Affidavit of William Kenneth Hale; Reapportionment Criteria

    :4.+,*.*-'&-

' 't '\L.
t

(_ o
L..,,.
AFFIDAVIT

V/,r* z.\l|':r---

t,illiarn Kenneth Hale, being duly srorn, deposes and says:

l. .I m an attoroey licensed in the State of lbrth Carolina and il sDployed

by the North Canolina General Assemb'ly. I have served as staff counsel to the

House Legislative Redistricting Cormittee since January 1981'

?. In gctober 1981, the North Carolina General Assembly adopted a redistrict-

ing plan for the t{orth Carolina House of Representatives that did not contravene

the North Carolina constitutional provisions prohibiting the division of countles

in the formation of districts and that had an overall range of deviation from the

idea'l population for representative districts of l5'611. (The first redistricting

plan for the House passed by the General Assembly in July 1981, had also followed

the constitutional provisions prohibiting the division of counties and had an

overa'll range of deviation of 23.6%.) The October plan was submitted to the United

States Department of Justice for preclearance pursuant to Section 5 of the Voting

Rights Act of 1955, as anended, (42 U.S.C. 51973, ffg')'
3. pursuant to the Voting Rights Act of 1965, 40 of the 100 counties in the

State of North Carolina are covered by the Act, nfrich requires the counties to sub-

mit any change in voting qua'lification or prerequisite to voting' or standard,

practice, or procedure to the United States Attorney General for preclearance prior

to any such change becoming effective as law. (Approval of such changes may also

be obtained by seeking a declaratory judgment in the United States District Court

for the District of Columbia.) In 1968, Article II, S3(3) and S5(3) of the North

Carolina Constitution had been amended to prohibit the division of counties in the

formation of Senate and Representative districts, Although these amendments were

subject to the preclearance provisions of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act' they

were not submitted to the United States Department of Justice until September 1981.

The Attorney General interposed an objection, by letter dated 30 November 1981' to

the constitutiona'l amendments insofar as they affected the covered counties, The

objection letter noted that the prohibition against dividing the 40 covered

counties in the formation of Senate and House districts predictably required, and

had led to the use of, large multi-member districts' The letter noied further,

that the use of such multi-member districts necessarily submerges cognizable

minority population concentrations into larger ntrite electorates.



4. By letter dated January 20, !g8?, an objection was interposed by the

Attorney General to the october House plan because it rould have resulted ln a sub-

mergence of black tpting strength. Ihe diection letter noted that the House plan

had employed 'large rnrlti-member districts wtrich effectively submerged sizeable

concentrations of black''popu'lation into a majority utrite electorate and nrtrich were

apparenqy a consequence of the State's adherence during redistricting to the 1958

constitutional anendment. The objection letter also specifically noted that the

use of a county-wide district in Guilford County submerged a significant concentra-

tion of black citizens in the city of Greensboro rrhere black persons comprise over

one-third of the city,s population, Cumberland County was also pointed out as an

area where concentrations of black citizens likewise suffered a submergence of

their voting strength as a result of large multi-member districts. The objection

letter also specifica'lly pointed to the northeastern counties of Bertie, Gates'

Halifax, Hertford, Martin and Northampton (previously District 5 under the 1971

plan), ufiere the black popu'lation percentage of 57.51 in the 1971 three-member

district had been reduced to 51.7X, wtrich appeared to be a retrogression in the

position of racia'l minorities with respect to their effective use of the electoral

franch i se.

5. The House Legislative Redistricting Committee (hereinafter the Committee)

on Januar! Zg, l9g2, adopted a set of criteria, based on federal and State redis-

tricting requirements, to guide them in creating representative districts for the

North Carolina General Assembly. (A copy of these criteria is attached hereto as

Hale Affidavit Exhibit A and is hereby incorporated by reference as if fully set

forth herein.)

6. In light of the objections interposed by the Civil Rights Division of the

United States Department of Justice, and upon examination of the census population

figures for the counties and townships in the State of North Carolina, it is my

opinion that it is necessary in order to create representative districts for the

General Assembly to divide counties that are not covered by the Voting Rights Act'

More specifically, Guilford County y.ras one of the counties identified in the obJec-

tion ]etter received by the State. Guilford County has a population of 317'154

under the l9g0 census. For purposes of t'one personr one vote" considerations, an

ideal representative district should contain 49,015 people. Under the 1971 lbuse

district plan, Guilford County was allocated seven representatives. Under the 1980

census, rne rue6i populatron for an area comprising seven representatives ls 3431105,

Under these circumstances, tf the Guilford County llouse district was not changed'

-2-



E-*t-'

Its population rould have been 25,951 people less than the ldeal Dopulatlon, *tlch

rrould yleld a relatlve deviailon of -7.561. In onder to brlng the relatlve ;"'"r'61+-''r-

devlation for tjre Gullford districts rmder 51, lllch rculd satisfy the devlatlon

criterion est&Itshed by the Gcrnlttee, lt ras necessary to csobine tornshlPs sf

another county or count{es rith Gullford County tomihips. The only tro countles

con6guous to 6uilford that re also covered by the Yotlng Rlghts Act are

Rockingham urd Caswell Counties. .-..i1;

[+:.,t

l. llext, looking at the northeastern countles of llorth Carollna, almota 
"rt,

of utrich are covered by the Voting Rights Act, the Attorney General had objected

speclficaily to the dilution of mlnorlty voting strength ln Bertle, Gates, Hallfax'

Hertford, l4artin and t{orthampton Counties, In order to glve cognizance to the

rignificant concentratlon of black cltlzens ln the northeastern countles' the

General Assembly created predominantly black tlouse Districts 5 and 7, with black

population percentages of 61I and 52I respectively. (These districts were ultl-

mately approved by the Attorney General under the Voting Rights Act as givlng black

voters a reasonable opportunity to elect candidates of their choice.)

In creating these distrlcts so as not to reduce or dilute the voting

strength of black cltizens, lt was necessary to transfer out of Distrlct 7 and lnto

the new District 22 (comprising CaswelI, Person, Granville, Vance and portions of

l{arren and Halifax Counties), the predominantly wtrite Population of the Hallfax

County township of Roanoke Rapids. Correspqndingly, lt was necessary to transfer .

from District ZZ and into District 7 the predominantly black townships of Fishing

Creek, Ford, Sandy Creek, 
-Shocco, 

and Hamenton. This resulted in a lowerlng of

the black population percentage ln District 22, *trlch district is primarl.ly made up

of counties also covered by the Voting Rights Act and lts protections against the

dilution of the effectiveness of black voting strength.

8, If, in order to bring the population figures for the Guilford distrlcts

into line with the Conmittee's relative deviation cr{terion, the General Assembly.

had transferred townships soleIy from Rockingham County into the Guilford distrlcf',
,.*

It would have been necessary to transfer certain Caswell County townshlps to the,.,

district comprising Alamance County and the remainder of Rockingham County'

Because of the heavy concentration of black populatlon ln Caswell County, thls

would have further diluted the black votlng strength ln new District 22 and also ..

would have necessitated further transfers of townships lnto Distrlct 22 frun other

conilguous counties ln nrrler to com,rly with the relatlve deviation criterion of the

Conmittee. (hvlously, the trinsfer of any partlcular township from one district to
! "' ..1.. , : 1r

another rlll have a rrlpple. or 'domlno' effect on surroundlng countles urd distrlcts. *
or

il*i, ;:ElE =.+"'"€-



F*;-, *=_**f

g, Similarly, combining caswell county townships' lnstead of Rockingham

county townships, with Guilford county townships to bring the relative deviation of

the Guirford districts into line rith the criterlon, rould not only have the same

minorlty dilution effect qr oistrTcr 22, as rentioned ln paragraph 8 above' but

would leave the four-rember district conslsting of Alamance and Roctingham Counties

13,31s persons short of the ideal population, with a relatlve deviation of -6'791'

lO. But for the existence of the Voting Rights Act and the necessity for

approval or preclearance by the Department of Justice, lt uould have been posslble

to draw redistricting plans for the House wtrich did not cross county lines or

divide any county, It appears that it would not have been possible.to gain

approval by the Department of Justice without drawing the representative districts

as they are now drawn, or drawing some other plan r*rich nould have. also required

crossing some county lines in uncovered as well as Covered counties'

Hilliam Kenneth Ha'le being duly sworn, states that he has read the foregoing

Affidavit subscribed by him, and that the contents th'ereof are true to the best of

his knowledge, information and belief' Art,ll^^*,W
Sworn to and subscribed before me

*is /4* ou, or 6-, - ' 1e82'

My Conrnission

I

4-



,
4.. a?

--\a IEAPPoRU ONUEIST GRXTEBIA j r.*,ei6g,

fhe comlttees respooslble for redisBrlctlog the liorth Caroll.aa General .

Aseeubly, esslsted L;l tbc legislatlve staff, ehall be gulded by tbe follordng

standards ln the developuent of thc plm tor ahc St8te Bousc'rod tbe Sanate:

1. Each legislatlve dlstrlet sha1I, ln accordance rrlth the requireDenta

of the 14th Amendmeut to the Constltutlon of the Unlted States and of Artlcle 
..

IIr Sectlons 3(1) aait 5(1) of the Constltutlon of NorEh Caro11na, be drawn so

88 to contalu as.oearly as posslble 1171635 for each Senate oember and 49r0r ror'

eaclt llouse nember ln such leglslatlve dlst.rlcts. Ttre populatlon varlat1oa

(relatlve devlation) of each dlstrlct shall fall between plus and mlnus flve
percenr (152)

2. Ia order to avold the dllutlon of the votl.ng rlghts of racial
mlnorltles as Protected by the Votlng Rlghts Act of 1955 and the !4th anct 15th

Amendnents to the United. States Constltutlon, concentrations of racla1 ul.noritles
shall not be fractured or dl.vided.

3. All legislatlve distrlcts shall conslst of contlguous terrltory as

requlred by the North Carollna Constltution and ehall be as compact as Is
practlcable consistent wlth reguirements I and 2 above.

4. To the extent consistent uith all of the above requlreoents, dl.strl.cts

.should be constructed 60 as to recognize the ataters hl.storlc communitles anil

commonalities of Lnterests with respcct to the lnhabitants and constituencles

rllthln such distrLcts.

5. To the exteDt not Lnconsistent wlth all of the above standards and

.ln order to uinlroize voter confuslon and maintain the interests Eet.out LD

paragraph 4 above, Present legislatlve distrl,ct ll.nes shaII be preserved.

6. No county sha1l be subdivLded nor shall a county llne be broken

unless necessary to Deet the requlrerDents or r an-ugh 5 above.
. t ..;" ".' .

'!
,4

.:t..
.-g

I
F
).k-
E ','



o
.;. ,

-i.. :,'!L*#!rfi:tii"*r*€r#;x.-e-{r-6-

'*t ,

a
." r. ..r;..*t, -,,f..;r i.qi, r:..::. g.).i: :.l'ttif,+-,.

?. Durlng the course tii ttetr rork, the coraltt.." .t"U'.o*ifa ;;;
the lcglslatlve staff, the Attoroey Gencral rnd letrlned cormscl rltb rcspcct

. to any legal issues.

' 8. Itc eor""rlttees sball corpletc thelr rork, to the -ad that a lcgLrlatlve
proposal ls prepared for the couolttees to bold a publ1c hearLng on thelr: -'.
proposed plans the rreek of February l, Lg82. the cor,,a,1tteea shall, ia con- .

eultatl'oa vith couuscl, PrePare oalll.ngs aotlfylng intcreaied indivlduaS md
.'t *organlzetlons thrcughout the stare of the date and tloe of the publlc. ' E-{

hearlng 'end sha1l also cause approprl.ate press releases to be prepared for
' thq nedia. The corunl.ttees shaIl also prepare Dotlces for publlcatl.on in the

lega1 notlces aectlon of approprlate ,r"r"r"0..".

shall seek

they deen

the Legislature

such opinions fron.,the Attorney General and retalDed counsel as

approprlate and ro report a bill favorably to be acted upon by

the week of Fdbruary B, 1982.

a

a:

2r*
.,..: