Defendants' First Request for Admissions with Certificate of Service

    a wh 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA 

WESTERN DIVISION 

Civil Action No. 4-96-CV-104-BO(3) 

MARTIN CROMARTIE, et al.. ) 

) 
Plaintiffs, ) 

) 

V. ) 

) 
JAMES B. HUNT, JR., in his official ) 

capacity as Governor of the State of North ) 

Carolina, ef al., ) DEFENDANTS’ FIRST 

) REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS 

Defendants, ) 

) 
and ) 

) 
) 
) 
) 

ALFRED SMALLWOOD, et al., 

Defendant-Intervenors. 

TO: MARTIN CROMARTIE, THOMAS CHANDLER MUSE, LOIS WEAVER, JOEL K. 

BOURNE, R. O. EVERETT, J. H. FROCHICH, JAMES RONALD LINVILLE AND 

SUSAN HARDAWAY 

Pursuant to Rule 36 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, defendants serve their First 

Request for Admissions. Please admit or deny the following matters. 

INSTRUCTIONS 

Pursuant to Rule 36(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, each matter of which an 

admission is requested is admitted unless, within 30 days after service of the request, a written 

answer or objection addressed to the matter signed by the plaintiffs or plaintiffs’ attorney is served 

upon defendants. If objection is made, the reasons therefor shall be stated. The answer shall 

 



  

o® we 
specifically deny the matter or set forth in detail the reasons why the plaintiffs cannot truthfully 

admit or deny the matter. A denial shall fairly meet the substance of the requested admission. and 

when good faith requires that plaintiffs qualify an answer or deny only part of the matter of which 

an admission 1s requested, plaintiffs shall specify so much of it as true and qualify or deny the 

remainder. 

Plaintiffs may not give lack of information or knowledge as a reason for failure to admit or 

deny unless the plaintiffs state that they have made reasonable inquiry and that the information 

known or readily available by them is insufficient to enable them to admit or deny. 

Plaintiffs may not object to any request on the ground alone that the matter of which an 

admission has been requested presents a genuine issue for trial; the plaintiff may, subject to the 

provisions of Rule 37(c), deny the matter or set forth reasons why the plaintiff cannot admit or deny 

it. 

DEFENDANTS’ FIRST REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS 

[Requests 1 through 37 refer to information provided in the Affidavit of Alfred W. Stuart 

(signed 23 February 1998) filed by defendants relating to summary judgment and preliminary 

injunction proceedings. | 

I The minimum travel time in District 12 (1997 Plan) between Greensboro and 

Charlotte is 1.67 hours as computed by TransCAD (version 2.1) software. 

2. The travel distance between Greensboro and Charlotte as computed by TransCAD 

(version 2.1) software is 95 miles. 

3. The distance between Greensboro and Charlotte is the greatest distance from one end 

to the other of District 12 (1997 Plan). 

2 

 



  

wh “ 
4. Of all twelve congressionaldistrictsin the 1997 Plan. District 12 has the third shortest 

travel time between its farthest points (Greensboro to Charlotte). as measured by TransCAD (version 

2.1) software. 

5. Of all twelve congressionaldistricts in the 1997 Plan. District 12 has the third shortest 

distance (95 miles) between its farthest points (Greensboro to Charlotte), as measured by TransCAD 

(version 2.1) software. 

6. District 12 is a highly accessible district by highway. 

7 District 12 is compact in the sense of travel time and distance for a congressional 

representative. 

8. The map “North Carolina Congressional District 12: Travel Time and Distance,” 

reflecting the time and distance route between Greensboro and Charlotte as measured by TransCAD 

(version 2.1) software, is authentic and genuine. 

9 The minimum travel time in District 3 (1997 Plan) between Holly Ridge and Corolla 

1s 4.97 hours as computed by TransCAD (version 2.1) software. 

10. The travel distance between Holly Ridge and Corolla as computed by TransCAD 

(version 2.1) software is 233 miles. 

114 The distance between Holly Ridge and Corolla is one measure of the greatest distance 

from one end to the other of District 3 (1997 Plan). 

12. The minimum travel time in District 3 (1997 Plan) between Dobbersville and 

Whalebone is 4.12 hours as computed by TransCAD (version 2.1) software. 

13. The travel distance between Dobbersvilleand Whalebone as computed by TransCAD 

(version 2.1) software is 193 miles. 

14. The distance between Dobbersville and Whalebone is one measure of the greatest 

distance from one end to the other of District 3 (1997 Plan). 

15. Of all twelve congressional districts in the 1997 Plan, District 3 has the third longest 

travel time between its farthest points (measured between Holly Ridge and Corolla or Dobbersville 

and Whalebone), as measured by TransCAD (version 2.1) software. 

16. Of all twelve congressional districts in the 1997 Plan, District 3 has the third longest 

distance (233 or 193 miles) between its farthest points (measured between Holly Ridge and Corolla 

or Dobbersville and Whalebone), as measured by TransCAD (version 2.1) software. 

J 

 



  

ut " 
7. The map “North Carolina Congressional District 3: Travel Time and Distance,” 

reflecting the time and distance routes between Holly Ridge and Corolla or Dobbersville and 

Whalebone as measured by TransCAD (version 2.1) software, is authentic and genuine. 

18. The minimum travel time in District 1 (1997 Plan) between Roxboro and Sunbury 

is 3.02 hours as computed by TransCAD (version 2.1) software. 

19. The travel distance between Roxboro and Sunbury as computed by TransCAD 

(version 2.1) software 1s 151 miles. 

20. The distance between Roxboro and Sunbury is one measure of the greatest distance 

from one end to the other of District 1 (1997 Plan). 

21. The minimum travel time in District 1 (1997 Plan) between Sunbury and Goldsboro 

1s 2.72 hours as computed by TransCAD (version 2.1) software. 

The travel distance between Sunbury and Goldsboro as computed by TransCAD 22. 

n 2.1) software is 143 miles. (versio 

23. The distance between Sunbury and Goldsboro is one measure of the greatest distance 

from one end to the other of District 1 (1997 Plan). 

24. The minimum travel time in District 11 (1997 Plan) between Cliffside and Oak Park 

1s 3.58 hours as computed by TransCAD (version 2.1) software. 

The travel distance between Cliffside and Oak Park as computed by TransCAD 2S. 

n 2.1) software 1s 178 miles. (versio 

26. Of all twelve congressional districts in the 1997 Plan, Districts 1 and 11 have the 

longest travel times, after District 3, between their farthest points (Roxboro and Sunbury or Sunbury 

and Goldsboro, and Cliffside and Oak Park, respectively), as measured by TransCAD (version 2.1) 

software. 

27. Of all twelve congressional districts in the 1997 Plan, Districts 1 and 11 have the 

longest distances, after District 3, between their farthest points (Roxboro and Sunbury, or Sunbury 

and Goldsboro; and Cliffside and Oak Park, respectfully) as measured by TransCAD (version 2.1) 

software. 

28. The map “North Carolina Congressional District 1: Travel Time and Distance,” 

reflecting the time and distance route between Roxboro and Sunbury or Sunbury and Goldsboro as 

measured by TransCAD (version 2.1) software, is authentic and genuine. 

 



  

wh ww 
29. The map “North Carolina Congressional District 11: Travel Time and Distance.” 

reflecting the time and distance route between Cliffside and Oak Park as measured by TransCAD 
(version 2.1) software, is authentic and genuine. 

30. The time and distances measures for Districts 1, 3 and 11 (as measured by TransCAD 

version 2.1 software) reflect the relative geographic size of the districts which result from the 

dispersion of the population in these sparsely populated areas of the state. 

31 Congressional Districts 4. 6, 9 and 12 have travel times of less than two hours 

between their farthest points (Carbon and Picks, Eli Whitney and Landis, Matthews and Boiling 

Springs, and Greensboro and Charlotte, respectively) as measured by TransCAD (version 2.1) 

software. 

32. Congressional Districts 4, 6, 9 and 12 have travel distances of less than 100 miles 

between their farthest points (Carbonton and Picks, Eli Whitney and Landis, Matthews and Boiling 

Springs, and Greensboro and Charlotte, respectively) as measured by TransCAD (version 2.1) 

software. 

33. The primary means used by persons moving around within a congressional district 

in North Carolina is the personal automobile. 

34. The degree of highway accessibility from one end of a congressional district to 

another is a significant measure of intra-district interaction. 

35. Average driving time is of greater concern for most people than mileage. 

36. “Figure 10. Afro-American Population, 1990” is an authentic and genuine map 

representing the Afro-Americanpopulationin North Carolinain 1990 as a percent of total population 

for all 100 counties. 

37. “Table 1 North Carolina Congressional Districts (1997) Estimated Maximum 

Distances Within Districts” is authentic and genuine. 

38.  Asreflected in the legislative record, a goal of the North Carolina General Assembly 

when enacting the 1997 Plan was to cure the constitutional defects in the 1992 Plan. 

39. At the time the General Assembly enacted the 1997 Plan, the Senate was controlled 

by Democrats. 

40. At the time the General Assembly enacted the 1997 Plan, the House of 

Representatives was controlled by Republicans. 

 



  

wh wh 
41. To enacta new congressionalredistrictingplanin 1997. the plan would have to garner 

the support of a majority of the members of the Senate. 

42. To enacta new congressionalredistrictingplanin 1997, the plan would have to garner 

the support of a majority of the members of the House of Representatives. 

43. As reflected in the legislative record. in order to achieve a compromise between the 

Democratic controlled Senate and Republican controlled House of Representatives, the 1997 Plan 

had to be perceived by the members of the General Assembly as preserving the existing partisan 

balance of six to six in the States then existing congressional delegation. 

44. As reflected in the legislative record, race was not the predominate factor in 

constructing any district in the 1997 Plan. 

45. As reflected in the legislative record, traditional redistricting criteria were not 

subordinated to race in constructing any district in the 1997 Plan. 

46. As reflected in the legislative record, emphasis was placed on the following factors 

in constructing the 1997 Plan: 

a. avoidance of division of precincts; 

b. avoidance of the division of counties when reasonably possibly consistent 

with other goals; 

C; functional compactness (grouping together citizens of like interests and 

needs); 

d. avoidance of long narrow corridors connecting concentrations of minority 

citizens; 

e, ease of communication among voters and their representatives. 

47. The goals of the General Assembly as reflected in the legislative record (see request 

45 above) were accomplished in the 1997 Plan by 

a. reducing the number of divided precincts from 80 to 2; 

b. reducing the number of divided counties from 44 to 22; 

C. eliminating the division of any county between three congressional districts; 

d. eliminating cross-overs, double cross-overs and places with point contiguity. 

6 

 



  

owe wh 

48. The two precinctsdivided in the 1997 Plan accommodate peculiar local circumstances 

unrelated to race. 

49, All 12 districts in the 1997 Plan are contiguous. 

50. The 1997 Plan did not pit then incumbents against each other. 

51. The residence of the elected representative from District 9, Sue Myrick, was in 

District 12 in the 1992 Plan, the 1997 Plan and the 1998 Plan. as a result of Representative Myrick’s 

residence being in the same neighborhood and precinct as the elected representative from District 

12, Mel Watt. 

52. Representative Myrick was not an incumbent when she ran for election in 1994 in 
District 9. 

33. As reflected in the legislative record, the General Assembly relied on voting results, 

not voter registration, to achieve partisan balance between the districts in the 1997 Plan. 

54. As reflected in the legislative record, the General Assembly maintained the partisan 

cores of each of the districts based on the 1992 Plan. 

55. Based on voter registration, none of the State's twelve congressional districts in the 

1997 Plan has a majority of Republican voters. 

56. Election results were the principal factor which determined the location and 

configuration of all districts in the Senate’s proposed plan for 1997, Plan A. 

57. Election results were used by Senator Cooper to determine the partisan balance of the 

1997 Plan and earlier drafts of the plan. 

58. Election results were used by Representative McMahan to determine the partisan 

balance of the 1997 Plan and earlier drafts of the plan. 

59. Senator Roy A. Cooper, III, Chairman of the Senate Redistricting Committee in 1997, 

and Representative W. Edwin McMahan, Chairman of the House Redistricting Committee in 1997, 

were the primary persons responsible for: 

a. proposing the 1997 Plan and earlier drafts: 

b. negotiating between chambers on the 1997 Plan and earlier drafts; 

Cc. speaking for the 1997 Plan and earlier drafts in committee meetings; 

7 

 



  

we we 

d. speaking for the 1997 Plan during floor debates: 

C. obtaining passage of the 1997 Plan in their respective chambers of the 

General Assembly by a majority vote. 

60. As reflected in the legislative record, to assure race did not predominate over 

traditional redistricting criteria, District 12 was drawn so that in contrast to the 1992 Plan: 

a. only one precinct is divided; 

b. the only precinct divided is in Mecklenburg County and is divided in every 

local districting plan; 

C. its length was reduced by 46% (from approximately 191 to 102 miles); 

d. the number of counties included in the district was reduced from 10 to 6: 

ge; all cross-overs, double cross-overs and places with point contiguity were 

eliminated; 

f. it is a functionally compact, highly urban district joining ‘together citizens in 

the Piedmont Urban Crescent. 

61. As reflected in the legislative record, to assure race did not predominate over 

traditional redistricting criteria, District 1 was drawn so that in contrast to the 1992 Plan: 

a. no precincts are split; 

the number of counties included in the district was reduced from 28 to 20; 

the number of divided counties in the district was reduced from 18 to 10; 

all cross-overs, double cross-overs and places of point contiguity were 

eliminated; 

the length of the district was reduced by 24% (from approximately 225 miles 

to 171 miles); 

it is a functionally compact district joining together citizens in rural and 

economically depressed counties in the northeastern and inner coastal plain 

region of the State. 

 



  

w" "ve 

62. As reflected by the legislative record. considerations of avoiding pitting incumbents 

against each other and maintaining their residences in their congressional district affected the 

boundaries of districts in the 1997 Plan as follows: 

a. by extending District 3 into the eastern side of Pitt County and excluding 

Congessman Jones’ residence from District 1; 

b. drawing District 12s boundaries to avoid placing the residence of 

Congressman Burr (District 5) and Congressman Coble (District 6) within 

District 12. 

C. drawing District 12 so as not to include Cabarrus County, the home county 

of Congressman Hefner (District 8). 

63. As reflected in the legislative record, heavy concentrations of Democratic voters in 

the cities of Rocky Mount, Greenville. Goldsboro, Wilson and Kinston were included in District 1 

to help protect District 1 in the 1997 Plan as a Democratic district for Congresswoman Eva Clayton. 

64. As reflected in the legislative record, heavy concentrations of Democratic voters in 

Charlotte, Greensboro, and Winston-Salem were included in District 12 in the 1997 Plan to help 

protect District 12 as a Democratic district for Congressman Mel Watt. 

635. As reflected in the legislative record, a goal of the General Assembly in drawing the 

1997 Plan was to comply with the Voting Rights Act. 

66. As reflected in the legislativerecord, the General Assembly in 1997 had a strong basis 

in evidence for concluding that the creation of a district in the northeastern and inner coastal plain 

region of the State in which African-Americans have an equal opportunity to elect a representative 

of their choice was reasonably necessary to comply with Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. 

67. District 1 in the 1997 Plan includes all of the counties which at one time or another 

historically were placed in the district commonly referred to as the “Old Black Second.” 

68. District 12 in the 1997 Plan is an island of Democratic-voting voters in a sea of 

Republican-voting voters in the Piedmont area of the State. 

69. District 12 in the 1997 Plan is not a majority African-American district as measured 

by: 

a. total population; 

b. voting age population; 

 



  

wh ut 
C. registered voters. 

70. District 1 in the 1997 Plan is not a majority African-American district as measured 

by 

a. voting age population: 

b. registered voters. 

71. As reflected in the legislative record, 12 of the 17 African-Americanmembers of the 

House voted against the 1997 Plan on the grounds that it did not adequately take into account the 

interests of the State’s African-American citizens. 

72. As reflected in the legislative record, geographic compactness was not selected as a 

goal that should receive independent emphasis in constructing the 1997 Plan, so that the committees 

chose to avoid dividing counties only to the extent reasonably possible consistent with its other 

goals. 

73. To comply with the constitutional mandate of one person, one vote. it is not possible 

to draw a congressional plan (based on the 1990 Federal Census data contained in the General 

Assembly’s redistricting computer) without splitting counties. 

74. As reflected in the legislative record, the General Assembly did not use mathematical 

measures of compactness in constructing the 1997 Plan. 

Z3. The State of North Carolina may be required legally to split counties cities or towns 

in order to recognize concentrations of minority citizens in drawing election districts where Section 

2 factors and the totality of circumstances, as stated in Thornburg v. Gingles, 478 U.S. 30 (1986), 

exist. 

76. It is unlawful for the State of North Carolina intentionally to fracture concentrations 

of minority citizens when drawing election districts. 

72. Under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, the burden is on the State of North 

Carolina to establish that any changes to an election district do not have a discriminatory purpose 

or effect of abridging the right to vote on account of race. 

78. The districts in the 1997 Plan reflect significant differences from the 1992 Plan, 

including the following: 

a. The plan reassigns more than 25% of the State’s population to different 

districts; 

10 

 



  

oh " 
b. The plan reassigns nearly 25% of its geographic area to different districts: 

Cc. District 12 contains less than 70% of its original population; 

d. District 12 contains only 41.6% of its original geographic area: 

e. District 1 contains less than 70% of its original population; and 

£ District 1 contains only 65.3% of its original geographic area. 

79. District 12 is built around major transportation corridors. 

80. Seventy-one percent (71%) of District 12°s voters in the 1997 Plan are registered 

Democrats. 

81. At least sixty-two percent (62%) of District 12’s registered voters voted for the 

Democratic candidate in the 1988 Court of Appeals Election, the 1988 Lieutenant Governor election 

and the 1990 United States Senate Election. 

82. Eighty-seven percent (87%) of District 1°s voters in the 1997 Plan are registered 

Democrats. 

83. At least 53% of District 17s registered voters voted for the Democratic candidate in 

the 1988 Court of Appeals Election. the 1988 Lieutenant Governor's Election, and the 1990 United 

States Senate Election. 

84. With rare exceptions. the registration maps relied on by plaintiffs (McGee Affidavit, 

Exhibits N. O, and P) demonstrate that: 

a. adjoining precincts excluded from District 12 consistently have Democratic 

voter registration blow 60%; 

b. precincts included in District 12 consistently have higher Democratic voter 

registration ranging from 60% to over 90%; 

Ci the rare precincts within District 12 with Democratic registration between 

50% and 60%, consistently have Democratic registrations higher than the 

adjoining excluded precincts. 

85. In North Carolina, voter registration is not a reliable indicator of voting behavior 

since many voters who are registered as Democrats vote Republican in: 

a. national elections; 

11 

 



  

0 0 

b. statewide elections. 

86. As of 1990, 64% of the Stte’s voters were registred as Democrats and 31% as 

Republicans. 

87. In the 1988 Presidential election, George Bush received 58% of the vote compared 

to Michael Dukakis’ 42%. 

88. In the 1992 Presidential election, George Bush and Bill Clinton each received 43% 

of the vote. 

89. From 1992 until the 1998 election. the State had two Republican United States 

Senators. 

This the 2 of Lo lov 1999. 

MICHAEL F. EASLEY 

ATTORNEY GENERAL 

hi Z Ad 
dwin M. Speas. Jr. 

Chief Deputy Attorney General 

N.C. State Bar No. 4112 

  

   
  

Tiare B. Smiley 

Special Deputy Attorney General 

N. C. State Bar No. 7119 

Norma S. Harrell 

Special Deputy Attorney General 

N.C. State Bar No. 6654 

N.C. Department of Justice 

P.O. Box 629 

Raleigh, N.C. 27602 

(919) 716-6900 

12 

 



  

oe | 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

This is to certify that [ have this day served a copy of the foregoing Defendants’ First 

Request for Admissions in the above captioned case upon all parties by hand delivery or by 

depositing these documents in the United States mail, first class mail. postage prepaid addressed as 

follows: 

Robinson O. Everett 

Suite 300 First Union Natl. Bank Bldg. VIA HAND DELIVERY 

301 W. Main Street 

P.O. Box 586 

Durham, NC 27702 

ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFFS 

Adam Stein 

Ferguson. Stein. Wallas. Adkins. 

Gresham & Sumter, P.A. 

Suite 2 VIA US MAIL 

312 W. Franklin Street 

Chapel Hill. NC 27516 

Todd Cox 

NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc. 

1444 1 Street NW VIA US MAIL 

Washington, DC 20005 

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT-INTERVENORS 
0 

Thisthell dyol niet 11999.   

  

Tiare B. Smiley 

Special Deputy Attorney General