 

LIST OF FINAL DATA SET - CHECX COMPARISONS 

| SEGMENT IPRECNCT 1ToTPOP 

171 172.0 37.067.1452 035.067.0801 12.067.1452 3662 
172 173.0 37.067.1410 05.067.0801 12.067.1410 4317 173 173.1 37.067.1410 035.067.0802 12.067.1410 4317 
174 174.0 137.067.1433 05.067.0802 12.067.1433 3743 
175 173.0 237.007.1417 05.067.0802 12.067.1417 3022 

08s IOTHVAT IREGYOT IREGWHT IREgELK IREGATH 

171 ] 1467 261 1205 1 172 0 2509 sg 2561 0 
173 0 2539 sa 2561 0 174 19 1388 841 539 6 
175 2 1492 533 987 2 

08S IDEM IRER OTOTPOP OTOTWHT oToTeLK 

171 1280 127 3448 2428 1004 172 2483 61 3448 24286 1004 173 2489 61 5497 4344 1121 174 ora 32% 5497 4344 1121 178 1174 263% 5497 4344 121 

083 OREGWHT OREGBLK OREGOTH 0COEuRE OL DEUAS 

17 1419 525 £4 627 8sg 172 1419 525 4 627 859 173 18956 457 3 634 835 174 1958 457 3 €34 83s 175 1356 457 3 834 635 

oBS 

rt 0.77 0.74 0.82 0.78 0.75 0.82 0.85 “1 0.97 0.87 0.53 0.98 0.97 0.39 0.952 0.97 0.97 0.99 0.98 0.87 0.88 0,92 PT RYE 0.39 0.39 0.48 0.40 0.39 0,84 375 0.73 0.69 0.84 0.73 0.70 0.64 0.75 

08s 

71 9.27 0.47 0.48 0.45 0.64 2618 2846 172 09.27 0.47 0.43 0.45 0.64 a33 4713 173 . Q.19 Q.40 0.43 0.37 0.60 3313 £213 174 0,19 0.49 0.43 0.37 0.60 26487 1713 175 0.19% 0.46 0.43 0,37 9.60 2248 2218 

OBS OLTG88 0COAS8 OSENSO GTBLKPOP LTBLKPOP 

  
171 1417 1300 1317 
172 1417 1300 1317 
173 1390 1475 1439 
17¢ 1330 1475 1438 
178 1330 1473 1439 

Q8s 

171 1 0 [0] 

1" 1 0 a 
173 1 0 a 
174 1 0 0 
173 1 a 0 

0BS EQDEUSEN GTOEMREG 

17m 0 1 
173 0 1 
173 Q 1 

174 0 1 

S 0 1 

  

E
a
 

I 

O
o
o
o
 o
 

oh
 

oA
 

eh
 

bh
 

bh
 

LTDEMAEG 

C
0
0
0
0
 

O
o
o
o
 
o
 

(=
 
JN

 -
N
o
N
 

- 
I
]
 

EQDEVREG 

0
0
0
0
0
 

O
0
0
 

a
q
Q
o
 

ad
 

wd
 

od
 

A 
ob
 

t
h
 

ad
 

oh
 

ed
 

wh
 

DEMNTBLK 

o
o
0
o
o
0
o
0
o
 

  Prted 05/07/99 15:09:27 Discovery 

ITOTWHT IToTELK 

B18 2803 
104 4208 
104 4208 

2030 1653 
804 2192 

ICDEMAE Albumen 

7 723 
S80 1050 

880 1050 
649 670 
671 704 

OWHTVOT oBLXvOT 

1861 714 

1361 714 
3373 805 
3a 805 
3373 803 

GSPEMGO OCREPSS 

587 673 
saz 873 
529 841 

529 841 

529 841 

1861 

Jz 
Jzz21 

1068 

1367 

o
o
o
o
c
a
 

12086 

2561 

2561 

5435 

259 

O
o
o
o
 

847 
1140 
1140 
1043 
944 

td
 

od
 

fh
 

8 
a 

0 0 

Q 0 
Q 0 

0 0 
Lo} 0 

BLKNTDEM PRFLAS 

Q 0 
0 0 

0 0 
0 0 
0 0 

ITMHTVOT 

6 58 

82 

B82 

1399 

673 

774 
1017 

1017 

964 

861 

-
—
t
 

eh
 

ld
 

A
 

A
 

ISDEMSO 

743 
1736 
173¢ 
425 
708 

OASIVOT 

0 

o
o
c
o
c
o
o
 

LREP&8 

758 

758 

98% 

855 
955 

837 
1751 

1751 

780 

928 

O
n
D
o
0
o
o
o
 

IBLKVOT 

1936 

3217 

217 
1028 

1351 

ICREP&S 

0.27 

0.27 

0.18 

0.18 
0.19 

2688 
2668 
1202 

€202 

202 

o
o
0
c
a
o
0
 

210 

0 

0 
0 
0 
] 

h
h
 

e
d
 

eh
 

eh
 

C
o
O
0
o
O
O
0
O
o
D
O
O
o
O
 

IASIVOT 

27 
dg 

.18 

«19 
.19 

1023 

1023 

1153 

3153 

1153 

10 

ILA 

@o016/028 

EP&8 

1479 

1171 
1349 

-1348 

td
 

wd
 

od
 

oA
 

1349 

0.30 

0.30 

0.21 

0.21 

0.21 

727 

727 

B28 

BZ9 

B28 

O
0
0
 
O
0
0
O
0
 

TAO Vor 

(=
 

= 
J 

= 
J 

= 
J 

= 

O
o
o
o
 
o0
 

0.27 

0.27 

0.20 

0.20 

0.20 

529 
529 

460 

460 
460 

GTMINVOT LTMINVOT EQMINVOT GTMINREG LTMINREG EQUINREG GTDEMCOA LTOCMCOA EQDEMCOA GTDEULTG LTDEALTG EQDEMLTG GTOEMSEN LTDEUSEN 

  

B93 
IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPGT IMINPCT IVMINPCT IRMINPCT IPDEMLTG IFDEUCOA IPDEMSEN IPCTDEM OBLKPCT OVBLXPCT ORSLKPCT OMINPCT OVMINPCT 

ORMINPCT OPDEMLTG OPDEMCOA OPDEWSEN QOPCTDEM ITOTVOT ITOTMIN IUINVOT IMINAEG ILTGAS ICOAQS ISENSQ OTOTVOT OTOTMIN OMINVOT OMINREG 

EABLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EQBLIVOT GTBLKREG LTBLKREG EQBLXREG GTMINPOP LTMINPOP EGMINPOP 

  

  

 



    
08/07,88 13:38 FAX 918 544 4901 PRI ASSOCIATES INC @o17/028 

  

| ’ NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 15:06 Tuesday, Septeaber 7, 1999 43 

  

Ga LIST OF FINAL DATA SET - CHECX COMPARISONS 
N\ 

BEQMENT VTDKEY OPAECNCT IPRECNCT ITareop ITOTWHT ITOTBLK wHTvor IBLKVOT IASIVOT TAMIVOT 
; : 

176 176.0 37,.087.1417 03,067.0303 12.067.1417 3022 804 2192 6739 1581 10 4 
177 177.0 37.087.1417 053.087.1438 12,087,1417 3022 804 2192 675 1551 10 4 
178 178.0 37.087,1417 Q05.087.1407 12.087,1417 3022 804 2192 87% 1551 10 4 
179 179.0 37.087.1430 05.087.1407 112.087.1430 2748 583 2133 525 1576 15 4 
180 180.0 347.087.1430 05.067.1403 12.087.4430 2748 584 21323 525 157¢ 15 4 

08S IOTHVOT IREGVOT =~  IREGWHT IREGBLK IREGOTH ICDEMSS ILDEMSS ISDEMIO ICREPBS ILREPSB ISREPS0 

176 2 1482 533 057 2 671 704 708 190 240 220 
377 2 1432 533 857 2 671 704 708 180 240 220 
178 2 1492 $33 857 2 671 704 708 180 240 220 
179 3 1475 as? 1076 2 544 696 798 ° 119 153 100 
180 a 1475 387 1076 2 644 6356 796 118 153 100 

08S IDEM IREP QToTPOP OTOTWHT OTOTBLK OYHTVOT OBLKYOT DASIYOT OAMIVOT oOTHYOT OREGVQT 

{78 1174 265 9833 4285 505 2624 46 22 7 2 2810 
177 1174 285 4398 2758 1584 2593 1073 1? 12 8. 1930 
178 1174 285 S649 2896 2658 2658 1830 a1 23 10 2732 
179 1228 190 5649 2896 2658 2653 1838 ai 23 10 2732 
180 1228 190 2444 2437 275 1021 203 22 4 5 1780 

03S OREGWHT OREGBLK OREGOTH OCDEAMS8S OLDEMSS O030EMDO CCREPRA OLAEPEER OSREPSQ ODEM OREP 

176 2357 246 7 706 742 53d 257 1083 1042 1482 838 
1m 1410 516 4 564 606 579 sos S36 436 1078 661 
178 1626 1100 6 856 870 1041 516 S544 283 1683 759 
179 1626 1100 6 B56 S70 1041 S16 544 289 1683 758 
180 1623 132 8 473 559 S54 469, 493 508 868 624 

CBS IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVMINPCT YRUINPCT IPOEMLTG XPOEUCOA IFDEMSEN IPCTDEM QBLKPCT QVBLKPCT ORBLKPCT OMINPCT OVMINPCT 

% 50.73 0.69 0.64 0.73 0.70 0.84 0.75 0.78 0.78 0.82 0.13 0.12 0.08 0.14 0.13 
0.73 0.69 0.64 0.73 g.70 0.84 0.75 0.74 0.78 0.82 0.38 0.32 0.27 0.37 0.33 
0.73 0.68 0.64 0.73 0.70 0.64 0.75 0.74 0.78 0.82 0.47 0.42 0.40 0.49 0.43 

178 0.78 0.74 0.73 0.79 0.75 0.73 0.82 0.84 0.a9 0.87 0.47 0.42 0.40 0.49 0.43 
180 0.78 0.74 0.73 0.73 0.75 0.73 0.82 0.84 0.88 0.87 0.11 0.09 0.08 0.13 0.11 

083 CRMINPCY OPDEIATG OPDCMCOA OFDEMSCN OPGTDEM ITOTVOT ITOTMIN IMINVOT IMINAEG ILTGES ICOAB8 ISEN30 QTOTVOT OTOTMIN OMINVOT OMINREG 

176 0.10 Q.41 Q.42 0.24 0.61 2246 2218 1567 959 944 861 923 3001 548 ar7 253 
177 0.27 a,53 0.59 0.57 0.62 2246 2218 1567 as39 944 861 929 3403 1640 1110 S20 
178 - 0.40 a.84 0.82 6.78 0.69 2246 2218 1567 gs39 944 861 929 4647 2747 1984 11086 
179 0.40 0.84 0.82 0.78 0.69 2123 2183 183a 1078 849 783 856 4647 2747 1964 1106 180 0.08 0.53 0.50 0.52 0.61 2123 2183 1558 1078 848 763 836 2152 307 231 147 

08S OLTG88 OCOAS8 OSENOG GTBLKPOP LTELKPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EQBLKVOT GTBLKREG LTRLXREG EOBLKREG GTMINPOP LTUINPOP EQUINPOP 

176 1825 1663 1576 

177 1142 1073 1015 

178 1514 1372 1330 

178 15314 1372 1330 
180 1032 942 1063 PP

 
RT
 

0 
i 

o
o
o
 

0
0
0
0
 
Q
 

P
E
 

E
E
 

o
O
o
0
o
0
O
0
O
O
0
O
 

0
0
0
0
0
 

tA
 

oh
 

hd
 

oh
 

A 

O
o
o
o
 

O
o
0
o
Q
Q
a
o
 

-
—
e
d
 

wh
 

wh
 

A 

(o
l 

= 
Ji

 
= 

J 
= 

BY
 
=|

 

O
D
O
O
0
O
O
o
 

08S BTMINVOT LTWINYOT EQMINYVOT GTMINREG LTMINREG COMINREG GTOEMCOA LTDEMCOA EQDEMCOA QTDEMLTG LTOEMLTG EQOEMLTG GTDEMSEN LTDEMSEN 

178 1 i] 0 1 0 0 i 0 lo] 1 0 0 1 0 177 1 0 0 1 o 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 | 0 
178 1 0 o 1 0 0 1 0 lo} 1 vl 0 0 1 179 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 
180 1 a 0 1 0 o 1 0 ‘Q 1 0 0 } 0 

083 EQDEMSEN GTOEMREG LTOEMREG EQDEMAEG DEMWNTRLK BLKNTDEM PRFLAG :   0 1 0 0 0 0 0 
177 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 
178 Q 1 Q 0 o 0 a 
479 [1] 1 0 [0] [+] Q Q i. 0 1 0 0 0 0 0       

Prioted 09/07/99 [5:09:28 Discovery 

 



15:39 FAX 819 544 4801 PRI ASSOCIATES INC do018/028 

14 hn) 

P 

    RT 

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 15:06 Tuexzday, Ssptember 7, 1809 44 
LIST OF FINAL DATA SET - CHECK COMPARISONS 

  

; 
SEGMENT YTOKEY OPRECNCT IPRECNCT IToTPQP ITATWHT IToTBLK IWHTVOT IBLKYOT IASIYOT TAMIVOT 

181.0 897.067.1430 05.087.1432 132.087.1430 2748 525 1576 | 182.0 137.067.1420 05.067.1422 12.087.1429 31u 15 1955 184.0 237.067.1426 05.067.1422 12.067.1426 s18s 173 2141 185.0 37.067.1426 05.067.1408 12.067.1426 318s 173 2141 
186.0 37.067.1414 05.067.1408 12.067.1414 2895 185 1980 

IOTHVOT IREGvOT IREGWT IREGBLK IREGOTH ISDENSO0 ICREP&S ILREPOR 

1475 397 1076 796 
1353 7 1346 758 
1313 77 1235 707 
1313 77 123% 707 

25 1330 

0TOTPOP 
QOTHYOT 

11 

19 

olLocusa OCREF838 

110m 405 : 1805 
1101 40S 1805 461 
1101 408% 1805 461 
537 248 166 929 316 
537° 248 166 824 316 

IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLXPCT IMINPCT IVMINPCT IRUINPCT IPOEMLTG IPDEMCOA IPDEUSEN IPCTDEM OGLKPCY OVELKPCT ORBLKPCT OMINPCT OVMINPCT   0.74 
0.393 

0.52 

0.92 
0.81 

0.32 0.29 0.42 

0.32 0.28 0.42 

0.32 0.28 0.42 

0.28 0.26 0.18 

0.28 0.26 0.18 

12 : 21213 2183 1598 1078 763 886 8473 2015 1848 1006 
. . 1972 . 3311S 1957 1348 604 763 5473 2015 1848 1008 

2319 2978 2148 1238 5123 217 £473 20158 1848 1008 
2319 2978 2146 1236 813 717 194ae8 873 538 288 
2164 2698 1899 1330 718 B23 1948 873 538 266 

0LTaaa 0COA88 OSEN90 GTBLKPOP LTBLKPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EQBLKVOT GTBLXREG LTBLKREG EORLKHEG GTMINPOP LTMINPOP 'EQUINPOP 

1536 1314 1580 
1536 1314 1560 

1538 1314 1580 
810 728 758 
810 728 758 

GTMINVOT LTMINVOT EQMINVOT GTMINREG LTMINREG EQMINAEG GTDEMCOA LTDEMCOA EQDEMCOA GTDEMLTA LTDEMLYG EQDEMLTG GTDEMSEN LTDEMSEN 

EQDEMSEN GTDEMAES LTDEMREG       Printed 09/07/99 15:09:28 Discovery  



PRI ASSOCIATES INC do18,028 

  

STRICTIN 

LIST OF FINAL DATA SET - CHECK COMPARISONS 

OPRECNCT IPRECNCT 1ToTPOR IYoTwT ITOTBLK IWHTVOT IBLKVOT IASIVOT JAMIVOT 

187.0 37.067.1414 05.067.1411 12.067.1414 2805 197 2686 185 
188.0 137.067.1423 05.067.1411 12.067.1423 3386 67 3310 49 
183.0 J7.067.1443 05.067.1411 12.067.1449 2702 1787 858 1527 
190.0 27,087,14439 Q5,087,1427 12.067.1449 ATOR 178? asa 1527 
181.0 Q37.087.1448 05.087.1441 12.087.1449 2702 1787 85a 1827 

L[OTHVOT IRCGvaT IREGHHT IREGBLK IREGOTH 1CDEMSR ILDEUAR ISOEMSO ICREPBE 

138% 23 1330 699 710 823 19 
1722 1712 433 512 718 
1283 369 423 438 468 275 
1283 38g 488 275 
1283 369 

275 

IREP OTOTPOP QTOTWHT : QREGVOT 

26 2600 2131 1310 
44 2600 2131 1310 

265 2600 2131 1310 
265 28%s 2249 : i 1603 285 2172 1976 § 1255 

OREGBLK OREGOTH 0CoBu88 OCREP88 OLREP88 OREP 

108 324 ¢ 38% 379 483 108 : 24 a55 379 483 
108 324 ass 379 4835 
212 £47 432 490 418 
61 364 4353 543 433 

IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVMINPCT IAMINPCTY 1POELE TG IPOEUCOA 1PDEMSEN IPCYDEU OBLKPCY OVEBLKPCT DRELXPCT OMINPCT OVMINPCT   0.98 . 0.92 : 0.97 1.00 0.16 0.14 . 0.13 0.18 
0.838 0.88 0.88 1.00 = 0.16 0.14 - + 098 0.16 
0.29 0.29 0.65 0.63 . 0.16 0.14 . 0.18 0.16 
0.29 . 0.29 0.65 0.63 3 0.20 0.17 . 0.24 0.19 
0.29 . 0.29 . . 0.65 0.63 : 0.08 0.07 > g.08 0.08 

ORMINPCT QPOCMLTG OPDEMCOA OFDEMSEN CPGTOEM ITOTYOT ITOTWMIN IMINYOT IMINREG ILTG88 ICOA88 ISENSO OTOTYOT OTOTMIN OMINVOT OMINAEG 

186 0.08 . 0.48 : . 2184 1899 1330 751 718 223 2218 4639 112 187 0.09 . 0.48 : 2411 2362 1713 S44 S0S 721 2215 489 112 188 0.0% : 0.48 . . 2186 829 374 €98 84€ 743 2215 489 112 189 © 0.13 0.56 2186 628 are 698 648 743 2332 806 218 190 0,05 0.44 . . 2156 629 374 698 648 743 17359 196 63 

08S OLTG38 OCOAS8 OSENSO GTBLKPOP LTBLXPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLXVOT LTBLKVOT EQALKVOT GTBLKREG LTBLKREG EQBLKREG GTMINPOP LTMINPOP EQMINPOP 

186 737 699 
187 7 699 

188 757 698 
189 1082 928 
180 ass 820 

OFS GTWINYOT LTMINYOT EQMINVOT GTNMINAEG LYWINAEG COMINACG GTDEMCOA LTDEMCOA EQDEMCOA GTDEMLTG LTDEMLTG EQDEMLTG GTDEMSEN LTDEMSEN 
1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

EQDEMSEN GTOBMREG LTDEMREG       Printed 09/07/99 15:09:28 Discovery  



    
08/07/,88 15:38 FAX 918 544 49801 PRI ASSOCIATES INC dc20-028 

  
      ROAT{ CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 

LIST OF FINAL DATA SET - CHECX COMPARISONS 

.GMENT ~~ VTDKEY OPRECNCT IPRECNCT ITOTPOP ITOTWHT ITOTBLK IWHTVQT IBLKVOT IASIVOT TAMIVOT 

191 182.0 37.067.1415 05.067.1441 12.067.1415 2606 1094 1496 871 1003 4 2 
192 193.0 347.067.1418 085.067.1413 123.067.1415 2606 1054 1496 871 1003 14 2 
193 184.0 37.067.0402 05.067.1413 132.067.0403 4842 67H 1107 2554 725 18 8 
104 195.0 87.067.0402 05.067.1202 112.067.0402 4842 S871 1107 2954 725 18 3 
195 196.0 837.057.0301 05.067.1202 12.0S?.0301 6400 8148 184 4594 124 23 17 

088 IOTHVOT IREGVOT IREGRHT IREGBLK IREGOTH ICDEMSS ILDEMGS ISDEMRO ICREPSR ILREPBE ISREPSO 

191 5 1189 484 70S 0 548 549 S28 158 243 212 
192 S 1189 484 708 0 548 549 528 188 243 212 
183 16 2014 1772 238 4 47a 509 370 738 790 724 
194 16 2014 1772 238 a 478 508 370 739 790 724 
193 4 3147 3053 a7 7 872 736 S544 1357 1406 1346 

08s IDEM IREP aYorpor QTOTWHT OTOTBLK OWHTVOT 0BLKVOT CASIVOT OAXIVOT 00THVOT OREGYOT 

191 943 202 2172 1376 169 1822 115 a 6 2 1255 
182 843 202 2180 1858 273 1489 163 3 s 10 769 
183 1078 708 2180 1858 273 1489 163 3 5 10: 569 
194 1078 708 353¢ 3302 191 2587 145 18 10 8 1588 
195 1291 1668 Is 3302 191 2587 145 18 10 B 1988 

083 OREGWHT OREGBLXK OREGOTH oCorMss OLDEM8S OSDEMS0 OCREPBA OLREPEA OSREP90D ODEM OREP 

181 1182 a1 2 364 356 232 £59 543 588 720 459 
182 886 73 0 267 260 174 283 3a4 386 492 agg 
183 836 73 0 267 260 174 293 344 386 as2 ass 
194 1938 48 4 448 arT as4 865 916 927 S68 859 
195 1538 48 4 4489 477 354 865 916 827 8€a B59 

083 IBLKPCT IVBLKPCY IRBLKPCT ILQMPCT IVNINFCT IRMINPCT IPDEMLTG IPDEMCOA 1POEUSEN IPCTDEM OBLKPCT OVBLKPCT ORBLKPCT OMINPCT OVMINPCT 

0.57 0.53 0.59 0.58 0.54 0.59 0.69 0.74 0.71 0.82 0.04 0.07 0.05 0.09 0.03 
0.57 0.53 0.59 0.58 0.54 0.59 0.69 0.73 0.71 0.82 0.13 a.10 0.08 0.14 0.11 
0.23 0.19 0.12 0.24 0.21 0.12 0.39 0.39 0.34 0.57 g.13 0.10 0.08 0.14 0.11 

we 0.23 0.18 0.12 0.24 0.21 0.12 0.39 0.39 0.34 0.57 0.08 0.05 a.02 0.07 0.06 
185 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.34 0.33 0.29 0.44 0.05 0.05 0.02 0.07 0.06 

OBS GRANINPCT OPDEMLTG OPDEMCOA OPOEMSEN OPCTDEM ITOTVOT ITOTMIN IMINVOT IMINREG ILTGS4 I1COA88 ISENSO OTOTVOT OTOTMIN OMINVOT OMINREG 

181 0.05 6.40 0.44 a,28 0.61 1885 1512 1014 705 792 744 740 1759 196 137 63 
192 0.08 0.43 0.48 0.314 0.55 1885 1512 1014 705 782 744 740 1670 304 181 73 193 .0.08 0.43 0.48 0.34 0.55 3721 1174 767 242 1289 1217  10D4 1670 304 181 73 
194 0.03 0.34 0.34 0.28 0.53 a721 15 ira) 767 242 1289 {217 1084 2786 232 179 52 
195 0.03 0.34 0.34 0.28 0.53 4762 252 164 84 32142 2029 1890 2788 232 179 52 

08S OLTG88 0COAB8 OSENSO GTELKPOP LTBLKPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EQBLKVOT GTEBLKREG LTBLXREG EQBLKREG GTMINPOP LTUINPOP EMMINPOP 

181 899 823 820 

192 604 360 560 

193 604 S60 360 

184 1383 1314 {261 

195 1393 1314 1281 0 
= 

od
 

oA
 

ob
 

-“
 
0
0
0
0
 

O
D
D
 
O
O
O
 

© 
= 

bh
 

md
 

wd
 

0
0
0
0
 

0
0
0
0
0
 

h
d
 

wd
 

wd
 

C
0
0
0
0
 

O
0
O
0
O
O
0
O
0
O
 

oo
 
T
E
 

pt
 
C
r
 

- 
O
0
O
0
0
O
0
 

Q
O
0
O
O
0
O
0
O
0
o
 

06S GTUINVOT LTMINVOT EQMINVOY GTUINREG LTMINREG EQMINREG GTDEMSGA LTDELCOA EQDEMCOA GTOEMLTG LTDEMLTG EQDEMLTG GTDEMSEN LTDEMSEN 

191 1 0 0 1 0 0 4 0 0 4 0 0 1 bs] 182 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 183 1 0 0 1 0] 0 0 1 0 0 | o 1 0 194 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 o 1 0 195 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 

085 EQDEMSEN GTDEMAEG LTDEMREG EQDEMAEQG DEUNTEHLK BLKNTDEM PRFLAG 

181 0 1 0 ¢ o 0 0 
182 0 1 0 Q 0 0 0 
103 0 1 0 Ls] 0 0 0 
‘qq 0 1 o 0 0 0 0 

0 0 1 0 0 0 0     “Prted 05/07/95 15:00:28 Discovery 

 



09/07/99 15:40 FAX 918 544 4801 PRI ASSOCIATES INC @o21/028 
Ry wed I eh Teves, WARE + SDS oT TI Wa ye TT: Be tom | re ~ TT Lge Le; SRE ; BET _ INS EH Ik "yy Hpk «oo, eave Jey TW. A Sa 5 KK Teed PS q RB HI % rage +4 Poth... . h vena “oe RGR 

RAINE X Ay SUR TURTITRSS, 27 Sibu 3, [TCE Shak S TRIN i 2 RETR SORIWPR- Sey, 

MORTH LINA REDISTRICTING 
LIST OF FINAL DATA 8ET - CHECX COMPARISONS 

VTDKEY OPRECNCT IPRECNCT ITQTPOP ITOTYHT ITOTBLK IAHTVOT IBLKVOT IASIVOT IAGVOT 

327.057.0801 05.067.1202 12.057.0801 14 438 347.057.0801 05.067.0503 12.057.0801 14 438 347.057.0801 05.059.035 12.057,0804 14 438 37.057.1401 05.059.035 12.057.1401 25 2636 200.1 137.057.1401 05.059.020 12.057.1401 2636 

I0THVOT IREGVOT IREGWHT JREGBLK ISDEMS0 ICREPBE ILREP8A ISREPSO 

220 
104 1135 117 220 : 104 115 fa I d 220 
104 1135 117 1413 
685 707 732 1418 
685 7a7 732 

oTOoTPOP OTOTWHT 0AMIVAT 0QTHVOT QfEavaT 

3534 8302 1 1834 4666 2892 
1916 2288 2217 
1223 2203 2217 
1223 1631 1502 
863 

OREGWT OREGOTH OCDEusa OLREPS88 O8REFSO 

1936 449 816 827 868 858 1826 354 403 884 768 720 1130 233 231 533 581 467 698 1130 233 251 583 581 467 688 797 201 180 412 411 329 492 

IBXPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVUINPCT IRUTNPCT IPDEULTG TPDEUCOA IPDEMSEN IPCTDEM OGLKPCT OVBLKPCT ORBLKPET OLINDCT OVMINPCT   
0.04 . 0.22 0.28 0.20 0.38 
0.04 . 0.22 0.28 ° 0.20 0.38 
0.04 0.22 0.28 0.20 0.38 
0.01 0.27 0.28 0.19 0.42 
0.01 0.27 0.28 0.18 0.42 

146 : 

146 2178 
148 1748 

802 1748 
502 1234 

0.05 

0,08 

0,08 
0.08 

OLTGSR 0COASA CSENSO GTELKPOP LTBLKPOP EQBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EQELKVOT GTELKREG LTOLKREG EQSLKAREG GTMINPOP LTMINPOP EQMINPOP 

196 1393 1314 1281 
197 1330 1184 1177 
194 198 862 842 
188 B38 862 842 

a22 601 S91 

GYMINVOT LTMINVOT EQAONYOT GTMINAREG LTWMINREG EQWINREG GTDEMCOA LTDEMCOA EQDEMCOA GTDEMLTG LTDEMLTG EQDEMLTG GTDEMSEN LTDEMSEN 

EQDEMREG DEMNTBLK BLKNTDEM         Printed 09/07/99 15:09:28 Discovery  



     
CR-V 

    

   

¥¥. 10:40 FAX 819 5 

  
SEGMENT  VTDKEY 

  
201 622 601 591 
203. 622 601 581 2 [or

d 
[=
] 

-t
 

[4
d 

oO
 

—
 

O
O
0
O
C
O
O
0
 

  08s 

201 0 1 0 
202 o 1 0 
203 [1] 1 0 
20d 0 1 0 
208 0 1 0 

08S EQDEMSEN  GTDEUREG  LTDEMREG 

201 0 1 0 
a 0 1 0 
203 0 1 0 
204 Q 1 0 
203 0 1 0 

44 4801 

201 9.08 0.34 0.33 0.30 0.449 
202 0.08 0.34 4.33 a.3ao 0.40 
2035 0.0a 0.34 0.33 0.30 g.40 
204 © 0.04 0.34 0.34 0.30 0.40 
205 0.08 0.34 0.34 0.30 0.40 

088 

o
h
 

o
h
 

o
d
 

o
b
 

o
b
 

PRI ASSOCIATES INC 

LIST OF FINAL DATA SEY - CHECK COMPARISONS 

[
=
=
 
«
N
e
o
 

434 
1844 
5035 
303s 
2514 

OBS ORMINPCT OPDEMLTG OPOEMCOA OPDEMSEN OPCTDEM ITOTVOT ITOTMIN 

51 
nn 

158 

158 

147 

1 0 1 
1 0 1 

1 0 1 

1 0 1 

1 0 1 

EQDBMREG DEUNTBLK 

0 0 

a 0 
a 1 

0 1 

0 1 

ITOTWHT 

568 

2282 

OPRECNCT IPRECNCT ITOTPOP 

«ol 201.0 37,057,701 05,059.020 12.057.1701 613 
202 201.1 37.057.1301 05.059.020 12.057.130%1 2353 
203 202.0 37.057.1302 05.089.020 12.057.1302 4023 
204 202.1 3J37.057.1302 03.059.025 12.057.1302 4023 
205 203.0 3J37.057.0401 05.033.025 12.057.0401 3383 

OBS IOTHVOT IREGVOT TIREGWHT TREGBLK IREGOTH 

201 0 278 260 18 0 
202 4 1320 1280 39 1 
203 3 1822 1721 g8 3 204 | 1822 1721 o8 8 
205 10 1470 1406 . 64 0 

08s IDEM IREP oTaTPOP OTOTWHT OTOTBLK 

201 144 108 1834 1502 148 202 B41 817 1631 1502 118 
203 S20 41s 1631 1502 118 204 820 818 4636 4068 538 
20% 846 483 4636 4068 538 

08s OREGWHT OREGBLK OREGOTH OCDENSS oLDEMER 

201 57 61 0 201 210 
202 787 61 0] 201 210 203 787 61 0 201 2io 
204 2274 185 1 590 812 205 2274 185 1 S80 812 

QBS IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLXPCT ININPCT IVMINPCT IRWINPCT IPDBATG IPDENMCDA IPDEMS 

201 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.08 0.08 0.06 0.43 
"0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.34 

0.04 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.06 0.39 ¢ 0.04 0.04 0.05 Q.0¢ 0.0¢ 0.06 0.28 205 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.48 

ITOTBLK 

37 
8s 

144 
144 

121 

ILDEUBSE 

389 
369 

OCREPEB 

400 

400 

400 

1144 

1144 

IWHTVOT 

-
 

-4
 
O
0
0
 

OLREPBS8 

412 

412 

412 

1188 

1188 

0.07 

0.07 

‘0.07 
Q.12 
0.12 

IBLKYOT 

7 
51 

120 

120 

foc) 

ICREPSS 

107 

565 

707 
707 

528 

QAMI VOT 

O
0
0
»
 

, 

i 

OSREP30 

411 

411 

411 

1183 

1183 

IASIYQT 

0.08 0.07 

0.08 0.07 

g.oa 0.07 
6.11 6.08 
0.11 0.08 

W
O
O
O
 

=
D
 

022/028 

ILREPBS 

104 
Sea 

rar 
727 
553 

COTHYQT 

S
D
 

N
N
M
N
 

ODEM 

328 

329 
329 
849 

5439 

0.08 

0.08 

0.08 

0.12 
0.12 

15;08 Tuesday, September 7, 1999 4g 

EN IPCTDEM QBLKPCY OVBLKPCY ORBLKPCT OMINPET OVMINPCT 

IMINVOT IMINREG ILTGB8 ICOA38 ISENSO OTOTVOT OTOTMIN OMINVOT OMINREG 

36 
S6 

129 
128 
110 

O
0
0
 

148 184 
40 815 

101 1194 

101 1188 

64 1008 

O
0
O
0
O
o
O
0
O
 

182 
833 

1182 
1162 
885 

172 
aso 

11582 
1152 
830 

1254 
1234 
1234 

3520 

3520 

128 
129 

129 

5648 

568 

88 
88 
89 

404 

404 

66 
gs 
66 

190 
180 

OLTGS8E 0COAB8 OSENSO GTBLKPOP LTALKPOP EQBLKPOP GYBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EQBLKVOT GTBLKREG LTBLKRES EOGBLKREG GTUINPOP LTRINPOP EQMINPOP 

  “Primed 05/07/99 15.0931 Discovery 

  

 



  

   

   
206 

207 

208 

200 

210 

08s 

  

  

b. | 

Ud, Vis 99 

    

19:40 FAX 819 544 4901 

   

PRI ASSOCIATES INC 

So ER 

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 

LIST OF FINAL DATA 8ET - CHECX COMPARISONS 

TTOTWHT 

Jeosa 

1381 

1381 

1381 

1004 

IcotMas 

188 

ITOTBLK 

725 

354 
a58 
S58 

asLkvoT 

J89 

IWHTVOT 

2977 

1039 
1038 

1039 

750 

ISDEMI0 

488 

221 

140 

140 

OCREP88 

1144 

1144 

1767 

448 

448 

OLREFES8 

1188 

1188 
1844 

472 
472 

15:06 

CF ENE 

csday, Septemb 

IBLXVOT IASIVOT 

529 12 

263 4 
283 4 

263 4 

247 0 

ICREFPOS ILAEPSS 

B61 899 

254 278 

254 278 
254 278 
251 284 

OAMIVOT 0OTHVOT 

10 4 

10 4 
17 4 

4 3 

4 3 

OSREPS0 ODEN 

1183 9490 

1183 849 
1842 1460 

4686 ara 
488 37a 

@023,028 

  

er 7, 1999 43 

TAMTVOT 

27 

O
O
O
O
 

XSREPSO 

£52 

IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVMINPCT IRUINPCT IPOEMLTG IPDEMCOA IPDELSEN IPCTDEN OBLKPCT OVBLKPCT ORBLXPCT OUINPCT OVMINPGT 

0.46 

6.51 

0.51 
0.51 

0.37 

S68 

Z71 

371 

271 

247 

0.40 
0.47 

0.47 
0.47 

0.35 

338 1 

136 

136 

136 

115 

680 

S564 

564 

S64 

423 

1588 

S23 
523 
523 

401 

Q.12 
0.12 
0.186 

0.71 

0.11 

1573 

513 

513 
513 

404 

g.11 
0.11 

0.15 
0.10 

0.10 

3520 
3520 
5435 
13687 
1367 

0.08 

06.08 

0.0d 

0.08 

0.08 

202 

0.12 

0.12 

0.17 

0.11 

0.11 

404 

404 

8353 

149 

140 

0.11 
0.14 

0.16 

0.11 

0.11 

ILTG88 ICOA33 ISENSO OTOTVOT OTCTUIR OUINVOT OUINREG 

. 180 

180 

298 

75 

75 

OLTG88 OCOA38 OSENSO GTBLKPOP LTBLKPOP EQBLKPOR GTBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EQALKVOT GTBLKREG LTBUXREG EQBLKREG GTMINPOP LTMINPOP EQUINPOP 

BUNNTODEM 

C
0
0
0
 
OC

 

| SEGMENT  VTDKEY OPRECNCT YPRECNCT IToTPUP 

204.0 237.158.0401 0S.059.025 12.159.0401 4583 
205.0 37.159.1401 05.089.025 12.159.1401 1756 
205.1 37.139.1401 05.059.030 12.158.1401 1758 205.2 237.158.1401 05.055.008 12.1S9_440% 1756 
206.0 37.159.1201 05.053.005 12.159.120% 1347 

IOTHVOT IREGVOT IREGWHT IREGALK INEGOTH 

0 2518 2181 225 6 
4 B44 708 185 1 
4 844 708 135 1 
a 844 708 135 1 
0 5834 519 114 1 

IDEU IREP oTorTPoP OTOTWHT OTOTBLK 

1428 952 4636 4068 538 
4358 300 4636 4068 538 
438 aco 7014 5415 1138 
458 300 1786 1584 190 
299 297 1788 1884 190 

OREGYHT OREGBLK OREGOTH OCDEMSS OLDEMAR 

2574 185 | 550 812 
2274 185 1 530 "812 
3518 289 2 914 948 
EBd 7a 3 223 240 
B84 78 3 233 2490 

0.16 0.15 0.13 0.17 0.16 0.13 0.46 
0.20 0.20 0.16 0.21 0.21 0.16 0.$1 0.20 6.20 0.16 0.21 0.21 0.18 0.51 
0.20 0.20 0.16 0.21 0.21 0.18 0.51 
0.25 0.25 0.18 0.25 0.25 0.18 0.41 

 OAMINPCT OPDEMLTG QPDEMCOA QFDEWSEN OPCTDENY ITOTVOT ITOTMIN IMINVOT IMINAEG 

0.08 0.34 0.34 0.30 0.40 3545 781 
0.08 0.34 0.34 0.30 0.40 1309 375 
0.08 0.34 0.34 0.30 0.40 1309 ars 
0.08 0.34 0.34 0.30 0.40 1309 a78 0.08 0.34 0.54 0.30 0.40 837 841 

1800 1734 1691 1 0 0 1 1800 1734 {891 1 0 a 1 
2790 2681 2822 1 0 0 x TVA 712 631 665 1 0 0 1 
712 681 665 1 0 0 1 

1 0 o 1 0 0 1 
1 0 0 1 0 0 1 
1 0 0 1 0 0 1 
3 Q 0 1 o Q 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 

EOQDEMSEN GTDEMREG LTDEMREG CQDEMREG DEMTELK 

0 1 [1] 0 0 
0 1 0 0 0 
0 1 0 0 0 
0 1 0 0 0 
0 1 0 0 0 

PRFLAG 

o
O
0
C
c
o
o
O
o
a
e
 

  Printed 09/07/99 15:09:28 Discovery 

    

    

 



      

08/01/89 

  

SEGMENT  VTDXEY 

  

08s IOTHVAT 

211 4 

212 4 

213 4 

214 24 

218 24 

0oBs IDEM 

211 768 

212 768 

213 768 

214 1879 

218 1878 

08s OREGWHT 

211 1049 

212 710 

213 2477 

214 2219 

215 2237 

08S 

3 0.23 0.21 

Lh 0.23 0.21 

3.0.23 0.21 

£14 0.14 0.13 

215 0.14 0.13 

08s 

211 0.19 0.50 

212 0.03 0.35 

213- 0.05 0.31 

214 0.06 0.39 

215 0.09 0.38 

088 

211 7183 751 
212 484 433 
213 1762 1677 

214 1568 1535 
213 1553 1481 

  

3 
sah meg® 
§ = tl 

  

» 

OPRECNGT IPR 

IREGVOT 

7 
436 

1871 

1537 
1428 

17Nn 

1171 

17 

3608 

3608 

IREP 

0.17 

0.17 

0.17 

0.07 

0.07 

oes 

211 1 0 0 
212 1 0 0 
213 1 0 0 
214 1 a 0 
215 0 1 0 

08S EQDEMSEN GTOEMAES 

231 +4 1 
212 0 1 
213 0 1 
214 a 0 
8 0 0 

I REGWHT 

OTOTPOP 

© 
ob

 
wd

 
od
 

2392 
1372 

5151 

3859 

as72 

-24 0.21 

24 0.21 

24 0.21 
16 0.14 

+16 0.14 

-
 
O
0
0
 

D
O
D
 

CQ
 
d
A
 

LTOEMAEG 

-
 

ad
 
O
0
0
 

  

bay 

13:40 FAX 919 544 4801 

ECNCT 

211 207.0 237.097.0601 10.087.1501 12.097.0601 
212 208.0 37.097.0601 10.097.1101 12.087.0801 
213 209,0 337.097.0601 10.097.0201 12.097.0801 
214 210.0 S7.097.0301 10.097.1401 12.097.0301 
215 211.0 137.097.0301 110.097.1402 12.097.0301 

  

PRI ASSOCIATES INC 
— 

SERIE) te 

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 

LIST OF FINAL DATA SET - CHECK COMPARISONS 

IT 

IREGRLK 

188 
138 

138 
233 

233 

OTOTWHT 

1853 

1308 

4759 

3269 

3116 

OCOEM38 

424 

159 

573 

643 
588 

0.17 

0.17 

0.17 
0.07 

0.07 

1343 
1343 

1343 

5943 

5543 

O
0
0
 

0
0
 

oTPOP 

1823 
1823 

1823 
8121 

8121 

IREGOTH 

0.438 

0.48 

0.48 

0.33 

0.33 

1 0 

0 0 
0 0 
0 0 
1 0 

EODEMAEG ~~ OEMNTBLK 

0 0 
0 0 
0 0 
0 0 
0 0 

O
Q
 

~~
 
2
0
 

ITOYwWT 

1383 

1393 

1393 

68s 

€858 

0.35 

0.55 

0.55 

0.35 

0.35 

2a7 
287 

2a7 

829 

829 

-“
- 

O
0
0
 
0
0
 

-_
 

et
 
O
O
 

BLKNTOEM 

OO
 
-
0
0
<
C
 

ITOTBLK IVHTVOT 

419 1056 

418 1056 

419 1056 

1168 5114 

1168 5114 

ILDEuUBA ISDEMSO 

367 77 

3687 ar7 

367 ar? 

782 er7 

82 877 

OBLKVOT OASIVOT 

877 1 
28 0 

278 1 

us 0 

486 52 

OCREPBS OLREP88 

327 380 

254 317 

1104 1218 
892 870 

asa 856 

0.51 0.68 

0.51 0.68 

0.81 0.68 

0.40 0.58 

0.40 0.5% 

189 754 

198 754 

1688 754 

0.22 

0.02 

0.07 

0.13 

0.18 

71? 733 
717 733 

717 733 
240 2364 2247 2219 

240 2364 2247 2219 

0
0
 

0
0
 

D 
e
d
t
 
a
D
 

C
0
0
0
0
 

PRFLAG 

(
o
l
e
 

RN
e 
R
e
e
 

O
O
 

=~
 
2
0
 

“=
 
0
0
 

Oo
 

-_
 
l
O
O
 
=
 

IBLKYOT 

283 

283 

283 

766 

766 

ICREPSS 

OSREPS0 

429 

374 
1118 

883 
834 

D. 
g. 

0. 

0 

0 a
2
2
R
8
X
 

1817 
1031 

3856 
3063 

3154 

0
0
0
0
0
 

lo 
JT
 
Se

 
pu
 

Sp
ry

 

Q
O
0
O
O
0
O
Q
O
0
 

539 

64 
392 

3530 

358 
O
O
 

= 
= 

a 

A
4
0
0
 
0
D
 

388 
a4 

J0s 

382 
348 

0247028 

-
 
0
0
0
 

  

   

  

842 

242 

22 

125 

1489 

214 

OLTGB8 OCOAS8 0SENSO GTELKPOF LTBLKFOP EQBLKPOP GTBLXVOT LTBLKVOT EORLKVOT GTBLKREG LTBLKREG EOBLKREG GTMINPOP LTMINPOP EQHMINPOP 

[=
 

=3
 
«
l
e
 

=]
 

GTMINVOT LTWMINVOT EQMINVOT GTMINREG LTMINREG EQMINREG GTDEMCOA LTOEMCOA EQDEMCOA GTDEMLYG LTOEML TG EQOEMLTG GTDEMSEN LTDEMSEN 

  Printed 09/07/99 15:09:29 Discovery 

  

 



UB/ Ui, 8% 13:40 FAL 918 544 4801 PRI ASSOCIATES INC @o25-028 

Fain 

NORTH pi REATSTAICT Ing 15:08 Tioeter, Septeaber 7, 1939 =m 
LIST OF FINAL DATA SET - CHECX COMPARISONS 

‘SEGMENT  VIDKEY  oPRECNCT  IPAECHCT ToThoP  ITOTWHT  IYOTBLK  rwwrvoT  IBLKVOT  IASIVOT  YAMIVOT 
«8 212.0 137.007.1408 10.087.1402 12.097.1408 4354 1509 2418 1514 1547 217 213.0 137.007.1403 10.097.1402 t2.097.1403 4220 1814 2373 1405 1550 218 214.0 37.097.1403 10.097.1404 12.097.1403 4220 1214 2373 1405 1550 219 215.0 37.097.1403 10.087.1405 12.097.1403 4230 1814 2373 1405 1550 220 218.0 37-.097.1403 110.087.1301 12.097.1403 4220 1814 1405 1550 

OBS IOTHVOT IREGVOT IREGWT IREGBLK IREGO™ ICDEMS8 ISDEM30 ICREPBE ILAEFB8 ISREPSQ 

2351 12386 863 610 320 1829 1048 722 2am 1828 1048 722 289 1829 1048 722 299 1829 1048 722 299 
IDEM IREP oTaTpoOP OTOTWHT OTOTBLK h CASIVOT 

1812 473 3972 3116 758 52 1449 318 3972 3116 758 52 1440 31s 3643 593 
1449 31s a7ss 674 
1449 315 6042 408 

1 

OREGAHT OREGBLK OREGOTH OLDEMES 
O0CM 

2237 597 
1370 2237 S97 
1370 2067 8as 

818 1485S 1979 807 797 1425S 2726 725 1227 1268 1784 

IBLKFCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVMINPCT IRMINPCT IPDEMLTG IPDEMCOA IPDEMSEN IPCTDEM OBLXPCT OVBLKPCT ORBLKPCT OMINPCT OYMINPCT   0.50 D.55 0.56 . 0.55 0.63 0.51 0.69 0.13 0.15 0.52 0.57 0.57 . 0.58 0.66 0.57 0.71 ’ 0.19 0.15 0.52 0.57 0.57 3 0.58 0.66 0.57 0.71 0.16 0.14 0.32 0.37 0.57 : 0.58 0.66 0.57 0.71 : 0.18 0.15 0,32 0.37 0.57 0.358 0.66 0.57 0.71 - 0.07 0.07 

0.17 

0.17 
0.15 

0.18 

0,07 
ORMINPCT QPPEWMLTG QPPENCOA OPOEKSEN OPCTPEM ITQTVQT ITOTMIN IMINVOT IMINAZLG ILTaas8 IcoA88 ISENSO OTOTVOT OTOTMIN CMINVOT OUINREG 

0.09 0.38 . . 3079 2445 1865 1201 1264 1240 1253 3154 858 548 214 0.09 0.38 . ‘ 2979 2406 1574 1082 974 883 1021 3154 858 S48 214 0.12 0.43 . . . 2979 2408 1574 1052 874 883 102% 2924 Big 438 281 0.14 0.41 : . . 2979 2408 1574 1052 B74 983 1021 3000 703 479 17 0.07 0.37 . . . 2979 2408 1574 1052 B74 pa3 1021 4589 430 324 185 

OLTGE8 OCOABR OSENSO GTBLKPOP LTEBLKPOR EQALXPOP GTBLXVOT LTBLKYOT EQALKVOT GTBLKREG LTBLXREG EQBLKREG GTMINFOP LTMINPOP EQMINPOP 

1533 14B1 1428 

1853 1481 1428 

1602 1830 1487 
1488 1432 {33s 

18852 184% 1880 

GTMINVOT LTMINVOT EQMINVOT GTUINREG LTMINREG EQUINREG GTDEMCOA LTDEMCOA EQDEMCOA GTDEMLTG LTOEWLTG EQUEMLTG GTDEMSEN LTDEMSEN 

      Printed 09/07/99 15:09:29 Ducovery  



    

  

  

  
221 

222 

223 

224 

225 

221 

  

OPRECNCT IPRECNCY ITOTPOP ITOTWHT 

217.0 237.087.1403 10.087.0801 12.087.1403 4220 1814 218.0 237.087.1406 10.087.0801 112.087.1406 4354 18069 219.0 237.097.0101 10.09Y.0501 112.087.0101 4070 3620 220,60 37,097,010 19,097,070{ 123.087.0104 4070 3820 
221.0 37.097,0402 10,097, 0701 12,087.0402 3837 R477 

IoTHvVaOT IREGVOT TREGWHT IREGSLK IREGOTH ICDEuga 

7 1829 777 1048 4 580 
9 2351 1050 1296 5 630 1 1372 1227 144 1 372 1 1372 1227 144 1 372 
2 1859 1189 658 2 608 

IDCM IREP 0TOTPOP OTOTWHT OTUTBLK OWHTYOT 

1445 315 53486 44488 862 M71 1812 473 5386 449% 862 MU 
822 4987 5386 4499 862 UN 822 497 8071 78%4 214 6217 1318 483 8071 7814 214 6217 

OREGWHT OREGBLK OREGOTH OCDEMEQ OLDEMSR OSDEMGO 

2835 ass a 784 741 778 2835 365 3 7684 741 778 2835 365 3 764 741 778 4077 76 3 761 B71 833 4077 76 3 761 B71 833 

0.56 

0.56 

a.11 

0.11 

0.37 

0.173 

0.11 
s B.11 

0.02 

0.02 

2110 

2110 

2110 
2716 

are 

Us/Ui 89 15:41 FAX 818 544 4801 

\ 

SEGMENT  VTDKEY 

0,3s 

0.35 
0.35 

0.32 

0.32 

2027 

2027 

2027 

25440 
2540 

2034 
2034 

2034 
2560 

2560 

0.38 
0.38 
0.38 
0.30 
0.30 

-
 

w
h
 

(
 

e
d
 

a
 

   

  

— 

REET DR 

NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 

PRI ASSOCIATES INC 

      

LRTI 

  

SRGS TW 

  

      

LIST OF FINAL DATA SET . CHECK COMPARISONS 

0.57 0.53 
0.56 0.51 

g.1 0.10 

0.11 0.10 
0.38 0.34 

0.38 0.62 

0.38 0.62 
0.38 0.82 
0.38 0.49 
0.38 0.49 

O
Q
 
~
0
0
 

221 1 o 0 1 0 
222 1 0 0 1 0 
223 0 1 0 0 1 
224 1 0 0 1 0 
225 1 0 0 1 0 

083 EQDEMsEN GTDCMACG LTOEMREG EQDEMREG 

21 0 1 0 [1] 
222 0 1 6 o 
223 0 1 0 0 

| 294 0 1 0 io} 
: 0 1 0 0 

  

0.11 
0.11 

"0.36 

2979 

A079 
3007 

3007 
2543 

DEMNTBLK 

.66 0.57 

.63 0.51 

.39 0.42 
-39 0.42 

S56 0.56 

2406 1374 

2445 1565 
450 307 
450 307 

1£20 1005 

C
o
 
-
0
0
 

BLKNTDEM 

[=
 

JN 
=
o
 

o
l
e
 

J 

1 

1ToTaLK 

237 

241 

43 
43 

148 

a 

8 
Ss 
8 

8 

ILDEMGS 

642 
796 

361 
361 

628 

OBLKVOT 

OCAEPEB 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

283 
263 

263 

778 

778 

052 974 

301 1264 
145 823 

145 9283 

660 1127 

PRIFLAG 

O
O
O
 

O
0
O
0
 

IWiTVOT 

1405 
1514 

2704 
2700 
1933 

ISO 

0. 

983 

1240 

881 

831 

1078 

    Printed 09/0799 15-09-29 Discovery 

  

Erman 

03 

1021 

1259 

801 

801 

1077 

IBLKVOT 

0 

1550 

1547 
297 
25? 

988 

ICR 

.02 

4086 

4086 

4056 

6387 

8397 

EPSa 

423 

610 

519 

519 

470 

IASIVOT 

257 
w
+
 

30 

@c26-028 

ILREPAR 

0.02 

180 

180 

3s: 06 Yueetay, Septenter 20 
   

  

1999 52 

lAadIvor 

~
N
a
D
o
D
m
D
 

ISREPSS 

299 
390 

488 
408 

460 

083 DAMINPCT OPDEMLTG OPDEMCOA OFDEMSEN OPCTDEM ITOTVOT ITOTWIN IMINVOT IMINREG ILTG88 ICOA88 ISENSO OTOTYOT OTOTMIN OMINVOT OMINREG 

79 
OB3 OLTGB8 OCOABS GSEN9G GTBLKPQP LTBLKPOP EOBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTBLKVOT EQBLKVOT GTBLKREG LTBLKREG EQBLKREG!'‘GTMINPOP LTNINPOP Efzieop 

  
 



    

        

  

    

@o027/028 

  

    

FRI ASSOCIATES INC 

I 
T Bi PR RAR EAS na al to ps dL EA 
NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 

LIST OF FINAL DATA SET - CHECK COMPARISONS 

      
    

        

  

| SEGUENT VTDKEY OPRECNCT IPRECXCT ITOTPOP rotwT ITOTRLK IWHTVOT IBLKVOT IASIVOT Iaavor 

£26 222.0 37.007.0404 10.087.0701 12.097.0404 4228 4064 140 3066 100 12 3 
227 223.0 37.119.0701 10.097.0701 12.119.0701 4280 3529 669 3089 510 47 12 228 224.0 37.119.0701 089.119.0901 12.119.070% 4200 8529 869 308s 310 47 12 229 225.0 037.112.0501 083.119.0901 12.119,0504 3708 3041 626 2279 441 16 6 230 226.0 937.119.0801 038.119.0801 12.119,0804 50€9 4305 725 3316 524 10 20 
08S IOTHVOT YAEAVOT IRECWHT IREGELK IREGOTH ICDEMER ILDEusA ISDEM20 ICREPRA ILAEPBA ISREPSO 

226 4 1888 1618 50 2 377 3s0 300 608 636 641 227 7 2203 1885 312 6 431 692 861 512 544 447 
224 4 2203 1885 12 6 491 682 981 512 S44 447 
229 1 1809 1537 269 3 360 47% 538 528 622 564 
230 2 2837 2475 359 3 541 653 822 792 891 948 

083 IDEM IREP OTOTFOP OTOTWHT QTOTBLK OWHTVOT ogLxvaT OASIVOT QAMIVOT 0OTHVOT OAEGVOT 

226 890 687 8071 7814 214 6217 184 12 8 6 4156 227 1413 g13 8071 7814 214 6217 184 12 8 6 4156 228 1413 ¢13 £557 5389 152 4286 123 28 9 3 3508 228 1078 628 5537 5383 952 4286 123 28 8 3 3508 
230 1537 1142 5597 5383 152 4286 123 28 9 3 3508 

08s OREGYHT OAEABLK OREGOTH OCDEMER oLDEMEE OSDEMS0 OCREFE8 OLREPQA 0SREP90 OOEX OREP 

228 4077 76 3 781 871 53a 1779 1845 1627 1814 1898 227 4077 76 3 781 871 933 177% 1845 1627 1914 1998 
22a 3429 72 4 43S 760 83s 1397 1482 1288 1542 1715 
229 3429 72 q 435 760 53s 1397 1482 1298 1542 1715 230 3429 72 a 4395 780 93s 1397 1462 1293 1542 1715 

OBS IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLKPCT IMINPCT IVMINPCT IRMINACT IPDEMLYG IPDEMCOA IPDELREN IPCTDEM OBLKPCT OVBLKPCT ORBLKPCT OMINPGCT OVMINPET 

26 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.38 0.38 0.32 0.56 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.10 0.14 0.14 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.56 0.48 0.68 0.70 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 i 0.16 0.14 0.14 0.18 0.18 0.14 0.56 0.43 0.68 0.70 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.04 0.04 YT 0.18 0.15 0.18 0.17 0.15 0.44 0.42 0.49 0.63 0.03 0,03 0.02 0.04 0.04 230 0.14 0.14 0.13 0.18. 0.14 0.13 0.42 0.41 0.46 0.57 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.04 0.04 

083 ORMINPCT OPOEMLTG OPDEMCOA OFDEMSEN OPCTDEM ITOTVOT ITOTMIN IMINVOT JMINREG ILTGB2 1COAB88 ISENSO OTOTVOT OTOTUIN OMINVOT OMINREG 

226 0.02 0.32 0.30 0.36 0.49 3187 184 121 §2 1026 983 941  €307 257 180 79 
227. .0.02 0.32 0.30 0.36 0.49 3675 751 576 318 1236 1003 1408 83897 257 180 79 
228 0.02 0.3a 0.26 0.42 0.47 3675 751 578 318. Y938 1003: 1403 4449 214 163 76 229 0.02 0.3 0.28 0.42 0.47 2743 ans 484 272 1101 905 1100 4449 214 163 76 230° 0.92 0.34 0.28 0.42 0.47 3872 764 556 387: 1544 13833. 1770 4449 214 163 76 

08s OLTGES OCoaEs GSENSO GTBUKPOP LTBLKPOP-EQBLKPOP GTBLKVOT LTBLKYOT COBLKVOT GTBLXREG LTBLKREG EQBLKAEG GTMINPOP LTMINPOP EQMINPOP 

226 2718 2540 2580 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 227 2718 2540 2560 1 Q 0 1 0 Q 1 0 0 1 0 0 228 2222 1892 2233 1 0 0 : 4 0 i) 1 0 0 1 0 0 229 2222 1392 2233 1 0 a 1 0 ] 1 0 0 1 0 i} 230 2222 1892 2233 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 o 

0BS GTUINVOT LTMINVOT EQMINVOT GTMINAEG LTMINREG EQMINREG GTDEMCOA LTDEMCOA EQDECOA GTDEMLTG LTDEMLTG EQDEMLTG GTOEMSEN LTDEMSEN 

226 1 Q 0 1 Q 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 227 1 Q 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 228 1 Q 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 229 1 0 0 1 1] 0 1 ) 0 1 0 0 1 0 230 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 ho} 0 1 0 

00S EQDEMSEN GTDEMAREG LTDEMREG EQDEMREG OZMNTBLK BLKNTDEM PRFLAG   226 0 1 o 0 0 0 0 
227 0 1 0 Q Q o 0 
223 0 1 0 0 0 0 a 
229 0 1 0 +} 0 0 0 

“0 4] 1 0 a 0 0 0     Printad 09/07/99 15:09:29 Discovery 

 



     

        

  

   
   

  

519 344 i801 PRI ASSOCIATES INC do28-028 
  

    
  
  

   
NORTH CAROLINA REDISTRICTING 

LIST OF FINAL DATA SET - CHECK COMPARISONS 

VTDKEY OPAECNCT I1PRECNCT ITOTPOP Y{oTWHT ITOTRLK IRHTVOT I1BLKVOT IASIVOT TANIVOT 

231 227.0 37.119.0801 09.119,1001 112.119.0801 5089 4305 725 3316 524 10 20 

232 228.0 37.119.10X1 09.119,1001 12.119.10X1 843 732 103 591 88 1 4 
233 229.0 37.119.10X1 09.119,1501 12.118.10XY 843 732 103 501 8a 1 4 

234 230.0 37.119.10X1 09.119.1401 12.119.10X1 843 732 103 591 86 1 4 

08s IOTHVOT IREGVOT IREGWHT IREGBLK IREGOTH ICDEMBS ILDEMA8 ISDEMSO ICREFEE ILREP88 ISREPSQ 

2 2837 2475 359 3 541 653 B22 792 881 948 
232 0 421 376 44 1 84 107 127 104 123 {8a 

233 0 421 376 44 1 64 107 127 104 123 153 
234 0 421 376 44 1 64 107 127 104 123 155 

083 IDEM IREP OTOTPOP OTOTWHT OTOTBLK OWHTVOT OBLKVOT QASIVOT QAMIVOT OOTHVOT OREAVOT 

231 1537 1142 4218 3803 aay 2830 256 16 30 3 183s 
232 250 149 4218 3803 337 2830 256 16 ao 3 1835 

233 250 148 2417 2319 70 1781 58 3 7 5 1494 
234 250 14g 25437 444 75 1918S sg 0 6 5 1434 

08S OREGWHT OREGBLK OREGOTH OCDEMBS OLDEMER 0SDEMSO OCREP&E OLREP88 OSREP20 ODEM OAELP 

231 1730 200 5 as7 484 581 478 S65 705 1146 666 
232 1730 200 5 387 494 581 478 $65 705 1145 686 
233 1436 56 2 184 256 343 513 ges 655 732 660 
234 1385 38 1 243 231 279 483 664 ! 644 B4B 521 

08S IBLKPCT IVBLKPCT IRBLXPCT IMINPCT IVMINPCT IAMINPCT IFDEMLTG IPDEUCOA IPOEMSEN IPCTDEM OBLKPCT OVBLKPCT ORBLKPCT OMINPCT OVMINPCT   231 0.14 0.14 0.13 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.42 0.44 0.486 0.57 0.08 0.08 0.10 0.10 0.10 
232 L.12 0.13 0.19 0.13 0.13 0.11 0.47 0.45% 0.45 0.83 0.02 0.08 0.10 0.10 0.10 
299 0.12 0.13 0.10 0.13 0.13 0.11 0.47 0.45 0.45 0.83 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04 

234 0.12 0.13 0.10 0.13 0.13 0.11 0.47 0.45 0.45 0.83 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.03 

23 ORUINPCT OFDEMLTG OPDEUCOA OPDEMSEN ORCTDEM ITOTVOT ITOTMIN IMINVOT IMINREG ILTGS8 ICOABS ISENSO OTOTVGT OTOTMIN OMINYQT CMINMAEG 

—231 0.11 0.47 0.45 0.45 0.63 3872 764 556 302 1544 a3 aT0 Mls 418 305 205 
232 0.1 0.47 0.45 0.45 0.63 682 1m 91 45 230 18a 280 3135 418  .305 205 
233 0.04 0.21 0.27 0.33 0.53 682 111 31 45 230 188 280 1851 ga 70 58 
234 0.03 0.27 0.34 0.30 0.62 682 111 81 46 230.0 dma. 280 1984 83 "69 39 

QBS 0LTG38 0COA88 QSEN9Q GTBLKPOP |TBLXPOP EGELKPOP GTBLKVOT LTELKVOT EDBLKVOT GTBLKREG LTBLKREG EQBLKREG GTMINFOP LTMINPOP EQMINPOP 

231- 105% 885 12as 

232 1089 865 1286 
233 825 707 1038 

234 945 708 923 -t
 

ob
 

oh
 

oh
 

O
O
O
O
 

t
h
 

ed
 

=A
 

QO
 
o
0
O
0
Q
 

o
O
 
0
0
O
o
0
 

—
 
d
d
 

Oo
 
0
0
0
 

0
0
0
0
 

o
Q
 

O
0
0
 1 

1 

1 

1 o
o
0
o
o
0
o
o
 

[«
JR
 
e
e
e
]
 

0BS GTWINVOT LTMINVOT EQMINVOT GTMINREG LTMINAEG EQWINREG GTOEMCOA LTDEMCOA EQDEMCQA GTDEMLTG LTOEMLTG EQDEULTG GTDEMGEN LTDEMSEN 

231 1 0 ) 1 Q 0 0 K 0 0 1 0 1 0 
23z 1 0 0 1 a Qe" 0 1 9 0 1 0 1 0 
233 1 Q Q 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 
234 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 

QBS EQDEMSEN GTDEMREG LTOEMRER EQDEVRES DEMNTBLK BLXNTDEM PRFLAG 

0 0 1 0 0 0 0 
232 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 
233 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 ; 
234 0 1 0 0 0 0 0     
      

Printed 09/07/99 15:09:29 Dixcovery 

 



o
F
 

-
 

1
0
I
S
D
r
y
,
 

ol 
hi 

dt 
prs 

-
—
 

2 
o
h
 

  

 
 

    
 
 
 
 

 
 

 
 
 
  
     

  
 
 

 



  

MAP EXHIBITS 
  

  

Guilford Precincts by Percent of 
Population Black with Democratic 

Registration Values 

March 18, 1998 Joint Exhibit 107 

  

Forsyth Precincts by Percent of Population 
Black with Democratic Registration 

Values 

March 18, 1998 Joint Exhibit 108 

  

1997 Congressional Plan - Iredell County 
August 6, 1999 

  

    
Voter Precincts by Percent Black Voting Plaintiff’s Exhibit 
Age Population 240 

1997 Congressional Plan - Rowan County 

Voter Precincts by Percent Black Voting August 6, 1999 Plaintiff’s Exhibit 
Age Population 242 

1997 Congressional Plan - Davidson 

County Voter Precincts by Percent August 6, 1999 Plaintiff’s Exhibit 
Democratic Vote in 1988 COA Race 254     
  

  

 



EXHIBIT 

SZ 
(Ueber [27094 

. 
= 

x 

™ 
c 
c 
3 
> 
= 
= 

5 
Q 
=< 

£ 
o  



STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA 

Reconstituted Election Analysis by 

U.S. Congressional District 

in House Bill 586 - Plan A (1997) 

1990 Democratic Primary for U.S. Senate 

  

District Candidate Vote < 0) tT
 I) \o
 

1 Easley e 29603 
Gantt (B) 36352 
Garner 1716 
Hannon 1274 
Ingram 18520 
Thomas 69517 o\

® 
o\
° 

o\
° 

o\
° 

o\
° 

o\
0 

W
o
y
 
w
o
 

wu
 

id
 

Easley 6351 
Gantt (RB) 342481 
Garner 352 
Hannon 238 
Ingram 3448 
Thomas 1990 o\

® 
o\
° 

o\
% 

o\
% 

o\
®@
 

o\
° 

N
D
A
 
U
0
 

O
Y
 

OY
 

 



STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA 

Reconstituted Election Analysis by 

U.S. Congressional District 

in House Bill 586 - Plan A (1997) 

1990 Democratic Run-0fFff for U.S. Senate 

District Candidate Vote Vote % 

1 Easley 27719 
Gantt (RB) 33502 

Easley 7016 
Gantt (B) 39966 

 



® @® 
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA 

  

Reconstituted Election Analysis by 

U.S. Congressional District 

in House Bill 586 - Plan A (1997) 

1590 Generzl Election for 0.8. Senate 

  

  

District Candidate Vote Vote % 

vs on Gantt (BR) 83594 53.8% 
Helms 71768 46.2% 

12 ; Gantt (R) 107736 66.4% 
Helms 54533 33.6% 

 



* ww 
STATE OF NORTE CAROLINA 

  

Reconstituted Election Analysis by 

U.S. Congressional District 

in House Bill 585 - Plan a (1997) 

1392 Democratic Primary for State Auditor 

District Candidate Vote Vote % 

1 Campbell (B) 30068 46.5% 
Freeman 192459 29.8% 
Hicks 15332 23.7% 

12 Campbell (RB) 20509 56.3% 
Freeman 8232 22.6% 
Hicks 7682 21.31% 

 



* w 
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA 

Reconstituted Election Analysis by 

U.S. Congressional District 

in House Bill 586 - Plan A (1997) 

1552 Generzl Election for State Auditor 

District Candidate Vote 
  

Vote % 

1 - » Campbell (RB) 112275 £9.23% 
Abernethy 49761 30.7% 

Campbell (B) 110545 66.8% 
Abernethy 54840 33.2% 

 



pe * 
STATE OF NORTE CAROLINA 

Reconstituted Election Analysis by 

U.S. Congressional District 

in House Bill 586 - Plan A (1997) 

1996 Generzl Election for U.=s. Senate 

District Candidate Vote Vote % 

l Gantt (B): 87170 
Helms 79075 
Ubinger 803 
Pardo 407 
Kopperud 8 

  

>
 

Un
 

O
O
 
O
p
 

ip
 

o
N
 

UI
 
o
y
 

o\
® 

o\
% 

o\
% 

o\
° 

o\
° 

Gantt (BR) 1028484 
Helms 57259 
Ubinger 1378 
Pardo 684 
Kopperud 3 

Ww
 

on
 

O
O
O
 

W
w
W
 

O
n
 

0
 
W
w
w
 

o\
® 

o\
® 

o\
° 

o\
° 

o\
° 

 



# w 
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA 

Reconstituted Election Analysis by 

U.S. Congressional District 

in House Bill 586 - Plan A (1997) 

1596 General Election for State Auditor 

Candidate Vote Vote % 

Campbell (B) 108309 57. 
Daly 51469 31. 
Dorsey 1475 
Janowski 731 

Campbell (BR) 103454 
Daly 50844 
Dorsey 2445 
Janowski 1176 

 



iw 
STATE OF NORTE CAROLINA 

  

Reconstituted Election Analysis by 

U.S. Congressional District 

in House Bill 586 - Plan A (1997) 

1998 Democratic Primary for U.S. Senate 

District 
  

  

Candidate Vote Vote % 

3 Ayers 3756 5.4% 
Carmack 1486 2.1% 
Edwards 37999 54.7% 
Gay 1732 2.5% 
Martin 17183 24.7% 
Robinson 2226 3.2% 
Scarborough (RB) 5132 7.4% 

12 Ayers 1058 2.9% 
Carmack 383 1.31 
Edwards 13297 36.8% 
Gay 508 1.4% 
Martin 7869 21.8% 
Robinson 791 22% Scarborough (B) 12226 33.8% 

 



o ® 
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA 

  

Reconstituted Election Analysis by 

U.S. Congressional District 

in House Bill 586 - Plan A (1997) 

1598 General Election for U.S. Senate 

Digtrict Candidate Vote Vote % 

1 Edwards 87415 63.4% 
Faircloth : 49069 35.6% 
Howe 1392 1.0% 

12 Edwards 89726 69.3% 
Fazircloth 37619 29.3% 
Howe 2087 1.6% 

 



# i» 
STATE OF NORTE CAROLINA 

  

Reconstituted Election Analysis by- 

U.S. Congressional District 

in House Bill 1394 - Plan A (1998) 

1330 Democratic Primary for U.S. Senate 

  

  

District Candidate Vote - Vote % 

1 Easley 25603. 31.4% 
: : Gantt (BR) 36352 38.5% 

Garner 171s 1.8% 
Hannon 1274 1.3% 
Ingram 18520 15.6% 
Thomas 6917 7.3% 

12 Easley 6517 15.22 
Gantt (BR) 31033 68.0% 
Garner 377 0.8% 
Hannon 296 0.6% 
Ingram 4253 $.9% 
Thomas 2459 5.4% 

. E - 10 

 



# o 
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA 

Reconstituted Election Analysis by 

U.S. Congressional District 

in House Bill 1394 - Plan A (1998) 

1950 Democratic Run-Off for U.S. Senate 

District Candidate 

1 Easley 
Gantt (B) 

2 Easley 
Gantt (B) 

 



& # 
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA 

  

Reconstituted Election Analysis by 

U.S. Congressional District 

in House Bill 1394 - Plan A (1998) 

1590 General Election for U.S. Senate 

  

District Candidate Vote ~ Vote % 

3 Gantt (B) 83594 53.8% 
Helms 71768 46.2% 

12 Gantt (RB) 97406 55.3% 
Helms 66862 40.7% 

 



® @ 
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA 

  

Reconstituted Election Analysis by 

U.S. Congressional District 

in House Bill 1394 - Plan A (1998) 

1592 Democratic Primary for State Auditor 

  

District Candidate Vote Vote % 

Dad d Campbell (RB) 30068 46.5% 
Freeman 192459 29.8% 
Hicks I5332 23.7% 

12 Campbell (RB) 17820 50.9% 
Freeman 9899 28.3% 
Hicks 7266 20.8% 

. E -.13 

 



# i 
pe STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA 

  

Reconstituted Election Analysis by 

U.S. Congressional District 

in House Bill 1394 - Plan A (1998) 

1592 General Election for State Auditor 

  

District Candidate Vote Vote % 

1 Campbell (B) 112275 69.3% 
Abernethy 49761 30.7% 

12 Campbell (B) 105001 59.1% 
Abernethy 72717 40.9% 

. £5 94 

 



4 * 
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA 

  

Reconstituted Election Analysis by 

U.S. Congressional District 

in House Bill 1394 - Plan A (1998) 

15996 General Election for U.S. Senate 

  

  

District Candidate Vote Vote % 

3 Gantt (B) 97170 54.8% 
Helms 75075 44 .6% 
Ubinger 803 0.5% 
Pardo 407 0.2% 
Kopperud 5 0.0% 

12 Gantt (EB) 103367 56.4% 
Helms : 77021 42.1% 
Ubinger 1851 1.0% 
Pardo S07 0.5% 
Kopperud 7 0.0% 

 



# > 
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA 

Reconstituted Election Analysis by 

U.S. Congressional District 

in House Bill 1394 - Plan A (1998) 

1956 General Election for State Auditor 

District Candidate   

  

3 ~~ Campbell (B) 108909 
Daly 51469 
Dorsey 1475 
Janowski 731 

Campbell 96767 
Daly 68337 
Dorsey 3270 
Janowski 1521 

 



r - 
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA 

  

Reconstituted Election Analysis by 

U.S. Congressional District 

in House Bill 1394 - Plan A (1998) 

1998 Democratic Primary for U.S.Senate 

District Candidate Vote Vote % 

1 Ayers on 3756 5.4% 
Carmack 1486 2.1% 
Edwards 37999 54.7% 
Gay 1732 2.5% 
Martin 37153 24.7% 
Robinson 2226 3.2% 
Scarborough (B) 5132 7.4% 

12 Ayers 882 2.8% 
Carmack 307 1.0% 
Edwards : 11328 35.6% 
Cay 360 1.1% 
Martin 9379 29.4% 
Robinson 759 2.4% 
Scarborough (B) 8862 27.8% 

 



# - 

STATE OF NORTE CAROLINA 

  

Reconstituted Election Analysis by 

U.S. Congressional District 

in Bouse Bill 1394 - Plan A (1998) 

1998 General Election for U.S. Senate 

  

District : Candidate Vote Vote % 

1 Edwards 87415 63.4% 
Faircloth 45069 35.6% 
Howe 1392 1.0% 

12 Edwards ‘ 87585 £1.1% 
Faircloth 52869 36.9% 
Howe 2973 241% 

 



  

gf a 
Information Supporting North Carolina’s 

Section S Submission for its 1997 Congressional 

Redistricting Plan 

The following information is submitted by North Carolina in support of its request to 

preclear the State's new congressional redistricting plan enacted by the General Assembly on 

March 31, 1997. The numbered paragraphs correspond to the numbers of the rules of the 

Deparment of Justice, 28 C.F.R. §§ 51.27 and 51.28. In most cases, information documenting 

the information in numbered paragraphs is contained in an attachment bearing a corresponding 

number. (e.g. Paragraph 97C-27A is documented by Attachment 97C-274). 

€97C-27A. 1997 Enactment of Congressional Redistricting Plan 

| On March 31, 1997, the North Carolina General Assembly enacted a new 

congressional redistricting plan to remedy the constitutional defects in the State’s former plan 

identified by the United States Supreme Court in Shaw v. Hunr, 116 S. Ct. 1894 (1996). The new 

plan, known as 97 House/Senate Plan A, is contained in Section 2 of Chapter 11 of the General 
Assembly's 1997 Session Laws. A copy of this legislation is included in Arachment 97C-27A-1. 

Chapter 11 contains two plans. 97 House/Senate Plan A and 97 House/Senate Plan AQ. 

Plan A appears in Section 2 of Chapter 1. Plan AO appears in Section 3 of Chapter 11. Plan A 

and Plan AQ are essentially identical except that Plan A has an overall population range from -344 

to +947 for a towal deviation of .27%. Plan AO has an overall population range from 0 to +1 for 

a total deviation of .00%. Only Plan A is submitted for preclearance. Plan AO would become 

effective only in the event Plan A is declared unconstitutional on one-person, one-vote grounds. 

For a discussion of the differences between Plan A and Plan AQ, see the March 26, 1997, 

memorandum to the Senate Select Committee on-Congressional Redistricting and the House 

Commirtee on Congressional Redistricting included in Attachment 97C-27A-2. 

2 Maps, including two large color maps, population data; voter registration data and 

certain election results for.Plan A are included in Attachment 97C- 27 A-3. This Attachment also 

includes the same information for Plan AO. 

3. A diskette containing the Chapter 11 plan is included as Awachment 97C-27A-4. 

4. Access to the computer tape is available to the public by contacting Don Fulford, 

Director of the Legislative Information Systems Division, 400 Legislative Office Building, 300 

North Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 29603-5925. Telephone (919) 733-6834. 

Technical questions should be addressed to Mr. Dan Frey of the Legislative Information Systems 

Division at the same address and phone number. 

 



    

i“ — 
197C-27B. Prior Redistricting Plans 

The redistricting plan in effect for North Carolina’s congressional elections between 1992 and 1996 is attached as Attachment 97C-27B. 

97C-27C. Documents Explaining the 1997 Chan ges to the Congressional Redistricting 
Plan 

1. Chapter 11 of the 1997 Session Laws repeals the last valid plan in effect - the plan that was completed in 1982. The strike-throughs in the text of Chapter 11 therefore show changes 
from the 1984 plan, not from the current plan. 

2. A chart showing the minority percentage of total population and voting age population in each district in the 1992 plan, and the 1997 plan is attached as Anachment 97C-27C- 1. Also included in the chart are Minority voter registration percentages for each district in the 1992 and 1997 plans. (Note: North Carolina had 11 congressional districts in the 1980s). 

-~ 

2 The changes are also discussed in o ther sections of this document, particularly €$97C-27H and 97C-27N. 

۩97C-27D. Persons making the submission are: 

Gary Bartlen 

Executive Secretary-Director 

State Board of Elections 
Suite 801, Raleigh Building 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601 
Telephone: (919) 733-7173 

Gerry Cohen 
Director of Legislative Drafting 
Senate Select Committee on Redistricting Counsel 
Suite 401, Legislative Office Building 
300 N. Salisbury Street 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603-5925 
Telephone: (919) 733-6660 
Fax: (919) 715-5459 
E-mail: gerryc@ms.ncga.state.nc.us 

 



  

- ® 
Linwood Jones 
House Committee on Congressional Redistricting Counsel 

Suite 545, Legislative Office Building 

300 N. Salisbury Street 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27603-5925 
Telephone: (919) 733-2578 

Fax: (919) 715-5460 
E-mail: linwoodj@ms.ncga.state.nc.us 

(97C-27E. Submitting Authority 

The submitting authority is the Executive Secretary-Director for the State Board of 

Elections for the State of North Carolina. 

(97C-27F. Submitting Body 

Not applicable. 

197C-27G. Enacting Body 

The congressional redistricting plan is an act of the State legislature -- the North Carolina 

General Assembly. 

€97C-27H. Authority and Process for Redistricting 

The North Carolina General Assembly is authorized by 2 U.S.C. §2a and §2c¢ and Arucle 

I, §82 and 4 of the United: States Constitution to redistrict its congressional districts. The prior 

redistricting plan was enacted by the General Assembly on January 24, 1992, and was precleared 

under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act on February 6, 1992. The United States Supreme Court 

declared District 12 in this plan unconstitutional in Shaw v. Hunt on June 13, 1996. On remand, 

the three-judge panel in the Shaw case issued an order on July 30, 1996, permitting the use of the 

unconstitutional plan for the 1996 elections and giving the General Assembly until April 1, 1997, 

to draw a new plan. Chapter 11 was enacted in response to that order. A copy of the court order 

1s attached as Attachment 97C-27P-2. 

The process leading to the enactment of Chapter 11 began in the North Carolina House of 

Representatives in June, 1996. The following is a chronology of events leading up to the 

enactment of the plan. The designation “AA” after a name indicates that the individual is an 

African-American. The designation “NA” after a name indicates that the individual is a Native 

American: | 

June 13, 1996: United States Supreme Court declares District 12 unconstitutional in Shaw v. 

Hunt. 

 



  

| —_— 
June 14, 1996: House Speaker Harold Brubaker appointed a House Select committee on 
Congressional Redistricting. The committee was chaired by Representative Robert Grady. The 
other members were as follows: Representatives Carolyn Russell, Lyons Gray, Frances 
Cummings (AA), George Holmes, Julia Howard, Theresa Esposito, Ed McMahan, Richard 
Morgan, Mary McAllister (AA), Jim Crawford, and Linwood Mercer. This Committee never 
met. 

July 8, 1996: Senator Marc Basnight, President Pro Tempore of the North Carolina Senate, 
appointed a Select Committee on Redistricting. The Committee was chaired by Senator Roy 
Cooper. The following were also appointed as members of the Committee: Senators Charles 
Albertson, Frank Ballance (AA), Patrick Ballantine, Betsy Cochrane, Richard Conder, Jim 
Forrester, Wib Gulley, David Hoyle, Don Kincaid, Bob Martin, Bill Martin (AA), Tony Rand, 
R.C. Soles, and Leslie Winner. 

July 10, 1996: The Senate Select Committee on Redistricting met to discuss the Shaw decision 
and the feasibility of adopting new congressional districts in time for the 1996 general election. 
The Committee heard from Mr. Gary Bartlett, Executive Director of the North Carolina State 
Board of Elections, on the requirements for a shortened filing and primary election schedule. 
Senator Cooper wrote a letter to North Carolina Attorney General Michael Easley outlining the 
Senate's position and requesting that Anorney General Easley inform the three-judge federal panel 
that it was impracticable to adopt new congressional districts in time for the 1996 general election. 
The letter is attached as Arachment 97C-28F-4B(2). 

July 17, 1996: The House Committe= on Rules. Calendar, and Operations of the House released 
a redistricting plan (Congress-96-001) to the public. The plan is attached as Attachment 97C-27R- 
1. The House Committee on Rules, Calendar, and Operations of the House was chaired by 
Representative Richard Morgan. Its other members were as follows: Representatives Arlene 
Pulley, Jim Crawford, Jim Black, Joanne Bowie, Jerry Dockham, Theresa Esposito, Ed 
McMahan, Chuck Neely, and George Robinson. The redistricting plan was submitted by 
Representative Morgan to the Committee for its review, with instructions that the plan would not 
be voted on at that meeting. Representative Morgan read a statement to the Committee about the 
plan that is attached as Attachment 97C-28F-4A and announced that there would be a public 
hearing the following week on redistricting. 

July 19, 1996: The three judge panel issued an order asking for the opinions of Speaker Brubaker 
and Senate President Pro Tempore Basnight on the likelihood that the General Assembly would 
be able to draw a plan in time for the 1996 elections. The House was at the time and remains 
under the control of Republicans. The Senate was at that time and remains under the control of 
Democrats. The North Carolina congressional delegation, elected in 1994, was divided as 
follows: 8 Republicans and 4 Democrats. Senator Cooper, acting on behalf of Senate President 
Pro Tempore Basnight, submitted an affidavit to the Attorney General that was filed with the 
Court. Senator Cooper stated in his affidavit that a new plan could not reasonably be enacted for 
the 1996 elections. Representative Morgan, acting on behalf of House Speaker Harold Brubaker, 

4 

 



submitted an affidavit to the Attorney General that was filed with the Court. Representative 

Morgan stated in his affidavit that it would be practical to redraw legislative districts in time for 

the 1996 elections. Senator Cooper’s and Representative Morgan's affidavits are attached as 
Attachments 97C-28F-4B(2) and 97C-28F-4B(1), respectively. 

July 24, 1996: The House Committee on Rules, Calendar, and Operations of the House 

conducted a public hearing in Raleigh on July 24, 1996, to hear the views of interested parties on 
redistricting generally and on the plan released by the Committee the week before. A copy of 

the notice of this public hearing, which was published in legal ads throughout the State, distributed 

to the media through the media service “Xpedite,” and mailed to a list of minority contacts is 
attached as Attachment 97C-28F-2A. The list of the media organizations contacted by Xpedite 

is attached as Attachment 97C-28F4J. The list of minority contacts is attached as Attachment 

97C-28H. The transcript of the hearing and sign-in sheets are attached as Attachment 97C-28F- 
3A. This Attachment includes exhibits submitted by the speakers at the public hearing. 

July 30, 1996: The three judge panel issued an order allowing the 1996 elections to proceed 

under the unconstitutional plan and giving the North Carolina General Assembly until April 1, 

1997, to submit a revised congressional redistricting plan to the court for its approval. The order 
is attached as Attachment 97C-27H-1. The General Assembly adjourned its 1999-96 session on 
August 3, 1996. 

January 29, 1997: The North Carolina General Assembly convened its 1997-98 session on 

January 29, 1997. Speaker Harold Brubaker appointed a new House Committee on Congressional 

Redisuicung. The Committee was chaired by Representative Ed McMahan. The following were 

named as members of the Committee: Representatives Dewey Hill, Gene Arnold, Cherie Berry, 

Dan Blue (AA), Joanne Bowie, Walter Church, Jim Crawford, Arlie Culp, Don Davis, Theresa 

Esposito, Toby Fitch (AA), Robert Grady, Lyons Gray, Thomas Hardaway (AA), George 

Holmes, Robert Hunter, Larry Justus, Joe Kiser, Mary McAllister (AA), Richard Morgan, 

Warren Oldham (AA), Carolyn Russell, Edgar Starnes, and Ronnie Sutton (NA). 

Senator Basnight reauthorized the Senate Select Committee on Redistricting. The same 

members appointed to the first committee were appointed to this committee (See July 8, 1996 

entry for the names). Senator Hugh Webster was also added as a member. 

February 12, 1997: The House Committee on Congressional Redistricting held its initial 

meeting, at which time Mr. Edwin M. Speas, Senior Deputy Attorney General, briefed the 
Committee on the Shaw litigation. Mr. Speas and Linwood Jones, Committee Counsel, answered 
questions of the Committee members. The transcript of this meeting is contained in Attachment 

97C-28F4E(1). 

February 20, 1997: The Senate Select Committee on Redistricting met and Senator Cooper 

presented a congressional redistricting plan (1997 Congressional Plan A) to the Committee. This 

plan is attached as Attachment 97C-27R-2. Senator Cooper announced that no vote would be 

5  



iw — 
taken on the plan so that the public could comment on the plan at the public hearing scheduled for the following week. The transcript of that meeting is attached as Attachment 97C-28F4D(2). 

February 25, 1997: The House Committee on Congressional Redistricting met. Representative McMahan presented a plan to the Committee that had been drawn in response to the Senate plan. This plan, 1997 House Congressional Plan A.1, is attached as Attachment 97C-27R-3. Representative McMahan announced that no vote would be taken on the plan so that the public could comment on the plan at the public hearing scheduled for the following week. The transcript of that meeting is contained in Attachment 97C-28F4E(2). 

February 26, 1997: The joint public hearing was held in the Legislative Auditorium in Raleigh on February 26, 1997. The transcript of the public hearing and the sign-in sheets are attached as Attachment 97C-28F-3B. Exhibits submitted by the speakers at the public hearing are included as Attachment 97C-28F-3B Ex. See July 24, 1996 entry for the distribution of the notice of the hearing. 

February 27 - March 18, 1997: Senator Cooper and Representative McMahan met to attempt to resolve the differences between the House version of the plan and the Senate version of the plan and submitted numerous maps to each other during a four-week period of negotiations. During most of the negotiation period, the primary point of contention was how Wake County would be divided between proposed Districts 2 and 4. With one exception, none of these plans containing offers and counter-offers were released to the committees or made public. The excepuon is 97 House Congressional Plan G, discussed below. However. all of these plans are discussed in 97C- 27R and are included in Attachment 97C-27R-12. 

Senator Cooper and Representative McMahan were uncertain if they could resolve their differences regarding Wake County before the Court’s April 1 deadline. They each called for meetings of their respective committees to take up their own plans. Senator Cooper introduced Senate Bill 433, containing 1997 Congressional Plan A, the same plan Senator Cooper had presented to the Committee weeks earlier. The bill was referred to the Senate Select Committee on Redistricting. 

March 19, 1997: The Senate Select Committee on Redistricting met. Senator Cooper presented Senate Bill 433, containing 1997 Congressional Plan A. See Attachment 97C-27R-2. Senator Betsy Cochrane presented an amendment that would substitute her plan, “Congress Cochrane,” for the plan offered by Senator Cooper. Senator Cochrane’s plan is attached as Attachment 97C- 27R-11. The Committee approved the plan presented by Senator Cooper. The transcript of this meeting is attached as Attachment 97C-28F4D(3). 

The House Committee on Congressional Redistricting also met on March 19,1997, Representative McMahan presented a new plan to the Committee: 97 House Congress Plan G. See Attachment 97C-27R-4. Plan G was one of the more recent compromise proposals from Representative McMahan to Senator Cooper. Because House rules allow House committees to 

6  



» a 
introduce bills, the passage of Plan G from committee in effect constituted approval to file a bill 

for introduction containing Plan G. The transcript of this committee meeting is attached as 

Attachment 97C-28F-4E(3). 

March 24, 1997: Representative McMahan filed the bill containing Plan G on behalf of the 

Committee. The bill was given a number —- House Bill 586 — and was referred back to the House 

Committee on Congressional Redistricting. Afterwards, Senator Cooper and Representative 

McMahan announced to their committees that negotiations would continue and that they still 

thought the differences could be resolved before the deadline. Senator Cooper and Representative 

McMahan agreed on a plan that they would each submit to their respective committees and 

chambers. 

March 25, 1997: The plan agreed to, 97 HOUSE/SENATE PLAN (and its contingent backup 

plan, 97 HOUSE/SENATE PLAN 0), was presented to the House Congressional Redistricting 

Committee. Representative Dan Blue offered an alternative plan for the purpose of changing the 

proposed District 4 back to approximately its current location. The amendment was defeated by 

the Committee. Representative Ronnie Sutton (Native American) offered an amendment involving 

Robeson and Cumberland Counties that was also defeated by the Committee because he did not 

have statistical data showing the effect of his amendment on the population of the districts at that 

time. The Committee passed 97 HOUSE/SENATE PLAN as a proposed committee substitute 

for House Bill 586. The transcript of this mesting is attached as Artachment 97C-28F-4E(4). 

March 26, 1997: House Bill 586 was reported to the House floor and was calendared for debate. 

Representative McMahan presented an overview of the plan to the House. Representative Ronnie 

Sutton offered an amendment to move a predominantly Native American precinct in Robeson 

County from District 8 to District 7, where nearly all of the other predominantly Native American 

precincts were located. Representative McMahan had already announced in earlier remarks that 

he and Senator Cooper supported the Sutton amendment. The amendment passed by a vote of 

117-0. Representative Mickey Michaux of Durham offered three successive amendments. These 

amendments represented, respectively, plans known as Fitch Michaux Plan A, Fitch/Michaux Plan 

B, and Fitch/Michaux Plan C. These amendments are discussed in more detail at 97C-27R and 

they are attached as Attachments 97C-27R-8, -9, and -10. 

The committee substitute for House Bill 586 was passed, with the Sutton amendment, by 

a vote of 87 to 30. Of the 18 members of the House who are minorities, 3 African-American 

members and 1 Native American member voted for the bill and 12 African-American members 

voted against it. The bill was sent to the Senate. A transcript of the House floor debate is 

attached as Attachment 97C-28F-4F(1). (The House does not record its debates. The transcript 

was prepared from a recording of the entire floor debate by the University of North Carolina 

Public Television). The relevant portions of the House Journal are included as Attachment 97C- 

28F-4G(1). The record of the votes is attached as Attachment 97C-28F4H.  



* Nr 
March 27, 1997: The Senate Select Committee on Redistricting met to discuss House Bil] 586 
as it came from the House. The Committee voted for the bill. No amendments were offered 
during the committee meeting. See Attachment 97C-28F-4D(4) for the transcript of this meeting. 

The bill was considered on the floor of the Senate the same afternoon. Senator Cochrane 
presented an amendment containing the same plan that she had presented and that had been 
defeated in the Senate Committee. (See entry above under March 19, 1997). The amendment 
was defeated on the floor by a vote of 27 to 18. No other amendments were offered to House Bill 
586. The bill passed by a vote of 32 to 14. All 7 African-American Senators voted for the bill. 
A transcript of the Senate floor debate is attached as Attachment 97C-28F-4F. The relevant 
portions of the Senate Journal are included as Attachment 97C-28F-4G(2). The record of the vote 
Is attached as Attachment 97C-28F 4H. 

March 31, 1997: House Bill 586 was ratified as Chapter 11 of the 1997 Session Laws. 

April 1, 1997: The Anorney General filed the redistricting plan with the three-judge panel. The 
Arntorney General also filed a motion requesting that the court delay ruling on the plan until the 
State had received a response from the United States Department of Justice under Section 5 of the 
Voting Rights Act. The Court was informed in this motion that the State would seek expedited 
consideration of this preclearance request. 

€97C-271. Adoption Date 

The enactment of the congressional redistricting plan, Chapter 11 of the 1997 Session 
Laws (House Bill 386). was effective when ratified on March 31, 1997. 

997C-27J. Implementation Date 

The congressional redistricting plan will take effect in the elections beginning in 1998. 
The times for the holding of primary and regular elections are contained in N.C. GEN. STAT. 
§163-1. The time for filing notice of candidacy is contained in N.C. GEN. STAT. §163-106. 
Copies of these statutes are included as Attachments 97C-27]-1 and 97C-27]-2. 

197C-27K. Enforcement 

The changes in the congressional redistricting plan enacted March 31, 1997, have not yet 
been enforced or administered. The plan has now been submitted to the three-judge panel for 
approval in accordance with its July 30, 1996 Order (see §97C-27M below). 

(97C-27L. Scope 

Not applicable.  



  

* "> 
197C-27M. Reason for Change 

North Carolina's twelve congressional districts were redrawn to remedy a redistricting plan 
containing a district (District 12) that was declared unconstitutional by the United States Supreme 

Court in Shaw v. Hunt. 

(97C-27N. Effect of Change on Minority Voters 

The General Assembly’s primary goal in redrawing the plan was to remedy the 

constitutional defects in the former plan. Those defects were the predominance of race in the 

location and shape of District 12, and perhaps in the location and shape of District 1. and a failure 

of narrow tailoring. This goal was accomplished by emphasizing the following factors in locating 
and shaping the new districts: (1) avoidance of the division of counties and precincts; (2) 

avoidance of long narrow corridors connecting concentrations of minority citizens: (3) geographic 

compactness; (4) functional compactness (grouping together citizens of like interests and needs); 

and (5) ease of communication among voters and their representatives. Emphasis on these factors 

accomplished this goal. For example: (1) the unconstitutional plan divided 44 counties while 

the new plan divides only 22 counties; (2) the unconstitutional plan divided 6 counties among 3 

districts while the new plan does not divide any county among 3 districts; (3) the unconstitutional 

plan divided 80 precincts while the new plan only divides 2 precincts; (4) the unconstitutional plan 

used “cross-overs.” “double cross-overs” and “points of contiguity” to create contiguous districts 
while the new plan uses none of these devices; (5) District 12 in the unconstitutional plan was 191 

miles long (in “traveling distance”) while District 12 in the new plan is only 102 miles long; and 

(6) District 1 in the unconstitutional plan was 225 miles long while District 1 in the new plan is 

only 171 miles long. In addition. the new plan makes new District 12 a highly urban district by 

joining together citizens in the City of Charlotte and the cities of the Piedmont Triad (Greensboro. 

Winston-Salem and High Point). Conversely, new District 1 is a distinctively rural district 

formed from the largely agrarian and economically depressed northeastern counties. 

The General Assembly’s other primary goal was to preserve the 6-6 partisan balance in 

the State’s current congressional delegation. This balance reflects the existing balance between 

Democrats and Republicans in the State. The State House of Representatives is presently 

controlled by Republicans; the State Senate is presently controlled by Democrats; and most 

statewide elections are decided by narrow margins. It was clear from the beginning that the only 

plan the Senate and House would be able to agree on was one that preserved the existing 6-6 

balance in the congressional delegation. At the same time, the chairmen of the Senate and House 

redistricting committees felt strongly that the legislature had a constitutional duty to draw a plan 

for the three-judge panel to review, rather than leave that task to the court. For these reasons, 

preservation of the existing partisan balance became a driving force in locating and shaping the 

districts. 

These primary goals were accomplished while still providing minority voters a fair 
opportunity to elect representatives of their choice in at least two districts (Districts 1 and 12). 

9 

 



h SY ® 
Data and expert studies before the General Assembly provided a strong basis in evidence for the conclusion that the Gingles factors are present in the area generally encompassed by new District 1. See Attachment 97C-28F-3B and 97C-28F-3B Ex. Based on this evidence, legislative leaders concluded that avoidance of potential liability under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act probably required the creation of a majority-minority district in that area. Accordingly, 50.27% of the total population within the District is African-American and 46.54% of the voting age population is African-American, based on 1990 census data. In addition, 1997 population projections indicate that the percentage of African-Americans and the percentage of African-American registered to vote are slightly higher in District 1 today than in 1990. See Attachment 97C-28A-2. These percentages plus the “cross-over” voters within the District (20 to 25%) provide African- American citizens in District 1 a reasonable opportunity to elect a candidate of their choice. This opportunity is almost certainly enhanced for the life of this plan (the 1998 and 2000 elections ) by the incumbency of Eva Clayton. Congresswoman Clayton was elected from old District 1 in 1992, 1994 and 1996 with percentages of 67.0%, 61.0% and 65.9%, respectively, even though African-Americans constituted only 53% of the District's voting age population and 50.5% of the District’s registered voters. 

The General Assembly did not have sufficient evidence to conclude, and believes that sufficient evidence does not exist to conclude, that Gingles factors exist in any other area of the State so as likely to require the creation of a second majority-minority district. In Shaw the Supreme Court specifically rejected the State’s argument that it had a compelling interest in Creating a majority-minority district in the area encompassed by old District 12. Likewise, the General Assembly specifically rejected the creation of a second majority-minority district in the area eastward of Charlotte to Cumberland and Robeson Counties, as proposed for example by Senator Cochrane. Creation of any district in that area would artificially group together citizens with disparate and diverging economic, social and cultural interests and needs. It would sandwich rural voters between urban voters in the State's banking and commercial center at one end of the district and voters residing on and around Fort Bragg and Pope Air Force Base at the other end of the district. Such a district would also rely on uncertain coalitions between African-American and Native-American voters for its “majority-minority” status. Significantly, it would have thwarted the goal of maintaining partisan balance. Under these circumstances, voters could not obtain effective representation, or be effectively represented. Moreover, under these circumstances, race would have become the predominate factor, to the 2xclusion of the State’s redistricting criteria, in the creation of a district which would bear an uncomfortable resemblance to Georgia’s District 11 declared unconstitutional in Miller v. Johnson. 

Nevertheless, District 12 in the State's plan also provides the candidate of choice of African-American citizens a fair opportunity to win election. Though not a mMajority-minority 
district, the candidate of choice of the MINOrity community within the District will have a fair and reasonable opportunity to win election based on a combination of mino 
votes. Congressman Mel Watt was elected from old District 12 in 1992, 1994 and 1996 with percentages of 70.4%, 65.8% and 71.5%, respectively. (African- 
53% of the voting age population and 53.5% of the registered voters of old District 12) 

rity and non-minority 

American citizens constituted 

10  



    

2 R 
Consistent with the General Assembly's primary goal to preserve the existing partisan balance in 

Congress, new District 12 contains a substantial portion of the core of the urban population of old 

District 12 and a substantial percentage of voters with an affinity for Democrat candidates, 

regardless of their race. Those factors, together with the significant African-American population 

in the District (46.67% total population and 43.36% voting age population) provide a fair 

opportunity for incumbent Congressman Watt to win election. 

197C-270. 

I. 

Litigation relating to Redistricting in North Carolina: 

Litigation relating to 1990s congressional districts: 

(a) Pope v. Blue, 809 F. Supp. 392 (WDNC), aff'd. 113 S. Ct. 30 (1992). 

February 20, 1992 (suit filed claiming 1992 congressional plan was an 

unconstitutional political gerrymander); March 9, 1992 (three-judge court 

dismisses suit); October 5, 1992 (Supreme Court affirms three-judge cour). 

(b) Shaw v. Hunt. 116 S. Ct. 1894 (1996). July 1, 1991 (General Assembly 

enacts plan containing one majority-minority district in northeastern counties): 

December 18, 1991 (USDOIJ refuses to preclear plan on grounds that second 

majority-minority district can be drawn); January 24, 1992 (General Assembly 

enacts plan containing two majority-minority districts, Districts 1 and 12); March 

12. 1992 (suit filed claiming Districts 1 and 12 are unconstitutional racial 

gerrymanders); April 27, 1992 (three-judge court grants defendant motion to 

dismiss); June 28. 1993 (Supreme Court reverses and remands); August 27, 1996 

(three-judge court enters judgement for defendants following two week trial); June 

13, 1996 (Supreme Court reverses, declares District 12 unconstitutional but 

dismisses challenge to District 1 on standing grounds); July 30, 1996 (three-judge 

court allows 1996 elections to proceed, gives General Assembly until April 1, 1997 

to enact new plan and submit for court's approval); April 1, 1997 (new plan 

submitted to three-judge court). 

(©) Daly v. State Board of Elections, No. 5-96-CV-88-V (WDNC). January 

27, 1997 (complaint served claiming several districts in 1992 congressional 

redistricting plan and several State House and Senate districts in the existing plans 

are unconstitutional racial gerrymanders); March 21, 1997 (defendants answer and 

move to dismiss or transfer for improper venue) 

(d) Cromartie v. Hunt, No 4-96-CV-104 (EDNC). July 3, 1996 (complaint 

filed challenging District 1 in 1992 congressional plan); September 4, 1996 (order 

entered staying all proceedings pending completion of Shaw v. Hunt remedial 

phase). 

11 

 



    

~ ~ 
2. Other redistricting litigation: 

(a) Thornburgh v. Gingles, 478 U.S. 30 (1986) (Section 2 litigation concerning 
legislative districts). | 

(b) Drum. Sewell, 249 F. Supp. 877 (MDNC), aff'd. 383 U.S. 831 (1966) (one- 
person, one-vote challenge to congressional districts). 

97C-27P.  Preclearance of Prior Plan 

The prior congressional redistricting plan was precleared on February 6, 1992 (see 
Attachment 97C-27P-1). The authority of the North Carolina General Assembly to redistrict its 
congressional districts is contained in 2 U.S.C. §2a and §2c, Article I. §§2 and 4 of the U.S. 
Constitution, and the July 30, 1996. order by the three-judge court in Shaw v. Hunt. See Attachment 
97C-27P-2. 

197C-27Q. Information Required for Redistricting 

Information required for redistricting and specified under 28 C.F.R. §§31.28(a)(1) and (b)(1) 
is located is Attachments 97C-28A and 97C-28B. 

€97C-27R. Other Material Concerning the Purpose of the Plan 

Nearly 200 congressional redistricting plans have been drawn by legislative staff, interest 
groups, and the public using the North Carolina General Assembly’s redistricting computers since 
January 1, 1996. There were a few exploratory plans drawn by the legislative staff in the fall of 1993 
after the United States Supreme Court overturned Georgia's congressional redistricting plan. Some 
plans were never completed and some are duplicates of others. Plans that were actually presented 
during the legislative process as alternatives are discussed below and most are also discussed in w07- 
27H: 

7 Plans Publicly released by the House and/or Senate 

(a) Congress-96-001: This plan was released by Representative Richard Morgan to the 
House Rules Committee in July, 1996. The plan was never voted on by the Committee. See €97C- 
27H and Attachment 97C-27R-1. The plan contained a district from Charlotte to Robeson County 
similar to the district contained in the plan offered by Senator Betsy Cochrane as an amendment to 
1997 Congressional Plan A and to the plan eventually enacted. (See Attachment 97C-27R-11 for 
the plan proposed by Senator Cochrane). Representative Morgan’s primary goal in releasing the 
plan at that time was to establish that a redistricting plan could be drawn in time for the 1996 
elections. That plan was never considered by the General Assembly after the public hearing. 

12 

 



    

# * 
(b) 1997 Congressional Plan A: This was the first plan released by Senator Cooper to 

the Senate Select Committee on Redistricting on February 20, 1997. The plan was approved by the 
Committee on March 19. 1997 as Senate Bill 433, but was withheld from a vote on the Senate floor 
as negotiations between the House and Senate continued on a compromise plan. This plan is 
contained in 3 different forms in Attachment 97C-27R-2: as released on February 20; as re-released 
on February 24 with a contingent zero-deviation plan; and as released again on March 18 as Senate 
Bill 433. 

(c) 1997 House Congressional Plan A.1: This was the first plan released by 
Representative McMahan to the House Committee on Congressional Redistricting. It was presented 
at the February 25, 1997 meeting of the committee. The plan was never voted on by the committee. 
See Attachment 97C-27R-3. 

(d) 97 House Congress Plan G: This plan was submitted to the House Committee on 
Congressional Redistricting on March 19, 1997. The Committee approved it and had it introduced 
as a committee bill (House Bill 586). The bill was sent back to Committee. (See Attachment 97C- 
27R-4). 

(e) 97 HOUSE/SENATE PLAN: This plan represented the plan agresd to by the House 
and the Senate. The plan was approved by the House Committee on Congressional Redistricting 
on March 25, 1997. The plan was amended on the floor of the House bv Rep. Ronnie Sutton. and 
the amended version was sent to the Senate as 97 HOUSE/SENATE PLAN A. See €97C-27H for 
a discussion of the Sutton amendment. See Attachment 97C-27R-3 for this plan. 

9:8 House Committee Amendments 

(a) Blue Amendment: Representative Dan Blue offered an amendment that was designed 
primarily to preserve the 4th district essentially in its 1992 form instead of having it divided between 
the 2nd and 4th district. The amendment was rejected. See Attachment 97C-27R-6. 

(b) Sutton amendment: Representative Ronnie Sutton of Robeson County offered an 
amendment to shift a predominantly Native American precinct in Robeson County from District 8 
back to District 7 and to “make up the population difference” in Cumberland County. 
Representative Sutton did not identify which precincts in Cumberland County should be moved to 
account for this change. Counsel to the Committee suggested that he make this change as a floor 
amendment to the bill so that the appropriate precincts could be identified and the population data 
recalculated on the computer. For purposes of the proposed back-up plan containing zero 
population deviation (97 HOUSE/SENATE PLAN 0), census blocks within a precinct would also 
have to be identified and moved and the population figures recalculated to ensure that there was still 
zero population deviation in Districts 7 and 8. Representative Sutton’s amendment was defeated in 
committee. (Note: Representative Sutton offered an amendment on the floor the following day, 
complete with a statistical analysis. See below). 

13 

 



    

-  @® 
3. House Floor Amendments 

(a) Representative Sutton offered an amendment on second reading of the bill, complete 
with statistical analysis, to both the primary plan and the alternate zero deviation plan. His 
amendment moved a predominantly Native American precinct from District 8 to District 7, moved 
Fort Bragg from District 7 to District 8, and changed western Cumberland County and western 
Fayetteville to offset the population difference in District 7 created by the transfer of Fort Bragg. 
This amendment passed 117-0. See Attachment 97C-27R-7. The recorded vote is attached as 
Attachment 97C-28F-4H. 

(b) Representative Mickey Michaux offered the following three related amendments to 
House Bill 586 on second reading of the bill: : 

(1) Fitch/Michaux Plan A (See Attachment 97C-27R-8) 

(2) Fitch/Michaux Plan B (See Attachment 97C-27R-9) 

(3) Fitch/Michaux Plan C (See Attachment 97C-27R-10) 

Representative Michaux announced that the purpose of his amendments was to maximize 
the minority vote by creating more minority influence districts. See House floor debate, Attachment 
97C-28F-4F (1). pp. 9-10. 

Each of these amendments contained a northeastern majority-minority district (District 1) 
comparable to the proposed District 1 in House Bill 586. The percentage of African American 
population (total population) of District 1 in all three Fitch/Michaux plans was 50.23%. (It is 
50.27% in the enacted plan). Each of the amendments also contained a new District 5 running from 
Durham to Greensboro and a District 12 running from Charlotte to Winston-Salem. In Plan A. 
District 5 runs from Granville County through Durham into Greensboro. In Plans B and C, District 
5 runs from Durham to Greensboro and then to High Point. The amendments also had variations 
in District 7. In Plan B, Robeson County is in District 8. In Plan C, Robeson County is in District 
7. 

| 

The percentage of African American and Native American population, based on 1990 census 
data, for Districts 1, 5, 7, and 12 in the Fitch/Michaux Plans were as follows. (Note: for District 7, 
the first number is African American population percentage; the second number is Native American 
population percentage. For the other districts, the number is African American population 
percentage): 

14 

 



    

* iw 

  

District | District 5 District 7 District 12 

Plan A: 50.23 33.88 29.62/8.61 37.44 

Plan B: 50.23 34.41 32.17/39 37.66 

Plan C: 50.23 34.41 30.02/8.55 37.66 

All three amendments were voted on in the House and defeated by the following margins: 
Plan A (90 to 27); Plan B (90 to 26); Plan C (87 to 30). The recorded votes on these amendments 
are attached as Attachment 97C-28F-4H. 

Representative Michaux's amendments were rejected because they did not preserve the 
partisan balance in House Bill 586 nor did they preserve the cores of the existing districts in the 
Piedmont. Plan B would have placed two Democratic incumbents in the same district: 
Congressman McIntyre from Robeson County and Congressman Hefner from Cabarrus County. 
All three plans (A, B, and C) would have placed two Republican incumbents together in District 6: 
Congressman Burr and Congressman Coble. 

In addition, all three plans would seriously weaken the ability of the African-American 
incumbent in District 12 (Congressman Watt) to win re-election. The African-American percentags 
in District 12 is only 37.66 percent in Plans B and C and 37.44 percent in Plan A --- approximately 
nine percent lower than the African-American percentage of District 12 in the enacted plan 
(46.67%). 

The three Fitch/Michaux plans also reduce the percentage of African Americans in Districts 
2.3, 4 and 8 as compared to the enacted plan, as shown below: 

  
Dist. 2 Dist. 3 Dist. 4 Dist. 8 

Enacted plan 27.91 19.79 21.02 27.73 
Fitch/Michaux A 23.62 18.82 19.55 18.62 
Fitch/Michaux B 23.731 16.77 18.93 20.90* 
Fitch/Michaux C 23.71 16.77 18.93 23.06 

*This plan (B) also includes a Native American population of 8.64% in District 8. 

4. Plans Offered in Senate Committee 

Senator Betsy Cochrane offered an alternative plan, Cochrane Congress (Attachment 97C- 
27R-11), at the March 19, 1997 meeting of the Senate Committee. This plan was offered as an 
alternative to the plan offered by Senator Cooper (1997 Congressional Plan A). Senator Cochrane's 
plan was rejected by the Committee. See the minutes from the Senate Committee meeting for that 

15 

 



~ » 
day in Attachment 97C-28F-4D(3) and §97C-27N for extensive discussion on Senator Cochrane’s 
plan and why it was not accepted. 

5, Plans Offered on Senate Floor 

Senator Cochrane offered her plan again. See the discussion above. The plan was defeated 
by a vote of 27 to 18. See Attachment 97C-28F-4H for the recorded vote on the amendment. 

6. Plans Discussed in Negotiations 

Senator Cooper and Representative McMahan were involved in negotiations with each other 
for nearly three weeks in an effort to develop a plan that both the House and the Senate could agree 
to. These negotiations centered primarily on the division of Wake County between the 2nd and 4th 
districts. 

Several proposed plans were exchanged during this time. The plans constituted a series of 
offers and counteroffers that gradually moved the Senate and House closer together. This series of 
changes can best be understood in light of the original plans released by both sides (1997 
Congressional Plan A in the Senate and 1997 House Congressional Plan A.1 in the House) and how 
those plans came about. | 

In developing the Senate's initial plan as well as subsequent plans. Senator Cooper consulted 
with members of the congressional delegation and members of the Senate, particularly Senator Frank 
Ballance, Senator Leslie Winner. Senator Bill Martin. and Senator Marc Basnight. Senator Ballance. 
an African-American and the Deputy President Pro Tempore of the Senate. was consulted about the 
placement of counties in the northeastern part of the state -- the area in which he resides (Warren 
County) -- including the location of the boundaries of the new 1st district. Senator W inner, counsel 
for the plaintiffs in the Gingles litigation in the early 1980s and a resident of Charlotte, was 
consulted about the composition of the 12th district, which includes much of Charlotte. Senator 
Martin, an African-American representing much of Greensboro and Guilford C ounty, was consulted 
both as to statewide plan issues and the placement of parts of High Point and Greensboro in the 12th 
district. Senator Basnight, President Pro Tempore of the Senate, was consulted on the plan generally 
and on the placement of counties in the northeast. Senator Basnight also resides in the northeast 
(Dare County). Senators Basnight and Ballance together represent most of northeastern North 
Carolina. 

The initial Senate plan was perceived by many Republicans as treating incumbent Republican 
congressman Walter Jones (3rd District) unfairly (see, for example, the comments of Representative 
McMahan to the House Redistricting Committee on February 25, 1997 at Attachment 97C-28F- 
4E(2)). The House Republicans felt that the 3rd district was perhaps their most critical district and 
that the Senate's proposal, especially in the 3rd district, threatened the 6-6 partisan balance. Rep. 
McMahan responded by releasing a plan (1997 House Congressional Plan A.1) that in many respects 
resembled the Senate plan. However, Rep. McMahan’s plan also addressed the concerns about the 
3rd district and created other intentional differences between the two plans to use as “bargaining 

16  



* >» 
chips” in negotiating primarily on three districts -- the 2nd, the 3rd, and the 4th. Representative 
McMahan also consulted with numerous individuals, including African-American and other 
members of the House and Democratic and Republican members of the North Carolina 
congressional delegation. 

Although the boundaries of the 1st District were affected by changes in the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th 
districts, these changes did not significantly affect the percentage of African-Americans in the 1st 
District. This percentage fluctuated about two-tenths of one percent as a result of this series of 
changes. The enacted 1st district is similar to the 1st district that was originally proposed by Senator 
Cooper after consultation with Senators Ballance and Basnight. As enacted. it includes more of the 
territory of the existing Ist district than the original House plan, thus keeping more of 
Congresswoman Clayton’s current constituency intact in the district. At the same time, the counties 
in the coastal/Tidewater region (Chowan, Pasquotank, Perquimans, Currituck, and Tyrrell) are able 
to remain together with the coastal counties with whom they share economic and other interests. 

Differences between the House and Senate plans in the 12th district were resolved quickly. 
The House agreed to include Winston-Salem in the 12th district in one of its first counter-offers to 
the Senate, recognizing that it was the only major city in the Triad area not included in the urban- 
based 12th district. 

After the 3rd district and 12th district were resolved, the negotiations focused on the dividing 
line in Wake County between the 2nd and 4th districts. The Senate considered that many of the 
House plans for the 2nd district were not consistent with the goal of keeping a partisan balance and p g pmgap 
the House felt that the 2nd district in the Senate plans did not reflect the partisan makeup of the prior 
2nd district. This issue was the last to be resolved. 

Plans Presented at Public Hearing 

Several plans were presented at the public hearings. These plans are contained as exhibits 
to the public hearing transcripts and are included in Attachments 97C-28F-3A and -3B. Of these 
plans, it is believed that only three were ever introduced as bills or offered as amendments: the plan 
presented by Senator Cochrane (offered as an amendment to the first Senate plan and to the plan that 
was eventually enacted); a plan introduced by Representative Steve Wood (House Bill 599); and a 
plan introduced by Representative Robert Grady (House Bill 585). See Attachment 97C-27R-11. 
Neither Representative Grady nor Representative Wood offered his plan as an amendment to House 
Bill 386. 

Public Access and Other Plans 

The legislature provides access to the public so that any member of the public may draw a 
redistricting plan. The legislature also provides a qualified staff person to assist members of the 
public in using the public access redistricting computer. Numerous plans have been drawn by 
members of the public and interest groups using the public access computer. Attachment 97C-27R- 

17  



— 
12 contains a list of all congressional plans drawn by legislative staff, the public and others since 
January 1, 1996. The legislative staff has reviewed this list and, after eliminating plans that were 
duplicates, has produced summary reports on all staff plans and public access plans, including some 
plans for which the districts were not completed or which were attempts to draw only certain districts. A map is also included with the reports. The reports provide summary information on 
population, voting age population, registration, and elections of the districts. This information is 
included in Attachment 97C-27R-12. 

197C-28A. Demographic Information 

See the 1992 Submission at C-28A. See Attachment 97C-27A-2 for demographic data based 
on the 1990 census and 1990 voter registration data and estimated 1996 voter registration data. See 
Attachment 97C-28A-1 for 1997 population projections. 

97C-28B. Maps 

1. Maps of the prior districts (Congressional Base Plan 10) are contained in the States 
previous submission as Attachment 2C-27A. 

Maps of the new districts (97 HOUSE/SENATE PLAN A and 97 HOUSE/SENATE 
PLAN A 0) are contained in Attachment 97C-27A-2. Two large color maps are included as 
Attachment 97C-27A-3. 

Not applicable. 

Thematic maps of minority concentration by county (based on 1990 census data) are 
contained in the previous submission at C-28B. 

4. Not applicable. 

Not applicable. 

6. Not applicable. 

197C-28C. Annexation Information 

Not applicable. 

- 97C-28D. Election returns 

Election returns for the following elections are attached as follows: 

1992 congressional primary elections Attachment 97C-28D-1  



# oe 
1992 congressional general election Attachment 97C-28D-2 
1994 congressional primary elections Attachment 97C-28D-3 
1994 congressional general election Attachment 97C-28D-4 l 
1996 congressional primary elections Attachment 97C-28D-3 
1996 congressional general election Attachment 97C-28D-6 

M97C-28E. Language usage 

Not applicable. 

{97C-28F. Publicity and Participation Relating to Congressional Redistricting Plans 

1. An index of articles from major North Carolina newspapers is included as Attachment 
97C-28F-1. These articles cover two different periods with respect to the North Carolina General 
Assembly’s involvement with redistricting: (1) the summer of 1996, when Shaw was decided and 
the legislature considered the feasibility of drawing new districts at that time and (2) the period since 
the reconvening of the legislature in late January, 1997. 

2, Copies of notices for the two public hearings are included as Attachment 97C-28F. 
The first public hearing was held July 24, 1996, by the House Committee on Rules, Calendar, and 

Operations of the House. The notice of this hearing, including legal ads published in major 
newspapers throughout the State. are included at Attachment 97C-28EF-2A. 

The second hearing was a joint public hearing of the House and Senate redistricting 
committees on February 26. 1997. The notice of this hearing. including legal ads published in major 
newspapers throughout the State, are included at Attachment 97C-28F-2B. 

A list of newspapers in which the hearing notices were published is included as Anachment 
97C-28F-4J. 

- 

3. Copies of the transcripts of both public hearings and exhibits by speakers are 
included. The 1996 public hearing transcript is included as Attachment 97C-28F-3A. The 1997 
public hearing transcript is included as Attachment 97C-28F-3B. Speaker and visitor registration 
sheets for the hearings are included. 

4. The following statements, speeches, and minutes concerning the redistricting process 
are included: 

(a) Statement of Representative Richard Morgan, Chair of the House Committee on 
Rules, Calendar, and Operations of the House, to that Committee on July 16, 1996, concerning a 
proposed redistricting plan “Congress-96-001.” (Attachment 97C-28F-4A). 

(b) Affidavits of Senator Cooper and Representative Richard Morgan to the federal 
district court on behalf of Senate President Pro Tempore Marc Basnight and House Speaker Harold 

19  



— a 
Brubaker, respectively, on the issue of whether redistricting could be accomplished in time for the 
1996 elections. (Attachment 97C-28F-4B). 

(c) Letter from Senator Roy Cooper, Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on 
Redistricting, to Attorney General Mike Easley stating the position of Senate leadership that 
redistricting could not be accomplished prior to the 1996 elections. (Attachment 97C-28F-4C). 

(d) Minutes and notices of the Senate Select Committee on Redistricting: 

July 10, 1996 meeting 

February 20, 1997 meeting 

March 19, 1997 meeting 

March 27, 1997 meeting 

Attachment 97C-28F-4D(1) 

Attachment 97C-28F-4D(2) 

Attachment 97C-28F-4D(3) 

Attachment 97C-28F-4D(4) 

Minutes of the House Committee on Congressional Redistricting 

February 12, 1997 meeting 

February 25, 1997 meeting 

March 19, 1997 meeting 

March 25, 1997 meeting 

Transcript of the House floor debate 
Transcript of the Senate floor debate 

House Journal Excerpt 

Senate Journal Excerpt 

Recorded votes 

Attachment 97C-28F-4E(1) 

Attachment 97C-28F-4E(2) 

Attachment 97C-28F-4E(3) 
Attachment 97C-28F-4E(4) 

Attachment 97C-28F-4F(1) 
Attachment 97C-28F-4F(2) 

Attachment 97C-28F-4G(1) 

Attachment 97C-28F-4G(2) 

Attachment 97C-28F-4H 

Correspondence 

Senator Cooper Attachment 97C-28F-4I(1) 
Rep. McMahan Attachment 97C-28F-41(2) 

(G) Media list Attachment 97C-28F-4] 

197C-28G. Availability of Submission 

1: A copy of the public notice that will be published announcing the submission to the 
United States Attorney General of the materials required by 28 C.F.R. Part 51, informing the 
public that a complete duplicate copy of the submission is available for public inspection at the 
Legislative Office Building, Raleigh, North Carolina, and inviting comments to be addressed to 
the United States Attorney General is Attachment 97C-28G-1. 

20  



  

* » 
2. The publication list for the public notice of the submission is Attachment 97C-23G- 

2(a) and the distribution list for the public notice is Attachment 97C-28G-2(D). 

97C-28H. Minority Group Contacts 

A list of minority contacts is maintained by the legislature for redistricting. The individuals 
and organizations on the list were contacted about public hearings on redistricting by mailing a copy 

of the notice of the hearing. The minority contact list is attached as Attachment 97C-28H-1. 

21 

 



  

ORTH CAROLINA District Statistics 

JOINT 
EXHIBIT 

101B 
  

  

  

  

  

Date: 1/23/92 
Time: 2:17 p.m. 

ious Plan: 1992 Congressional Base Plan #10 Page: 1 
Plan type: Congressional Base Plan ; 

District Number Total Ideal District XY District 
Name Members Population Population Variance Variance District 1~ TT. 1 337,386 552,386 0 0.00 

District 2 1 552,386 552,386 0 0.00% 
District 3 1 552,387 552,386 1 0.00% 
District 4 1 552,387 552,386 1 0.00% 
District 5 1 552,386 552,386 0 0.00% 
District 6 1 552,386 552,386 0 0.00% 
District 7 1 552,386 552,386 0 0.00% 
District 8 1 552,387 552,386 1 0.00% 
District 9 1 552,387 552,386 1 0.00% 
District 10 1 552,386 552,386 0 0.00% 
District 11 l 552,387 552,386 1 0.00% 
District 12 1 552,386 552,386 0 0.00% 
Total 12 6,628,637 6,628,632 0 0.00% 

PLANWVIDE STATISTICS: 
Range of populations: 
Ratio range: 

Absolute range: 

Ahsolute overall range: 

- ative 
—-elative 

Absolute 

Relative 

Standard 

range: 
overall range: 

deviation: 

mean deviation: 

mean deviation: 

552,386 to 552,387 
1 

0 

1 

a 
28 

0
 Fk 

.0000 

to 1 

.00 to 0.00% 

.00% 

42 
.00% 

.6455 

 



  

IORTH CAROLINA 

  

  

  

District Summary Date: 1/23/92 
Total Populations, All Ages Time: 2:18 p.m. 

bes. Plan: 1992 Congressional Base Plan #10 Page: 1 
Plan type: Congressional Base Plan 

District Total Total Total Total Total Total 
Name Pop. Vhite Black Am. Ind. Asian/PI Other 

District 1 552,386 229,829 316,290 3,424 1,146 1,698 
100.00% 41.61% 57.26% 0.62% 0.21% 0.31% 

District 2 532,386" 421,083 121,212 3,154 4,077 2,860 
100.00% 76.23% 21.94% 0.57% 0.74% 0.52% 

District 3 552,387 423,398 118,640 2,436 4,044 3,869 
100.00% 76.65% 21.48% 0.44% 0.73% 0.70% 

District 4 552,387 "426,361 111,168 1,548 10,602 2,714 
100.00% 77.19% 20.13% 0.28% 1.92% 0.49% 

District 5 552,386 463,183 83,824 1,083 2,448 1,848 
100.00% 83.85% 15.17% 0.20% 0.44% 0.33% 

District 6 552,386 504,465 41,329 1,973 3,489 1,129 
100.00% 91.32% 7.48% 0.36% 0.63% 0.20% 

District 7 552,386" 394,855. 103,428 40,166 5,835 8,102 
100.00% 71.48% 18.72% 7:22 1.06% 1.47% 

jer 8 552,387 . 402,406 ~ 128,417 13,789 4,232 34543 
~~ 100.00% 72.85% 23.25% 2.50% 0.77% 0.64% 

District 9 552,387 492,424 49,308 1,729 7,373 1,553 
100.00X% 89.14% B.93~ 0.31% 1.33% 0.28% 

District 10 552,386 517,542 30,155 942 2.238 1,510 
100.00 93.69% 5.46% 0.17% 0.41% 0.27% 

District 11 552,387 502,058 39,767 7,835 1,791 936 
100.00% 90.89% 7.20% 1.42% 0.32% 0.17% 

District 12 552,386 230,888 . 312,791 2,077 4,891 1,739 
100.00% 41.80% 56.63% 0.38% 0.89% 0.312 

Total 6,628,637 5,008,492 1,456,329 80,156 52,166 31,501 
100.00% 15.56% 21.97% 1.21% 0.79% 0.48% 

 



ORTH CAROLINA District’ Summary Date: 1/23/92 
Voting Age Populations Time: 2:20 p.m. 

Plan: 1992 Congressional Base Plan #10 
Plan type: Congressional Base Plan 

District Total 

~~ 
Page: 1 

  

District 1 

District 

District 

District 

District 

District 

District 

ict 

District 

District 

District 

District 

Total 

Vot. Age 
Vot. Age 

White 
  

399,969 
100.00% 

420,087 
100.00% 

413,263 
100.00% 

428,984 
100.00% 

428,782 
100.00% 

428,096 
100.00% 

414,413 
100.00% 

403,678 
100.00% 

421,615 
100.00 

421,456 
100.00% 

430,457 
100.00% 

411,687 
100.00% 

5,022,487 
100.00% 

181,933 
45.49% 

328,676 
78.24% 

324,808 
78.60% 

336,850 
78.52% 

364,886 
85.10% 

393,27] 
91.87% 

306,754 
74.02% 

305,366 
75.65% 

380,364 
90.22 

397,476 
94.31% 

396,064 
92.01% 

186,115 
45.21% 

3,902,563 
77.70% 

Vot. Age 

Black 
Vot. Age 

Am. Ind. 

Vot. Age 

Asian/PI 
  

213,602 
53.40% 

84,311 
20.07% 

81,170 
19.64% 

81,210 
18.932 

60,204 
14.04% 

30,188 
7.05% 

71,071 
17.15% 

84,386 
20.90% 

33,849 
8.03% 

20,837 
4.94% 

27,438 
6.37% 

219,610 
53.34% 

1,007,876 
20.07% 

2,428 
0.61% 

2.173 
0.52% 

1,755 
0.42% 

1,239 
0.29% 

822 
0.19% 

1,433 
0.33% 

26,489 
6.39% 

8,699 
2.13% 

1,275 
0.30% 

700 
0.17% 

5,126 
1.19% 

1,529 
0.37% 

53,668 
1.071 

Vot. Age 

Other 
  

844 
0.21% 

3,074 
0.73% 

2,922 
0.71% 

7,782 
1.81% 

1,650 
0.38% 

2,407 
0.56% 

4,201 
1.01% 

2,956 
0.73% 

5,059 
1.20% 

1,409 
0.33% 

1,237 
0.29% 

3,283 
0.80% 

36,824 
0.73% 

1,110 
0.28% 

1,963 
0.47% 

2,608 
0.63% 

1,903 
0.44% 

1,221 
0.28% 

798 
0.19% 

5,898 
1.42% 

2,271 
0.567% 

1,069 
0.25% 

1,036 
0.25% 

592 
0.14% 

1,150 
0.28% 

21,619 
0.43%  



District Summary 
Registration 

7 Plan: 1992 Congressional Base Plan #10 

Plan type: Congressional Base Plan 
District 

© 

" JRTH CAROLINA 1/23/92 
2:19 p.m. 

Page: 1 

Date: 

Time: 
~ 

  Total White Black Other Dem. 

District 

District 

District 

District 

District 

District 

District 

District 

District 

District 

District 

Total 

Name Reg. 

270,229 

100.00% 

270,061 
100.00% 

248,318 
100.00% 

306,226 
100.00% 

293,437 
100.00% 

292,842 
100.00% 

218,613 
100.00% 

254,082 
100.00% 

296,124 
100.00% 

297,917 
100.00% 

318,958 
100.00% 

283,076 
100.00% 

3,349,883 
100.00% 

Reg. 

132,323 

48.97% 

219,727 
81.36% 

201,699 
81.23% 

250,780 
81.89% 

255,458 
87.06% 

273,216 
93.30% 

162,148 
74.17% 

197,961 
77.91% 

270,843 
91.46% 

283,928 
95.30% 

299,765 
93.98% 

129,930 
45.90% 

2,677,718 
79.94% 

Reg. 

136,536 

50.532 

48,153 
17.83% 

45,684 
18.40% 

53,212 
17.38% 

37,427 
12.75% 

18,907 
6.46% 

38,413 
17.57% 

52,140 
20.52% 

24,125 
8.15% 

13,611 
4.57% 

16,847 
5.28% 

151,835 
53.54% 

636,610 
19.00% 

Reg. 

1,296 

0.48% 

2,196 
0.81% 

955 
0.38% 

2,238 
0.73% 

550 
0.19% 

726 
0.25% 

18,104 
8.28% 

3,973 
1.56% 

1,154 
0.39% 

398 
0.13% 

2,338 
0.73% 

1,568 
0.55% 

35,496 
1.06% 

Reg. 

235,445 

87.13% 

190,564 
70.56% 

173,132 
69.72% 

191,876 
62.66% 

178,786 
60.93% 

145,337 
49.63% 

154,517 
70.68% 

166,645 
65.59% 

148,223 
50.05% 

135,660 
45.54% 

192,259 
60.28% 

216,967 
76.65% 

2,129,411 
63.57% 

Repub. 
Reg. 

29,509 
10.92% 

66,366 
24.57% 

64,771 
26.08% 

88,762 
28.99% 

97,316 
33.16% 

128,153 
43.76% 

55,296 
25.29% 

74,262 
29.23% 

124,786 
42.14% 

142,775 
47.92% 

107,923 
33.84% 

51,900 
18.33% 

1,031,819 
30.80% 

 



  

JB¢ NORTH CAROLINA District Summary Date: "3/14/97 
Elections Time: 4:59 p.m. 

Plan: 1992 Cong plan £10 ~- copy 1 Page: 1 ?1... type: Congressional Base Plan 

District Senate Senate Lt. Gov Lt. Gov Court court Name Gantt Helms Rand Gardner Lewis Smith Jistrictil 92,395 61,852 102,669 51,356 106, 349 38,667 
59.90% 40.10% 66.66% 33.34% 73.34% 26.66% 

istrict 2 67,911 99,914 78,686 83,370 80,513 73,717 
40.47% 59.53% 46.82% 53.18% 52.20% 47.80% 

strict 3 62,122 89,207 74,899 82,722 77,490 68,209 
41.05% 58.95% 47.52% 52.48% 53.18% 46.82% 

district 4 115,192 81,089 100,795 89,383 87,046 84,566 
58.69% 41.31% 53.00% 47.00% 50.72% 49.28% 

Jistrict. 5 17,282 99,863 93,553 94,460 86,868 £5,457 
43.63% 56.37% 49.76% 50.24% 5 50.41% 49.59% 

district 6 62,881 112,994 72,039 107,579 62,530 104,170 
35.75% 64.25% 40.11% 59.89% 37.51% 62.49% 

istrict 37 57,098 65,188 70,412 56,539 65,173 51,469 
46.69% 53.31% 55.46% 44.54% 55.87% 44.13% 

istrict 8 67,018 83,500 73,861 43,239 73; 151 68,099 
44.52% 55.48% 52.16% 47.84% 51.79% 48.21% 

) £t 9 80,275 98,139 71,404 106,527 57,711 89.533 
44.99% 55.01% 40.13% 59.87% 36.70% 63.302 

district 10 63,605 121,348 72,925 121,632 68,441 117,387 
34.39% 65.61% 37.48% 62.52% 36.83% 63.17% 

districe 11] 87,482 100,302 26,001 103,966 94,114 83,708 
46.59% 53.41% 43.01% 51.99% 50.11% 49.89% 

istrict 12 117,680 46,967 101,907 48,884 93,695 43,469 
71.47% 28.53% 67.58% 32.42% 68.31%. 31.69% 

‘otal 950,941 1,060,363 1,015,155 1,025,657 953,081 928,451 
47.28% 52.72% 49.74% 50.26% 50.65% 49.35% 

 



JOINT 
EXHIBIT 

103B 
      “7” >NORTH CAROLINA District Statistics 

  
  

  

Date: 5/19/98 
3 Time: 11:09 a.m. Plan: 98 CONGRESSIONAL PLAN A Page: 1 Plan type: CONGRESSIONAL WITH 97 HOME SEATS 

; District . Number - Total Ideal District ~ % District Name Members Population Population Variance Variance District 1 
1 552,161 552,386 -225 -0.04% District 2 
1 552,152 552,386 -234 -0.04% District 3 
1 552,622 552,386 236 0.04% District 4 
I 551,842 552,386 -544 -0.10% District S 
1 551, 848 552,386 -538 -0.10% District 6 
4 552,415 552,386 29 0.01% District 7 1 552,382 552,386 4 0.00% District 8- 4 1 .553,143 7. 883.386 757 0.14% District 9 
1 552,424 552,386 38 0.01% District 10 
1 553,092 552,386 706 0.13% District 11 
1 552,089 552,386 -297 -0.05% District 12 
1 552.467 552,386 81 0.01% Total 

12 6,628,637 6,628,632 0 0.00% 
PLANWIDE STATISTICS: 

Range of populations: 551,842 to 553,143 Ratio range: 
1.0024 

Absolute range: -544 to 757 
Absolute overall range: 1.301 

ative range: =0.10 to 0.14% 
ative overall range: 0.24% 

Absolute mean deviation: 307.42 
Relative mean deviation: 0.06% 

Standard deviation: 399.4802 

 



~~ NORTH CAROLINA District Summary 
Total Populations, All Ages 

Plan: 98 CONGRESSIONAL PLAN A Plan type: CONGRESSIONAL WITH 97 HOME SEATS 
District Total 

Name Pop. 

Date: 5/19/98 
Time: 11:09 a.m. 

Page: 1 
  

  Total 

White 
Total 

Black 
Total 

Am. Ind. 

- Total 

Asian/PT 
Total 

  
District 

District 

District 

District 

District 

District 

District 

District 

District 

District 

District 

Total 

552,161 

100.00% 

$52,152 

100.00% 

552,622 

100.00% 

551,842 

100.00% 

551, 848 

100.00% 

552,415 

100.00% 

552,382 

100.00% 

553,143 

100.00% 

552,424 

100.00% 

553,092 

100.00% 

552,089 

100.00% 

552,467 

100.00% 

6,628,637 

100.00% 

268,458 

48.62% 

388,234 

70.31% 

429,481 

77.72% 

421,224 

76.33% 

469,996 

85.17% 

430,794 

77.98% 

371,545 

67.26% 

373,569 

67.54% 

486,030 

87.98% 

510,697 

82.33% 

512.127 

92.76% 

346,337 

62.69% 

5,008,492 

75.56% 

277,565 

50.27% 

154,108 

27.91% 

. .109,353 

19.79% 

116,006 

21.02% 

76,638 

13.89% 

113,427 

20.53% 

133,985 

24.26% 

153,396 

27.73% 

58,438 

10.58% 

37,583 

6.80% 

29,276 

5.30% 

196,549 

35.58% 

1,456,329 
21.97% 

3,461 

0.63% 

2,267 

0.41% 

2,131. 

0.39% 

1,454 

0.26% 

1.15] 

0.21% 

2,505 

0.45% 

40, 845 

7.39% 

14,294 

2.58% 

1,388 

0.25% 

873 

0.16% 

7,888 

1.43% 

1,889 

0.34% 

80,156 

1.21% 

1,238 

0.22% 

4,183 

0.76% 

-5,625 

1.02% 

10,770 

1.95% 

2,450 

0.44% 

4,241 

0.77% 

2.781 

0.51% 

5,541 

1.00% 

5.371 
0.97% 

2,380 

0.43% 

1,838 

0.33% 

5,738 

1.04% 

"52,166 
0.79% 

Other 

1,440 

0.26% 

3,363 

0.61% 

6,027 

1.09% 

2.391 

0.43% 

1,603 

0.29% 

1,447 

0.26% 

3.2186 

0.58% 

6,343 

1.15% 

1,198 

0.22% 

1,559 

0.28% 

960 

0.17% 

1,954 

0.35% 

31,501 

0.48% 

 



“NORTH CAROLINA 

Voting Age Populations Time: 11:09 Plan: 98 CONGRESSIONAL PLAN A Page: 1 Plan type: CONGRESSIONAL WITH 97 HOME SEATS 
: District Total Vot. Age Vot. Age Vot. Age vot. Age Vot. Age Name Vot. Age White Black Am. Ind. Asian/PI Other 

District Summary 
Date: sf 

  

  

  

District 1 

District 

District 

District 

District 

District 

District 

District 

District 

District 

District 

403,065 

100.00% 

419,099 

100.00% 

417,769 

100.00% 

427,266 

100.00% 

426,737 

100.00% 

426,824 

100.00% 

408, 299 

100.00% 

402, 666 

100.00% 

416,251 

100.00% 

426,184 
100.00% 

430,111 

100.00% 

418,216 

100.00% 

5,022,487 

100.00% 

211,273 

52.42% 

303,740 

72.47% 

330,971 
79.22% 

332,013 

77.71% 

367,521 

86.12% 

339,863 

79.63% 

287,254 

70.35% 

283,487 

70.40% 

371,553 

89.26% 

396,840 

93.11% 

402,639 

93.61% 

275,409 

65.85% 

3,902,563 

77.70% 

187,573 

46.54% 

108,234 

25.83% 

76,672 

18.35% 

84,535 

19.79% 

55,615 

13.03% 

8),221 

15.03% 

90,009 

22.04% 

101,961 

25.32% 

39,319 

9.45% 

26,129 

6.13% 

20,455 

4.76% 

136,153 

32.56% 

1,007,876 

20.07% 

2,450 

0.61% 

1,649 

0.39% 

1,657 
0.40% 

1,118 

0.26% 

861 

0.20% 

1.819 

0.43% 

26,816 

6.57% 

9,096 

2.26% 

1,009 

0.24% 

664 

0.16% 

5.159 

1.20% 

1,370 

0.33% 

53,668 

1.07% 

872 

0.22% 

3,169 

0.76% 

4,012 

0.96% 

7.927 

1.86% 

1.718 

0.40% 

2.910 

0.68% 

2,067 

0.51% 

3,809 

0.97% 

3.572 

0.86% 

1,443 

0.34% 

1.257 

0.29% 

3,968 

0.95% 

36,824 
0.73% 

955 

0.24% 

2,307 

0.55% 

4,457 

1.07% 

1,673 

0.39% 

1.023 

0.24% 

1,012 

0.24% 

2,153 

0.53% 

4,24 
1.05% 

801 

0.19% 

1,108 

0.26% 

601 

0.14% 

1.316 

0.31% 

21,619 

0.43% 

 



4 # a 

  

*" "TORTH CAROLINA District Summary 

  

Date: 5/19/98 Registration Time: 11:10 a.m. Plan: 98 CONGRESSIONAL PLAN A Page: 1 Plan type: CONGRESSIONAL WITH 97 HOME SEATS 
District Total White Black Other ~Dem. Repub. ; Name Reg. Reg. Reg. Req. Reg. Reg. District 1 271,673 148,208 121,958 1.491 235 338 31, 393 100.00% 54.55% 44.89% 0.55% 86.62% 11.56% 

District 2 262,713 197,138 64,603 872°" ‘188.416 63,567 100.00% 75.04% 24.59% 0.37% 71.72% 24.20% 
District 3 — 213,448 177,975 . 34.801 688 148,801 54,152 - 100.00% 83.38% 16.30% 0.32% 69.71% 25.37% 
District 4 315,782 285.728 55,959 4,095 200,635 86,394 100.00% 80.98% 17.72% 1.30% 63.54% 27.36% 
District § 290,655 255,898 34,134 623 169,480 103,142 100.00% 88.04% 11.74% 0.21% 58.31% 35.49% 
District 6 302,789 241,483 60,459 847 166,447 116,292 100.00% 79.75% 19.97% 0.28% 54.97% 38.41% 
district 7 273,584 193,552 61,670 18,322 “200.576 63,969 100.00% 70.76% 22.54% 6.70% 73.35% 23.38% 

.ct 8 333,898 170,879 58,907 4,112 ' 160,654 61,417 100.00% 73.06% 25.18% 1.76% 68.70% 26.26% 
district 9 294,326 267,631 25,835 860 153,500 119,770 100.00% 90.93% 8.78% 0.29% 52.15% 40.69% 
district 10 302,951 285,988 16, 626 335°" 142,367 140,933 100.00% 94.40% 5.49% 0.11% 46.99% 46.54% 
districe 11 319,610 304,158 13,108 2,344 188,349 111,979 100.00% 95.17% 4.10% 0.73% 58.93% 35.04% 
district 12 268,454 179,100 88,550 807. © 174,710 78,752 100.00% 66.72% 32.99% 0.30% 65.08% 29.34% 
otal 3,349,883 2,677,778 636,610 35,496 2,129,411 1,031,819 100.00% 79.94% 19.00% 1.06% 63.57% 30.80% 

 



   
   

  

™" NORTH CAROLINA y ale District Summary 
Date: §/1 

Elections 
Time: 11:10 Plan: 98 CONGRESSIONAL PLAN A 

Page: 1 Plan type: CONGRESSIONAL WITH 97 HOME SEATS 
District Senate ' Senate Lt. Gov Lt. Gov .Court Court Name Gantt Helms Rand Gardner Lewis Smith District 1 

84,590 74,188 97, 349 60,092 101,516 44,207 53.28% 46.72% 61.83% 38.17% 69.66% 30.34% 
District 2 

77,449 87,350 82,802 79,483 80,919 67,993 47.00% 53.00% 51.02% 48.98% 54.34% 45.66% 
District 3 

%i 53,362 75,119 62,499 70,906 65,828 57,263. Kan is 41 .53% 53.47% 46.85% 53.15% 53.48% 46.52% 
District 4 116,953 81,994 104,429 91, 265 91,593 83,439 58.79% 41.21% 53.36% 46.64% 52.33% 47.67% 
District § 

¢ 68,536 110,048 84,789 103,153 78,140 92,392 38.38% 61.62% 45.11% 54.89% 45.82% 54.18% 
District 6 

80,468 94,977 B2.722 92,643 72,587 92,353 45.87% 54.13% 27.17% 52.83% 44.01% 55.99% 
District 7 

75,152 80,562 91,897 68,676 87,320 61,441 48.26% 51.74% 57.23% 42.77% S8.70% 41.30% 
 iisict 8 tT 64,574 71,664 76,221 61, 265 69,792 56,44 is 

47.40% 52.60% 55.44% 44 .56% 55.29% 44.71% 
District 9 

76,502 101,483 72,569 106,079 61,819 98, 686 42.98% 57.02% 40.62% 59.38% 38.52% 61.48% 

Districr ‘10 
70.730 115, 658 80,234 116,558 35,520 113,598 37.95% 62.05% 40.77% 59.23% 39.93% 60.07% 

Districec 11 
86.212 102.511 94,396 105, 889 91,924 96,040 45.93% S4.07% 47.13% 52.87% 48.91% 51.09% 

District 12 
96,411 65,809 85, 248 69,647 76,123 64,597 59.43% 40.57% 55.04% 44.96% 54.10% 45.90% 

Total 
950,941 1,060, 363 1,015,155 1,025,657 953,081 928,451 ; 47.28% 52.72% 49.74% 50.26% 50.65% 49.35% 

 



f 
 JoINT 
EXHIBIT 

126A 
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 
 
 

 
 

 
 

    
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 
 
 

 
 

  
  

 
 

 
 

 
 

  
 
 

  
 
 

  
 
   

  
 
 

  
   
 

      

  

 



   
   

   

    

     

     

    

   

  

  
  

  

96 Congress Winner /Cooper 1.0 — 

District 1 October 12, 1999 

  

  
    

  

  

  

  

LEGEND 

County Boundary n 

RIX XX] District 1 

ES NW] District 2 

he F==——"Y District 3 
mtn —] District 4 

Dom LN t==———] District 7 

[IIIT] District 8 

    

  
  

  

  

  

  

        

  

  

  
      

  

  

  

  
  

    
      

  

  

  

  

  

    
  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  
  

  

  
  

  

    
  
  

  

  

    
  

  
  

  

  
  

  

    
  

  

     

  

f x = = a 19 County | 

E wi P es 
* = ty 

1 Tse Y 
] 3 
x NN 
— \ ath 

- V1 Incheon < _- ET 
< 

I ll 
\ L \ , \, 

, , LY 8, 

\, AOR Sh 
¢ N RS SNE ™, * be 

2 \, ™ "\ ) \ > > ) - \ k “ 
Tey . ~S Hi NN \, ’N/ > > pa 

. \ NAS 355 2 k* wy \ “, N \ bY i, 5 > XL 
{ Ea) oy ~ NIN MATT ANY! 06% > J. 

) PCS RESIS SSR RRIRRAK, J CT | Dee Son w ul : NR R083: SRS RXR A NN a) ag MON RR RSS RIES E858 RRR SAE AN eS Ti N RN 0165008 6 Ju tal 0 220 telat 2a ede 2 0622 RK SGSKKA KS perierofl ras vont Ne, he : on 252535 REX RR Sa RK S35009S SHR SK TIN Re nN BN co030tuletotodeles Sotetetetatet canines FRYER AT K N, % x », ) 3% 4 LD IRE N/ ems CY R Cp hb RQ 2 > 0 

hol ci IRR RAITE P5RRRHKIR Pe a: : oo a A RRR Flute IRS Al PTERRK 3% Tr / aN \/ CS Sirs NS . pr : UTR Ws oo RITTER 8 So - 
  

  
  

  
  

  

  
  

  

    
    

        JOINT 
EXHIBIT 

  

  
  

  

  

  

  
  

  

    

  
  

  

  126B        

  

  

    
    

  

  
  

  

  
  

  

  

  
  

    
  

  

    

  N.C. General Assembly 

Legislative Services Ofc. 

Redistricting System 
Software Copyright 1990 
Public Systems Associates 

  
  

  

  

    

    

  

  
  

  

  
  

    

  

  
            

    

    

  

  
  

    

  
    

  

  

    

  

        

    



 
 
 
 

 
 

      

 
 

 
 
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

    
 
 

  

 
 

 
 

  
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

Ul 
=
 

A
 

Q
 

5 
>
 

)
 

Shay 

& 
S 

C
O
,
 

bg 
S 

f
=
 

V
E
N
 

=
 

Ei 
a
]
 

“~~ 
Se 

~~ 

%: 
S 

r
q
 
R
S
 

bls 
> 

~
 
L
O
 

B
o
t
 

S
g
 

By 
=
 

8 
O
x
 

> 
= 

3
 
2
 

Y 
3 

> 
3 

a
 

“
2
0
 

509 
To) 

= 
3 

Se 
a 

wi SON, 
EN 

all 
E
S
 

vw 
o
o
o
 

= 
— 

—~— 
try 

S
e
y
 

-
 

OO 
d
y
 

gd 
i 

Wy 
R
l
 

Q 
3) 

HE 
3 

"
I
Z
:
 
i
i
z
:
 

r
e
s
o
 

; 
wm 

Ww 
mo 

Ww 
Wm 

ow 
E
S
 

§
3
2
3
2
2
8
2
2
¢
3
 

T
o
e
 

Q
 

S
 

-— 
3 

3
 

% 
Z
 

i
 

th 
n
S
 

L 
$
e
 

§ 
~
~
 

. 
Z
 

Vo 
a3 

* 
P
R
 

R
a
 

- 

4 
7
 

=
 

os 
=
 
S
A
 

ps 
cl 

h
y
 

Q 
2 

kid 

| 
%
 

2
 

Coif 
(B 

i 
i
 

J 
IJ 

a
,
 

; 
= 

T
N
 
S
e
a
 

  
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 
 
 

  
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 
 
 

  

  
 
 

 
 

 
 

    
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

    
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

   

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

    
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

  
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

    
  

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

  
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

  
  

 
 

 
 

 
 

      
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

  
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

      
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

  
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

      
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

|] 
\ 

> 
=
 

| 

E
N
 

Bone. 
Ti 

n
F
 

- 
k 4 

i
 

.
 

3 
Ir 

1 

BR 
aS 

/ A 
P23 

L 
| | 

gl 
=
 

4 
b 

| 

a 
) 

By 
|
 

J 

1 hd i 
f h! 

A Ad 1 
i 

4 

ane 
% LY 

<
n
 

. 
4.4 

V t
n
 

A 

x
 

r
e
 

p
e
 

> 
£ 

S
n
 

+ 
L. 

1} 
f
e
 

fm 
jet 
S
t
 

(
)
)
 

4d 
AV 

A 
1 

es 
>
 

6 
§ 

Qo 
=
F
 

/ 
—
 

v4 
oO 

! 
—
 

7 c
o
m
e
 
QU 

| 
{ 

h
g
 

L 
—~. 

7
A
 

p
a
d
 

x
 

O
o
 

aN) 
/ 

7 
7
 

dif r
l
 

Ey 
S
o
m
 

Z5 
= 

TING 
- 

d
d
l
 

g 
id E
A
 

rt 
=
 

| 
rd 

i 
~ 

S
s
 

r
r
 

/ 
“
 
F
E
A
 

2
 

L 
x 

&* 

Tele 
0
0
0
0
0
0
 

08 
s 

£2 
7
 

2 
. 

; 
LF 

7 
p 

e
z
 

i 
=
 

=
 

oo 
= 

2 
a
L
 

Z 
i
’
 

LAER 
a
 

: 
p. 

z~ 
. pt 

ATT 
A 

x 
E 

= 
0 

7
4
 
7
 

f 
 ; 

—
—
 

. 
r
o
m
e
d
,
 

A
 

{ 
—
 

N
L
L
 

/ 
S
S
 

A
“
 

e
e
 
—
)
 

wn 
F
o
)
 

7
 

c
h
i
 
=
 

a 
w
n
 

#7 
yd 

7
 

a
.
 

re 

7
 

fo 
~
 

z 
: 

QO 
r
s
 

= 
S 

be 
C
A
 

Se 
3 

L
S
 

or 
A 

SS 
2 

) 
0
 

=
 

Z
i
 

a
 

S
a
 

1 

E 
2/7 

S
e
 

o 
i
 

=
 

r
y
 

~~ 
a 

A
A
 

; 
ri 
E
F
 

vA 

e
t
 

i= 
% 

=
%
 

© 
a 

3 
BS 

H 
i
g
 

¥ 
of 

Ac 
+ 

(@p) 
z 

C
y
 

3 
FiOS 

2 
J 

r
i
d
 

R
R
 

7
 

Z
z
 
L
A
 

I
N
 

2 
A
 

7
 

/ 
2 

5 
N 

4 
Pe 

7
7
 

r
p
 
7
 

i
 

x
X
 

rian 
\ 

ir 
o
r
 

2 
N
R
 

A
 

L
R
 

  
  

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

    
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

  

! 4 

Vd 

3 

Ne “Ny 

0% 

, 

h 

\, 

N\ 

2 

; 
'd 

£ 

pd 

7 
a 

  
oN 

: 
/ 

7 
d 

: 
\ 

i
 

f
r
 
r
d
 
7
 

A 
! i 

y 
vy. 

#” 
, 

4 
2 

Ne 
~ 

JS 
rd 

r
a
 

» 7
 

, /
]
 

7
 

d 
F 

#4 
ht 

5 
f
i
 

k
i
 

’
S
 

il 
’ 
i
h
 j 
A
 

pd 
w
v
 

Mu 
3 

; 
"ie 

rd 
/
 

7
 

id 
o
f
 

a
 

dey 
A 

5 
a
 

» 

h ¥ 

a 

i 

A 

  

> | 

THEE Naw 
A 

~ 

LY 

™ \, 

ph 

%, 

“ 

  

\ 

5 

AY 

    

bY 

4 

W \, 

~ 

N\, 

he \ 

    

N 
\ 

NN N ON ~ 

bo 
NS 

\ he" : 

Y ™ i 

a . 

Dnletthe Lonady 

Lis Coty 

[J 

se Com 

“ 

So 
oh 

oN 

4 

3 hb 

i WT 

oh 
NN 

$y 
NON, 
il 

NES 

N 
N 

ho 

% \ 

  

ia 

~ 

~ 
> 

BY 

oN 

  
  

      
 
 

 



i 

_-RTH CAROLINA 

  

District Summary 

  

    

Date: 9/ 7/99 

Total Populations, All Ages Time: 2:11 p.m. 
Plan: 96 CONGRESS WINNER/COOPER 1.0 Page: 1 

tvoe: Congressional Base Plan 

District Total Total Total Total Total Total 
-Name Poo. - White Black Am. Ind, Asian/PI Other 

rict 1 552,682 280,593 266,051 3,410 1,181 1,448 

100.00% 50.77% 48.14% 0.62% 0.21% 0.26% 

rict 2 551,617 376,221 155,228 2,543 4,019 3,606 

100.00% 68.20% 29.95% 0.46% 0.73% 0.65% 

rice .} 551,968 413,040 125,853 2,109 5,070 5,886 

100.00% - "74.83% 22.80% 0.38% 0.92% 1.07% 

rice 4 551,774 417,437 119,326 1,489 11,228 2.320 

100.00% 75.65% 21.63% 0.27% 2.03% 0.42% 

cuter Sw £552,632 470,397 76,982 1,184 2,543 1,545 

100.00% 85.12% 13.93% 0.21% 0.46% 0.28% 

trict 6 552,617 448,555 96,102 2,353 4,093 1,513 

100.00% 81.17% 17.35% 0.43% 0.74% 0.27% 

srict 7 552,916 33,910 142,215 45,820 5,226 4,42 

100.00% 64.01% 25.7¢€% 3.47% 0.95% 0.82% 

3 552,387 410,3¢¢9 125,47% 8,101 3,420 4,963 

100.00% 74.30% 22.2% 1.47% 0.62% 0.50% 

=rict S §52,301 439,297 55,444 1,353 5,050 1,158 

100.00% 83.55% 310.043 0.24% 0.91% 0.21% 

cxrict +10 553,077 £13,085 35.1429 e003 2.356838 1,535 

100.00% 82.77% 86.35% 0.156% 0.43% 0.29% 

trict 11 552,085 512 127 29,2786 7,883 1,838 250 

100.00% 92.76% 5.30% 1.43% 0.3332 0.17% 

ericr 12 562,597 323,450 219,033 2,033 6,127 1,949 

100.00% 58.53% 39.64% 0.37% 7.11% 0.35% 

al 6,628,637 5,008,492 1,456,329 30,156 52,166 31,501 
100.00% 75.56% 21.97% 1.21% 0.79% 0.43% 

EXHIBIT. 
126D 
   



    
NORTH CAROLINA District Summary Date: 10/12/99 

Elections Time: 12:36 p.m. 

Plan: 96 CONGRESS WINNER/COOPER 1.0 

  

Page: 1 
?lan type: Congressional Base Plan 

District Senate Senate Lt. Gov Lt. Gov Court Court 
Name Gantt Helms Rand Gardner . Lewis Smith 

district. 1 84,793 74,403 96,732 60,076 102,357 44,330 

53.26% 46.74% 61.69% 33.31% 69.78% 30.22% 

District 2 77,334 89,039 83,476 80,393 80,626 69,926 
. 46.61% 53.39% 50.94% 49.06% 53.55% 46.45% 

District: 3 60,570 74,804 70,398 70,471 73,187 57,250 

44.74% 55.26% 49.97% 50.03% 56.11% 43.89% 

District 4 112.375 80,260 99,480 89,925 86,993 81,246 

59.34% 41.66% 52.52% 47.48% 51.71% 48.29% 

District 5 68,282 109,418 84,364 101,534 77,552 90,694 

38.43% 61.57% 45.38% 54.62% 46.09% 53.91% 

District 6 78,098 98,099 81,475 85,504 71,188 95, 340 

44.32% 55.68% 46.04% 53.96% 42.75% 57.25% 

District 7 72,466 70,058 37,509 60,065 81,613 54,736 

50.84% 49.16% 59.30% 40.70% 59.86% 40.14% 

ct 2 64,116 82,035 77,447 70,519 72,034 63,079 

43.87% 56.13% 52.34% 47 .66% 53.31% 46.69% 

District 9 73,182 101,916 71,545 106,199 61,605 99,082 
41.79% 58.21% 40.25% 59.75% 38.34% 61.66% 

District. 10 70,584 117,976 30,352 113,818 76,034 115,204 

37.43% 62.57% 40.34% 59.66% 39.76% 60.24% 

District 11 86,212 101,511 94,396 105, 889 91,924 96,040 

45.93% 54.07% 47.13% 52.87% 48.91% 51.09% 

District 12 : 102,529 60, 844 87,981 66,264 77,968 61,524 

62.76% 37.24% 57.04% 42.96% 55.89% 44.11% 

Total 950,9411,060,363.1,015,155 1,025,657 © 953,081 928,451 

47.28% 52.72% 49.74% 50.26% 50.65% 49.35% 

 



» hl “ ® 
96 Congess Winner/Cooper 2.0 — 

District 1 October 18, 1999 

  

  

    

LEGEND 

RA 

OOOO] District 1 

ESS] District 2 
[7] Districts 

& [TTTTITT] District 4 

Cy Cr visio 
‘shan f [TTTITTTIII) District 8 

Cony 19 ie 

  

  

  

Perquimans County 

  

          Tyrrott County                             

JOINT 
EXHIBIT 

1278   
  

            
  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Craven C 
N Shtly Pamitco County N.C. General Assembly 

Legislative Services Ofc. 
Counly dows Coury Corbort County Redistricting System 

\ Software Copyright 1990 
orsiwbuaty Public Systems Associates 

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

      

  

        
  

 



  

              

    
  

  
  
  

  
  

    
  

          

  

                

     
   

      
    

    
         

   
        

    

    

  

   

          
                  

    
                          

  

  

  

  
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            

                                                              
  
    

96 Congress Winner/Cooper 2.0 — 
District 12 October 19, 1999 

ey rm 

So Higa hy Oey | LEGEND 
Ashe County ; Surry Cobaly - a Stokes County Rockingham County | Caswell County Corin 

Sey oT oo || pistriets 
Vida Xe gh gy E% | ] District 6 « Melange Cony : "Wilkes Counly ; : | a == District 7 

j Yadkin Cotsaty ~ — [IIIT] District 8 

Nt [ZZ] bistricts 
- OR) ——— Alamance County District 10 

NON IY District 12 | 
Caldwell Coun 19 Counly 

y Alexander County 

on i 
iste pr oy | 

Koda Connly Ss RRS 2 2.64. 00.8 00 hE PER ee NN 
T2323 57505258 5000 525.05252509030 30005? OR : IS Np 

Bund Coty” / RRA CEL Nk 
Catowba County 52 SESSA oy 

Fs 

irfco 

ev. u : 

asion Leun 

EXHIBIT 
12JC 

N.C. General Assembly 

Legislative Services Ofc. 

I Redistricting System 

, | | Software Copyright 1990 
N . : . 

x : Public Systems Associates 
ee : A —           

     



> J EXHIBIT 
127D 
  

JB: NORTH CAROLINA District Summary Date: 10/19/99 

Elections Time: 9:24 a.m. 

-. Plan: 96 CONGRESS WINNER/COOPER 2.0 Page: 1 

lan type: Congressional Base Plan 

District Senate Senate Lt. Gov Lt. Gov Court Court 

Name Gantt Helms Rand Gardner .. Lewis Smith 

district 83,981 75,769 96,913 51,3105 102,903 45,120 

52.57% 47.43% 61.33% 38.67% 62.52% 30.48% 

  

District 77.73% 89,039 83,476 80,393 80,626 69,926 

46.61% 53.39% 50.94% 49.06% 53..55% 46.45% 

District 61,382 73,438 70,217 69,442 72,641 56,460 

- 45.53% 54.47% 50.28% 49.72% 56.27% 43.73% 

District 112,375 80,260 99,480 85,925 86,993 81,246 

58.34% 41.66% 52.52% 47.48% B1.71% 48.29% 

District 68,235 109,642 84,371 101,728 77,537 90,897 

38.36% 61.64% 45.34% 54.66% 46.03% 53.97% 

District 77,679 98,073 80,967 85,5684 70,654 95,481 

44.20% 55.80% 45.87% 54.13% 42.53% 57.47% 

District 72,466 70,058 87,509 60,065 81,613 54,735 

50.84% 45.16% 59.30% 40.70% 59.86% 40.14% 

64,116 82,035 77,447 70,519 72,034 63,079 

43.87% 56.13% 52.34% 47.66% 53.31% 46.69% 

District 74,527 103,552 12,593 107,541 62,135 100,434 

41.85% 58.15% 40.30% 59.70% 38.22% 61.78% 

District 70,584 117,976 80,352 113,813 76,034 115,204 

: 37.43% 62.57% 40.34% 59.66% 39.76% 60.24% 

District 86,212 101,511 94,396 105,889 91,524 96,040 

45.93% 54.07% 47.13% 52.87% 48.91% 51.09% 

District 101, 650 59,000 87,434 64,668 71,987 59,828 

63.27% 36.73% 57.48% 42.52% 56.59% 43.41% 

950,941 1,060,363 1,015,155 1,025,657 © 953,081 928,451 

47.28% 52.72% 49.74% 50.26% 50.65% 49.35% 

 



  

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 

    
 
 
 
 

  
  

  

  
 
   

      
     
 

 



  
  SS CJ 

  

  
  

  

October 14, 1999 

        

  

  

  

  

  

  

  
  

  

    

  
  

* Calowba Sou 

os 
24     

  

    velafid Cau 

    

  
  

      
  

LEGEND 

County Boundary 

[1] District4 

77 72] District 5 

RSS] District 6 
[IIIT] District 8 

[ZZ] District 9 

ESS District 10 

CCE District 12 

19 Counly 

  
      

          7 25           

  

                  
      

JOINT 
EXHIBIT 

128B 
  

  

  
  

      

  

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    

N.C. General Assembly 

Legislative Services Ofc. 

Redistricting System 

Software Copyright 1990 
    

    
  

  
  

  
  

  

Public Systems Associates     
 



& 

  

NORTH CAROLINA 

  

  

  

  

District Statistics Date: 3/5. = 

Time: 9:17 a.m. 
Plan: 97 CONGRESS COOPER 1.0 Page: 1 

Plan type: Congressional Base Plan : 
District Number Total Ideal District ZX District 

Name Members Population Population Variance Variance 
Bistrict 1 1 552,135 552,386 -251 -0.05% 
Bistrict 2 1 551,998 552,386 -388 -0.07% 
District 3 1 552,138 552,386 -248 -0.04% 
Bistrict 4 1 552,274 552,386 -112 -0.02% 
Bistrict S 1 553,331 4852,386 945 0.17% 
Bistrict 6 A 1. ..553,260 552,386 874 0.16% 
District 7 1 552,027 552,386 -359 -0.06% 
District 8 1 552,752 552,386 366 0.07% 
District 9 1 552,048 552,386 -338 -0.06% 
District 10 1 553,077 552,386 691 0.13% 
District 11 1 552,089 552,386 -297 -0.05% 
District 12 1 551,508 552,386 -878 -0.16% 
Total 12 6,628,637 6,628,632 0 0.00% 

PLANVIDE STATISTICS: 
Range of populations: 551,508 to 553,331 
Ratio range: 1.0033 

Absolute range: -878 to 945 
~.. solute overall range: 1,823 

“kelative range: -0.16 to 0.17% 
Relative overall range: 0.33% 

Absolute mean deviation: 478.92 
Relative mean deviation: 0.09% 

Standard deviation: 552.1284 

 



Ni 

)b: “NORTH CAROLINA Date: 
Time: 

District Summary 
Total Populations, All Ages 
Plan: 97 CONGRESS COOPER 1.0 

3/31/97 

9:17 a.m. 

Page: 1 

’lan type: Congressional Base Plan 
District   Total Total Total Total Total Total 

district 1 

Jistrict 

Jistrict 

Jistrict 

District 

District 

District 

District 

District 

District 

District 

Total 

Name Pop. 

552,135 

100.00% 

551,998 
100.00% 

552,138 
100.00% 

552,274 
100.00% 

553,33) 
100.00% 

353,260 
100.00% 

552,027 
100.00% 

552,752 
100.00% 

552,048 
100.00% 

553,077 
100.00% 

552,089 
100.00% 

551,508 
100.00% 

6,628,637 
100.00% 

Vhite 

254,839 
46.16% 

379,132 
68.68% 

414,167 
75.01% 

451,452 
81.74% 

471,223 
85.16% 

449,667 
81.28% 

362,283 
65.63% 

389,727 
70.51% 

490,298 
88.81% 

513,066 
92.77% 

512,127 
92.76% 

320,511 
58.12% 

5,008,492 
75.56% 

Black Am. Ind. Asian/PI Other 
  

290,844 
52.68% 

162,925 
29.52% 

125,466 
22.72% 

85,7175 
15.53% 

76,854 
13.89% 

95,620 
17.28% 

145,341 
26.33% 

134,001 
24.24% 

54,415 
9.86% 

35,140 
6.35% 

29,276 
5.30% 

220,672 
40.01% 

1,456,329 
21.97% 

3,504 
0.63% 

1,994 
0.36% 

1,906 
0.35% 

1,553 
0.28% 

1,168 
0.21% 

2,364 
0.43% 

37,332 
6.76% 

18,161 
3.29% 

1,333 
0.24% 

908 
0.16% 

7,888 
1.43% 

2,043. 
0.37% 

80,156 
1.21% 

  

1,443 
0.26% 

4,161 
0.75% 

4,912 
0.89% 

10,940 
1.98% 

2,543 
0.46% 

4,131 
0.75% 

3,771 
0.68% 

4,920 
0.89% 

4,880 
0.88% 

2,368 
0.43% 

1,838 
0.33% 

6,259 
1.13% 

52,166 
0.79% 

1,506 
0.27% 

3,786 
0.69% 

5,687 
1.032 

2,558 
0.46% 

1,543 
0.28% 

1,477 
0.27% 

3,300 
0.60% 

5,943 
1.08% 

1,123 
0.20% 

1,595 
0.29% 

960 
0.17% 

2,023 
0.372 

31,501 
0.48%  



* ® 

  

Foi, 

NORTH CAROLINA District Summary Pate: 3/3: 57 
Voting Age Populations Time: 9:18 a.m. 

Plan: 97 CONGRESS COOPER 1.0 Page: 1 
Plan type: Congressional Base Plan 
  

  

    

District Total Vot. Age Vot. Age Vot. Age Vot. Age Vot. Age 
Name Vot. Age Vhite Black Am. Ind. Asian/PI Other 

District 1 406,461 202,319 199,584 2,486 1,066 1,065 
100.00% 49.78% 49.10% 0.61% 0.26% 0.26% 

District ‘2 419,543 298,650 113,698 1,443 3,181 2,570 
100.00% "+= 71.18% 27.10% 0.34% 0.76% 0.61% 

District 3 416,187 319,994 86,977 1,471 3,521 4,224 
100.00% 76.89% 20.90% 0.35% 0.85% 1.012 

District 4 425,040 351,790 62,304 1,199 7,966 1,781 
100.00% 82.77% 14.66% 0.28% 1.87% 0.42% 

District 5 428,040 368,592 55,781 881 1,800 988 
100.00% 86.11% 13.03% 0.21% 0.42% 0.232 

District 6 427,321". 352,714 69,038 1,705 2,831 1,033 
100.00% 82.54% 16.16% 0.40% 0.66% 0.24% 

Di~rricr 7 408,413 281,066 97,822 24,596 2,770 2, 
: 100.00% 68.82% 23.957 6.02% 0.68% 8." +4 

District 8 401,766 294,214 88,551 11,591 3,451 3,959 
100.00% 73.23% 22.04% 2.89% 0.86% 0.992 

Discrict'$ 415,772 374,282 36,558 958 3,228 749 
100.00% 50.02% 8.79% 0.23% 0.78% 0.18% 

District 10 426,814 398,819 24,761 678 1,438 1,118 
100.00% 93.44% 5.80% 0.16% 0.34% 0.261 

District 11 430,111 402,639 20,455 5,159 1,257 601 
100.00% 93.61% 4.76% 1.20% 0.29% 0.142 

District 12 417,019 257,484 152,347 1,501 4,315 1,372 
100.00% 61.74% 36.53% 0.36% ° 1.03% - 0.332 

Total 5,022,487 3,902,563 1,007,876 53,668 36,824 21,619 
100.00% 17.70% 20.07% 0.73% 0.432 

 



hh + 
     

  

JRTH CAROLINA District Summary Date: 3/31/97 
Registration Time: 9:17 a.m. 

Plan: 97 CONGRESS COOPER 1.0 Page: 1 
lan type: Congressional Base Plan 

" District Total Vhite Black Other -~ Den. Repub. 
Name Reg. Reg. Reg. Reg. Reg. Reg. 

istrict 1 276,384 141,864 132,286 2,234 239,473 30,111 
100.00% 51.33% 47.86% 0.81% 86.65% 10.892 

istrict 2 262,635 194,678 67,025 932 192,066 61,304 
100.00% 74.12%. 25.52% 0.35% 73.13% 23.34% 

istrict 3 227,878 -.181,935 45,306 637 163,743 53,526 
100.00% 79.84% 19.88% 0.28% 71.86% 23.492 

istrict 4 303,417 262,257 37,772 3,388 185,044 90,288 
100.00% 86.43% 12.45% 1.12% 60.99% 29.76% 

istrict 5 290,638 i 255,817 34,188 633 171,124 101,075 
100.00% 88.02% 11.76% 0.22% 58.88% 34.78% 

istrict 6 300,599 247,716 52,052 834 161,482 119,177 
100.00% 82.41% 17.32% 0.28% 53.72% 39.652 

)istrict 7 269,234 186,138 66,153 16,943 196,935 62,864 
fi 100.00% 69.14% 24.57% 6.29% 73.15% 23.352 

Yoieict 8 231,021 176,150 49,325 5,546 157,020 62,552 

100.00% 76.25% 21.35% 2.40% 67.97% 27.08% 

Jistrict 9 293,513 +" 268,862 23,866 785 152,808 120,176 
100.00% 91.60% 8.13% 0.27% 52.06% 40.94% 

Jistrict 10 304,768 289,055 15,372 339 140,908 144,329 
100.00% 94.84% 5.04% 0.11% 46.23% 47.36% 

Jistrict 11 319,610 * 304,158 13,108 2,344 188,349 111,979 
100.00% 95.17% 4.10% 0.73% 58.93% 35.04% 

district 12 270,186 169,148 100,157 881 180,459 74,438 
100.00% 62.60% 37.07% 0.332 66.79% 27.55% 

Total 3,349,883 2,677,778 636,610 35,496 2,129,411 1,031,819 
100.00% 79.94% 19.00% 1.067% .-- 63.57% 30.80% 

 



& 

  

{ORTH CAROLINA 

# 

t Date: 3/3..% 

  

District Summary 
Elections Time: 9:17 a.m. 

Plan: 97 CONGRESS COOPER 1.0 Page: 1 

Plan type: Congressional Base Plan 
District Senate Senate Lt. Gov Lt. Gov Court Court 

Name Gantt Helms Rand Gardner Lewis Smith 

District 1 95,628 67,978 103,481 55,585 107,526 40,276 

58.45% 41.55% 65.06% 34.94% 72.75% 27.25% 

District 2 75,745 87,560 83,173 79,669 81,149 67,496 

46.38% 53.62% 51.08% 48.92% 54.59% 45.41% 

District 3 59,472 76,318 70,163 4 71,887 73,868 58,224 

43.80% 56.20% 49.39% 50.61% 55.92% 44.08% 

District 4 104,288"  -87,631 93,747 95,608 81,365 87,199 

54.34% 45.66% 49.51% 50.49% 48.27% 51.73% 

District 5 68,235 109,642 84,371 101,728 77,537 90,897 

38.36% 61.64% 45.34% 54.66% 46.03% 53.97% 

District 6 77,679 98,073 80,967 95,564 70,654 95,481 

44.20% 55.80% 45.87% 54.13% 42.53% 57.47% 

Dierrict 7 76,142 77,149 91,082 66,094 85,380 59,847 - 

49.67% 50.33% 57.95% 42.05% 58.79% 41.; { 

District § 60,779 73,963 73,396 62,606 67,522 57,526 

45.11% 54.89% 53.97% 46.03% 54.00% 46.00% 

District 9 74,527 103,562 72,593 107,541 62,135 100,434 

41.85% 58.15% 40.30% 53.70% 38.22% 61.78% 

District 10 70,584 117,976 80,352 118,818 76,034 115,204 

37.43% 52.57% 40.34% 59.66% 39.76% 60.24% 

District ll 86,212 101,51} 94,396 105,889 91,924 96,040 

45.93% 54.07% 47.13% 52.87% 48.91% 51.09% 

District 12 101,650 59,000 87,434 64,668 77,987 59,828 

63.27% 36.73% 57.48% 42.92% - 56.59% 43.41% 

Total 950,941 1,060,353 1,015,155 1,025,657 953,081 928,451 

47.28% 52.72% 49.74% 50.26% 50.65% 49.35% 

  

 



District Statistics 

4 
)B+- NORTH CAROLINA Date: 10/27/99 

Time: 2:56 p.m. 

Plan: 97 CONGRESS COOPER 2.0 Page: 1 
’lan tvpe: Congressional Base Plan 

District Number _ Total 

Name Members Population 

  
Ideal 

Population 

District 

Variance 

2 District 

Variance 
  

istrict 

istrict 

istrict 

J)istrict 

)istrict 

Jistrict 

district 

district 

district 

Jistrict 

istrict 

Jigtrice 

WO
 

0
 

J
o
 

U1
 

x
 
W
N
P
 

(
I
 

= 
NN
 
=
O
 

551,434 

552,245 

553,216 

551,774 

553,331 

553,260 

551,903 

552,752 

552,048 

553,077 

552,089 

551,508 

552,386 

552,386 

552,386 

552,386 

552, 385 

552,386 

552,386 

552,386 

552,386 

552,386 

552,386 

552,386 

-952 
-141 
830 

-612 
945 
874 

-483 
366 

-338 
691 

-297 
-878 

17% 
.03% 
.15% 
11% 
17% 
.16% 
.09% 
.07% 
.06% 
.13% 
.05% 
.16% 

J 
TS

 
E
E
 

= 
J 

mr
 

ar
 

SJ
 

SC
 

So
 

fotal 

p
e
d
 

5,628,637 6,628,632 0 .00% 

SLANWIDE STATISTICS: 

Range of populations: 551.,4324°t0 553,331 

Ratio range: 1.0034 

Absolute range: 

Absolute overall range: 

-852° to 945 

1,897 

(tive range: 

kelative overall range: 

-0.17- 00.17% 

0.34% 

Absclute mean deviation: 

Relative mean deviation: 

617.25 

0.11% 

Standard deviation: 874.8205 

   



® # 

District Summary Date: 10/27/99 
Total Populations, All Ages Time: 2:58 p.m. 

Plan: 97 CONGRESS COOPER 2.0 Page: 1 

an _tvpe: Congressional Base Plan 

District Total 

Name Pop. 

"ORTH CAROLINA 

  Total 

White 

Total Total 

Black Am. Ind. 

Total 

Asian/PI 

Total 

Other 
  

strict 

strict 

Strict 

Strick 

(strict 

551,434 

100.00% 

552.245 

100.00% 

553,216 

100.00% 

551,774 

100.00% 

553,331 

100.00% 

553,260 

100.00% 

551,803 

100.00% 

552,752 

100.00% 

552,043 

100.00% 

$53,077 

100.00% 

552,039 

100.00% 

551,503 

100.00% 

6,628,637 

100.00% 

280, 659 

50.90% 

385,801 

69.86% 

412,974 
74.65% 

417,437 

75.65% 

471,223 

85.16% 

449,667 

81.28% 

365,002 

66.14% 

389,727 

70.51% 

490,298 

83.81% 

513,066 

82.77% 

512,127 

82.76% 

320,511 

58.12% 

5,008,492 

75.56% 

264,800 

48.02% 

157,369 

28.50% 

127,104 

22.98% 

119,325 

21.63% 

76,854 

13.89% 

95,620 

17.28% 

141,752 

25.68% 

134,001 

24.24% 

54,415 

0.86% 

35,140 

6.35% 

28,216 

5.30% 

220,672 

40.01% 

1,456,329 

21.97% 

3,394 

0.62% 

1,142 

0.21% 

4,164 

0.75% 

5,109 

0.92% 

11,228 

2.03% 

2,543, 

0.46% 

4,131 

0.75% 

3,584 

0.65% 

4,920 

0.89% 

4,880 

0.88% 

2,368 

0.43% 

1,838 

0.33% 

6,259 

1.13% 

52,166 

0.79% 

1,440 

0.26% 

3,215 

850 

0.17% 

2,923 

0.37% 

31,501. 

0.48%  



District Summary 

Voting Age Populations 

Plan: 97 CONGRESS COOPER 2.0 

  

b+ ~*ORTH CAROLINA Date: 10/27/99 

Time: 3:00 p.m. 

  

  

Page: 1 
.an _tvpe: Congressional Base Plan 

District Total Vot. Age Vot. Age Vot. Age Vot. Age Vot. Age 
Name Vot. Age White Black Am. Ind, Asian/PI Other 

strict 1 404,733 221,039 179,543 2,400 816 993 
100.00% 54.61% 44.36% 0.59% 0.20% 0.25% 

strict: 2 420,183 303,027 110.511 1,272 3,185 2,188 
100.00% 72.12% 26.30% 0.30% 0.76% 0.52% 

istrict il 417,355 318.873 88,831 1,626 3,656 4,369 
100.00% 76.40% 21.28% 0.39% 0.88% 1.05% 

istrict 4 425,265 327,847 86,414 1,153 8,205 1,646 
100.00% 77.09% 20.32% 0.27% 1.93% 0.39% 

istrict 'S 428,040 368,592 55.781 881 1,800 .=988 
100.00% 86.11% 13.03% 0.21% 0.42% 0.23% 

istrict 6 427,321 352,714 66,038 1,705 2,831 1,033 
100.00% 82.54% 16.16% 0.40% 0.66% 0.24% 

istrict 7 408,108 283,033 85,086 24,744 2,642 2,603 
100.00% 69.35% 23.30% 6.06% 0.65% 0.64% 

e.g 401,766 294,214 88,551 11,591 3,451 3,959 
100.00% 73.23% 22.04% 2.89% 0.86% 0.99 

istrict. S 415,772 374,282 36,558 958 3,228 749 
100.00% 90.02% 8.79% 0.23% 0.78% 0.18% 

istrict 10 426,814 398,819 24,761 678 1,438 1,113 

100.00% 93.44% 5.80% 0.16% 0.34% 0.26% 

istrict 11 430,111 402,639 20,455 5,159 1,257 601 

100.00% 93.61% 4.76% 1.20% 0.29% 0.14% 

istrict 12 417,019 257,434 152,347 1,561 4,315 1.372 
100.00% 61.74% 35.53% 0.36% 1.03% 0.33% 

>tal 5,022,437 3,902,583 1,007,876 53,668 36,824 21,619 

100.00% 77.70% 20.07% 1.07% 8.73% 0.43% 

 



  

[ 

District Summary 

  

4 

  

"RTH CAROLINA Date: 10/27/99 

  

- Registration Time: 2:58 p.m. 

Plan: 97 CONGRESS COOPER 2.0 Page: 1 

an tvpe: Conaressional Base Plan 

District Total White Black Other Dem. Repub. 

Name Req. Req. Req. Req. Reg. Req. 

strict 1 =270,215 152,780 116,007 1,428 231,905 33,081 

100.00% 56.54% 42.93% 0.53% 85.82% 12.24% 

strict 2 262,046 196,875 64,318 853 190, 148 81,355 

100.00% 75.13% 24.54% 0.33% 72.56% 23.41% 

strict 3 225,882 177,803 47,435 644 162,226 53,104 

100.00% 78.71% 21.00% 0.29% 71.82% 23.51% 

strict 4 308,157 248,308 55.719 4,130 194,612 84,812 

100.00% 80.58% 18.08% 1.34% 63.15% 27.52% 

strict 5 20,638 255,817 34,188 633 171,124 101,075 

100.00% 88.02% 11.76% 0.22% 58.88% 34.78% 

strict 5 300,599 247,716 52,052 834 161,482 115,177 

100.00% 82.41% 17.32% 0.28% 53.72% 39.65% 

strict 1 273,248 191,106 65,063 17,0789 198,370 65,741 

100.00% 69.94% 23.81% 6.25% 72.60% 24.06% 

== 8 231,021 176,150 49,325 5,546 157,020 82,552 

100.00% 76.25% 21.35% 2.40% 67.97% 27.03% 

jgtrict © 293.513 268,862 23,865 785 152,808 126,175 

100.00% 91.60% 8.13% 0.27% 52.06% 40.94% 

istrict 10 304,762 289, 05S 15.372 339 140,908 144,329 

100.00% 94.84% 5.04% 0.11% 45.23% 47.36% 

istrict 1} 319,610 304,153 13,103 2,344 188,349 311.973 

100.00% 95.17% 4.10% 0.73% 58.93% 35.04% 

istrict 12 270,186 169,143 100, 157 881 180,459 74,438 

100.00% 62.60% 37.07% 0.33% 66.79% 27.55% 

stal 3,349,883 3, 677.778 636,610 35,496. 2,129,411:1,031,81¢9 

100.00% 79.94% 19.00% 1.06% 53.57% 30.80% 

 



  

* & 
3: NORTH CAROLINA District Summary 

  

» 

  

Date: 10/27/99 

Elections Time: 2:59 p.m. 

Plan: 97 CONGRESS COOPER 2.0 

  

Page: 1 

.an tvpe: Congressional Base Plan 

District Senate Senate Lt. Gov LL. Gov Court Court 

Name Gantt Helms Rand Gardner Lewis Smith 

istrict 1 83,981 75,765 96,913 61,105 102,503 45.120 

52.57% 47.43% 61.33% 38.67% 69.52% 30.48% 

istrict 2 78,535 86,052 33% 335 79,025 80,074 67,360 

47.72% 52.28% 51.33% 48.67% 54.31% 45.69% 

istrict 3 51,3232 73,438 20,227 69,442 72,641 56,460 

: 45.53% 54.47% 50.23% 49.72% 56.27% 43.73% 

istricre 4 112,375 80,260 99,480 89,925 86,993 81,246 

58.34% 41.66% 52.52% 47.48% 5Y.71% 48.29% 

istricr-. 5S 68,235 109, 642 84.371 10%,728 77,537 9Q, 897 

38.36% 61.64% 45.34% 54.66% 46.03% 53.97% 

istrict 6 77,679 98.073 80,967 85,564 70,654 95,481 

44.20% 55.80% 45.87% 54.13% 42.53% 57.47% 

istrict. 75,002 81,117 91,701 69,346 86,677 82,855 

43.04% 51.96% 56.94% 43.06% £7.97% 42.03% 

cto 60,77¢ 73,963 73,396 62,606 67,522 57,525 

45.11% 54.89% 53.97% 46.03% 54.00% 46.00% 

istrict S 74.527 103,582 72,583 107,541 82,135 100,434 

41.85% 58.15% 40.30% 59.70% 33.22% 61.78% 

tet rick 1-0 70,524 117,975 30,352 113,813 76,034 115,204 

37.43% 62.57% 40.34% 59.66% 39.76% 60.24% 

istrict 11 86.212 101,511 94,396 105, 889 91,924 96,040 

45.93% 54.07% 47.13% 52.97% 48.91% 51.09% 

strict 12 101,650 59,000 87,434 64,668 71,9387 59,828 

63.27% 36.73% 57.48% 42.52% 56.59% 43.41% 

otal S50 ,941«1, 060,363>1.,015,155:1,025,657 953,081 822,451 

47.28% 52.72% 49.74% 50.26% 50.65% 49.35% 

 



  

* 

  

97 Congress Cooper 2.0 
October 28, 1999 

        
      
  

  

  

  

  
a. 

  

    

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  
      

  

  

  
  

  

  

        

  

  

  

    
  

    
  

  

1
 

        

                                                      
  

  

  

    

  

          
  

        
    

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

    

  

  

LEGEND 

—————————— County Boundary 

BIRRER District 1 
E=_~_\] District 2 
[=u===x District 3 
! ] District 4 

7] District 5 

[ANNAN] District 6 

E——] District 7 

[III] District 8 
[ZZ] District 9 
[S=_X.] District 10 

[~—==) District 14 

ROX RXR] District 12 

  

    

19 County 

JOINT 
EXHIBIT 
129 A 
  

  

  

  

  

  
  

      

  

  
    N.C. General Assembly 

Legislative Services Ofc. 

Redastricting System 

Software Copyright 1990 

Public Systems Associates 
  

  

 



® . ho 

  

  

| 97 Congress Cooper 2.0 — 

District 1 October 14, 1999 
      

  

        

LEGEND 

————— County Boundary 

| 
REITER District 1 

| ES" _N] District 2 

F————] istrict 3 

[1 pistrict4 
    

| Eg vistrict7 
Person County | [III] District 8 

19 County 
  

  

~
~
 

  

  

  

  

  

        

ge County 

Durham County 

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  
  

  

  
  

  

  

    

  

  

  

  

  

  

    

  

    

  

    

  

  

    

  

  

  

    

  

  

    

  

  

  

  
  
    

  

  

    

  

  

    
  

  

  

    
                

    

          

  

  
  

    
        

  

                          

              

AN Ec JOINT 
ama = oh " EXHIBIT 

PE LW = LL : BN = 
E 9 Y \ I= Graven Gouri 7 lllE ! 9 = oF on ", I N.C. General Assembly 

2 Sr =F be = 2) Ta Legislative Services Ofc. 
: Lom = Tones Courly vanes z == Redistricting System 

= = a = eet 1 Software Copyright 1990 
is = NY = —_— i Public Systems Associates 
  

    
  

 



  
  
  

  

97 Congress Cooper 2.0 — 

District 12 November 4, 1999 
    
  
  

  

  

    
  

    
  

  

    

  

  

     

  

    
  

  

  

    

  

  

  

  

  

        
     

  

     

    
  

  

  

                    

  

                    

                                                                                                                  
  

                          
            P

a
                                           ) B

i
d
                         

  

                    

P
S
 id 

rd 

            

  
L
J
 

  

  

i Ir LEGEND 

ee Sokinghars Coy 
ES District 2 

\ 

*/ 7 7 71 District § 

23 
DONS] District 6 

[ITTIIITITITT District 8 
[ ri i ee ] District 9 

B N N J District 10 

XXX] District 12 
Caldw 

; = 

JOINT 
EXHIBIT 
129 C 
  

  

  

  

                        
  

  

    

  

    

            N.C. General Assembly 
Legislative Services Ofc. 

Redistricting System 
Software Copyright 1990 

Public Systems Associates     
  

  

  

 



'P~"TORTH CAROLINA 

‘lan tvpe: Conaressional Base Plan 

District Statistics 

Plan: 97 CONGRESS COOPER 3.0 

- 

Date: 

Time: 

10/28/99 

4:32 p.m. 

Page: 1 

  

strict 

istrict 

‘istrict 

)istrict 

yistrict 

)istrict 

district 

)istrict 

)istrict 

)istrict 

)istrict 

Mstrict 

‘octal 

00
 
J
o
y
 

Wn
 

vu
 
W
w
 

District 

Name 

'LANWIDE STATISTICS: 

Range of populations: 

Ratio range: 

Absolute range: 

Numbe r EE ; Total 

Members Population 

Ideal 

Population 

District 

Variance 

% District 

Variance 
  

ea
 

al
 

al
 

eT
 

CT
 

ST
 

Se
 

So 
ST
 

Cr
 

Cl
 

=
 

nN
 

£51,353 £0.553,287 

$53,297 

§52, 245 

551,353 

551,774 

552,261 

552,234 

551,903 
$52,152 

553,173 

552,928 

552,08¢ 

552,630 

65,628,637 

1.0035 

=1,033 to.511 

552,386 

552,386 

552,388 

552,386 

552,388 

552,388 

552,388 

552,386 

552,386 

552,386 

552,388 

£52,388 

6,628,632 

911 
-14% 

-1,033 
-512 
-125 
-152 

1-483 
366 
787 
540 

-287 
244 

.16% 

.03% 

.19% 
JI1% 
.02% 
.03% 
.09% 
.07% 
.14% 
.10% 
.05% 
.04% 
.00% 

absclute overall range: 1,844 

rance: 

overall range: 

-0.19 

0.35% 

acsolute mean deviation: 

Relative mean deviation: 

474.25 

0.09% 

Standard deviation: 859.4732 

   



ry 

District Summary 
Total Populations, All Ages 
Plan: 97 CONGRESS COOPER 3.0 

Congressional Base Plan 

District 

~~ 

“ORTH CAROLINA 
Date: 

Time: 

10/28/99 

4:33 p.m. 

Page: 1 
lan tvpe: 

  Total Total Total Total 

istrict 1 

Mstrict 

wsbriot 

Jistrict 

Nstrict 

istrict 

Yistrict 

Jistrice 

district 

Name Pop. 

553,297 

100.00% 

‘552,245 
100.00% 

551,353- 

100.00% 

$51,774 

100.00% 

£82,281 

100.00% 

$52,234 

100.00% 

$51,503 

100.00% 

852,752 

100.00% 

$53,173 

100.00% 

552,926 

100.00% 

552,089 

100.00% 

552,630 

100.00% 

100.00% 

White 

276,099 

49.90% 

385,801 

69.86% 

417,534 

75.73% 

417,437 

75.65% 

478,856 

86.71% 

493,39] 

3°.34% 

365,002 

66.14% 

339,727 

30.51% 

432,41¢ 

87.21% 

506,833 

91.66% 

512,127 

92.76% 

233,264 

51.26% 

6,628,637 5,008,492 

15.55% 

Black Am. 

Total" 

Asian/PI 

Total 

Other 
  

271,188 

42.01% 

157,369 

28.50% 

120,716 

21.89% 

116,325 

21.83% 

141,752 

25.68% 

134,001 

24.24% 

60,784 

10.99% 

41.15) 

7.44% 

29,276 

5.30% 

250,215 

47.09% 

1,456,329 

21.97% 

l.,116 

0.20% 

4,164 

0.75% 

5.135 
0.93% 

11,228 

2.03% 

2,369 

0.43% 

37267 

0.59% 

3,584 

0.65% 

4,220 

0.89% 

6,971 

1.26% 

2,405 

0.43% 

1,838 

0.33% 

5,165 

0.94% 

52,1565 

0.79% 

1,467 

0.27% 

3,215 

0.58% 

5,877 

1.07% 

2,320 

0.42% 

 



    
*" 9RTH CAROLINA District Summary 

  

  

  

Date: 10/28/99 
Voting Age Populations -" Time: "4:35 p.m. 

Plan: 97 CONGRESS COOPER 3.0 Page: 1 
lan tvpe: Congressional Base Plan 

District Total Vot. Age Vot. Age Vot. Age Vot. Age Vot. Age 
Name Vot. Age White Black Am. Ind. Asian/PI Other 

iskrict 1 404,984 218,973 183,860 2,414 791 1,004 
100.00% 53.58% 45.40% 0.60% 0.20% 0.25% 

strict 2 420,183 303,027 110,511 1,232 3,185 2,188 
100.00% 72.12% 26.30% 0.30% 0.76% 0.52% 

ietrice 3 - 417,104 322,939 - 84,514 1,612 - 3,681 4,358 
100.00% 77.42% 20.26% 0.39% 0.88% 1.04% 

istrict 2 425,285 327,847 86,414 1,153 8,205 1,646 
100.00% 77.09% 20.32% 0.27% 1.93% 0.39% 

Jdistrict S g 430,047 376,936 4¢,634 743 1,899 1,031 
100.00% 87.65% 11.54% 0.17% 0.40 0.24% 

Jistrict 6 425,917 384,712 37,39 1,48¢ 2,275 1,043 
100.00% 50.11% 8.76 0.35% 0.53% 0.24% 

Jistrice 7 408,108 283,033 St,086 24,744 2.8642 2.603 
100.00% 65.35% 23.30% 6.06% 0.65% 0.64% 

).. ict 3 401,768 294,214 88,551 11.59% 3.45 3,859 
100.00% 73.23% 22.04% 2.39% 0.86% 0.99% 

district 9 421,093 372,885 41,304 1,147 4,771 877 
100.00% 83.55% ¢.31% 0.27% 1.13% 0.23% 

district 10 422,451 390,633 23,616 1,411 1,094 
100.00% 02.47% 6.77% 0.1 0.33% 0.26 

district 11 430,111 402,639 20,455 5 159 1,257 601 
100.00% 93.61% 4.76% .20% 0.29% 0.14% 

district 12 414,453 226,740 181,532 1,645 3,456 1.115 
100.00% 54.70% 43.80% 0.40% +. 0.83 0.27% 

Total 5,022,487 3,902,563:1,007,876 53,668 36,824 21,619 
100.00% 77.70% 20.07% 1.07% 0.73% 0.43% 

 



  

District Summary 

    
‘ORTH CAROLINA 

  

Date: 10/28/99 
Registration Time: 4:33 p.n. 

Plan: 97 CONGRESS COOPER 3.0 Page: 1 
’lan _tvoe: Conaressional Base Plan 

District Total White Black Other Dem. Repub. 
Name Reg. Req. Req. Rea. Req. Rea. 

Mstrict 1 271,327 150,719 119,164 1,428 233,592 32,499 
100.00% 55.55% 43.92% 0.53% 86.09% 11.98% 

Nstrict 2 282 046 196, 875 64,318 853 180,148 61,355 
100.00% 75.13% 24.54% 0.33% 12.56% 23.41% 

istrict 3 224,770 179,864 - 44.378 644 © 160,539 ° 53.635 
100.00% 80.02% 19.70% 0.29% 71.42% 23.88% 

district 4 308,157 248,308 55,719 4,130 194,612 84,812 
100.00% 80.58% 13.08% 1.34% 63.15% 27.52% 

digzrier S 301,468 270,355 30,524 57¢ 173,820 108,402 
100.00% 82.68% 10.13% 0.19% 57.66% 35.96% 

district 6 289,808 266,171 22,901 739 142,951 126,906 
100.00% 91.84% 7.90% 0.25% 49.33% 43.79% 

Jistricr 7 273,243 191,106 65,063 17,079 128,370 85,741 
100.00% 69.94% 23.81% 6.25% 72.60% 24.06% 

; ict ‘8 231.022 176,150 49.325 5.546 157,020 62,552 
100.00% 96.25% 21.35% 2.40% 67.97% 27.08% 

Jiseric: © 2%4,31¢ 286,720 27,001 1,088 150,728 121,550 
100.00% 80.47% 9.16% 0.37% 51.13% 41.23% 

AHerricr 10 253,520 275,113 18,055 350 139.402 136,150 
100.00% 93.73% 5.15% 0.12% 47.45% 46.39% 

Necrict 11 319,610 304,158 13,108 2,344 183, 349 111,¢79 
100.00% 95 17% 4.10% 0.73% 53.93% 35.04% 

Jistricr 12 230,089 152,229 127,154 706 169,880 66,177 
100.00% 54.35% 45.40% 0.25% 71.36% 23.63% 

octal 3,349,883 2,677,778 636,610 35,496 2,129,411 1,031,819 
100.00% 79.94% 19.00% 1.06% 63.57% 30.80% 

 



  

"ORTH CAROLINA 

  

. District Summary 

  

  

Date: 10/28/99 
. Elections Time: . 4:34 p.m. 

Plan: 97 CONGRESS COOPER 3.0 Page: 1 
lan tvoe: Congressional Base Plan 

District Senate Senate Lt. Gov Lt. Gov Court Court 
Name Gantt Helms Rand Gardner Lewis Smith 

istrict 1 84,910 74,997 97,351 60,373 103,087 44,424 
53.10% 46.90% 81.72% 38.28% 69.88% 30.12% 

Yistrict 2 78,535 86,052 83,335 79,025 80,074 67,360 
47.72% 52.28% 51.33% 48.67% 54.31% 45.69% 

Mstrict 3 - os 60,453 74,210 “69.779 70,174 72,457 57,158 
44.89% 55.11% 49.86% 50.14% 55.90% 44.10% 

istrict ¢ 112.3375 80,260 89,480 89,625 86,993 81,246 
58.34% 41.66% 52.52% 47 .48 51.71% 48.29% 

district S 73,994 110,045 39,83¢ 105,470 83,205 95,003 
40.21% 59.79% 46.00% €4.00% 46.69% 53.31% 

Mstrict 6 §4,S51 109, ¢256 72,23¢ 104,622 £2,553 102,863 
27.1 62.86% 40.85% 55.15% 37.81% 62.19% 

district. 7 75.002 81,117 91,701 69,345 86,677 62, 855 
43.04% 51.5% 56.54% 43.06% 57.97% 42.03% 

Jipralcr ia 60,77¢ 73,9863 73,396 62,€08 €7,522 57,526 
45.11% 54.89% £3.57 45.03% 84.00% 46.00% 

district © 30,155 97,200 72,000 104 319 58 753 67,728 
45.15% 54.31% 40.72% 55.23% 37.94% 62.06% 

Yistrict 10 55.813 116,435 96,377 135.514 32,674 112.212 
36.11% 63.89% 39.80% 60.20% 39.31% 60.69% 

Jigteicr71 86,212 $01.51] Q4,305 105, 82¢ €1,924 G5,040 
45.93% 54.07% 47.13% 52.87% 43.91% 09% 

district 12 107,781 54,646 95,262 57,8¢4 86,162 54,033 
66.35% 33.65% 62.20% 37.80% 61.46% 38.54% 

Total 950,941 1,060,363 1,015,155 1,025,657 953,081 928,451 
47.28% 52.72% 49.74% 50.26% 50.65% 49.35% 

 



  

37.025.0101 

37.025.0102 

37.025.0103 

37.025.0201 

37.025.0202 

37.025.0203 

37.025.0204 

37.025.0301 

37.025.0401 

37.025.0402 

37.025.0403 

37.025.0404 

37.025.0405 

37.025.0406 

37.025.0407 

37.025.0408 

37.025.0409 

37.025.04N1 

37.025.04N2 

37.025.04N3 

37.025.0501 

37.025.0601 

37.025.0701 

37.025.0801 

37.025.0901 

37.025.1001 

37.025.1101 

37.025.1201 

37.025.1202 

37.025.1203 

37.025.1204 

37.025.1205 

37.025.1206 

37.025.1207 

37.025.1208 

37.025.1209 

37.057.0101 

37.057.0201 

37.057.0301 

37.057.0401 

37.057.0501 

37.057.0502 

37.057.0503 

37.057.0601 

37.057.0602 

37.057.0701 

37.057.0702 

37.057.0703 

37.057.0801 

Cabarrus 

Cabarrus 

Cabarrus 

Cabarrus 

Cabarrus 

Cabarrus 

Cabarrus 
Cabarrus 

Cabarrus 

Cabarrus 

Cabarrus 

Cabarrus 

Cabarrus 

Cabarrus 

Cabarrus 

Cabarrus 

Cabarrus 

Cabarrus 

Cabarrus 

Cabarrus 

Cabarrus 

Cabarrus 

Cabarrus 

Cabarrus 

Cabarrus 

Cabarrus 

Cabarrus 

Cabarrus 

Cabarrus 

Cabarrus 

Cabarrus 

Cabarrus 

Cabarrus 

Cabarrus 

Cabarrus 

Cabarrus 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Township 1, Box 1 * 

Township 1, Box 2 * 

Township 1, Box 3 * 

Township 2, Box 1 * 

Township 2, Box 2 * 

Township 2, Box 3 * 

Township 2, Box 4 * 

Township 3 * 

Township 4, Box 1 

Township 4, Box 2 * 

Township 4, Box 3 * 

Township 4, Box 4 * 

Township 4, Box 5 * 

Township 4, Box 6 * 

Township 4, Box 7 * 

Township 4, Box 8 * 

Township 4, Box 9 * 

Township 4, Box 1 Noncontiguous A 

Township 4, Box 1 Noncontiguous B 

Township 4, Box 1 Noncontiguous C 

Township 5 * 

Township 6 * 

Township 7 * 

Township 8 * 

Township 9 * 

Township 10 * 

Township 11 * 

Township 12, Box 1 * 

Township 12, Box 2 * 

Township 12, Box 3 * 

Township 12, Box 4 * 

Township 12, Box 5 * 

Township 12, Box 6 * 

Township 12, Box 7 * 

Township 12, Box 8 * 

Township 12, Box 9 * 

Abbotts Creek * 

Alleghany * 

Arcadia * 

Boone * 

Central * 

Holly Grove * 

Liberty * 

Cotton * 

Southmont * 

Denton * 

Emmons * 

Silver Valley * 

Hampton * 

JOINT 
EXHIBIT 

 



  

37.057.0901 
37.057.1001 
37.057.1101 
37.057.1102 
37.057.1103 
37.057.1104 
37.057.1105 
37.057.1106 
37.057.1107 
37.057.1108 
37.057.1109 
37.057.1110 
37.057.1111 
37.057.1201 
37.057.1301 
37.057.1302 
37.057.1401 
37.057.1501 
37.057.1601 
37.057.1602 
37.057.1603 
37.057.1604 
37.057.1605 
37.057.1606 
37.057.1607 

~ 37.057.1608 
37.057.1609 
37.057.1701 
37.067.0101 
37.067.0102 
37.067.0103 
37.067.0201 
37.067.0301 
37.067.0302 
37.067.0303 
37.067.0401 
37.067.0402 
37.067.0501 
37.067.0502 
37.067.0503 
37.067.0601 
37.067.0602 
37.067.0603 
37.067.0604 
37.067.0701 
37.067.0702 
37.067.0703 
37.067.0801 
37.067.0802 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Davidson 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Healing Springs * 

Jackson Hill * 

Lexington No. 1 * 

Lexington No. 2 * 

Lexington No. 3 * 

Lexington No. 4 * 

Ward No. 1 * 

Ward No. 2 * 

Ward No. 3 * 

Ward No. 4 * 

Ward No. 5 * 

Ward No. 6 * 

Welcome * 

Midway * 

Reeds * 

Tyro* 

Reedy Creek * 

Silver Hill * 

Thomasville No. 1 * 

Thomasville No. 2 * 

Thomasville No. 3 * 

Thomasville No. 4 * 

Thomasville No. 5 * 

Thomasville No. 7 * 

Thomasville No. 8 * 

Thomasville No. 9 * 

Thomasville No. 10 * 

Yadkin College * 

Abbotts Creek #1 * 

Abbotts Creek #2 * 

Abbotts Creek #3 * 

Belews Creek * 

Bethania #1 * 

Bethania #2 * 

Bethania #3 * 

Broadbay #1 * 

Broadbay #2 * 

Clemmonsville #1 * 

Clemmonsville #2 * 

Clemmonsville #3 * 

Kernersville #1 * 

Kernersville #2 * 

Kernersville #3 * 

Kernersville #4 * 

Lewisville #1 * 

Lewisville #2 * 

Lewisville #3 * 

Middlefork #2 * 

Middlefork #3 * 

 



  

37.067.0901 

37.067.1002 

37.067.1003 

37.067.1101 

37.067.1102 

37.067.1202 

37.067.1203 

37.067.1301 

37.067.1302 

37.067.1303 

37.067.1401 

37.067.1402 

37.067.1403 

37.067.1404 

37.067.1405 

37.067.1406 

37.067.1407 

37.067.1408 

37.067.1409 

37.067.1410 

37.067.1411 

337.067.1412 

37.067.1413 

37.067.1414 

37.067.1415 

37.067.1416 

37.067.1417 

37.067.1418 

37.067.1419 

37.067.1420 

37.067.1421 

37.067.1422 

37.067.1423 

37.067.1424 

37.067.1425 

37.067.1426 

37.067.1427 

37.067.1428 

37.067.1429 

37.067.1430 

37.067.1431 

37.067.1432 

37.067.1433 

37.067.1434 

37.067.1435 

37.067.1436 

37.067.1437 

37.067.1439 

37.067.1440 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Old Richmond * 

Old Town #2 * 

Old Town #3 * 

Salem Chapel #1 * 

Salem Chapel #2 * 

South Fork #2 * 

South Fork #3 * 

Vienna #1 * 

Vienna #2 * 

Vienna #3 * 

Ardmore Baptist Church * 

Ashley Middle School * 

Bethabara Moravian Church * 

Bible Wesleyan Church * 

Bishop McGuinness * 

Bolton Swimming Center * 

Brown/Douglas Recreation * 

Brunson Elementary School * 

Calvary Baptist Church * 

Carver High School * 

Christ Moravian Church * 

Country Club Fire St. * 

Covenant Presbyterian Church * 

East Winston Library * 

Easton Elementary School * 

First Christian Church * 

Forest Hill Fire Station * 

Forest Pk. Elementary School * 

Forsyth Tech W. Camp. * 

14th Street Recreation Center * 

Greek Orthodox Church * 

Hanes Community Center * 

Happy Hill Recreation Center * 

Hill Middle School * 

Jefferson Elementary School * 

Kennedy Middle School * 

Latham Elementary School * 

Lowrance Middle School * 

M. L. King Recreation Center * 

Memorial Coliseum * 

Messiah Moravian Church * 

Miller Park Recreation Center * 

Mineral Springs F. St * 

Mt. Sinai Church * 

Mt. Tabor High School * 

New Hope United Methodist Church * 

Old Town Presbyterian Church * 

Parkland High School * 

Parkway United Church * 

 



  

37.067.1441 

37.067.1442 

37.067.1443 

37.067.1444 

37.067.1445 

37.067.1446 

37.067.1447 

37.067.1448 

37.067.1449 

37.067.1450 

37.067.1451 

37.067.1452 

37.081.0101 

37.081.0102 

37.081.0103 

37.081.0104 

37.081.0105 

37.081.0106 

37.081.0107 

37.081.0108 

37.081.0109 

37.081.0110 

37.081.0111 

37.081.0112 

~ 37.081.0113 

37.081.0114 

37.081.0115 

37.081.0116 

37.081.0117 

37.081.0118 

37.081.0119 

37.081.0120 

37.081.0121 

37.081.0122 

37.081.0123 

37.081.0124 

37.081.0125 

37.081.0126 

37.081.0127 

37.081.0128 

37.081.0129 

37.081.0130 

37.081.0131 

37.081.0132 

37.081.0133 

37.081.0134 

37.081.0135 

37.081.0136 

37.081.0137 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Forsyth 

Guilford 

Guilford 

Guilford 

Guilford 

Guilford 

Guilford 

Guilford 

Guilford 

Guilford 

Guilford 

Guilford 

Guilford 

Guilford 

Guilford 

Guilford 

Guilford 

Guilford 

Guilford 

Guilford 

Guilford 

Guilford 

Guilford 

Guilford 

Guilford 

Guilford 

Guilford 

Guilford 

Guilford 

Guilford 

Guilford 

Guilford 

Guilford 

Guilford 

Guilford 

Guilford 

Guilford 

Guilford 

# 

Philo Middle School * 

Polo Park Recreation Center * 

Reynolds High School Gym * 
Sherwood Forest Elementary School * 
South Fork Elem School * 

St. Andrews United Methodist * 
St. Anne's Episcopal Church * 
Summit School * 

Trinity Moravian Church * 

Trinity United Methodist Church * 

Whitaker Elementary School * 

Winston Lake Family YMCA * 

GB-01 * 

GB-02 * 

GB-03 * 

GB-04 * 

GB-05 * 

GB-06 * 

GB-07 * 

GB-08 * 

GB-09 * 

GB-10 * 

GB-11 * 

GB-12 * 

GB-13 * 

GB-14 * 

GB-15* 

GB-16 * 

GB-17 * 

GB-18 * 

GB-19* 

GB-20 * 

GB-21 * 

GB-22 * 

GB-23 * 

GB-24A * 

GB-25* 

GB-26A * 

GB-27A * 

GB-28 * 

GB-29 * 

GB-30 * 

GB-31 * 

GB-32 * 

GB-33 * 

GB-34A * 

GB-35A * 

GB-36 * 

GB-37A * 

 



ps > 

  

37.081.0138 Guilford GB-38 * 
37.081.0139 Guilford GB-39 * 
37.081.0140 Guilford GB-40A *. 
37.081.0141 Guilford GB-41A * 
37.081.0142 Guilford GB-42 * 
37.081.0143 Guilford GB-43 * 
37.081.0144 Guilford GB-44 * 
37.081.0145 Guilford GB-45 * 
37.081.0201 Guilford HP-01 * 
37.081.0202 Guilford HP-02 * 
37.081.0203 Guilford HP-03 * 
37.081.0204 Guilford HP-04 * 

37.081.0205 Guilford HP-05 * 
37.081.0206 Guilford HP-06 * 
37.081.0207 Guilford HP-07 * 

37.081.0208 Guilford HP-08 * 

37.081.0209 Guilford HP-09 * 

37.081.0210 Guilford HP-10 * 

37.081.0211 Guilford HP-11* 

37.081.0212 Guilford HP-12 * 

37.081.0213 Guilford HP-13 * 

37.081.0214 Guilford HP-14 * 

37.081.0215 Guilford HP-15 * 

37.081.0216 Guilford HP-16 * 

37.081.0217 Guilford HP-17 * 

37.081.0218 Guilford HP-18 * 

37.081.0219 Guilford HP-19 * 

37.081.0220 Guilford HP-20 * 

37.081.0221 Guilford HP-21 * 

37.081.0222 Guilford HP.22 * 

37.081.0223 Guilford HP-23 * 

37.081.0224 Guilferd HP-24 * 

37.081.0301 Guilford Bruce * 

37.081.0401 Guilford North Center Grove * 
37.081.0402 Guilford South Center Grove * 

37.081.0501 Guilford Clay * 
37.081.0601 Guilford Deep River * 

37.081.0701 Guilford Fentress-1 * 

37.081.0702 Guilford Fentress-2 * 

37.081.0801 Guilford Friendship-1 * 
37.081.0802 Guilford Friendship-2 * 
37.081.0901 Guilford Gibsonville * 

37.081.0902 Guilford Whitsett * 

37.081.1001 Guilford Greene * 

37.081.1101 Guilford Jamestown-1 * 

37.081.1102 Guilford Jamestown-2 * 

37.081.1103 Guilford Jamestown-3 * 

37.081.1201 Guilford North Jefferson * 

37.081.1202 Guilford South Jefferson * 

 



* 

North Madison * 

South Madison * 

North Monroe * 

South Monroe * 

Oak Ridge * 

Stokesdale * 

North Sumner * 

South Sumner * 

North Washington * 

South Washington * 

  

37.081.1301 Guilford 
37.081.1302 Guilford 
37.081.1401 Guilford 
37.081.1402 Guilford 
37.081.1501 Guilford 
37.081.1502 Guilford 
37.081.1601 Guilford 
37.081.1602 Guilford 
37.081.1701 Guilford 

37.081.1702 Guilford 
37.081.2124 Guilford GB-24B * 
37.081.2126 Guilford GB-26B * 
37.081.2127 Guilford GB-27B * 
37.081.2134 Guilford GB-34B * 
37.081.2135 Guilford GB-35B * 
37.081.2137 Guilford GB-37B * 
37.081.2140 Guilford GB-40B * 
37.081.2141 Guilford GB-41B * 
37.081.2901 Guilford GIB-G * 
37.081.3124 Guilford GB-24C * 
37.081.3127 Guilford GB-27C * 
37.081.3135 Guilford GB-35C * 
37.097.0101 Iredell Barringer * 
37.097.0201 Iredell Bethany * 
37.097.0301 Iredell Chambersburg * 
37.097.0401 Iredell Coddle Creek #1 * 
37.097.0402 Iredell Coddle Creek #2 * 
37.097.0403 Iredell Coddle Creek #3 * 
37.097.0404 Iredell Coddle Creek #4 * 
37.097.0501 Iredell Concord * 
37.097.0601 Iredell Cool Springs * 
37.097.0701 Iredell Davidson * 
337.097.0801 Iredell Eagle Mills * 
37.097.0901 Iredell Fallstown * 
37.097.1001 Iredell New Hope * 
37.097.1101 Iredell Olin * 

37.097.1201 Iredell Sharpesburg * 
37.097.1301 Iredell Shiloh * 

37.097.1401 Iredell Statesville #1 * 
37.097.1402 Iredell 

37.097.1403 Iredell 

37.097.1404 Iredell 

37.097.1405 Iredell 

37.097.1406 Iredell 

Statesville #2 * 

Statesville #3 * 

Statesville #4 * 

Statesville #5 * 

Statesville #6 * 

37.097.1501 Iredell Turnersburg * 
37.097.1601 Iredell Union Grove * 
37.119.0101 Mecklenburg Charlotte Pct. 1 * 
37.119.0102 Mecklenburg Charlotte Pct. 2 * 
37.119.0103 Mecklenburg Charlotte Pct. 3 

 



37.119.0104 

37.119.0105 

37.119.0106 

37.119.0107 

37.119.0108 

37.119.0109 

37.119.0110 

37.119.0111 

37.119.0112 

37.119.0113 

37.119.0114 

37.119.0115 

37.119.0116 

37.119.0117 

37.119.0118 

37.119.0119 

37.119.0120 

37.119.0121 

37.119.0122 

37.119.0123 

37.119.0124 

37.119.0125 

37.119.0126 

37.119.0127 

37.119.0128 

37.119.0129 

37.119.0130 

37.119.0131 

37.119.0132 

37.119.0133 

37.119.0134 

37.119.0135 

37.119.0136 

37.119.0137 

37.119.0138 

37.119.0139 

37.119.0140 

37.119.0141 

37.119.0142 

37.119.0143 

37.119.0144 

37.119.0145 

37.119.0146 

37.119.0147 

37.119.0148 

37.119.0149 

37.119.0150 

37.119.0151 

37.119.0152 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Meckienburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

* 

Charlotte Pct 

Charlotte Pct 

Charlotte Pct 

Charlotte Pct 

Charlotte Pct 

Charlotte Pct 

Charlotte Pct 

Charlotte Pct 

Charlotte Pct 

Charlotte Pct 

Charlotte Pct 

Charlotte Pct 

Charlotte Pct 

Charlotte Pct 

Charlotte Pct 

Charlotte Pct 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

.4 
5% 
6* 
LT 
.8* 
.9* 
.10* 
11” 
12+ 
13+ 
14+ 
15 
16+ 

rd 
18+ 
19" 
20 * 
21* 
22 * 
23 * 
24 * 
25 * 
26 * 
27* 
28 * 
29 * 
30 * 
31+ 
32+ 
33+ 
34* 
35 * 
36 * 
37+ 
38 * 
39 * 
40 * 
41+ 
42 * 
43 * 
44 * 
45 * 
46 * 
47 * 
48 * 
49 * 
50 * 
51 * 
52 *  



  

37.119.0153 

37.119.0154 

37.119.0155 

37.119.0156 

37.119.0157 

37.119.0158 

37.119.0159 

37.119.0160 

37.119.0161 

37.119.0162 

37.119.0163 

37.119.0164 

37.119.0165 

337.119.0166 

37.119.0167 

37.119.0168 

37.119.0169 

37.119.0170 

37.119.0171 

37.119.0172 

37.119.0173 

37.119.0174 

37.119.0175 

337.119.0176 

37.119.0177 

37.119.0178 

37.119.0179 

37.119.0180 

37.119.0181 

337.119.0182 

37.119.0183 

37.119.0184 

37.119.0185 

37.119.0186 

37.119.0187 

37.119.0188 

37.119.0189 

37.119.0190 

37.119.0191 

. 37.119.0192 

37.119.0193 

37.119.0194 

337.119.0195 

37.119.0196 

37.119.0197 

37.119.0198 

37.119.0301 

37.119.0401 

37.119.0501 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

ol 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

53* 

54 * 

55 * 

56 * 

57> 

58 * 

59 * 

60 

61 * 

B82.» 

63 * 

64 * 

65 * 

66 * 

67 * 

Charlotte Pct’ 68 * 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

Charlotte Pct. 

BER * 

CCK™ 

COR? 

69 * 

70 * 

71> 

2" 

3 

74 

75+ 

5* 

77> 

78 * 

79* 

80 * 

81* 

82 * 

83* 

84 * 

85* 

86 * 

87" 

88 * 

89* 

20+ 

91 

02» 

o3* 

94 * 

95 * 

96 * 

o7 * 

o8* 

 



  

37.119.0601 

37.119.0602 

37.119.0701 

37.119.0801 

37.119.0901 

37.119.1001 

37.119.1002 

37.119.10X1 

37.119.1101 

37.119.1102 

37.119.116T 

37.119.11X1 

37.119.11X3 

37.119.1201 

37.119.1202 

37.119.1203 

37.119.1204 

37.112.1272 

37.119.1301 

37.119.1302 

37.119.1303 

37.119.1401 

337.119.1501 

37.119.1502 

37.119.1601 

37.119.1701 

337.119.1702 

37.119.1703 

37.119.17X1 

37.119.1801 

37.119.1802 

37.119.2000 

37.119.2104 

37.119.2105 

37.159.0101 

37.159.0102 

37.159.0201 

37.1569.0202 

37.159.0203 

37.159.0204 

37.159.0205 

37.159.0206 

37.159.0207 

37.159.0208 

37.159.0301 

37.159.0401 

37.159.0501 

37.159.0502 

37.159.0601 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Meckienburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Mecklenburg 

Rowan 

Rowan 

Rowan 

Rowan 

Rowan 

Rowan 

Rowan 

Rowan 

Rowan 

Rowan 

Rowan 

Rowan 

Rowan 

Rowan 

Rowan 

# 

CO1* 

CO 

DAV * 

HUN * 

LEM * 

LC1 - North 

LC2 

LC1 - South 

MCA1 

MC2 

XMC1 

XMC2 Noncontiguous 

MA1 * 

MA2 * 

MA3 * 

MA4 * 

MH1 * 

MH2 * 

MH3 * 

OAK 

Pci 

PC2* 

PVL:* 

PR1 

PR2 

PR3 

XPR1 

SC1 

S5C2 

Charlotte Pct. 100 * 

Bradshaw * 

Enochville * 

Blackwelder Park * 

Bostian School * 

N. China Grove * 

S. China Grove * 

East Kannapolis * 

West Kannapolis * 

East Landis * 

West Landis * 

Cleveland * 

Franklin * 

Barnhardt Mill * 

Rockwell * 

Bostian Crossroads * 

 



fl "» 

  

37.1569.0602 Rowan Faith 
37.159.06X2 Rowan Faith Noncontiguous 
37.169.0701 Rowan Locke * 
37.169.0702 Rowan Sumner * 
37.159.0801 Rowan Morgan | * 
37.159.0802 Rowan Morgan II * 
37.1569.0901 Rowan Mt. Ulla * 
37.159.1001 Rowan Gold Knob * 
37.1569.1101 Rowan East Spencer * 
37.169.1102 Rowan Granite Quarry * 
37.169.1103 Rowan Hatters Shop * 
37.159.1104 Rowan Milford Hills * 
37.159.1105 Rowan Spencer * 
37.169.1106 Rowan Trading Ford 
37.159.1107 Rowan West Innes * 
37.159.1108 Rowan East Ward | * 
37.159.1109 Rowan East Ward Il * 
37.159.1110 Rowan North Ward [| * 
37.159.1111 Rowan North Ward Il * 
37.159.1112 Rowan South Ward * 
37.159.1113 Rowan West Ward | * 
37.159.1114 Rowan West Ward Il * 
37.159.1115 Rowan West Ward lil * 
37.159.11X6 Rowan Trading Ford Noncontiguous A 
37.159.1201 Rowan Scotch Irish * 
37.159.1301 Rowan Steele * 
37.159.1401 Rowan Unity * 

 



  

    
      

Mecklenburg County Precinct Map 

sgn RowWari es a Davidson Coddle Creek #4 ~Gdddie Creek Enochville ; West Kannapalis 
ast Kannapoli 

    -. 

   
  

  I
 

mserd Bostian Crossroads Bamhardt Mill’ Rockwell 

  

      

   

    

      

  

    
   

  

  

  

   
   

  

       
        

   
   
    

      

   

  

     

     
  
  

  

DAV To ip 4, Box 
LA By nship 4, Box 3 

) ip4, B Township 6 
COR 

Lincol n LEM Township 3 ownship 7 

Medklenburg 

Vo] % HUN Township 8 

Landers Chapel 3 
High Shoals 

er 
3 Stanley #1 Lucia ge 

Alexis 

Tryon 

Gaston 
Dallas #2 

ir R roa Dallas #1 Stanley #2 Township 9 

= Bessemer City #1 hig 

9 

ee A ealth Center Oye charlotte Pct 263 

Bessemer City #2 any HER 
~  — = oie fo Township 1, Box 2 

? EET A ONY 

LT 2S Ng ardner Park Belmont #2 Township 10 
™ ) Sh ood : 

\ Ashbrook 
Ci 2 

| roman) Jaimont # 
Zp Forest Heights =F 

St 
Wy anly 

Crowders Min. 

South Gastonia 

) Union 

Fairview   
Legend XSC2 Norcontighong 

SC2 

——— County 

1] Precinct 

92 Cong 

oi 97 Cong 

Hemby Bridge 

Fe x Unionville ( 

« mn | gc oe 

~~ Jndian Trail EE 65 ETE 

Bo Bakers Crestview 
West Sandy Ridge iy a 

Siler 
Mon 

Wingate North Marshville             

  

  

  

 



    
CTO AUD LU IT Le UC 

3/25/97 Drafc North Carolina Congressional Districts Plan: HszNe7 

gi 97 Houae/Senata Plan : 

: 1994 199A 199q Narivae 

Black Black Dem, 1390 1996 1996 1988 13964 1996 1994 1992 Dem. Black Black Amer. 

Parzona Per. VAR Pact Sen. Sen. Prs. Pre. Aud. Hse. Hse. Sen. Req. Reg Req, rec. 

= Digerict : - ; 

coufore 23.7.4 37.73 33.28 49.4 18.3 33.3 43.1 383.57 50.0 37.9 33.5 42.3 67.9 as.3 22.3 0.0S 

extie 20,388 62.48". 57.41, 71.0 iS8.% 1082.9 10.9 83.1 77-1 84.1 RA3.2 RAT RID SA.R SS 4 0.23 
Yaven 25,279 43.20 19.90: “88.4 mg.& S3.2 55.08 47.0. 58.9 586.5 61.0 - 61.3 6G.8 16.9 18.9 0.2% 

dgecombe §6,S58 §35.98 52.11 G9.1 56.6 S7.& 63.9 Ssa.2 71.7 68.5 65.4 62.1 30.9 52.8% 50.2 0.12 

aces 3,308 44,92 43.00 75.8 61.2 51.7 67.1 58.5 6.0 53.3 5%. n.k R1.8 an.» 45.4 0.053 

ranville 20,717 48.74¢ 47.122 $7.3 54.0 55.5 61.7 87.5 72.3 65.1 §G.0 gL.a 81.5 11.46 %1.3 0.10 

reene 15,384 42.39 39.32 59.4 42.3 39.6 45.3 S2.3 83.5" 47.9% 37.4 _SO.Y.  4L.S8 5 1 10 36.0 a.10 

falafax $5,918 43.69 45.76 86.2 2.5 95.65 62.8 54.3 $3.8 £4.68 $3.2 SY 8 83 449 42 4 3.03 

cre fard 22,523 7.589 £3.49 Jy. .4F ies ® go Lt I3.08 83.0. 78.3 kR.s 60.2 677 86.4 Ga.5 65.4 1.03 

‘aes 8,553 40.47 "38.53 "52.6 43.9 ‘49.5. 853.8% 55.7 63.0 52.2 55.9 55.% 21.5 A%. 2 A%.2 0.09 

.eno1r 31,016 £1.13 ST7.,3% 88.0 ‘sy 8 "Sigl.) 84.3 8.4 70.3 ..65.%5 60.7 62.3 .7B.9" 865.0 - 352.9 0.03 

crean 25,0739 44.60 41.28 81.6 42.8 47: 85.4 53.4 63.4 47,1 31.4 5% 4 16.2 31.38 ia 2 0.08 

lszchanpecon 20,798 S3.27 SE 98 ..70.85 50.3 - 84.) 73.5% 88.7 38.5 'GR.7  GS.G i 7L.8 $2.3 54.) -5Y.a 0.20 

Jar3on 31,001 34,780 37.88 amy 40.8 46.3 51.8 47.5% 82.7 44.8. 45.8 50.8 76.4 31.4 32.5 0.74 

ice 49.53d. 53.17 dC.2% 0 57.3 LC. G4. 67.8 Sr. RI.Y 96.1 48.8 96.9 KP.0. 0 AY, T4429 0.17 

’ance 38,802 45,03 43.40" 53.7 "49.4. S535 iS.) 50.6 $3.0 + C4.) 59.2 - 8V.% 42.1" 42.0. "120.7 0.12 

iarz=n 17.265 87.03 £3.38 71.9 £§2.9 €2.0 8a.) . 67.3: 13.3 57.4 63.3: 88.3 38.0 54.5 55.1 4.42 

fazhingecon 10,750 48.44 43.73 67.0 43.4" B5.0: 84.4 52.2 70.4 B3.2. 84.9 w9.0 a4. 45 , Tic iad] 0.02 

{&yne 38.323 $5.7) 547.83 Sp. 4 "50.83 "54.3" $5.4 50.7 “62.2 50.1 641.8 58.2. 70.2 43.7% 448.5 fey 

iilaen 43,617 SN.97 46.73  Y6.§ 85.8 . S33 vst 7 54.1 67.3 §5.5 54.3% 60.4 71.0 49.7 17.4 a.Y} 

Tazal {~228) $32.16) » Ra.27 28.63 £3.55. 52.3 $5.0 80.5 iiss on :is7.3 $9.8 30.1 G9.3 38.4 RG.0i0 AG .¢ n.4% 

ve DigeTicr 2 

fr lin Jg.424 35.27 4.32.39 S6.3 45.8 + 46.5 33.5. 49.9 50.3 780.3 -S4.9  S2.% €7.1 29.1) 32.4 0.20 

re 17,828 27.28 nE.32 $0.7 42.3 35.2 4. 42.9 £2.85 32.¢ 50.3 24.3 hq 1 23.5 50.1 8.45 

pa 67.322 22.52 20.52 48.3 39.00 37.8 ca.) 42.7 "450.4 83.4 Led: v48.67 ¢2.8 13.3 18.2 g.3) 

larnztan 31.308 17.70 7513.02 “43.4 = 233.2 33.3 YU4 36.0 &w.T : 48.9 AQ.8 490.3 187.4 13.9 15.4 0.22 

Lea 42.374 22.930 aq ane eT 6 A008 40.3 46.4 37.1 $2.2 03.5 4.4 45.8 RI. Te 16.5 0.41 

Nazh 5.8770: 3.49 39.30 247.0 16.7 17.9 43.2 38 7 aa 0 49.0 39.3 AG 60.1 an. v4 0 23 

tampon 22,745 35.0% 37 EA FEY 49 0 AG.8 83.1 81.8 SSA TAB. 7 (S5.5 743.2% 60.4 1a.4a 3103 1.74 

Jaics 135,641 33.67 31.36 56.3 62.3: S7T.8 .S7.0 91.5 93.1 esp 7 i823 0 39.) $7.7 10.4a 11 2 g.27 

iiigson 22,544 12.04 11.91 45.2 29.3 29.1 va 24.3 34.5% 42.14 33.5 37.6 58. Yui 8.4 trl a.a0 

Socal (-238) 532,181 27.91. 53% 33 SY 4 48.3 AS. a 43.) Na. 0 24.40 4.7 45.9 40.8 53.7 24.0.7 25.8% n.en 

=. Yigtrice 3 

jesulort 13.883 “32.87 230.71 "43.47 39.0 ..°39.7" 41.1% 3%.» SU... 35.9 319.7 42.7 -6GR.0 25.4 22.7 a.ay 

Tamdon 5,904 45.09 24.23¢€ ca.o0 «9.3 43.9 $3.3 48.7 €3.0 40.0 A ..0 i iv 5 *2.6 -3.¢ 0.36 

Tet wo we a” sé ®., 04 r.he 42.0 “3.8 ae.a SS.) 29.13 Tded = I Lvele 1d os VY . G& ree} 2.7 e.33 

Chowan 13.808 27.66  la.48 60,9 '5%.1 52.2: 87.5 49.0 838. S%.7 -S5%.0 "56,7 Ix.4 2%.5 11.0 0.13 

Craven $6,334 13.10 16.40 "19.4 40.) 39.0.7 33.1  33.4..:42.0 733.4 40.3  3/.4 47.2 ¥31.8 15.2 0.45% 

Qurrituck 13,736 11.35 10.31 48.9 45.4 in.4 47.1 3n.2 49.1 16.8 47.9 $0.9 59.0 8.6 33.7 0.417 

ace RN, 746 3.5% 3.38 €1.0 €0.4 49.0 47.6 34.9 50.2 10.7 fs .1 43.8 a. 2.2 2.3 9.3 

Tyde 5.413% 32.91 33.29. 70.4 S1.% C0.0 SSB.4 «858.0 1.7 44.1 CR.7 KN.7y . 3R.9 23.2 29 7 0.07 

Joriza 361 25.03% 23.89 47.8 30.1: 27.04" 33.8 37.8 43.90 30.%. 40.3 ¥3.G 7G.) 20.7 aq 2 0.12 

Lantoir 46,353 13.63 12.36 83.0 + 20.0 26.3 "30.8 25.0 44.0: 23.) 35.3 34.0 - 668.0 21.8 G.a n.1s 

nsicv 119.932 19.89 13.05 43.7 38.9 40.§ 32.5 37.4 47.6 39.4 42.9 I.9 53.0 16.4 15.2 0.63 
»amlics 31.372 285.95 24.08 53.5 47.7 46.6 43.8 49.3 57.3 32.7 SI.L 53.7 69.2 229 11.8% 0.23 

3axquotank 31,298 37.01 35.40 ‘631.4 '84.% 53.8 85.0" 49.7 61.9 5.54.3 AN.40 59.7 £7.1 16.2 36.307 0.19 

ferguimana 30.447 « 312.99 29.94. 65.3 S0.5 43.2 57.0 36.% $7.1 "51.74. 53.) 63.9 71.3 29.7 07 33.3 a.17 

ies $3,340 14.08 1G6.3a 46.9 46,1 43.6 43.0 39.2 "1.2 314.9 36.7 46.9 48.0 16,2 15.8 0.23 

Tyrzell 3.306 eq.u1 372.03 76.3 47.6 81.7 65.1" 85.8 IS.6 «4F.4 0 h9.3 60.3 38.4 7 32.2 1L.4 0.1C 

‘ashizzgcon 3,247 15.69 18,85 63.2 44.49 47.3 64.4 51.9 $3.9 G0 9) 0 NY. 82.5% 11.9 1y 3 0.34 

# 
G
i
s
 

: 
: 
!  



  

   
".. MAR-25-97 TUE 10:39 # » P. 03 

Drak North Carolina Conqressional Nigrriess Plan: nHsenav 

97 House/Sanats Plan 

1996 1996 1390 Native 

Alack Black Dem. 1990 1936 19896 1938 1994 1996 1994 1992 Dem. Black Rlarck ner 

Parsons Pez. VAP Fert son. Sen. Pre. Pre. Aud. Hee. Hoe. Sen Raq. Raq Rag. Pet. 

{syne $3,347 31,97 20.65 39.2 28.0 6.36.7 32.7. 33.3 4.1 2.2 43.9718. s%.¢ 0 1v.8 8.9 0.29 
Tonal =3C) £53, €22 10.70 13.35 7 Ny BC 41 ® an 9 42 2 ian 49 2 17 4 A485 2 44 0 87.7 16 § 16.5% a.a3 

ws Bighrics 4 

-lalliam 47,432 dV..OV 19.19 ahr.7 Ad. 8 24.2 33.0 pe fe 0 1 20.0 20.2 Pr Ed wl A Gaon. 16.% an. g.3% 

r tonm bomnens em os, am: aw . aa aec>a oe. cm .a ®e.w LE I on » < - gibi AE 4 - _. = -n . bu . we. on - 

St uty 33,833 33.37 12.083 ee.3 TY. @ “U.Z Cu.A “vo. Coote wit. Clo Cw.’ BYU so pI Vie dV 

Parzon 9.1379 19.50 18. /8 42.6 30.0 32.2: 38.0 36.2 47.5 30.6 3s.8 410.1 66.0 14 8 18.8 27 

Take SHILNIS IMLS 010.30 43.8 £1.70 "47.5 43.9% 37.83 43.077 47.83 "4%. 3 ian] 27.1 ¥.3 1.3 0.28 

Toral (-54d) 551,343 21.02 33.79 52.7 58.6 $6.0 53.5 48.1 56.9 87.3 80.5 54.8% 52.9 17.~ 17.4 0.25 

sw District 5 

Alamance 79,978 3.1 21.49 44.8 41.0 42.43 44.7 327.0 S0.1 38.5 36.3) 40.4 $6.3 22.9 12°% 9.27 

Alleghany 9.583%0 1.98 1.96 Gi.7 43.8 42.8 47.3 47.2 53.4 37.7 47.0) 43 4 R7.1 1.8 1.4 a uHK 

Azha 22,209 0.65 0.65 44.0 38.7 33.5 41.8 39.7 44.9 36.3 41.8 e1.9 eh.2 0.a 0.3 0.09 

Caswall 20,693 40.777 40.10 67.8 2.4 51.2 66.3 6.2 63.4 48.1 0.9 Gd. 6 79.18 319.0 43.7 0.13 

Javie 47,859 3.31 8.5¢ 11.e 23.8 AR.4 3a. 28.3 1a .R 28.7 10.2 12.9 3.2 6.9 2.5 9.3) 

Faravrh 20A.766 11010 10.23 16.7 40.2 38.3 16.6 al 40.1 29.9% 23.8 19.6 41.6 9.1 7.6 0.20 
Romie agham ac,acae 30.30 A0.00 46.0 38.3 480.3 Lc. 0 44.2 £2.90 3e¢e.7 40.2 40.2 €L.8 29.23 -=D.3 Td 

SLokaes 37.323 $.58 S.41 3a.s 34.3 31.4 33.3 371.9 38.4 3.1 36.3 44.0 45.56 “.U YZ nu 14 

3urry 61, 704 4.31 4.18 43.8 37.40 37.5 19.6 33.3 45.13 33.90 41.0 5.0 62.3 4.3 41.6 9.11 

*o%al (-302) 552.084 13.462 12.7%: 41.38 39.1 33.0 39.7 37.3 314.8% 31.3 33.38 43.3 50 13 1.5 bh | 0 

w= Districe [3 

4 ace 28,2217 A.07 7.84 da. Ll 28.5 qu.8 Allo 27.9 13.a z1.8 a.0 14.4 «7.4 1.9 y BE 0.30 

m 9,520 28.71 26.54 23.0 44.5 46.7 54.2 43.3 55.6 S6.3 52.3 Ered 55.3 29.3 28.9 0.25 

Ce _uso0n 23.398} e.11 3.8% 38.8 30.4 25.2 34.3 29.3 37.4 22.2 3.8 35.5 13.1 Y.2 3.3 0.30 

Suilford 211,363 140.19 9.50 19.1 43.0 42.9 41.3 33.3 41.0 27.8 3.5 43.3 44.7 30.0 3.0 0.33 

NMoare S3,011 19.44 14.03 39.2 42.0 41.1 40.2 34.7 41.6 47.1 i lig Ld 41.7 Ign 12 A 135.3 C.52 

Randolph 106,546 5.%4 5.65 30.9 29.8 23.4 31.8 26.4 33.7 23.3 0.0 13.3 Ja. 4 S80 y a 1) 43 

Rowan 77,499 7.7% 7.16 J4.3 32.2 31.2 310.5 29.0 15.4 38.7 26.8 31.4 60.1 6.2 6.13 1.322 

Total (-215) 882,171 3.3 a.7s 37.0 37.3 37.3 37.4 31.1 30.2 33.2 22.0 33.7 42.3 3.5 7.8 0.17 

ss Discrice 7 

laden 28,6R3 33.37 36.21 $4.3 0.3 52.5 60.1. 57.3 70.0 63.7 63.3 G4.1 20.2 3x.) 15.8 1.682 

Jounewick 50,988 13.07 15.94 s1.0 45.17 87.1 $0.2 44.5 5.9 53.2 53.1 19.7 52.9 13.3 $G.3 0.a/ 

Calumbua 49.587 30.83 27.5380 69.5.. 44.8 850.2. ED.2 SB. 20,3 7%.) FC 87.4 84.9 IR. 00 20. 10 28.9 2:76 

Cumberland 132,639 26.31 25.323 51.6 45.3 41.9 4G.4 43.7 51.9 55.0 51.0 49.5 55.9 24.6 252 2.1) 

buplin 39,955 33.13 3C.67 £3.0 431.0 46.2 e3.2 S0.7 R1.a SD.s $3./ $1.8 14.9 31.86 30.9 0.25 

New Hanavar 120.284 0.03 17.79 44.0 18.3 413.1 45.2 39.6 47.1 44.4 48.9 4,8 an, 4 ¥3 156.4 0.3¢ 

fender 28,855 30.39 27.62 “0.4 48.4 47.2 45.3 47.2 53.5 4197.2 61.6 48.1 €0.1 4.0 10.3 0.2% 

Rcbeson 77,0858 23.05 20.43 74.7 §9.2 €l.a 66.9 87.5 75.3 82.9 50.0 60.5 87.6 23 23.3 39.44 

Sampxoa 24,5782 In.\7 28.94 48.7 43.0 43.8 47.4 23).4 £a.g ak. kh “1.1 an. 1 EY 29.7 30.3% 1.9¢ 

Total (309) 552.695 35.69 21.438 85.0 43.8 49.1 51.4 43.3 56.7 55.2 £0.2 h2.6 Gl1.9 pg 23 1 6 &: 

** Didlr.icL 1 

Ansnn 23,474 47.31 43.40 77.4 $3.5 S8.a 3.9 63.6 74.7 340.) 0.1 Ga .4 81.8 41.22 39 3 90.2: 

Cabarrus SR, 9138 12.99 11.83 39.9 35.0 37.1% 38.8 12.3 42.2 $0.2 46.1 30.5 45.0 4.0 11.4 g 3 

Swab: Land 141,877 36.60 la . 064 SA 3 $7.8 $7.3 57.1 49.1 GO.8 f3.a 54 4 $6.6 59.0 3g.2 35.7 1.0. 

4ok2 23.8%6 43.23 40.907 68.8 83.7 RQ 3 65.3 82.4 63.7 I2.7° GI:Y GR.R 13.9 $82. an." 13.3 

“oncyomecsy 213, 144 1% .70 $3.29 $7.7 16.0 46.1 83.2 4/,2 s8.1 53.5 53.9 £2. G4.1 2.4 74.9 0.3 

Uchmoad 14,514 2R.91 26.21 64.2 54.8 $3.9 65.4 GA.A 70.7 11.6 63.6 83.2 17.3 27.8 27.17 1.1 

on 38,094 32.69" 30.82 74.8. 66.0 66.2 ° 72.0 . 85.9 17.7  AM.Y 793.3 U2.4 8.4" 30.9 MAUR. 

rage 

 



     [RYRTRN 

. 

31/25/97 

Seatland 

Stanly 

Calon 

Total (444) 

ss Dizatric: 9 

Cleveland 

Sazean 

Macklenburg 

Tocal (223) 

*o Daslroict 10 

Alexander 

Avery 

surka 

Caldwell 

Carawha 

Iredell 

Lincoln 

Micshell 

watauga 

Hilkes 

Yadkin 

Total (947) 

Adywoud 

‘lenderson 

Jackaon 

McCowvell 

Macon 

Yadixoa 

Folk 

Auycherford 

Swain 

Transylvania 

Yancey 

Tocal (=297) 

ss Discrice. 13 

Davidsoa 

Ferayeh 

Guilford 

lzedall 

Mecklenburg 

rowan 

Tocal (-343) 

Cy Ji LUG 

Barzons 

33,754 

51,785 

Re 211 

552,830 

84,714 

175,093 

292,808 

§582,618 

47,544 

14,867 

75,744 

70,709 

119.412 

54,472 

50,119 

14,433 

3§,9852 

59,393 

Jo.43a 

$33.333 

174,322 

20,170 

7.1858 

7.19€ 

15,942 

69,285 

26,846 

15.53% 

23.439 

13.953 

14.418 

SAa.9%18 

31.268 

25,540 

15,419 

562,049 

G3.G0e4 

$3,112 

134, 057 

13,459 

213,615 

131,106 

552,043 

LU«Qy 

Draft North Carolina Congressional Disnricha 

97 House/Senara Plan 

1530 

Sex. 

56.3 

34.7 

36.4 

46.9 

1996 

San. 

57.3 

34.9 
35.3 

46.0 

45.2 

38.8 

46.6 

43.6 

4.4 

28.3 

42.0 

5.3 

36.5 

33.7 

37.7 

eb. 3 

49.7 

33.8 

23.8 

36.2 

59.7 

43.2 

45.6 

37.7 

43.2 

13.9 

$4.9 

38.0 

42.1 

43.6 

46.1 

40.0 

52.0 

a5. 

46.5 

46.0 

33.3 

79.0 

69.6 

43.2 

72.3 

53.58 

64.2 

1336 

Prs. 

63.3 

38.3 

3g.2 

49.1 

48.7 

36.9 

41.2 

41.0 

36.49 

28.6 

45.6 

i8.7 

35.3 

34.7 

40.3 

27,8 

47.2 

35.0 

28.7 

37.7 

50.2 

a4.2 

45.3 

40.2 

83.9 

ag.% 

£5.2 

41.5 

44 4 

$1.6 

42.0 

43.3 

55.3 

41.9 

43.0 

416.4 

J6.0 

v8.3 

70.3 

43.8 

71.5 

S2.a 

64.4 

da.e 

37.5 

372.5 

50.8 

32.4 

49.0 

40.5 

33.5 

46,5 

41.1 

40.12 

$9.1 

33.2 

414 .4 

41.8 

33.8 

77.0 

51.9 

37.14 

60.8 

48.4 

56.5 

1996 

hze. 

a3.5 

43.7 

42.7 

B.S 

33.2 

30.4 

38.0 

36.2 

34.2 

2V.8 

33.2 

3.2 

23.1 

32.0 

331.6 

19.5 

40.§ 

33.3 

28.4 

1934 

Hse. 

59.1 

87.0 

44.2 

54.5% 

41.9 

31.9 

36.3 

3a.a 

37.0 

20.9 

an. 4 

33.2 

26.6 

J3.0 

337.9 

19.6 

44.5 

J4&.9 

25.2 

3.3 

40.9 

37.5 

12.) 

33.5 

32.58 

1.5 

47. .h 

d2.3 

33.9 

42.3 

38. 

368.1 

43.7 

38.7 

i8.9 

3.7 

16.4 

77.4 

84.3 

45.6 

RA. 

415.2 

54.5. 

14
 

. 
“o
ie
 

. 
: 

ON
 I
 

TR
 

~ 
YE
 V

R 
J
T
 

TR
E 

SE
 

VIP
 

I 
N
R
 

- 
wn
 

- 
Ov
 

+
 

Oo
 

Oo
 

~
 

. (8%
) 

OS
 

=
 
E
N
O
 

oe
 

P. 04 

("L
I 

EN
 | 

o
 

LY 
a 

7]
 

19
 

8
 

00
 

O
 

OO
 

¥
 

~~
 

oO
 

+
 

OO
 

QO
 

~
 

ON
 

. 
. 

. 
. 

. 
. 

' 
. 

. 
-~

 
WL
 

u
n
o
 

oe
 

[SPIE
R 

SE
 

J 
= 

a
 

34.4 

71i.4 

“wl. 

an.s 

47.6 

«5.1 

aa ,?2 

. =
 

uv
 

O
O
 

O
O
 

0 
0 

O
O
 
O
O
D
 

O
n
o
 

5 
0
 

. 
. 

. 
. 

. 
. 

a
 

(1
) 

uw
 

nN
 

0. 

0. 

Q. 

A.2 

0. 

9. 

0. 

Cige 

 



ESTIMATED 1996 VOTER REGISTRATION DATA 

  

The following estimates of the percentage of African-American voters in the 12 
districts as of the November, 1996 election was prepared by NCEC in Washington at the 
request of legislative staff and provided to the staff on April 7, 1997. 

 



ArR- 7-87 MON 13:08 

04/07/97 Draft North Carolina Congressional Districts Plan: HSENS7A 
jee 97 House/Senate Plan A 

Estimated 

Black 1990 Black Reg. 1996 Black Reg. Nov 1996 Voter Registration Estimaces 1990 
Persons VAP Total Pct.- Total Pot. Total D-Total (DS) R-Total (RA) Sen. 

«+» District 

Beaufort 23,714 33.88 2,572 22.8 3,353 25.3 13,206 8,978 67.9 3,360 . 38.8 
Bertie 20,388 57.41 6,027 55.6 7,180 58.8 12,196 10,371 39.32 974 ‘ 8. 
Craven 25,279 39.90 4,829 38.9 5,99 36.9 16,200 10,832 66.8 3,804 . 56. 
Edgecombe 56,558 52.11 14,778 50.2 18,642 52.8 35,289 28,578 80.9 4,988 . Sé 
Gates 9,305 43.00 2,302 45.4 2,360 40.2 5,857 4,791 81.8 672 . 61 
Granville 20,717 47.12 3,831 "91.3 5.35% 43.6 12,273 10,258 813.5 1,396 
Greene 15,1384 39.22 2,726 36.0 2,980 35.3 8,491 6,933 81.6 1,150 
Halifax 55,516 45.76 10,991 42.4 13,320 44.7 29,742 24,158 81.2 3.896 
Hertford 22,523 53.48 7,461 55.4 7.59% S4.S 13,911 12,020 86.4 1,534 
Jones 8,553 38.59 1,954 43,2 2,163 39.2 5,527 4,619 83.5 680 
Lenoir 31,016 57.45 7,086 52.9 9,328 56.9 16,381 32,931 18.9 2,489 
Martin 25,078 41.25 4,030 34.2 5,501 37.4 14,681 11.197 76.2 2,423 
Northampton 20,798 55.76 6,744 53.4 7,086 54.1 13,092 12.082. 92.2 658 
Person 21,001 32.55 3,034 32.5 3,589 31.4 11,404 8,717 76.4 2,014 
Pite : 49,584 46.38 9,987 42.9 12,524 41.7 30,032 20,74S 69.0 5,357 
Vance 38,892 41.60 2.553 40.7 8,450 42.0 20,088 16,497 82.1 2,529 
darren 17,265 531.88 5,687 55.1 6,137 54.5 11,257 9.9121 88.0 328 
Washington 10,750 43.73 2,627 44.1 2,822 45.7 6,166 $,189 84.1 707 
Wayne 35,323 47.58 7.255 44.5 8,718 46.3 18,826 33.238 70.2 4,166 
Wilson 43,517 46.73 9,174 47.4 11,764 49.7 23,638 17,262 73.0 4,805 
Tocal (-225) $52,161 46.53 126,345 46.4 144,855 45.5 318,254 249,784 78.4 49,530 

T
V
W
 

aO
 
N
O
O
R
 

Ww
 

0 
@ 

HS
 

OO
 

A
 
W
D
 

W
 

DE
 
O
W
 

L
m
 

D
I
 

B
D
 

R
o
h
s
 

se
 
B
d
 

i
e
 

es. District 

Franklin 16,414 6,288 21,440 14,392 $,457 
Sranville 17,628 1,989 9,025 5,786 2,294 

Je 67,822 7,081 36,457 22,814 10,513 
n 81,306 7,430 $3,290 30,592 17,790 

41,374 4,106 23,890 15,094 6,377 
Nash 76,677 12,114 48,224 29,016 15,566 
Sampson 22,745 4,486 14,737 8,907 S,031 
dake 185,641 40,443 232,675 76,640 37,3123 
4ilson 22,544 : . 1,457 15,379 9.101 5.139 
Tocal {=238). 552,153 85,364 355,137 212,342 105,482 

. 

aA
 

=~
 

HH
 

N
 

OO
 
W
O
 

& 
a 

x 
OW
 

= 
N
N
 

Jd
 

© 
N
N
 

W
w
e
 

m
C
 

= 
N
O
 

® 
N
A
D
 

~ 

*~ Districec 

3eaufort 18,569 

camden S,904 
10,343 2,635 

4,333 682 
Carterec $2,556 34,644 13,446 
howan 13,506 

7,599 1,482 
raven $6,334 28,879 10,995 
Jurrituck 13,736 9,738 2,399 
dare 22,746 15,574 4,816 
Hyde S,411 3,436 314 
Jones 861 507 1u2 
—anoir 26,258 14,473 4,021 
Onslow 149,838 42,472 14,199 
?amlico 11,372 7.9301 2.737 
Pasquotank 31,298 19,078 3,987 
Perquimans 10,447 6,971 1,174 
Piece 56,340 38,195 11,915 
Tyrrell 3,856 2,268 236 

EL
 

I
 

Y
T
 

- 
J 

= 
J 

Vo
l 

C
Y
 

wn
 

I 
TLR

 
T
O
R
 

ENE
 

R
T
 

Lo
 

. 

>
 

[+
] 

[*
] 

. 
Su
vi
 

ai
e 
w
e
 

ee
 

w
w
e
 

ow
 

E
e
 

Xe
 

ie
 

W
O
 

U
W
 

Jd
 

J
U
V
 

OO
 

O
W
N
 

® 
VW
 

e&
 
J
N
 

oO
 

 



     { 

ye—tuyey 

ington 

1 

il (236) 

Yiseriah 

ham 

al {(=-543) 

district 

nance 

aghany 

: 

«cll 

.a 

sycth 

ingham 

es 

oy
 

haa 

.dson 

ford 

“~ 

jolph 

n 

21 (-219) 

nycrice 

lan 

rgwick 

mmbaiyg 

sacland 

-in 

Hanover 

lar 

nm 

S 

JE ivi 

Peaxgons 

3,247 

58,343 

552,622 

29,239 

181, R36 

931,151 

3,173 

237.739 

551,84) 

19,976 

9.590 

22,209 

20,693 

27.059 

206,766 

86,064 

37,323 

£1,704 

552,084 

28,237 

8.520 

59,991 

211,363 

$9,013 

106,546 

17,4739 

552.171 

28,6612 

$0,98% 

19,587 

127,912 

39,995 

120,384 

28,8585 

81.548 

24,552 

553,382 

13,474 

98,938 

146,653 

33,856 

22,246 

The AA" | A 

3.406 

39.07 

18.07 

30.61 

21.39 

311.14 

20.03 

30.39 

21.10 

11.1317 

44.36 

47.31 

12.99 

41.00 

43.122 

26.170 

Slack 

VAP 

34.63 

20.6¢ 

23.35 

19.69 

14.74 

14.49 

18.78 

10.30 

12.73 

21.49 

1.86 

0.65 

40.10 

8.54 

10.23 

1J.08 

S.41 

4.1% 

12.72 

7.86 

26.64 

1.87 

3.50 

156.08 

5.G5 

7.18 

R.728 

AA. 

15.924 

27.58 

19.63 

in.67 

17.79 

37.63 

19.63 

28.9¢ 

22.04 

41.40 

11.¥1 

38.7 

40.9%0 

23.29 

Draft North Carolina Congressional Districta 

97 House/Senate Plan A 

1990 Black Reg. 

Pct. - Total 

55) 

3,834 

35,419 

3,532 

33.420 

7.3084 

41 

11,091 

36,174 

5,396 

4,84) 

7,979 

3,636 

S,849 

9.942 

4,447 

2,342 

J, 416 

60,5G4R 

4,519 

€.0805 

16,550 

3,42) 

3,082 

38.3 

18.9 

16.5 

35.8 

16.2 

28.9 

13.3 

30.9 

16.4 

Jo.13 

22.1 

30.1 

22.5 

39.8 

11.4 

49.8 

40.0 

24.9 

Bscimaced 

1996 Dlack Raq. 
Total 

S66 

§,276 

43,998 

3.683 

15,975 

9,704 

845 

16,798 

77,003 

9,820 
106 

73 
4,957 

1,254 
131,311 
8,877 
2,279 
1.50 

. - 

41,139 

1,436 

1,590 

1,134 

16.190 

5.320 

3,11e 

3,105 

31,881 

5,689 

8,26) 

9,559 

13,787 

6,708 

13,508 

4,997 

9.542 

4,062 

73,121 

5,657 

7,943 

24,228 

4,823 

31,148 

Pct. 

33.9 

37.9 

16.5% 

»
 

te
] 

nu
n 
N
C
 

8&
8 
D
L
 

Ww
 

NM
 

Nov 19596 Voter Registration PgCimartes 

Total 

1,668 

25,324 

271,403 

22,292 

137,635 

$0,661 

§,679 

201,339 

447,600 

49.140 

7.004 

15,737 

12,687 

18.149 

142,700 

48,306 

25,398 

37,000 

356,331 

19,833 

S,812 

34,697 

141,244 

41.567 

41,992 

43,5870 

374.621 

17.183 

39,6243 

32.75 

69,R03 

21,212 

$8,212 

20,7740 

47,127 

11.669 

360.350 

13,070 

72,104 

44,150 

12,625 

13,965 

D-Total 

3.377 

16,909 

160,139 

13,491 
06,061 
46,876 
1,751 

86.074 
237,0L.3 

27,992 

4,756 

7,307 

10,134 

G.034 

62,112 

29,802 

11,5138 
23,599 

179.474 

9,480 

3,697 

14,93 

12,137 

16.516 

21,593 

20,009 

152,404 

13,764 

20,981 

25,924 

19,%0Y 

16,813 

45,594 

12,470 

41,416 

7,33 

222,794 

10,914 

12,470 

39,030 

9,315 

f.980 

(DY) 

82. 

52. 

“). 

S 

é 

i 

86.9 

67. 

46. 

919. 

33. 

41]. 

61. 

45, 

La. 

50. 

47. 

65. 

43. 

44 

39. 

34. 

40. 

42, 

a0. 

53. 

19. 

56. 

74, 

46. 

60. 

87. 

91. 

61, 

83. 

4h. 

60. 

73. 

G4. 

bY 

2 

R 

2 

§ 

S 

6 

a 

l 

6 

8 

1 

J 

1 

8 

3 

- 

2 

2 

0 

6 

> 

| 

3 

| 

6 

A 

3 

0 

2 
- 

3 

R Taral 

217 

10,1865 

Re, 522 

6,023 

30,3135 

18,938 

1,4AK8 

80,599 

13%, Jo) 

16,293 

1,887 

1,132 

1,RG2 

10.5811 

61,172 

23,319 

1,704 

11,990 

116.871 

7.827 

1,460 

16,738 

AA, HOT 

19,218 

33.503 

43,578 

109.327 

7.404 

14,1486 

2.051 

40,602 

4,701 

38,R70 

6.217 

4,127 

5,560 

101,648 

1,534 

29,998 

11,068 

1,986 

1,H48 

(RY) 

13.0 

34.8 

4.4 

27.0 

22.0 

23.4 

25.8 

40.0 

Jo. 

31.2 

26.6 

45.1 

14.4 

67.9 

412.8 

47.5 

46.2 

37.7 

Ji.4 

39.3 

26.0 

48.2 

4] .4 

4h. 

54.12 

437.5 

45.2 

14.0 

35. 

25.4 

20.5% 

az2.1 

A. 4 

29.9 

8.7 

40.6 

2¥.4 

31.7 

41.6 

22.9 

15.7 

37.5 

«Ja 

Plan: RSEN9IA 

1980 1992 1994 

Sen. San. Sen. 

44.8 $2.3. 47.1 

aR 0 34.1 30.7 

41.5 44.0 40.9 

84.8 57.2 64.2 

63.3 63.0 64.8 

70.6 66.7 68.2 

0.0 40.9" 30.4 

51.7 485.1" 47.5 

213. G 

41.0 

43.5 

38.7 

82.4 

29.18 

40.2 

38.3 

FL 

A7.0 

39.2 

28.5 

44.5 

10.4 

43.0 

47.0 

29.0 

32.2 

Y4.3 

50.13 

45.7 

48.6 

43.0 

43.0 

49.4 

48.2 

60.3 

411.0 

48.3 

59.4 

35.0 

65.1 

£9.72 

46.0 

45.4 d2.4¢ 

410.4 42.9 

41.9 38.% 

fa.6 61.2 

32.92 708.4 

13.6 12.9 

49.9. 740.9 

43.0 31.4 

45.0.°27.9 

43.31 39.0 

an.c 30.4 

$53.7. 46.1 

AE 20.2 

42.9 “42.9 

AY 44), 

3.8 29.12 

33.4 32.2 

¥8.°7 84.2 

54.3 52.5% 

48.7 47. 

G4.9 §0.2 

47.12 412.2 

$1.8 46.2 

43 4 48.1 

48.1 47.1 

70.4 62.4 

46.0 43.1% 

$2.2 414.6 

CR.4 58.4 

38.5 27.a 

64.4 66.7 

66.6 560.2 

52.1) dG. 

 



    

ren 79% 

Persons 

Richmond 44,518 

Robeson - 23,631 

Scotland 33,754 

Scanly 51,765 

Union 84,211 

Total (757) 553,143 

«=» Districe 9 

Cleveland 84,714 

Gascon 175,093 

Mecklenburg 292,808 

Total (229) 552,615 

+¢ Districc 10 

Alexande:z 27,544 

Avery © 14,867 

Burke 75,744 

Jlaldwell 70,709 

Zatawba 118,412 

Iredell S4,472 

Lincoln 50,319 

vicchell 14,433 

4acauga 36,952 

dilkes 59,393 

fadkin 30,488 

Tocal (947) £83,333 

0 Se 

e 174,821 

Therokee 20,170 

Clay 7.155 

3raham 7.136 

41aywood 46,942 

denderson 69,285 

Jackson 26,846 

4cDowall 35,681 

Macon 21,499 

4adison 16,9583 

olk 14,416 

Jutherford 56,918 

3wain 11,268 

Transylvania 25,520 

Yancey 15,419 

focal (-297)  S5%2,089 

*¢ Discxice 12 

davidson 66,684 

"orsyth 59.112 

nilford 136,087 

Iredell 38,459 

4scklenburyg 218,628 

lowan 33,106 

APR- 7-97 MON 13:11 

Black 

PCL. 

28.91 

38.01 

36.07 

11.54 

15.94 

27.73 

20.94 

12.95 

7.18 

31.12 

6.07 

1.06 

6.84 

5.49 

9.03 

10.14 

8.16 

0.16 

2.08 

4.7% 

4.25 

6.53 

8.20 

1.79 

0.57 

0.01 

3.38 

3.41 

1.58 

4.15 

1.64 

0.80 

7.30 

11.44 

1.74 

4.66 

0.98 

5.30 

14.77 

72.92 

51.53 

24.29 

51.89 

35.62 

Black 

VAP 

26.21 

35.49 

32.72 

10.18 

14.10 

25.32 

18.83 

11.52 

6.47 

9.93 

5.68 

1.19 

§.37 

4.99 

7.96 

9.14 

2.13 

0.18 

2.24 

4.47 

4.10 

5.3} 

7.38 

1.73 

0.58 

0.02 

1.29 

2.90 

1.74 

4.01 

1.50 

0.91 

6.40 

10.21 

1.64 

4.01 

0.99 

4.76 

13.54 

69.80 

48.61 

21.70 

47.74 

32.16 

Draft North Carolina Congressional Districts 

37 House/Senate Plan A 

Egtimated 

1990 Black Reg. 1996 Black Reg. 

Tocal PCL.’ Total Pct. Total 

5,914 27.7 7,438 27.8 26,673 

6,661 40.0 4,893 37.0 13,208 

4,611 30.1 6,533 34.2 19,100 

2,662 9.9 3,053 9.4 32.173 

5,012 1a.S 7,001 11.6 59,865 

57,239 24.7 74,783 24.0 310,383 

7,330 18.5 9,391 19.8 47,272 

9,896 12.5 11,628 11.9 97,568 

9,885 5.7 21,306 8.7 243,398 

27,111 8.3 42,325 10.9 388,238 

867 4 999 4.8 20,684 

36 .4 43 0.4 10,691 

2,320 6.1 2,671 S.7 46,455 

1,944 2,174 $.2 41,117 

4,25) S,426 6.9 78,139 

2,221 . 2,871 7.8 36,623 

3.37873 2,065 34,342 

6 21 10,260 

[+] 522 32.329 

1,387 1,425 37,369 

425 7 S04 18,357 

15,246 5 § 18,723 5.3 366,406 

6,559 . 6,728 .6 119,168 

183 218 y.2 16,900 

29 is 6,256 

0 0 S.737 

364 392 34,868 

1.017 1,147 55,475 

217 250 19,184 

748 793 21,501 

97 . 9s 0.5 18,760 

62 60 13,472 

617 678 $7 11,838 

2,376 2,880 9.1 31,333 

172 - 13? 8,592 

636 «3 » 135 19,883 

77 0.6 8s 12,958 

13,154 . 14,253 3.6 39s,985 

4,708 14.4 5,436 12.6 43,122 

20,693 71.4 24,258 69.1 35,098 

40,963 $1.3 46,6388 $2.3 89,238 

3,966 20.5 S,014 18.7 26,697 

$2,074 47.6 66,570 47.8 139,246 

4,73%0 28.1 6,456 30.2 21,336 

D-Totcal 

20,625 

11,127 

13,409 

15,139 

27,617 

178,626 

30,007 

48,028 

91,052 

169,087 

9,071 

1,721 

23,460 

17,586 

30,285 

17,216 

16,363 

1.351 

12,535 

13,194 

5,737 

148,579 

64,516 

8,269 

2,787 

2,674 

2,747 

18,652 

10,797 

12,256 

8,645 

8,218 

5,284 

19,086 

5,241 

9,193 

6,841 

204,176 

19,331 
26,850 
60,065 

13,37s 
87,959 
22,137 

(D%) 

77.3 

84.2 

70.2 

47.0 

46.1 

57.4 

R-Total 

4,292 

1,314 

3,343 

13,107 

24,379 

94,866 

12,820 

39,005 

111,674 

163,499 

9.587 

7,678 

17,507 

18,581 

36,560 

15,530 

13,876 

7,786 

13,4397 

21,125 

11,289 

173,015 

39,900 

6,891 

2.522 

2,63) 

9.304 

27,861 

5.815 

7.334 

7.558 

4,053 

4,800 

9.494 

2,348 

7,771 

4,969 

143,253 

19,852 

4,995 

19,416 

10,114 

32,526 

6,981 

Nov 1996 Voter Registration EstimaLes 

(RY) 

16.0 

9.9 

17.5 

40.7 

40.7 

30.5 

h
a
 

Ww
 

oO
 

w 
wn

 
wv
 

oO
 
o
o
n
 

N 
WW

 
& 

Ww
 

& 
Ww

 
4 

O 
0 

© 
0 

a 

W
w
e
 

N
H
 

W
N
 

O
S
 

39.0 

38.3 

36.1 

46.0 

14.2 

21.7 

37.8 

23.3 

32.7 

P. 04 

Plan: HSEN®7A 

1990 1992 1996 

Sen. Sen. Sen. 

S4.8 63.2 53.9 

63.0 70.0 63.3 

56.8 66.3 S7.8 

34.7 40.9 34.9 

36.4 39.3 35.3 

47.3 50.6 46.4 

46.0 46.3 45.2 

38.9 32.6." 35.8 

48.1 40.0 46.6 

44.6 38.9 43.6 

15.9 4vu.3 34.4 

20.1 29.9 28.3 

42.1 45.0 42.0 

372.3 38.0" 35.8 

38.2 35.6.'36.5 

36.3 35.6 33.7 

38.6 "39.5. 37.7 

“Te... TT.3 25.8 

53.0 47.8 43%.7 

31.2 35.6 32.6 

24.9 31.3" 23.3% 

37.7 138.0%.36.2 

49.8 47.8 50.7 

42.8 46.4 43.2 

44.5 46.0 45.6 

35.4 44.3 37.7 

49.6 53.3 49.2 

41.9%. 35.7 38.9 

52.1..55.)1 54.9 

38.4 46.0 38.0 

47.8 "48 U0 - 42.1 

47.7 ..53.5 “49.8 

49.1. 44.) 45.1 

40.0 44.0 40.0 

46.2 S2.5 52.0 

45.9 44.2 .45.] 

42.4 S0.5 46.5 

45.9 46.5 46.0 

36.8 33.7 33.3 

82.7 80.5 73.0 

69.0 66.8 69.6 

49.1 43.9 43.2 

75.0 68.4 72.3 

54.0 S3.2 83.5 

 



    
   7-97 MON 13:12 P.05 

  

iid Draft North Carolina Congressional Districts Plan: HSENI7A 

97 House/Senate Plan A 

Bstimaled 

Black slack 1990 Black Reg... 1996 Black Reg. Nov 1996 Voter Registralion Bwlimales 3990 "1992 1996 

Persons Pct. VAP Tocal Pct. Total PCC. Total D-Total (D%) R-Tocal (R¥%) Sen. Sen. Sen. 

cal (-343) S52,043 46.67 43.36 127,191 44.23 154,419 43.5 354,734 219,717 61.9 93,884 26.4 66.6 62.6 64.2 

Page 4 

 



ESTIMATED 1996 VOTER REGISTRATION DATA 

  

The following estimates of the percentage of African-American voters in the 12 
districts as of the November, 1996 election was prepared by NCEC in Washington at the 
request of legislative staff and provided to the staff on April 7, 1997. 

 



(-8( MON 13:09 

14/07/91. Draft North Carolina Congressional Districts 
i 97 House/Senate Plan A 

Plan: HSENS7A 

Estimated 

Black 1990 Black Reg. 1936 Black Reg. Nov 1996 Voter Registration Estimates 1990 
Persons - VAP Total Pct. Total Pct. Total D-Total (DS) R-Tocal (RA) Sen. 

» Plgtrict 

jeaufort - 23,714 33.88 2,572 22.8 3,353 28.3 13,206 8,978 67.9 3,360 38.8 
iertie 20,388 57.41 6,027 55.6 7,180 58.8 12,196 10,871 89.2 974 . 58 
raven 25,279 39.90 4,829 38.9 5,991 36.9 16,200 10,832 66.8 3,804 . S56. 
:dgecombe 56,558 52.11 14,778 50.2 18,642 52.8 35,289 28,578 80.9 4,988 . S6 
ates 3,305 43.00 2,302 45.4 2,360 40.2 S,857 4,791 81.8 672 . 61 
iranville 20,717 47.12 9.531 91.3 5,359 43.6 12,273 10,258 83.5 1,396 . 54 
ireene 15,384 39.22 2,726 36.0 2,980 35.1 8,491 6,933 81.6 1,150 . 42 
talifax 55,516 45.76 10,992 42.4 13,320 44.7 23,742 24,158 81.2 3.896 . 52 
lect ford 22,523 53.48 7,461 55.4 7,591 54.5 13,911 12,020 86.4 1,534 y ile 
Jones 8,553 38.59 1,954 41.2 2,163 39.2 5,527 4,619 83.5 680 43. 
.enoir 31,016 57.45 7,086 52.9 9,328 16,381 12,931 78.9 2,489 . 57 
fartin 25,078 41.25 4,030 34.2 S,501 14,681 21,1397 "76.2 2,423 42. 
iorthampton 20,798 55.76 6,744 53.4 7,086 . 13,092 12,082 92.2 658 . 60. 
Jerson 21,001 32.55 3,034 32.5 3,589 . 11,404 8,727 76.4 2,014 40. 
ice ; 49,584 46.138 9,987 42.9 12,524 . 30,032 20,745 63.0 6,357 . 56 
‘ance 38,892 41.60 7.553 40.7 8,450 . 20,088 16,497 82.1 2,529 
faxren 17,265 53.88 5,687 55.2 6,137 : 11,257 9.911 88.0 328 61. 
tashington 10,750 43.73 2,627 44.1 2,822 6,166 S.189 84.1 707 . 48. 
tayne 36,323 47.58 7.255 44.5 8,718 . 18,826 13,2135 70.2 4,166 
{ilson 43,8517 46.73 9.174 47.4 11,764 . 23,635 17,262 73.0 4,805 
‘otal {-225)" $52,161 46.53 126,345 46.4 144,855 . 318,254 249,784 78.4 

wv
 

Ww
 
O
N
 

OO
 

0 
14 

49. 

S50. 

5S. 

49,530 . S2. Ww
 
e
s
,
 

W
w
E
 
W
D
 

O
Y
 

» Discrice 

‘ranklin 36,414 

stranville 17,628 

ii, 67,822 

81,306 

41,374 

fash 76,677 

21,440 

9,025 

36,457 

$3,290 

23,890 

48,224 

24,737 

132,675 

15,379 

385, Y17 

HH
 
N
N
 

ew
 

N 
© 

. 

T
a
 

SN
 

Ww
 

Oo
 

& 
& 

H
M
 
H
V
 

W
O
 

W
 

iampson 22,745 

‘lake 185,641 

iilson 22,544 

‘octal (-2139%) $52,151 

aA
 

= 
H 

N 
OO
 
W
O
 

& 
> 

XE
 

WV
 

= 
NN

 
NJ

 
©
 
N
N
 

W
e
 

~ 

* District 

eaufort 18,569 10,343 7,033 

4,313 3,206 

34,644 16,520 

7,599 S,52¢ 

28,879 13,640 

9,738 5,750 

15,574 8,302 

3,436 2,988 

507 386 

14,473 9,560 

42,472 22,547 

7,301 5,473 

19,078 12,816 

6,972 5,133 

38,195 21,036 

2,268 1,939 

amden S,904 

arteret 52,556 

howan 13,506 

‘raven 56,334 

urrituck 13,736 

are 22,746 

yde S,411 

ones 861 

eanoir 26,258 

nslow 149,838 

amlico 11.372 

asquotank 31,298 

. 

Ww
W 

&
 

& 
0 

>»
 

NW
 
N
C
 

. 

N
N
W
 
N
N
O
 
E
B
A
N
N
R
A
R
N
N
 

RH
 
®
R
 

erquimans 10,447 

dee 58,340 

yrrell 3,856  



  

ington 

e 

11 (236) 

Yiseriah 

ham 

Fe § {t=543) 

district 

nance 

aghxny 

» 

wcll 

-® 

iycth 

:ingham 

‘es 

nycrice 

lan 

1swick 

mba y 

clad 

An 

Hanover 

lug 

-q0n 

iscrict 

n 

Poargons 

1,247 

68,343 

552,622 

29,239 

181, R15 

91,1851 

3,173 

237,739 

351,84) 

19,976 

9.590 

22,209 

20,693 

27,859 

206,766 

86,064 

37,233 

£1,704 

352,084 

28,237 

9.520 

69,991 

211,363 

$3,013 

106,546 

17,499 

552,17 

28,662 

S0,98% 

19,587 

127,912 

19,995 

120,384 

29,855 

81,548 

24,552 

553,382 

43,474 

98,935 

146,652 

32,856 

21,1246 

flack 

Pee. 

35.69 

21.97 

19.79 

20.50 

37.21 

15.127 

19.60 

10.7% 

21.02 

22.71 

10.19 

18.44 

1.7) 

3.406 

39.07 

18.07 

30.61 

21.39 

11.14 

20.03 

30.39 

21.10 

11.37 

24.26 

47.31 

12.99 

41.00 

43.22 

26.70 

Slack 

VAP 

34.63 

20.86 

12.35 

19.69 

14. 7¢ 

14.89 

18.778 

10.230 

13.79 

21.49 

1.86 

0.65 

40.10 

8.54 

10.23 

1J.08 

5.41 

14.1% 

12.72 

7.86 

26.64 

1.27 

3.50 

15.08 

5.65 

7.16 

R.7S 

A. Nn 

15.94 

47.58 

19.63 

in. 87 

17.79 

47.63 

19.63 

28.9¢ 

22.04 

41.40 

11.41 

38.7% 

40.90 

23.29 

  

Draft North Carolina Congressional Districta 

97 House/Senate Plan A 

1990 Rlack Rag. 

Total 

551 

3,834 

35,41) 

3,532 

33,420 

7.304 

14° 

11,091 

56,174 

7,998 

84 

‘7% 

4.658 

1.134 

1,646 

7.876 

2.337 
1.402 

32,107 

1,054 

1,483 

914 

9.814 

4,617 

2.78% 

1,942 

22,479 

5,396 

4,841 

7,979 

3,636 

S,849 

9.942 

4,447 

2,342 

3,416 

60.548 

4,519 

6.0808 

16,550 

3,42) 

3,082 

Pek. 

38.3 

18.9 

16.5 

20.5 

32.0 

12.1 

18.8 

8.3 

17.0 

19.5 

1.3 

0.5% 

41.7 

7.5 

7.6 

19.1 

5.2 

4.€ 

11.1 

7.2 

28.9 

1.2 

8.0 

14.3 

S.¢ 

5.3 

7.8 

3s.8 

16.2 

28.9 

13.8 

30.9 

16.4 

3o.3 

22.1 

30.1 

22.5 

39.8 

131.4 

49.8 

40.0 

24.9 

Bscimated 

1996 Dlack Req. 

Total Pet. 

S66 33.9 

§,27¢ 17.9 

43,995 16.5% 

3.681] 16.5 

15,978 13.14 

9,704 12.0 

845 14.8 

16,794 8.3 

77,005 17.2 

9,820 19.9 

106 1.8 

73 0.4 

4,957 35.0 

1,254 6.9 

13,311 s.3 

8,877 18.3 

1,279 S.0n 

2 LNG a 4.1 

41,139 11.5 

1,436 7.2 

1,880 28.1 

1,134 3.3 

16.120 10.0 

5.320 13.8 

3,314 S.0 

1.105 €.2 

31,881 8.5 

€.88% 313.3 

f,26 13.3 

9,559 23.1 

13.107 9.7 

6,705" 3.4 

313,508 13.7 

4,997 24.0 

9.542 20.2 

4,062 29.7 

23.331: 29.3 

5,657 411.2 

7,943 11.0 

24,225 §£0.2 

4,895 34.9 

1,145 22.9% 

Nov 1336 Voter Registration PgCimatrs 

Total 

1,668 

29,3234 

477,403 

22,292 

137.615 

80,661 

§,879 

201,339 

447,000 

49,140 

7,004 

1%,7%7 

12,687 

18,149 

142,700 

48,396 

25,298 

37,000 

156.1311 

19,839 

S$,612 

34,697 

143,244 

41.507 

61,992 

49,570 

374,62) 

17.19] 

39,621 

2.1 

69,R03 

21,212 

98,232 

4U,740 

47,127 

11,669 

360,350 

13,070 

72,104 

43,150 

12,6758 

13,965 

D-Total 

1,177 

16,909 

160,139 

13,491 
06,061 
46,876 
1,781 

86,074 
237,03 

27,992 
4,756 

7,307 
10,134 

G.03¢ 
62,112 
29,802 
11,538 
19,592 

179.474 

9,480 

3,697 

14,973 

RAN 

36.514 

21,593 

20,009 

150,404 

11,758 

20,981 

25,924 

a9,5%0Y 

16,813 

45,594 

12,470 

41,416 

2.33 

222,798 

10,914 

32,470 

49,030 

2,315 

f,980 

  

(DY) 

82.§ 

57.6 

$2.7 

<9
 

> 

oC
 

®&
 

FF
 

2 
Vv

 
> 

Cc
 

LV
 

WP
 

61,4 

83.5 

45.0 

60.2 

73.7 

64.2 

R Toral 

217 

10,1865 

Re, 522 

6,023 

10,1335 

18,938 

1,4RK8 

80,559 

Yi, 30) 

15,293 

1,887 

1,132 

1,RG2 

10.5811 

61,172 

13,319 

11, 700 

11,990 

116.871 

7.027 

1,460 

16,738 

AA, HOS 

19,33R 

33.28) 

23,578 

109.3217 

2.404 

14,186 

5.051 

40,602 

4,701 

a8,R70 

§.217 

4,127 

5,560 

101,698 

1,534 

29,998 

11,068 

1,986 

1,448 

(RY) 

13.0 

34.% 

la.4 

»
 

-
 

N
N
 
W
w
»
 

Js
 

A 
N
O
 

W
W
 

- [3
 

> 
NW
 

L
O
 

{
S
I
 

B
E
N
 

B
E
 

I 
SE
 

L
Y
.
 
I
E
 

S
R
 

| 

3.27 

41.6 

22.9 

15.7 

47.3% 

la 

Plan: RSEN9IA 

1990 1992 1994 

Sen. San. Sen. 

14.8 $3.3 47.1} 

AR 0 34.1 38.7 

41.5 44.0 40.9 

S4.R 57.2 64.2 

63.3 63.0 64.80 

70.6 66.7 68.2 

30.0 40.37 7.2 

53.7 45.1 41.5 

‘eld. le 

41.0 

€3.5 

38.7 

82.4 

29.8 

40.2 

38.3 

14,3 
37.0 

3g.1 

23.58 

44.5 

30.4 

43.0 

47.0 

29.0 

32.2 

; of SH 

$0.4 

tly 

48.6 

43.0 

43.0 

44.4 

48.2 

60.3 

4131.0 

48.3 

£9.46 

35.0 

65.1 

59.2 

46.0 

Uv 

5.4 42.4 
40.4 42.8 
41.9 38.5 

fa.6 61.2 
12.9 28.4 

39.0 33.9 
49.9 40.9 
45.0 31.4 
45.0 2.8 

41.3 19.0 

35.6 20.4 
$2.7 46 
35.6 29.3 
42.27 42.9 
AV 4. 414 
33.0% 29.3 
33d aie 

3.7 10.3 

64.3 532.5% 
4.7 4&7. 

Ga.9 0.2 
47.1 42.3 
S1.8 4€.2 
43 4 48.1 
48.1 47.1 
70.4 52.4 
16.0 43.8 
$2.2 44.6 

CR.a 58.4 
31.5 27.8 
64.4 66.7 
66.6 50.2 
52.1 4G. 

 



   . APR- 7-97 MON 13:11 
- 

07/97 

ichmond 

.obeson 

.cotland 

‘canly 

‘nion 

‘otal (757) 

* Digtrict 9 

leveland 

ascon 

fecklenburg 

‘otal (229) 

‘¢ Districc 10 

\lexandez 

wery 

jurke 

laldwell 

‘atawba 

‘redell 

.Ancoln 

ticchell 

‘atauga 

illkes 

‘adkin 

‘octal (947) 

Fick 11 

e 

Therokee 

lay 

iraham 

iaywood 

ienderson 

‘ackson 

icDowell 

acon 

adison 

olk 

wtherford 

'wain 

Tansylvania 

‘ancey 

‘ocal (-297) 

®* Discricc 12 

avidson 

‘orsyth 

amilford 

redell 

imcklenburg 

Qwan 

Persons 

44,518 

- 23,631 

33,754 

51,765 

84,211 

553,143 

84,714 

175,093 

292,808 

552,615 

27,544 

14,867 

75,744 

70,709 

118,412 

54,472 

50,319 

14,433 

36,952 

59,393) 

30,488 

$53,333 

174,821 

20,170 

7.155 

7,196 

46,942 

69,285 

26,846 

35,681 

23,499 

16,953 

14,416 

56,918 

11,268 

25,520 

18,419 

$52,089 

66,684 

59,112 

136,087 

38.439 

218,628 

33,106 

Black 

PCC. 

28.91 

38.01 

36.07 

11.54 

15.94 

27.73 

20.94 

12.95% 

7.28 

11.12 

6.07 

1.06 

6.84 

5.49 

9.03 

10.14 

8.16 

0.16 

2.08 

4.75 

4.25 

6.53 

8.20 

1.79 

0.57 

0.01 

1.38 

3.41 

1.58 

4.15 

1.64 

0.80 

7.30 

11.44 

1.74 

4.66 

0.98 

5.30 

14.77 

72.92 

51.53 

24.29 

51.89 

35.62 

Black 

VAP 

26.21 

35.49 

2.71 

10.18 

14.10 

5.32 

18.83 

11.52 

6.47 

9.93 

S.68 

1.19 

6.37 

4.399 

7.96 

9.14 

7.13 

0.18 

2.24 

4.47 

4.10 

5.91 

7.38 

1.73 

0.58 

0.02 

1.29 

2.90 

1.74 

4.01 

1.%0 

0.91 

6.40 

10.31 

1.64 

4.01 

0.99 

4.76 

13.54 

69.80 

48.61 

21.70 

47.74 

32.16 

Draft North Carolina Congressional Districts 

37 House/Senate Plan A 

1990 Black Reg. 

Tocal Pcl.’ 

5,914 27.7 

6,661 40.0 

4,611 30.1 

2,662 9.9 

5.012 13.8 

57,239 24.7 

7,330 18.5 

9,896 12.5 

9,885 S.2 

27.111 S.3 

867 «9 

36 3 

2,320 6.1 

1,944 5.6 

4,25) 

2,221 9 

1.287 

[ 

0 0 

1.387 9 

425 7 

15,246 «2 

6,559 

133 

29 

[] 

364 

3,017 

23173 

748 

97 . 

62 

617 

2,376 

172 

636 9 

77 . 

13,154 . 

4,708 14.4 

20,693 71.4 

40,963 $1.2 

3,966 20.5 

$2,074 47.6 

4,79%0 28.1 

Estimated 

1996 Black Reg. 

Total pce. 

7,438 27.8 

4,893 37.0 

6,533 34.2 

3,053 9.4 

7,001 11.6 

74,783 24.0 

9,39 19.8 

11,628 31.9 

21,306 8.7 

42,325 10.9 

999 = 

43 .4 

2,671 . 

2,174 “2 

5,426 

2,871 . 

2,065 

21 

$22 

1,425 

S04 

18,721 : 4 

6,728 [3 

218 2 

35 

°] 

392 

1,147 

250 

793) 3.6 

35 

60 

678 

2,880 93.1 

js Jo By J 1.3 

i» 7985 

8s 

14,253 3.6 

S,436 12.6 

24,258 69.1 

46,6388 52.3 

S,014 18.7 

66,570 47.8 

6,456 30.2 

Nov 1996 Voter Registration Estimates 

Total 

26,673 

13,208 

19,100 

32.1173 

59,865 

310,383 

47,272 

97,568 

243,398 

388,238 

20,68¢ 

10,691 

46,495 

41,117 

78,139 

36,623 

34,342 

10,260 

32,329 

37,389 

18,357 

366,406 

119,168 

16,900 

6,256 

S.79% 

34,868 

55,475 

19,184 

21,501 

18,760 

13,472 

11,838 

I1,333 

8,592 

19,883 

12,958 

39s, 985 

43,122 

35,098 

89,238 

26,697 

139,246 

21,336 

D-Total 

20,625 

11,127 

13,409 

35,139 

27,617 

178,626 

30,007 

48,028 

91,052 

169,087 

3.071 

1,722 

23,460 

17,586 

30,285 

17,216 

16,363 

3.353 

12,535 

23,194 

$.737 

148,579 

64,516 

8,269 

2,787 

2,674 

21,747 

18,652 

10,3197 

12,256 

8,645 

8,218 

5.2814 

19,056 

S,241 

9,193 

6,841 

204,176 

19,331 

26,850 

60,065 

13,37s 

87,959 

12,137 

(Ds) 

77.3 

84.2 

70.2 

47.0 

46.1 

57.4 

63.4 

49.2 

37.4 

43.5 

43.8 

16.1 

50.4 

42.7 

38.7 

47.0 

47.6 

13.1 

33.9 

35.3 

3.2 

40.5 

$4.1 

48.9 

44.5 

46.1 

62.3 

313.6 

56.2 

$7.0 

46.0 

61.0 

44.6 

60.8 

61.0 

46.2 

52.7 

51.5 

44.8 

76.5 

67.3 

50.1 

63.1 

$6.8 

R-Total 

4,292 

1,31¢ 

3,343 

13,107 

24,379 

94,866 

12,820 

39,005 

111,674 

163,499 

9,587 

7,678 

17,507 

18,581 

36,560 

15,530 

13,876 

7.786 

13,497 

21,125 

11,289 

173,016 

39,900 

6,891 

2.522 

2.633 

9,304 

27.86) 

5.815 

7.334 

7.558 

4,053 

4,800 

9.494 

2,348 

7.77} 

4,969 

143,253 

19,852 

4,995 

19,416 

10,114 

32,526 

6,981 

(R%) 

16.0 

9.9 

17.5 

40.7 

40.7 

30.5 

39.9 

45.8 

~ 
~ 

w
n
 

[+
] 

~~
 

o * 

> 
a 

" 
~ 

a
 

da 
aa 

le 
«a
y 

T
e
 

N 
U
U
 

uu 
® 

d
d
 

J
E
 

0 
Ww 

F o 
Ww
 

oo
 

® 
o 

W
O
 

W
w
 

n
C
 

N
H
 
W
N
 

w
u
 

a 

w
 

oo
 

P. 04 

Plan: HSEN97A 

19390 19392 1996 

Sen. Sen Sen. 

S4.8 63.2 53.9 

63.0 70.0 63.3 

56.8 66.3 sS7.8 

34.7 40.9 34.9 

36.4 39.3 35.3 

47.3 50.6 46.4 

46. 46.3 45.2 

35.9: 32.6" "315.8 

48.1 40.0 46.6 

44.6 38.9 43.6 

35.9 40.3 34.4 

26.1..29.8.728.3 

42.1 45.0 42.0 

37.3 38.0 35.8 

38.2::35.6 35.5 

36.3 “35.6 33.7 

38.6 39.5 37.3% 

.“e i. 27.3 225.8 

$3.0 47.8 495.7 

31.2. 35.8 12.6 

249.9 31.3 23.8 

37.2 38.0" l5.2 

19.8% 47.8. 90.7 

42.8 46.4 43.2 

44.5 46.0 45.6 

35.4 449.1 37.7 

49.5°::53.3- 49.2 

41.5 415.7 ."38.9 

$2.1 55.1. 54.9 

38.4 46.0 38.0 

47.6 46.0 42.1 

47.7..'5S3.5 49.8 

45.1 44.1 45.1 

40.0 44.0 40.0 

46.2 'S2.9 52.9 

45.9 44.2 45.1 

42.4 50.5 46.5 

45.9 46.5 46.0 

36.8 39.731.) 

82.7 80.5 79.0 

69.0 66.8 69.6 

49.1 43.9 43.2 

75.0 68.4 72.3 

54.0 53.2 $83.5 

 



  

    

  

. AFx- 7-97 MON 13:12 P. 05 

il praft North Carolina Congressional Districts Plan: HSEN97A 

97 House/Senate Plan A 

Bstimaled 

Black #lack 1990 Black Reg.. 1996 Black Reg. Nov 1996 Voter Regastralion EBxlimalwews 1990 1992 1396 

Persons Pct. VAP Tocal Pct. Total Pct. Total D-Total (D%) R-Tocal (R¥) Sen. Sen. Sen. 

cal (-343) S52,043 46.67 43.36 127,191 44.2 154,419 43.5 354,734 219,717 61.9 93,884 26.4 66.6 62.6 64.2 

Page 4 

 



§163-201 ol sizcrions  s1e320 @ 

109, Block 133, Block 134, Block 135, Block 136, Block 137, Block 
138, Block 139, Block 140, Block 141, Block 142, Block 143, Block 
144, Block 146, Block 148, Block 191, Block 192, Block 193; Block 
Group 2: Block 216, Block 217, Block 218; Tolars *: Tract 0108: 
Block Group 2: Block 211A, Block 212, Block 213, Block 214, Block 
215, Block 219, Block 220, Block 221, Block 222, Block 223A, Block 
224A, Block 254A, Block 255, Block 256, Block 257, Block 258, Block 
259A, Block 260A, Block 261A, Block 262, Block 263, Block 264, 
Block 265, Block 266, Block 267, Block 268, Block 269, Block 270, 
Block 275, Block 276, Block 277A, Block 285A; Caldwell *: Tract 
0108: Block Group 2: Block 201, Block 202, Block 203, Block 204, 
Block 205, Block 206, Block 207, Block 208, Block 209, Block 210, 
Block 211B, Block 223B, Block 224B, Block 225, Block 226, Block 
227, Block 228, Block 229, Block 230, Block 231, Block 232, Block 
233, Block 234, Block 235, Block 236, Block 237, Block 238, Block 
239A, Block 239B, Block 240, Block 241, Block 242, Block 243, Block 
244, Block 245, Block 246, Block 247, Block 248, Block 249, Block 
250, Block 251, Block 252, Block 253, Block 254B, Block 259B, Block 
260B, Block 261B, Block 277B, Block 284B, Block 285B, Block 286, 
Block 287, Block 288, Block 289, Block 290, Block 291, Block 292, 
Block 293, Block 294, Block 295, Block 296A, Block 296B, Block 
297A, Block 297B; Block Group 3: Block 301, Block 302, Block 303, 
Block 304, Block 305, Block 306, Block 307B, Block 319B, Block 320, 
Block 321, Block 322, Block 323; Block 324, Block 325, Block 326, 
Block 327, Block 328, Block 329, Block 330, Block 331, Block 332, 
Block 333, Block 334, Block 335, Block 336, Block 337, Block 341, 
Block 370, Block 371, Block 372, Block 373, Block 374B; Tract 0109: 
Block Group 2: Block 201B, Block 201C, Block 201D, Block 201E, 
Block 202, Block 203, Block 204B: Rowan County: Franklin *: Tract 
0505: Block Group 1: Block 101E; Tract 0513.01: Block Group 2: 
Block 208B; Block Group 3: Block 302; Tract 0513.02: Block Group 
3: Block 301, Block 307, Block 308, Block 309, Block 310, Block 311, 
Block 312, Block 313, Block 314, Block 315, Block 316, Block 317, 

  

Block 318, Block 321C, Block 321D, Block 322, Block 323, Block 324, 
Block 325, Block 326, Block 327, Block 328, Block 329, Block 330, 
Block 331, Block 332, Block 333, Block 334; Tract 0519: Block Group 
2: Block 225A, Block 248A, Block 249, Block 250; East Spencer ¥, 
Milford Hills *, Spencer *, Trading Ford, West Innes *: Tract 0505 
Block Group 2: Block 211, Block 212, Block 213; Block Group 3: 
Block 311, Block 315, Block 316, Block 317, Block 318, Block 319, 
Block 320, Block 321, Block 322, Block 323, Block 324, Block 325, 
Block 326, Block 327, Block 328, Block 329, Block 330, Block 331, 
Block 332, Block 333, Block 334, Block 335; Tract 0513.02: Block 
Group 3: Block 3214; East Ward II *, North Ward I *, North Ward 
IT *: Tract 0505: Block Group 1: Block 101B, Block 101C, Block 104, 
Block 107A, Block 110; Tract 0506: Block Group 1: Block 104A, Block 
105, Block 106, Block 107, Block 112, Block 113, Block 114, Block 
115, Block 116, Block 119, Block 120, Block 121, Block 122, Block 
123, Block 132; West Ward III *, Trading Ford Noncontiguous A, 
Scotch Irish *, Unity *. - 2? 

(b) The names and boundaries of townships, precincts (voting 
tabulation districts), tracts, block groups, and blocks, specified in 
this section are as they were legally defined and recognized in the 
1990 U.S. Census, except as provided in subsection (c) of this 
section. Boundaries are as shown on the IVTD Version of the United 
States Bureau of the Census 1990 TIGER Files, with such modifi- 

228  



    

  

? 

! 
' 

} 

  

  

  

   
   

  

r J ART. 17. U.S. REPRESENTATIVE 3163-201 

ca as made by the Legislative Services " and shown on its 
computer database as of May 1, 1991, to reflect census blocks 
divided by prior district boundaries, and precincts added or modified 
as outlined in subsection (c) of this section. 

(¢) For Guilford County, precinct boundaries for High Point 
Precincts 20, 23, and 24 are as modified by the Guilford County 
Board of Elections and shown on the Legislative Services Office 
computer database as of May 1, 1991. 

For Mecklenburg County, precinct boundaries are as altered by 
the Mecklenburg County Board of Elections as reported to the 
Legislative Services Office and shown on the Legislative Services 
Office computer database as of May 1, 1991. 

For Wake County: 
(1) St. Marys Precinct #7 is as created by the Wake County 

Board of Elections out of St. Marys Precinct #4; 
(2) Raleigh 01-27 Part is an area reported by the Bureau of the 

Census as part of Raleith 01-23 but has been put by the 
Wake County Board of Elections in Raleigh 01-27; and 

(3) VID ZZZZ has been assigned to the appropriate parts of 
Wake Forest #1 and Wake Forest #2, 

all as shown on the Legislative Services Office computer database as 
of May 1, 1991. 

For Anson, Bertie, Camden, Caswell, Franklin, Gates, Greene, 
Hertford, Hoke, Lee, Lincoln, Martin, Mitchell, Northampton, 
Pasquotank, Perquimans, Person, Tyrrell, Vance, Warren, and 
Yadkin Counties, precincts are as shown on maps on file with the 
Legislative Services Office as of May 1, 1991, except that: 

(1) In Anson County, Lanesboro #1 and Lanesboro #2 are listed 
together as Lanesboro #1 and #2; 

(2) In Vance County, where West Henderson II is not contigu- 
ous, the northerly part is listed as West Henderson IIA and 
the southerly part as West Henderson IIB; 

(3) In Perquimans County, computer VID Code 0005 (Tract 
9801, Block 550A) is actually part of Belvidere Precinct and 
is districted with it notwithstanding any description above; 

(4) In Greene County, Snow Hill Town Satellite is Tract 9503, 
Block 301A which is a part of Snow Hill Town Precinct 
entirely surrounded by Sugg Precinct and is districted with 
Sugg Precinct notwithstanding any description above; 

(5) In Greene County, Snow Hill Town Sat B is Tract 9503, 
Block 224B which is a part of Snow Hill Town Precinct 
entirely surrounded by Snow Hill Rural Precinct and is 
districted with Snow Hill Rural Precinct notwithstanding 
any description above; 

(6) In Mecklenburg County, Precinct XMC2 Noncontiguous is 
Tract 55.01, Block 303C, and is districted with Precinct 
MC1 notwithstanding any description above; 

(7) In Martin County, any listing of VTDs not defined consists 
of Tract 9705, Block 413 (which is in Poplar Point Precinct), 
Tract 9704, Block 202 (which is in Goose Nest Precinct), 
and Tract 9706, Block 168A (which is in Robersonville #2 
Precinct), and those blocks are districted with those respec- 
tive precincts regardless of any listing above; 

(8) In New Hanover County, Tract 123.98, Blocks 307B, 308A, 
309, 310A, 311A, and 312A, listed by the Census Bureau as 
art of VID ZZZZ, are districted by this section as part of 
ilmington #2. 

229 

 



  

\ 

BPA 
s Se 

§163-201 rr] ELECTIONS §163-201 
If any precinct or township boundaries are changed, such ch shall not change the boundaries of the Congressional Districts, which shall remain the same. 

Ti In the case where any individual blocks are listed above, the district allocation of unlisted water blocks shall be as found on maps and statistical reports of the districts on file with the Secretary of tate 
(cl) In this section: 

(1) Wake County Tract 05 10, Block 301 is shown on the computer database as part of Raleigh 01-23 * when it isin fact correctly shown on the Board of Elections map ag part 

of North Brook III; 
3 (4) Mecklenburg County Tract 0044 Block 906F is shown on the computer database as part of OAK when it is in fact correctly shown on the Board of Elections map as part of 

(d) If this section does not specifically assign any area within North Carolina to a district, and the area is: : (1) Entirely surrounded by a single district, the area shall be deemed to have been assigned to that district; (2) Contiguous to two or more districts, the area shall be deemed to have been assigned to that district which con- tains the least population according to the 1990 United States Census: or 
(3) Contiguous to only one district and to another state or the Atlantic Ocean, the area shall be deemed to have been 

1982, Ex. Sess., c. 7; 1991], ¢. 601, s. };c 761 1991, Ex. Sess, c. 7,8. 1; 1993, c. 553, s. 66.) 

Editor's Note. — Session Laws 1991, Justice on February 6, 1992. Ex. Sess., c. 7, which amended this sec- Legal Periodicals. — For article, tion and which was submitted to the “Political Gerrymandering After Davis v. Attorney General of the United States Bandemer,” see 9 Campbell L. Rev. 207 pursuant to Section 5 of the Voting (1987). Rights Act of 1965, as amended (42 For article, “Racial Gerrymandering U.S.C. 1973¢), received preclearance and the Voting Rights Act in North Caro- from the United States Department of lina,” see 9 Campbell L. Rev. 255 (1987). 

230 

  

  

  

  

An
ta
 
st
 

  
 



    

’ 
{ 

! 
? 
i 

N 
1 

' 

I 

’ 

    

# 
§163-201.1 ART. 17. U.S. REPRESENTATIVES §163-201.2 

CASE NOTES 

Constitutionality. — As the variance 
between the enacted legislative plan and 
a rejected alternative plan was insub- 
stantial and de minimis, and the legisla- 
ture made a good faith effort to equitably 
reapportion, this section was constitu- 
tional and not in violation of the equal 
protection clause of U.S. Const., Amend. 
XIV. Drum v. Scott, 337 F. Supp. 588 
(M.D.N.C. 1972). 

The act of the 1967 session of the 
legislature reapportioning congressional 
districts met minimum federal constitu- 
tional standards. Drum v. Seawell, 271 F. 
Supp. 193 (M.D.N.C. 1967). 

For case holding former apportion- 
ment unconstitutional, see Drum w. 

Seawell, 249 F. Supp. 877 (M.D.N.C. 
1965), aff’d, 383 U.S. 831, 86 S. Ct. 1237, 
16 L. Ed. 2d 298 (1966). 

Practical and Rational Equality 
Required. — While rigid mathematical 
standards are not the sine qua non of 
constitutional validity, practical and ra- 
tional equality is required. Such equality 

recognizes only minor deviations which 

may occur in the recognition of rational 

and legitimate factors, free from the 
taint of arbitrariness, irrationality and 
discrimination. Drum v. Seawell, 250 F. 
Supp. 922 M.D.N.C. 1966). 

Stricter adherence to equality of 
population between districts may 
more logically be required in congres- 
sional than in state legislative represen- 
tation. Drum v. Seawell, 250 F. Supp. 922 

(M.D.N.C. 1966). 

§ 163-201.1. Severability of congressional appor- 
tionment acts. 

If any provision of any act of the General Assembly that appor- 
tions congressional districts is held invalid by any court of compe- 
tent jurisdiction, the invalidity shall not affect other provisions that 
can be given effect without the invalid provision; and to this end the 
provisions of any said act are severable. (1981, c. 771, s. 2.) 

§ 163-201.2. Dividing precincts in congressional 
apportionment acts restricted. 

(a) An act of the General Assembly that apportions congressional 
districts after the return of a census may not divide precincts unless 
an act that apportioned congressional districts after the return of 
that same census has been rejected by the United States Depart- 
ment of Justice or the District Court for the District of Columbia 
under section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. 

(b) If an act that apportioned congressional districts has been 
rejected by the United States Department of Justice or the District 
Court for the District of Columbia under section 5 of the Voting 
Rights Act of 1965, then a subsequent act may only divide the 
minimum number of precincts necessary to obtain approval of the 
act under section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. 

(c) This section does not prevent the General Assembly from 
taking any action to comply with federal law or the Constitution of 
the United States. (1995, c. 355, s. 2.) 

Editor’s Note. — Session Laws 1995, upon ratification. The Act was ratified 
c. 365, s. 3, made this section effective June 29, 1996. 

231 

 



  

  

  

1997 Congressional Plan — Davidson County 
Precincts by Percent Democrat Vote in 

1990 Senate Race 
  

  

  

  

  
  

  

  

  
  

  

  

  

  
  

    
  

  

  

  

  

Fe = 
TT —— 

7 

7 : 

A 
  

        

    

  

September 13, 1999 

LEGEND 

County Boundary 

VID Boundary 

  

Dist. Boundary (C004) 

1 0-39.9X Democrat 

DOCKXXX)] 40 — 49.9% Democrat 

PZ777777] 50 — 59.9% Democrat 

EER] 60 - 100% Democrat 

PLAINTIFF'S 
EXHIBIT 
264 
  

  

N.C. General Assembly 

Legislative Services Ofc. 

Redistricting System 

Software Copyright 1990 

Public Systems Associates 
  

  

 



  

  
Precincts by Percent Democrat Vote in 

1990 Senate Race 
  

1997 Congressional Plan — Iredell County 

  
  

  

        
   

  

   
    

       

  

Ls 0. 0.0.0 

0. @ 0.6.6” 
OV) * 
200%". 

os 
      

  BHOTRS A CX BRRRX XN] 

00? 70%% Ou PLEX 
& 

   

    

   

    

ORR 
  

\/ 
RA 

BERK 

> $6     

  
  

  
  

     
        

    

    

       

September 13, 1999 

LEGEND 

County Boundary 

VTD Boundary 

Dist. Boundary (C004) 

[CC] 0- 39.9% Democrat 

BOON] 40 — 49.9% Democrat 
0777777] 50 — 59.9% Democrat 

60 — 100% Democrat 

  

  

PLAINTIFF’S 
EXHIBIT 

  

  

N.C. General Assembly 

Legislative Services Ofc. 
  

  

SS MA 2 
000%! oo OOO " OOOO ee KX AERL RAS | 

00,00 0°03 ‘ets 
*® 

  

  

  

  I 
  

  

  
  Redistricting System 

Software Copyright 1990 

Public Systems Associates 

  

  

 



  

  
  

  

  NORTHAMPTON In 
ALLEGHANY, 3 y GATES 2 

n ASw ARSON £ ARREN sroxts OCHINOHAM SWELL | PERS & x, w. t 2 VARTIONG NN 

J   HALIPAR 
  

! Aa. of 3 
PY Oreensbors «°° s PRANKLIN 

4 ° 
CALDWELL OUILIOAD d , 

IATDELL Jf DAVIE TYRRELL 

    
DARE     VANCEY 

  

MADISON 
DAVIDION 

su~nCOoMel 
Aohovite CATAWSA 

®     
[1 RUTHEAPORD HInCOLN rie 

CARTON @ STANLY 

avian 0, hb 
[) \ 

Chortetve 

  
CHEnOw « CUMBE ALAND 

SAMPSON 

ROSLION BLADEN 

coLumeus 

V
Y
N
I
'
T
O
d
 

VD
 
H
L
Y
O
N
 

HE Re SA SY 

PLAINTIFF'S’: 
EXHIBIT 24 

a Er vc) 
E     

         



  
  
  

(11 Districts) 

  

  

  

      
   

  

  

   

  

  

ALL L1ivan NUL RINGHAM 

ASHE STOXLS 

™ 

fd WILKLS YAORIN TORSTIN SCREEN SBORO fe 

WINSTON-SALEM PY hi 

HIGH <'e 
— 

DAVIL fe POINT : 
-« 

HADISON o 
DAVIDSON 

; VY Eiak ranoouPr A] CHATHAM 

BUNCONBE a). PS 

[ J 
0 

SALISBUR in HATWOOD |, cy ev ILLE nr 
RUTHERFORD % %%, 

CRATAN HENDERSON GASTONIA x, 0, 

POLK s ® ’) i BEA 
LEVELAND < 

GASTON ra an 

CHEROREL MACON o S o 
CHARLOTTE z 

CLAY 
3 

UNION ANSON i & 

< 5 
( o 

3 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC STATISTICS ADMINISTRATION 

BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 

CaswlLL | PLRSON ; 

HALIFAR 

— 
- 

~ Iq 

id C 2 
3 FRANRLIN / 

BURLING TO ROCKY MOUNT 

aD NASH Fr pGECOMBE 

  

Map of Congressional Districts, Counties, and Selected Cities 

— NORTHAMPTO0 
— 

WARREN 
HERTFORD 

    
APEL HILL 

RALEIGH 

          

   
WILSON 

WAK( 

        JOHNSTON 
GOLDSBORO 

® 

    

    FAYETTEVILLE 
SAMPSON    

STAAL ESR SE I nT Es 
pm a * 

22 PEAINTIEES; 5 
2 wis 

San 

pect + oH tv] 

  

ioe 

  

  

  

  

    

  
  

[
/
4
1
°
4
7
 

|
M
A
Y
 

pa
ys

 
qo

is
y 

si 

   



MULTI-COUNTY PLANNII REGIONS AND THEIR 

PLANNING AGENCIES 

    

   
    

  

      

   © cums © © Gum— © © Gm——"© © 

  

        

    

. Ce 0.0 a fp Sn © 6 wn 0 @ 

angen 

    

Commu oo 0 Gms © 0 Cum © @ Sm—" "6 00 omnes og Gm—" oO 

[ [ELLLANY rine 

peatnsar ios 

peeat 
[RITIR) 

aettineein 

Ba 
F-/ 

man 

seas 

  

wataves 
     

       

        

    

  

   

  

   

Ne iki / 

        
    

    

nine avdmancl     

MI sey 
0 

rascey w 
> 

soi 
wareeer 

wl 

LO] 

      

    

ark ” . CLEviLang 

  

    
Aye’ 

A Jacenen 

a 

/ cataesnt 
nites 

Li dich \.—* . — 44 ed mel
 weer isenne 

[ 
“ay 

nt 

Je, 

00 mms ob cmm— 
[LUA LL] 

  

00 men 00 Gmm— ® 
    

  

LY 

  

- 

       "uy 
Ty. 

coLomnt 

J) 

IA
XX
 

    

  

Planning Agency 

Southwestern North Carolina Planning and Economic Development Commission 

Land-of -Sky Regional Council 

Isothermal Planning and Development Commission 

Region D Council of Governments 

o
w
»
 

Western Piedmont Council of Governments 

Centralina Council of Governments 

Piedmont Triad Council of Governments 

Pee Dee Council of Governments 

  

Q
™
m
m
 

—~
 

foo
d 

Northwest Piedmont Council of Governments 

Triangle J Council of Governments 

Kerr-Tar Regional Council of Governments 

Region L Council of Governments 

R
L
 

Region M Council of Governments 

N——— 
“« 

(or aga EE Se 

Lumber River Council of Governments 

EAR Sa 3 

Cape Fear Council of Governments 

BLAIN IFES 

EXHIBIT = 
Neuse River Council of Governments 

w
o
O
o
Z
X
 

Mid-East Commission 

Albemarle Regional Planning and Development Commission 

=
O
 

    
  

  

            
NOTE: The map outlined above shows the new Planning Region I that was created in 1979 when Region G was divided into two 

planning regions. The statistical tables presented in this "Abstract'' were compiled before this change in planning 

regions took place and therefore do not show data for Region I. 

 



  

BAAR TIPLE       

{ 

NORFORK-VIRGINIA BEACH-PORTSMOUTH 
NORFOLK CITT 

PORTSMOUTH CITY KAO) FAOSR 

PORTSMOUTHI®) @YrGrm BEACH 
w= VIRGINIA BEACH 

  

  

   

   

    

    

  

       
   

  

   

      
       

   

   

    

  

CHESAPEAKE 
Hata ra 

\ ed 

ALLEGHANY A OOOTIN 

Ang SURRY CASWELL | PERSON 

GREENSBORO-WINS 
BURLINGTON 

WATAUGA 8 SRE 
a SE BY 

AVERY CKY MO 

5 

GREENVILLE 

sUNCOMBE 2 MC DOWELL CATAWBA 

0 pUAUFORT   
© ASHEVILLE 

WS 

    

   

     
  

            

  

   

SFE ‘e, UNCOLN TT 
A 

H 3 

HENDERSON Runemone “O23 Ni GASTON AN > eh, MOORE SR 

POLK GASTONIAQ) oy \ Bam “s, Vs 

BD CHEROKEE 
EHANQITE J cn : o A 5 I” TTEVILLE 

Ww 

CHARJLOTTE-GASTONIA Fi % o 2 SAMPSON 

; ih S. FAYETTEVILLE 

ROBISON 
PENDLR 

ILMINGTON 
COLUMBUS 

LEGEND 

® Places ol 100,000 or more inhabitants 

[] Places of 50,000 to 100,000 inhabitants 

(®) Central cities of SMSA's with fewer than 50,000 inhabitants 

OQ Places of 25,000 to 50,000 inhabitants outside SM3A’'s 

7 Standard Metropolitan 

Statistical Areas (SMSA’s) 

EERE TT 

as defined in 1972 
PLAINTIFF’ or 

EXHIBIT 

  
SOURCE: U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. 

 



  

O
0
0
 

9
 

A
 

nt
 

A
 
W
N
 

=
 

e
T
 

e
T
 

S
E
 

= 
SE
 

= 
SE

 
ey

 
a 

r
R
 

E
e
 

r
R
 

E
L
 
v
g
 

WE
 

ee
 

19 

# No 
Gerry F. Cohen 9/17/99 Page 198 
  

  

A Are you talking about the 1st District or the 12th? 

Are you talking about if the 12th became 51? 

Q 1st and the 12th. If it were a district that had 46 

percent, would you say there would be a very high likelihood 

that an African American--- | 

Ms. Smiley: (interposing) Objection; asked and 

answered. 

Q —---would be nominated and elected? I am just trying 

to clarify the two. 

A I think it is a much greater likelihood that a black 

candidate be elected in a 12th District that was 46 percent 

black than in a 1st District that was 51 percent black, more 

likely with the 46. 

Q I’m sorry? 

A More likely with the 46 in the 12th than with 51 in 

the 1st. 

Q Is that because of the substantial white crossover 

vote? 

A That and because of the substantial number in the 12th 

of whites that are registered as Republicans that still vote 

in the Democratic primary. | 

Q So that would mean that the nominee would be much more 

likely to be an African American in the first instance? 

A What is the first--- 

  

Ms. Smiley: (interposing) Object to the form of 

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



[o—
y 

DN
 

OB
 

he
 

ped
 

ped
 

ped
 

ped
 

fed
 

pd
 

fd
 

ped
 

ped
 

3 
= 

0 
F
i
 

© 
WW.

 
O00

 
A
O
N
 

Un
 

RA
 

N
e
e
 

# # 
Gerry F. Cohen 9/17/99 Page 199 
  

eC
 

00
 

9 
a
 

n
n
 

A&
A 

W
B
N
 

  

the question. 

A What is the first instance? 

The 12th District, I’m sorry, the 12th District. 

When you said the first instance--- 

Ms. Smiley: (interposing) I still object to the 

form of the question. 

Q Okay. Let me rephrase it, then. Would it be true, 

then, that you are surmising that if there is a 46 percent 

population of African Americans in the 12th District, then 

the percentage of African Americans voting in the Democratic 

primary would be very substantial, considerably above 46 

percent? 

A Yes. 

Q And that in turn it would be highly likely they would 

nominate an African American as a candidate; is that correct? 

Ms. Smiley: Object to the form of the question; 

characterization of dominance. 

A I think it would allow in that situation minority 

candidates to elect a candidate of their choice. 

Q And would it be your view that in most instances their 

choice would be to have an African American candidate 

represent them? 

A I can’t speak for the voters in the district, but I 

think the historical record probably would show that. 

Q I'm sorry? 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886    



© 
JANE

S 
TS
 J
 

SE
 

= 
S
y
 

= 
GE

 
Cr
 

SS
 

T
E
 
a 

<
=
 

# a 
Linwood L. Jones 9/22/99 
  

N
D
B
 

NE
 

EN
 

a 
dN

 
TG

 
N
p
 

  

in 1991 by myself and others on the staff covering a number 

of issues relating to redistricting. 

Q And Exhibit 317? 

A Exhibit 31 is a spreadsheet, and it is showing I 

believe 1996 election data and 1996 registration data for 

District 2 at some point during the 1997 negotiation. I do 

not know if this is the final plan or sons plan that led up 

to the final plan. 

Q This was used in negotiation of what? 

A This was used by Representative--or by myself and 

Representative McMahan to look at the Republican versus 

Democratic voting in District 2 in 1997. 

Q Well, I will get back to that in just a moment, if I 

may. 

A Okay. 

Q Are you aware of whether the same thing was done with 

respect to any other congressional districts? 

A I believe we did a similar spreadsheet for District 4, 

but those were the only two we did this for, 2 and 4. 

Q Were you working primarily with and for the chair, 

Representative McMahan, in doing this or were you working 

with several others very closely in that connection? 

A In connection with the House redistricting committee, 

I worked primarily for Representative McMahan. I did work 

with a few other legislators in drawing plans. 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886    



eo
 

0 
9 

A
 

n
n
 

A
 
W
N
 

BD
 

be
d 

pe
d 

pd
 

pe
d 

fe
ed

 
pe

d 
fe

d 
pe

d 
pe

d 
fe

d 

| 4 @ 
Linwood L. Jones 9/22/99 
  

  

Ms. Harrell: (interposing) She has not waived the 

legislative privilege, so as far as any requests from her-—- 

Mr. Everett: (interposing) Okay. 

Ms. Harrell: ---I would instruct him not to 

answer. 

Mr. Everett: Sure; all right. 

By Mr. Everett: 

Q Under what circumstances did you prepare this particu- 

lar e-mail? 

Ms. Harrell: Objection to the extent that he 

cannot answer without revealing communications to her 

from--further communications to Senator Winner or communica- 

tions from Senator Winner that would come within the 

legislative privilege. 

A"--Yeah. ‘I'don’t recall what it is in connection with. 

I mean, it appears to be during the time of redistricting, 

but I don’t recall anything else about it. 

Q Now, this was back in the 1960s? 

A 1996, ‘right. 

Q 1996. Do you remember whether you sent the same 

information to anybody besides Leslie Winner? 

‘A I don’t recall. 

Q To the best of your knowledge, is that accurate in 

terms of registration figures as of April 1996? 

A To the best of my knowledge, although I do not recall 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886    



  

Lo
 

XR
 

9 
A
 

Un
 

A
 

W
O
 

DN
 

11 

# # 
Linwood L. Jones 9/22/99 Page 80 
  

  

what the source of this information was. 

Q So far as you can recall, was that the last date as to 

which you had what you thought were relevant--thought were 

accurate registration figures, the most current date as to 

which you had what you thought to be accurate registration 

figures? | 

A To the best of my recollection. 

Q And those are statewide figures? 

A They are statewide. 

Q Is it true that the African American population in 

North Carolina is about 22 percent of the population? 

A I don’t know exactly. I would put it between 20 and 

25. 

Q And the voting age population? 

. A I don’t know what the voting age population is. 

Q Would the voting age population of African Americans, 

to the best of your knowledge, be a lower percentage than the 

total population percentage? 

A It would be a lower percentage. 

Q Now, would you consider African Americans in North 

Carolina to be widely dispersed? 

Ms. Harrell: Objection; I don’t--objection to the 

form of the question. I don’t know what you mean by widely 

dispersed. 

Q Okay. Are the--- 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

O
 

G0
 

e
l
 

N
U
N
 

A
 
W
N
 

=
 

C
U
R
E
 

© 
J 

© 
J
V
 

JE
 

Sh
 

Or 
GU
 

S
R
 
S
U
 

S
E
 

SE
 
o
R
 

oo 
JE
 

eee
 

A
 

BD
. 

RB
 

EE
 

SB
 
8
:
 

N
e
 

n
i
h
 

W
N
 

m
S
 

4 » 
Linwood L. Jones 9/22/99 Page 148 
  

  

Mr. Stein: Objection. 

A I don’t know what agreement or discussions they had 

on, you know, how they would do the district. 

Q And I believe I asked you this earlier, but just to be 

sure, you do not recall any discussions where McMahan, Cohen 

or you were involved where you were present where the view 

was expressed that if it is below 50 percent it is not 

subject to Shaw v. Reno, or do you recall that? 

Ms. Harrell: Asked and answered. 

Mr. Everett: It probably is, but I must admit I 

can’t recall. That was long ago and far away. 

The Witness: Yeah. 

Ms. Harrell: I believe that is one where I had 

directed him not to answer as to any legislator--- 

The ‘Witness:  ~ (interposing) Right. 

Ms. Harrell: ---other than the ones who had waived 

their legislative privilege. 

The Witness: I believe the answer I gave was that 

I believe Senator Cooper referred to that on the Senate 

floor, which is in the transcript. 

By Mr. Everett: 

Q And that was never withdrawn as a matter of record-- 

  

j.e., he never said, "I ‘was vrong" or—-- 

A (interposing) Yeah. He never took it back, as far as 

I know. 

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 

Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

C
e
 

0
0
 

9
 

A
 

n
n
 

A
 

W
O
N
 

=
 

I 
S
C
 

p
p
d
 

25 

4 * 
Linwood L. Jones 9/22/99 Page 149 
  

  

Q And nobody else ever took it back for him? 

A As far as I know. 

Q And so far as you know, neither Mike Easley, Tiare 

Smiley, Eddie Speas, or anyone else you could identify from 

the AG’s office ever came over ‘and said it was wrong, "I take 

it back"? 

Ms. Harrell: Objection to the extent you are 

asking for advice of counsel. 

Mr. Everett: Let’s say on the record instead. 

Ms. Harrell: In the public record. 

By Mr. Everett: 

Q Let me ask you to look at Exhibit 34. 

Mr. Markham: 31. 

Q 31; I beg your pardon. And 31 is--I believe you 

t-a@lready- testified generally what it was, but in preparation 

for the next question could you describe again what 31 

purports to be? 

A It is a spreadsheet showing various election data and 

registration data which I believe is all from 1996. And this 

is only for District 2. And what I don’t know is exactly 

which stage of the development of plans this spreadsheet goes 

to. 

Q And with respect to--is there any other one like this" 

for say the 4th District, to the best of your recollection? 

A We may have had one for the 4th District, but in 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 

Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

eo
 

0
0
 

9 
A 

n
i
 

A 
W
O
N
 

T
R
E
 

C
R
 

S
E
R
 

fe
 

R
S
 

IW
 
SE

 
S
R
N
 

a
e
 

AR 
P
E
R
 

R
B
S
 

E
I
 

5 
hn 

B
W
 
N
S
 

4 a 
Linwood L. Jones 9/22/99 Page 150 
  

  

looking for it we weren’t able to locate it. I do know we 

didn’t do them beyond the 2nd and possibly the 4th. 

Q You don’t recall any being done for the 12th or for 

the 1st or anything like this? 

A Not by the House; there was nothing we had access to 

or that I had access to. 

Q Is there any that was done by the Senate that you had 

access to or are aware of? 

A There was nothing we had access to--that I had access 

to during the time the negotiations between Representative 

McMahan and Senator Cooper were going on. 

Q Now, with respect to results of various types, did you 

at any time see any results of elections that had been 

furnished by NCEC, whatever that means, I think National 

1 Center. of  something,=which is a think:tank having some sort 

of Democratic orientation? 

A I don’t recall seeing anything like that until after 

the enactment of the plan. 

Q So during the process you saw nothing of that sort? 

A Right. 

Q How about election results furnished by any other 

group regardless of whether they are partisan or non- 

partisan? Did you see anything other than what you have 

already told me? 

A No, not that I recall. 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

No
 

0
 

Na
 

A
A
 

n
t
 
A
W
N
 

SS
 

o
T
 

T
T
 

oo 
S
C
 

C
y
 

GA 
Gh
 

CO 
S
y
 

GH 
S
Y
 

l
g
 

N
w
 

OS
 

NS
 

R
T
T
 

ER
 
W
N
 

m
S
 

» * 
W. Edwin McMahan 10/1/99 Page 88 
  

  

Q Did you receive any additional election data from 

groups like the National Republican Committee or any other 

group with respect--- 

A (interposing) No, sir, I did not. 

Q And so far as you know, was the data in the computer 

in 1996 or ‘97 when you were preparing the plan the same data 

that had been there in 1992? 

A I do not know that for a fact. I was not here in ‘92, 

but I know it was old data. 

Q And while you were there, was there any change made or 

any insertion of data to the best of your knowledge? 

A At the end of--close to the end of the process we did 

get Linwood to try to zero in on District 2 and District 4 

with some current registration data, because that is--we were 

down to trying to balance those two districts, Republican- 

Democrat, to maintain the six-six balance. So that was some 

new data he went out to gather, but as far as I know that was 

the only new data. 

Q So with respect to the 12th or the 1st, there was no 

additional data obtained at any time? 

A No, sir, I don’t believe so. 

Q Do you recall what the results had been as between 

Gantt and Helms in the 12th District? 

A No, sir, I don’t recall at this point. 

Q Or the 1st? 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



K
o
 

0
0
 

a
 

A
 

i
n
 

A
 

W
O
N
 

[\
S 

nN
 

[)
 

[N
e]

 
pe
 

oo
t 

_"
 

tt
 

oh
 

HY
 

oh
 

au
l 

a
 

—_
- 

th
 

3
 

Ww
 

[\
S)

 
tl
 

(=
) 

o
 

oo
 

EN
 

| 
=
 

Wn
 

¥S
 

Ww
 

3]
 

ne
y 

(=
 

> * 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 
  

  

A No. 

Q Do you recall having any discussions with anyone back 

during that time that they were seeking your assistance in 

some aspect of evidence? 

A I don’t recall any such incident. 

Q Is it your conclusion that party is a better explana- 

tion than race in the construction of the external boundaries 

of congressional districts of the 1997 plan or that it is 

essentially an equal explanation? 

A My conclusion is that although there is a correlation 

between the racial composition of the populace and the 

boundaries of the 12th District, there is also a correlation 

between the political affiliation of the people in the 12th 

District and nearby and the boundary taken by the district 

and that .of ‘the two correlations the lightly stronger one is 

with political affiliation and not with race. 

Q Is the degree of difference in the explanatory value 

of the data sufficient to permit you to say that one is a 

better fit than the other? 

A Yes. 

Q So these differences are in your view significant? 

A I am not sure how you are using the term "signifi- 

cant." It is simply the case that one correlation is larger 

than the other. 

Q Does your analysis provide an answer to the question 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 

Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886    



Wo
 

O
B
 

i
a
d
 

S
N
 

U
r
 
Y
N
 

No
 

ro
 

\°
] 

bo
 

al
 

HL
 

pt
 

ro
ms
 

Ly
 

bo
t 

—_
 

Mil
ly 

pn
t 

id
 

IN
 

N
 

No
 

bo
 

[=
] 

&
 

oo
 

J
 

=
 

th
 

Ra
l 

Ww
 

No
 

I.
 

<>
 

— 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 14   

  

  

of whether a significant number of persons are placed into or 

excluded from the district on the basis of race? 

A It doesn’t really address that issue, nor does it 

address the similarly phrased issue with respect to party 

affiliation. All it does is measure the correlation between 

race and the boundary and the correlation between party 

affiliation and the boundary and observe that of the two 

correlations that with party affiliation seems to be somewhat 

stronger than that with race. 

Q Do you have any direct knowledge concerning the 

motivation of members of the legislature who shaped the plan? 

A Not direct in the sense that I have spoken with any of 

the legislators. 

Q And what is the source of your knowledge? 

A What knowledge? 

Q Did you have any indirect information respecting the 

motivations of legislators? 

'A I am told that the legislators, at least some of them, 

have said that in drawing the boundaries they considered 

party affiliation and not race. But I have not in any way 

relied on that information. My analysis is purely objective. 

Q And have you been told what measure of party affilia- 

tion these legislators indicated was relied upon? 

A I may have been told. I don’t remember at the moment 

what I was told. 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886    



  

W
W
 

0
0
 

S
J
 
N
h
 

A
 
W
e
 

10
 

NN
 

O
N
 

pe
 

pe
 
k
p
 

pb
 

pk
 

ek
 

p
k
 

pk
 

pe
d 

@ Nl 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 15 
  

  

Q Have you reviewed any of the materials from the 

Section 5 submission of the North Carolina legislature to the 

Department of Justice? 

A I am not familiar with that material by that name. 

Q Have you reviewed any materials that are provided to 

the Justice Department in connection with seeking pre- 

clearance in a congressional districting plan? 

A Not by that name. 

Q Have you been provided any information that with 

respect to Congressional District 12 that someone moved the 

Greensboro black community into Congressional District 12 and 

then later removed 60,000 persons from the district? 

A I am unaware of that. 

Q And if you were aware of that information and assuming 

its accuracy, would that.affect your.analysis.in.any way? 

A No. 

Q Have you done or attempted any segment analysis 

similar to that reflected in the data before you using the 

boundaries of either the 1st or the 12th Congressional 

District from the 1992 congressional district plan? 

A No. 

Q So do you have any basis to offer an opinion in any 

way as to whether the external boundaries of the 1st or 12th 

Congressional Districts in that plan were predominantly 

racial or predominantly political in motivation? 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 

Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

S
E
Y
 

- 
S
E
R
 

S
e
 

W
A
 

E
e
 

C
S
E
 

I 
S
E
 

p
t
 
p
d
 p
d 

N
N
 
=
O
 

rd
 

Wh
 

_ 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 16   

  

A I have no opinion on that. 

Q On how many other occasions have you performed some 

sort of segment analysis in your work? 

A I have never done an analysis exactly like this, but 

it is rather common in my practice to start with a fact 

situation and tailor an analysis to that--to the question of 

interest in that fact situation. So the general approach is 

one that I have used lots of times. The specific result of 

that approach in this instance is unique. 

Q Have you at any time attempted a boundary analysis for 

the 1997 plan for Congressional District 1? 

A No. 

Q And have you attempted such a boundary analysis for 

any of the other districts in the 1997 plan? 

A No. 

Q Do you know whether segment analysis is a standard, 

recognized procedure in any scientific field? 

A It is certainly common to identify atomic entities and 

examine them individually and then aggregate the results of 

those individual instances to see whether there is an overall 

statistical pattern. That is really the essence of 

statistical analysis. In this particular case the atomic 

pieces were segments of a boundary. I am unaware of anyone 

who has done exactly that kind of analysis in the past. 

Q Have you used this sort of analysis, this atomic 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

=
 

|e
] 

J
 

A
A
 

Wn
 

Ha
 

Ww
 

[}
 

qi“
! 

BO
 

pm
 

pe
d 

pe
d 

Je
d 

pe
d 

pe
d 

pe
d 

pe
d 

e
d
 

pe
d 

&* @ 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 17 
  

  

analysis, to offer an opinion respecting whether--the intent 

behind an action? 

A I’m sorry; is the question complete? 

Q Yes. 

A I don’t understand it. 

Q Have you used this sort of atomic analysis using 

subparts of the data and then evaluating them in the method 

that you have described as a way of establishing the intent 

of some person or somebody? 

A Only indirectly; in employment discrimination 

litigation it is fairly common to examine atomic circum- 

stances in which an employer made a decision and then to 

aggregate the results of those individual decisions to see 

whether there is a pattern of the employer in instance after 

instance -making..decisians .which.are adverse .to.the. interest. . 

of some particular protected group from which one, typically 

not the statistician, but the trier of fact, may be inclined 

to infer intent. 

Q Do any of your writings, either your newsletters or 

your academic writings, deal with some sort of segment 

analysis? 

A They certainly deal with atomic analysis, but not 

specifically segment analysis. That is rather particular to 

the circumstances of this case. 

Q And other than the documents that are before you here 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

e
o
 

0
 

9 
A
 

n
n
 

A
 
W
N
 

N
N
 
O
N
 

O
N
 

e
d
 

ee
 

pd
 

pd
 

pd
 

pd
 

e
d
 

p
e
d
 

p
e
d
 

ed
 

R
r
 
R
a
h
:
 

N
o
d
 

W
e
e
 
N
o
n
 

n
i
a
 
m
a
s
 

Ra, a. 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 18 
  

  

today, do you have any other writings regarding 

redistricting? 

A I.4on’t think so, no. 

Q Is it possible that this same sort of segment analysis 

would indicate a predominance of party over race even for a 

district which a court may have already invalidated under the 

conclusion that race was indeed the predominant factor? 

A It could happen, yes. 

Q Have you conducted any analysis concerning issues that 

relate to voter cohesion by race in North Carolina? 

A No. 

Q Have you conducted any analysis concerning polariza- 

tion of voting by race within North Carolina or the absence 

of such polarization? 

A Only to the extent that I have =xamined the correla-— 

tion between race and affiliation with a Democratic party, 

but those results are reported in my two affidavits. 

'Q But with respect to voting behavior in terms of 

election contest results have you conducted any such 

analysis? 

A I would just repeat my earlier answer in response to 

that. To the extent that I have, the results are reflected 

in my two affidavits. 

Q And you are referring to the political party affilia- 

tion data as including the election contest results as well 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



©
 

00
 

NN
 
O
S
 

tn
 

A
 
W
h
 

N
D
 

N
Y
 

T
A
D
 
e
e
 

C
p
e
 

T
e
d
 
E
k
 

e
d
 

op
ed
 

eh
 

ed
 

B
H
 

N
N
N
 
m
B
.
 

®
 

0
 

o
t
h
 

A
 
W
i
p
e
 

©
 

* w 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 
  

  

as the registration by race and other similar data? 

A Yes. I have used four different measures of party 

affiliation and I have referred to them collectively. 

Q Have you analyzed the question of whether or not 

Congressional District 12 as drawn in 1997 maximized 

Democratic strength within any particular region of North 

Carolina? 

A No. 

Q Did you conduct any analyses or begin any analyses 

which are not included in your report or reflected in its 

results? 

A On that issue? 

Q No; on any issue that relates to redistricting in this 

Cromartie assignment. 

(Pause.) 

A Not that I can recall; this was our study. 

Q So there is no instance in when you began a process 

and found it wasn’t fruitful or properly illustrative and 

just dropped that analysis? 

A No; we don’t do that. 

Q And other than the segment analysis, is there anything 

else you relied on in reaching your conclusions? 

A No. 

Q How large a difference in values is necessary, for 

example, with respect to partisan affiliation before you 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 

Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886    



  

W
o
 

0
0
 

sd
 

O
N
T
 

L
e
 

S
N
 

ee
 

DS
 
D
p
 

ek
 
C
k
 

e
t
 

ee
k 

eh
 

e
d
 

ge
 

p
e
a
k
 

B
R
N
 

N
0
8
 

i
n
e
t
 

e
e
 

a 
e
e
 

a 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 20   

  

  

consider that difference important enough to be helpful in 

this analysis? 

A I am not sure I understand your use of the term 

"helpful." All I did was to develop a measure of correlation 

between where the boundary of the 12th District runs and the 

racial makeup of the populace and then apply that same 

measure to the political affiliation of the same populace and 

note which of the two correlations tended to be stronger. 

Q Let’s look at the data in Exhibit 21: <7 would like to 

look at a sample line of the data to make sure I am following 

the numbers and their import. Perhaps we could look at 

observation 80. And I believe observation 80 will appear 

beginning on page 23? 

A Yes. 

Q Is that correct? . And .observation 80 would be the 

fifth of the five lines written across the page for each of 

these? 

"A Yes. 

Q Beginning at the first--obviously, your first column, 

your observation, is a number which you have designated. 

What is the second column? 

A The one that is labeled "Segment"? 

QO . Yes. 

A That also is a number that we have designated. The 

first number is simply a line counter. The second number is 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



(V
- 
JO
N 

- 
E
N
 

IE
 

~ 
YR
 

7) 
EE
 

~ 
SE
R 

P
R
 

B
E
 

CE
E 

CT
 

CE
 

CG
 

ST 
GE
 

— 
U
R
 

S
R
 

SS
 

SR
 

oo
 S

R 

* * 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 
  

  

a segment number which we assigned. 

Q What is the third column? 

A I don’t recall offhand. It is some kind of an 

identifier, but I can’t tell you exactly what its origin is. 

Q What is the next column? 

A The next column is a precinct identifier. And it is 

identifying the outside precinct for which this line segment 

forms a boundary, outside precinct meaning outside of 

District 12. 

Q Do you know what the subparts of that number, for 

example, the 06 at the beginning of that item, stands for? 

A There is a way of decoding it. TI have forgotten 

exactly how it goes. That may be a county identifier, but I 

am not sure. 

Q And the fifth column on the first line is-entitled 

"IPRECNCTM? 

A Yes. That is the identifier of the internal precinct. 

And the segments in question here is the boundary between-- 

the external precinct and the internal precinct are identi- 

fied by those two identifiers. 

Q What is the meaning of the next column? 

A I believe that is the number of people that reside in 

the internal precinct. 

Q Okay. And the next column? 

A Would be the number of white people that reside in the 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 

Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886    



Lo
 

0
0
 

9 
A
 

n
t
 

A
 
W
N
 

B
N
 

Pe
k 

ee
k 

fk
 

Je
s 

pe
t 

pe
d 

pe
d 

pk
 

pe
s 

ped
 

iy on 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 
  

  

internal precinct. 

Q And the next? 

A Would be the number of African Americans who reside in 

the internal precinct. 

Q And the next column? 

A Is the number of white people--whoops; this would be 

the number of white registered voters living in the internal 

precinct. 

Q And the next line? 

A The next column is the number of African American 

registered voters living in the internal precinct. 

Q And the next column? 

A Is the number of Asian registered voters in the 

internal precinct. 

Q And the next one, which is the final one for the first 

line? 

A That is the number of American Indians who are 

registered voters and living in the internal precinct. 

Q Now coming down to the second row in which observation 

80 continues, what is the first column that begins with 

NIOTHVOT"? 

A That is the number of registered voters who are 

counted neither as whites, African Americans, Asians, or 

American Indians who live in the internal precinct. 

Q Then what is the next column? 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886    



  

ES
 

e
n
 

C
w
 
N
U
 
B
T
N
 
e
e
 

U
R
C
 

B
E
 

U
E
 

N
E
 

T
R
S
 

I 
a
h
 

on 
ET
E 

oh
 

i 
l
S
 

ye
 
I
E
 
e
A
 

cr
 

a
N
 

B
R
 
R
B
S
 
e
a
 

A
W
N
 

e
S
 

& * 
  

  

David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 23 

A Oh; well, I need to back up just a bit because 

the--let’s see; the preceding one, two, three, four, five 

columns were not registered voters but rather voting age 

population voters. And we are beginning now the sequence of 

counts of registered voters in the internal precinct. 

Q So the second column on the second row reflects total 

number of registered voters in the precinct? 

A Yes; that is correct. 

Q And the next column? 

A Is the number of white registered voters in the 

internal precinct. 

Q And the next one? 

A Is the number of African American registered voters in 

the internal precinct. 

Q And the next one? 

A Is the number of registered voters who are not counted 

either as whites or blacks living in the internal precinct. 

0 And what is the next column, which is labeled 

"TICDEM3S8"? 

A This would be the total number of people--- 

(Witness peruses document.) 

Well, it is——- 

‘(Witness peruses document.) 

I. am not sure what that count is. I would have to go 

back and look at probably documentation in my office. Let me 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 

Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



Oo
 

00
 

gO
 

O&
O 

n
i
 

A
 

W
O
N
 

N
N
 
N
N
 

e
d
 

m
d
 

pd
 

e
d
 

m
d
 

m
d
 

p
e
d
 

pe
nd
 

p
e
d
 

pe
d 

B
R
 

D
a
l
 

o
D
 
o
w
e
 

h
e
 

o
t
 
E
o
 

m
e
d
 

e
b
 

David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 24   

  

  

just see if I can get another clue here; just a minute, 

please. 

(Witness peruses document.) 

Q And you are referring to which page of the other part 

of the materials? 

A I am referring back to the program segments, and that 

is on page 2 where the numbers appear in the upper left-hand 

corner. 

Q Still in document 217? 

A Still in ‘document 21; right. 

(Witness peruses document.) 

Oh, 1 see; okay. Going back to page 23, the ICDEMS8S8 

count is the number of people in the internal precinct who 

voted Democratic in the 1988 Court of Appeals election. And 

the next .column.over that. is headed. TILDEMSS.is the. number. of. 

people who voted for the Democratic candidate in the 1988 

lieutenant governor election. 

Q And the next column? 

A Is the number of people who voted for the Democratic 

candidate in the internal precinct in the 1990 Senate 

election. 

Q Okay. And the next three columns? 

A Are the analogous counts for people who voted for the 

Republican candidate in each of those three elections. 

Q And then coming down to the third set of lines, again 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886    



  

N
S
 

0
 

W
F
 

S
N
 

U
n
 

u
s
 

W
T
S
 

R
R
 

Y
L
 
N
R
 
W
E
 

S
I
 

e
a
e
,
 

E
S
R
 

B
R
E
 

R
E
 

E
E
 
R
E
 

B
N
:
 

8
.
 
N
B
.
N
 

B
B
 

B
i
s
a
 

o
a
t
h
 

b
w
 

N
e
 

OD
 

é > 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 . Page 25 
  

  

to observation 80, the first column that says IDEM, what does 

that signify? 

(Witness peruses document.) 

Q IDEM is the number of people who are registered 

Democrats in the internal precinct. 

Q And the next column? 

A Is the number of registered Republicans in the 

internal precinct. 

Q Now, beginning at the next column, which is the third 

column on the third row, and continuing to the end of the 

fourth column, is it correct that those are all the analogous 

data with respect to the outside precinct for each of the 

categories you have just identified above? 

A That is the case, yes. 

Q Now, coming to the fifth line where the first column 

is IBLKPCT~-- 

A (interposing) Yes. 

'Q ---can you tell me what that means? 

A Yes. These are percentages that are calculated on the 

basis of the preceding numbers. So the IBLKPCT pertains to 

the internal precinct, and it is a percentage that African 

Americans constitute of the whole, where the whole is the 

total population of people living in that precinct. 

Q And the next column? 

A Is the percentage that blacks constitute of the voting 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 

Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1332 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

©
 

0°
00
 

0 
A
 

Un
 

A
 
W
N
 

d
N
 
O
N
 

O
N
 

O
N
 

e
e
d
 

p
d
 

ee
 

e
d
 

h
e
d
 

p
k
 

p
e
t
 

p
w
d
 

p
k
 

pe
a 

B
D
 
R
D
 

B
o
b
a
 

m
o
 
S
o
a
r
 

B
o
o
p
 

n
m
 

i
a
 

e
d
 

Ww —. 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 | Page 26   

  

age population. 

Q And the next column? 

A Is the percentage blacks constitute of the registered 

voting population. 

Q And again, whith are all with respect to the internal 

precinct; is that correct? 

A Yes, 

Q And the next? 

A Is the percentage that minorities constitute of the 

population of the internal precinct. 

Q And the next column? 

A Is the percentage that minorities--voting age 

minorities constitute--the percentage that minorities 

constitute of the voting age population of the internal 

precinct. 

Q And the next column? 

A Is the percentage that minorities constitute of the 

registered voters in that precinct. 

Q Now, with respect to each of those three columns, are 

all persons other than those who identify themselves as white 

in the census considered to be members of a minority? 

A Yes. Minority should be interpreted as meaning not 

white. 

Q So it would include Asians and it would include Native 

  

Americans? 

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

No
 

O
O
 

I
 
N
n
 

O
R
 
W
D
 

I
 

0 
BO
 

pm
 

pe
 

pk
 

pe
t 

h
b
 

e
d
 
e
d
d
 

fe
d 

ed
 

* * 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 27 
  

  

A Yes. 

Q The next column, which will be I believe the sixth 

column--I’m sorry; the seventh column? 

A Yes. 

Q Can you tell us what that signifies? 

A Yes. That is the--in the internal precinct, that is 

the percentage of people who voted for the Democratic 

candidate in the 1988 lieutenant governor election. 

Q Do you have any information concerning how third party 

candidates, if any, are treated in that data? 

A Yes; they are excluded. 

Q And the next column? 

A Is the percentage of people living in the internal 

precinct who voted for the Democratic candidate in the 1988 

Court of Appeals election. 

Q And the next column? 

A Is the fraction of people living in the internal 

precinct who voted for the Democratic candidate in the 1990 

senatorial election. 

Q And then our next column, which is IPCTDEM? 

(Witness peruses document.) 

And again, can you let us know which page you are 

referring to to attempt to respond to that question? 

A I am looking at pages 2 and 3 where the numbers appear 

in the upper left-hand corner in the first part of the 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

W
o
 

q
h
 

B
W
 

oR
 

L
R
 

7 
W
E
 

a
 

W
W
 
N
=
 

® » 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 28   

  

  

exhibit. 

(Witness peruses document.) 

Well, I have forgotten how I characterized the 

variables IDEM and IREP to you earlier. But the entry that 

shows up in the column that is headed IPCTDEM is the ratio of 

IREP to IDEM. So it is--or let’s see. Tt is--no; it'is 

the--it is the fraction that the Democrats constitute of the 

sum of those two numbers. So it is IDEM divided by the sum 

of IDEM plus IREP. 

Q And the next ten columns, they are just the analogous 

entries for the external precinct; is that correct? 

A Yes. 

Q And that brings us then to the sixth line across--or 

group of lines across and the sixth column that is headed 

ITOTVOT. 

A Yes, 

Q What does that signify? 

A That is the total voting age population of the 

internal precinct. 

Q And the next column, ITOTMIN? 

A That is the total number of minorities living in 

that--in the internal precinct. 

Q And the next column? 

A Is the total number of minority voting age residents 

in the internal precinct. 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

Co
 

0
 

9 
S
N
 

a
 
W
N
 

N
O
O
N
 

N
N
 
O
N
 

e
k
 

pd
 

pd
 

k
d
 

e
d
 

m
d
 

pd
 

p
e
d
 

e
d
 

pd
 

i
g
 

D
N
 

N
D
B
 
M
B
E
 

8
B
 
O
B
 

o
h
 
r
e
m
 

N | 
  

  

David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 29 

Q And the next line, which is ILTG88? 

A I think we skipped one here. 

Q I’m sorry. 

A What I gave you--the answer--my last answer was for 

the column headed IMINVOT. 

Q Okay; fine. 

A And the next column--- 

Q (interposing) Let’s go back to IMINREG--- 

A (interposing) Right. 

Q ---which I believe will be the ninth column of the 

sixth row. 

A That is the total number of minority registered voters 

living in the internal precinct. 

Q What is the significance of the next column? 

(Witness peruses document.) 

A That is the total number of people who voted either 

for the Democratic candidate or for the Republican candidate 

in the 1988 lieutenant governor’s election. 

Q And the next two columns are the similar totals for 

the Court of Appeals and the Senate; is that correct? 

A That is correct, yes. 

Q And then we begin a series of columns. The next seven 

peginning with OTOTVOT and ending with OSEN90, are those 

columns that provide similar information for the external 

  

precinct? 

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

iw a. 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 30   

  

  

A Yes, 

Q So that brings us then in our data down to the seventh 

group of lines and to the fourth column. Can you tell me 

what GTBLKPOP means? 

A. It is a flag. It takes the value zero or 1 depending 

on the truth of the proposition, which I have now to 

recollect. 

(Witness peruses document.) 

Okay. That is a variable that is equal tol: if the 

representation of blacks in the inside Precinct is greater 

than the representation of blacks in the outside precinct. 

Q And what does the next column signify? 

A Just the reverse of that. 

Q And the third column--I’m sorry; the sixth column of 

that line, which is the seventh line? : 

A That is also. a flag, and: that is equal to ‘1 dif the 

internal and external percentages are identical. 

Q And taking the next columns in groups of three, can 

you tell me what the next three columns relate to? 

A Yes. They relate to the representation of blacks 

among voting age population. 

Q And the next three columns? 

A They relate to the representation of blacks among 

registered voters. 

Q And the next three? 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

O
O
O
 

J
O
 

t
h
 
B
N
 

ee
 

BO
 

hd
 

pe
d 

he
d 

pe
d 

e
d
 

fe
d 

he
d 

e
d
 

pd
 

ed
 

  

Lg * 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 31 
  

  

A They relate to minorities in the population as a 

whole. 

Q And then coming down to our eighth line of data, can 

you tell me what the next three columns that begin that line 

provide data regarding? 

A They pertain to the minority voting age population. 

The next three? 

Pertain to the minority registered voters. 

The next three? 

oS
 

«al
e 

8 

They pertain to voting behavior in the Court of 

Appeals election in 1988. 

Q And the next three? 

A They pertain to voting behavior in the lieutenant 

governor election in 1988. 

Q And now for the final two of that row and the first 

one Of the very last row of data, what does that data show? 

A These are more flags again doing comparisons across 

the segment boundary. And these flags pertain to voting 

behavior in the 1990 senatorial election. 

Q What about the next three? 

A These pertain to party affiliation as revealed through 

voter registration. 

Q And the next column, which is DEMNTBLK? 

A That is a flag that--—- 

(Witness peruses document.) 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 

Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 800) 255-7886 

  

 



O
o
 

0
 

uO
 

A
N
 

n
n
 
R
A
W
 

D
D
 

O
T
 

© 
T
E
 

= 
SE

 
So 
G
y
 

Sr 
G
y
 

S
l
 
S
W
 

S
R
 

a
 

a * 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 
  

  

--—-takes the value 1 if the internal precinct is 

Democratic or more Democratic than the external precinct by 

every one of the four measures and is not greater in black 

population than the external precinct by every one of the 

three measures of racial composition. 

Q And the next column? Is that the reverse? 

A Close to it; it is also a flag that takes the value 1 

if the internal precinct is not more Republican than the 

external precinct by every single one of the four measures of 

party affiliation and has a greater representation of blacks 

in it than the external precinct by every one of the three 

measures of black representation. 

0 And the final column, PRFLAG? 

A That is a flag that takes the value 1 if any one of 

the numeric values. in the preceding record is missing. 

Q So does that indicate observations upon which there is 

incomplete data? 

A Yes. 

Q Going from observation 1 to observation 234, how is 

the data arranged? What is the thematic organization of 

these data, if any? 

A They are sorted in order of segment number, which is 

the second variable. 

Q How are the segments generated? 

A I think we looked at a map and figured out from a map 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 

Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886    



oo
 

00
 

uN
 

A
 

Un
 

A 
W
O
N
 

J 
NS 
T
N
 

E
T
 

a 
TE

 
oe 
T
E
 

<= 
WE
 

SO
 

= 
SE

 
So 

SE
 

Go 
py
 

wey
 

“ —_ 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 33   

  

of the different segments where and then just numbered them 

in order of occurrence starting at some place on the 

boundary, no place in particular. 

Q So it is your understanding, then, that these segments 

will continue in procession around the boundary of the 

district? 

A It is probably the case that they do, but they might 

not. There is no--there is nothing about the segment number 

that is important to our analysis. 

Q And when you say we looked at a map, who particularly 

did that? Did you personally look at these maps? 

A I personally looked at the maps, but I didn’t do 

the--all of the segment coding. 

Q Did you--- 

A (interposing) There was another--there was another 

person who worked on this project who has since left PRI 

Associates, and she probably did most of the actual segment 

numbering. 

Q What was her name? 

(Pause.) 

A It will come to me. I can see her face. I can’t 

think of her name at the moment. 

07 .ip6 you know her background and education and 

experience? 

A She has a Ph.D. in sociology from Duke. I will supply 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886    



  

7 
BO
G 

- 
S
R
A
 

EE
E 

W
E
 

J 
SR
E 

E
E
 

CC 
ER
 

a
e
d
e
g
n
 

6 
T
E
E
 

 S
EN

EE
T 

0 
EE
S 

"
C
C
E
 

WH
ER
E 

S
E
E
 

E
R
 
e
i
 

E
E
 

E
E
 

i 
T
I
 

B
D
 
E
R
N
E
 

R
R
 
B
o
 

R
O
 

o
m
 

a
 
0
s
 

m
S
 

# * 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 34 
  

  

her name as soon as I think of it. 

Q Did you generate any of the segments, the listing of 

the segments, by looking at the maps? 

A I am not sure what you mean, the segments--I 

mean, they are just lines on a map and you go through and 

number then. 

Q And what set of maps did you use to find those 

segments? 

A It was a set of maps that was supplied to us by the 

State. 

Q Were they maps of a similar character as the map of 

Iredell County which is contained in your second affidavit, 

Exhibit 20, entitled "1990 Voting Precincts in Iredell 

County"? 

A Yes. 

Q And did you have a map of that sort for every county 

in the 12th Congressional District? 

A I don’t know that we had them county by county, but we 

had maps that were at that level of detail. 

Q Do you remember if you just had one map for the entire 

state? 

A I have seen such maps, but the ones that we used for 

identifying the segments were of a larger scale than that. 

Q But you don’t recall today whether in preparing the 

segment analysis whether you had individual maps of each 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 

Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

N
o
 

0
 
S
N
 
D
W
N
 

a
 

N
 
N
M
 

e
t
 

e
e
k
 

pd
 

pd
 

pd
 

e
d
 

e
d
 

e
d
 

ee
 

B
B
N
 

R
B
 
g
g
u
n
s
 

B
o
n
 

e
e
 

e
k
e
 

No
 

Wn
 

a 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 35     

  

  

individual county similar to those of Iredell? 

A I don’t recall at the moment, no. 

Q So the process of identifying the segments was done 

visually by comparing these maps and looking at the Segments 

as you march along the boundary of the district? 

A Yes. 

Q And did the maps which you had include overlaid upon 

it the 1997 congressional district boundary? 

A It would have been that boundary that we were 

following. It had to have been. 

Q But you don’t recall today how that boundary was 

marked or in what fashion? 

A 1 don’t. I don’t recall if it was--the inside portion 

was colored a different color than the outside portion or 

whether the boundary itself was purple and the others were 

black. 

Q Now, these data which are in Exhibits 21 and 22, can 

you identify for me--for example, let’s look at observations 

53 and 54, which I believe will be reflected on page 18. 

A Yes. 

Q Can you tell me looking at observation 53 and the 

outside precinct what county that precinct comes from? 

A TI cannot tell that looking at page 18. 

Q Do you have any other data that would assist you to 

answer that? 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

~
~
 

R
I
T
 

T
R
 

CR
ER
GE
 

V 
G
E
 

 S
HR

ET
 

 
E
E
R
 

N
N
 
O
N
 

O
N
 

em
 

p
t
 

p
k
 

w
d
 

m
k
 

d
k
 

pd
 

m
k
 

pd
 

pd
 

B
.
A
.
 

5
.
 
P
R
N
 

S
 

N
N
 
S
R
G
 

N
e
S
 

@* 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 36 
  

  

A Not in my possession at the moment, no. 

Q And at the time that you were preparing this analysis 

did you have some sort of correlating key which would 

correlate the VID key and the outside precinct key to a 

particular county and a particular named precinct? 

A Yes. 

Q And what was the source of that information? 

A Well, it ultimately would have been the State. 

(Witness peruses document.) 

Q In determining--- 

Ms. Smiley: (interposing) Excuse me; I am not 

sure he has answered his question--finished answering. 

A Right. Let me check one other thing. 

(Witness peruses document.) 

A Yes. If vou will look at page 2 you will see listed 

there--sorry; it is page 2 where the numbers appear in the 

upper right-hand corner, so it is later on than where you are 

looking just at the moment. 

Q Okay. 

A There. 

Q All right. 

A You have gone too far; there you are. 

Ms. Smiley: What exhibit number, David? 

The Witness: I'n.sorry;«it:is Exhibit: 21, Thank 

you. You will see listed there 25 records from a file called 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

ND
 

OO
 
“
a
l
i
 

B
N
 

U
N
 
S
U
 

N
e
 

A
 

|
 

S
E
E
 
M
E
 

HR
 

U
C
R
 
S
R
 

l
n
 

C
O
 
S
e
 

B
a
R
 

R
e
b
 

b
o
 
B
o
n
s
 
m
e
m
e
 

a
e
 

pe
 

a
E
 

* a 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 37   

  

  

NC Borders. And that file provides a link between the VTD 

key and the segment number and the internal and external 

precinct numbers and something which might pass for an 

English description of the precincts that are involved. 

Q Do you know in determining or generating the listing 

of segments whether two precinsts which touch at a point and 

have only point contiguity would have counted as being 

segments of this district? 

A No. Segment had to have a positive length in order to 

come to the analysis. 

Q Do you know whether or not the precincts that are 

reflected on page 2 numbered in the upper right-hand corner 

are data for 1990 or for precincts as they exist today? 

A I don’t know for sure, but I expect that they are the 

identities of precincts that were used in the drawing of the 

12th Digtrict. 

Q The maps that were used to establish the segment 

listings, did you retain those maps? 

A Yes, I think so. 

Q Do you know from what sort of software those maps were 

produced? 

A Not exactly; we didn’t produce them. They were 

produced for us by the State. 

Q Do you know if--well, let me step back. All’ the 

election data numbers that are contained in the data, were 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

Y
S
»
 

- 
I
E
E
 
C
R
E
 

7 
S
R
 

- 
T
E
T
 
C
H
 
h
e
 

B
N
 

OB
R 

e
d
 

m
d
 

p
e
d
 

fe
ed
 

e
d
 

e
d
 

p
e
d
 

p
e
d
 

p
e
d
 

ed
 

N
A
N
 

N
b
 

E
B
 

R
R
 

B
h
 
R
O
N
 

m
S
 

* * 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 38 
  

  

they provided to you, then, by the State of North Carolina? 

A Yes. . . 

Q Do you know in calculating their election data whether 

absentee ballots are assigned back to the precinct from which 

the voter resides in this data? 

A I don’t know. 

Q Do you have any information concerning how absentee 

ballots are allocated with respect to these data? 

A No. 

Q And you indicated earlier that third party candidates, 

it was your understanding, were discarded in the analysis and 

the data was just removed? 

A We discarded them. 

Q Okay. 

A . So that anytime we report a precinct as being say 40 

percent Republican, it is a fair inference that by that same 

measure it is 60 percent Democratic. 

Q And you would have done that both respect to party 

registration data and with respect to election contest data? 

A Yes. 

Q If there are mistakes in the accuracy of the data, 

could that affect the degree of difference of the ultimate 

conclusions of your analysis? 

A it could, yes. 

Q Could it affect whether there is a difference? 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 

Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

N
O
 

OD
 

ad
 

T
O
N
 

WU
 

B
R
 
W
N
 

DN
 

B
N
 

e
d
 

e
d
 

ew
 

pd
 

e
d
 

e
d
 

ee
 

p
e
d
 

pe
d 

R
-
 
R
0
3
 

N
o
i
 
o
m
e
n
 

o
a
 

a
k
 

e
T
 

a
 

w . 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 39   

  

A It could, yes. 

Q And it could therefore affect the direction of the 

difference? 

A Yes, it could. 

Q Did you or anyone in your organization make any effort 

to verify the accuracy of the data? 

A No, not beyond making sure that we had read it 

correctly. 

Q Do you have any information concerning whether any of 

the data that is contained in Exhibits 21 and 22 were the 

result of a modification process by the State of U. S. Census 

Bureau data? 

A The question was whether we had done what? 

Q Do you have any information whether the data that is 

contained in Exhibits 21 and 22 reflect = modification by 

State personnel of U. S. Census Bureau data? 

A Well, some of the information is obviously not U. Ss. 

Census Bureau data, so in that sense I suppose--I am not sure 

if you would consider it a modification. 

Q Well, let me change--- 

A (interposing) It is unrelated---— 

Q (interposing) Well, let me rephrase my question. 

With respect to the population data, total population and 

voting age population per precinct, do you know whether or 

not the State of North carolina modified data from the U. S. 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



ND
 

O
0
8
 

N
l
 

O
N
 

W
n
 

A
 

W
N
 

pe
 

C
R
E
E
 

L
R
 

Oe 
a
 

S
E
 

S
n
 
e
e
 

e
e
 

E
E
 

E
R
 

ee
 

a
l
 

B
r
 

R
R
R
 

B
i
m
 
{
n
h
 
R
N
 

i
D
 

Lg » 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 
  

  

Census Bureau in preparing the data which they provided to 

you in Exhibits 21 and 22? 

A I don’t know. 

Q And if that data were modified in error, could that 

affect the accuracy of your results? 

A It could, although if the data are erroneous and the 

data are in fact what the legislature relied on in making its 

decision, it might be that even erroneous data would not 

affect the conclusion that I draw. 

Q I would like to draw your attention to observation 

198, which I believe is in Exhibit 22. I believe that is 

reflected on page 47 in the upper right-hand corner; is that 

correct? 

A Yes. 

Q. Can you tell me how many black registered voters in 

observation 198, segment 199, are shown for the external 

precinct, the outside precinct? 

(Witness peruses document.) 

A My copy is a little hard to read, but it looks like it 

might be 93, but it might be 90 or it might be 98. 

Q And how many black persons in total are there for that 

observation? 

‘(Witness peruses document.) 

A It looks like there are 60 recorded here. 

Q So a precinct with 60 black persons generates a black 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 

Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886    



  

Co
 

O0
8 

J
 

S
h
 

Wn
 

BA
 

W
O
N
 

me
 

DN
 

N
O
N
 

p
d
 

pd
 

pl
 

ee
 

e
d
 

p
e
d
 

pe
 

e
d
 

p
e
d
 

pe
 

  

a hy 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 | Page 41 
  

  

registered voter population of 90 or greater? 

A That is what it looks like, yes. 

Q Let’s look at observation 199. Is the same trend 

present in that observation as well? 

A Yes. It. looks like it. is the--probably the same 

precinct that is involved. 

Q And observations 203, 204, and 205, which appent on 

page 48 of the data in Exhibit 22, is that also another 

example in which there are more black registered voters than 

black persons residing in the precinct? 

A Where would that be again, please? 

Q Observations 203, 204, and 205. 

A I show in 203, 118 blacks, 61 registered blacks, and 

in 204, 538 total blacks and 185 registered, and in 205, 538 

total blacks and 185 registered. . 

Q Let me look, then, at observations 149 and 150, which 

is in Exhibit 22, page 37; is that correct? 

A It was 149 and 1507? 

Q Yes. 

A Yes. 

(Pause.) 

Is there a question pending? 

Q Yes. The question is is that precinct and that 

observation an instance in which there are more black 

registered voters than total blacks in the precinct? 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

AD
 

O
O
 
W
E
N
 

U
N
 
R
W
 

N
C
E
 

© 
T
E
 
S
C
 

Sh
 

Sr 
S
S
 

= 
S
R
 

S
R
 

SR
 
S
S
 

Lg  e 
  

  

David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 42 

A No. 

Q You are looking at observations 149 and 1507 

A Yes. 

Q Okay. Which columns are you looking at there? 

A The--in the third row the column that is headed 

"OTOTBLK," which would be the total black population, and in 

the fourth column the--sorry; the fourth row, the second 

column, in the one that is "OREGBLK," showing the number of 

registered black voters. 

Q I'm sorry; can we focus on the internal precinct? 

A Okay. 

(Witness peruses document.) 

Yes. In the internal precinct the data show 44--no, 

sorry; the data show 61 blacks in total but 132 registered 

black voters in lines 149 and. in.line 150 as well.. 

Q And the number you began to give, the 44 number, would 

be the number of adult blacks who reside in that precinct 

according to the data. 

A Yes. 

Q Is that correct? 

A That:is right. 

Q In Exhibit 21 is there a listing of precincts for 

which you lacked full data? 

  

(Witness peruses document.) 

Q Sir, can I draw your attention to page 77? 

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 

Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



N
0
0
:
 

a
l
 

N
U
N
 

RR
 
O
N
 

pe
 

o
l
l
 

SE
ES

 
C
B
E
 

E
T
 

L
T
 

Wa
 

Tr 
CO
G 

U
S
 

W
S
 

W
e
g
 

B
R
O
 

D
a
l
 

B
a
g
h
 
B
E
 

a
m
e
 

“ Wy 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 
  

  

A Yes, 

Q Were you aware at the time you prepared your analysis 

that you were missing full data with respect to these 

observations, these five observations? 

A Yes. 

What effort, if any, did you make to obtain complete 

data? 

A I don’t recall whether we specifically asked about 

these data or not. We had several conversations with the 

people who supplied us with the data. But my understanding 

is that we have all of the data that are available. 

Q And who are the persons at the State who were 

providing and answering technical questions concerning the 

data? 

A There were two people, I believe, that we.worked with. 

It has been quite awhile since--since we worked on this with 

them. One name that comes to mind is Dan Frey. 1 am not 

sure if I have got it right. And there was another person, I 

think a woman, with whom we worked, but I don’t remember her 

name offhand. 

Q Do you know whether any of the precincts that are 

reflected in the missing data on page 7 would--their 

inclusion in the complete data would affect results of any of 

the precincts which you have analyzed? 

A I'don’t know. 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886    



  

G
0
 

e
d
 

O
N
 

t
h
 
B
R
A
N
D
 

N
O
N
 

O
N
 

N
O
N
 

ee
 

pe
 

e
d
 

pd
 

ed
 

e
d
 

e
d
 

p
e
d
 

f
e
d
 

pd
 

B
-
R
.
N
 

B
N
R
 

B
e
 
R
R
E
 

N
D
C
 

R
S
 

Lg a 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 44 
  

  

Q Do you know whether in the state of North Carolina 

there are some precincts which are not--in which all portions 

are not geographically contiguous? 

A Do you mean that there are precincts that are not 

contiguous, that have--- 

Q (interposing) That are comprised of two chunks. 

A That are separated by some distance; is that what you 

are saying? 

Q Yes. Are you aware that such precincts exist in the 

state of North Carolina? 

A No. 

Q Did you evaluate that, of course, in any way in your 

analysis? 

A It seems as though they would have come to our 

attention as we were looking at the precincts that.bound the... 

12th District’s, but I don’t recall any such precincts coming 

to light. 

'Q Do you know whether the census geography is equivalent 

to the precincts for the material that you were provided for 

the counties relevant to this analysis? 

A I don’t understand the question. 

Q Do you know whether the--in your footnote--let me just 

start a different way. In your footnote in your first 

  

affidavit——- 

Ms. Smiley: What exhibit number is that? 

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7386 

  

 



  

A, Ty 

  

  

David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 45 

1 Mr. Markham: That is Exhibit Number 19, page 3, 

2 |" footnote 1. 

3 By Mr. Markham: 

4 Q You make a mention of some special circumstances which 

S | relate to Davie County? 

6 A Yes. 

7 Q Can you explain to us what those circumstances are? 

8 A I am not sure what there is to say beyond what is said 

91 in the footnote. 

10 | Q Did you make any effort to obtain data that was 

11 | missing from the State with respect to Davie County? 

12 A No. We just used minor civil division data. 

13 Q Do you know whether the minor civil division data 

14 | corresponds to the precincts for that county? 

154 A As I sit here, I don’t. 

16 Q Did you calculate the data for Davie County with 

17 | respect to election results or were these figures that were 

18 | supplied to you by the State? 

19 A All of the figures were supplied to us by the State. 

20 Q Can you identify which of the data contained in 

2] | Exhibits 21 or 22 relate to Davie County? 

22 A No. 

23 Q ‘Assume with me that evidence will show that observa- 

24 | tion 199 will be among those observations which relate to 

25 | Davie County.       

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

 



  

pk
 

Oo
 

0
 

a 
S
a
 

wn
 

A
 
W
N
 

11 

|g BE 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 46 
  

  

A All right. 

Q What is the percentage of support for the Democratic 

candidate for the U. S. Senate in 1990 in that precinct? 

A Are we talking about an internal precinct or an 

external precinct? 

Q The external precinct. 

(Witness peruses document.) 

A The question again was? 

Q What was the level of support for the Democratic 

candidate for the United States Senate in the precinct 

reflected as the outside precinct in segment 199--I’m sorry; 

segment 200, observation 199. 

A It looks as though 30 percent of the voters in that 

precinct voted for the Democratic candidate. 

Q Looking at the next observation--- 

A (interposing) Yes. 

Q -—-—-can you confirm that that involves a different 

external precinct from the same county, and can you tell us 

what the results were for the Democratic senate race in that 

precinct? 

A That does have a different precinct identifier. And 

the fraction is once again 30 percent. 

Q And continuing to the next page, I believe the next 

identifying--the next new identifier for an external precinct 

will be in the fourth line, observation 2047? 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 

Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

o
o
 

0
0
 

gO
 
O
Q
 

n
l
 

A
 

W
O
N
 

(\®
) 

\®
) 

rh
 

[—
 

—
 

—
 

po
d 

pt
 

pk
 

pt
 

—
 

pd
 

2
 

3
 

0
 

ty
 

C
a
 

©
 

c
o
 

~~
 

(=
) 

Wn
 

SN
 

W
w
 

13
°)

 
_-
_-
" 

~
~
 

  

hey —S 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 47   

  

  

A Yes. 

Q Can you tell us what the Democratic percentage was for 

the Democratic candidate--I’m sorry, what the percentage was 

of support for the Democratic candidate in that precinct 

according to observation 209 for another precinct in that 

county? 

A Observation 2047? 

Q Yes. 1'm sorry; yes, i204. 

A 30 percent. 

Q And continuing to the next page, what is the next 

unique precinct on the outside? Is that at observation 208? 

A Yes, 

Q Can you tell me what the Democrat support was for the 

United States Senate in that precinct in the same county? 

A. Also 30 percent. 

Q And the next observation, 209, does that also reflect 

a unique precinct within the same county? 

A Yes. 

Q And what is the Democrat support? 

A Also 30 percent. 

Q As a statistician would it surprise you that every 

precinct in the county voted in the same proportion in the 

United States senate contest? 

A It would surprise me if they had all voted in exactly 

the same proportion, yes. 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

,-
 
RE
EL
 

JO
SE

 
"
E
E
 

W
E
 

J 
S
R
 

S
t
 

G
E
 

R
E
 

I
O
 

1
D
 
k
e
 

N
p
 

pe
 

pk
 

ek
 
d
k
 

S
t
 

a
h
 

a 
a 

a
y
 

S
E
 

b
e
 
S
R
 

R
E
 

R
C
 

W
E
 

E
E
 
Y
L
 

4 a 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 48 
  

  

Q And if those data are incorrect could they affect the 

accuracy of your analysis? 

A Yes, they could. 

Q In fact, were precincts bordering Davie County among 

those which you used in calculating whether or not race or 

party were a better explainer--a better method of explaining 

the external boundaries of the district? 

Q Yes. 

Q There are more segments than precincts that comprise 

your analysis; is that correct? 

A Yes. 

Q Is that a form of double counting? 

A No. 

Q Are all convergent segments equally probative of each 

of the two theories, whether race or party predominated in 

the construction of the external boundary of the district? 

A I treated them as equally probative. 

.Q Would it be possible that because of differences--that 

convergent segments could be used to support one or the other 

theory of the construction of the external boundary of the 

district because of differences in the level of change with 

respect to party or with respect to race? 

A One could devise other measures that take into account 

the magnitudes of the differences across boundaries, yes. 

Q And did you make any effort to conduct such an 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 

Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

N
o
 

0
0
 

aT
 

A
y
 

U
n
 

B
e
 

R
D
 

p
e
 

D
N
:
 

D
e
 
i
 
C
t
 

fk
 

5 
k
L
 

a
 

p
a
 

uk
 

pn
 

  

# Ny 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 _ Page 49   

  

  

analysis? 

A No. 

Q Do you have any sense for what that analysis would 

show without conducting it? 

A No. 

Q Did you consider conducting such an analysis? 

A Briefly, yes. 

Q Did you make some initial attempts to evaluate data 

with respect to such an analysis? 

A No. 

Q I had an unrelated question on Exhibit 21, page 5, in 
the upper right-hand corner. These are 24 observations from 

data set NC.PRECINCT. Can you tell me what that analysis 

began to show, what the purpose of this activity was? 

A What this program does is..to.combine.information. from. | _. 
two files. The first few records of one of the files is—--are 

listed on page 5. And a short time ago we looked at the 

records that are listed on page 2. Those are the top few 

records from the other file on which this analysis is based. 

And what the analysis--or what the computer program 

does is to combine these two files together to produce the 

single file that runs for many, many pages and contains the 

results of our calculations. 

Q I wanted to draw your attention to the fourth row 

across of data, the fourth grouping of rows, where county     

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 
 



Oo
 

©
 

uN
 
O
S
 

n
n
 

A
 
W
N
 

N
O
N
 

O
N
 

O
N
 

ee
 

pe
 

p
e
d
 

e
d
 

e
k
 

pd
 

pe
d 

pe
d 

pe
d 

B
N
 

D
R
 

h
E
 

R
N
 

i
t
h
 
R
R
 

m
S
 

* * 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 
  

  

names are listed, Beaufort and Bertie. 

A Yes. 

Q Are those the very first that exist in the file and is 

that the reason they are included at this location, or is 

there some other purpose or reason why those two counties 

were included in these data? 

A This is just the top of the file called NC.PRECINCT. 

Q Do you have any information concerning in which 

congressional district those two counties are located? 

A Not at the moment, no. 

Q Does your analysis treat away all precinct comparisons 

as equivalent regardless of their respective populations? 

For purposes of proving or disproving theory, does each 

precinct segment count the same regardless of what the 

population is .inside..or.outside..the. district? 

A When you say what the population is, you are referring 

to the number of people as opposed to their--- 

Q (interposing) The total--- 

A —-—-either political composition or their racial 

composition? 

Q That is right, their total number. 

A The total number? Yes, the count is independent--or 

the correlation measure that I use is independent of the 

total number of people involved in each precinct. 

Q In evaluating intent would there not be a need to 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 

Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886    



N
D
.
 

O0
 
C
A
E
N
 

U
C
R
 

C
O
 

h
E
 

pe
 

E
E
 

H
E
 
C
E
E
 

e
e
 

R
h
 

C
U
 

I 
i
e
 

E
E
E
 

E
W
 

Ry a 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 51   

  

weigh the segment analysis according to populations in order 

to determine intent in constructing a congressional district? 

A I wouldn’t think that there would be a need to do it. 

One could do it, but it is not necessary. 

Q So this was not an approach you have attempted? 

A That is correct. I did not attempt it. 

Q And so each segment counts the same even if the two 

precincts involved are relatively small in population and 

have relatively little effect on the overall character of the 

congressional district? 

A That is correct. 

Q And does this analysis count each precinct equally 

either in support or in opposition to the theory even if the 

differences are very small or even trivial? 

A Well, I don’t know about trivial, but all it does is 

to count up differences. 

Q Did you ever prepare a listing of those instances in 

which--of the precincts and the observations that reflect 

your Type P divergent segments? 

(Witness peruses document.) 

A Those are listed on pages 41 and 42 of Exhibit 21, or 

at least these are the ones that are consistently opposed. 

Did you intend--- 

Q (interposing) My question was any that were 

divergent. 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886    



  

OC
 

0
0
 

uO
 

O
N
 

n
h
 

A
a
 
W
N
 

N
O
N
 

RN
 

ee
d 

pm
 

bd
 

e
d
 

b
e
d
 

f
e
d
 

p
e
d
 

p
e
d
 

p
e
d
 

pe
d 

B
o
 

a
N
e
N
 

N
H
 

2
 

2
 
O
B
 

n
D
 

R
R
 
D
i
p
R
 

S
s
 

* » 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 52 
  

  

A Any that are—--- 

Q The 26 that you have listed in your report. 

A Oh; I don’t recall having printed those out: 

separately. They are of course included in the entire list, 

Exhibit 22 and the bulk of Exhibit 21, but they aren’t listed 

separately. 

Q Let’s mark as Exhibit 23, I believe, a list which I 

will place before you. 

| A Thank you. 

(Exhibit 23 was marked for 

identification.) 

Q And I would like for you to briefly review the data 

reflected inside and outside and confirm for me that those 

would be instances if these data and numbers are correct that 

would support the Type P divergent analysis and these would 

be the 26 segments. And you have before you, I believe, 

Exhibits 21 and 22, the original data, if you need to make a 

check on any of those. 

(Witness peruses document.) 

Ms. Smiley: We have been going for over an hour 

and a half. David, would you like to take a break? 

Mr. Markham: That is fine with me. 

The Witness: I am doing fine. 

Ms. Smiley: Okay; we will wait. Why don’t we go 

for another--- 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 

Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



py 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 53   

  

  
  

The Witness: (interposing) But if you want to 

take a break while I do some homework here, that is fine. 

Ms. Smiley: Well, that was the other thing, 

whether or not you would be more comfortable taking a few 

minutes to look at the data. 

Stein: How long will it take for you to 

figure an answer to the question? 

Witness: It is going to take a little while. 

Markham: Well, why don’t we take a short 

Smiley: When we say a little while, 

minutes we will check again? 

Witness: Yes. 

Smiley: Todd, we will take at least ten 

Cox: Okay. 

Mr. Markham: Let me do this before then: I have 

got an additional set of data for the R divergent segments. 

Why don’t we have him review those as well? And we will 

later identify that as Exhibit 24. 

The Reporter: Why don’t we just identify it now? 

Mr. Markham: Let’s identify it as 24 now and have 

him make the same analysis, if he will. 

(Exhibit 24 was marked for 

identification.) 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886    



  

eo
 

O
R
 

NJ
 

O
N
T
 
U
W
 N
e
 

N
N
 

ee
 

ee
 

pd
 

e
d
 

pd
 

pd
 

p
e
d
 

e
d
 

p
e
d
 

pe
 

R
R
R
 

N
B
S
 

g
i
o
n
 

om
 

ml
 

a
e
 

* * 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 54   

  

The Reporter: Off the record. 2:10 p.m. 

(A brief recess was taken.) 

Mr. Markham: On the record. 2:29 p.m. 

By Mr. Markham: 

Q Dr. Peterson, before we went on the break we had 

presented to you Exhibits 23 and 24 and asked you to confirm 

that those are indeed the--with respect to Exhibit 23 the 15 

Type P or party divergent segments and with respect to 

Exhibit 24 the group of Type R or race divergent segments 

that comprise a part of your analysis in this case? 

A Well, I didn’t quite understand my assignment to be 

that. I understood it to be that if the numbers on these 

exhibits are correct would they be Type P or Type R--- 

Q (interposing) Okay. With that limited——- 

A --=-Segments. 

Q ——-understanding let me ask you with respect to 

Exhibit 23 are each of these Type P divergent segments? 

A | They appear to be. In some cases it is hard to tell 

because the accuracy with which the numbers are shown I think 

in some instances makes it ambiguous. But they appear to be 

the Type P divergent segments. 

Q Which ones do you think have some ambiguity as to 

whether they are or are not Type P divergent based on the 

accuracy by which the numbers are calculated? 

A I am trying to find an example. It may be--- 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

©
 

0
 

N
O
 
O
S
 

n
n
 

A
 
W
N
 

D
S
 

B
D
 

h
e
m
 

pe
d 

p
m
b
 

e
h
 

p
e
d
 

p
d
 

d
h
 

ee
d 

e
d
 

O
N
E
 

R
E
 

l
s
 
E
a
 

UR
E 

r
o
t
 

e
r
 

B
R
 

S
R
O
 

T
Y
 

T
R
 

a @ 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 55 
  

  

(Witness peruses document.) 

It may be in the Exhibit 24 that I found one or more 

instances where I couldn’t really tell. Let me check that 

one as well. 

(Witness peruses document.) 

Yes. On Exhibit 24, segment number 118, the figure 51 

percent is shown for the Democratic representation both in 

the internal precinct and the external precinct. But I think 

that if the numbers were calculated to greater precision, one 

would find that the two percentages are in fact not 

identical. 

Q Okay. Can we look at Exhibit 22 and locate 

observation 1177? 

A It is on page 31. 

Q And is the data reported in your data set calculated 

beyond the third digit? 

A No, but all of the comparisons that are done of the 

percentages are done with greater precision than is indicated 

on the page. 

Q Can you define what a trivial difference would be with 

respect to numbers reflected on these two charts? 

Ms. Smiley: Object to the form of the question; I 

don’t think he has indicated he used trivial in any of the 

  

analyses. If you can answer the question, Dr. Peterson, give 

ita go. 

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 

Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

e
o
 

0
 

9 
A
 

Un
 

B
A
W
 

N
e
 

[3
° 

IN
 

B
N
 

e
e
 

p
e
 

p
m
 

p
e
d
 

p
e
d
 

p
e
d
 

p
e
d
 

e
d
 

p
e
e
d
 

pe
a 

. —_ 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 56 
  

  

A If you can define for me what you mean by trivial,;-X 

can try to answer. 

Q I was going to ask you if there are any of these 

results which you would perceive as being trivial differences 

in terms of the internal black percentage or the external 

black percentage, for example. 

A No, I have not characterized any of them as trivial. 

They are simply differences. 

Q In your normal analysis, your statistical analysis 

that you prepare for various clients, do you from time to 

time determine whether differences are or are not trivial? 

A On occasions when I calculate the statistical 

significance of differences, I will say that some differences 

ar significant and others are not significant, but trivial is 

not a technical term. 

Q Are there differences between the values on charts 23 

and 24 comparing internal precincts to external precincts and 

comparing percentage black party--excuse me; percentage black 

voter registration to Democratic registration in which these 

numbers are not significant? 

A I don’t know what significant means in this context. 

When I use the term "significant," it is within the context 

of a particular probability model. And I can’t think of a 

probability model that it would be appropriate to employ 

  

here. 

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

pr
ed

 
©
 

0
 

N
N
 

S
N
 

tn
t 

A
 

W
B
N
 

C
T
E
 

© 
T
E
 

C
E
 

G
E
 

SE
 

U
R
 

S
E
 

S
E
 

S
E
 
S
T
 

# * 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 57 
  

  

Q If in fact these are the instances in which--all the 

instances in which segments provide support for the political 

hypothesis reflected in your affidavits, Exhibits 19 and 20, 

can you tell me what is the range of black voter registration 

reflected for this group of precincts? 

A What you want to know is the largest of the black 

percentages that is shown here and the smallest of the black 

percentages? Is that what your question is? 

Q For those that were included inside Congressional 

District 12. 

A Well, the range for the inside figures shown on 

Exhibit 23 for the black percentages goes from a low of zero 

percent——- 

(Witness peruses document.) 

I haven’t checked these numbers to see if the right-- 

are these fractions or are they in fact percentages? They 

look more like fractions than percentages despite the label. 

I will interpret them as fractions. 

Q I will represent to you that the first number of the 

first line, .1484, is intended to represent 14.84 percent. 

A All right. 1 will interpret it that way, then. It 

looks like the largest of the numbers in this column is 20.1 

percent. 

Q Do you have any information concerning the range of 

black voter registration in the total group of precincts that 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

Oo
 

0 
QO
 

A
 

nN
 
A
W
N
 

em
 

a 
A
E
 

S
R
 

S
R
 

SR
 

U
y
 

I
E
 
G
T
 

o
r
 

(E
R 

—_ —- 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 58   

  

comprise Congressional District 12? 

A Within the district as a whole? 

Yes. 

The representation of blacks among registered voters? 

Yes; do you have any information concerning that? 

Yes. 

0 
B
O
O
 

B
D
 

And what is that percentage? 

A The representation of blacks amount registered voters 

within the 12th District is 46 percent. 

Q So are any of these precincts typical of the bulk of 

Congressional District 12? 

Ms. Smiley: Object to the form of the question; 

if you can divine an answer to it, David, go ahead. 

A I am not sure what you mean by representative. None 

of them contain blacks to the extent of 46 percent. . 

Q I am looking at Exhibit 24, the precincts which are 

said to argue for a racial explanation for the external 

boundary structure of the district. What is the most African 

American by voter registration of any of those precincts? 

A External, did you say? 

Of the internal precincts. 

Internal. 

Included within Congressional District 12. 

24 percent included--I'm sorry. 

O
e
y
 

0
.
»
 

0 

Included within Congressional District 12 internally. 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



o
R
 

A
Y
N
 

t
h
 

B
a
i
 
N
e
 

C
T
 

© 
T
E
 

SO
 

Co 
S
C
 

G
y
 
G
S
 

S
S
 

R
Y
 

R
R
 
Y
N
 

E
N
E
 

R
Y
 

R
L
 

# i 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 
  

  

A Okay; 24 percent. 

Q So all the precincts reflected on Exhibit 24 would be 

considerably lower in black voter registration than would the 

district be as a whole; is that correct? 

A It is lower, yes. 

Q I want to turn your attention back to Exhibit 22 to 

observation number 160. 

(Witness peruses document.) 

A Page 39. 

Q In looking at Exhibit 23, this is one of the observa- 

tions that is used to support the Type P divergent segment 

analysis; is that correct? 

(Witness peruses documents.) 

A Yes. 

Q And assuming that. the evidence will show those 

identifiers to be High Point Precinct 1 on the inside 

included in Congressional District 12 and High Point 

Precinct 4 externally, which is excluded and not--or not 

included in Congressional District 12, can you tell me how 

many black registered voters there are in the 1st Precinct 

inside the district and what total number? 

A Internally there are four registered blacks out of a 

total of 1,212. 

Q And what about the external precinct not included? 

(Witness peruses document.) 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886    



O
o
 

0
0
 

g
O
 
O
Q
 

n
t
 

A
 
W
N
 

DN
 

O
N
 

ee
 

ed
 

e
d
 

pd
 

mm
 

pe
d 

pe
d 

m
d
 

ee
 

pe
 

— ~ 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 60   

  

A And outside it is seven blacks registered out of 

2, 114% 

Q And this is evidence that there is a higher proportion 

of black persons outside the district than inside the 

district for that segment? ° 

A Yes, if you calculate the two percentages and compare 

them, one number is greater than the other. 

Q And is that a significant difference in your view? 

A Again, when I use the term "significant" it is within 

the context of a probability model. And I don’t see what 

probability model would be applicable under these circum- 

stances, so I don’t use the term "significant" here. 

Q So is this evidence that the designers of the district 

in determining which precincts to include or exclude along 

the external boundary as it wanders through High Point chose 

High Point Precinct 1 on the inside and excluded High Point 

Precinct 4 on the outside despite the fact that High Point 4 

was a blacker precinct? 

A What it is is an element in the correlation of the 

boundary line with the racial makeup of the precincts which 

it separates. 

Q I want to look at observation number 6, which I 

believe will appear on page 9 of Exhibit 21. 

(Witness peruses documents.) 

Q Have you located that? 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886    



  

WO
 

00
. 

J
 

S
h
 

W
h
 
K
W
O
N
 

mm
 

ju
 

[=
 

é # 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 61   

  

A Yes. 

Q And can you tell me again for that precinct how many 

black persons are in the precinct outside the district and 

how many black persons are in the precinct inside the 

district? 

A In the total population? 

Q Among the registered voters, black registered voters. 

(Witness peruses document.) 

A Outside there are 305 black registered voters and 

inside there are 338 black registered voters. 

Q What is the total number of registered voters inside 

the precinct? 

A The total number of registered voters inside the 

precinctis 2,278. 

Q And for the external precinct? 

A The total number of registered voters is 2,005. 

Q Now, again, is this evidence significant or important 

to support a hypothesis that the designers of the district 

were looking at party rather than race and determining to 

select the internal precinct and to exclude the external one 

in this instance? 

A It is an element of evidence of that, yes. 

0. Ts lt wrivial evidence? 

A That is your word, not mine. 

Q Is it significant evidence? 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



OC
 

0 
NN
 
O
S
 

n
n
 

A
 
W
N
 

B
O
 

BN
 

he
 

e
d
 

pe
d 

pd
 

pe
d 

pe
d 

fe
d 

pe
d 

pe
d 

pe
d 

— » 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 62 
  

  

A Again, I don’t know what significance means in this 

context. 

Q Would it surprise you that there are a number of other 

observations with very small differences in the number of 

black persons or in number and support for or registration as 

a Democrat for a number of these precincts that your analysis 

is based upon? 

A I am sure there are small differences that go both 

ways. 

Q And have you made any evaluation of those, the numbers 

and types of--let me back up. Have you made any evaluation 

of thresholds beyond which there are larger differences or 

smaller differences and relate them to these 25 precincts 

said to be supportive of the party analysis and these 16 

precincts said to be supportive of a race analysis? 

A No. 

Q Now, does your analysis take into account whether 

inclusion of the external precinct touching the boundary of 

the 12th Congressional District would require the creators to 

split open another county which at the moment in the process 

of developing this plan is wholly contained elsewhere? 

A I don’t understand the question. 

Q Does it matter to you whether parts of the segment of 

this district lie along county boundaries for counties which 

are not included otherwise in the congressional district? 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886    



  

Oo
 

0
 

N
a
 

O
&
A
 

wn
 

A
 
W
N
 

C
T
S
 
J
 

SO
 

a
 

S
E
 

SR
 

S
R
 
S
S
 

N
o
g
 
M
u
i
 

RB
 
C
B
 

R
A
B
 

h
h
 
R
O
N
 

m
R
.
 

a» 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 63 
  

  

A No. 

Q So you give the same weight and force to the failure 

of the legislature to break across a county line to take out 

a single precinct of a county and include it than if they are 

making adjustments within counties that are already in part 

included in the district? 

A Right. It is important to note that what I am doing 

is measuring a correlation, not doing a decision analysis. 

Q Do you have any information concerning how many of 

these, the 26 Type P comparisons or the 16 Type R compari- 

sons, involve counties other than the six that are in the 

1997 plan included in part in Congressional District 127? 

A I’m sorry; I didn’t understand the question. 

Q Do you know how many of these data set--these data 

examples, the 25 Type P divergent and the 16 Type R 

divergent, involve counties external to the six counties 

which comprise in part Congressional District 12? 

A I think the answer is no, but I still don’t understand 

the question. 

Q Well, let me step back. Do you know the six counties 

that are included in the 12th Congressional District in 19977? 

A Not offhand, no. 

Q okay. And do you know how many of the external 

precincts that are compared to precincts within the 12th 

Congressional District would be in counties that are not at 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

©
 

0
0
 

Jd
 

A
 

n
r
 

A
 

W
O
N
 

DN
 

ON
 

be
 

md
 

hd
 

ed
 

pd
 

md
 

fe
d 

pe
d 

pe
d 

ped
 

- » 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 64 
  

  

present included in the 12th Congressional District at all? 

A I don’t know. 

Q And again, in your view every segment counts equally 

in the analysis regardless of whether that is maybe a factor 

in the decision maker’s mind? 

A Right; this is a correlative study. 

Q Do you know, for example, whether Davie County is a 

county that is included in the 12th Congressional District in 

any part at the present time? 

A I don’t recall at the moment. 

Q I want to go back briefly to the Davie County data. I 

believe we were at observation 190s to 200, in that area. 

Ms. Smiley: That is the data that you were 

telling us is the Davie County data. I don’t believe Dr. 

Peterson has identified it as Davie County data. 

Mr. Markham: Okay. 

By Mr. Markham: 

Dr. Peterson, are you familiar with FIPS codes? Q 

A What kind of codes? 

Q FIPS, F-I-P-S. 

A Well, I may have been at one time, but I am not at the 

moment. 

Q Are you familiar with county identifier codes of the 

U. S. Census Bureau data? 

A Oh, yes; yes. 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

©
 

0
 

NN
 

S
A
 

un
 

A
 
W
N
 

=
 

W
E
 

T
e
 
S
e
 

t
N
 
S
T
 

S
E
 

a 
a
t
 

EE
 

R
Y
 

B
h
 

BR
 

3 
8B
 

5 
QO
 

n
i
s
 

i
m
 

OS
 

”® i» 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 65 
  

  

Q and is that-—— 

A (interposing) That is to say that I know there are 

such things and I have worked with them in the past, but I 

couldn’t cite one to you at the moment. 

Q I believe we were looking at observation 199 before. 

I wanted you to look through and confirm, if you would, that 

the data for the percentage of support for the Democrat 

candidate for the Court of Appeals in those various precincts 

that we identified as being part of a same county but unique 

precincts also is all the same figure. 

A Well, you will have to lead me through step by step, 

because I don’t recall what the comparisons were that you 

were interested in. 

Q If we go to observation 198 through observation 210. 

A Okay. 

Q I am looking at the external precinct results for 

first the lieutenant governor’s race. Can you confirm that 

they are all either 34 percent? 

A If you could point me to the right column, that would 

be helpful. 

Q If I could point you to the correct column? 

A Yeah. Are we looking at the--in the one, two, three, 

  

four, five, sixth row, the second column in? Is that what 

you are looking at? 

Q Yes. 

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 

Post Office Box 31382 ! FAX 782-0814 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

Lo.
 

R
E
 

~~
 
S
I
R
,
 

SE
E 

R
E
E
 
{
R
A
 

7 
R
l
 

© 
E
E
 

FY
 

D
N
 

D
N
 

=
 

p
d
 

p
e
d
 

p
e
d
 

m
d
 

h
d
 

p
e
d
 

e
e
d
 

p
e
d
 

ea
d 

h
o
 

D
B
 

M
e
l
 

8
 

S
a
i
n
 

B
o
S
o
g
 

e
o
 

a
 

p
t
 

A » 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 66   

  

A And the question is in those entries in records 198 

through 210 are the numbers all 34 percent? 

Q Yes. 

(Witness peruses documents.) 

A Yes, they are. 

Q And you confirmed earlier that several of those 

reflect unique precincts within whatever county is reflected 

by the code 059? 

A It seems to be the case. That is, the precinct 

numbers do change but the--- 

Q And now if you would look at the next column, can you 

confirm that the support for the Democratic candidate in the 

Court of Appeals in each of those precincts is also identical 

or equivalent? 

A This is starting with 198? 

Q Yes. 

A And it is the column that is headed OPDEMCOA? 

Q Do you understand that to be the Democrat support. for 

a Court of Appeals candidate? 

A TY do. 

Q Yes. 

A (interposing) Okay. I am just-—- 

Q (intetposing Are those the same? 

A ---trying to make sure--no, they are not. That is why 

I was asking. 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 
  

 



  

OW
 

0
0
 

S
N
.
 

NN
 

t
h
 
A
W
 

NM
 

m=
 

S
Y
 

S
E
 
S
S
 
S
S
 

S
N
 
S
R
 

S
S
 

* * 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 67 
  

  

Q Are they essentially equivalent? 

Ms. Smiley: Object to the form of the question. 

A Are you asking me if the differences are trivial? 

Q Yeah. Just so we can be clear, some are reflecting 33 

percent and some are reflecting 34 percent support; is that 

correct? 

A Yes, that is correct. 

Q And for Democrat registration can you tell me what the 

percentages are for each of the precincts within that same 

county? 

Ms. Smiley: I am going to object. I think you 

have already noted from his affidavit that Davie County does 

not have precinct level information, that he used minor civil 

divisions. That was in footnote 1 on page 3. To the extent 

that you keep referring to these as precincts, I will object. 

By Mr. Markham: 

Q Well, then let me ask you this, Dr. Peterson: when 

you did your segments along the boundary of Davie County did 

you compare precincts in Davidson County to minor civil 

divisions in Davie County? 

A My recollection is that what we did was to draw the 

boundaries based on precincts driven primarily by the 

Stecingt. definition internal to. District 12. . But for 

purposes of calculating the percentages that applied to the 

geographic areas in Davie County, we relied on minor civil 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 

Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7836 

  

 



  

eo
 

0 
9 

A 
n
i
 

A 
W
O
N
 

DN
 

=
 

p
d
 

p
e
d
 

p
e
d
 

p
e
d
 

p
e
d
 

p
e
d
 

p
e
d
 

p
e
d
 

pe
d 

R
o
R
 

B
e
 
N
N
 

B
N
 
B
t
 

B
r
o
d
 

a
e
 

m
E
 

* » 
  

  

David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 68 

division data. All of this--- 

Q (interposing) Do you know if any elections are 

conducted in minor civil division territories? 

A Well, certainly there are elections conducted there, 

but whether they are tabulated by minor civil division is the 

important question, don’t you think? 

Q That is the import of my question. Are elections 

tabulated by the minor civil divisions? 

A The information that we had on voter registration and 

election results in Davie County was at the minor civil 

division level, so apparently so. 

Q And do you know whether that data is imputed or 

whether it was actually calculated by the State? 

A I don’t know. But if it was the data on the basis of 

which the redistricting was done, it probably doesn’t matter. 

Q And looking again at this set of observations, 199 

through 210, can you tell us what the party registration 

figures are tor each of the precincts? 

Ms. Smiley: Object to the form of the question. 

Are you talking about internal or external? If you are 

talking about external--- 

Mr. Markham: (interposing) External, external. 

Ms. Smiley: Does external mean you think it is 

Davie County data? 

  

Mr. Markham: Yes. 

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 
  

 



©
 

°
°
 

9 
a
 

n
t
 

A
 
W
h
 

N
O
O
N
 

RN
 

N
N
 

ee
 

pe
 

pm
 

e
d
 

p
d
 

e
d
 

pd
 

pd
 

pe
ed

 

o
k
o
 

R
E
 

o
e
 
L
P
L
 

t
e
 

o
R
 

l
g
 
y
n
 

r
i
g
 
B
l
 

# * 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 69 
  

  

Ms. Smiley: I think he has just testified that 

the data there was by minor civil division. David, if you 

can answer the question--- 

By Mr. Markham: 

Q Well, for the observations, regardless of whether with 

respect to Davie County they are precincts or minor civil 

divisions, can you tell us whether all the minor civil 

divisions of Davie County have the same percentage of persons 

registered as Democrat in them? And again, we are defining 

Davie County as being those observations 199 through 210. 

A I am sure there are more minor civil divisions in 

Davie County than are reflected here. 

Q For the ones that are reflected in your data set, 

Exhibit 22, can you confirm that for a group of Davie County 

precincts all of them have the exact same Democrat voter 

registration percentage? 

Ms. Smiley: Object to the form of the question; 

same objection. 

Q In that case, let me reword the question: can you 

confirm that for a group of minor civil division of Davie 

County that the voter registration is the same for all those 

minor civil divisions? 

A This is the black registered voters that you are 

asking about; is that right? 

Q Yes. I’m sorry; Democrat registered voters. 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886    



  

LC
 

RX
 

9 
A
 

n
n
 

A
 
W
N
 

BD
 

p
e
d
 

p
e
d
 

pd
 

p
e
d
 

e
d
 

e
d
 

pe
 

p
d
 

pe
d 

N— —. 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 70   

  

A Democrat registered voters; okay. 

(Witness peruses document.) 

For all of the entries 198 through 210, the fraction 

indicated for the percentage of Democrats is the same. i It is 

40 percent. 

Q I am correct that your segment analysis considers only 

precincts that are the external border of the district and 

adjacent ones outside, but not those that are internal to 

cores of the district in the urban areas of Charlotte, 

Winston-Salem, High Point, and Greensboro, for example? 

A It just--the calculations just involve those precincts 

that touch the border. 

Q Would that analysis be affected in any: 1f all the 

precincts which don’t touch the border were 100 percent 

white? 

A No. 

Q And similarly they would not be affected if they were 

overwhelmingly black? 

A That is right. 

Q Did the characteristics, demographic or political or 

otherwise, of the cores--and by core district I am referring 

to--let me use a different term: nonexternal touching 

precincts. Rather than "core," I will just use a made up 

term for those precincts which are not touching the external 

boundary of the district. would your analysis be affected in 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

ND
 

OD
 

sy
 

E
N
 

U
N
.
 
N
e
 

NN
 

O
N
 

pe
 

pd
 

p
e
d
 

e
n
d
 

e
d
 

p
e
d
 

pd
 

pd
 

p
e
d
 

pd
 

Pi
ed
 
N
N
N
 

N
i
e
 
B
S
L
 

R
B
 
B
r
S
 

® * 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 71 
  

  

any way by either the political or racial characteristic of 

those precincts? 

A No. 

Q Does it matter to your analysis whether those 

precincts which tend to support the party explanation for 

external precinct selection or the racial theory for their 

selection--whether they are in the urban counties at the 

extreme of the district or whether they are in the counties 

that make up the bridge or connection between those counties? 

Ms. Smiley: Object to the form of the question; 

answer it, David. Go ahead. 

A Could you give me the early part of the question 

again, please? 

Q Does it matter to your analysis whether the precincts 

which are a Type P divergent or Type R divergent are located - 

in the large urban counties of Mecklenburg, Forsyth, and 

Guilford or whether they are located in the connecting 

counties of Iredell, Rowan, and Davidson? 

A It does not affect my calculation. 

Q Have you ever performed any analysis to determine how 

many of those precincts upon which your analysis relies fall 

in one type of county as opposed to another? 

a No. | 
Mr. Markham: Let me mark as Exhibit 25 a summary 

of the divergent precincts. 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



No
 

w
y
 

T
O
N
 

t
n
 

a
 
W
D
 

em
 

O
N
 

T
G
 

S
O
 

UO
 

CO 
G
O
 

G
A
G
 

C0 
S
G
 

G
U
 

CI
 

R
R
 

P
R
 
B
o
o
s
e
 

i 
t
e
 
a
m
e
 

l
e
 

A. » 
  

  

David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 72 

(Exhibit 25 was marked for 

identification.) 

Q Assume with me that population data elsewhere in this 

case will establish the percentage of black population in the 

12th Congressional District in the 1997 version from each of 

the counties. Does it matter to your analysis whether the 

Type P segments or for that matter the Type R segments occur 

in a county that provides a plurality of the black population 

for the district or whether it occurs in counties that 

provide less than 5 percent? 

A The initial part of the question again was does it 

matter to the analysis? 

Q Yes, 

A No, it doesn’t. 

Q Do you know how many precincts in total are 

responsible for the 25 segments which are Type P and the 16 

segments which are Type R? 

A No. 

Q Do you know what portion of the entire number of 

precincts or of the population of the district those 

precincts comprise? 

A No. 

And again, that has no effect on your analysis? Q 

A That is correct. 

Q Is it your view that because the partisan level of the 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886    



  

©
 

0
 

N
N
 

a
 

un
 

A
 
W
D
 

RS
 

R
D
 

ee
k 

he
 

ph
 

dk
 
C
a
b
 

i 
h
b
 

h
p
 

# @ 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 | Page 73 
  

  

district is in the 60 percentiles and the race level of the 

district is in the 40 percentiles for African American under 

several different measures that the designers must have been 

concerned more about party than by race? Was that the 

conclusion that you reached in your affidavit? 

A Well, we can read the affidavit. 

Ms. Smiley: Which affidavit are you referring to? 

(Counsel peruses documents.) 

Mr. Markham: I am interested in the--- 

Ms. Smiley: (interposing) Are you referring to 

Exhibit 197? 

By Mr. Markham: 

Q Yeah. I am referring to page 8 of Exhibit 19 and the 

analysis before that time. Is it the fact that partisan 

| levels of support are higher than black population levels 

that in your view somehow lend support to a view that the 

designers were more concerned about party than about race, or 

am I misreading your analysis there? 

A Well, the conclusion that I state is that these 

figures support the position that creation of a Democratic 

majority in District 12 is a more important consideration in 

its construction than was the creation of a black majority. 

The assertion there I think is based on the fairly obvious 

point that blacks in fact are not a majority in the 12th 

District, but Democrats are. 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 

Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1332 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

No
 

O0
0 

N
O
N
.
 

U
r
 
R
W
 

DN
 

N
O
N
 

ee
 

ee
 

pd
 

pd
 

pe
l 

pd
 

e
d
 

pd
 

pe
d 

pe
d 

    

  

David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 74 

Mr. Markham: We will mark this, then, as Exhibit 

26. 

(Exhibit 26 was marked for 

identification.) 

Q So would the data at the top of Exhibit 26 support the 

same conclusion that the designers of the district--that in 

designing--the creation of a Democratic majority in the 

district was a more important consideration in the con- 

struction of the 1992 Congressional District 12 than was the 

creation of a black majority? 

Ms. Smiley: I object to the form of the question. 

I don’t believe that Dr. Peterson has any basis of knowing 

where this data came from or whether it is accurate. If you 

would like to attempt to answer, David, go ahead. 

A Well, the first thing that I notice is that in 

Congressional District 12 according to Exhibit 26 there is a 

black majority in the 12th District. And that makes this set 

of numbers quite different from the set of numbers to which I 

refer in my first affidavit. 

Q Okay. So if we look at your affidavit at page 8, 

would those figures also support the proposition that 

creation of a district with a high Democrat support was more 

important than the construction of a district with a high 

level of black population? 

  

Ms. Smiley: Object to the form of the question; 

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

©
 

0
 

Nd
 

A
 

n
n
 

A
 
W
N
 

0
 

pe
t 
i
 

ie
d 

p
e
t
 

pk
 

p
t
 
t
k
 
C
e
 

o 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 75 
  

  

go ahead and answer if you can. 

A I am not sure that I can... I have given a fairly 

precise interpretation of those figures that applies to that 

set of figures. That interpretation does not apply to the 

figures in Exhibit 26. 

Q If it were the case that in--let’s assume 

hypothetically there were a district in which the black 

population, black voting age population, black registered 

voters were 51 percent--- 

A (interposing) Yes. 

Q ——-1in all categories and that the partisan results 

were the same as those reflected on page 8. Then would you 

be able to make the same assertion that you have made on page 

8? 

A I don’t think so, no. 

Q So you think it is significant to your analysis that 

the African American population is less than 50 percent on 

population measures? 

A Because 50 percent is the cutoff between minority and 

majority. 

Q Well, there is nothing about that data, if I under- 

stand your analysis, that would prevent the fact that in the 

selection of precincts to include in a district or to exclude 

from a district race was predominant? 

A Give me the question again, please. 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

Oo
 

0
0
 

a
 

A
 

n
t
 

A
 
W
N
 

BN
 

DN
 

ee
 

m
d
 

pe
d 

e
d
 

pe
d 

ee
d 

pd
 

e
d
 

pe
d 

pe
 

R
R
 

O
.
B
 

R
B
 

g
i
n
o
 

f
o
n
 

D
e
 
R
m
 

A. » 
  

  

David. W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 76 

Q If I understand your paragraph 21 of page 8 of Exhibit 

19, an important element of that analysis is the fact that 

the numbers are literally under 50 percent? 

A That is a critical feature of that set of data, yes. 

If the object were to create a minority majority district, 

the object was not met. But the object of--if it had been 

the object to create a Democratic majority district, that 

objective was met. 

° And if the object was to create a district with a 

substantial African American population, would that change 

your analysis? 

A I would have to know now what is meant by substantial. 

Q Suppose we created a black majority district in the 

State of North Dakota, where there are relatively few blacks. 

Would that indicate to you that persons were considering race 

in the construction of that district? 

A If they set out to create a black majority district 

there and they said that was their purpose and they succeeded 

in doing it, I would say they probably had done what they set 

out to do. 

Q And suppose--because there are relatively few African 

Americans in North Dakota, suppose that the greatest African 

American concentration that can be created is a 40 percent 

  

district. 

A Okay. 

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

J
 

c
S
 

G
R
E
 
G
E
 

B
E
E
 

T
E
E
 

CC
 
SE
E 

BO
 

BO
 

kd
 

md
 

md
 

pe
d 

e
d
 

fe
d 

pe
d 

pe
d 

pe
d 

# # 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 77 
  

  

Q Is the fact that they only reached 40 percent in your 

mind somehow proof that they were not looking at race in the 

construction of the district because they didn’t get to the 

magic 50 percent number? 

A Well, now I am confused as to what the underlying 

supposition is. Are we looking just at the numbers or are we 

looking at more information about what motivated the 

selection of the boundaries? 

Q Could the construction of a 40 percent African 

American district be racial in intent? 

A Of course, as could any other number. 

Q And is it generally the case that African American-- 

let me step back. Could it generally be correct for any 

political subdivision of North Carolina based on your review 

of the data that you have- had before you that the number of 

registered Democrats in a unit would exceed the number of 

registered black persons? 

‘A I'm sorry; is the question could the registered--the 

number of registered Democrats exceed the number--- 

Q (interposing) Would it generally exceed the number of 

registered black persons? 

Ms. Smiley: Object to the form of the question. 

A could it or would it or does it? 

Q Would it usually? 

  

Ms. Smiley: Object to the form of the question. 

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 

Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

O
O
 
S
N
 

A
W
 

M
U
L
E
 

oa
 

Vo
uk
 

T
R
 

L
E
 
n
T
 

e
T
 

re
 
E
u
 

® ~ 
  

  

David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 A Page 78 

A Could I have the question again, please? 

Q Have you conducted any analysis of the relationship of 

Democratic registration and African American registration? 

A Not formally; I have certainly looked at lots of 

individual numbers, some of it here today. 

Q Would it generally be the case that a Democratic 

candidate will receive a percentage of vote in a precinct 

which will exceed the black percentage in that precinct? 

Ms. Smiley: Object to the form of the question. 

A I am not sure I understand the question. Can you give 

me something more specific? 

(Pause.) 

Q I will move to another topic. What is the effect of 

the exclusion of independence in determining the Democrat and 

Republican percentages? 

A It tends to overstate both the Democratic representa- 

tion and the Republican representation. 

Q Do you have any information regarding whether or not 

black and white voters have equal or similar levels of 

registration as independents? 

A I have not looked at that issue. 

Q If there were racial differences in party registration 

as Independent, could that affect the accuracy of the 

analysis in sone instances? 

A I don’t think accuracy is the word that is appropriate 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 

Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



oo
 

O
O
 
S
J
 

U
n
 
A
W
N
 

pe
 

Y
E
 

To 
S
G
 

C
G
 

S
S
 

S
E
 
S
R
 

S
C
 
S
S
 

No
 
W
a
n
.
 

N 
N
M
S
 

R
P
h
 

R
A
E
D
 

R
I
S
 

# @ 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 79 
  

  

here. If some different account were taken of independence, 

it could change the numbers. But I am not sure that it would 

make the study any more or less accurate. 

Q Did you make any effort to perform such an analysis? 

A No. 

Q And such an analysis would have required dividing 

Democrat voter registration by total registration; is that 

correct? 

A Well, it would have required the same thing for 

Republican registrations. 

Q And might it be the case that certain precincts which 

appear as race divergent or party divergent in one set of 

analyses might shift as a result of that type of analysis? 

A It could happen. 

Q And it would be most likely to happen in instances 

where differences in Democrat registration between external 

and internal precincts are relatively small as a percentage 

of the difference? 

A That is true. 

Q So for example, looking at Exhibit 24, observation 19, 

where you have a 2 percent difference in Democrat registra- 

tion in the internal and external precinct, if you had a 

precinct that had 20 percent independents and another had 

very few, then that is the sort of instance in which the 

analysis could change?’ 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 

Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886    



pd
 

e
o
 

0
0
 

gO
 

A
 

n
n
 

A
 
W
N
 

wn 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. : 9/20/99 Page 80 
  

  

A It could change the character of a segment, yes. 

Q Now, in measuring race, your analysis uses three 

measures, if I understand it correctly, total population, 

voting age population, and registration. In your view, are 

each of those equal, each of those equal in weight? 

A For determining the character of the racial composi- 

tion in a precinct? 

Q No; for determining whether in assigning precincts 

along the external boundary of the 12th Congressional 

District precincts were included or excluded more likely on 

the base of race rather than party. 

A I haven’t really thought about one being more 

appropriate or important than the other. I simply used each 

in turn. 

Q - And is the same true for the four measures of party’ 

support? Did you make any effort to evaluate which of those 

is more likely to be a predictor of partisan behavior than 

another? 

A I did do something there, although in the final 

analysis I treated all four equally. But I think that of the 

four voter registration is probably the least reliable 

indicator of voting behavior. 

Q And yet if I understand correctly, the data which you 

provided which shows the greatest difference or support for 

the party thesis over the race thesis is in fact the voter 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886    



"
B
E
E
S
 

- 
E
E
 

E
E
 

V
E
 

B
E
Y
 
C
O
 

C
S
 

T
E
 
a
 

BO
 

be
d 

e
d
 

pd
 

pd
 

pe
d 

p
d
 

e
d
 

pd
 

pe
d 

ed
 

& ® 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 
  

  

registration data? 

A I don’t remember if that is the case or not. It may 

be. 

Q Well, I will draw your attention to paragraph 18 of 

your Exhibit 19. And can you confirm that in fact it was the 

voter registration data upon which you base this portion of 

your analysis? 

A Well, paragraph 18 does describe an analysis that is 

based on voter registration; that is correct. Paragraph 19 

reports the results of all of the other analyses. 

Q And are those results of the other analyses also 

reported in Exhibit 21 in summary fashion? And if so, can 

you tell us which pages? 

A Yes. 

(Witness peruses documents.) 

The results are reported starting on page 35 through 

page 40. 

Mr. Markham: Next we will mark Exhibit 27. 

(Exhibit 27 was marked for 

identification.) 

Q Can you confirm that this is an accurate summary of 

the race and party divergent segments on the various measures 

that you employed? 

(Witness peruses documents.) 

A Yes, it ‘is. 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 

Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886    



e
o
 

0
 

QQ
 

S
N
 

1 
A
W
N
 

DN
 

D
N
 

p
e
d
 

p
d
 

p
d
 

p
d
 

p
e
d
 

p
d
 

e
e
 

p
d
 

p
d
 

p
e
 

B
R
 

BD
 
p
h
 

S
o
g
n
 

o
n
 

m
o
e
 
m
i
 

w® 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 
  

  

Q Just so I am clear, as an example, if one were 

constructing the district based on the results in the 

lieutenant governor’s race, the analysis would show that race 

was a better predictor than party for the external segments 

of the district 22 occasions to 19; is that correct? 

A Yes. 

Q And comparing to the voting age population data, if 

one were constructing a district using the political results 

of the lieutenant governor’s race in 1988, race would be a 

better predictor than party for the external segments of this 

district 22 occasions compared to 17 occasions? 

A Yes. 

Q And similarly if you are looking at voter registra- 

tion, 20 to 187 

(Witness peruses documents.) 

A Yes, I believe that is correct. 

Q And in fact the analysis that you reported in your 

affidavit is a comparison of Democrat voter registration to 

racial registration, which is the last column in the bottom 

row; is that correct? 

The one that is described in paragraph 18? 

Yes. 

Yes, I believe that is the case. 

Q And that is the instance out of these 12 comparisons 

in which party most exceeded race; is that correct? 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886    



  

No
 

G
O
.
 

T
N
 

t
n
 
A
W
 

B
O
.
 

DN
 

AD
 

pe
t 

pb
 

ph
 

e
t
 

pa
k 

p
b
b
 

k
k
 

* * 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 83 
  

  

(Witness peruses documents.) 

A Yes. 

Q And if registration is less reliable, is it less 

reliable both with respect to Democratic registration and 

with respect to African American registration? 

A I doubt it. I don’t know what the reason for that 

would be. 

Q But if we discounted those analyses which include 

registration as a component, then the analyses which would be 

relevant to this inquiry would be the six analyses on the top 

two rows for the first three columns for lieutenant governor, 

Court of Appeals, and U. S. Senate; is that correct? 

A If for some reason we were to discount registration 

entirely, you are right, although I can’t think why we would 

dc that. 

Q I believe you told us earlier that you don’t know 

where any of the particular segments are that are reflected 

on Exhibit--that are analyzed in Exhibit 27, do you, any 

particular locations of those boundary segments along the 

edges of the district? 

A That is correct. 

Q So if you were to review maps here today of these 

various districts, you would be unable to add any additional 

information other than the statistical analysis which you 

have prepared; is that correct? 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 

Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

Oo
 

O°
 

O9
9 

A
 

n
t
 

A
 
W
N
 

NN
 

O
N
 

p
d
 

pm
 

em
 

ed
 

pe
d 

pe
d 

p
t
 

pe
d 

A. A. 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 84 
  

  

A That is right. "I ‘don’t have a way of pointing out to 

you what the particular segments are. 

Q And if in fact it were known where a particular 

segment was, do you have any information about what other 

explanations might account for the inclusion of that segment 

or the exclusion in the district other than the mathematical 

analysis? 

A That is right. I have no information on point. 

Q So if, for example, one of the segments which 

establishes race as a better predictor than--I’m sorry; which 

establishes party as a better predictor than race for the 

external structure of the district, if that precinct were the 

only precinct connecting two ends of the district, the 

necessity for that precinct wouldn’t factor into your 

analysis about whether in fact it was truly party or race 

that accounted for its inclusion? 

Ms. Smiley: Objection to the form of the 

question; excuse me. If You can answer that, go ahead. 

(Pause.) 

A I am not sure what the question is. 

Q Suppose there is a single precinct--- 

A (interposing) I understand the geometry. I am not 

sure what the question is that I am supposed to respond to. 

Q If that single precinct were needed to provide 

contiguity to the district--- 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

ND
 

OR
T 

wd
 

ON
 
B
U
N
 

a 
WU
 

IN
 

p
e
 

BO
. 

N
D
 

h
p
 

fh
 

pr
 

as
 

f
h
 

ek
 
E
h
 

CO 
pd
 

* * 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 85 
  

  

A (interposing) Right. 

Q ---that element of the analysis wouldn’t fagtor into 

your mathematical analysis, but in fact that segment along 

that precinct is proof that party drove the external boundary 

location at that location of the district? 

Mr. Stein: Objection. 

Ms. Smiley: Objection to form. 

A The boundary of the segment would be included in my 

calculation and it would be an element in the calculation of 

the correlation or the degree of association between the 12th 

District boundary and the characteristics of the party 

affiliations on the one hand or the racial identities on the 

other of people living on either side of the boundary. So it 

would figure into the calculation. 

Q- But your analysis would not take into account the 

possible individual idiosyncratic explanations for any one 

precinct’s presence or exclusion in a district based on 

geography, for example? 

A That is true. It simply accepts the boundary as it 

was drawn and asks does this boundary function better to 

separate--does this boundary function better to fence in 

Democrats or does it function better to fence in blacks. 

Q Ard for example, in your Exhibit 20, the map of 

Iredell County where——— 

(Counsel peruses document.) 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 

Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

a
m
a
s
 

B
E
C
 
T
E
 

YE
R 

| 
SE
R 

GE
N 

ST
A 

a
e
,
 

DN
 

AN
E 

Ct
 

pd
 

pe
ek
 

pe
 

p
h
 

p
t
 

pl
 

p
h
 

pk
 

ph
 

Wi
 
D
a
n
i
m
e
n
i
e
 

a 
ai
pi
ni
nt
iy
 

yg 
no
u 

° iY 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 : Page 86   

  

Let me scratch that. For example, if inclusion of a 

precinct would result in some distortion of the geographic 

shape, that would not factor into your analysis in any way? 

Mr. Stein: Objection; asked and answered. 

A The analysis depends upon the boundaries that are 

involved in the 12th District and the nature of the people on 

either side of the boundary, immediately on either side of 

the boundary. And it measures the degree of correlation 

between the path taken by the boundary and the racial 

composition of people living on either side of the boundary 

and the political affiliation of the people living on either 

side of the boundary. 

Q And if in fact you included a precinct which had 

previously been excluded, your analysis doesn’t review where 

it would be necessary to remove a precinct of equivalent 

population in order to achieve population equality, for 

example? 

A | No. 

Q And you don’t swap or compare groups of precincts of 

equivalent populations, do you? 

A 1 certainly don’t. 

Q And the segment analysis--in an instance where the 

district is one precinct wide, the segment analysis assumes 

that you could add the external precinct and exclude the 

internal precinct, or does it? 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

©
 

0
 

NN
 

O
O
 

n
t
 

A
 
W
N
 

BO
 

pd
 

he
d 

pe
d 

p
d
 

pe
d 

pd
 

pe
d 

pe
d 

pe
d 

fe
d 

# al 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 87 
  

  

A No, it makes no such assumption. 

Q And it makes no comparison of what the effect on the 

district would be to have both the internal and the adjacent 

external precinct compared to just the internal precinct? 

A That is correct. It doesn’t do that either. 

Q So in the construction of a district are decision 

makers able to decide to include or exclude a district based 

on a difference in race or party as the model analyzes? 

Mr. Stein: Objection. 

A I don’t understand the question. 

Q Does the analysis that you have conducted take into 

account whether a decision maker in fact could include the 

external precinct and exclude the internal one consistent 

with, for example, contiguity or equal population or any 

other interest? 

Mr. Stein: Objection; asked and answered. 

A What the analysis does is to measure the correlation 

between an existing line. It doesn’t consider other lines. 

It considers just the existing line. It says what is the 

correlation between this and race, what is the correlation 

between this and political affiliation. 

Q And when you said your analysis is not a decision 

making analysis, you meant by that that your analysis doesn’t 

determine whether at that stage of drawing the boundary any 

decision maker would or could make that kind of comparison? 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 

Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

pd
 

Co
 

o
O
 

3
 

S
N
 

N
n
 
A
W
 

% dy : 
David W. Peterson, Ph.D. 9/20/99 Page 88   

  

A What the analysis doesn’t do is to ask what other 

correlations might be achieved by drawing the lines else- 

where. 

Q Do you have any personal knowledge of the neighbor- 

hoods of the 12th Congressional District or the counties that 

comprise it? Have you done any--as a part of your analysis 

have you made any investigation? 

A Only to the extent that I have driven through them on 

occasion, but not for any purpose connected with this litiga- 

tion. 

Q What other criticisms other than those that you have 

stated in your written report, Exhibit 20, and Exhibit 21 do 

you have of Dr. Weber’s analysis in this case? 

A Well, Dr. Weber, as I understand it, has submitted two 

analyses, one of which I received late last week and at this 

point I have no comment on. 

Q Have you reviewed it at all? 

“A I have skimmed through it. I have not read words on 

every page yet. And with respect to my comments on his 

earlier report, I think they are all fairly summarized in my 

second affidavit. 

Q Have you reviewed any report of Mr. Lee Mortimer? 

A tai see something by Mr. Mortimer, and it had to do 

with identifying the segments that I mention in my second 

affidavit. But that is the only thing I have studied in 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 
Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 
Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

Do
 
G
y
 

8
 

n
h
 

Ah
 

WG
 
N
D
 

N
O
N
 

O
N
 

O
N
 

DN
 

pe
 

pm
 

m
k
 

pk
 

pk
 

pd
 

ed
 

p
d
 e

d 

a» 
Ronald E. Weber, Ph.D. Volume 2, 10/18/99 Page 329 
  

  

overly safe? 

Mr. Markham: Objection; asked and answered. 

A Yeah. My normative perspective is that we don’t need 

a lot of safe congressional districts. So any congressional 

district that is safe is overly safe. 

Q Okay. On page 87 also-—-- 

A (interposing) Yes, sir. 

Q I’m sorry; 88. 

A Okay. 

Q You use the word "narrow tailoring"--- 

A (interposing) Yes. 

Q ---in this first paragraph. Would you define narrow 

tailoring for me? 

A Well, again, I am going to define it as a social 

scientist, not in a legal sense. A narrowly tailored 

district is one that has a high degree of electoral com- 

petitiveness, that comports with race neutral principles of 

districting. 

And I guess, you know, sort of moving from the 

definition to the instance here is that if you have an 

unusual pattern where the African American--the candidates of 

choice of African American voters are winning more than 60 

percent of the vote in the general elections, that seems to 

me is prima facie evidence that it is not a narrowly tailored 

  

district. 

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 

Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

G
e
 
S
N
 

i
h
 

B
A
W
 

A
D
 

C
R
T
 

CE
 

Tr 
G
T
 
G
o
 
C
n
 

TE
 

~ 
TE
 

J 
S
E
 

SE
 

Ronald E. Weber, Ph.D. Volume 2, 10/18/99 Page 330 
  

  

Q You say high degree of electoral competitiveness. 

What does that mean? 

A It means that it is going to be less than 60 percent. 

And of course when it comes to 50-50, that would be a more 

narrowly tailored district. 

Q You say more narrowly tailored? 

A Yes. 

Q Would 60 percent in your assessment be narrowly 

tailored? 

A No. 

Q So anything less than 60 percent would be not narrowly 

tailored? 

A Anything less than 60 percent would be narrowly 

tailored, but I am saying that the most narrowly tailored 

district is going to be a district that is like 51-49 or 50.5 

to 49.5. 

Q And this is in terms of electoral--—- 

"i (interposing) Competitiveness. 

Q -—-—support? 

A Competitiveness; yes. 

Q You mentioned that 60 percent is your measure for 

assessing degrees of electoral competitiveness. Is there 

anywhere in the social science literature that applies that 

assessment of electoral competitiveness to narrow tailoring? 

A I don’t--I am not aware that there is any social 

  

KAY McGOVERN & ASSOCIATES (919) 782-9100 

Post Office Box 31382 FAX 782-0814 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27622-1382 (800) 255-7886 

  

 



  

# ww 
Winner - 51 

  
  

  

  

    

thought we were done with some plan or some version of 

the plan, if we were going to make more changes to it we 

would then copy it and do it under the name of a new 

plan. So while this looks like we did a whole lot of 

different plans, it may be just like one precinct 

different that would be impossible to see on these maps. 

Well, let's then.do this. Let's look at these 

subsequent maps and we can -- to whatever extent it's 

possible to trace or to identify changes we can do that, 

and that's what I have in mind. So if you could, for 

example, look at the -- look at Plan Number 2, Exhibit 

Number 2 I should say. 

Are you going to want me to be looking at Exhibit 2 

compared to Exhibit 17? 

Exhibit 2 compared to Exhibit 1 and compared to -- 

MS. SMILEY: Well, I'm going to.object to 

you having her compare it to the 1992 

plan. You still haven't laid any 

foundation that she was working off 

the 'S2 plan. I don't believe that 

you've established that with any of 

these maps, and I mean, what she's 

Just’ sald is that they -- this 1 

through 5 is a series of plans and 

that she could testify to maybe if she 

    
      

 



  

24 

25 

yl i» 
Winner - 52 

  

  

could see the modifications. 

MR. EVERETT: Well, I can certainly ask her 

that now. 

I don't think it's too material one way or the other, 

but to what extent were you working off the 1992 plan, 

if at all? 

There was a procedure that you could superimpose one 

plan on another on the computer and 8Ctually import it. 

Okay. 

We did not do that, so - = 

You didn't use that procedure, okay. 

So to that extent we did not literally start from 

the '92 plan and modify it. Although we could have, we 

didn't. I think we were generally aware of where the 

districts were in general in the state, and some 

districts more than others we tried to keep the same or 

approximately the same. For example, the 11th District, 

which is the western part of the state, just because of 

the geography of North Carolina, it's going to be sort 

of what it is, so the only -- but we did make a 

decision, if you'll see in the 1992 plan, that there are 

several counties that are divided in the 11th District 

and we decided not to divide them. So while the 11th 

District is still generally in the same part of the 

state, it doesn't have the same boundaries. Because you 

    

  

 



  
24 

25 

-» 

IJ
 

0
 

  

  

CIRCUIT, THE EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE. THAT'S OUR BASIC 

POSITION. YOUR HONORS, THANK YOU. 

JUDGE THORNBURG: LET ME ASK YOU FOR MY 

EDIFICATION. IF YOU WOULD JUST TELL THE COURT WHAT YOU 

FEEL THE ISSUES ON WHICH YOU HAVE THE BURDEN OF PROOF ARE; 

JUST A SIMPLE STATEMENT OF WHAT YOU HAVE TO PROVE IN ORDER 

FOR US TO RULE. 

MR. EVERETT: WE THINK WE HAVE THE BURDEN OF 

PROOF AS TO PREDOMINATE RACIAL PURPOSE, SUBJECT POSSIBLY 

TO THE CAVEAT IN A SITUATION WHERE THIS IS A CONTINUATION 

OR REPLACEMENT OR REMEDY FOR A DISTRICT THAT WAS 

PREVIOUSLY ADJUDICATED UNCONSTITUTIONAL OR CLEARLY WOULD 

BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL. THE 12TH HAS BEEN ADJUDICATED 

UNCONSTITUTIONAL. THERE SEEMS TO BE LITTLE DOUBT THAT THE 

ORIGINAL FIRST IN THE 1992 PLAN WAS UNCONSTITUTIONAL. 

WE WOULD MAINTAIN THAT UNDER THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES THE 

BURDEN IS ON THE DEFENDANT TO SHOW THAT THE VESTIGES HAVE 

BEEN REMOVED. THAT'S THE WAY IT HAPPENED IN THE 

SEGREGATION CASES. THEY HAD TO SHOW THE VESTIGES OF THE 

OLD SEGREGATION; RACIAL SEGREGATION HAD TO BE REMOVED. 

THAT WAS A BURDEN ON THE DEFENDANTS. CITES THE SAME SORT 

OF BURDEN YOU HAVE ON THE FRUIT OF THE POISONOUS TREE TO 

SHOW THE TAINT HAS BEEN CUT OUT. THAT'S ON THE OTHER 

SIDE. 

SO WE WOULD MAINTAIN REALLY AS TO EVERYTHING, THEY 

  

  

  
    

 



# 

HAVE THE BURDEN OF PROOF. CLEARLY AS TO THE TEST OF 

  

SCRUTINY, THEY HAVE TO SHOW THAT THERE IS A COMPELLING 

GOVERNMENT INTEREST AND THEY HAVE TO SHOW THAT THERE'S 

NARROW TAILORING. THAT'S OUR POSITION IN THAT REGARD. 

AND WE WOULD MAINTAIN, THOUGH AS FAR AS THE 

PREDOMINATE RACIAL PURPOSE, THAT IT IS SO CLEAR, AS WAS 

EVIDENT TO THE COURT AT THE TIME IN MORGANTON WHERE WE HAD 

THE HEARING, IT'S SO CLEAR IT DOESN'T MAKE MUCH DIFFERENCE 

WHETHER WE BEAR THE BURDEN OF PROOF OR NOT BECAUSE WE 

THINK THE INDISPUTABLE EVIDENCE POINTS IN THAT DIRECTION. 

AND WE THINK IT WILL POINT MORE IN THAT DIRECTION IF 

THE COURT CONSIDERS ULTIMATELY THE POINTS THAT HAVE BEEN 

BROUGHT OUT ON THE CROSS-EXAMINATION OF THE DEPOSITION OF 

DR. PETERSON, WHICH WAS READ, ON WHICH THE SUPREME COURT 

GLEANED ITS PARTICULAR DECISION. WE THINK THAT PLAYED A 

PART IN THE DEBEAUR (PHONETIC) MOTION WE MADE, ALTHOUGH 

NOT TO PERSUADE THE COURT TO EXCLUDE IT, NEVERTHELESS 

SHOWING THIS IS VERY UNRELIABLE. AND THERE'S NOTHING THAT 

THEY HAVE THAT WILL DISPUTE THERE WAS A PREDOMINATE RACIAL 

PURPOSE WITH RESPECT TO BOTH THE 12TH AND FIRST AND WE 

MAINTAIN THEIR OWN ADMISSIONS DEMONSTRATE THERE WAS 

PREDOMINANT RACIAL PURPOSE IN THE FIRST DISTRICT. 

MS. SMILEY: FOR THOSE I HAVE NOT HAD THE 

PLEASURE OF APPEARING BEFORE, I BELIEVE THAT'S YOU, JUDGE 

BOYLE, I'M TIARE SMILEY. THIS IS TODD COX, MS. NORMA     
   



  
24 

25 

& - i 
  

  

PRIMARY. 

A. MY ESTIMATE, AGAIN, FOR 1996 IS ABOUT 59 PERCENT 

AFRICAN AMERICAN IN THE DISTRICT 12 DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY. 

Q. DOES THAT INFORMATION ALLOW YOU TO MAKE A JUDGMENT OF 

WHETHER THE DISTRICT IS CONSTRUCTED IN A WAY THAT’S LIKELY 

TO DENOMINATE A CANDIDATE OF CHOICE OF AFRICAN AMERICAN 

VOTERS? 

A. YES, EXCEPT FOR THE POSSIBILITY THE AFRICAN AMERICAN 

COMMUNITY MIGHT BE FRACTURED OR NONCOHESIVE. ASSUMING 

THEY ARE COHESIVE, THE CANDIDATE OF CHOICE OF AFRICAN 

AMERICAN VOTERS WILL BE NOMINATED IN BOTH THE 1ST AND 12TH 

DISTRICT. 

Q. IN REVIEWING YOUR REPORT, WE SKIPPED OVER EXHIBITS 

50, 51. I WONDER IF YOU COULD TELL US WHAT THESE DATA ARE 

AND WHAT ASSISTANCE THEY PROVIDE TO THE ANALYSIS? 

A. DISTRICT 50, WHICH IS LABELED AS EXHIBIT C FOR MY 

DECLARATION, IT INVOLVES TWO COMPONENTS. ONE IS 

ESTIMATING THE PARTICIPATION RATES OF AFRICAN AMERICAN AND 

NON-AFRICAN AMERICAN VOTERS IN THE CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS 

OF 1998, NAMELY THE 1ST DISTRICT AND THE 12TH DISTRICT. 

SO IT’S GOT THE PARTICIPATION RATES AND, AGAIN, THE 

PICTURE THERE IS ONE IN WHICH AFRICAN AMERICANS 

PARTICIPATED HIGHER RATES THAN NON-AFRICAN AMERICAN IN THE 

PRIMARY ELECTIONS FOR THOSE TWO DISTRICTS IN 1998. AND 

THEN IN THE GENERAL ELECTIONS, THE WHITE OR NON-AFRICAN 

  

  

 



  

* BC 169 
  

  

AMERICAN VOTERS TEND TO VOTE AT HIGHER RATES, SLIGHTLY 

HIGHER RATES THAN THE AFRICAN AMERICAN VOTERS IN THOSE 

PARTICULAR DISTRICTS. SO THAT’S THE FIRST COMPONENT IS 

PARTICIPATION RATES. 

THE SECOND THING DONE IN THESE IS THROUGH AGGRESSION 

ANALYSIS AND EXTREME CASE ANALYSIS TO APPORTION THE SHARES 

OF THE VOTE BY AFRICAN AMERICAN VOTERS TO THE VARIOUS 

CANDIDATES AND NON-AFRICAN AMERICAN VOTERS TO THE 

CANDIDATES. SO CONSEQUENTLY ONE CAN GET WHITE CROSS-OVER 

NUMBERS FROM THOSE PARTICULAR ELECTION RESULTS. ALTHOUGH 

I DO NOT REPORT THEM IN THE BODY OF MY DECLARATION, THE 

GENERAL ELECTION RETURNS FOR THE TWO CONGRESSIONAL 

DISTRICTS SUGGESTS THAT REPRESENTATIVE CLAYTON GOT ABOUT 

30.4 PERCENT OF THE NON-AFRICAN AMERICAN VOTE IN THE 1998 

GENERAL ELECTION WITHIN THE 1ST DISTRICT. AND 

REPRESENTATIVE WATT GOT ABOUT 32.6 PERCENT OF THE WHITE 

VOTE IN THAT CONTEXT. 

INTERESTINGLY, IN THE DEMOCRATIC PRIMARIES, IN THE 

1ST DISTRICT, THE DISTRICT PERFORMS FAIRLY CONSISTENTLY 

WITH THE OTHER PRIMARY ANALYSIS THAT IT HAD DONE AND SHOWS 

THAT REPRESENTATIVE CLAYTON GOT ABOUT 12.5 PERCENT OF THE 

WHITE VOTE, SO UNDER A LOWER NUMBER THAN TYPICALLY HAPPENS 

IN THE GENERAL ELECTION. BUT INTERESTINGLY MR. WATT, .1 

HAVE HIM GETTING 60 PERCENT OF THE WHITE VOTE IN THE 

PRIMARY IN 1998 IN DISTRICT 12, 64 PERCENT IN THE 

  

  

 



* > 170 
1 DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY FOR MR. WATT. 

  

  

2 Q. WHAT DOES EXHIBIT 51, YOUR EXHIBIT D OF YOUR REPORT, 

3 REFLECT? 

4 A. EXHIBIT D HAS -- OR EXHIBIT 51 OF THE DEPOSITIONS HAS 

5 ALL OF THE ESTIMATIONS THAT UNDERLIE TABLES SEVEN, EIGHT, 

6 AND NINE IN MY DECLARATION, AGAIN, HAVING THE 

7 PARTICIPATION RATES AND THE DIFFERENCES IN THE RACIAL THE 

8 PREFERENCES OF THE TWO RACIAL GROUPS IN THE ELECTIONS. SO 

9 WHAT I HAVE DONE IS -- THIS IS THE DETAIL -- AND WHAT I 

10 DID IS I SUMMARIZED IN THE DECLARATION ITSELF WHAT I 

ll THOUGHT WAS THE MOST IMPORTANT POINTS FROM THAT EXHIBIT. 

12 Q. NOW, YOUR REPORT ILLUSTRATES THE ASSIGNMENT OF 

13 PRECINCTS IN A STATISTICAL WAY. DO THE MAPS -- THE 

14 PLAINTIFFS’ EXHIBITS, WE BEGIN WITH 227. DO THEY ALSO 

15 PROVIDE INFORMATION TO ASSIST THE COURT WITH THE QUESTION 

16 OF HOW VOTERS ARE ASSIGNED IN THE STRUCTURE OF THE 

17 CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT? LET ME GET YOU A COPY OF THAT 

18 MAD. 

19 CAN YOU TELL US WHAT INFORMATION MAP 227 HAS TO 

20 ASSIST THE COURT IN EVALUATING THE QUESTION OF WHETHER 

21 PERSONS WERE ASSIGNED TO THE CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 1 ON 

22 THE BASIS OF RACE? 

23 A. THE MAP PORTRAYS THE NORTHEAST TO EASTERN QUADRANT OF 

24 THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA RUNNING FROM DARE COUNTY ON 

25 THE RIGHT TO -- LOOKS LIKE LEE COUNTY, CHATHAM COUNTY,       

 



BE RC 188 

1 IT’S A MAP OF THE 80’S OR THE MAP OF THE 70’S OR EVEN A 

  

  

2 MAP OF THE 60’S, ALL OF THEM SHOW HOW THE STATE IN USING 

3 TRADITIONAL CRITERIA, DREW CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS AND 

4 THIS PARTICULAR MAP FROM THE PLAN OF THE MAP OF THE 1970 

5 ADOPTED APRIL 29, 1971, DOES NOT SPLIT A SINGLE COUNTY OF 

6 THE 100 IN THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN DRAWING 

7 CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS. 

8 Q. SORRY. YOU ARE REFERRING TO THE 1970 MAP? 

9 A. YES. MAYBE I PULLED OUT THE WRONG EXHIBIT. 

10 Q. YOU WERE REFERRING TO 288 A? 

31 A. I GOT INTO THE WRONG EXHIBIT, I’M SORRY. 

12 MY BOOK DOES NOT HAVE A 288, THAT’S WHY OR IT’S OUT 

13 OF SEQUENCE. 

14 288 A IS THE PLAN FROM 1980 -- AFTER THE 1980 CENSUS, 

15 I SHOULD SAY, AND IT REFLECTS THAT THERE WERE A TOTAL OF 

16 FOUR COUNTIES SPLIT IN ALL OF NORTH CAROLINA. I CAN'T 

17 READ THE ONE COUNTY UP IN -- 

18 JUDGE BOYLE: AVERY. 

319 A. SORRY, AVERY, YADKIN, MOORE AND JOHNSTON COUNTY WERE 

20 SPLIT. ALL THE REST WERE COMPOSED OF WHOLE COUNTIES. 

21 Q. NEXT I WOULD DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO EXHIBIT 288 D, 

22 WHICH IS A DATA SHEET THAT COMES FROM A SECTION 5 

23 SUBMISSION. CAN YOU TELL US FROM THAT INFORMATION WHAT 

24 WAS THE MOST HEAVILY AFRICAN AMERICAN CONGRESSIONAL 

25 DISTRICT IN THE 1980’S?       

 



* a a0 
1 A. THAT WOULD BE DISTRICT 2, WHICH IF YOU TAKE THE 1980 

  

  

2 CENSUS WAS 41.1 PERCENT AFRICAN AMERICAN WHERE YOU TAKE 

3 THE CALCULATION AFTER THE 1990 CENSUS WAS AVAILABLE IS 

4 43.5 PERCENT. DISTRICT 2 IS THE MOST AFRICAN AMERICAN 

5 DISTRICT AT THAT TIME. 

6 Q. WHERE GENERALLY IS THAT DISTRICT LOCATED? 

7 A. THAT DISTRICT ON THE EAST WAS EDGECOMBE COUNTY AND 

8 HAD ALL OF ROCKY MOUNT IN IT INCLUDING NASH, WILSON, A 

2 PORTION OF JOHNSTON AND HALIFAX, WARREN, VANCE, GRANVILLE, 

10 PERSON, CASWELL AND DURHAM. DURHAM IS IN THAT DISTRICT. 

ko Q. NEXT WE GO FORWARD TO EXHIBIT 289, WHICH I BELIEVE 

12 YOU LOOKED AT EARLIER. WHAT INFORMATION DOES THAT MAP OF 

13 THE 1970°8 CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT PROVIDE THAT WOULD 

14 ASSIST THE COURT WITH REGARD TO ANY ISSUES IN THIS CASE? 

15 MS. SMILEY: OBJECTION TO CHARACTERIZATION AS 

16 EITHER OF THESE MAPS, 288 OR 289, PROVIDING ASSISTANCE TO 

17 THE COURT. I DON’T THINK THAT FOUNDATION HAS BEEN LAID. 

18 JUDGE THORNBURG: I’LL LET THE WITNESS ANSWER 

19 THE QUESTION. 

20 A. THESE MAPS EITHER NOW OR IN THE PLAINTIFFS’ EXHIBIT 

21 WERE ORIGINALLY IN MY DECLARATION IN 1998 BECAUSE IN THAT 

22 DECLARATION I WAS TRYING TO OUTLINE THE WAY IN WHICH 

23 CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT PLANS HAVE DEVELOPED OVER TIME IN 

24 THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA. AND IN THE DAYS RIGHT AFTER 

25 THE ONE-PERSON, ONE-VOTE DECISION, THE STATE WAS ABLE TO       

 



  
24 

25 

# ® pe 
  

  

  

DRAW CONSTITUTIONAL DISTRICTS USING WHOLE COUNTIES. 

1980, THE MAP WE JUST LOOKED AT IN THE PREVIOUS 

EXHIBIT, 288 A AND B, THEY THEN HAD TO SPLIT FOUR 

COUNTIES, BUT THAT’S THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE STATE HAD TO 

IN A SENSE IGNORE TRADITIONAL REDISTRICTING PRINCIPALS. 

1970'S, THEY DIDN’T AND CERTAINLY IN THE LATE 60’S AS 

THEY WERE SORTING OUT THE DISTRICT SIZES AS A RESULT OF 

THE ONE-PERSON, ONE-VOTE DECISION, THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO 

DRAW DISTRICTS SPLIT ACROSS THE COUNTIES. 

Q. WHAT'S THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF COUNTIES NECESSARY TO 

SPLIT IN NORTH CAROLINA IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE ONE-PERSON, 

ONE-VOTE EQUALITY? 

A. AS A PRINCIPLE, YOU TAKE THE NUMBER OF CONGRESSIONAL 

DISTRICTS AND YOU HAVE ONE LESS DISTRICT MINUS ONE, SO 

IT’S 11. IF YOU START WITH THE 1ST DISTRICT AND YOU DRAW 

WHOLE COUNTIES AND YOU GET TO SOME PLACE WHERE YOU HAVE TO 

SPLIT A COUNTY, THAT’S ONE COUNTY SPLIT. NOW, THE SECOND 

DISTRICT YOU DRAW ALL THE WHOLE COUNTIES AND YOU MAY HAVE 

TO SPLIT A COUNTY. IT’S ALWAYS ONE LESS THAN Ir, SO 11 1s 

THE MAXIMUM TO BE SPLIT IN NORTH CAROLINA. 

Q. NEXT I DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO THE SERIES OF MAPS, 290 

THROUGH 301. THESE ARE MAPS WE LOOKED AT EARLIER 

REGARDING QUESTIONS FOR PRECINCTS. DO THESE MAPS PROVIDE 

ANY INFORMATION TO YOU WITH RESPECT TO ISSUES THAT RELATE 

TO THE CASE? 

  

  

 



  
24 

25 

# > 103 
  

  

A. YES. THESE WERE VERY IMPORTANT MAPS AND I HAVE BEEN 

ASKING FOR THEM EARLY ON IN THE CASE THAT WE GET THESE 

KIND OF MAPS. 

MS. SMILEY: YOUR HONOR, I’M GOING TO OBJECT TO 

THE RELEVANCE OF THESE 1990 MAPS. I UNDERSTAND YOU MAY 

WANT TO SEE IF HE CAN MAKE THE ‘99 PRECINCTS RELEVANT. I 

OBJECT TO THE RELEVANCY TO THIS LINE OF TESTIMONY. WE 

HAVE BEEN THROUGH THE PROBLEMS WITH THE 1999 PRECINCTS. 

JUDGE THORNBURG: I’LL LET THE WITNESS ANSWER SO 

WE CAN MOVE ALONG AND, OF COURSE, WE'LL MAKE A DECISION ON 

WHAT WE CONSIDER RELEVANT WHEN REVIEWING THE EVIDENCE. 

A. I HAVE KNOWN ALL ALONG, IN DOING THE ELECTION 

ANALYSIS IN THIS CASE, THAT THERE WERE MORE THAN TWO 

PRECINCTS SPLIT IN THE CREATION OF THE CONGRESSIONAL 

REDISTRICTING PLAN. THERE ARE BY 1996 AND 1998, WHEN I'M 

DOING ANALYSIS OF ELECTIONS, I KNOW THERE ARE MORE 

PRECINCTS SPLIT BECAUSE I HAVE THE ELECTION RETURNS. I 

CAN SEE IN THE ELECTION RETURNS, THE PIECES. SO THESE 

MAPS NOW PROVIDE ME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO DOCUMENT 

EXACTLY WHERE THE SPLIT PRECINCTS ARE THAT ARE PRODUCED AS 

A RESULT OF NOT FOLLOWING THE CURRENT PRECINCTS IN THE 

DRAWING OF THE PLAN RATHER THAN USING THE STILL OUTDATED 

1990 PRECINCTS. 

MS. SMILEY: I’M GOING TO OBJECT. I DON’T KNOW 

THERE'S A CLAIM IN THIS CASE THAT THERE'S A CONSTITUTIONAL 

  

  

 



  
24 

25 

# a 152 
  

  

OR EQUAL PROTECTION CLAIM WHERE THE LEGISLATURE NOT ONLY 

USING THE CENSUS DATA BUT PRECINCT DATA THAT MATCHES UP 

WITH THE CENSUS DATA. I DON’T SEE A CLAIM IN THIS CASE 

THERE’S SOME CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATION FOR THE LEGISLATURE 

NOT TO HAVE SOMEHOW TRIED TO TAKE THE 1990 CENSUS DATA AND 

ATTACH IT TO 1999 PRECINCTS. I DON’T UNDERSTAND HOW THIS 

IS RELEVANT TO ANY LEGAL ISSUE IN THIS CASE. 

JUDGE THORNBURG: I'LL LET YOU POINT THAT OUT ON 

CROSS. YOU WILL HAVE AMPLE TIME TO DO THAT. 

BY MR. MARKHAM: 

Q. DO YOU HAVE ANY INFORMATION CONCERNING WHAT SORT OF 

ADMINISTRATIVE OR ANY BASIS FOR INFORMATION CONCERNING 

WHAT SORT OF ADMINISTRATION OR ELECTION CONDUCT EFFECT 

THESE SPLIT PRECINCTS WOULD HAVE? 

A. I KNOW THE ELECTION RETURNS, AS THE ELECTION WAS 

CONDUCTED IN 1998, WHEN YOU HAVE COUNTIES THAT ARE SPLIT 

FOR THE PURPOSES OF CREATING A CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT IN 

SOME CASES THE ELECTION OFFICIALS HAD TO DIVIDE THE VOTERS 

IN THE PRECINCT, SOME IN SAY DISTRICT 12 AND SAY SOME IN 

ANOTHER DISTRICT SO THAT THE VOTERS ARE VOTING IN THE 

RIGHT PORTION OF THE PRECINCT BECAUSE THE COUNTY DID NOT 

HAVE THE TIME BETWEEN THE ORDER OF THE COURT TO PUT A PLAN 

IN PLACE AND THE TIME TO CONDUCT THE PRIMARY OF THE 

GENERAL ELECTION TO SORT OUT THE PRECINCTS. SO I KNOW 

FROM THE ELECTION RETURNS THAT SOME PRECINCTS WERE SPLIT 

  

  

 



  
24 

25 

# ®:. 
  

  

AND THAT, YOU KNOW, I’M NOT GOING TO INFER ANYTHING ELSE 

FROM THAT BUT I DO KNOW FOR A FACT THERE ARE 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROBLEMS WHEN YOU HAVE SPLIT PRECINCTS. 

Q. FROM YOUR ANALYSIS INVOLVING ISSUES OF SPLIT 

PRECINCTS, WHAT ARE THE POTENTIAL RISK OF VOTER BALLOT 

SECRECY FROM THIS PRACTICE? 

MS. SMILEY: I’M GOING TO OBJECT, YOUR HONOR. 

JUDGE THORNBURG: SUSTAINED. 

Q. LET’S MOVE TO MAP 302, THE MULTI-COUNTY PLANNING 

REGIONS. 

JUDGE THORNBURG: LET’S TAKE A TEN MINUTE 

RECESS. 

(RECESS TAKEN.) 

MS. SMILEY: YOUR HONORS, MIGHT WE ASK, FOR 

PURPOSES OF STAFF AND OTHER THINGS, HOW LATE YOU INTEND TO 

GO TODAY? 

JUDGE THORNBURG: WE'LL BE GOING UNTIL AROUND 

5:15, | 

MS. SMILEY: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 

BY MR. MARKHAM: 

Q. DR. WEBER, LET ME DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO THE MAP AT 

EXHIBIT 302. 

A. YES, SIR, I HAVE THAT BEFORE ME. 

Q. AND WHAT DO THE PLANNING REGIONS, WHAT SORT OF 

INFORMATION DO THESE PROVIDE WITH RESPECT TO ANY ISSUE 

  

  

 



  
24 

25 

# #* ” 
  

  

  

THAT’S BEFORE THE COURT? 

A. WELL, PLANNING REGIONS ARE ONE WAY THAT YOU CAN 

DIVIDE A STATE FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEFINING COMMUNITIES OF 

INTEREST. TYPICALLY PLANNING REGIONS ARE ORGANIZED AROUND 

A MAJOR CITY AND THEN THE COUNTRYSIDE AROUND THAT CITY 

WILL BE THE BASIS FOR THE DEFINITION OF A REGIONAL 

PLANNING DISTRICT. 

Q. AND SIMILARLY IS THE EXHIBIT 303, WHICH SHOWS 

METROPOLITAN AREAS, IS THAT ANOTHER ILLUSTRATION OF 

REGIONALISM? 

A. YES. THE MAP PORTRAYED IN EXHIBIT 303 HAS THE 

STANDARD METROPOLITAN AREAS FOR NORTH CAROLINA AND, AGAIN, 

SHOWS THE EITHER MULTI COUNTY SMSA’S OR SINGLE COUNTY SMSA 

AND, AGAIN, THOSE ARE BASICALLY THE URBANIZED AREA OF THE 

STATE. 

MS. SMILEY: YOUR HONOR -- EXCUSE ME, ARE YOU 

THROUGH? I WANT TO OBJECT TO THESE BEING ANY USE TO THE 

COURT, EXHIBIT 302 AND 303, UNLESS THERE’S SOME FOUNDATION 

LAID. IN FACT, THE LEGISLATURE INTENDED IN ANY WAY TO USE 

THESE PARTICULAR MAPS WHICH ARE NOT FROM THE GENERAL 

ASSEMBLY IN THEIR THOUGHT PROCESS. I DON’T UNDERSTAND THE 

RELEVANCE. 

JUDGE THORNBURG: GIVE US SOME MORE FOUNDATION 

AND MOVE ON. 

BY MR. MARKHAM: 

  

  

 



# * 195 
2 Q. IN DETERMINING HOW WOULD YOU, AS A POLITICAL 

    

  

no 

2 SCIENTIST, GO ABOUT DETERMINING WHAT CONSTITUTES 

3 TRADITIONAL PRINCIPAL, SPECIFICALLY IN A COMMUNITY OF 

4 INTEREST? 

5 A. ONE OF THEM IS COMMUNITY OF INTEREST. SO THERE ARE A 

6 NUMBER OF WAYS OF DEFINING TRADITIONAL -- DEFINING 

7 COMMUNITIES OF INTEREST AND AMONG THEM ARE METROPOLITAN 

8 AREAS, PEOPLE WHO LIVE AND WORK IN THE SAME REGION OF THE 

9 STATE ARE DEFINED AS HAVING A COMMUNITY OF INTEREST. AND 

10 THIS MAP IN PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT 303 CLEARLY EXHIBITS SHOWS 

ii THOSE COMMUNITIES OF INTEREST. 

32 Q. AND THE MAP IS EXHIBIT -- JOINT EXHIBIT 102 

13 ILLUSTRATES THAT THE 1997 PLAN, IN FACT, CUTS ACROSS THOSE 

14 COMMUNITIES; IS THAT CORRECT? 

15 A. YES. WELL, CHARLOTTE IS IN A DIFFERENT METROPOLITAN 

16 AREA THAN WINSTON-SALEM AND GREENSBORO. 

17 MS. SMILEY: YOUR HONOR, I OBJECT AND MOVE TO 

18 STRIKE THIS WHOLE LINE OF TESTIMONY. ONCE AGAIN, THE FACT 

19 A POLITICAL SCIENTIST THINKS OF THESE ARE TRADITIONAL 

20 PRINCIPLES, I DON’T THINK ANY COURT SAID ANY LEGISLATURE 

21 IS REQUIRED TO USE THESE MAPS AND THERE'S NO EVIDENCE THAT 

22 THE LEGISLATURE USED THESE MAPS, SO I DON’T SEE THEY'RE 

23 RELEVANT TO THE INTENT OF THE LEGISLATURE, WHAT IT DID OR 

24 DIDN'T DO. 

25 JUDGE VOORHEES: YOU THINK THE LEGISLATURE WAS       

 



  
24 

25 

# "> v 
  

  

UNMINDFUL OF STANDARD STATISTICAL METROPOLITAN AREAS, IS 

THAT NOT OBSERVED, ON ITS FACE, CONTEMPLATE THEY HAD NO 

IDEA ABOUT SMSA? 

MS. SMILEY: WELL, YOUR HONOR, FIRST OF ALL THE 

SMSA, THESE ARE FROM 1982. I’M NOT SURE THEY ARE CURRENT, 

WHETHER THESE ARE THE ONES THAT EXIST. THEY MAY BE AWARE 

OF IT, YOU ARE EXACTLY RIGHT, IN THE BACKS OF THEIR MINDS, 

BUT THERE’S NO EVIDENCE THEY ARE INTENDING TO USE THESE IN 

ANY WAY IN DEVELOPING THEIR PLAN. SO I STILL WOULD SAY 

THEY ARE NOT RELEVANT. 

JUDGE THORNBURG: I OVERRULE THAT AND MOVE ON. 

Q. DID YOU FINISH YOUR ANSWER, DR. WEBER, WITH RESPECT 

TO THAT MAP? 

A. WELL, ONE OF THE CRITERIA THAT IS INVOLVED IN THE 

COMMUNITY OF INTEREST IS LIVING IN PROXIMITY TO ANOTHER 

PERSON AND SMSA’S ARE THE BEST WAY THE NATIONAL GOVERNMENT 

HAS COME UP WITH WITH DEFINING METROPOLITAN AREAS AND 

METROPOLITAN AREAS WHETHER IT’S SOCIAL SCIENCE OR 

SOMETHING LEGISLATURE DOES, WE'RE ALL AWARE OF AS 

REPRESENTING ONE AREA OF COMMUNITY INTEREST. 

Q. TURN YOUR ATTENTION TO EXHIBIT 304 REGARDING 

TOPOGRAPHICAL OF THE STATE. 

A. THIS IS ONE ALTERNATIVE WAY TO LOOK AT REGIONS WITHIN 

THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA. AND COMMUNITY OF INTEREST IN 

THE CONTEXT OF CONGRESSIONAL REDISTRICTING IS PAYING SOME 

  

  

 



  
24 

25 

* i 
  

  

PRECINCTS TO IT. THE THEORY WOULD BE THAT IF YOU ARE 

GOING TO ASSIGN AND CREATE DEMOCRATIC DISTRICTS, THEN YOU 

WOULD ASSIGN DEMOCRATIC PRECINCTS. 

Q. BUT, DR. WEBER, YOUR TABLES ONE TO FOUR DO NOT PICK 

AND CHOOSE BETWEEN PRECINCTS. YOU JUST SAID IF YOU DON’T 

ASSIGN PARTICULAR WHITE PRECINCTS, YOUR TABLE DOES NOT 

DISTINGUISH WHETHER A WHITE DEMOCRATIC PRECINCT IS RIGHT 

NEXT TO DISTRICT 1 OR IS SOMEWHERE OUT THERE IN THE COUNTY 

SOMEWHERE; ISN’T THAT RIGHT? 

A. NO. I KNOW THAT BECAUSE OF THE MAPS, BUT TABLE ONE, 

TWO, THREE AND FOUR IS ABOUT SPLIT COUNTIES AND SPLIT 

CITIES. THE PRECINCTS ARE DEALT WITHIN TABLE FIVE. 

Q. THAT'S RIGHT. BUT YOUR SPLIT COUNTIES -- ALL RIGHT. 

LET'S TALK ABOUT TABLE FIVE. THERE YOU ARE, YOU HAVE 

AFTER AMERICAN PRECINCTS, YOU SHOW WHERE THEY ARE ASSIGNED 

TO THE DIFFERENT DISTRICTS? 

A. YES, MA’AM. 

Q. ISN'T IT ASSIGNMENT OF THE HEAVILY DEMOCRATIC 

PRECINCTS. WOULDN'T YOU GET THE SAME TABLE FIVE IF YOU -- 

EXCUSE ME. WOULDN'T YOU GET THE SAME TABLE FIVE WITH THE 

RACIAL BREAKDOWN IF WHAT THE LEGISLATURE DID WAS ASSIGN A 

HEAVILY DEMOCRATIC PRECINCT? 

A. YOU MIGHT AT THE TOP HAVE THE SAME PRECINCTS. AS YOU 

GET DOWN FURTHER TO THE MIDDLE OF THE TABLE, YOU WOULD 

HAVE DEVIATIONS FROM THE PATTERN OF RACIAL ASSIGNMENT 

  

  

 



# > 
  

  

VERSUS POLITICAL ASSIGNMENT. 

Q. ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT TABLE SIX NOW? 

A. NO, I’M SAYING IF ONE WERE TO HAVE PUT THE POLITICAL 

DATA INTO TABLE FIVE AS WELL AS THE RACIAL DATA AND THEN 

YOU SORTED THE TABLE BASED UPON, SAY, THE 1990 GANTT /HELMS 

RACE, THERE WOULD BE SOME PRECINCTS AT THE TOP THAT WOULD 

BE THE SAME IN BOTH TABLES. BUT AS YOU GO DOWN IN THERE, 

YOU WOULD HAVE SOME DEMOCRATIC PRECINCTS THAT WOULD BE 

HIGHER IN THE DEMOCRATIC TABLE VERSUS THOSE THAT ARE IN 

THE RACIAL TABLE. 

Q. BUT YOU STILL WOULD HAVE CREATED A DEMOCRATIC 

PERFORMING DISTRICT AND YOU WOULD HAVE STARTED WITH YOUR 

HEAVIEST DEMOCRATS OR MOST LOYAL DEMOCRATS? 

A. IF YOU HAD CHOSEN TO DO THAT, THERE ARE ADJACENT 

AREAS IN FORSYTH, GUILFORD AND MECKLENBURG COUNTY THAT ARE 

DEMOCRATIC THAT ARE NOT ASSIGNED TO DISTRICT 12. 

Q. BUT CAN ALL OF THOSE DISTRICTS BE ASSIGNED TO 

DISTRICT 12 AND MEET ONE-PERSON, ONE-VOTE? 

A. YOU CAN DISCARD SOME OTHER PRECINCTS IN ORDER TO DO 

THAT. 

Q. AND WHY, IF YOU ARE TRYING TO CREATE A SAFE 

DEMOCRATIC DISTRICT, WOULD YOU DISCARD YOUR STRONGEST 

DEMOCRATIC PRECINCTS? 

A. I QUIBBLE WITH THE NOTION THAT THE STATE SHOULD BE 

DESIGNING SAFE DEMOCRATIC DISTRICTS. THEY SHOULD BE 

     



r * 
  

  

  

DESIGNING COMPETITIVE DEMOCRATIC DISTRICTS, NOT SAFE 

DEMOCRATIC DISTRICTS. 

Q. TELL ME, IS THAT A LEGAL REQUIREMENT THAT LEGISLATORS 

SHOULD NOT CREATE SAFE DISTRICTS? 

A. POLITICALLY IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. IT’S NOT A LEGAL 

TERM, BUT AS A POLITICAL SCIENTIST, IT -- I WOULD TELL YOU 

IT DOESN’T MAKE SENSE TO CREATE ONE SET OF SAFE DISTRICTS 

FOR ONE-PERSON PARTY AND ANOTHER FOR ANOTHER PARTY WHICH 

DISCOURAGES THE VOTER FROM HAVING A CHOICE IN ELECTIONS. 

Q. THAT'S YOUR VIEW IN POLITICAL SCIENCE? 

A. YES, MA’AM. 

Q. DO YOU KNOW ANY POLITICIANS WHO WOULD SAY THEIR 

DISTRICT IS TOO SAFE? 

A. NO, I NEVER MET A POLITICIAN WHO WOULD ADMIT THEIR 

DISTRICT WAS TOO SAFE. 

Q. NOW, YOU TESTIFIED YESTERDAY YOU LOOKED AT EXHIBITS 

433 AND 434. DO YOU HAVE THOSE EXHIBITS STILL UP THERE? 

A. I DON'T BELIEVE I HAVE THAT BOOK. 

Q. NOW, AM I RECALLING CORRECTLY THAT YOU LOOKED AT 

THESE TWO EXHIBITS AND YOU COMPARED IT TO YOUR 

DECLARATIONS AT 47 AND YOU INDICATED THAT THE RACIAL 

DIFFERENCES THAT YOU FOUND WHEN YOU ANALYZED WERE GREATER 

THAN THE PARTY DIFFERENCES THAT ARE SHOWN WHEN YOU DO A 

POLITICAL ANALYSIS? 

A. YES. FOR 433, THE FIRST PAGE, WHICH HAS THE 12TH 

     



P > ” 
1 CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT, I FOUND ALL SIX OF THOSE COUNTIES 

  

  

2 | THAT THE RACIAL DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE PORTION ASSIGNED TO 

3 | DISTRICT 12 OR THE PORTION ASSIGNED TO ANOTHER DISTRICT 

4 | WAS GREATER THAN THE PARTISAN DIFFERENCE. 

5 | Q. WHAT WERE YOU COMPARING IT TO IN YOUR —- 

6 | A. I'M SORRY. I WAS COMPARING IT TO TABLE TWO IN MY 

7 | REPORT. 

8 | Q. TABLE TWO IN YOUR REPORT? 

9 | A. YES, MA’AM. 

10 | Q. YOU DID THE SAME THING WITH 434. TIS THAT A 

11 | COMPARISON OF TABLE FOUR WITH THE POLITICAL DATA? 

22 |'a. yrs, 

13 | Q. OKAY. AND YOU CONCLUDED THAT THE POLITICAL 

14 | DIFFERENCES WERE NOT AS GREAT AS THE RACIAL DIFFERENCES? 

15 | A. THAT'S CORRECT, YES. 

16 | Q. TELL ME, DR. WEBER, EXHIBITS 43 AND 44 ARE USING A 

17 | DATA BASE THAT COMES FROM THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS; IS THAT 

18 | RIGHT? IS THAT RIGHT, THAT'S POLITICAL DATA? 

19 A. THAT MAY HAVE BEEN THE ULTIMATE SOURCE, BUT I BELIEVE 

20 | IT’S ACTUALLY THE DATA BASE THAT THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY USED 

21 | FOR REDISTRICTING. 

22 | Q. AND -- ALL RIGHT. AND YOUR TABLES TWO AND FOUR, YOU 

23 | USED GENERAL ASSEMBLY DATA BASE ON TOTAL POPULATION. AND 

24 | IS IT YOUR BELIEF THE TOTAL POPULATION FIGURES COME FROM 

25 THE CENSUS BUREAU?       

 



  

P i 
  

  

A. YES. THE CENSUS DATA WAS LOADED INTO THE STATE'S 

COMPUTER SYSTEM AND VARIOUS REPORTS WERE PRODUCED BASED 

UPON THAT TABLE. 

Q. IS IT YOUR UNDERSTANDING THE CENSUS BUREAU PROVIDED 

THE ELECTION DATA? 

A. NO, THEY DID NOT. 

Q. SO THEY DID COME FROM DIFFERENT SOURCES? 

A. YES, THE PRIMARY SOURCES ARE DIFFERENT. 

Q. THE PRIMARY SOURCES ARE DIFFERENT? 

A. YES. 

Q. AND CENSUS IS COUNTING ALL PEOPLE? 

A. THAT’S RIGHT. 

Q. THE BOARD OF ELECTIONS, THEIR DATA ON REGISTRATION IS 

NOT GOING TO INCLUDE ALL PEOPLE? 

A. NO. 

Q. WE KNOW EVERYONE DOESN'T VOTE? 

A. WE/D LIKE THEM TO BUT -- 

Q. SO THOSE PEOPLE WOULDN'T BE FROM THE SAME UNIVERSE? 

A. IT’S A SMALLER UNIVERSE. 

Q. THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT VOTE, THAT COMES FROM THE 

BOARD OF ELECTIONS ALSO? 

A. YES, IT COMES ULTIMATELY FROM THE COUNTIES, BUT IT’S 

REPORTED TO THE STATE BOARD. 

Q. AND THAT'S GOING TO BE A LOT SMALLER THAN THE CENSUS 

DATA, TOO? 

  

  

 



  
24 

25 

+ El a 
  

  

A. IT’S GOING TO BE SMALLER, BUT I WOULDN'T CHARACTERIZE 

IT A LOT SMALLER THAN THE CENSUS DATA, ACTUAL VOTERS WHO 

SHOW UP AND VOTE. 

Q. UNFORTUNATELY, WE KNOW THAT’S A MUCH SMALLER NUMBER 

THAN THE TOTAL POPULATION. 

A. YES, MA'’AM. 

Q. WE'RE LOOKING AT TWO SOURCES OF DATA WITH POLITICAL 

DATA ON EXHIBITS 434 AND 343 IN YOUR TABLES? 

A. lyre, 

Q. AND ISN'T IT TRUE ALSO THAT CENSUS DATA FROM 1990 —- 

A. THE DATA IN 434 AND 433 ARE ALSO FROM ’88 AND ‘90 AS 

WELL. 

Q. WELL, THE ’88 ELECTIONS. IS THAT GOING TO BE -- T 

MEAN, THERE ARE TWO 1988 ELECTIONS INCLUDED IN THERE, 

AREN'T THERE? 

A. YES. 

Q. SO THAT'S A DIFFERENT YEAR FROM THE CENSUS IN 19907? 

A. YES. 

Q. SO YOU ARE DEALING WITH SOME OF THAT DATA IS COMING 

FROM DIFFERENT YEARS? 

A. YES, I AGREE TO THAT. 

Q. AND YOU HAVEN'T GIVEN US AN EXHIBIT OR ANYTHING 

DEMONSTRATING THE DIFFERENCES THAT YOU SAY EXIST BETWEEN 

THE RACIAL GAP AND THE POLITICAL GAP? 

A. NO, I ONLY SAW 433 AND 434 WHEN I ARRIVED ON SUNDAY. 

  

  

 



* 
  

  

Q. WOULD YOU HAVE ANY CONCERNS ABOUT THE DATA BUT JUST 

DRAWING COMPARISONS BETWEEN EXHIBITS 434 AND YOUR TABLES 

BASED ON THE FACT BASED ON THESE DATA DIFFERENCES? 

A. I WOULD RELY MOSTLY IN 433 AND 434. I WOULD RELY ON 

THE FAR RIGHT HAND COLUMN, WHICH HAS THE 1990 U. S. SENATE 

RETURN. 

Q. WHICH IS THE SAME YEAR? 

A. YES. 

Q. BUT YOU HAVE TWO DIFFERENT DATA SOURCES AND YOU ARE 

LOOKING AT TWO DIFFERENT UNIVERSES, TOTAL POPULATION FROM 

THE CENSUS AND THE OTHER SOME LIMITED? 

A. RIGHT. BUT STILL DOESN’T -- SORT OF BEGS THE 

QUESTION. THE POINT IS THAT THE RACIAL DIFFERENCES ARE 

GREATER THAN THE PARTISAN DIFFERENCES. 

Q. BUT THAT'S ONLY IF IT’S ACCURATE TO COMPARE THOSE TWO 

PERCENTAGES ACROSS THE BOUNDARY OF THE POLITICAL DATA AND 

THE RACIAL DATA? 

A. THAT’S ALL WE HAVE. 

Q. AND YOU WOULDN’T CRITICIZE SOMEONE ELSE’S -- ANOTHER 

EXPERT WHO PERHAPS TRIED TO MAKE THAT KIND OF COMPARISON? 

A. I DON'T BELIEVE SO. I THINK IT’S AN APPROPRIATE 

COMPARISON, GIVEN THE QUESTION THAT'S BEEN POSED. 

Q. YOUR TABLES ONE THROUGH FIVE, WHERE YOU ARE LOOKING 

AT THE ASSIGNMENT OF AFRICAN AMERICAN PRECINCTS AND OTHER 

PRECINCTS, IT WOULD BE FAIR TO SAY THAT’S PURELY 

     



+, » 
  

  

CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE, ISN’T IT? 

A. I DON’T CONSIDER MYSELF AN EXPERT ON EVIDENCE, BUT I 

HEARD THAT TERM USED TO DESCRIBE THE KIND OF WORK THAT I’M 

DOING, YES. 

Q. WELL, IT COULD BE WHEN YOU LOOK AT YOUR DATA, YOU 

MIGHT SEE A RACIAL SPLIT ON THE RAW NUMBERS. THAT'S WHAT 

SOME OF YOUR DATA IS SHOWING, RIGHT? 

A. “YES, 

Q. IT COULD BE THERE’S A NON-RACIAL MOTIVE FOR A SPLIT 

COUNTY OR SPLIT PRECINCT THAT WOULDN'T BE REFLECTED IN 

YOUR DATA; ISN'T THAT CORRECT? 

A. THERE ARE SOME COUNTIES IN TABLE TWO, FOR EXAMPLE, 

THAT I WOULD ASSERT ARE NOT RACIAL, BUT THEY ARE NOT 

ASSIGNED TO DISTRICT 12 OR 1. 

Q. IF YOU DON’T ADD THAT EXTRA PIECE OF INFORMATION THAT 

THOSE ARE COUNTY LINES THAT ARE DIVIDING THOSE TOWNS, THEN 

YOU COULD JUST CONCLUDE THAT RACE PREDOMINATE DISTRICT? 

A. NO. TI DID PUT AN ASTERISK IN TABLE THREE AND TABLE 

FOUR WHENEVER THE COUNTY LINES SPLIT THE COMMUNITY, AND 

THAT'S NOTED IN THAT DATA BASE. FOR EXAMPLE, BEST EXAMPLE 

IS ROCKY MOUNT. 

Q. AND YOU DID -- YOU TOOK THAT INFORMATION AND YOU PUT 

THOSE STARS ON YOUR TABLE. BUT THAT'’S NOT SOMETHING YOU 

WOULD KNOW WHEN YOU HAD JUST TAKEN YOUR TABLES AND RUN THE 

DATA? 

     



  
24 

25 

P | » i 
  

  

A. NO. ALL OF THIS HAS TO BE DONE IN CONJUNCTION WITH 

MAPS. YOU CAN'T ADDRESS THIS WITHOUT THE MAPS THAT YOU 

ARE USING. 

Q. WELL, IF THERE WAS DIRECT EVIDENCE AND TESTIMONY THAT 

A PARTICULAR TOWN WAS SPLIT SO THAT A MILITARY BASE COULD 

BE PUT INTO A PARTICULAR DISTRICT, THAT WOULDN’T SHOW UP 

ON YOUR TABLES, WOULD IT? 

A. NO, IT WOULDN'T. I’D HAVE TO GO TO THE RECORD TO 

KNOW THAT TOOK PLACE. 

Q. BUT THAT WOULD DEFEAT A RACIAL INTERPRETATION OF YOUR 

DATA FOR THAT TOWN? 

A. NO. MY EXPERIENCE IN TERMS OF HOW MILITARY BASES 

HAVE BEEN DEALT WITH IN CONGRESSIONAL REDISTRICTING 

SUGGESTS THAT TYPICALLY DEMOCRATIC INCUMBENTS WANT 

MILITARY BASES SO THAT THEY CAN HAVE NONVOTERS IN THEIR 

DISTRICTS, AND I SPEAK OF THAT AS A DEMOCRAT. 

Q. WHAT IF I TOLD YOU THAT MILITARY BASE WAS PUT INTO 

DISTRICT THREE, WHICH IS A REPUBLICAN DISTRICT, WITH THE 

INTENT OF THE LEGISLATURE TO KEEP A REPUBLICAN? 

A. IT’S A MARGINAL REPUBLICAN DISTRICT, BUT THE OVERALL 

PATTERN THAT I HAVE SEEN AROUND THE COUNTRY IS DEMOCRATIC 

INCUMBENTS WANT -- 

Q. THAT OVERALL PATTERN DOES NOT FIT THE FACTS IN NORTH 

CAROLINA. 

A. IN THAT PARTICULAR ONE CASE, IT DOES NOT FIT THAT 

  

  

 



  
24 

25 

  

  

  

    

    2 N vy Cae t Ho 
FACT, NO. 

0. BUT THEN YOUR DATA TABLES DON'T REFLECT ANY OF THE 

REAL LIFE DECISIONS MADE BY LEGISLATORS SUCH AS THAT, DO 

THEY? 

A. NO. IT REPORTS THE DATA AS THE DECISION WAS MADE AND 

ADOPTED AND PRECLEARED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. 

0. NOW, I THINK YOUR DATA DOES NOT GO QUITE THAT FAR, 

BUT IT MERELY REPORTS THERE ARE SOME RACIAL DIVISIONS FROM 

WHICH YOU CONCLUDED RACE PREDOMINATE? 

A. THAT'S CORRECT. 

0. BUT DIRECT EVIDENCE COULD SHOW THAT ANY NUMBER OF 

THOSE DIVISIONS HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH RACE? 

A. IT’S POSSIBLE FOR THAT TO HAPPEN, YES. 

0. FOR PURPOSES OF YOUR ANALYSIS, YOU DON’T NEED TO KNOW 

OR CARE TO KNOW? 

A. NO. I DO -- AGAIN, I READ THE RECORD AND IF THE 

RECORD SPEAKS TO IT, I KNOW IT. IF THE RECORD DOESN'T 

SPEAK TO IT, I WASN'T PERSONALLY PRESENT ALWAYS HERE IN 

RALEIGH WHEN THE PLAN WAS ADOPTED. I WASN'T SITTING BY 

THE COMPUTER WATCHING THE MAN MOVE THE MOUSE. 

Q. YOU DON’T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT NORTH CAROLINA 

POLITICS? 

A. I WOULD SUBMIT THAT'S NOT TRUE. 

Q. WELL -- 

A. YOU COULD PROBABLY STUMP ME WITH SOME TRIVIA, 

  

  
  

 



  
24 

25 

dP w ohh 
  

  

AND WE THINK THE OTHER EVIDENCE PRETTY CONVINCINGLY, 

WHEN PUT IN CONTEXT, EVEN THE EVIDENCE OF THE STATE'S 

EVIDENCE MAKES IT PRETTY CLEAR IT WAS A RACIALLY 

PREDOMINATE PURPOSE. BUT WE THINK, TAKING ALTOGETHER AND 

LOOKING AGAIN AT THE MAPS, WHICH ARE HERE, PARTICULARLY 

THE ONE THAT SHOWS THE RACIAL CONCENTRATION, THAT YOU COME 

TO THE CONCLUSION INEVITABLY IT WAS DONE WITH A RACIAL 

PURPOSE AND THAT IT WAS PREDOMINATE. 

OBVIOUSLY, IT’S VERY EASY AND I ASK THE QUESTION: 

COULD THEY REENACT THE OLD PLAN, SAY GEE WHIZ, IT’S NOW 

POLITICAL. IT’S VERY EASY TO USE A COVER STORY IN 

POLITICS. THAT MAY BE ONE OF THE UNHAPPY ASPECTS OF THE 

SUPREME COURT OPINION. YOU DON’T GET INTO THE QUESTION OF 

WHETHER OR NOT IT IS FOR A PREDOMINATE MOTIVE, SIMPLY 

WHETHER IT WOULD HAVE BEEN DONE THAT WAY APART FROM THIS. 

EVEN IF, IN THE CONFINES OF THIS PREDOMINATE RACIAL 

MOTIVE, WE THINK THE CASE WAS PROVEN BY OVERWHELMING 

EVIDENCE, SO WE DON’T -- WE FEEL THAT THE COURT SHOULD BE 

COMPELLED IN THE RULING WITH US ON THAT BASIS, JUST AS 

THEY FELT THE CASE WAS CONSIDERABLE FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT A 

YEAR AND-A-HALF AGO. 

WE DON’T THINK ANYTHING IS CHANGED. BUT, IN 

ADDITION, WE FEEL VERY PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS IN TERMS 

OF THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN INTRODUCED IN THIS TRIAL WHICH 

SHOULD PERSUADE YOU THERE WAS A PREDOMINATE RACIAL MOTIVE. 

  

  

 



  
24 

25 

+ * ou 
  

  

TO PERSUADE YOU, FIRST, THE STATE CONCEDED THEY CAN'T 

SURVIVE STRICT SCRUTINY TO THE 12TH DISTRICT AND SHOULD 

PERSUADE YOU IN ADDITION THEY CANNOT SURVIVE STRICT 

SCRUTINY AS TO THE 1ST DISTRICT. 

I APOLOGIZE FOR INTERRUPTING CO-COUNSEL’S 

PRESENTATION. I REALIZE THIS IS THE BASIC ISSUE WHICH YOU 

ARE DEALING WITH AND WE THINK THAT FROM THE POINT WHERE WE 

MADE OUR OPENING CONTENTIONS, THE OPENING STATEMENT WHICH 

IS -- WHICH HAS BEEN TRANSCRIBED, YOU HAVE DAILY 

TRANSCRIPTS, WILL SHOW OUR POSITION. WE THINK IT’S 

CONSISTENT. WE BELIEVE WE PROVED IT. 

JUDGE THORNBURG: WE APPRECIATE YOUR CANDOR WITH 

THE COURT. 

MR. MCGEE: YOUR HONORS, IF I MAY APPROACH, I'D 

LIKE TO PUT UP A MAP THAT JUDGE EVERETT MENTIONED BEFORE. 

I’M GOING TO BE DISCUSSING THE 12TH DISTRICT AND WE TRULY 

THINK THIS PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS. IT SHOWS 

HOW THE DISTRICT ZIGS AND ZAGS BACK AND FORTH TO PICK UP 

VIRTUALLY EVERY PRECINCT IN WHICH AFRICAN AMERICANS 

CONSTITUTE 40 PERCENT. 

70 PERCENT OF THE POPULATIONS ARE AT THE EXTREMES OF 

THE DISTRICTS AND YOU CAN SEE HOW IT, IF YOU COMPARE THIS 

MAP WITH THE MAP OF THE PLAN IN 1992, IT’S VERY CLEAR THAT 

IN THESE SIX COUNTIES THE AREAS WHERE THE MINORITY 

CONCENTRATIONS ARE LOCATED FROM THIS MAP ARE PRIMARILY 

  

  

 



# iw 
  

  

MR. MCGEE: YOU CAN DO IT AS LONG AS YOU DON'T 

DO IT BY RACE. IN THIS ATTEMPT THEY HAVE GONE IN AND 

TAKEN HIGH CONCENTRATIONS OF AFRICAN AMERICANS AND THEY 

PUT THEM IN THE DISTRICT AND AFRICAN AMERICANS DO PERFORM 

AS =~ 

JUDGE BOYLE: IF YOU WENT THROUGH AND CHERRY 

PICKED OUT EVERY PRECINCT 80/20 IN ITS ELECTION RESULTS, 

YOU WOULD PROBABLY HAVE A STRONG MINORITY CONCENTRATION, 

BUT THAT WOULD BE INCIDENTAL. 

MR. MCGEE: THE POINT THAT I WAS ATTEMPTING TO 

MAKE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT IS YOU DO NOT HAVE TO DRAW 

A DISTRICT THAT IS THIS CONTORTED. THIS DISTRICT CANNOT 

BE EXPLAINED IN POLITICAL TERMS. IF YOU ARE TRYING TO 

CREATE A DEMOCRATIC DISTRICT, YOU CAN CREATE ONE NOT THIS 

SPREAD OUT, NOT THIS NONCOMPACT AND PERFORMS EXCELLENTLY 

FOR A DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE WITHOUT TAKING IT TO THIS 

EXTENT. AN EXAMPLE OF THAT IS THE DISTRICT IN 1998, WHICH 

IS LESS RACIALLY MOTIVATED, WHICH IS MORE COMPACT, SPLITS 

FEWER COUNTIES, AND INCLUDES FEWER COUNTIES AND PERFORMS 

PERFECTLY WELL FOR THE DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE, DID NOT 

EFFECT RESULTS OF ANY OF THE SURROUNDING AREAS. 

IN THAT INSTANCE, WE SAY IT’S NOT A DEMOCRATIC ISLAND 

OF A REPUBLICAN SEED. THERE'S OTHER AREAS IN THAT GENERAL 

PROXIMITY THAT WOULD SUPPORT A DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE AND 

THOSE WERE EXCLUDED BECAUSE OF RACE. I SEE I’M ABOUT OUT

Copyright notice

© NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.

This collection and the tools to navigate it (the “Collection”) are available to the public for general educational and research purposes, as well as to preserve and contextualize the history of the content and materials it contains (the “Materials”). Like other archival collections, such as those found in libraries, LDF owns the physical source Materials that have been digitized for the Collection; however, LDF does not own the underlying copyright or other rights in all items and there are limits on how you can use the Materials. By accessing and using the Material, you acknowledge your agreement to the Terms. If you do not agree, please do not use the Materials.


Additional info

To the extent that LDF includes information about the Materials’ origins or ownership or provides summaries or transcripts of original source Materials, LDF does not warrant or guarantee the accuracy of such information, transcripts or summaries, and shall not be responsible for any inaccuracies.

Return to top