HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda 10-19-2021; 8-l - Resolution Acknowledging the Results from the 2020 Census Indicating Orange County Remains in Lawful Compliance With Applicable Requirements for BOCC Nominating Districts 1
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: October 19, 2021
Action Agenda
Item No. 8-1
SUBJECT: Resolution Acknowledging the Results from the 2020 Census Indicating
Orange County Remains in Lawful Compliance With Applicable Requirements
for Board of County Commissioners' Nominating Districts
DEPARTMENT: County Attorney, Planning, &
County Manager
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT:
John Roberts, County Attorney, 245-
1) June 27, 2006 Approved 2318
Resolution and Election Map/Plan Brian Carson, GIS Technician III, 245-
2) Population Deviations for the 2595
Approved 2006 Map/Plan Greg Wilder, County Manager's Office,
3) Current Electoral Districts along 245-2300
with Population Numbers Based
on the 2010 Census
4) Current Electoral Districts along
with Population Numbers Based
on the 2020 Census
5) Resolution Acknowledging the
Results from the 2020 Census
Indicating Orange County
Remains in Lawful Compliance
With Applicable Requirements for
Board of County Commissioners'
Nominating Districts
PURPOSE: To approve a Resolution Acknowledging the Results from the 2020 Census
Indicating Orange County Remains in Lawful Compliance With Applicable Requirements for
Board of County Commissioners' Nominating Districts.
(NOTE: This agenda item only relates to the population changes, reflected in the 2020
Census, within the Orange County Board of Commissioners' electoral districts
as currently configured. This agenda item does NOT pertain to any
consideration regarding changing the process or method of election for
members of the Board of Commissioners.)
BACKGROUND: At the Board of Commissioners' January 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 were elected in Orange County. The representatives requested that the
2
Board review the current method of election for the members of the Board, which entailed all
five members of the Board being nominated and elected to staggered four-year terms on an at-
large basis.
The Board pursued a series of discussions and meetings over the next sixteen months including
public hearings, Board discussions on possible draft district maps/plans for potentially either a
five or seven-member Board, and decisions on specific map/plan issues.
The public hearings and discussions led to the development of a map/plan (identified in 2006 as
"Proposal D") for a seven-member board that met all statutory requirements. The County
Attorney prepared a draft resolution calling for a November 2006 referendum in concert with
"Proposal D", and the Board approved that resolution and the election plan/map at the June 27,
2006 regular meeting. The approved resolution and election map/plan are provided at
Attachment 1. The population deviations for the approved 2006 map/plan are provided at
Attachment 2.
In the November 2006 referendum, the voters subsequently approved the election plan/map
with more than two-thirds supporting the initiative. The election plan/map was implemented with
the May 2008 primary election and all seven members of the Board have since been qualified
and elected under the plan.
PRIOR REVIEW OF DISTRICT ELECTIONS MAP BASED ON 2010 CENSUS
The final numbers for the 2010 Census published in 2011 provided new population numbers for
Orange County as a whole as well as for the two current electoral districts. North Carolina
General Statute 153A-22 states, "If a county is divided into electoral districts for the purpose of
nominating or electing persons to the board of commissioners, the board of commissioners may
find as a fact whether there is substantial inequality of population among the districts."
Population growth or decline in districts can lead to significant deviations in the numbers of
residents between districts, thereby compromising the integrity of the districts and the election
plan as a whole. Therefore a board of commissioners may, but is not required to, review the
impact of the new Census numbers to determine if there is substantial inequality.
Attachment 3 is a map showing the current electoral districts along with the population numbers
based on the 2010 census. In the 2006 adopted plan (Attachments 1 and 2), Orange County
met its goal of keeping the population deviations within five percent of the exact population
totals for each district, less than a total of ten percent deviation (referred to nationally as the Ten
Percent Rule). Attachment 3 showed that Districts 1 and 2 were still within the Ten Percent
Rule deviation criteria based on the 2010 Census data. Since the Districts were, combined,
within the ten percent deviation allowed by law there can be no finding of substantial inequality.
Without a violation of the Ten Percent Rule, it is highly unlikely that any group or individual could
make any rational argument that there is substantial inequality between the districts. It is even
more unlikely that any judicial challenge to a decision not to redistrict could survive a summary
judgment in the County's favor.
REVIEW OF DISTRICT ELECTIONS MAP BASED ON 2020 CENSUS
The 2020 Census information for Orange County was published on August 12, 2021.
Attachment 4 is a map showing the current electoral districts along with the population numbers
based on the 2020 Census. Attachment 4 shows that Districts 1 and 2 are once again within the
3
Ten Percent Rule deviation criteria based on the 2020 Census data. Since the Districts are,
combined, within the ten percent deviation allowed by law, there can be no finding of substantial
inequality.
Similar to a 2011 resolution adopted by the Board of Commissioners relating to the districts and
the 2010 Census, Attachment 5 is a resolution for Board consideration acknowledging there is
no substantial inequality revealed by the 2020 Census results. Although it is not legally
necessary, it may be prudent for the Board to approve the resolution. As noted above, North
Carolina General Statute 153A-22 states a local government "may" review the census numbers
to determine if substantial inequality exists. Alternatively, should the Board wish to adjust the
district lines, it must have those lines drawn and adopted by November 17, 2021 in order to be
effective for the 2022 election.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact associated with consideration of the
Resolution Acknowledging the Results from the 2020 Census Indicating Orange County
Remains in Lawful Compliance With Applicable Requirements for Board of County
Commissioners' Nominating Districts.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends, and the County Attorney concurs, that
the Board approve the Resolution Acknowledging the Results from the 2020 Census Indicating
Orange County Remains in Lawful Compliance With Applicable Requirements for Board of
County Commissioners' Nominating Districts (provided at Attachment 5) and authorize the Chair
to sign the resolution.
Attachment 1
NORTH CAROLINA 1
ORANGE COUNTY
RESOLUTION CALLING A SPECIAL
REFERENDUM ON THE QUESTION OF
AN ALTERATION IN THE STRUCTURE
OF AND MODE OF ELECTING THE ORANGE
COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
VVHEREAS, the Board of Commissioners has, from time to time, considered changing
the structure and mode of electing the members of the Board; and
WHEREAS, on January 24, 2005 the Board received a petition from citizens of the
County,requesting the Board to alter the method and manner by which Orange County
Commissioners are elected to include electoral districts; and
WHEREAS,in.response to the January 24,2005 petition, Orange County staff presented
a report to the Board on May 5,2005, which report addressed:
1. the legal framework for structure 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; and
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.
WHEREAS,the Board considered the staff report, conducted public hearings and has
'continued to work on the concept of altering the structure of the Board and on specific alteration
H:\Resolutions\20061Resolution Prop D Residency and Nom by Dist adopted 62706.doc
5
proposals since May 5,2005,culminating in this Resolution calling for a special referendum on
the structure of and the mode of electing members of the Board of Commissioners.
NOW, THEREFORE,BE 1T RESOLVED,by the Orange County Board of
Commissioners,pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 153A-58, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64
I. there is hereby called a special referendum conducted in Orange County on
November 7, 2006 on the question of whether there will be an alteration in the structure of and
mode of electing the Orange County Board of Commissioners.
H. The proposition that will be printed on the ballot is as follows:
"Shall the structure of the Board of Commissioners of Orange County be altered
as follows:
1. change the board from five members to seven members;
2'. change from the qualified voters of the entire County nominating all
candidates for and electing all members of the board to a structure in which there is one three
member district(District 1),one two member district(District 2) and two members at large;
members shall reside in and represent the districts according to the apportionment plan adopted;
the qualified voters of each district shall nominate candidates who reside in the district for seats
apportioned to that district, and the qualified voters of the entire county shall nominate
candidates for seats apportioned to the county at large; and the qualified voters of the entire
county shall elect all the members of the board.
District i consists of that portion of Chapel Hill Township that is south of a line
that begins at the boundary between Bingham Township and Chapel Hill Township,then goes
east along the boundary of the Chapel Hill-Carrboro and Orange County school administrative
units to Eubanks Road; east along Eubanks Road to MLK,Jr.Boulevard(State Highway 86);
H:1Resolutions120061Resolution Prop D Residency and Nom by Dist adopted 62706.doc
6
north along MLK, Jr. Boulevard to Interstate 40; east along Interstate 40 and ending at the
boundary between Orange County and Durham County.District 2 consists of the rest of Orange
County.
3. The transition process is:
1) The first election for which this election system will apply will be.
in 2008. The three commissioners elected in 2006 will serve the remainder of their unexpired
terms. Two of the three seats in District 1, one of the two seats in District 2 and one of the two At
Large seats will become available in 2008.
2) Four-commissioners will be elected in the 2008 election. The two
commissioners whose terms expire in 2008,along with other qualified candidates,may choose to
i
run for two of the three District 1 seats, for one of the two District 2 seats or for one of the two
At Large seats. The qualified voters of District 1 will nominate candidates for the District 1 seats.
The qualified voters of District 2 will nominate a candidate for the District 2 seat. The qualified
voters of the entire County will nominate a candidate for the At Large seat. The qualified voters
of the entire County will elect the members of the District 1 seats,the member of the District 2
seat, and the member of the At Large seat, all for four year terms.
3) Three commissioners will be elected in the 2010 election. The
three commissioners whose terms expire in 2010, along with other qualified candidates,may
choose to run for one of the three District 1 seats,.for one of the two,District 2 seats or for one of
the two At Large seats. The qualified voters of District 1 will nominate a candidate for the
District 1 seat. The qualified voters of District 2 will nominate a candidate for the District 2 seat.
The qualified voters of the entire County will nominate a candidate for the At Large seat. The
H:\Resolutions\20061Resolution Prop D Residency and Nom by Dist adopted 62706.doc
7
qualified voters of the entire County will 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.
❑ YES.
❑NO.,,
III. This Resolution shall be published, shall be filed and indexed in the ordinance
book of the County and shall be available for public inspection in the office of the Clerk to the
Board of Commissioners, all as provided by law.
IV. A map showing electoral District 1 and electoral District 2 is attached hereto and
thereby made a part of this Resolution.
V. As provided by law, if a majority of the votes cast in the November 7,2006
special referendum are in favor of the plan submitted to the voters,the plan shall be put in effect.
If a majority of the votes cast in the November 7, 2006 special referendum are against the plan
submitted to the voters,this Resolution and the plan submitted to the voters are void.
This the day of , 2006.
Upon motion of Commissioner C , seconded by Commissioner
the foregoing resolution was adopted this the_o� r day of 2006.
Ayes "- 461'"J.1
01
Noes
I, Donna S. Baker, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for,.the County of Orange,North
Carolina,DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of so much of the
proceedings of said Board at a meeting held on 0? Z 2006 as relates in any way to the
adoption of the foregoing and that said proceedings are recorded in the minutes of said Board.
H:1Resolutions\2006%esolution Prop D Residency and Nom by Dist adopted 62706.doc
8
WITNESS my hand a seal of said County,this day of , 2005.
,rya eLat; f/s �
tt
e to the Board.of Commissioners
i
H:1Resolutions12006\Resolution Prop D Residency and Nom by Dist adopted 62706.doc
9
----------
i
i
49 ,157 <r78fi
I
— ---
District 2
( 44,142 ) i
Mebane ! I
70 i
m m
Hillsborough j
I
�o
I ! 86 _Durham
----
I i
! I
i 7 Member Plan
District 1 = 3 Members
j ! District 2 = 2 Members
i 2 At Large
i
i
i
I
Chapel Hill
j 64 Carrbolro
i
i
District 1 District 2
( 71;389 ) 38
15
--------______, District 1
N ------
__----,_--- 501 ss•i.
4
4
Orange County Planning and Inspections Department
GIS Map Prepared by Brian Carson July 07,2006
Orange County Electoral Districts Map p
+•ire �...��
10
Attachment 2
2006 Orange County Electoral Districts Map
Population Deviation Statistics
The population numbers are from the 2000 Census.
115,531 = County Population
7 members
2 Districts
115,531 /5 =23,106
District 1 (3 members in district)= 69,318 ("ideal population")
5% deviation+/- 3,466
Range= 65,852 to 72,784
District 2 (2 members in district)=46,213 ("ideal population")
5% deviation+/- 2,311
Range=43,902 to 48,524
Deviation
D1 =2.99 % (71,389)
D2 =4.48 % (44,142)
Attachment C
49 157
86 57
District 2
�o
86
District 1: 3 Commissioners
District 2: 2 Commissioners
m At-Large: 2 Commissioners
54 District 1
15
501 e,,,a
o 1 z
Voting District 1 Miles
Voting District 2
Orange County Planning and Inspections Department
,77ICurrent BOCC Voting Districts GIS Map Prepared by Brian Carson.5/26/2011
Actual Population Ideal Population 5% Deviation Actual Difference Actual % Deviation
Census 2010 County Population 133,801
District 1 Population (3 Members) 82,412 80,280 +/-4,014 + 2,132 + 2.66 %
District 2 Population (2 Members) 51,389 53,520 +/-2,676 -2,131 - 3.98 %
People per Commissioner: 133,801/5=26,760
One person, one vote applies to people being elected from a district not to a person who is elected at-large. This is why the total
population is divided by 5 and not 7.
Census zozo BOCC District Review 12
l- sweii county Person Count}
49 157
86
57
Q
a
70 n
1
70A
AlamancE ._.. ® 70
95,
County
751
0
DD o
D
m O
a
4 86
54 0 s 15
a
a 501
0
0
Q Current BOCC Disticts a
Current BOCC Districts °
(Census Blocks 2020) N n=3.5 miles
ORANGE Miles
Chatham County COUNTY
District 1 ,,"„'l,,,,, 0 3.5
U Planning and Inspections Department(BC)
District 2 8/16/2021
Ir 1W
Census 2020 Population 148,696
District 1 Population (3 Commissioners) 7 89,499 89,217 +/-4,461 282 0.32
District 2 Population (2 Commissioners) 59,197 59,478 +/-2,974 -281 -0.47
People per Commissioner: 148,696/5= 29,739
One person,one vote applies to people being elected from a district not to a person who is elected at-large.This is why the
total population is divided by 5 and not 7.
wug t;cais[riaing��cnsus 2021) ensus uuu�view.epix�census 2o2o BOCC District Review
13
RES-2021-064 Attachment 5
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
RESOLUTION ACKNOWLEDGING THE RESULTS ON THE 2020 CENSUS INDICATING ORANGE
COUNTY REMAINS IN LAWFUL COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS FOR
NOMINATING DISTRICTS
WHEREAS, in 2005 and 2006 following a petition by Orange County residents to change the manner of
nominating Orange County Commissioners Orange County began the process of creating nominating districts for
Orange County Commissioner elections; and
WHEREAS, North Carolina General Statute 153A-22 states in pertinent part that in a county where
commissioners are nominated or elected by district the Board of Commissioners "may find as a fact whether there
is substantial inequality of population among the districts"; and
WHEREAS, due to the COVID-19 Pandemic the 2020 Census was delayed and the State of North Carolina
enacted Session Law 2021-56 giving counties until November 17, 2021 to review and act on the 2020 Census
Data; and
WHEREAS, State and Federal law require redistricting after each census when there is a finding of substantial
inequality; and
WHEREAS, upon receipt of the 2020 Census data Orange County staff examined the results of the Census for
Orange County in its entirety and also for both nominating districts and determined there is less than one half of
one percent discrepancy of population in each district; and
WHEREAS, upon a determination that the population discrepancy between and among the commissioner
nominating districts of Orange County is less than one half of one percent in each district as a matter of law there
is no substantial inequality.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Orange County Board of County Commissioners, pursuant to
North Carolina General Statute 153A-22 and Session Law 2021-56, finds as a fact that the discrepancy in District
1 is zero point three two percent (0.32%) and the discrepancy in District 2 is zero point four seven percent
(0.47%), that this discrepancy is de minimis, statistically insignificant, and therefore there is, as a matter of law,
no substantial inequality between or among the commissioner nominating districts of Orange County.
This the 19th day of October, 2021.
Renee Price, Chair
Orange County Board of Commissioners
Attest:
Laura Jensen,
Clerk to the Board of Commissioners