Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
4 <br />orange County Board of Commissioners <br />Page a <br />May 2, .2005 <br />apportionment plan adopted and delineates the districts, If a <br />district mode is chosen, no more than half the board may be <br />apportioned to the county at-large. <br />North Carolina General Statute § 153A-60 provides that the <br />board of commissioners initiates any alteration of board <br />structure by resolution. The alteration of board structure is <br />then accomplished or not following a referendum conducted by the <br />county board of elections. <br />North Carolina General Statute § 153A-61 directs the ballot <br />question which, in effect is, yes for the altered structure <br />described in the ballot or no for the altered structure. If the <br />referendum passes, the new structure is put into effect. If the <br />referendum fails, the resolution adopted by the board of <br />commissioners calling for the restructuring and the plan for the <br />altered structure are both void, <br />P.ny new structure for election of members of the board of <br />commissioners must meet constitutional requirements including <br />the "one person, one vote," requirement. There is nothing that <br />has happened in the courts that changes the analysis of these <br />principles that is contained in the 1996 letters from me to the <br />Board which accompany this letter. I have not previously and <br />don't here consider that either the present structure of the <br />Board of Commissioners or any proposed structure does or would <br />discriminate on the basis of race, color, or membership in a <br />language minority group protected by the Voting Rights Act. <br />Therefore, in my opinion, there is no constitutional issue <br />involved in this matter other than adherence to the "one person, <br />one vote" principle. With respect to the "one person, one vote" <br />principle, the federal courts have shown considerable deference <br />to local decisions in determining how to satisfy that principle. <br />The letters that accompany this letter give the rationale for <br />approved variations. <br />A case decided since my 1996 letter to you, Cannon v. <br />Durham County Board of Elections, 959 F.Supp. 289 (E.D.N.C. <br />1997); affirmed, 129 F.3d 116 (4`h Cir. 1997; opinion <br />unpublished), approves "voting age population" districting. When <br />Durham County merged its school districts, the plan of merger <br />approved by the Durham County Board of Commissioners and the <br />North Carolina State Board of Education included a district <br />