Order; Correspondence from Blacksher to Judge Thompson with Plaintiffs' Amended Exhibit #187

    L ® Fier 
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE 

iF LifSapie Pit in a FIA iY IMO 

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION:y     
NTDo Tv Oo Cri 
TL 

JOHN DILLARD, et al., ) 

) 
Plaintiffs, ) 

) 
v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 85-T-1332-N 

) 
CRENSHAW COUNTY, etc., et al., ) 

) 
Defendants ) 

ORDER   

Based on the representations made by counsel for all parties 

during a telephone conference call on March 26, 1986, it is ORDERED that an 

additional hearing on all pending motions is set for April 1, 1986, at 2:00 

p.m. in the fourth floor courtroom of the federal courthouse is Montgomery, 

Alabama. 

DONE, this the 26th day of March, 1986. 

Yin Wd ey 
  

UNRATED STATES — 

 



BLACKSHER, MENEFEE & STEIN, P.A. 

ATTORNEYS AT LAw 

  

405 VAN ANTWERP BUILDING 

P. 0. BDX 1051 

MOBILE, ALABAMA 36633-1051 

JAMES U. BLACKSHER TELEPHONE 
LARRY T. MENEFEE March 26, 1986 (205) 433-2000 
GREGORY B. STEIN 
WANDA J. COCHRAN 

Hon. Myron H. Thompson 
Judge, United States District Court 
Middle District of Alabama 
Montgomery, AL 36104 

RE: Dillard, et al. v. Crenshaw County, Alabama, et al. 

Civil Action No. 85-T-1332-N 
  

Dear Judge Thompson: 

Pursuant to your instructions in the telephone conference with 
all lawyers on this date, I enclose herewith the following 
documents: 

1. A corrected exhibit 187. 

2. A corrected table showing counties with district election 
systems before 1900. 

3. A corrected table showing district systems that shifted 
to at-large elections in the 1890's. 

4. A corrected table showing counties shifting to districts 
during the period 1900-1930. 

5. A corrected table showing counties with district 
primaries and at-large general elections (dual systems). 

6. A corrected table showing counties shifting from 
districts to at-large elections after 1945. 

7. Pages 15 and 16 from Governing Boards of County 
Governments: 1973, issued October 1974 by the Federal Bureau of 
the Census, which displays the method of electing the governing 
board for each county in Alabama. 

8. A copy of a memorandum prepared today by Dr. McCrary for 
my use, which answers in detail each discrepancy listed in Your 
Honor's letter dated March 21, 1986. 

Exhibit 187 shows, and Mr. Kirk confirmed by telephone today, 
that Pickens County still operates a "dual system," that is, 

 



  

Hon. Myron H. Thompson March 26, 1986 
Page Two 

their primary elections are held from four single-member 
districts, while the general elections are conducted at-large. 

Jack Floyd informed us at the hearing and in today’s telephone 
conversation that the 1966 population bill that would have 
changed Etowah County's at-large elections to a mixed system of 
four single-member districts and one at-large was declared 
unconstitutional in state court and never went into effect. One 
cannot tell from the face of the 1966 Act how many districts were 
contemplated, but Mr. Floyd assures me that it was four districts 
and one elected at large. 

You asked me to clarify and summarize my argument concerning 
shifting the burden to the state and its subdivisions. Ve 
contend that where the State Legislature has maintained an 
historical pattern and practice of utilizing at-large election 
schemes for county commissions with the racial motive of diluting 
black voting strength, the burden shifts to the state, which is 
before the Court through the defendant counties, to prove the 
following in order to justify continued use of at-large county 
commission elections under the amended Section 2 of the Voting 
Rights Act: 

(1) That the Legislature never changed to or maintained 
at-large elections for the particular county with the racial 
motive that has been demonstrated generally; and 

(2) That the racial motives behind general at-large laws, 
(e.g., numbered posts) never affected the county; or 

(3) That the continued use of at-large elections in the 
particular county does not effectively deny black voters an equal 
opportunity to participate in the political process and elect 
candidates of their choice. 

The case that is perhaps most directly on point for our 
proposition is Sims v. Amos, 365 F.Supp 215, 220 n.2 (M.D.Ala. 
1973) (three-judge court), aff'd sub nom. Wallace v. Sims, 415 
U.S. 902 (1974), cited at p.34 of our brief, and quoted here as 
follows: 

Even if the explicit mandate of section 5 of the 
Voting Rights Act were not applicable to the present 
case, the history of racial gerrymandering in Alabama 
would, like the history of de jure segregation, create 
a presumption that defendants’ plan 1s discriminatory 

 



  

Hon. Myron H. Thompson March 26, 1086 
Page Three 

and impose upon the state the burden of proving that 
its present plan, unlike past plans, does not dilute 
minority votes. Cf. Keyes v. School District No. 1, 
413 U.S. 189. 

Since Arlington Heights, proof that a decisionmaker has been 
motivated even in part by a racially discriminatory purpose 
shifts the burden to the decisionmaker to establish that "the 
same decision would have resulted even had the impermissible 
purpose not been considered." Village of Arlington Heights v. 
Metropolitan Housing Development Corp., 429 U.S. 252, 270 n.21 
(1977). The same principle recently has been applied to the 
voting context in Hunter v. Underwood, 105 S.Ct 1916, 1920 
(1985): 

Once racial discrimination is shown to have been a 

"substantial" or "motivating" factor behind enactment 
of the law, the burden shifts to the law's defenders to 
demonstrate that the law would have been enacted 
without this factor. 

The same principle applies in Title VII law, where direct 
evidence of discrimination requires the employer not merely to 
"articulate" a reason for its actions but to prove that it would 
have made the same decision even in the absence of discriminatory 
motive. E.g., Bell v. Birmingham Linen Service, 715 F.2d4 1552, 
  

  

1656-57 (llth Cir. 1983), cert. denied, _ U.S.__ (1984); Miles 
v. M. N. Sea Corp., 750 F.2d 867 (llth Cir. 1985); Thompkins v. 

iy 1 , 752 F.2d 558 (11th Cir. 1985). Even under 
the national labor laws, once the NLRB proves that an employer 
has demonstrated an anti-union animus, the burden shifts to the 
employer to prove that a discharged union member would have been 
discharged in spite of the unlawful motive. NLRB v. 

nagement Corp., 426 U.S. 393 (1983). Justice 
White's rationale for such burden shifing in the NLRB case 
applies with equal force to other situations: 

  

The Board's allocation of the burden of proof is 
clearly reasonable in this context... The employer is 
a wrongdoer; he has acted out of a motive that is 
declared illegitimate by the statute. It is fair that 
he bears the risk that the influence of legal and 
illegal motives cannot be separated, because he 
knowingly created the risk and because the risk was not 
created by innocent activity but by his own wrongdoing. 

 



  

Hon. Myron H. Thompson March 26, 1986 
Page Four 

462 U.S. at 408. 

Heights and Hunter v. Underwood referred to 
single, discrete decisions. But the northern desegregation cases 
referred to in my March 19, 1986, letter to the Court, establish 
the same burden-shifting rule in the context of a racially 
motivated historical pattern and practice, as does Sims v. Amos, 
supra. In fact, arguably, there is an even more compelling reason 
to shift the burden to the state and its subdivisions in actions 
brought under statutes whose purpose is to eliminate once and for 
all the vestiges of de jure segregation, whether in schools or in 
election structures. 

Each of the six remaining defendant counties has some 
explaining to do in light of the Legislature's racially motivated 
pattern and practice. First, they must demonstrate that their 
at-large election systems have not been affected by the racially 
motivated 1961 numbered-post law, and why in light of current 
racial impact the at-large schemes are still in place. In 
addition, they must explain: 

¥hy the Legislature in 1939 changed Calhoun County's 
district election system to at-large voting. 

Why the Legislature provided at-large elections for Coffee 
County until 1927, when it changed the election system to 
single-member districts, and then why in 1953 it changed back to 
at-large elections. (We are informed by Coffee County counsel 
that the 1953 law never went into effect; instead, a 1971 federal 
court order, in an action where no blacks participated, changed 
the single-member districts to at-large elections.) 

Why the Legislature changed Etowah County's elections from 
district to at-large in 1890 and why it made no attempts to 
correct the technical errors after the 1966 districting statute 
was declared unconstitutional in state court. 

Why the Legislature provided district elections for Lawrence 
County in 1967, but immediately changed to at-large voting in 
1069. 

Why the Legislature changed the Pickens County election 
system from districts to at-large in 1894, established a "dual 
system" in 1935, changed briefly to at-large elections in the 
primary as well as the general elections in 1963, then returned 
to a "dual system" of districts in the primary and at-large 

 



  

Hon. Myron H. Thompson March 26, 1986 
Page Five 

voting in the general election in 1967. 

Why the Legislature provided single-member districts for 
Talladega County from 1919 to 1951 and then changed to at-large 
voting. (Again, the voters defeated the referendum change to 
at-large voting in 1951, but at-large elections were obtained 
through a redistricting lawsuit in 1970, another case in which 
blacks did not participate.) 

We will be prepared to answer additional questions the Court may 
have at the hearing scheduled for April 1, at 2:00 p.m. 

Best regards. 

Very respectfully, 

BLACKSHER, MENEFEE a P.A. 

es U. Blacksher 

\ A     
  
   

—— 

cc (w/encl) All Counsel 

 



   

  

yr a eee 

Ed 

Page No. 
03/26/86 

ENACT 
DATE 

x CooNTy 
11/25/68 
02/23/83 
01/01/18 
02/25/31 
07/08/35 
06/25/43 
09/06/87 
11/19/89 
08/29/61 
08/15/61 

** COUNTY 
02/16/75 
02/27/79 
02/11/79 
01/28/91 

VOL PAGE TYPE APP AT- 
LAR YEAR 

1868 351 
1883 156 
1918 218 
1931 v3 
1938 238 
1943 310 
1957 661 
1959 1492 
1961 670 
10681 2234 

autauga 
18785 263 
1879 248 
18790 262 
1891 252 

01/28/91 
"09/07/67 

09/17/71 

1891 
1087 

1971 

253 
1269 

2479 

** COUNTY 
12/07/66 

** COUNTY 
12/30/68 

** COUNTY 
02/18/75 
02/09/77 
01/30/93 
12/13/94 
09/10/15 
07/29/27 
05/29/31 
07/31/67 
07/26/73 
10/07/75 

** COUNTY 
02/16/75 
02/09/77 
01/27/79 
02/18/95 
02/08/97 
03/12/03 
08/16/19 
06/02/65 

baine 
1866 76 

baker 

1868 488 

baldwin 
1878 263 
1877 154 
1893 219 
18904 148 
1015 381 
1927 83 
1931 100 
1067 472 
1973 188 
1975 1681 

barbour 
1875 263 
1877 154 
18790 248 

1885 997 

1897 658 
1903 144 

1919 69 
1965 31 

 RUBINTIFFS QPMENO EL EXHISE #/87 
OR # 85-7=/332-N 

ALL ACTS BY COUNTY 

ACTS MODIFYING ELECTION STRUCTURES 
OF LOCAL GOVERNING BODIES IN ALABAMA 

0Q
 

0G
, 

00
, 

0G
, 

0Q
, 

00
, 

0G
, 

0Q,
 

0Q 
00

 
H 

H
R
E
H
E
P
H
P
 

H
E
H
E
R
R
P
R
P
 

RP
P 
H
E
P
 

H
P
F
 
H
H
H
 

g
d
 

M
A
K
]
 
d
d
 

e
g
 

r
g
 

eg
 

SMD RNMMSAT?Y? 

l
S
 

EUNM 
SMD 

r
d
 

hh
 

dd
 

hd 
1d 

wd 
ed 

rd 
vd 

1d 
~ 

AT 
Jd G 

K
d
 

d
d
 

d
d
 

rd 
id 

hd 
d
d
 

N 
T 

rd 
vd 

g
g
 

K
K
 

J
d
]
 

R 
I 

G 
E 
N 

rd 
rd 

rd 
wd

 
<
A
 

R
R
R
 
K
K
 

e
g
 

r
d
 

TOT 
SEAT 

O
O
O
O
 
0
O
0
0
0
0
0
 

BD 
A
R
B
O
R
 R
 

E
N
N
I
S
)
 

JN
 

Ne
 

FT 
N
N
T
 

2 
B
E
N
S
 

No
l 

NN
 

AL 
SEAT 

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

Bh 
O
R
B
 
O
O
R
 

R
P
O
U
O
B
R
B
R
O
B
R
O
B
N
L
 

N
H
D
O
O
O
k
h
 i
 

SMD 
SEAT 

C
O
O
 

O
0
C
O
0
0
0
 

oO
 

P
O
O
O
O
0
O
O
 

O
C
O
0
O
0
0
0
O
0
O
H
R
O
O
 

O
O
O
O
 

O
0
O
0
0
O
0
O
 

MMD 
SEAT 

C
O
O
0
O
0
0
0
0
O
O
0
O
0
O
0
O
0
0
 

oO
 

C
O
O
 
D
O
O
 

C
O
O
0
O
O
0
0
0
0
0
O
0
0
0
 

O
0
0
 

0
C
0
C
0
O
0
0
D
 

 



Page No. 2 ALL ACTS BY COUNTY 
03/26/86 

  

ACTS MODIFYING ELECTION STRUCTURES 
OF LOCAL GOVERNING BODIES IN ALABAMA 

ENACT VOL PAGE TYPE APP AT- SMD RNMMS APG TOT AL SMD MMD 
DATE YEAR LAR EUMATNRE SEAT SEAT SEAT SEAT 

SMDJIOCTIN 

07/31/67 1967 5291 1 Y n Y yy Y Y 5 5 0 2 

*% COUNTY ‘Dbibb 
01/29/79 1879 208 1 Y Y MN 4 4 0 0 
07/31/07 1907 596 1 yy: VY vy 4 0 4 0 
09/17/71 1971 2327 l Y Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 
02/25/80 1980 33 1 Y Y Y 0 0) 0 0 

** ‘COUNTY Dblount 
03/11/87 1887 797 1 YY vy 4 0 4 0 
02/18/95 1895 1136 1 Y Y Y yY 4 4 0) 0) 
03/15/39 1939 98 1 Y vY Y vY 4 0 4 0 
03/15/39 1939 0©8 1 v Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 
09/19/49 1940 022 1 v Y vy Y n 4 0) 4 0) 
09/19/49 1949 922 1 Y Y Y Y 4 4 0) 0 
09/02/55 19855 754 1 Y n v Y Y 4 4 0 0 
08/15/63 1963 626 1 n vY Y Y Y 4 0 4 0 
08/16/65 1965 627 1 n'y Y Y Y 4 0 4 0 
09/01/65 1965 1529 1 Y Y vY vY % 0 4 0 
09/08/67 1967 1484 1 0) 0) 0 0 

** COUNTY bullock 
12/05/66 1866 65 3 Y 0 0 0 0 
02/13/89 1889 396 1 Y Y v 4 0) 4 0 
01/30/93 1893 219 1 V4 Y Y 4 0 4 0 
12/13/94 1894 146 1 Y Y v vY 4 4 0 0 
08/20/65 1965 788 1 Y } Y ny 4 0 4 0 
05/04/82 1982 847 1 Y Y 0) 1 0 0 

** COUNTY butler 
01/30/93 1893 219 1 v Y Y 4 0 4 0 
12/13/00 1900 549 1 Y Y g 4 0 4 0 
12/13/00 1900 549 1 NV Y Y Y 4 0 4 0 
06/23/45 1945 100 1 Y Y YY 4 4 0) 0 
08/30/49 1949 732 1 vY Y viy 4 0 4 0 
05/14/69 1969 201 1 Y Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 
11/28/83 1983 74 1 Y Y VY 4 4 0 0 

** COUNTY calhoun 
02/05/81 1881 i Y 4 0 0 0 
02/09/95 1899 524 1 Y Y vY Y 4 4 0 0 
09/17/23 1923 180 1 ny Y Y Y 5 0 5 0 

i 1939 252 1 V4 VY Y 3 3 0 0 
lif 19563 760 1 vY YY Y 3 3 0 0 

09/12/69 1969 1587 1 0 0 0) 0 
Ov/26/73 1973 187 1 0 0 0 0 
06/14/77 1977 1478 1 0 0 0 0 
06/14/77 19%? 1501 p 0) 0 0 0 

 



Page No. 6) ALL ACTS BY COUNTY 
03/26/86 

  

ACTS MODIFYING ELECTION STRUCTURES 
OF LOCAL GOVERNING BODIES IN ALABAMA 

ENACT VOL. PAGE TYPE APP AT- SMD RNMMSAPG TOT AL SMD MMD 
DATE YEAR LAR EUMATNRE SEAT SEAT SEAT SEAT 

SMDJ GT IN 

** COUNTY chambers 

02/17/85 1885 606 1 Y Y Y 4 4 0 0) 
08/27/15 1915 132 1 Y yn ny 4 4 0 4 0 
09/05/51 1951 1287 1 Y Y Y YY 4 0) 4 0 
06/18/59 1959 470 1 Y Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 
09/20/71 1971 3241 1 vY Y vy vY 5 5 0 0 
08/22/73 1973 689 1 Y Y Y vY 5 5 0 0 
08/07/77 1977 241 1 Y Y vy YY 5 0 5 0) 

** COUNTY cherokee 
01/29/79 1879 208 1 Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 
12/12/84 1884 288 1 Vie oY Y 4 0 4 0 
02/26/87 1887 635 1 Y | Y v 4 4 0) 0 
08/24/39 1939 138 1 Y Y Y Y Vv 4 4 0 0 
06/24/43 1943 162 1 Y Y vy 1 3: 0 0 
07/22/47 194% Ol 1 y Vv Y Y 4 0 4 0 
07/22/47 194% Ol 1 YY Y v 4 0 4 0 
06/28/49 1940 188 1 yy Y Y 4 0 4 0 
07/26/73 1973 2068 1 vY Y Y 4 4 0 0 

** COUNTY chilton 
01/29/79 1879 208: 1 Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 
12/12/84 1884 288 1 Y Y Y 4 0 4 0 
02/28/87 1887 979 1 Y n 4 0 0 0 
02/06/91 1891 419 1 Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 
01/27/99 1899 375 1 y v Y 4 4 0 0 
09/12/51 1951 1505 1 Y Y a, 4 4 4 0 0 
09/02/59 1989 941 1 VY Y Y 0 0 0 0 
08/15/63 1963 661 1 Y Y Y 5 5 0 0 

** COUNTY choctaw 
02/16/75 1875 263 1 vY Y Y 4 4 0 0 
01/30/93 1893 219 '1 vY vY vy 4 0 4 0 
09/27/23 1923 307 1 Y Y Y vY 4 4 0 0 
06/27/27 1927 41 1 ny Y yY Y 4 0) 4 0 
08/16/65 1965 626 1 Y Y Y yY 4 4 0 0 

** COUNTY clarke 
01/29/79 1879 208 1 Y Y Y 4 4 0) 0 
10/01/71 1971 3912 1 Y Y Y 0) 0) 0 0 
05/21/81 1981 1270 1 Y Y 4 0 0 

** COUNTY clay 
12/07/66 1866 92 l Y 0 0 0) 0 
01/28/79 1879 219 1 V4 vy vY 4 4 0 0 
09/02/35 1935 189 1 Y Y VY Y 4 4 0 0 
03/08/39 1939 68 1 n. vy Y Y & 0 4 0 
03/08/39 1939 68 1 V4 Y Y 4 4 0) 0 
09/11/39 1939 240 1 vY V4 Y 0 0 0 0 

 



  

Page No. 4 ALL ACTS BY COUNTY 
03/26/86 

ACTS MODIFYING ELECTION STRUCTURES 
OF LOCAL GOVERNING BODIES IN ALABAMA 

ENACT VOL PAGE TYPE APP AT- SMD RNMM S APG TOT AL SMD MMD 
DATE YEAR LAR EUMATNRE SEAT SEAT SEAT SEAT 

SS MDJGTIN 

09/11/39 1939 241 1 v 0 0) 0 0 

06/30/43 1943 193 1 Y Y Y ny 4 4 0 0 

06/30/43 1943 193 1 yy vY 4 0 4 0 

** COUNTY cleburne 
12/06/66 1866 71 1 Y 0) 0) 0 0 
02/26/87 188%" 635 1 Y V4 Y 4 4 0 0 

03/04/01 1901 2241 1 Y Y Y vY 4 4 0 0 

03/04/01 1901 2241 1 vY V4 4 Y 4 4 0 0 

09/16/39 1939 339 l Y vY Y 4 4 0 0 

08/11/87 128% 571 1 Y Y Y YY 4 0) 4 0 

*% COUNTY code of al 
07/02/40 1940 450 ¢g Y Y Y 3 0 0 0 

** COUNTY coffee 
02/08/67 1867 362 1 Y vY Y 4 0] 4 0 
09/09/27 192% 395 1 YY vY Y 4 0) 4 0 
09/09/53 1953 813 1 Y vY Y vY 4 4 0 0 

** COUNTY colbert 
02/08/67 1887 351 1 Y 0 0) 0 0 
06/23/45 1945 101 1 Y Y YY 4 4 0 0 
06/23/49 1949 158 1 Y vY vy 5 5 0 0 
10/08/75 1975 1822 p 0) 0 0) 0 

** COUNTY conecuh 
12/11/73 1873 107 1 Y Y Y 4 4 0) 0 
12/11/73 1873 107 1 Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 
03/01/81 1881 208 1 0 0) 0) 0 
09/07/15 1915 203 1 Y yn vY v 5 0 5 0 
09/05/19 1919 118 1 YY Y + v9 4 0 4 0 

08/27/37 1937 241 1 Y yy Y Y Y 5 1 4 0 

09/19/39 1939 349 1 vy Y Y YY 5 5 0 0 

06/23/45 1945 01 1 Y Y Y Y Y 5 1 4 0 

10/01/71 1971 3686 1 Y ny vY Y vY 5 1 0 4 

** COUNTY coosa 
02/16/75 1875 263 1 Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 

02/09/77 1877 154 1 Y vY vY 4 4 0) 0 

02/07/85 1885 317 1 Y vY Y yY 4 4 0 0 

06/26/53 1983 176 1 Y Y YY 4 0) 4 0) 

08/13/5% 1957 326 7p Y Y yn 0 0 0) 0 

08/13/57 1987 326 1 Y 'Y Y 0 0 0 0 

** COUNTY covington 
01/29/79 1879 208 1 Y v Y 4 0 0 

12/12/84 1884 258 1 Y Y yY 4 0) 4 0 

12/12/94 1894 62 3 vy V4 vy Y 4 4 0 0 

 



  

Page No. 5 ALL ACTS BY COUNTY 
03/26/86 

ACTS MODIFYING ELECTION STRUCTURES 
OF LOCAL GOVERNING BODIES IN ALABAMA 

ENACT VOL. PAGE TYPE APP AT- SMD RNMMS APG TOT AL SMD MMD 
DATE YEAR LAR EUMATNRE SEAT SEAT SEAT SEAT 

SMDJIGTIXN 

04/07/11 1011 231 1 Y 5 1 0) 0 
01/01/15 1915 ©8 3 n Y Y Yn 4 0 4 0 
02/04/19 19190 8 1 Ye ve Y v 5 fs 4 0 
05/19/45 1945 23 1 y yy Y 5 1 4 0 
10/01/71 1971 3564 1 Y yy Y 5 5 0 0 

** COUNTY crenshaw 
11/24/66 1866 38 1 vY 0) 0 0 0 
01/29/79 1879 208 1 Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 
12/12/84 1884 258 1 Y  ¥ Y 4 0 4 0 
09/29/19 1919 255 1 vY yY 4 0 0 0 
09/29/19 1919 2865 1 Y Y 4 0 0 0 
05/11/%1 1971 1092 1 Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 

** COUNTY cullman 
01/24/77 1877 69 1 ny 4 4 0) 0 
02/13/79 1879 227 1 XY i. Y Y 4 0 4 0 
02/18/97 189% 1463 1 ny ay vY Y 4 0 4 0 
03/05/03 1903 200 1 5 0 0 0 
04/14/36 1936 70 3 Y vY 5 5 0 0 
09/11/39 19389 244 1 V4 Y 3 3 0 0 
08/17/51 1951 804 1 y  yYy' VY Y 5 1 4 0 
08/17/51 1951 804 1 Yn .y Y 5 1 0 0 
02/14/55 1955 38 1 Y v Y 3 3 0 0 
09/23/59 1959 690 1 Y Y Y Y 3 3 0 0 
08/11/%%. 1977 612 1 vy Y YY 3 3 0 0 

** COUNTY dale 
02/16/67 1867 B37 1 Y Y vY 4 0 4 0 
07/29/68 1868 67 1 0 0 0) 0 
12/11/72 18%) 3Y71. 1 0 0 0 0 
01/29/79 1879 208 1 Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 
12/00/96 1896 378 1 Y Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 
09/20/71 1971 3174 1 v Y Y yY 5 5 0 0 
07/30/79 1979 1125 1 Y yy YY M4 v 5 1 4 0 

** COUNTY dallas 
02/19/76 1876 385 1 4 0 0 0 
02/08/01 1901 840 1 Y Y g 5 5 0 0 
02/08/01 1901 890 1 Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 
02/19/76 1976 381 1 0) 0) 0 0 

** COUNTY dekalb 
02/16/75 1875 263 1 Y Y Y 4 4 0 0) 
02/09/77 1877 154 1 Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 
02/22/87 1887 892 1 Y v Y 4 0 4 0 
01/30/93 1893 219 1 vy Y y 4 0 4 0 
08/24/39 1939 147 1 Y Y Y VY Y 5 5 0 0 
09/07/55 1955 890 1 Y Y ny. 5 5 0 0 

 



Page No. 6 ALL ACTS BY COUNTY 
03/26/86 

  

ACTS MODIFYING ELECTION STRUCTURES 
OF LOCAL GOVERNING BODIES IN ALABAMA 

ENACT VOL, PAGE TYPE APP AT- SMD R NM MS APG TOT AL SMD MMD 
DATE YEAR LAR EUMATNRE SEAT SEAT SEAT SEAT 

SMDaGT IN 

09/07/55 1955 890 1 nn. yy .y Y 1 4 0 
08/19/69 1969 889 1 V4 Y YY 5 5 0 0 
10/06/75 1975 1551 1 0) 0 0 

** COUNTY elmore 
02/16/75 1875 263 1 Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 
09/14/15 1915 373 1 Y Y Y 4 4 0) 0 
09/14/15 1915 373 1 n .y yn n Yy n 4 0 4 0 
09/14/15 1918 373 1 YY V4 4 0 4 0 
09/14/15 1915 373 1 Y Y 4 4 0 0 

** COUNTY escambia 
12/10/68 1868 397 1 Y 0 0 0) 0 
01/29/79 1879 208 1 yY Y V4 4 4 0) 0) 
12/07/00 1900 . 187. 1 Y Y Y 4 0 4 0) 
06/22/43 1943 129 1 YY Y Y 4 0) 4 0 
08/30/63 1963 912 1 vY Y Y Y 5 5 0) 0 
07/08/82 1982 165 1 yY 0 0 0) 0 

** COUNTY etowah 
02/13/79 1879 227 1 Y v Y 4 0 4 0 
12/02/90 1890 12 1 Y Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 
08/11/2% 1037 187: 1 n n nn MN Y 4 0 0 0 
09/09/55 19585 933 1 Y YY Y V4 5 5 0 0 
09/12/66 1966 487 p Y Y Y Y 5 1 4 0 
08/20/73 1973 631 1 vY Y 1 1 0 0 

** COUNTY fayette 
02/16/75 1875 263 1 Y vY Y 4 4 0 0 
02/09/77 1877 154 1 Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 
02/18/91 1891 1302 1 vy Y Y 0) 0 0) 0 
01/30/93 1893 219 1 Y Y vY 4 0 4 0 
12/13/94 1894 146 1 Y vy vy VN 4 4 0 0 
12/09/96 1896 380 1 Yo Y Y Y 4 0 4 0 
03/05/07 1907 397 1 Y Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 
09/12/69 1969 2027 1 Y Y Y 0 0 0) 0 
08/19/71 1971 672 p NY yY vY 0) 0 0 0 

** COUNTY franklin 
02/16/75 1875 263 1 Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 
02/09/77 18%" 154 1 Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 
02/18/91 1891 1302 1 Y Y Y 0 0) 0 0 
02/23/99 1899 1616 1 Y Y 0 0) 0 0 
02/27/01 1901 1203 1 Y iy 4 0 0) 0 
09/25/47 1947 220 1 Y Y Y 4 0) 4 0 
09/25/47 1947 290 1 Y Y n Y 4 4 0 0 
08/09/49 1949 902 1 y DEL, Y Y 5 1 4 0 
09/09/49 1949 902 1 Y Y Y Y 5 1 4 0 
09/05/51 1951 1288 1 n Y Y Y n 4 0 4 0 

 



Page No. 7 ALL ACTS BY COUNTY 
03/26/86 

  

ACTS MODIFYING ELECTION STRUCTURES 
OF LOCAL GOVERNING BODIES IN ALABAMA 

ENACT VOL PAGE TYPE APP AT- SMD R NM NMS APG TOT AL SMD MMD 
DATE YEAR LAR EUMATNRE SEAT SEAT SEAT SEAT 

SMDJGTIN 

09/08/51 1981 1288 1 n n v 4 0 0) 0 
07/23/83 1983 286 1 Y v Y 4 4 0) 0 

** COUNTY general 
07/09/45 1945 490 g YY v 3 0) 0) 0 

** COUNTY geneva 
02/11/70 1870 98 1 Y YY Y 4 0) 4 0 
02/18/95 1895 1136 1 v V4 Y Y 4 4 0 0 

** COUNTY green 
01/28/79 1879 219 1 Y Y Vi 4 4 0 0 

** COUNTY hale 
01/30/67 1867 47? 1 Y 0 0) 0 0 
02/09/77 1877 154 1 Y Y vY % 4 0 0 
08/03/07 1907 781 1 Y. 'Y Y 4 0 4 0 
06/03/53 1953 89 1 Y Y Y Y 4 4 0) 0 
09/06/59 19859 9061 1 Y YY Y vY 4 0 4 0 
08/10/65 1965 439 1 Y Y Y vY 4 4 0 0 
09/20/71 1971 3261 1 Y Y Y 0) 0 0 0 
09/20/71 1971 3262 p Y Y Y 4 4 0) 0) 
08/27/73 1973 925 1 Y v v Y 4 4 0) 0 

** COUNTY henry 
01/29/79 1879 208 1 Y Y vY 4 4 0 0 
09/02/19 1919 95 l v vY 4 0 0 0 
09/02/19 1919 95 1 Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 
08/13/23 1923 58 1 Y Y vY YY 4 0 4 0 
08/13/23 1923 58 3 vy. XY yY YY 4 0 4 0 
06/12/35 1935 655 1 Y Y vy Y 4 4 0 0 
06/12/35 1935 B55 1 Y Y Y VY 4 4 0 0) 
07/10/40 1940 364 1 YY Y yy 4 0 4 0 
07/07/4v 1947 58 1 Y Y Y YY 4 4 0 0 

** COUNTY houston 
08/09/07 1907 860 1 Y Y Y 5 5 0 0 
03/29/11 1911 172 1 yY Y yy 4 4 0 0 
08/24/15 1915 75 X Yy YY Y 0 2 0 0 
07/23/31 1931 266 1 nN, Y'u.Yy YY 3 0 3 0 
06/27/35 1935 71 1 why :y Y 3 0 3 0 
09/13/35 1935 253 1 n. vv -y YY 3 0 3 0 
08/22/39 1939 133 1 nn. ry Yy 4 0 4 0 
09/19/49 1949 931 1 n Y Y VY Y 4 0 4 0 
07/29/83 1983 326 1 v Y YY 4 4 0) 0 
05/24/87 198% 30 1 n Y Y yy 5 0 5 0 
09/12/69 1969 1673 1 vY Y YY 4 0 4 0 
09/12/69 1969 1674 1 yy yy YY YY 5 1 4 0 
09/12/69 1969 1673 1 Y Y YY 4 0 4 0 

 



Page No. ALL ACTS BY COUNTY 
03/26/86 

ACTS MODIFYING ELECTION STRUCTURES 
OF LOCAL GOVERNING BODIES IN ALABAMA 

VOL PAGE TYPE APP AT- SMD R NM MS APG TOT AL SMD MMD 
YEAR LAR E 

S 

UMATNR E SEAT SEAT SEAT SEAT 
MDJQGTIN 

** COUNTY jackson 
02/16/75 1875 263 
03/09/%77.:18%%7 18% 
01/29/79 1879 208 
06/30/43 1943 199 
07/06/45 1945 162 
10/08/47 1947 376 
11/04/50 1950 126 
07/09/57 1957 158 H

F
E
R
E
R
R
P
R
H
E
 

d
d
]
 

M
d
 

G
O
O
G
 

h 
O
n
 

C
O
O
 
O
h
 

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

OC
O0
O0
OO
0O
O0
O0
OO
 

** COUNTY jefferson 
02/05/81 1881 
02/18/99 1899 11158 
02/27/31 1931 149 
06/16/31 1931 208 
06/03/35 1935 157 <

o
d
]
 

** COUNTY jones 
02/04/67 1867 323 

** COUNTY lamar 
02/18/91 1891 1302 
02/23/99 1899 1616 
09/12/69 1969 2027 
10/01/71 1971 3475 
02/10/72 1972 4458 rd 

rd 
md 

ed 
1d 

rd 
rd 

rd 
hd 

** COUNTY lauderdale 
02/16/75 1875 263 
02/09/77 1877 154 
09/26/23 1923 259 
09/26/23 1923 259 
07/01/49 1949 200 
07/11/51 1951 458 
07/21/53 19853 272 

02/18/55 1955 61 
10/01/71 1971 3576 
11/24/71 1971 4166 a

 
al 

al
 

al 
ad 

a 
a 

al
 

H
d
d
 

dd
 

d
d
 

E
E
 

EE 
ES
 
R
E
 

I 
A 

M
d
 

NI
 

NI 
NIF

C 
J 

NI 
NN
 

ES
 

C
O
O
H
B
R
B
R
O
B
B
 

O
C
O
B
R
K
R
O
O
O
B
O
O
 

R
R
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
 

rd 
rd 

hd 
hd 

rd 
rd 

** COUNTY lawrence 
12/03/78 1878 243 
02/18/95 1895 1136 
08/30/27 1927 343 

08/12/59 1959 214 

05/03/67 1967 166 

07/01/69 1969 411 M
K
 

d
d
 

I
d
 

rd 
hd 

1 

B
O
B
 

B
R
  



  

Page No. 
03/26/86 

ENACT 
DATE 

** COUNTY 
12/05/66 
02/05/91 
12/17/94 

**. COUNTY 
02/16/75 
02/09/77 
07/27/31 
02/12/3% 
09/05/89 
08/29/39 
07/29/55 

** COUNTY 
08/01/68 
03/07/76 
02/28/89 
12/17/94 
07/29/0% 

** COUNTY 
02/22/8% 
02/10/91 
02/13/07 
10/15/20 
08/08/35 
06/06/35 
09/05/89 

** COUNTY 
12/13/94 
03/05/01 
09/26/19 
02/03/23 
09/12/69 
09/17/71 

** COUNTY 
01/23/6% 
09/17/19 
09/19/23 
02/17/55 
08/16/66 

** COUNTY 
02/16/75 
02/09/77 
01/28/79 

2 ALL ACTS BY COUNTY 

ACTS MODIFYING ELECTION STRUCTURES 
OF LOCAL GOVERNING BODIES IN ALABAMA 

VOL PAGE TYPE APP AT- SMD RN MMS APG TOT 
YEAR LAR BUMATNRE SEAT 

SMDJGTIN 

lee 

1866 50 1 
1801 367 1 
1804 238 1 N

g
 

~ r
g
 

9 th
 
O
O
 

limestone 
1875 263 
1877 154 
1931 258 
19037 B3 
1939 235 
1939 182 
1055 454 H

E
H
E
 

R
P
P
 

N
o
d
]
 

rd
 

N
o
d
 

~ 

e
g
g
 

N
K
]
 

(6
; 
16

) 
le

) 
Je

) 
Je
) 

JI
 
SN
T 

AN 

e
g
 

lowndes 
1868 71 
1876 379 
1889 1070 
18904 186 
1907 552 B

t
 et 

v Ls
 

O
o
k
 

O
h
 

S|
 BS ~ rd
 

mnacon 

1887 833 
1891 555 
1907 41 
1920 176 
1935 41 
1935 41 
1939 225 H

F
R
R
E
R
R
E
H
E
E
 

M
d
 

Hd
 

v2)
 

rd 
md 

rd 
1d 

ed 

H 

rd
 

md 
rd 

id 

a 

Me
d 

Hd
 
ed
d 

N
T
N
 

NI
T 

NI
N 

madison 
1804 135 1 
1901 2559 1 
1919 217 1 Y 

l 
l 
1 

4 

19023 3 
1969 2022 
1971 2906 r
d
 

1d 
id 

1d 
1d

 

wd 

M
d
 

ed
d 

os
 

h
d
 

id 
1d 

1d 
id

 

(@
 

Ne
o 

Ne
 
N
o
l
 I
 

marengo 
1867 185 
1919 141 
1923 188 
1955 45 
1966 67 P

H
R
F
 RE

 

g
g
 

S|
 

L
S
 

<
d
 

e
 

(o;
 
le

; 
le
) 
J
N
 
N 

marion 

1875 263 

1877 154 

1879 219 H
H
 

rd 
1d 

1 

md 1
d
 vd

 

r
i
d
 

I
N
T
 

AL 
SEAT 

O
O
H
 

O
B
 

R
P
 
O
B
R
O
B
R
O
 

O
O
0
O
R
O
O
 

H
O
O
F
 
O
B
B
 

Hh
 
O
O
 

O
N
E
 N
e)
 

B
h
 

SMD 
SEAT 

o
O
o
O
o
O
d
h
O
O
O
 

O
O
O
H
 

O
O
 

O
0
0
0
O
0
 

P
O
O
H
R
O
O
O
 

o
o
o
 

C
O
o
O
k
h
O
w
m
 

o
l
o
l
e
 

MMD 
SEAT 

O
0
0
0
0
O
0
 

O
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
 

O
0
0
0
O
0
 

O
0
0
 
0
0
0
O
0
 

O
0
0
 

O
0
0
0
O
0
 

QQ
 
O
0
0
 

 



Page No. 10 ALL ACTS BY COUNTY 
03/26/86 

  

ACTS MODIFYING ELECTION STRUCTURES 
OF LOCAL GOVERNING BODIES IN ALABAMA 

ENACT VOL PAGE TYPE APP AT- SMD RN MMS APG TOT AL SMD MMD 
DATE YEAR LAR EUMATNRE SEAT SEAT SEAT SEAT 

SMDIJGTIN 

02/04/79 1879 236 1 yy Y 4 0 4 0 
02/18/91 1891 1302 1 Yy yn Y vY 0) 0 0 0 
02/23/99 1899 1616 1 V4 Y 0) 0 0 0 
10/09/47 1947 403 1 Y YY Y YY 5 0 5 0 
09/07/71 1971 1956 1 Y YY yy 5 0 5 0 
05/21/81 1981 1243 1 YY: vv 'Y Y 5 1 4 0 

** COUNTY marshall 
02/16/75 1878 283 1 Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 
02/28/89 1889 134 1 Y. iY Y 0 0 0) 0 
08/30/27 1927 286 1 Y Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 
09/13/35 1935 271 1 Y Vv % Y 3 l 2 0 

fi. / 1036 46 1 0 0 0 0 
04/02/36 1936 49 1 ny vy vY 4 0 4 0 
08/26/83 1953 468 1 0 0 0 0 
08/23/55 19588 612 1 Rn yv:+Y n Y 4 0 4 0 
08/27/63 1963 756 1 n.'y vy Y 4 0 4 0 
09/12/69 1969 1867 1 Y Y Y 5 5 0 0 
08/23/76 19768 840 1 Y Y YY 5 5 0 0 

** COUNTY mobile 
07/30/68 1868 69 1 5 0 0) 0 
12/30/71 1871 388 1 Y Y 5 5 0 0 
12/04/88 1888 142 1 Y Y Y Y Y 5 0) 2 3 
02/28/01 1901 1842 1 Y vY vY v Y 5 2 0 3 
02/28/01 1901 1842 1 Y Y Y Y Y 5 5 2 3 
06/29/31 1931 372 1p v YY 0 0 0 0 
08/07/57 19587 233 1 n'y yy YY 3 3 0 0 

** COUNTY monroe 
01/29/79 1879 208 1 vY Y Y 4 4 0) 0 
12/13/00 1900 409 1 yoy Y 0 0 0 0 
12/13/00 1900 409 1 Y Y Y 0) 0 0 0 
09/25/15 1918 394 1 Y Y YY 4 4 0 0 
09/25/15 1915 394 1 ¥Y nw Rn. yy 4 4 0 0 
08/01/23 1923 42 1 n Y v Y VY 4 0) 4 0 
03/18/39 1939 109 1 ny lv V4 Y 4 0 4 0 

** COUNTY montgomery 
03/11/75 1875 513 1 Y 5 0 0 0 
02/09/77 1877 162 1 0) 0 0 0 
02/28/07 1907 219 1 VE Ee v 5 0 1 4 
09/29/23 1923 333 1 Y Y Y Y 5 0 2 3 
06/03/53 1983 60 3 YY Y 0 0 0) 0 
09/20/87 1957 1036 p Y YY YYVv 0 0 0 0 
05/11/%%v 1977 607 p Y Y Y 5 5 0 0 

 



Page No. 11 ALL ACTS BY COUNTY 
03/26/86 

  

ACTS MODIFYING ELECTION STRUCTURES 
OF LOCAL GOVERNING BODIES IN ALABAMA 

ENACT VOI, PAGE TYPE APP AT- SMD RNMMSAPG TOT AL SMD MMD 
DATE YEAR LAR EUMATNRE SEAT SEAT SEAT SEAT 

SMDJGTTIN 

** COUNTY morgan 
02/16/75 1875 263 1 M4 Y vY 4 4 0 0 
02/09/77 1877 154 1 Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 
02/26/87 1887 635 1 Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 
03/01/01 1901 1465 1 Y '¥ Y 0 0 0) 0 
03/01/01 1901 1465 1 Y Y yY 0 0 0) 0 
09/29/19 1919 288 1 yy. hoy Y Y 4 4 0 0 
09/29/19 1919 258 1 Y ~Y Y 4 0) 4 0 
03/09/39 1939 70 1 n nn." vey vY yn 4 0 4 0 
09/15/39 1939 287 1 Y Y Y Y Y n 5 1 4 0 
03/09/39 1939 70 1 n Y Y Y Y 4 0 4 0 
00/15/39 1939 287 1 Y Y Y Y Y 5 1 4 0 
03/09/39 1939 70 L n Y vY Y Yy n 4 0 4 0 
09/02/39 1939 181 1 vY v l 1 0 0 
09/15/39 1939 287 1 Y Y V4 v Y Vv 5 1 4 0 
03/09/39 1939 70 3 Y Y V4 Y 4 4 0 0 
08/06/73 1973 291 1 Y Y Y YY 5 5 0) 0 

** COUNTY perry 
02/05/81 1881 1 Y vY Y 4 4 0 0 
02/13/95 1895 B53 1 Y yan y Y 4 4 0 0 
07/16/62 1962 178 1 Y nny YY 0 0 0 0 
08/26/71 1971 1210 1 Y Y Y 0 0 0 0 

** COUNTY pickens 
02/05/81 1881 1 Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 
01/30/93 1893 219 1 Y Y Y 4 0 4 0 
12/13/94 1894 146 1 Y Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 
08/27/35 1935 167 1 y .Y YY 4 0 4 0 
08/27/35 1935 167 1 Y Y vY v 4 4 0 0 
09/04/63 1963 975 1 NY Y Y 0 0 0) 0 
07/31/67 1967 476 1 Y © y YY: ¥ 4 0 4 0 
07/31/67 19687 476 1 Y Y vY 4 4 0) 0 
07/01/69 1969 4068 1 0 0 0 0 
10/01/75 1975 1339 1 4 0 0) 0 

** COUNTY pike 
01/29/79 1879 208 1 Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 
12/12/84 1884 258 1 yy: y Y 4 0 4 0 
02/28/87 1887 954 1 Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 
02/28/89 1889 950 1 Y Y 4 0) 4 0 
02/06/91 1891 895 1 Y Y V4 4 4 0 0 
01/30/93 1893 219 1 v Y Y 4 0 4 0 
07/01/69 1960 431 1 V4 Y Y 0 0 0 0 

** COUNTY randolph 
02/18/91 1891 1275 1 Y n ty yY 4 4 0 0 
02/18/91 1891 1275 1 Y 4 0 0 0 
08/02/27 1927 121 1 Y Y 4 0 0 0 

 



Page No. 12 ALL ACTS BY COUNTY 
03/26/86 

  

ACTS MODIFYING ELECTION STRUCTURES 
OF LOCAL GOVERNING BODIES IN ALABAMA 

ENACT VOL PAGE TYPE APP AT- SMD RNMMS APG TOT AL SMD MMD 
DATE YEAR LAR FUMATNDRE SEAT SEAT SEAT SEAT 

SMD J GT IN 

08/10/65 1965 417 1 Y n.y yy 4 4 0 0 

**¥ COUNTY russell 
02/16/75 1875 263 1 vY vY Y 4 4 0 0 
02/04/91 1891 354 1 vY Y v Y 4 4 0) 0 
09/03/19 1919 102 1 Y Y Y Y 5 0) 5 0 
05/26/31 1931 65 1 Y Y Y Y 3 3 0 0 
10/14/32 1932 35 1 v v v 3 3 0 0 
05/25/45 1945 40 1 Y Y V4 3 3 0) 0) 
08/30/49 1949 776 1 Y Y Y 3 3 0 0 

** COUNTY sanford 
12/20/68 1868 492 1 Y Y V4 4 0 4 0 

** COUNTY shelby 
02/04/91 1891 354 1 Y Y Y vY 4 4 0 0 
01/30/93 1893 219 1 vY Y vY 4 0 4 0 
01/01/11 1911 154 1 Yo uy 5 5 0 0 
09/02/15 1915 199 1 pM, ILA Y vY 5 1 4 0 
09/10/19 1919 115 1 YY. Vy yn Y Y 5 1 4 0 
07/06/49 1949 208 1 Y Y yo vy 4 4 0) 0 
08/09/89 1959 448 1 hy .y v 4 0 4 0 
06/09/69 1989 448 1 ny Y Y 4 0 4 0 

** COUNTY st. clair 
01/23/66 1866 516 1 V4 Y n Y 4 4 0 0 
02/26/87 1887 635 1 Y Y Y 4 4 0) 0 
09/08/87 1957 663 1 Yy Vv ' ¥Y Y Y 5 1 4 0 
09/30/59 1989 753 1 Y n..y Y YY 4 4 0 0 
09/13/69 1969 2296 1 Y Y Y Vy 5 5 0 0 
12/15/71 1971 4263 1 vY vY YY 5 5 0) 0 
08/14/73 1973 579 1 Y Y YY 4 4 0 0 

** COUNTY sumter 
02/22/19 1919 51 3 Y Y Y 5 5 0 0 
11/01/21 1921 77 3 Y Vy ¥% vy Y 7 1 6 0 
07/29/27 1927 91 i Y ni. yn Y Y 7 7 0 0 
08/06/47 1947 187 1 Y Y vy 3 3 0 0 

** COUNTY talladega 
02/05/81 1881 1 v v v 4 4 0 0 
02/09/95 1898 524 1 yY Y Y 4 4 0 0 
09/23/19 1919 167 1 yy vy 4 0 4 0 
08/21/51 1951 955 1 V4 Y Y Y 5 5 0 0 

_ ** COUNTY tallapoosa 
02/16/75 1875 263 1 Y Y Y 4 4 0) 0 
02/09/%7 18%%7 154 1 Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 
12/05/90 1890 85 1 yY Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 

 



  

Page No. 13 ALL ACTS BY COUNTY 
03/26/86 

ACTS MODIFYING ELECTION STRUCTURES 
OF LOCAL GOVERNING BODIES IN ALABAMA 

ENACT VOL PAGE TYPE APP AT- SMD RNMM SS APG TOT AL SMD MMD 
DATE YEAR LAR EUMATNRE SEAT SEAT SEAT SEAT 

SMD JCGTIN 

12/05/90 1890 35 1 Y Y vY 4 4 0 0 
09/07/23 1923 144 1 yi: ¥ v 5 0 5 0 
09/07/23 1923 144 1 Y Y 5 5 0 0 
04/16/63 1963 211 1 Y Y vY Y 5 0 5 0 

** COUNTY tuscaloosa 
09/25/15 1915 470 1 Y Y 3 3 0) 0 
07/08/35 1935 or 1 Y n ny YY Y 3 3 0 0 
08/15/47 1947 246 1 Y Y 3 0) 0 0 

** COUNTY walker 
12/05/65 1865 464 1 Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 
02/16/75 1875 263 1 Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 
02/09/77 1877 154 1 Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 
08/09/07 1907 863 1 Y Y v vY 0 0 0) 0 
09/07/27 1927 394 1 Ne yy Y Y 4 0) 4 0 
06/13/31 1931 120 1 Y Y Y Vv % 3 3 0) 0 
10/11/32 1932 28 1 Y Y v Y 3 3 0 0 
07/31/35 1935 131 1 YY. v9... % vY 5 1 4 0 
07/31/35 1935 131 1 Y Y Y Y 5 5 0) 0 
07/12/5% 1957 166 1 Y N Y Y vY 5 1 4 0) 
07/12/87 1957 166 1 Y Y Y Y 5 5 0 0 
09/12/66 19668 555 1 Yo ny Y 5 5 0 0 
09/12/66 1966 555 1 vy Y Y Y 5 J 4 0 
09/17/73 1973 1802 1 Y Y Y Y 5 1 4 0 
09/17/73 1973 1802 1 Y Y Y 5 5 0 0 
10/08/75 1975 1811 p Y YY .% Y 5 1 4 0 
10/08/75 1975 1811 p Y Y Y 5 5 0) 0 

** COUNTY washington 
01/28/79 1879 219 1 Y Y Y 4 4 0 0 
02/05/87 1887 767 1 yi: Y Y 4 0 4 0 
02/21/93 1893 ©94 1 0 0) 0 0 
01/30/93 1893 219 1 Y vY Y 4 0) 4 0 
12/17/94 1894 240 1 0 0) 0 0 
12/13/94 1894 146 1 Y Y V4 Y 4 4 0 0 
09/18/15 1915 401 1 Y yy Y Y 4 0 4 0 
05/28/31 1931 80 1 un. yy § Y Y 4 0) 4 0 
06/27/35 1935 70 3 Y Y Y Y 5 5 0 0 
06/17/43 1943 93 1 Y “Yy Y Y 4 0 4 0 
08/17/51 1981 823 1 Y Y Y 4 4 0) 0 
08/12/69 1969 727 1 Y vY Y VY 4 4 0 0 
10/10/75 1975 2287 1 Y Y Y., YY 4 4 0 0 
05/17/81 1981 1019 1 VY 0 0 0 0 
07/18/83 1983 839 1 Y Y Y 0 0 0) 0 

** COUNTY wilcox 
02/09/77? 1877 156 1 0) 0 0) 0 
02/09/77 1877 187 1 4 0 0 0 

 



  

Page No. 
03/26/86 

ENACT 
DATE 

01/28/99 
02/02/37 
09/15/39 

** COUNTY 
01/26/66 
02/18/95 
07/30/31 
06/27/65 
07/09/8% 
10/29/59 
10/29/59 
08/11/65 
08/11/65 

14 ALL ACTS BY COUNTY 

ACTS MODIFYING ELECTION STRUCTURES 
OF LOCAL GOVERNING BODIES IN ALABAMA 

VOL PAGE TYPE APP AT- SMD RNMMS APG TOT 
YEAR LAR EUMATNRE SEAT 

SMDJGTIN 

1809 434 1 Y Y 4 
1037 24 1 Yy %Y Y 5 
19030 261 1 Y Y V4 5 

winston 
1866.51% 1 vy Y Y 4 
1895 1136 1 Y Y Y Y 4 
1931 305 1 Y Y Y YY 5 
1985 327 1 Y Y n Y Y 3 
1957 152 1 Y Y Y Y 5 
1950 9002 1 Y Y Y Y Y 3 
1960 002 1 Y Y Y Y Y 3 
1965 390 1 Y Y yY Y 3 
1965 300 1 Yy “nn. ¥y vY 3 

AL 
SEAT 

0
0
h
 

N
E
P
 

H
E
F
O
M
D
O
K
R
O
 

SMD 
SEAT 

O
o
o
o
 

o
v
 

V
O
R
 
O
O
G
O
B
 

MMD 
SEAT 

O
0
0
 

O
C
O
0
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
O
0
 

 



  

Counties With District Election Systems Before 1900 

County 

¥Vinston 

Marengo 

Morgan 

Coffee 

Dale 

Geneva 

Etowah 

Cullman 

Marion 

Crenshaw 

Covington 

Pike 

Chilton 

Cherokee 

Washington 

Blount 

DeKalb 

Marshall 

Bullock 

Lamar 

Baldwin 

Butler 

Date(Dist) 

1866 

1867 

1866 

1867 

1867 

1870 

1879 

1879 

1879 

1884 

1884 

1884* 

1884 

1884 

1887 

1887 

1887 

1889 

1889 

1891 

1803 

1893 

Date(At-Large) 

1895 

%Black (1890) 

0 

76 

25 

16 

19 

9 

17 

14 

40 

06 

48 

 



  

Choctaw 

Fayette 

Shelby 

Pickens 

  

53 

13 

ol 

58 

*Shifted to at-large in 1887, back to districts in 1889, back to 
at-large in 1891, and back to districts in 1893. 

6. There was a significant shift to at-large county 

commission elections in the 1890's at the time of the Populist 

Revolt. Those counties included 

District Systems That Shifted to At-large: 

County 

Winston 

Geneva 

Etowah 

Covington 

Pike* 

Chilton 

Washington 

Blount 

Bullock 

Baldwin 

Fayette** 

Date of Shift 

1895 

1895 

1890 

1894 

1891 

1891 

1894 

1895 

1804 

1894 

1894 

-— 10 — 

0 

9 

17 

11 

37 

21 

4] 

8 

78 

o6 

13 

1890's 

Black%(1890) 

 



  

Pickens 1894 58 

Marion 18909 2 

  

Shifted back to districts - 1883 
** Shifted back to districts - 1896 

7. After 1901, following the massive disfranchisement 

of black voters, there was a significant shift in the statutory 

pattern toward single-member districts for county commissions, 

particularly in counties that were heavily black. The following 

table summarizes the changes to single-member districts in the 

first quarter of the twentieth century: 

Counties Shifting to Districts, 1900-1930 

County Date of Shift %Elaok 

Barbour 1903 63.6 

Bibb 1907 03.6 

Butler 1900 51.4 

Calhoun 1923 25.2 

Chambers 1915 50.9 

Choctaw 1923 55.1 

Coffee 192% ”Q1.2 

Conecuh 1915 41.9 

Covington 1015 ”4.1 

1 
Percent black 1s calculated according to the federal 

dicennial census next nearest to the date of the change. 

- 31 

 



  

Hale 1907 81.7 

Macon 1907 84.2 

Baldwin 1915 15.3 

Henry 1923 48.5 

Houston 1915 29.6 

Madison 1923 45.5 

Marengo 1923 71.2 

Monroe 1900 55.4 

Montgomery 1807 72.95 

Shelby 1915 28.4 

Sumter 1921 77.6 

Talladega 1919 41.7 

8. There was also a substantial number of "dual 

systems" in which single-member districts were used in the 

white-only Democratic primaries, while the general elections 

(which were the only elections in which the few enfranchised 

blacks could vote) were held at large. Compare with McMillan, 

688 F.2d at 967. The following table summarizes the changes to 

dual systems: 

Counties With District Primaries and 

At-Large General Elections 

County Date of Adoption %Black* 

DeKalb 1955 2 

Elmore 1915 43 

18 - 

 



  

Cullman 1951 0 

Franklin 19047 1 

Lauderdale 1023 21 

Macon 1935 82 

Morgan 1919 17 

Pickens 1935 48 

Tallapoosa 1923 34 

Valker 1935 13 

Winston 1965 1 

Blount 1939 1 

  

*nearest decennial census 

©. From approximately 1915 to 1944 the efforts of white 

supremacists primarily were aimed at maintaining and defending 

thelr complete control. In 1944, the Supreme Court struck down 

the all-white Democratic party primary. Smith v. Allwright 321 
  

U.S. 649 (1944). The reintroduction of the federal presence via 

the Civil Rights Acts of 1957, 1964 and 1965 eventually removed 

most of the formal legal barriers to black voting. See 

generally, Blacksher and Menefee, "From Reynolds v. Sims to City 

of Mobile v. Bolden: Have the White Suburbs Commandeered the 

Fifteenth Amendment?," 34 Hast.L.J. 1, 1-2 and n.4 (1982). 

10. After Smith v. Allwright, there was a decilded 

shift back to the use of at-large elections. The following table 

kh, LT 

 



  

displays these changes : 

Counties Shifting From District to At-large After 1945 

County Date of Shift %Black* 

Autauga 1971 28 

Barbour 1965 52 

Bibb 1971 28 

Butler 1969 40 

Chambers 1959 37 

Cherokee 1973 o 

Chilton 1963 186 

Choctaw 1065 50 

Coffee 1953 21 

Covington 1971 15 

Cullman 1955 1 

DeKalb 1969 2 

Franklin 1953 1 

Hale 1965 71 

Henry 104% 38 

Houston** 1953 29 

Lamar 1969 12 

Lawrence 1869 19 

Madison 1969 15 

- 14 - 

 



Marengo 

Marshall 

Montgomery 

St. Clair 

Talladega 

Washington 

  

*Nearest decennial census 

**Shifted back to districts in 1957 

11. The Alabama Legislature also took steps to 

foreclose even the possibility that blacks could elect candidates 

of thelr choice in at-large elections. Theoretically (if not 

practically), in a true at-large election scheme, the top vote 

getters were elected even if they did not achieve election 

majorities. A cohesive minority group, like black voters, 

theoretically could vote for only one candidate, thus avoiding 

giving votes to all the other candidates and increasing the 

likelihood their favored candidate could win by plurality. This 

practice is commonly known as "single-shot voting". 

12. In 1981, the Legislature passed a law to prohibit 

single-shot voting in municipal elections. Act No. 606, 1951 

Acts of Alabama, p. 1043. This Act was sponsored by 

Representative Sam Engelhardt of Macon County, who was one of the 

founders of the White Citizens Council movement in the 1950's and 

was a notorious segregationist. Sam Engelhardt was the author of  



     

    
   
   
   

   
   

        

State and Local Government 

Special Studios No. 68 
LY 

3
 

  
  

   

  

OF 

JUNTY GOVERNMENTS: 

1973 

Cl 

  

  

  

Issued October 1974 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 
Frederick B. Dent, Secretary 

David W. Ferrel, Acting Assistant Secretary 

for Economic Affairs 

Social and Economic Statistics Administration 
Edward D. Failor, Administrator 

BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 
Vincent P Barabba, Divo ton 

     



 
 

 
 

   

 
 

 
 

 
 

   
 

 
 

    

3 

Vel 
hie! 

’y“ 
t 

1
2
 

(I 
| 

BE 
| 

e
3
1
2
 

a 
4
0
1
 

1
h
 

1
 

[
I
s
 

S
|
 

E
E
 

a 
$
4
0
3
9
 

$f 
4 

2 
0 

dq 
1 
1
x
 

BE 
I 

[I 
I 

|
 

- [8] 

©
 

™ 

: 
: 

Ad 
v 

[9] 
2 

pe] 
© 

> 
: 

: 
5
 

p
r
 

0 
i 
F
O
 

(= 
3 

(I) 
[= 

AT 
| 
T
N
O
 

TFT 
I
F
I
T
F
 

O
O
 
F
T
 

F
I
O
T
O
H
 

T
O
O
T
 

T
T
T
 

G
I
T
 

F
I
O
O
D
D
 

O
D
I
O
 

-
 

QQ 
Ww 

n
i
 
E
s
s
 

-
 

a 

5 
E|gif 

ee 
CE 

Ri 
@ 

S13¢E 
f
e
 

- 
- 

9 
wl 

ERAPEE: 
1-9 

SN 
|g|°E 

mm 
(e)] 

3 
) 

N
L
 

o
e
 

oy [*] 

2B 
| 

i
 

- 
y 

Cc 
@® 

-t 
0 

o
l
 
j
=
 

| 
= 

i 
| 

"
|
 

E
E
E
 

e
t
 

| 
1 

| 
e
k
e
 

be 
Ra 

Ke] 
-
]
 

| 
=
D
 

=
<
 

| 
4 

| 
a
 

BE 
E
E
]
 

t
e
d
)
 
=
)
 

I
M
 

ot 
od 

-
 

{
1
 

1
 
[
a
 

w
n
 

iN 
Q
o
 

P] 
v 

wd 
E
E
 

-
 

8 
; 

: 
=
 

~t 
dnd 

w 
£ 

on 
“ 

=
 

< 

v
v
 

= 
a 

E
S
 

: 
id 

S
 

@
 

~ 
0 

D
O
O
 

O
O
 

a
r
 

n
m
 

O
F
O
O
O
 

D
O
N
O
D
 

H
O
O
D
O
O
 

F
P
O
O
O
O
 

D
N
R
O
O
O
 

B
O
D
O
O
 

D
O
O
D
 

O
A
B
O
D
O
 

V
O
I
O
O
N
 

D
O
O
M
D
 

© 
m
5
 

3 « 
£
D
 

Q
 

re 

ug 
£ 

& 
>= 

=
 

-
 

—- 
- 

= 
££ 

~ }] 
-
 

1. 
LQ 

> 
Q 

o 
OO 

>
 

5
 

4 
a
 

p
r
e
b
e
r
i
n
y
 

p
s
 

~
~
 

V
T
O
V
O
Y
 

V
O
T
 

I
Y
T
 

V
O
V
Y
Y
 

O
T
T
O
T
 

O
T
T
 

O
T
 
O
T
T
O
 

V
O
V
Y
T
 

T
T
 
O
O
Y
 

O
T
I
S
 
F
T
X
 
O 

i
 

&
)
 

S
n
 

o
r
 

~— 
—
 
r
r
r
 

~
~
 

~
~
 

oJ 
3 

of 
3 

S
a
d
e
 

d
e
d
 

oF 
of 

I~ 
os 

os 
edad 

o
f
l
 
e
a
d
 

oJ 
edod 

od 

(®) 
>
 

=
 

°
K
 

= 
=
 

= 
T
I
T
 

T 
= 

Sd 
=r 

=r 
T
g
 

T
T
I
 

s
x
 

= 
= 

3 
EE 

5] 
z= 

- 
Bom 

or 
a3 

0
 

£ 
< 

0
0
 

3 
SC 

© 
a
m
 

“
w
s
 

O
 

L
I
 

* 
® 

eo 
9° 

.
s
 

°
°
 

e 
* 

0 
oo 

0 
| 

I 
NE 

J 
I 

* 
ss 

eo 
ss 

* 
ee 

eo 
0° 

*T 
e
e
 

eo 
8
 

8
.
8
 

e 
* 

& 
v
o
 

. 
8 

9 
w
.
 

e
s
 

9. 
0 

* 
5
%
 

¢ 
9 

4
)
 

Q
 

~
 

L
I
 

® 
@ 

a
e
 

» 
. 

» 
. 

 
¢
 

¢ 
» 

© 
e
H
 

w
w
 

@
»
 

. 
%
-
 

®
 

@ 
$
e
 

'
W
 

B
'
S
 

“
4
 

 
»
 

=» 
, 
S
E
 

O
S
 

R
E
 

e
e
 

& 
ss 

& 
0 

v
e
 

9% 
» 

» 
.
-
 

- 
» 

9
 

" 
B
.
B
0
.
@
 

Z
 

2
S
 

. 
° 

e 
& 

+ 
oo 

. 
= 

. 
° 

. 
& 

a
.
 
.
e
.
 

9 
* 

% 
@ 

9 
» 

* 
& 

a 
= 

® 
o
S
 

0 
* 

* 
eo 

» 
* 

e
w
 

e
o
 

@ 
L
e
 

9
»
.
 

0 
@ 

T
e
 

8
 

T
T
 

* 
* 

+
»
 

v
v
 

& 
® 

@ 
0 

Q
D
 

=
 

. 
. 

*
°
 

s
e
 

0 
. 

e
o
 

e
o
 

eo 
ov 

« 
* 

s
s
 

| 
EE 

B
I
 

«
s
e
 

eo 
0» 

® 
* 

es 
eo 

0 
® 

e 
eo 

eo 
0 

* 
o
o
 

* 
* 

eo 
& 

0 
«
e
e
 

eo 
+ 

0 
« 

v
e
 

0» 

S
D
 

eo 
° 

¢ 
8
 
9
 

* 
° 

* 
& 

*
:
-
 

8 
9 

Ww 
O 

. 
o
o
 

eo 
* 

°° 
8 

0 
«
a
 

0° 
es 

eo 
*« 

oo 
8 

9
°
 

«
6
 

2 
+ 

0
»
 

e
s
 

+
 

0
»
 

. 
% 

» 
9
 

® 
& 

° 
eo 

» 
¢ 

9
.
 

9 
9
»
 

s
 

B
 

L
I
 

J 
e 

@ 
& 

+ 
. 

L
N
 

* 
¢ 

® 
oo 

» 
$» 

® 
® 

@ 
» 

P
g
 

B
e
 

s
o
 

s
s
 

* 
% 

© 
¢& 

» 
* 

5 
8 

0° 
*
'
 

» 
9
 

e
e
 

8 
6 

0
 

¢
.
 

®
'
 

@ 
9
 

* 
9
 

+ 
0
»
 

(
©
)
 

~
~
 

. 
« 

8 
°
°
 

. 
o 

L
I
 

« 
s
o
»
 

* 
0
 

. 
* 

5 
8 

eo 
C
I
E
 

I 
I 

e
e
 

8 
oe 

8 
s
s
 

. 
so 

* 
9
»
 

L
E
 

I 
L
E
 

J 
. 

o
o
 

o
e
 

* 
& 

& 
+ 

o
n
 

S
m
o
 

12] 
o
O
 

O
 

<
>
 

. 
. 

s
e
s
 

os 
>
.
 

o
e
 

* 
eo 

o 
o
o
 

e
e
 

8 
0° 

« 
v
o
 

& 
@ 

TA 
WC 

er 
J
)
 

a
s
 

8 
+ 

0» 
e
s
 

9 
eo 

s
s
 

ss 
* 

» 
e 

eo 
s
s
 

e
s
 

ee 
9
»
 

T
H
E
 

AE 
=
 

Lal 

8 
2
k
 

i
e
s
 

R
i
s
e
.
 
a
i
n
 

e
o
 

s
e
 

* 
o
s
 

eo 
0 

« 
5 

eo 
» 

e
e
 

8 
® 

* 
e
s
 

0° 
e
o
 

oo 
oo 

eo 
oo 

eo 
oo 

a 
s
o
 

= 
s&s 

ea 
& 

+ 
v
e
 

e
s
 

os 
eo 

h
a
e
 

e
a
 

oe 
oe 

o 
8
 

i. 
2
3
 

E
r
 

H
e
e
n
a
n
 

B
e
s
 

A
a
 

T
E
R
T
 

PIS 
a
 

* 
v
e
e
.
 

T
e
 

t
s
e
 

e
w
 

E
E
 

* 
e
e
e
 

$
9
0
.
»
 

. 
slieie 

«
o
o
n
 

E
c
 

a
v
 

2
x
 

P
e
e
s
 

y
s
 

- 
s
e
 

— 
a 

a 
s
o
 

so 
oo 

«
s
s
 

es 
eo 

« 
+s 

ss 
oo 

® 
> 

8 
© 

ss 
@ 

“
e
o
 

5s 
o
o
 

s 
® 

8s 
eo 

e 
° 

ss 
oo 

* 
°
°
 

oe 
* 

® 
® 

® 
a 

PO 
S
R
E
,
 

Fe 
fo 

oe 
~
 

2
2
 

-
 

t
e
e
 

e
s
 

E
e
e
 

ZZ 
e
s
 

h
e
e
 

s
o
u
 

« 
+ 

eo 
0 

» 
e
e
 

eo 
0 

0 
e
e
 

w
e
 

s
s
 

e
s
 

e
o
 

0 
so 

0 
e
e
 

es 
e
s
 

e
o
 

eo 
o
o
»
 

«
s
s
 

8 
8 

® 
se 
s
s
 

+s 
+ 

©
 

oe: 
¥ 

W
D
D
 

BD 
= 

= 
W 

£ 
=
 

~
 

O
O
D
 

O
s
s
 

siee 
D
e
n
 

B
o
a
s
 

m
u
v
e
e
 

“
a
w
 

ein 
E
P
R
 

E
t
e
 
B
r
a
 

“
n
i
n
.
 

w
h
e
e
 

oo 
e
e
e
 

$
e
 

en 
© 

ve 
ee 

os 
wine 

® 
[SRV] 

ov 
uv 

[= 
4) 

o
g
 

3 
P
h
e
 

R
E
 

C
I
 

s
e
 

S 
S
i
t
u
s
 

e
s
 

e
s
 

eo 
oo 

oo 
*e 

* 
@ 

oo 
e 

& 
oo 

oo 
oe 

o
o
 

8 
ee 

e
o
 

8 
® 

° 
©& 

» 
« 

oe 
o 

oo 
0» 

® 
* 

oo 
oo 

P
E
R
C
 

e
t
 

w 
~
0
n
 

T
e
!
 

m
i
a
 

r
p
s
 

b
i
n
d
 

y
s
 

W
w
 

© 
¢ 

o
o
 

0 
“ 

» 
. 

8
.
8
"
 

« 
8s 

5 
eo 

* 
2 

8s 
0 

* 
e
s
 

0 
* 

e
s
 

ue 
e
s
 

= 
oo 

«
s
s
 

8 
eo 

E
R
E
 

Io 
el 

> 
a
 

E
Y
 

wi 
o
 

5
3
2
 

S
Z
Z
L
L
E
L
 

a
c
h
 

g
E
L
 

E
E
 

“
s
e
 

0
s
 

e 
os 
e
o
»
 

S
o
n
d
 

8 
T
e
m
i
 

¢ 
oe 

8 
9 

» 
s
o
 

0 
o
o
 

e
Z
 

e
d
 

» 
eld 

oo 
o
o
 

‘
s
o
 
w
i
v
e
 

B 
= 

wd 
' 

n
i
u
 

Ww 
A 

Of 
¥ 

<< 
=
 

0
 

«
u
k
 

=
 

= 
—
 

Q
u
i
d
 

W
O
O
D
I
D
D
 

W
I
H
I
D
 

W
I
I
 

C
L
A
 

¢« 
¢+ 

X 
+ 
Z
E
W
 

Z
B
 

o
e
 

2 
o
H
 
E
e
k
 

<
2
 

« 
«mj 

ewe 
oll 

we 
es 
0
s
 so 
2 

Z
T
 

e
n
 

ce 
O
W
 

2
 

O
l
a
h
s
 

a 
2 

Ww) 
M
@
 

B
U
U
V
O
O
O
 

W
O
O
 

W
O
O
 

D
U
=
D
 

o
i
e
 

O
W
 

& 
W
o
r
d
 

¢ 
I
<
 

V
J
 

W
O
I
-
J
d
 

<
u
 

5 
o
x
 

8
%
 

W
l
 

0
 

o
l
z
a
u
w
u
w
 8 

©
 

E
3
3
 

x 
V
U
u
L
U
 

X
V
U
U
V
 

IT 
V
U
 

0230 
«
2
 

W
O
R
O
 
F
i
 

X 
«o3 

W
W
E
 

O
X
 

«
<
q
 

E
Z
 
S
L
X
 

C
E
 

o
>
 

p= 
i
d
x
 

W
W
 

c
N
Q
Z
T
Y
V
 

Z
O
T
 

J
O
 

w 
x 

W
a
s
 

[n} 
= 

C
O
I
N
 

OD 
J
J
I
X
X
 

Z
x
E
h
a
 

L
i
d
g
e
 

2
0
 

dx| 
O
C
S
Z
T
W
U
Z
 

W
w
x
o
n
 

x
w
<
o
x
 

Lu 
ElO 

=~ 
M
e
O
 

Ta. 
C
I
T
E
 

TIT 
N
w
i
d
o
z
s
 

T
e
t
 

T
I
N
 

S
E
 

AEDNO0 
J
F
 
J
<
W
 

—-O 
<
<
 W 

L
A
Z
O
 

[
J
]
 

F
U
O
>
<
S
 

Z
T
M
W
I
U
Z
D
 

U
e
 

= 
2 

= 
wit 

£
1
0
5
 

r
e
c
o
n
 

@ 
po 

=
D
 

L
L
]
 

D
O
D
I
C
T
T
 

I
I
T
 
I
J
 

O
O
O
 

OO 
F
R
E
E
D
.
 
d
C
 

W
X
 

W
O
 

S
[
w
i
d
d
g
 

Wi—~ 
o
l
d
 

< 
<
<
<
O
O
|
 § 

g
r
e
 

0 
= 4 

" 
R
a
k
 

bd 
0 

Q
A
T
B
U
L
U
U
 

L
V
U
L
B
L
V
L
 

V
i
I
U
U
 

U
W
L
 

v
i
b
a
g
a
o
 

W
d
 

W
e
k
 

O
C
O
I
X
I
 

2
0
4
d
 

e
d
 
S
E
X
 

I
X
 
X
X
X
 

on 
- 

: 
>
 

A] 

~ 
P
E
 

D
E
 

- 
E
P
 

I
E
T
S
 
I
 

i
 
R
a
t
 

a
 

§ 
a
e
 

3
5
 

 
 

 



    

   

16 
GOVERNING 

Table 5. Number of Members of County 

of Selection, for County Governments, by States: 

  

BOARDS OF COUNTY GOVERNMENTS: 1973 

gth of Term and Method 

1973—Continued 
Governing Boards, by Len 

  

—————————————————
——— 

Item 

  

ALABAMA--CONT INUED 

1MO IV IDUAL COUNT 1ES=-CONT INUED 

MONTGOMERY. 
MORGAN. « = 

PERRY « 

PICKENS .« © 
PIKE. + =» 

RANDOLPH. 
RUSSELL « « 
§T. CLAIR . 
SHELBY. . 

SUMTER. « 
YALLADEGA . 

TALLAPOOSA. 
“TUSCALOOSA. 
WALKER. « « 
WASHINGTON. 
WILCOX. o « 
"WINSTON. «+ 

ee oo . 

‘ 

« - . 

eo . . . 

CE er wr RR i SE a 

. . . . 

« ® . . . 

eo 
oo 

® 
oo 

o
O
 

RR 
URL

 
ak
. 

at
 

SEE 

e 
» 

os 
o
o
 

0 

e 
5 

8 
3 

s
e
 

d
i
s
s
 

& 
8 

W 

sa 
5 

oo 
® 

o
o
 

o
n
 

s
i
m
i
l
e
»
 

PE
RE
 

A 
on
 

Oe
 

PU
ED
E 

Ni
 

OR 

s
e
 

8 
8
B
 

. 

s 
8
.
 

& 
% 

0 

v
i
e
 
w
w
e
»
 

s
i
e
 

s
-
.
 

4 
o 

a
w
.
 

ALASKA 
(9 BOROUGHS) 

SUMMARY BY SIZE OF BOARD: 

16 MEMBERS--1 BOROUGH . . . 

11 MEMBERS=--3 BOROUGHS. « « = 

5 MEMBERS--5 BOROUGHS: 

3 BOROUGHS. » =a » is eo.» 

3 BOROUGHS: + + sie os sis 

IND 1V IDUAL BOROUGHS: 

BRISTOL BAY 

FAIRBANKS NORTH STAR. 

GREATER ANCHORAGE « + 

HAINES. « 

KENAI PENINSULA « 

KETCHIKAN GATEWAY . 

KODIAK ISLAND . » 

MATANUSKA-SUSITNA 
. 

NORTH SLOPE « « + 

ALL COUNTIES. 

SUMMARY BY SIZE OF BOARD (AVER 

100 OR MORE MEMBERS--3 COUNT IES 

o.v oe 8 

es 
o
o
 

© 

« 
o
e
 

0 

NR 
gr
 

He
 
J.
 

» 
8 

8 
o
o
 

ARIZONA 
(14 COUNTIES) 

ARKANSAS 
(75 COUNTIES) 

60-99 MEMBERS--7 COUNTIES + 

50-59 MEMBERS--2 COUNTIES . 

40-49 MEMBERS~--8 COUNTIES « 

30-39 MEMBERS~--15 COUNTIES. « 

20-29 MEMBERS-~16 COUNTIES. 

15-19 MEMBERS-=7 COUNTIES © 

10-14 MEMBERS--9 COUNTIES . 

6-9 MEMBERS-=95 COUNTIES «+ « 

5 MEMBERS--2 COUNTIES « + 

iy MEMBERS--1 COUNTY vs » = = 

INDIVIDUAL COUNTIES: 

ARKANSAS. 

ASHLEY. « 

BAXTER. 

BENTON. « = 

BOONE «+ 

. 

See foo 

* 
8 

© 

. 

«a
 

8 
° 

= 

F
U
S
E
 

ol
 

A 

. es
 

8 
& 

0 - 

. 

PW Ha 

. oe 

tnotes at end of table. 

. 

. 

. 

° 

. e 
oo 

© 
8 

a
i
e
 

8 
w
e
 

2
 

£
8
8
 

oe
 

[
o
l
 

ad
 

s
l
s
 

W
e
 
8
 

Pa
 
a
 

NE
 

P
e
 

Ta
 

« 
8 

8 
8 

oo 
0 

® 
0 

8 
8 

8 

oa
d 

Pe
 

Fo
 

N
g
 

o
z
=
o
s
2
O
 

c
o
o
s
 

A 
a
 

gi
 

‘
e
e
 

v
e
.
 

e
e
 

8 
5 

oo
 

oo
 

0 

"S
E 

IE
 
a
 

s
s
 

8
2
 

8
 

&
 

Po
 

po
 

fo
 

go
 

    

« 
o
s
 

PIE 
RC 

1 

e
s
»
 

oo 

U
w
e
 

W
M
 

CIES 
TL
: 

Pi 
a.
 

a 
SE
L 

"
0
 

8
.
"
 

es 
eo 

® 
oo 

» 
e
e
 

o
w
 

AGES 

    

PINE 
W
N
 

a 
TL
 

TE
 

TN 
Nl
 

Ta
 

He
 

EE
 

SN
E 

PUR 
TR
 

Te
 

BR
 

an
 

ER
 

EE 

. 
8 

0
.
8
 

8 
B
e
e
 

    

n
e
 

8 
8 

. 
8 

¢ 
8
 

s
o
 

oo 
o
o
 

e
o
 

eo 
0 

a 
a 

8 

se 
8 

0 
o
o
»
               

  

   

  

BEE 

Q
L
 

O
 

w
a
r
e
s
 

U
U
 

O
U
u
L
 

16 
11 

   
Number elected per county 

district residence 

    

ee ———————— 

     

    

  

   
   
    
   
   
   

    

  

   

   

  

   

     
   

[
T
N
 I
] 

  

a
r
 

1
 

l 
|
=
 

1 
of
a 

0 

1 

§ 
r
o
t
e
 |

 
B
O
N
 

i
s
l
a
     

  
o
p
 

Be 
Jeb

 
bet

 
Bb
 

Bt
 

bb
 

Be 
Be
 

bes
 

a 
& 
0
 

C
0
0
0
0
 

0
O
C
0
O
0
0
0
                             pb

 
bb
 

po
 

po
 
bo



Notes re: Discrepancies Between Plaintiffs’ 
Exhibit #187 and Plaintiffs’ Proposed Findings 
of Fact and Conclusions of Law 

Introductory Note: In Exhibit 187 we identify a system as having 
single-member districts when most of the commissioners are 
elected by district, even if one or two seats on the governing 
body are elected at large. Alternatively, one could describe 
such systems as mixed. 

I. Chart p. 9-10 of Proposed Findings: 

A. "Chart lists Marengo as having districts since 1867; Exhibit 
187 shows that Marengo went to appointment system in 1869." 

Note: the statute listed for Marengo (12/04/69) was incorrectly 
identified as providing an appointive county commission. This 
nistake was corrected in the writing of the Proposed Findings 
(see the listing in the table on p. 9), but we neglected to change 
the D-Base Printout before trial. 

[Delete] 

B. "Chart lists Coffee as having districts since 1867; Exhibit 
187 shows that Coffee first used districts in 1927." 

Note: The discrepancy results from a coding error in the D-Base file. 
The 1867 statute listed for Coffee County (02/08/67) should be 
listed in Exhibit 187 as providing district elections. 
The listing in the table on p. © of the Proposed Findings 1s correct. 

C. "Chart lists Cullman as having adopted at-large elections in 
1895; Exhibit 187 shows that Cullman did not move to at-large 
elections until 1936." 

Note: This is correct. (Clerical error.) There is no record of 
a change to at-large elections for Cullman County in 1895. 

D. "Chart lists Marion as not having changed to at-large 
elections prior to 1900; Exhibit 187 says it changed to 
at-large elections in 1899." 

Note: This is correct. The chart on p. 9 should have listed the 
date 1899 in the column headed "Date(At-Large)" for Marion. 

[Delete in the Marion file the statute listed for 12/14/94 (p. 
160). As far as I can tell, it does not exist.] 

E. "Chart lists Covington as having districts since 1884 and  



changing to at-large elections in 1894; Exhibit 187 shows 
that Covington did not have districts until 19165. 

Note: This discrepancy results from a coding error involving the 
1884 statute for Covington (12/12/84) as well as Crenshaw, Pike, 
Cherokee, and Chilton. All were to have district elections. 
Thus the information in the Chart on p. 9 is correct, and the 
entry in Exhibit 187 is wrong. 

F. "Chart lists Pike as having districts in 1884; Exhibit 18% 
shows that Pike first used districts in 1893." 

Note: As in (E) above, this discrepancy results from a coding 
error in the 1884 statute (12/12/84), which provided district 
elections for Pike. The information in the chart on p. © should 
be supplemented as follows: 
1884: District 
1887: At-large 
1889: District 
1891: At-large 
1893: District 
Exhibit 18% also incorrectly identifies an at-large election 
statute (12/13/94) as applying to Pike County. This is a coding 
error. (The change to at-large elections came instead in 1969.) 

[Delete for Pike the statute approved 12/13/94. ] 

G. "Chart lists Chilton as having districts since 1884; Exhibit 
187 shows that Chilton first used districts in 1089." 

Note: Discrepancy due to coding error for 1884 statute (12/12/84) 
which did provide district elections for Chilton. Exhibit 187 
is correct, however, in identifying a change to appointments in 
1887, followed by an at-large plan in 1891 (lasting until 19859). 
The chart on p. 9 of the Proposed Findings 1s correct also. 

H. "Chart lists Cherokee as having districts in 1884; Exhibit 187 
shows that Cherokee first used districts in 194%." 

Note: Discrepancy due to coding error for 1884 statute (12/12/84) 
which did provide district elections for Cherokee. The shift to 
at-large elections came in 1887. Thus the chart on p. © is 
correct. 

I. "Chart lists Blount as having adopted at-large elections in 
1895; Exhibit 187 shows that it did not adopt at-large 
elections until 1939." 

Note: The chart on p. 9 1s correct. In Exhibit 187 we neglected 
to enter the 1895 statute for Blount (2/18/95).  



J. "Chart lists Crenshaw as having districts in 1884; Exhibit 18% 
shows that Crenshaw has had at-large elections since 1884." 

Note: Discrepancy due to coding error for 1884 statute (12/12/84) 
which did provide district elections for Crenshaw. Thus the 
chart on p. 9 is correct. (The shift to at-large elections 
seems to have come in 1971.) 

K. "Chart lists Lamar as having districts in 1891 and adopting 
at-large elections in 1894; Exhibit 187 shows that Lamar had 
districts in 1889 and did not adopt at-large elections until 
1969." 

Note: Chart on p. 9 incorrectly identifies an at-large 
election statute for Lamar in 1894. This was a clerical error. 
No such statute exists. There is also a typing error in Exhibit 
187: the district election statute identified as enacted on 
2/23/89 was, in fact, approved on 2/23/99. Thus the correct 
sequence 1s as follows: 
1891: district elections 
1899: : y 
1969: at-large elections 

[Correct the typo in the statute listed as 2/23/89 (which should 
have been 2/23/99). ] 

L. "Chart lists DeKalb as having districts in 1889; Exhibit 187 
shows that DeKalb adopted a dual system in 1887 and first 
moved to districts in 1893." 

Note: The chart on p. 9 is incorrect: DeKalb adopted district 
elections in 1887, not 1889 (typo). Exhibit 187 also contains a 
coding error: there was no at-large election feature to the 
statute enacted for DeKalb 2/22/87. 

[Delete the statute for DeKalb (2/22/87).] 

II. Chart on p. 10 of Proposed Findings: 

A. "Chart lists Etowah as changing to at-large elections in 1891; 
Exhibit 187 shows that this change occurred in 1890." 

Note: Typo in Chart on p. 10: date 1891 should be 1890. The 
statute shifting Etowah to at-large elections was enacted 12/2/90. 
Thus Exhibit 187 is correct. 

B. "Chart lists Cullman as changing to at-large elections in 
1895; Exhibit 187 shows that this change occurred in 1936." 

Note: The reference to Cullman in the chart on p. 10 is not correct. 
Cullman was not among those district systems shifting to at-large  



elections in the 1890's. An 1897 statute maintained district 

elections for Cullman. The D-Base file (Exhibit 187) is correct. 

C. "Chart lists Covington as changing from district to at-large 
elections in 1894; Exhibit 187 shows that Covington had been 
at-large since 1879 and never had districts until 1915." 

Note: Discrepancy results from coding error in 1884 statute 
(12/12/84), which provided district elections for Covington. 
Thus the chart on p. 10 correctly lists Covington as shifting 
from district to at-large in 1894. An additional typing error 
occurs in Exhibit 187: the first line referring to a statute 
enacted on 12/12/94 for Covington (p. 64) is incorrect. The 
statute is correctly entered on the next line of Exhibit 187. 

D. "Chart lists Chilton as changing to at-large elections in 1891 
and then moving back to districts in 1897; Exhibit 187 shows that 
Chilton nevere had districts until 1959." 

Note: Discrepancy due to coding error in 1884 statute (12/12/84) 
which provided district elections for Chilton. Exhibit 187 does, 
however, correctly identify enactment of an appointive system in 
1887, followed by an at-large system in 1891 that lasted until 
1959. The chart (pp. 10-11) incorrectly shows a return to 
districts in 1897 (this results from a clerical error). The 
18907 statute does not exigt. There is an 1899 statute 
(at-large). (In 1963 the new district system was replaced by a 
return to at-large elections.) 

E. "Chart lists Blount as changing to at-large elections in 1895; 
Exhlbit 187 shows that Blount has districts until 1939, when it 
moved to a dual system.” 

Note: The chart on p. 10 l= correct. Exhibit 187 inadvertently 
leaves out a statute enacted 2/18/95 for Blount, providing 
at-large elections. 

F. "Chart lists Pike as changing to at-large elections in 1891 
and then switching back to districts in 18083; Exhibit 187 shows 
that Pike consistently had at-large elections until 1893, when 1t 
changed to districts, and . . . then moved back to at-large 
elections in 1894." 

Note: The chart on p. 10 is correct, with reference to the 1890's 
(but there was earlier changes also). Exhibit 187 includes a 
coding error for an 1884 statute (12/12/84) that provided 
district elections for Pike (not at-large). An 1887 statute 
shifted Pike to at-large elections (2/28/87), but was repealed 
two years later (2/28/89). Presuambly this 1889 statute restored 
district elections (although Exhibit 187 does not include any 
reference to the election method).  



[Delete from the D-Base file the entry for Pike on 12/13/94, 
which was a coding error. ] 

G. "Chart does not indicate that Fayette moved back to districts; 
Exhibit 187 shows that it returned to districts in 1896." 

Note: This is correct: the chart on p. 10 should include this 
information (indicated by an asterisk and footnote). 

H. "Lamar should not be on this chart. Exhibit 187 shows that 
it did not adopt at-large elections until 1969." 

Note: This is correct. However, an additional statute that 

maintained district elections was inadvertently left out of 
Exhibit 187 (2/23/99). 

I. "It appears that Butler, Choctaw, DeKalb, Marion, and Shelby 
should all be on this chart." 

Note: Of this list only Marion should be added to the chart on 
p. 10, due to the passage of a statute (2/23/99) that provided 
for a shift to at-large elections. As for Butler, Choctaw, 
DeKalb, and Shelby, there is a coding error in Exhibit 187. 
They were not, in fact, among a group of counties shifting from 
district to at-large elections in 1894 (12/13/94). Thus these 
counties retained district elections throughout the 1890's. 

III. Chart on p. 11 of Proposed Findings: 

A. "Chart lists Marengo as changing to districts in 1919; Exhibit 
187 shows that Marengo shifted to at-large elections from an 
appointment system in 1919." 

Note: The chart on pp. 11-12 is incorrect for Marengo, but only in 
identifying the shift to district elections as taking place in 1919 -- 
the change actually occurred in 1923 [see U. S. v. Marengo County 
Comm’‘’n, 731 F.2d 1546 (llth Cir. 1984)]. As noted above (see I-A), 
no appointive system was, in fact, enacted for the Marengo County 
Commission in 1869. Thus a district system was in place from 
1867 to 1919. In 1919 an at-large system was adopted, which was 
then replaced by district elections in 19285. 

B. "Chart lists Sumter as changing to districts in 1927; Exhibit 
187 shows that Sumter moved to at-large elections in 1927." 

Note: This is true. Sumter shifted to districts in 19821, and 
back to at-large elections in 1927. The chart on p. 12 has the 
wrong date; Exhibit 187 is accurate. 

C. "Chart lists Conecuh as changing to districts in 1919; Exhibit  



187 shows that it changed in 1915." 

Note: This statement is correct. The confusion in preparing 
the chart on p. 11 arose from the fact that the D-Base file lists 
the 1915 Conecuh statute as a separate county sub-file (for 
reasons I cannot explain). 

D. "Chart does not indicate that shortly after Madison changed to 
districts in 1901, it adopted a gubernatorial appointment system." 

Note: Actually, the correct date for Madison in the chart on p. 12 
should be 1923, not 1901. The statute approved 2/3/23 clearly 
provided a district election system: it is correctly entered in 
Exhibit 187. After re-reading the 1901 statute (3/5/01), 
I have concluded that 
it 1s probably calling for at-large elections. Certainly the 
line entered for that statute specifying an appointive system is 
a mistake: the appointment of a fifth commissioner was only 
temporary, until the next election. However, the statute 
approved on 9/26/19 did provide for an appointive system: two of 
the three commissioners were to be appointed (indefinitely), with 
only one commissioner subject to election. Thus in 1923 Madison 
went from a mixed appointive/at-large system to a district 
election system. Exhibit 187 needs some editing to reflect 
these statutes more accurately. 

E. "Houston, Barbour, and Shelby Counties appear to have changed 
to some sort of mixed system, rather than to a pure district 
system as the chart suggests.” 

Note: See introductory comment. Yes, mixed systems are called 
district systems in this summary. 

F. "Macon, Baldwin, and Elmore (to a mixed system) should be on 
this chart, according to Exhibit 187." 

Note: Macon and Baldwin were not included in this chart because -- 
although they did shift to districts (Macon in 1907 and Baldwin 
in 1915) -- they had returned to at-large elections before 1930 
(Macon in 1920, Baldwin in 1927). Elmore was not included because 
in 1915 it established a "dual system" (district primary, 
at-large general election). Thus Elmore is listed among the 
dual systems in the chart on pp. 12-13. 

IV: Chart on p. 12 of Proposed Findings: 

A. "Chart lists Franklin as having moved to a dual system in 
1951; Exhibit 187 seems to indicate that this shift occurred in 
1949." 

Note: Actually, Exhibit 187 indicates correctly that Franklin  



$ 

adopted the dual system in 1947 (9/25/47), not 1951 as indicated 
in the chart on p. 13. 

B. "Chart lists Morgan as having moved to a dual system in 1939; 
Exhibit 187 shows it also had a dual system in 1919." 

Note: Correct. 

C. "Chart lists Winston as having changed to a dual system in 
1965; Exhibit 187 seems to indicate that this shift occurred in 
19560." 

Note: No, Exhibit 187 correctly identifies the change to a dual 
system in 1965. The 1959 statute provided for district election 
of assoclate commissioners in both primary and general elections. 

D. "Blount appears to have adopted dual systems in 1939 and 1949 
but is not listed on this chart." 

Note: True; 1t should be listed here. 

V. Chart on p. 14 of Propoged Findings: 

A. "Chart lists Houston as having changed to at-large elections 
in 1953; Exhibit 187 shows that it moved back to districts (1957) 
and finally adopted some sort of mixed system (1969)." 

Note: This is true, except that we call the 1969 system a 
district election plan. (Subsequently a court order sent it to 
at-large elections). 

B. "Lamar shifted from districts to at-large elections in 1969 but 
ls not listed on this chart." 

Note: True. It should be. 

Pp. Rl: "By 1975, only six of Alabama's 67 counties were still 
using single-member district elections for county commission." 

Note: This is in error. According to the 1973 Census of County 
Governing Bodies, ll counties had single-member districts. They are: 

County %Nonwhite (1970) 

Autauga 8.4 

Blount 2.4  



Choctaw 

Conecuh 

Lamar 

Lauderdale 

Limestone 

Marion 

Morgan 

Randolph 

Shelby 

Judge Thompson says: "According to Exhibit 187, however, 13 
counties were using districts in 1975," and he lists then: 

Blount, Bullock, Clay, Cleburne, Coosa, Henry, Houston, Lamar, 
Lauderdale, Marion, Monroe, Shelby, and Tallapoosa. 

Now we know from independent sources that some of these counties 
had gone to at-large elections as a result of court orders before 
1975 ("sweetheart lawsuits" claiming district malapportionment). 
This catagory includes at least the following from Judge 
Thompson's list: 

Houston, Monroe, and Tallapoosa. 

Additionally, we now know that Exhibit 187 -- as the Judge saw 
it -- did not include a 1947 statute (7/7/47) that sent Henry 
from district to at-large elections. 

This still leaves four counties who should have been using 
district elections, according to our statute search (Exhibit 187), 
but who were listed by the Bureau of the Census as using at-large 
elections as of 1973: 

Bullock, Clay, Cleburne, and Coosa. 

All four were listed by the Census Bureau (both in 1965 and in 1973) 
as having at-large elections with a residency requirement. It 
may be that we have mis-read the statutes. Otherwise, there 
must be some exogenous factor to explain why they were not using 
district elections.