|
101
<br /> tions where the population change has 25. G.S.160A-23(a)and 163A-22 for cities
<br /> been small, it may be possible to rely Notes and G.S.153A-20 for counties.
<br /> totally on census data provided in paper 26. G.S.143-318.9 through-318.17.
<br /> form combined with paper maps. In
<br /> 1. Section 160A-101 of the North Carolina 27. G.S.132-1 through-10.
<br /> General Statutes for cities,Section 153A-58 28. News and Observer Publishing Co.v.
<br /> more complex situations,the versatility for counties.Hereinafter the North Carolina Poole,330 N.C.465,412 S.E.2d 7(1992).
<br /> of the software programs may be very General Statutes will be referred to as G.S. 29. See David M.Lawrence,PUBLIC
<br /> helpful.Jurisdictions that purchase the 2. Dusch v.Davis,389 U.S.112(1967); REcORDs LAW FOR NORTH CAROLINA LOCAL
<br /> software and undertake the manipula- Dallas County,Ala.v.Reese,421 U.S.477 GOVERNMENTS 11-15(Chapel Hill:Inst.of
<br /> 1975 . Gov't The Univ.of N.C.at Chapel Hill
<br /> tion of the data themselves must keep in � P
<br /> mind the lessons of Shaw with respect to 3. G.S.153A-23(g). 1997).
<br /> 4. G.S.160A-23(b)for cities,G.S.153A-22 30. Bush v.Vera,517 U.S.952,964(1996)
<br /> the use of racial data.The ease of manip- for counties,and G.S.115C-37(i)for school (internal quotation marks omitted).
<br /> ulation-figuring the exact racial make- systems. 31. The county statute,G.S.153A-22(c),
<br /> up and drawing practically any bound- 5. Technically,a local bill is one that affects specifically so provides:"No change in the
<br /> ary desired-may result in unconstitu- fewer than fifteen counties,and a public bill is boundaries of an electoral district may affect
<br /> tional considerations of race. one that affects fifteen or more counties.For a the unexpired term of office of a commission-
<br /> Finally,a potential resource exists at discussion of local acts,see JOSEPH S.FERRELL, er residing in the district and serving on the
<br /> the General Assembly.As mentioned at THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY of NORTH CAROLINA: board on the effective date of the resolution."
<br /> A HANDBOOK FOR LEGISLATORs 28-34(7th The city and school system statutes do not
<br /> the outset of this article,the legislature is ed.,Chapel Hill:Inst.of Gov't,The Univ.of contain such an explicit provision,but there
<br /> responsible for redrawing the districts N.C.at Chapel Hill,1997). also is no authorization anywhere in the
<br /> for elections to the state House of Repre- 6. The statutes are G.S.160A-101 through statute for boards to shorten members'terms.
<br /> sentatives, the state Senate, and Con- -111 for cities and G.S.153A-58 through-64 32. 42 U.S.C.S 1973c.
<br /> gress. For those purposes it has pur- for counties. 33. It also is possible to seek preclearance in
<br /> chased sophisticated hardware and soft- 7. G.S.160A-23(b)for cities,G.S.153A-22 federal district court in Washington,D.C.
<br /> ware.In the 1990 redistricting,legisla- for counties,and G.S.115C-37(i)for school Further,it is possible for a jurisdiction,such as
<br /> systems. a city,a county,or a school system,to"bail
<br /> five staff assisted several local jurisdic- 8. G.S.160A-23 for cities and G.S.153A- out,"or remove itself,from the preclearance
<br /> tions in drawing district boundaries,and 23 for counties. requirements of Section 5.Generally,to bail
<br /> they stand available again.A request for 9. G.S.115C-37(i). out,the jurisdiction must show the federal dis-
<br /> such assistance must be received by the 10. G.S.160A-23(b)for cities,G.S.153A-22 trict court for the District of Columbia that,
<br /> staff from a member of the legislature, for counties,and G.S.115C-37(i)for school for the previous ten years,(1)it has not been
<br /> and it must be worked into available districts. found in violation of the Voting Rights Act,
<br /> staff time.This capability may be a very 11. Baker v Carr,369 U.S.186(1962). (2)it has not used a discriminatory procedure,
<br /> valuable resource. 12. Reynolds v Sims,377 U.S.533(1964). (3)it has precleared all changes that were
<br /> 13. Reynolds,377 U.S.at 555. required to be precleared,and(4)it has taken
<br /> 14. Avery v.Midland County,390 U.S.474 positive steps to increase participation by
<br /> By what date must you have (1968). minorities in the election process.The neces-
<br /> 15. See Daly v.Hunt,93 F.3d 1212,1220 sary showing is generally considered onerous
<br /> completed the redistricting? (4th Cir.1996)(involving county commission and is seldom undertaken.
<br /> and school board districts for Mecklenburg 34. See Reno v.Bossier Parish School Bd.,
<br /> Counties should have their new districts County,N.C.);Chen v City of Houston,206 528 U.S.320(2000),for a recent discussion
<br /> drawn in time for the beginning of can- F.3d 502,522(5th Cir.2000)(involving by the Supreme Court of retrogression.
<br /> didate filing for county commissioner municipal election districts). 35. G.S.120-30.9A through-30.91.
<br /> seats in January 2002. School systems 16. Daly,93 F.3d at 1220(internal quota- 36.28 C.F.R.pt.51.
<br /> generally have their elections at the same tion marks omitted),quoting Reynolds,377 37. 42 U.S.C.S 1973.
<br /> time as counties, so they also should U.S.at 577. 38. Thornburg v.Gingles,478 U.S.30
<br /> 17. G.S.160A-23.1. (1986).
<br /> have their new districts drawn by Jan- 18. G.S.153A-23(b). 39. Shaw v.Reno,509 U.S.630(1993)
<br /> nary 2002. 19. G.S.115C-37(i). ("Shawl").
<br /> Cities have a special problem in that 20. G.S.160A-101(6)for cities,G.S.153A- 40. Shaw v.Hunt,517 U.S.899(1996)
<br /> their candidate-filing period begins in 22(c)for counties,and G.S.115C-37(i)for ("Shaw II").
<br /> July 2001.44 Because drawing new dis- school systems. 41. Shaw II,517 U.S.at 905.See also Miller
<br /> tricts and preclearing them(if necessary) 21. Garza v County of Los Angeles,918 v.Johnson,515 U.S.900(1995).
<br /> by the candidate-filing deadline might F.2d 763(9th Cir.1990);Davis v.Mann,377 42. Shaw I,509 U.S.at 647.
<br /> U.S.678(1964). 43. TIGER Overview(visited Jan.14,
<br /> not be possible, the General Assembly 22. Daly v.Hunt,93 EM 1212,1227(4th 2001),available at http://wwwcensus.gov/
<br /> passed a statute permitting delay of the Cir.1996). geo/www/tiger/overview.html.
<br /> 2001 elections to 2002 if necessary and 23. G.S.153A-22. 44. G.S.163-291 and-294.2.
<br /> spelling out how that will work45 24. G.S.153A-23(b). 45. G.S.163-23.1.
<br /> POPULAR GOVERNMENT SPRING ZOOI 15
<br />
|