HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 03-21-2006-9aORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: March 21, 2006
Action Agenda
Item No. ~ -q
SUBJECT: Next Steps on District Elections far the Board of County Commissioners for a
November 2006 Referendum
DEPARTMENT: County Attorney, Planning,
County Commissioners &
County Manager
ATTACHMENT(S):
1) Citizen Petition Cover Sheet
2) Draft Principles
3) Draft Process/Timetable
4) Copy of N.C.. Gen.. Stat. § 153A-60
5) Summary of Public Comments from
March 2, 2006 BOCG meeting
6) Statistical Data and Map for Proposal 5
7) Statistical Data and Map for Proposal 3
PUBLIC HEARING: (YIN) No
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Geof Gledhill, County Attorney, 732-2196
Greg Wilder, 245-2300
David Hunt, 245-2130
Jahn Link, 245-2300
Brian Carson, 245-2595
Benedict, 245-2592
PURPOSE: To provide 1) an opportunity for the Board to consider the public comments made
at the March 2, 2006 Board meeting on district elections for the Board of County
Commissioners for a November 2006 referendum; 2) to provide the Board an opportunity to
consider the content of a Resolution calling for the referendum; and 3) to give the Board the
opportunity to provide comments, questions and any further direction to staff.
BACKGROUND: At the Board's .lanuary 24, 2005 regular meeting, representatives of a group
of Orange County residents addressed the Board and submitted a 1200-signature petition to
the Board regarding the method by which the members of the Board of Commissioners are
elected in Orange County. The representatives requested that the Board review the current
method of election far the members of the Board, which entails all five members of the Board
being nominated and elected to staggered four-year terms on an at-large basis.. The petition
requesting an alternative method and manner by which Orange County Commissioners are
elected is attached,.
The County Manager and County staff reviewed the issue and the petition submitted and
provided a report to the Board at the Board's May 5, 2005 work session. The report included
information on the following:
1) the legal framework for stgncture of boards of county commissioners;
2) the various methods of at-large election, district election, and combination of at-
large/district election utilized for boards of commissioners in the 99 other North Carolina
counties;
3) a history of past discussions by the Orange County Board of Commissioners in regard to
Board representation and election;
z
4) some limited boundaries and statistical information showing the population distribution as
it may relate to the consideration/formulation of district representation for Orange County.
The report was intended to provide an initial framework of information upon which the Board of
Commissioners could deliberate and determine as appropriate any further steps in evaluating
this issue and responding to the request and petition submitted,
The Board then pursued a series of meetings over the past nine months. Those meetings
included two public hearings, one on August 24 and the other on August 31, 2005, to receive
input from the public on this issue, The Board then discussed, at an October 17, 2005 work
session, five initial draft maps/plans, an introductory preamble, a draft set of Principles, and a
draft Process/Timetable. From that meeting, the Board scheduled and conducted a public
hearing at its November 2, 2005 regular meeting on three of the initial draft maps/plans,
The next discussion occurred at the Board's November 15, 2005 regular meeting. At that
meeting, the Board determined that it would like to invest more time at a work session for
specific discussion of the issues and possibilities associated with the district election of
commissioners. The Board did approve a motion at the meeting ".,.[to] pursue a district election
system and have a referendum in the general election of 2006 on the map that the Board of
Commissioners adopt."
The Board also briefly discussed district elections at the January 20, 2006 BOCC Retreat as
part of the "Priorities" review, and members of the Board indicated an interest in reaching a
conclusion on district elections discussions with two additional meetings, if possible,
At a February 16, 2006 work session, the Board:
1) decided there would be a total of 5 members on the Board in a district plan submitted to
the voters;
2) determined the district map/plan would be the one designated as "Proposal 5", with one
member from District 1 (all of the County except Chapel Hill Township); two members
from District 2 (encompassing Chapel Hill Township); and two At-Large members;
3) decided that members elected from District 1 and District 2 must reside in their respective
District, but the qualified voters of the entire County would nominate all candidates for and
elect all members of the Board;
4) confirmed that a referendum on "Proposal 5" along with related items would occur in
November 2006 (As noted above, the Board, at its November 15, 2005 regular meeting,
had already determined to have "a referendum in the general election of 2006 on the map
and plan that the Board of Commissioners adopt';
5) confirmed that implementation of the district election plan for the Board of County
Commissioners, with the approval of County voters in November 2006, would begin with
the 2008 Primary Election,
At the March 2, 2006 BOCC regular meeting, the Board received public comment on Proposal ,5
and other items related to district elections, It was contemplated that the March 2, 2006
meeting would also provide the Board with an opportunity to consider and give direction to staff
and the County Attorney concerning the content of a resolution for the call of a referendum on a
change in the way members of the Board of Commissioners are elected, However, because of
the amount of time devoted to public comment and the fact that Commissioner Foushee could
not attend the March 2, 2006 meeting, the review, consideration and direction did not occur.
Tonight's meeting provides the opportunity for Board review, consideration, and decisions as
the Board determines appropriate.
3
To initiate an alteration in the structure of the Board, the Board must adopt a Resolution as
prescribed by N,C. Gen. Stat. § 153A-60, The Resolution must:
1) briefly but completely describe the proposed alterations;
2) prescribe the manner of transition from the existing structure to the altered structure;
3) define the electoral districts, if any, and apportion the members among the districts;
4) call a special referendum on the question of adoption of the alterations.
The referendum shall be held and conducted by the county board of elections, The referendum
may be held at the same time as any other state, county or municipal primary, election, special
election or referendum, or on any date set by the board of county commissioners, provided, that
such referendum shall not be held within the period of time beginning 60 days before and
ending 60 days after any other primary, election, special election or referendum held in the
county.
Regarding a transition process for Proposal 5, Commissioner Gordon has recommended the
following for Proposal 5 (edited and abridged by the County Attorney to accommodate the
Board's February 16, 2006 decision):
1) Individuals seeking election to the Board of Commissioners will be nominated in primary
elections to represent each party recognized in North Carolina.
2) The first election for which this election system will apply will be in 2008. At that time, one
seat in District 2 and one At Large seat will become available.
3) In the 2008 election, the two commissioners whose terms expire in 2008, along with any
other qualified candidate, may choose to run either in District 2 or At Large, the District
seat based on residency. The qualified voters of the entire County will nominate the
candidates for and elect the member of the District 2 seat and the member of the At
Large seat both far four year terms.
4) In the 2010 election, the three commissioners whose terms expire in 2010, along with
any other qualified candidate, may choose to run either in District 1, District 2, or At
Large, the District seats based on residency. The qualified voters of the entire County will
nominate the candidates for and elect the member of the District 1 seat, the member of
the District 2 seat and the member of the At Large seat all for four year terms.
At the request of the Chair and Vice Chair, staff has provided the draft map and its related
statistical data for Proposal 3, one of the original district election maps/plans that has been
reviewed by the BOCC and the public during this process. Proposal 3 was one of the three
plans presented for public hearing at the Board's November 2, 2005 meeting. Proposal 3 would
create a seven member board, with four seats representing three districts (one district with two
commissioners) and three seats representing the county at large. Regarding a transition
process for Proposal 3, the County Attorney offers the following:
1) Individuals seeking election to the Board of Commissioners will be nominated in primary
elections to represent each party recognized in North Carolina.
2) The first election for which this election system will apply will be in 2008. At that time,
one seat in District 1, one seat in District 3 and two At Large seats will become available.
3) In the 2008 election, the two commissioners whose terms expire in 2008, along with
other qualified candidates, may choose to run for the District 1 seat, for one of the District
3 seats or for either of two of the three At Large seats, The qualified voters of the entire
County will nominate the candidates and elect the member of the District 1 seat, the
member of the District 3 seat, and the members of the At Large seats, all for four year
terms,.
4) In the 2010 election, the three commissioners whose terms expire in 2010, along with
other qualified candidates, may choose to run for the District 2 seat, for one of the District
a
3 seats or for one of the At Large seats. The qualified voters of the entire County will
nominate the candidates and elect the member of the District 2 seat, the member of the
District 3 seat and the member of the At Large seat, all for four year terms.
Fallowing the adoption by the Board of the Resolution required by N.G. Gen. Stat. § 153A-60,
the Resolution will be "published" also as required by that statute. The law does not prescribe
when the Resolution is to be published. The options are that the publication could occur soon
after the Resolution is adopted or sometime reasonably close to and prior to the 2008 primary
election. Alternatively, it could be published both times. It is recommended that the Resolution
be published in the News of Orange and in the Chapel Hill Herald.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact associated with the Board's consideration of
next steps on district elections for the Board of County Commissioners for a November 2006
referendum. There will be costs associated with the publishing of the Resolution and costs
associated with conducting a November 2006 referendum. The publication cost can be
addressed within the current FY 2005-06 budget. The referendum cost can be included with the
FY 2006-2007 budget.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board 1) consider the public
comments made at the March 2, 2006 Board meeting on district elections for the Board of
County Commissioners far a November 2006 referendum; 2) consider and give direction to staff
and the County Attorney concerning the content of the Resolution far a November 2006
referendum on changing the way in which the Board of Commissioners is elected; and 3)
provide comments, questions and any further direction to staff.
January 24, 2005
Petition Cover Sheet
1 (~
Fair and Equnl District Representa~tian
--' on the Orange County Board of Commissioners
Orange County is a diverse area comprised of identifiable communities
which reflect the diversity of the county including farmers, blue collar
workers, white collar workers, academics, professionals, and students, all of
diverse racial and ethnic self identifications.
It is important in our democracy that the diversity of the community be
reflected in its chosen representatives. For this reason North Carolina Law
pennits the voters of counties to choose commissioners by electoral districts
with each district being as nearly equal in population as practicable. Further,
North Carolina lM,aw permits the qualified voters of each district to nominate
candidates and elect members who reside in the district for seats apportioned
to that district. It is also permissible to have some commissioners allocated
to the county as a whole, whom the qualified voters of the entire county
nominate and elect. (NCG5 §153-5$(3)b)
Currently all Change County Commissioners are elected countywide. Thus
the large city and urban population in and around Chapel Hill and Carrboro
control the electoral process while the more rural areas of the county Pack the
population to elect someone from their areas who would be able to represent
their views in the deliberations and decisions of the Change County
Commissioners.
The undersigned residents of (}range County petition the Orazzge County
Board of Commissioners to alter the method and manner by which Orange
County Commissioners aze elected to afford equal and fair representation to
the residents of the county by adopting NCGS §153-Sf3(3)b, permitting the
voters of Orange County to choose commissioners by electoral districts with
each district being as nearly equal in population as practicable. Further, that
the qualified voters of each district nominate candidates and elect members
who reside in the district for seats apportioned to that district and that some
commissioners, but not more than half of the boazd, be allocated to the
county as a whole, to be nominated and voted upon by the qualified voters of
the entire county.
DRAFT
STRUCTURE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS
PRINCIPLES
Voters should have the opportunity to vote, in the general election, for a
majority of the members of the Board of Commissioners,
The establishment of district boundaries and any necessary revisions should
be based on decennial census data from the United States Census Bureau.
District lines should, where feasible, follow already-existing township lines,
precinct lines, roadways, and/or other boundary lines,
District lines should be as simple and as easy to understand as possible.
However, in order to comply with any statutory and constitutional
provisions, delineations such as including a small or substantial portion of a
township or community in one district may be necessary, thereby
designating the remaining portion of the township or community as part of
another district.
To the degree possible, district boundaries should be configured to provide
the opporhunity for areas more urban in nature to produce commissioners
from more urban areas and areas more rural in nature to produce
commissioners from more rural areas,
Any district plan should maintain a staggered term system for members of
the Board of Commissioners.
Any district plan should continue to provide African-Americans, women,
and other minorities an equal opportunity to elect candidates of their choice.
Adherence to the North Carolina statutory requirements that the district
populations be as nearly equal as practicable and the Constitutional
provision of one person-one vote and the existing population distribution in
Orange County precludes the establishment of one commissioner
representing each township in the County.
Any district plan should foster greater participation of the public in the
electoral process,
DRAFT
STRUCTURE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
PROCESS/TIMETABLE
ACTIONS TO DATE
.January 2005 Submission of Petition to BOCC
May 2005 Staff Report to BOCC
August 2005 Two Public Hearings Conducted by BOCC to
Receive Public Input
September 2005 County Staff Begins Review of Orange County
Decennial Census Data and Formulates Draft
Plans with Potential District Lines Based on
Proposals Received from BOCC Members
October 2005 BOCC Initial Review of Draft Plans including
Potential District Lines
November 2005 November 2, 2005 BOCC Public Hearing on Draft Plans
BOCC Regular including Potential District Lines and
Meeting Continued BOCC Review of Draft Plans
including Potential Dishict Lines
November 15, Additional BOCC Discussion and Decision to
2005 BOCC Schedule Further Discussion at a Work
Regular Meeting Session - BOCC approved motion for
November 2006 Referendum
February 2006 February 16, 2006 Additional Discussion and Review of Draft
BOCC Work Maps/Plans
Session
March 2006 March 2, 2006 Receive Public Comments on Proposal 5
BOCC Regular Along with Related Items for' a November
Meeting 2006 Referendum on District Elections for the
Board of County Commissioners
FUTURE (Proposed
March 2006 March 21, 2006 Consideration of the next steps on district
BOCC Regular elections for the Board of County
Meeting Commissioners for a November 2006
referendum
November 2006 Referendum by County Voters on B000-
Approved Plan (Already scheduled based on
BOCC Adopted Motion on 11/15/OS)
May 2008 Implementation of Adopted Plan (IF
APPROVED BY VOTERS)
.-`~
,
11'lU' U`7 11: U6 rRVU-
§153A-59
ART. 4. FORM CF QCVERNMENT §153A•60
Local Modification. - (.4s to Part 4 of
Article 4) BLsdea: 1967, e.. 646; Dare: 1991., Ex.
Sees., a 2, e. 4 (As to appliceb~7ity and contin-
genty provisions, see 1991 Session Laws, Ex.
Sesa., o. 2, a. 7); Lse (ea to Pert 4 and G.S.
153.4-68): 1989, c. 195, es, 4, 5 (effective June 1,
1989, but only applicable to resolutions ap-
proved oa or before Aug. 1, 1990), se emended
by 1959, c. 770, s. 43. Lea (ae to Sj'art 4 and G.S.
153A-58):1959, c.195, sa.. 4, 5 (effective Juna i,
1989, but only applicable to resolutions ap-
proved on or before Aug. 1, 1990), se amended
by 1989, a 770, s, 43
CASE xo~rEs
Cited is Ratclifiv County of Bvnmmbe, 759
F,2d 1159 (4ch Cir. 1955); Ratdiff a County of
Buncombe, 663 E Supp. 1009 (W.D.N.0. 1987),
§ 153A-59. Implementation when board has members
serving a combination of four- and two-year
terms.
If the structure of the board of commissioners is altezed to establish a board
vrlth an odd number of members servingg a 'combination of four- and twaye9r
terms of office, the new structure shall be implemented as follows:
At the first election all members of the board shall be elected. A simile
majority of those elected shall be elected for two-year terms, and the remaining
members shall be elected for four-year terms. The candidate or caildidates
receivingg the highest number of votes shall be elected for the four-year terms.
At eacb subsequent general election, s simple majority of the board shall be
elected. Thst candidate who is elected with the least number of votes shall be
elected for atwo-year term, and the other member or members elected shall be
elected fox four-year terms, (1927, c, 91, s. 3; 1969, c. 717, s. 1; 1973, c. 822, s.
1,)
§ 153A-60. Initiation of alterations by resolution.
' The boazd of commissioners shall initiate any alteration in the structure of
the board by adopting a resolution, The resolution shall:
(1) Briefly but completely describe the proposed alterations;
(2) Prescribe the manner of transition from the existing etnleture to the
altered structure;
(3) Define the electoral districts, if any, and apportion the members
among the districts;
(4) Call s special referendum on the question of adoption of the alter-
ations, The referendum shall be held and conducted by the county
board of elections. The referendum maybe held at the same time as
any other state, county or municipal primary, election, special election
or referendum, or on any date set by the board of county commission-
ers, grovided, that such referendum shall not be held within the
period of time begs' ing 60 days before and ending 60 days after any
other primary, election, special election or referendum field in the
county,
Upon its adoption, the resolution shaA be published in full. (1927, c. 91, s. 4;
1969, c, 717, s. 1; 1973, a 822, s. 1; 1977, c. 382J
I.oeal Modification. -Craven: 2001-d47, e..
1 (applicble only to resolutions adopted before
Jasuarp 1, 2002); Daze: 1991, Ex. Sass., c. 2, e,
1 (AB to applicability sad coatiagency prmd-
sions, see 1991 Session Lews, Es. Seas., c. 2, s.
7); Lee:1988, c 195, a. l (effective June 1,1989,
but only applicable to resolutions approved oa
or before Aug. 1, 1990); Wayne: 1987, c. 11.9
(only applicable to resolutions approved on or
before Nov. 30, 1968).
925
,a
,-
:;n
'1
~ti
': i
~~:.
i-oro rani u~t u-oor
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1.3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
2.3
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
.34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
4.3
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
DRAFT
7. Special Presentations
a. Receive Public Cc
~ ~, a~~
~u~~~L CaMn~n~
g
Commissioners
The Board received public comment on the Board's plan to pursue Proposal 5 along with
related items for a November 2006 referendum on district elections for the Board of County
Commissioners; to provide the Board with an opportunity to consider the content of a Resolution
calling for the referendum; and to give the Board the opportunity to provide comments, question
and any further direction to staff.
Chair Jacobs said that they had originally intended to hear public comment tonight and
then act, but since Commissioner Foushee is not here, they can hear the comments and then
take an action at the next meeting.
Geof Gledhill said that this is a process that had a beginning in January 2005 and there
have been a series of meetings and public hearings. The Board of County Commissioners on
February 16, 2006 approved Proposal 5, which says that there will be a total of five members on
the Board of County Commissioners in the district and at-large plan submitted to the voters.
The elections would continue to be partisan and the district map plan would have one member
from district 1 (all of the County except Chapel Hill Township); two members from district 2
(Chapel Hill Township); and two at-large members. Members elected from the districts would
have to reside in the districts.. They would be nominated from members of their party
everywhere in the County and then ultimately elected by all voters in the County.. The Board
also confirmed that a referendum on Proposal 5 would be presented at a November 2006
referendum. The Board also confirmed that the implementation of the district at-large system
would begin at the 2008 primary election. What has not been decided by the Board of County
Commissioners, but is presented for consideration tonight, is an implementation or transition
plan, He made reference to the map and the data that are available to the public. District 1 has
approximately 39,000 people and district 2 contains approximately 76,578 people (based on
2000 census data).
Chair Jacobs asked if the principles adopted by the County Commissioners were
available to the public, and it was answered no, He read same of the principles, which are
included in the agenda abstract,
Commissioner Gordon said that the proposal she came forward with had the possibility
of nominating by district or just having people reside in districts. She pointed out that the Board
of County Commissioners voted 3-2 to make these residency districts.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Artie Franklin lives in Chapel Hill and made reference to page three, paragraph one of
the abstract. He said that he found Commissioner Cordon's suggestions logical, but he hopes
that the Board will consider changing the references to the at-large seat to a countywide seat.
He thinks that the at-large seat and at-large elections could lead to some confusion., Also, in the
next paragraph regarding the publication of the resolutions, the News of Qrange and the Chapel
Hill Herald were both specifically mentioned. He asked that they also consider adding The
Chapel Hill News and The Daily Tarheel because it would increase the opportunity of Grange
County residents to receive notice. He said that there have been comments by County
Commissioners that the district representation proposal under consideration is a start.. He said
that it might be helpful to add an evaluation process to measure the effectiveness of and to
provide for improving the proposal should it pass in November.
DRAFT z ~
7
8
9
10
I1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
2.3
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
3.3
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
4.3
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
Bob Strayhorn is a farmer in Orange County and he was representing his farming
practices in his community and the Exchange Club of Hillsborough. He said that they are
extremely disappointed in what has been presented. He said that it was totally inadequate for
what they were hoping and trying to convey to the Board over the years.. He has been working
with people in the County for over 20 years to address this issue. He said that since there has
been development in Orange County, they have been trying to have infield around Chapel Hill,
Carrboro, and the Towns.. He said that every time this is done, it dilutes the influence of the
rural communities, He said that without something to help them be involved in the decision-
making, they are in a na-man's land. He said that without seven members and district elections,
they have the same thing they have now. He sees no improvement whatsoever. He said that
Chapel Hill Township where he lives could elect all five members now. He said that it would be
nice to have other people involved in this and they want to be included or they are going to lose
the agricultural interest. He is very frustrated.
Jeff Schmitt lives in Cedar Grove Township. He is the past president of the Orange-
Durham Cattleman's Association and current member of the board of directors. In 1980 the
population of Orange County was 77,000, of which 26,500 of the citizens resided in the six
townships outside of Chapel Hill and voting was an an at-large basis, While Chapel Hill
Township had a two to one majority, rural representation had been a reality on the Board of
County Commissioners, By 2000, the County's population had increased to 115,000, and non-
Chapel Hill Township's increased by 12,500 during this period, but the growth in the Chapel Hill
population was almost double and two-thirds of the population of the County resides in the
Chapel HiII Township. He said that most if not all of the demographic components are
dominated by Chapel Hill. He said that there are many citizens in Chapel Hill who feel that
County residents, that is, non-Chapel Hill residents, should have a voice for County
Commissioners nominated in and elected by those citizens of the County., He said that the
effective voice in County government of the 39,000 citizens is slowly eroding. He said that
39,000 citizens deserve their own representative -nominated by and elected in the general
election by them. He said that the voice of these citizens is a more conservative voice than the
Chapel Hill Township, He said that if there is countywide voting in the general election, the
Chapel Hill influence will dominate and there will not be a two-party system. He echoed the
comments of Bab Strayhorn and suggested that if they go forward with Proposal 5, they will be
wasting taxpayer money. He said that this proposal does not address any of the concerns that
have been voiced over the past 13 years regarding district representation,
Kat Cheek said that she worked for 37 years with the U. S. Department of Agriculture
Farm Service Agency. She is now serving on the Board of the North Carolina State Grange and
is president of Schley Grange. Most of the members of the Schley Grange signed the petitions
asking for the consideration of nominating and electing County Commissioners by district. She
owns land in northern Orange County but resides in Chapel Hill and she understands both sides
of the County. It concerns her that Chapel Hill is one side of the County and northern Orange is
another side of the County. She wants to get something done that will keep the County united
in all that it does.. She thanked the County Commissioners for all of their work. She said that
she is hearing much disappointment with this proposal, and it does not change what they have
now, She said that unless you give consideration to the proposal the citizens gave, the County
will still be divided..
Vern Miller is from Caldwell Community and he pointed out the divisiveness of this
proposal, He said that everyone knows that Chapel HiII has the weight in the County and he
said that the people in the outlying areas are now a minority in the County. He said that after
they attended a public hearing in the fall, everyone that talked at the meeting -most of them
from the Chapel Hill/Carrboro area -was in favor of the citizen's proposal. He is very frustrated
with County government and the song and dance. He said that the County Commissioners do
not seem to want to act on this proposal.
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1.3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
4.3
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
DRAFT
la
Howard McAdams, Jr. is a full-time farmer and a volunteer fireman,. He asked if the
volunteer fire departments would have to pay for part of the 800-megahertz radios. Also, he
thanked the County Commissioners for recognizing his wife at the last County Commissioners'
meeting and he thanked them for supporting agriculture and the agricultural summit, He said
that he would like for the Board to consider another plan and either change what is put in the
referendum, or put both plans on the referendum and let the voters decide which plan they
would Tike.
Oscar Compton is from Cedar Grove and was representing the Cedar Grove Ruritan
Club, He said that they strongly support all efforts to bring district representation to the Board of
County Commissicners. He said that this would be the fair and equitable thing to do. He said
that he bought a farm in 1989 and he appealed to the Planning Department to let him build a
country store.. There was a store there before for about 79 years before it got burned.. He said
that if he could have had district representation at that time, he would have been able to build
the store. He was told that he could not build a store because of the node. He asked for district
representation.
Lee Mortimer said that he is not a resident of Orange Ccunty, but he was asked by Keith
Cook to serve as an advisor to the 1993 task force that the Board of County Commissioners
appointed to study possible changes in the elections. This study is also referenced in the
background materials. He said that Proposal 5 is not likely to satisfy the people that are asking
for an alternative method of deciding who will represent them on the Board., The 1993 task
force made two recommendations -one for cumulative voting and a district plan requiring two
County Commissioners to live outside of Chapel Hill/Carrboro. The proposal for one rural
resident Commissioner falls short of either of the proposals made 13 years ago. The problem
remains that the twc-thirds of voters living in Chapel Hill/Carrboro will continue to decide who
will represent rural and northern Orange County, He said that the proposal would undoubtedly
pass the referendum because the two-thirds of voters who decide elections now know that
nothing will change for them.. He said that the one-third of voters seeking a change would
remain unsatisfied, He said that, in truth, district plans are not the best model and in many ways
they do not improve representation. He agrees with the task force members who supported the
cumulative voting recommendation in 1993. He said that this would be the optimum
compromise between district and at-large representation, Cumulative voting would allow
candidates to be voted on and elected by all voters of the County, just as they are today.. But
minority groups of voters -racial, political, or geographic -can cumulate their votes behind one
favorite candidate and be relatively certain of electing someone who they feel truly represents
their point of view. He said that several North Carolina counties and municipalities use a similar
system of limited voting to elect boards and town councils. He said that the people asking for a
new election system would probably prefer that the Board postpone any action until it feels more
able to move ahead with something that addresses the concerns in a more meaningful way.
Gary Barnes is a resident of Chapel Hill and the Chair of the Community Action Network.
He said that they have taken an interest in the district election issue since Representative
Faison proposed his bill. He said that, in general, they were supportive of two ideas -having
proportional representation for residents of the County and increasing the number of County
Commissioner seats to seven. He noted that the current proposal really means that only one of
the five is assured to reside in a rural area, where 33% of the electorate lives. In terms of the
issue of the number of Board seats, seven is a trend in North Carolina. In 1953, Orange County
went from three to five members, largely in response to population growth. There has been
significant growth since 1953 and he thinks it is time to increase the number of seats to seven.
He supports aseven-member Board with a proposal similar to Representative Faison's or a
five-member board with a "district vote', with one of those candidates voted on only by the
residents of the district..
DRAFT 4 l1
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1.3
14
]s
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
.30
.31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
Dolly Hunter lives in Bingham Township, She opposes Proposal 5 because it is the
same if not worse than the present election system, She said that it just perpetuates the
existing system with an even Tess chance of rural representation, She said that the rural
residents should be able to elect who best represents their interests and it is not logical to let
Chapel Hill decide who represents the rural residents. She said that a logical and fair method
would be to have each district vote for their candidates in the primary and elect their Board
members in the general election. Afive-member Board should have no at-large members and
have two members from the rural district and three from the Chapel Hill district. A seven-
member Board should have two members from the rural district and five members from the
Chapel Hill district or a combination of at-large and Chapel Hill residents.. Regardless, she said
that each district should be able to elect those who represent them best. These methods would
maintain the majority, but protect voices that otherwise would not be heard. She is also
concerned about the transition process, She suggested that the 2008 election, with the five-
member Board, have one rural district seat filled and the seven-member Board would have two
rural district seats filled. Then, in the 2010 election, with the five-member Board, the remaining
rural district seat would be filled and the seven-member Board would have the remaining at-
large seats filled. She said that the rural seats would need to be filled sooner than later. She
suggested that the referendum have a third box that says, "In favor of district voting, but not of
this proposal.," She said that in the final report of Shaping Orange County's Future, the number
one top ten critical issue was putting community building first by changing the election process,
including looking at increasing the size of the Board to make the Board more representative of
the rural County citizens. She said that all County Commissioners do a great jab with issues
that treat all citizens equally, such as social services, but when it comes to land use, it feels the
County Commissioners make decisions that favor the Chapel Hill voters that elected them and
not the rural people, She made reference to an article in the News and Observer yesterday
where Senator Ellie Kinnaird was quoted, "If you are the incumbent in power, you want to
maintain that in the next election., It's the nature of an organization to maintain itself." She said
that if the County Commissioners feel that they truly represent the rural people and they want to
make the election process in Orange County the best that it can be, they will make a district
voting resolution of integrity and not incumbency,
Bill Ray said that he is representing the American Legion and he commended the
County Commissioners for getting started on district representation. He said that they have not
gone far enough. He spoke in favor of more districts and seven County Commissioners. He
lives in northern Orange County and it has been 20 years since they have had a County
Commissioner living to the north of Hillsborough.
Representative Bill Faison distributed a letter and materials to the County
Commissioners, He lives on a farm in Cedar Grove and he said that he loves every, body in
Orange County, but he represents the people that live in the 75% of Orange County that does
not include Chapel Hill and Carrboro. He said that there is a problem in the way they elect
County Commissioners. He said that Chapel Hill and Carrboro makes up 2/3 of the population
of the County, but the County also has a small town area of Hillsborough and Efland and rural
areas. He said that beginning 13 %Z years ago, there was an agenda item almost identical to the
one they have tonight. A task force grew out of this item that one year later reported back to the
County Commissioners that, "the current system does not provide for fair and equitable
representation for all the citizens in the County," A proposal grew out of this for a district at-
large method of election, increasing the County Commissioners from five to seven, with five
elected from districts and two elected at-large. The County Commissioners did nothing with
regard to this proposal. Four years later, the matter came up again by Commissioner Carey,
who said, "a plan to provide district representation would increase the probability that citizens
who live in the rural areas will have a reasonable chance of being elected," In response to this,
the County Commissioners did nothing. Six years later, the issue was brought up again by
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
IS
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
3.3
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
DRAFT
~a
Commissioner Carey, wha proposed expanding the Board to seven members and having district
elections. It was defeated by the Board 3-2. Nine years later, it came up again, this time in the
Shaping Orange County's Future Task Force Report. This said that, for many rural residents
who have spoken to the task force, the issue of district representation is the primary issue they
feel needs to be addressed. The group recommended a very short-term task force appointed,
which would consider expanding the seats of the County Commissioners and having the
election of County Commissioners from districts.. Still, nothing happened and the County
Commissioners did not give a voice to the rural or small town portion of the County. This past
year, in January, 1,400 citizens of the County signed petitions asking that the Board consider
district representation and expanding the County Commissioners. It was sent to staff to be
investigated. He filed a bill in the General Assembly after about two months, trying to give the
County residents that which the County Commissioners would not give them, He said that this
was simply a chance to vote on the question of whether to expand the Board from five to seven
and to have some of the County Commissioners elected from districts that would allow the rural
and small town portion of the County to elect to the Board someone to represent them. He said
that he has attended the public hearings regarding this issue and everyone who came to speak
supported the proposition of electing people from districts.. He said that they would like for the
County Commissioners to put on the ballot in November a referendum on the following
question: Will they expand the County Commissioner Board from five to seven, with four of
them elected from the Chapel HiII Township, with one elected from the Hillsborough/Eno
Township/Efland precinct, one elected from the rest of the County, and one elected at-large?
He said that Proposal 5 was a change without a difference and does absolutely nothing, He
said that for 13 %2 years, residents of northern Orange County have been coming to the Board of
County Commissioners saying they need a change and the ability to elect County
Commissioners from districts. He asked the County Commissioners to revise their plan or else
the citizens will have to go back to the General Assembly, He said that, for the fourth time in 14
years, they are seeking to have representation.
Margaret Wood Cannel) represented the Hillsborough-Orange County Chamber of
Commerce Board of Directors and it's Governmental Affairs Committee.. She said that the
Board of Directors and Governmental Affairs Committee commends the Board of County
Commissioners for their efforts to address the public's request for representation by district.
They feel that the BOCC's response is a step in the right direction, The board and the
committee are of the opinion that Proposal 5 does not ensure equal or adequate representation
far all of the citizens of Orange County. Further, the board has concerns that afive-member
Board, elected by all Orange County citizens and representing two districts, will not allow for
enough diversity of representation. The Board of Directors encourages the Board of County
Commissioners to further investigate the viability of Proposal 3, aseven-member Board
representing three districts as the most effective method to ensure equal representation..
Bob Nutter is a dairy farmer and lives in Bingham Township. He said that the proposal
does not meet the intent of the rural people that are asking for district representation. He wants
to increase the County Commissioners to seven based on the population growth.
Jean Earnhardt said that there is lack of representation for a significant number of
people who live in the County. She is disappointed in Proposal 5 because she does not see
how this can guarantee rural representation. She thinks that rural representation needs to be
guaranteed,
.Jamie Daniel lives in Cedar Grove and is a candidate for County Commissioner again
this year. He said that Proposal 5 does not meet the needs of the people in northern Orange
County, He said that there is a culture in our County to disregard the people of northern Orange
County. He said that the thing that scares him is apathy.. He called 45 people from his
community to go to school board meetings and there was apathy because the people felt that
no one would listen to them, He said that the sub-culture does not divide them, but makes
DRAFT
13
1 Orange County unique. There is a different culture in Chapel Hill and they do not want to
2 change things, but they just want to have their people represent them. He said that the Board
3 has had over a decade to decide this issue and it is time to get it right.
4 Betty Tom Phelps-Davidson is from Caldwell, which is about as far away from any
5 township that you can get, and she said that this polarization and divisiveness has compelled
6 her to run for Orange County Commissioner.. She is a northern resident, but she cares for all of
7 Orange County. She said that this current plan was not fair orjust. She said that the underlying
8 issue is the emotion that they all feel tonight. She said that these people feel left out. She
9 believes in district representation. She likes the idea of a referendum for the people and she
10 plans to end the 20-year drought on May 2"d
11
12 Chair Jacobs said that this item would be on the County Commissioners' agenda on
1.3 March 21, 2006 at the Southern Human Services Center,.
14
Proaosal5
The populatiwr nau:bers are, from tl:e 2000 Census.
115,5.31 =County Population
5 members
2 Districts
115,5.31/.3 =.38510
District 1 = .38510 ("ideal population")
5% deviation +/- 1,926
Range = .36,584 to 40,436
District 2 = 77020 ("ideal population")
5% deviation +/- 3,851
Range = 73,169 to 80,871
Deviation
D1 = 1.19% (38,95.3)
D2 = 0.57% (76,578)
2000 Census Blocks
Voting Predncls
9~®~ Rural Buffer
P„®m8
Proposal 5
••~.
s
II " q
4 n.Aw
Proposal 3
The population rsumbers are franc the 2000 Ceasrrs.
115,5.31 =County Population
7 members
3 Districts
115,5.31 / 4 = 2888.3
District 1 & 2 = 2888.3 ("ideal population")
5% deviation +/- 1,444
Range = 27,439 to .30,327
District 3 = 57766 ("ideal population")
5% deviation +/- 2,888
Range = 54,878 to 60,654
Deviation
D1 = 4.17 % (.30,086)
D2 = 1.77 % (28,371)
D.3 = 1.20 % (57,074)
_~ r ,siira ar ~im t f +
a ~ . ..~ es a~h ~Il f u~E-rid' aiY' ~s t r~. ~ 3- i ` ° `
{ ~V.. (!F* a ~A to ~ r x '~~t f ~jT ~ ~= I ~ 4~,:
-. y~ srr'.~u~Y ryYl~~ Ptiy ~~- i'~ _ r :
~' ~` ~ Iy 1 r i'(-E 't' ~ °.Iti y'' ' x o~
~. ~ Y y f4 ~Y.lh r ' ~ ~
~ ~~~~ si u.~~l ri~~ r } f~~ 'i r d ir..j
v c~1
,y Y
1. ~ ~ P „~1 P ~L it , p t
"~ .~ .~ .( ~~ ,~p~ r
~ Z~ f~'"" Irr^' y
f ~ rt ~ " D~ ~ "~'t + ' I f.
K M 54
,
- ti , i~ ~".(30,086) t~ii' ,. ~ ~~i ,
-~ r~ ~, -~ ~r ~w.~~,,s Tai i ',
n
c ~ 13
._ ,.r:...,. .. ~T.
l,~Yt { X. y "13
u d I x yy~~wa~s d ii r uo a y s r ~ -
`~ y~. ~ y. s t'y lr I '- ~ ~ l
w
_ , q:` ~ r s ~ _~+
L ~
z
` s s, i` Y t' r Q
s ~ s ~ :fly 3 r ~
t.'
r a ~
1 . -K ac,y, r3. p 1. -~ ~
~.. „ P
r i ti' y F1c ~ k ~: mi ~at`^ ~~ t4 r Kf C
E y ' J.n, r
ue 3 '; a ~.. ti~ ~- ~ a ~ ~
ti ~" + , ~ x+ .~ ~+~:
s
~' ~. ~ x n ~"~ ~ ~1~`af~i5 r
3:
r ~'' to r ~~ ° - ." n~'~~~`-2~" y "i' 1 6
i r '~ a,.,r'C ~
t a ~: E. n. ..y ~ ,
D r yv~ ~? ~ r
o y a ~' r A. ' ~ `~ +, a3 / ~, r
nr x 7
dnS', r
~ st f ~ ~ ~~ " a 6 'l° ~~}
~ ®~~
I
' ~ ' (28871 o S y ~3 ,~
/ {I „
i. l l i~f)i ,. c n ~~., r~
`~~ ° a ~, ~~'~~ ? '~ 7 Member Proposal
~~' ~~~ ~'~` - ~ D1 = 1 Member
': ~,;, , r ~° r , ~, . ~ .~~ ~, + D2 = 1 Member
' '~ ~~ ~. D3 = 2 Members
~"~ ~~ 3 At Large
D3
~„ m
~b ~ ~~ (57;074-)
G ~~'
k ' V ~ DS D1
o
~q r` r ~, „d~U 49.40% 26 A4°/.
~: ,
N ~ ~ 0`^4_ _ 9 ~,~ nz
2456%
~~~^^^iiilll MIIBS Oran eCOUn PWrmin and Ins
0 1 2 3 4 G35 Map Prepared by Bdan Grson aron 6u11 0 51
2ODD Census Blocks
VoWg Precincts
6®~~ Rural Buffer
'®e.I
Proposal 3
v^•
rte' ~ oq