J. Daniel Long Affidavit No. 2 (Exhibit H)

    4^7 aVp,,""t' t/o' z

AFFIDAVIT

J. Daniel Long, being duly sworn, deposes and says:

1. I am an attorney licensed in the State of l{orth Carolina and an employed

by the General Research Division of the Legislative Services Office' I provided

lega'l and technical assistance to the Senate Redistricting Committee of the t{orth

Carolina General Assembly during the redistricting process in 1981 and 1982'

Z. part of my duties during the redistricting process included mapping out

Various red'istricting proposals and making statistical analyses of the programs

with regard to One-person, one-vote and racial percentages.

3. The General Assembly originally enacted a redistricting plan for the

Senate in July 1981, that did not divide any counties in the formation of districts.

The plan was submitted to the United States Department of Justice for preclearance

pursuant to Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, as anended (42 U.S.C. 51973,

et g1g. ),

4. By letter dated December 7, 1981, the Attorney General interposed an

objection to the proposed Senate redistricting plan stating that analysis showed

that in counties such as Guilford, bli'lson, Nash, Bertie, Edgecombe and Martin,

there were cognizable concentrations of minority persons whose political strength

was diluted as a result of the use of multi-member districts in the proposed

red.istricting p1an. The objection letter went on to specifically point out that

the Senate plan proposed a three-member district in Guilford County with a black

population percentage of only 25%; yet, under a fairly drawn system of single

member districts in that area, one such district likely rould be mqjority black and

would better recognize the potential of blacks to elect representation of their

choice. Likewise, the objection letter specifically noted that in }'lilson, Nash,

Edgecombe, Martin and several of the counties in proposed District 1 (which

comprised the covered counties of Beaufort, Bertie, Camden, Chowan, Gates,

Hertford, Northampton, Pasquotank, Perquimans and Hashington, and the uncovered



?L'....-

'a

counties of Curr.ituck, Dare, Hyde and Ty'rell) the multi-member districts seemed to

give blackvoters no opportunity to elect candidates of their choice, wtlile fairly

drawn single member districts would likely result in Senate districts that wou'ld

not minimize the voting potential of black voters in those covered counties.

5, The General Assembly enacted a new redistricting p'lan for the Senate in

February 1982, wtyich djd divide numerous counties in attempting to devise a plan

which would meet one person, one vote requirements and also address the obiections

interposed by the Attorney General, Thjs plan was submitted to the Attorney

Genera'l for precl earance '
6, By letter dated April 14,1982, the Attorney General again interposed

objections to the Senate redistricting plan, The obiection letter noted that the

plan was a substantia'l improvement and pointed to Gujlford County wtrere they felt

the state had created a district in wtrich black voters now were given a reasonable

opportunity to elect candidates of their choice. (Guilford had been divided into

three single-member districts, with District 31 having a black population of 54.9I.)

The objection letter, however, went on to specifically note that while the Senate

plan proposed a majority black District 2 in the northeast with a 5L.71 black popu-

lation, it was widely recognized that a compact, non-gerrSmandered district with at

least a 55% black population cou'ld be drawn in the northeast area. Because the

State enacted a plan providing for only a 5L.7% black population percentage' an

objection to the Senate plan was interposed.

l. The North Carolina Department of Justice provided the General Research

Division wjth a computer printout of the redistricting plan nfrich was prepared by

Michae'l S. Mjchalec for the plaintiffs in Cavanagh v. Brock (82-545-CIV-5)' I was

asked to make an analysis of the Michalec plan for redistricting the Senate.

g. Because of the specific objections previously interposed by the United

States Department of Justice, I looked particu'larly at the proposed districts for

Guilford County and for the northeastern counties. The Michalec plan divides

Guilford County horizontally across the middle and places the northern and middle

-2-



townships of Guilford County with Rockingham County to create a two-member district

with a black population of L6.7%. The southern townships of Guilford County are

combined with Randolph County to create a two-member district with a black

population of 24.9%, It is quite obvious that this particu'lar p'lan ignores the

Attorney General,s objections to multi-member districts in the Guilford area nrhich

dilute the cognizable concentrations of minority persons in Guilford County' The

original Senate p'lan objected to had a three-member district with a black popula-

tion of 25X. The Senate plan approved by the Attorney General contains a single-

member district in Guilford county with a 54.y1 black population.

9, A similar analysis was made of the districts proposed by the Michalec plan

in the northeastern counties, The Michalec plan does create single-member Senate

districts for rnst of the areas specifica'lly pointed out by the united States

D'epartment of Justice, the northeastern area and the counties of Nash, Edgecombe,

and Martin. lllilson County, however, is put into a two-member district' The

districts created by the Michalec plan covering these areas and their black popula-

tion percentages are: District 1 (43.7%); Districl 2 (33'5I); District 6 (36'2?l,l;

District 7 (51.9I); District 8 (38.81); and District 9 (29.8X). Obviously' this

p'lan with its only black majority district of 51.9X, will be no more acceptable to

the Attorney Genera'l than the 5L.7% black district proposed by the General Assembly

in their FebruarY 1982 Plan.

10, In light of the objections a'lready interposed by the Attorney General, the

M'ichalec pl an 'is inval id on its f ace'

11. The entire northeast and all of the Guilford area of the Michalec plan

would have to be redrawn in order to meet the objections interposed by the Attorney

General, Redrawing these areas nould require redrawing almost every other

redistricting line for the entire piedmont and eastern part of North Carolina. For

this reason further analysis of the Michalec p'lan is futile'

-3-



4..

!2. The ilichalec Plan is a

arise in attemPting to Preserve

the Voting Rights Act.

J. Daniel Long, being dulY

Affidavit subscribed bY him, and

his personal knowledge'

classic illustration

county lines and also

of the difficulties uhich

comply with the mandates of

sworn, states that he has read the foregoing

that the contents thereof are true to the best of

Sworn to and subscribed before me

tnis lffaur;, (r,, r,, 1e83.

My Conrnission Expires : 9- a*- st

-4-