,~ os~'~
REDISTRICTING BY
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
A GUIDE FOR THE 1990s
BICKERSTAFF, HEATH AND SMILEY
98 SAN JAC[NTO BOULEVARD, SU[TE 1800
AUSTIN, TEXAS 78701
PREFACE
This guide to redistricting' is designed for use by local governments. Drawing districts
is legally complex and can be politically difficult or even explosive. Following the 1990 census
many local governmental bodies will have to redistrict in order to comply with federal and state
law. It is important to go about the process of redistricting in an orderly and carefully thought
out manner. Across section of local citizens should be actively involved in redistricting.
Minority groups should be invited to participate in the process. Minority interests should be
represented on committees and their concerns should be heard and responded to at public
meetings and public hearings. If the reasonable concerns of protected minority groups are not
sought out and responded to before a redistricting plan is adopted, an ob}ection to the plan may
be interposed by the Department of Justice which will prevent the local government from
implementing its plan. This guide is intended to assist the local government in complying with
applicable law and developing and utilizing an orderly process of redistricting. If you have
questions or need further assistance, please let us know.
BICKERSTAFF, HEATH & SMILEY
98 San Jacinto Boulevard,
Suite 1800
Austin, Texas 78701-4039
(512) 472-8021
' Throughout this guide the term "redistricting" will be used to refer to both the process
of drawing district boundaries and to the process of allocating members of the legislative body
among areas of political subdivisions. The allocation process, however, is technically referred
to as "apportionment" or "reapportionment" but will be encompassed into the term
"redistricting" for simplicity.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
REDISTRICTING GUIDELINES ............................................................Pages 1-6

EXHIBITS
Exhibit A - - - State and Federal Agencies Providing Population Information
Exhibit B - - - Census Geography
Exhibit C - - - Guidelines for Voting Rights Section 5 Submissions
Exhibit D - - - Compilation of Population and Population Characteristics
Exhibit E - - - Calculation of Population Equality Among Precincts or Districts
Exhibit F - - - Sample Public Notice
Exhibit G - - - Sample Letter to Minority Community
Exhibit H - - - Sample Redistricting Resolution
Exhibit I - - - Sample Notice of Intent to Redistrict
REDISTRICTING PROCESS
INITIAL PREPARATIONS
o Assemble staff
o Collect, develop and maintain
records
o Obtain population data, maps
o Tabulate precinct results
DETERMINE WHETHER TO REDISTRICT
1
DEVELOP PROPOSAL
o Form citizen committee
o Adopt rules, criteria
o Conduct hearings
o Consider minorities
o Consider complying
alternatives
1
ADOPT PLAN
o Assessment
o Adoption
o Submission
o Implementation
REDISTRICTING GUIDELINES
This suggested schedule for redistricting provides a framework for the process. These
guidelines may need to be modified or supplemented.
STEP NO. 1. Staff. Designate a person or persons to be responsible for obtaining
necessary statistical information and to coordinate the redistricting process. The designa[ed
person must be authorized to call on local governmental officials and personnel freely for
statistical, legal, clerical, and secretarial assistance. It will be important to have the cooperation
of relevant officials and personnel. Local circumstances will determine how much of the
redistricting process can be accomplished through local governmental employees. Consultants
may be needed for some technical and legal assistance and outside assistance can be used in the
process to the extent feasible and appropriate.
STEP NO. 2. Records. Complete records must be maintained of the entire redistricting
process. Meetings and hearings should be recorded and, when practicable, transcribed. A coup
reporter can be employed for public hearings and those transcripts can be provided as a part of
the submission of the plan to the Department of Justice for preclearance. All written reports,
correspondence, exhibits, and work papers should be carefully labelled, filed, and retained so
that they can be located and identified tater. Contemporaneous records are important evidence
in the submission for preclearance and if there is litigation.
STEP NO. 3. Maps. Obtain accurate maps of the county or other political subdivision
to be redistricted. Maps of state or local origin should be obtained in addition to Census Bureau
maps. Also, obtain maps from the United States Bureau of Census depicting the Bureau's 1990
geographic areas (defined in Exhibit B) for the county or other political subdivision to be
districted.
See Exhibits A and B.
STEP NO. 4. Census Population Tabulations. Obtain United States Bureau of Census
1990 population tabulations as provided for all Census Bureau geographic areas.
See Exhibit A.
STEP NO. 5. Depictions of Precincts or Districts. Prepare graphic depictions of
existing county commissioner precincts (city or school trustee districts) on Census Bureau maps
to determine the census geographic areas within each commissioner's precinct. If the population
tabulations aze available by election precinct, this graphic depiction of existing commissioner
precincts may be done on a map of election precincts instead of census geographic areas. tilaps
of the political subdivisions should be used in conjunction with census maps to ensure accuracy
in locating the boundaries of existing commissioners precincts or other districts.
See Exhibits A and B.
STEP NO. 6. Precinct Tabulations. Prepaze tabulations of 1990 population statistics for
existing county commissioner precincts (city or school trustee districts) [o determine the degree
of disparity in population among the existing commissioner precincts and the racial and ethnic
makeup of each precinct or district.
See Exhibits D and E.
STEP NO. 7. Whether to Redistrict? The county commissioners court (city or school
district governing boazd) should review the results of the tabulations in Step No.6 and, on
consideration of those tabulations in view of state and federal requirements concerning equality
in population, determine whether redistricting is required. If not legally required, redistricting
may still be desirable to meet the needs of the county (city or school district). [f redistricting
is needed, it is within the discretion of the county commissioners court to order that it occur.
The remainder of this guide applies only if the decision is made to redistrict.
STEP NO. 8. Citizen Committee. The county commissioners court (city or school
district governing board) should determine whether to appoint a citizen committee to conduct
hearings and/or to propose plans for redistricting. If such a committee is created, its role may
vary. For example, it may conduct hearings and collect information or it may draw a plan or
alternative plans for review by tfie county commissioners court or the governing body of the
political subdivision involved. The committee cannot be delegated full responsibility for
exercising the authority to redistrict or reapportion, since that authority is vested to the
governing body. Recommendations from the citizen committers should be reviewed and
adopted, modified, or rejected as appropriate, It is important that if plans or
recommendations of the citizen committee are not followed, the reasons for the differing action
of the county commissioners court be explained and be part of the official record of the
reapportionment process. CJltimately, the local governmental body and its officials will be held
responsible for the redistricting plan.
STEP NO. 9. Hearings. Public hearings should be held by the county commissioners
court (city or school district governing board) regarding redistricting andlor the
recommendations of any citizen committee. Such hearings should be held even if hearings are
also held by a citizen committee. If alternative plans were submitted by individuals or groups
representing minority interests or political parties it may be important to provide these plans to
those attending the public hearings or making inquiries so that they can be understood and
discussed thoroughly if they are not adopted.
See Exhibits F and G.
STEP NO. 10. Rules for Redistricting Plans. A commissioners court (city or school
district governing board) may adopt rules that must be followed in order for a redistricting plan
to be considered. Such rules, if adopted, should be adopted by resolution at an early stage of
the process to assure that all affected persons are notified. Copies of the rules should be
available and provided to anyone showing interest in drawing a plan. The rules should require
that all plans or amendments to plans must be accompanied by legal and statistical assessments.
Unless the numbers involved can be verified and the reasons that the proponents believe make
the plan a desirable one can be understood, it will not be possible to evaluate the plan.
STEP NO. 11. Voting Rights Act Preparation. U.S. Department of Justice regulations
require or recommend that certain information accompany a submission under the Voting Rights
Act. Efforts to collect and prepare such information should begin early in the reapportionment
process to assure submission and approval of the enacted reapportionment plan without
unnecessary delay. The inability to obtain prompt approval of the redistricting plan adopted may
result in litigation in which a state federal district judge may draw the precincts or districts
rather than the governmental body.
See Exhibit C.
STEP NO. 12. Criteria for Redistricting. The county commissioners court (city or
school district governing board) should determine those criteria or interests to be recognized
during the redistricting process, keeping in mind that the
controlling criteria must be equality in population. Adoption of a resolution prescribing [hese
selected interests is appropriate.
See Exhibit H.
STEP NO. 13. Protected Minorities. Concentrations of minorities protected under the
Voting Rights Act should be identified. Prepaze a map depicting geographic areas or election
precincts with significant minority populations. Shade the map to distinguish areas or precincts
with (1) over 80% protected minority; (2) 60-80% protected minority; (3) 50-60% protected
minority; and (4) 30-50% protected minority. These maps should show concentrations of black
and Hispanic population separately. To assure compliance with the Voting Rights Act,
commissioner precincts must be drawn so as not to dilute minority voting strength. No county
commissioners precinct (city or school trustee district) boundary line should divide a
recognizable and concentrated minority community so as to produce precincts with less than 65 a
minority population unless there exists an objectively verifiable, legitimate, and significant
purpose for such a boundary.
See Exhibits C and D.
STEP NO. 14. Alternative Plans. Either a single or alternative proposed redistricting
plan should be drawn in accordance with the adopted criteria and requirements of state and
federal law, and proposed for adoption by the county commissioners court (city or school district
governing boazd).
STEP NO. 15. Assessment of Proposed Plans. Once plans are drawn and before they
are considered by the county commissioners court (city or school district governing board), all
such plans should be tested against applicable state and federal requirements, including the
Voting Rights Act, to determine if questionable population deviations or redistricting
characteristics are present. (Exhibit D.) Plans illegal per se must be discarded. A legal
assessment of each plan should be prepared for consideration by the governing body prior to and
at the time of adoption. If questionable population deviations and/or characteristics are present,
they must be corrected or the county commissioners court (city or school district governtng
body) must determine why such deviations or characteristics are necessary. No plan with a
smaller population deviation or with less adverse impact on minorities than the proposed plan
should be refused except for objectively verifiable, legitimate, and significant reasons clearly
established as part of the record of the reapportionment and redistricting process.
See Exhibits D and E.
STEP NO. 16, Adoption of Redistricting Plans. Plans must be adopter.
meetings. Only plans redistricting the entire county (city or school district) shoo.
considered. Written legal and statistical assessments of alternative plans should be availat,.
prior to and at the time of consideration of such plans. Proponents of substitute plans should
be required to present legal and statistical assessments of those plans. Proponents of
amendments to proposed plans should be required to present legal and statistical assessments of
the effect of their amendments, if adopted, on the proposed plan. The same maps and forms
recommended herein for assessing the proposed plan can be used for assessing any alternative
plan or amendment.
See Exhibits D and E.
STEP NO. 17. Post Adoption Review. Following adoption of a plan, a statistical and
legal assessment of the plan should be prepared. Opportunity should be afforded for
reconsideration of the adopted plan.
See Exhibits D and E.
STEP NO. 18. Submission. [f the adopted plan is to be submitted to the Department
of Justice for preclearance under the Voting Rights Act, it should be submitted as soon after
adoption as possible and with all required and suggested materials, Supporting letters from
representatives of the black and Hispanic communities should be included with the submission.
A written request should be filed with the Department of Justice to receive any correspondence,
briefs, or other material or information submitted by anyone to the Department of Justice
regazding the proposed reapportionment. (Pursuant to regulations such information is not
generally released; however, such a request still should be filed.) A written request also should
be filed with the Department of Justice to be notified of the person or persons responsible for
review of the proposed plan and for immediate notification for review of the proposed plan and
for immediate notification of any questions or information required by the Department for its
review. Regular and frequent telephone communication with the reviewer is appropriate. A trip
by local officials to Washington may be worthwhile if major questions arise or if the plan is
disapproved. Attempts to influence review through congressional intervention are not
appropriate. If the Department of Justice fails to preclear the proposed reapportionment, a
request for reconsideration should tae made.
See Exhibit C.
STEP NO. 19. Implementation. Election precincts can and should be redrawn in
accordance with redistricted commissioner precincts and contemporaneously with or upon
adoption of a redistricting plan. Under §42.032 of the Texas Election Code, if changes in
county election precincts are necessary to give effect to the redistricting plan, each
commissioners court shall order the change before October 1 of the year in which the
redistricting is done. Under §42.031 of the Texas Election Code, each commissioners court
shall make a determination during March or April of every odd numbered year as to whether
the county election precincts aze in compliance with statutory population and territorial
requirements in §§42.005-42.007. Though a determination may be made in an even numbered
year, the commissioners court shall order the necessary boundary changes before May 1 of the
yeaz in which the determination is made. Other provisions of Chapter 42 shall be followed,
including the requirement that a plan of election precincts be filed with the Secretary of State
of Texas.
STEP NO. 20. Litigation. Frequently reapportionments will be challenged in state or
federal court. Those responsible for reapportionment should proceed with the awareness that
every aspect of the process may later be scrutinized by a court. If suit is threatened, the county
commissioners court (city or school district governing board) should carefully assess the situation
and determine what is at stake and whether the legal issues are ones on which the county can
prevail. Protracted litigation without the probability of ultimate success can prove extremely
expensive. The principle is first to be sure the county's legal position is correct, and then to
proceed. It is hoped that these guidelines and the Reapportionment Report itself will reduce the
frequency of unnecessary litigation and allow expeditious and successful resolution of those suits
that may be filed.
EXHIBIT A
State and Federal Agencies
Providing Population Information
At this time, the Bureau of the Census is scheduled to release block level population data
by voting age population and ethnic group to the states by Mazch 31, 1991. The data will then
be available on magnetic tape, diskette, or paper in April 1991. Similarly, census geography
information (county, tract, block composition of 1984, 1986, 1988, and 1990 VTDs) will be
available in the fall of 1990. District, county and precinct voter registration data and possibly
turnout results for the 1984, 1986, and 1988 elections will be available in the summer of 1990.
Whereas, district, county, and precinct election returns for the 1984, 1986, and 1988 elections
will be available in the winter of 1990. All of this information may be obtained from the
following federal and state offices.
AUSTIN CENSUS BUREAU
State Data Center
Texas Department of Commerce
816 Congress Avenue
Austin, Texas 78701
(512)472-5059
TEXAS SECRETARY OF STATE
Elections Division
201 East 14th Street, Room 908
Austin, Texas 78711
(Sl2)463-5650
UNITED STATES BUREAU OF THE CENSUS
Customer Service Branch
Data User Services Division
Washington, D. C. 20233
(301)763-4100
EXHIBIT B
Census Geography
The following hierarchy of geographic units will be used in the distribution of census data
to the states:
1) State
2) County
3) Minor Civil Division/Census County Division -- a subdivision of a county based
on political, administrative, or statistical characteristics
4) Place
a. Incorporated place -- A governmental unit incorporated under state law as
a city, town, village, or borough having legally prescribed limits, powers.
and functions
b. Census designated place -- A statistical area comprising a densely settled
concentration of population that is not incorporated but which resembles
an incorporated place
5) Census TracUBlock Numbering Area -- An area delineated for grouping and
numbering of blocks. These usually contain between 2,500 and 8,000 inhabitants
and they do not cross county lines.
6) Block Group -- A combination of census blocks comprising a subdivision of a
census tract or black numbering area. These are equivalent to and a substitute for
enumeration districts used in prior censuses.
7) Block -- An area bounded on all sides by visible features such as streets, roads,
streams, and railroad tracks. Blocks do not cross census tract or block numbering
area boundaries. A block is the smallest geographic tabulation area from the 1990
census.
The 1990 census will provide population data at the block level for the entire country by
voting age population and ethnic group. Anew feature to aggregate the census units lblocks.
block groups, census tracts, etc.) will be used in 1990. This feature is currently being developed
by the state and is called a Voter Tabulation District (VTD). A VTD will be the closest
approximation to election precinct boundaries that is possible. VTDs are recommended as the
basic building block for redistricting since geographic and political boundaries are delineated in
them.
EXHIBIT C
Guidelines for Voting Rights Section 5 Submissions
The contents of submissions are set out at 28 CFR §SL26 et seq. The best practice is
to submit both the required material listed in Section 51.27 and the supplemental material set
out in Section 51.28. Relevant portions of those regulations are set out below.
Subpart C-Contents of Submissions
§SL26 General.
(a) The source of any information contained in a submission should be
identified.
(b) Where an estimate is provided in lieu of more reliable statistics, the
submission should identify the name, position, and qualifications of the
person responsible for the estimate and should briefly describe the basis
for the estimate.
(c) Submissions should be no longer than is necessary for the presentation
of the appropriate information and materials.
(d) The Attorney General will not accept for review any submission that fails
to describe the subject change in sufficient particularity to satisfy the
minimum requirements of §51.27(c).
(e) A submitting authority that desires the Attorney General to consider any
information supplied as part of an earlier submission may incorporate
such information by reference by stating the date and subject matter of
the earlier submission and identifying the relevant information.
(f) Where information requested by this subpart is relevant but not known
or available, or is not applicable, the submission should so state.
§51.27 Required contents.
Each submission should contain the following information ~
to enable the Attorney General to make the required determination pursuant to Sect.
respect to the submitted change affecting voting:
(a) A copy of any ordinance, enactment, order, or reQulatie.
embodying a change affecting voting.
(b) A copy of any ordinance, enactment, order, or regulation
embodying the voting practice that is proposed to be repeated,
amended, or otherwise changed.
(c) [f the change affecting voting either is not readily apparent on the
face of the documents provided under paragraphs (a) and (b) of
this section or is not embodied in a document, a clear statement of
the change explaining the difference between the submitted change
and the prior law or practice, or explanatory materials adequate to
disclose to the Attorney General the difference between the prior
and proposed situation with respect to voting.
(d) The name, title, address, and telephone number of the person
making the submission.
(e) The name of the submitting authority and the name of the
jurisdiction responsible for the change, if different.
(f) If the submission is not from a State or county, the name of the
county and State in which the submitting authority is located.
(g) IdentiFication of the person or body responsible for making the
change and the mode of decision (e.g., act of State legislature,
ordinance of city council, administrative decision by registrar).
(h) A statement identifying the statutory or other authority under
which the jurisdiction undertakes the change and a description of
the procedures the jurisdiction was required to follow in deciding
to undertake the change.
(i) The date of adoption of the change affecting voting.
(j) The date on which the change is to take affect.
(k) A statement that the change has not yet been enforced or
administered, or an explanation of why such a statement cannot be
made.
(1) Where the change will affect less than the entire jurisdiction, an
explanation of the scope of the change.
(m) A statement of the reasons for the change.
(n) A statement of the anticipated effect of the change on members of
racial or language minority groups.
(o) A statement identifying any past or pending litigation concerning
the change or related voting practices.
(p) A statement that the prior practice has been precleared (with the
date) or is not subject to the preclearance requirement and a
statement that the procedure for the adoption of the change has
been precleared (with the date) or is not subject to the preclearance
requirement, or an explanation of why such statements cannot be
made.
(q) For redistrictings and annexations: the items listed under
§S1.28(a)(I) and (b)(l); for annexations only: the items listed
under §51.28(c)(3).
(r) Other information that the Attorney General determines is required
for an evaluation of the purpose or effect of the change. Such
information may include items listed in §51.28 and is most likely
to be needed with respect to redistrictings, annexations, and other
complex changes. In the interest of time such information should
be furnished with the initial submission relating to voting changes
of this type. When such information is required, but not provided,
the Attorney General shall notify the submitting authority in the
manner provided in §51.37.
§51.28 Supplemental contents.
Review by the Attorney General will be facilitated it the following
information, where pertinent, is provided in addition to that required by §51.27.
(a) Demographic information. (1) Total and voting age population of
the affected area before and after the change, by race and language
group. If such information is contained in publications of the U.S.
Bureau of the Census, reference to the appropriate volume and
table is sufficient.
(2) The number of registered voters for the affected area of
voting precinct before and after the change, by race and
language groups.
(3) Any estimates of population, by race and language group,
made in connection with the adoption of the change.
(b) Maps. Where any change is made that revises the constituency
that elects any office or affects the boundaries of any geographic
unit or units defined or employed for voting purposes (e.g.,
redistricting, annexation, change from district to at-large elections)
or that changes voting precinct boundaries, polling place locations,
or voter registration sites, maps in duplicate of the area to be
affected, containing the following information:
(1) The prior and new boundaries of the voting unit or units.
(2) The prior and new boundaries of voting precincts.
(3) The location of racial and language minority groups.
(4) Any natural boundaries or geographical features that
influenced the selection of boundaries of the prior or new
units.
(5) The location of prior and new polling places.
(6) The location of prior and new voter registration sites.
(c) Annexations. For annexations, in addition to that information
specified elsewhere, the following information:
(1) The present and expected future use of the annexed land
(e.g., garden apartments, industrial park).
(2) An estimate of the expected population, by race and
language group, when anticipated development, if any, is
completed.
(3) A statement that all prior annexations subject to the
preclearance requirement have been submitted for review,
or a statement that identifies all annexations subject to the
prectearartce requirement that have not been submitted for
review. See §51.61(b).
(d) Election returns. Where a change may affect [he electoral
influence of a racial or language minority group, returns of
primary and general elections conducted by or in the jurisdiction,
containing the following information:
(1) The name of each candidate.
(2) The race or language group of each candidate, if known.
(3) The position sought by each candidate.
(4) The number of votes received by each candidate, by voting
precinct.
(5) The outcome of each contest.
(6) The number of registered voters, by race and language
group, for each voting precinct for which election returns
are furnished. Information with respect to elections held
during the last ten years will normally be sufficient.
(e) language usage. Where a change is made affecting the use of the
language of a language minority group in the electoral process,
information that will enable the Attorney General to determine
whether the change is consistent with the minority language
requirements of the Act. The Attorney General's interpretation of
the minority language requirements of the Act is contained in
Interpretative Guidelines: Implementation of the Provisions of the
Voting Rights Act Regarding Language Minority Groups, 28 CFR
Part 55.
(t) Publicity and participation. For submissions involving
controversial or potentially controversial changes, evidence of
public notice, of the opportunity for the public to be heard, and of
the opportunity for interested parties to participate in the decision
to adopt the proposed change and an account of the extent to which
such participation, especially by minority group members, in tact
took place. Examples of materials demonstrating public notice or
participation include:
(1) Copies of newspaper articles discussion the proposed
change.
(2) Copies of public notices that describe the proposed change
and invite public comment oc participation in hearings and
statements regazding where such public notices appeared
(e.g., newspaper, radio or television, posted in public
buildings, sent to identified individuals or groups).
(3) Minutes or accounts of public hearings concerning the
proposed change.
(4) Statements, speeches, and other public communications
concerning the proposed change.
(5) Copies of comments from the general public.
(6) Excerpts from legislative journals containing discussion of
a submitted enactment, or other materials revealing its
legislative purpose.
(g) Availability of the submission. Copies of public notices that
announce the submission to the Attorney General, inform the
public that a complete duplicate copy of the submission is available
for public inspection (e.g., at the county courthouse) and mvue
comments for the consideration of the Attorney General and
statements regarding where such public notices appeared.
(h) Minority group contacts. For submissions from jurisdictions
having a significant minority population, the names, addresses,
telephone numbers, and organizational affilia[ion (if any) of racial
or language minority group members residing in the jurisdiction
who can be expected to be familiar with the proposed change or
who have been active in the political process.
The submission should be sent to the following address:
Chief, Voting Section
Civil Rights Division
Department of Justice
P. O. Box 66128
Washington, D.C. 20035-6128
EXHIBIT D
Compilation of Population and Population Characteristics
The following chart may be used for determining the population and population
characteristics of existing county commissioner precincts (city or school trustee districts). It
similarly may be utilized to calculate such information for proposed precincts (districts).
Once existing or proposed county commissioner precincts (city or school trustee districts)
are depicted on census or election precinct maps, all voting tabulation districts located in whole
or in part within the boundaries of the precinct (district) should be identified and listed in
Column No.l. All population statistics should then be entered into the table and totaled to
determine the impact of the precinct (district) boundaries. Where a voting tabulation district is
divided by a boundary line, population data must be obtained by block. The relevant statistics
for each block must be aggregated to obtain a total for the particular portion of the voting
tabulation district in question.
EXNIB~T D
~qqp CENSUS coMPr[.AT~oN
OVERAId. STATISTICS
Comn-issioner Prec-nt No•
Ccnsm
GW'
~typ>,ic
Unix
Toa-
Pop"~~
Bpck
TO~I Col.
Col 3
2-
W Totyl
Nup Col. Col.
Col 5 6
4
'rJ1yI
QetcentagG
peicGCtw&r Voting A~°
popolylion - pngl°
Yotin ~A~C TJ~ Blyck CuP. Col.
P JP" n M81a 1
Blsck Nisp Col. Co{ C41. IS f6
Bl-°k Nisp. MoW Col. Cll l2 13
Cnl Col 9 i0
7 8
EXHIBIT E
Calculation of Population Equality
Among Precincts or Districts
There are numerous statistical measures utilized by [he courts to determine whether a
redistricting plan meets constitutional requirements for equality in population. In considering
population deviations, the following statistical measures may be used:
Statistical Measures of Populations Equality
Ideal Precinct (District)	equals	the total county (city or
Population		school district) population
		divided by the number of
		precincts (districts).
For Individual Precincts (Districts)
Absolute Deviation	equals	the precinct population
		minus the ideal population
Relative Deviation	equals	the precinct population
		divided by the ideal
		population (usually
		expressed as a percent).
For All Precincts (Districts) in the Redistricting Area
Absolute Range	is	the largest precinct's
		population and the smallest
		precinct's population.
Relative Range	is	the largest precinct's
		relative deviation and [he
		smallest precinct's relative
		deviation.
Absolute Mean Deviation	equals	the sum of all the precincts'
		absolute deviations divided
		by the number of precincts
		(ignoring + and -signs).
Relative Mean Deviation	equals	the sum of all the precincts'
		relative deviations divided
		by the number of precincts
		(ignoring + and -signs).
Standard Deviation	equals	the square root of the sum
		of al the squares of all the
		precincts' deviations
		divided by the number of
		precincts.
Total Maximum Deviation	equals	the largest precinct's
		relative deviation plus the
		smallest precinct's relative
		deviation (ignoring + and -
		signs).
The most common statistical measure of all precincts collectively is the total maximum
deviation.
EXHIBIT F
Public Notice
A PUBLIC MEETING
TO DISCUSS
REDUCTION TO TWO JUSTICE OF PEACE PRECINCTS*
FOR COUNTY*
WILL BE HELD ON
IN
AT
,TEXAS
Maps showing the boundaries proposed by the commissioners court for the two justice
of peace precincts can be examined at the [office of the county clerk in the courthouse] or
purchased for $ from the [county clerk's office at (address)].
Any person or group may submit a proposed plan for the two justice of the peace
precincts on or before .Any plan submitted should not operate to dilute
the voting strength of racial or language minority citizens, should be based on 1990 census
geography and statistics or other reliable source, should be composed of territory that is
contiguous and reasonably compact, and should preserve historic boundaries and recognize
clearly identifiable community interests to the extent possible.
EXHIBIT G
Letter to Members of
Mexican-American Community re
Reduction to Two Justice Precincts
Dear [insert names of individuals members of Mexican-American community here]:
The County Commissioners Court has determined that it would be in the best
interest of the citizens of County to reduce the justice of peace precincts to two. The
commissioners court has drawn proposed boundary lines for two justice of peace precincts.
The County plans to provide opportunity for all persons in the community to participate
in the process by which the final boundary lines will be drawn. Comments, suggestions, and
proposed plans are welcome. A public hearing on reducing to two justice precincts will be held
on at
Maps showing the boundaries preliminarily proposed by the County are available for
$_ These maps may be obtained from or examined at the office at
Street.
Any person or group that wishes to submit a proposed districting plan for the
commissioners court's consideration should submit the plan to the county clerk on or before
so that the plan may be inspected prior to the public hearing to be held on
The following criteria will be used by the commissioners court in
assessing plans for adoption:
1. Any plan should not operate to dilute the voting strength of racial or language
minority citizens.
2. Any plan should not fragment minority communities or pack them into districts
in concentrations greater than needed to elect minority representation.
3. Any plan should be drawn to conform with geographic boundaries utilized by the
Bureau of the Census in the 1990 census to the extent possible unless other reliable sources are
used.
4. Any plan should be based on 1990 census data unless other reliable sources are
used.
5. Any districts should be composed of territory that is contiguous and reasonably
compact.
6. Any plan, to the extent possible, should preserve historical boundaries, and should
recognize clearly identifiable economic or community interests.
These criteria should be followed in any districting plans submitted for the County's
consideration.
If you or other members of or groups within the Mexican-American community would
like to submit a plan or make comments or suggestions, the County is very much interested in
receiving them for consideration during the districting process. Ptease feel free to call
at (telephone number) if you have ques[ions about the districting
process.
We look forward to working with you on this important matter.
Sincerely,
EXHIBIT H
Resolution
WHEREAS, on 19 ,the City Charter was amended to provide for a
city council of seven persons to be elected from single-member districts; and
WHEREAS, it is now necessary to apportion the city into council districts; and
WHEREAS, in effecting the apportionment process, the city is subject to numerous federal and
state constitutional, statutory, and case law requirements; and
WHEREAS, the city has retained attorneys who have experience in the field of federal voting
rights law to assist it in the apportionment process; and
WHEREAS, it is the intent of the city to be sure that the apportionment is in full compliance
with the Voting Rights Act and with all other relevant law; and
WHEREAS, the city desires to afford all persons in the community an opportunity to participate
in the apportionment process; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the city give public notice of a public hearing to be held on a proposed
districting plan to be held ;and be it further
RESOLVED, that citizens be given an opportunity to present proposed districting plans for
consideration by the city council by submitting such plans to the City Secretary on or before
so that any such plan is available for inspection prior to the heartng; and
be it further
RESOLVED, that persons be afforded an opportunity to participate and to make comments and
suggestions at the public hearing even if they do not submit a proposed plan by the time set out
above; and be it further
RESOLVED, that citizens desiring to submit plans or make comments be advised that any plans
should meet the following criteria which the council will follow in its adoption of a plan:
(L) Any plan should have seven districts of substantially equal population;
(2) Any plan should not act to dilute the voting strength of racial or language
minority citizens;
(3) Any plan should avoid fragmenting or packing minority communities;
(4) Any plan should be drawn to conform with geographic boundaries utilized by the
Bureau of the Census in the 1990 census to the extent possible;
(5) Any plan should be based on 1990 census data;
(6) Any districts should be composed of territory that is contiguous and reasonably
compact and
('n Any plan, to the extent possible, should preserve historic boundaries, should
recognize clearly identifiable economic or community interests and should
preserve constituency-representative relations by minimizing contests among
incumbents.
EXHIBIT I
Notice of Intent by
Commissioners Court to
Reapportion County Commissioners Precincts
The Federal Voting Rights Ac[ requires county commissioner courts to meet certain
requirements and in order to be in compliance with the Federal statute. The County
Commissioners Court has determined that new commissioner precinct lines need to be
established.
The County plans to provide opportunity for all persons in the community to participate
in the process by which the final boundary lines will be drawn. Comments, suggestions, and
proposed plans are welcome. A public hearing on reapportioning commissioner precincts will
be held on at
Maps showing the boundaries preliminarily proposed by the County are available for
$ These maps may be obtained from or examined at the office at
Street.
Any persons or group that wishes to submit a proposed redistricting plan for the
commissioners court's consideration should submit the plan to the county clerk on or before
so that the plan may be inspected prior to the public hearing to be held on
.The following criteria will be used by the commissioners court in assessing
plans for adoption.
Any plan should not operate to dilute the voting strength of racial or language
minority citizens.
2. Any plan should not fragment minority communities or pack them into districts
in concentrations greater than needed to elect minority representation.
3. Any plan should be drawn to conform with geographic boundaries utilized by the
Bureau of the Census in the 1990 census to the extent possible unless other
reliable sources are used.
4. Any plan should be based on 1990 census data unless it can be shown that other
more reliable sources were used.
5. Any districts should be composed of territory that is contiguous and reasonably
compact.
6. Any plan, to the extent possible, should preserve historical boundaries, and should
recognize clearly identifiable economic or community interests.
These criteria should be followed in any redistricting plans submitted for the County's
consideration.
If anyone or groups would like to submit a plan or make comments or suggestions, the
County is very much interested in receiving them for consideration during the redistricting
process. Please feet free to call at [Telephone numbed if you have questions about
the redistricting process.
COUNTY lUDGE
County, Texas
Bickerstaff, Heath & Smiley
SAN JwCINTO CENTER, SUITE 1800
9B $wN JACINTO BOULEVARD
AVSTI N, TExAS ]B]01-4039
512/4]2-8021
TELECO PV ON LV: 312/320-3639
January 24, 1991
The Honorable W. G. "Bill" Stacy
Kerr County Judge
Kerr County Courthouse
Kerrville, TX 78028
STEVE DICRERSTFFF	MAN VEL O. MENDEZ•
G. RO BE RT HEATN•	SYDNEY W. FALN. JR.
MART Nw E. SMILEV	DhV10 MENOE2'
THOMAS M. FOL LLN•	CATNE RINE BROWN FRVER•
ANN CLARRE SHELL	FATRICIA E. RANT
wN OREW MEVER•	J. GREG HUDSON
CAROLVN E. SHELL Mr.N	WILLIAM D. DUGAT III
DOUGLA4 G. CwgOOM•	JESUS SIFUENTES
LIN pw AANER	DEBORAH NERZBERG LOOMIS
MVRA A. McDANIEL	BARNEV L KNIGHT
SUSAN C. GENTZ	KELLEY R. wTi(INSON
ROBIN w CASEY	VALARIE SCOTT BRISTOL
KATIE BOND	LYNN RAV SNERMAN
•BUtO Grtl/IW.	AG mInIMt.tIV. Law-
n... Bo..a w	LRwI 9waullutbn
Re: Redistricting of County Commissioner Precincts
Dear Judge Stacy:
The members of this firm have had extensive experience in
regard to the redrawing of county commissioner precincts. Enclosed
is a brief description of that experience. we would be pleased to
provide assistance to Kerr County, and we would be glad to fashion
our professional services to meet the County's specific needs.
The objective of any participation by this firm would be to
assist Kerr County in the design and adoption of a redistricting
plan that fully complies with all applicable legal requirements
while meeting appropriate policy considerations identified by the
Commissioners Court. Obviously, there can be no guarantee that
litigation will not be filed; but, by taking care to comply with
the requirement of the law throughout the process, Kerr County can
minimize the likelihood of costly litigation and better assure
success for the County if such litigation occurs.
For purposes of consideration by the Commissioners Court, we
submit the following two alternative proposals:
1. L~e al Advice. This firm would be prepared to provide
eg1 al advice to Kerr County personnel as needed on an
hourly basis. The hourly rate for the law partners who
would provide such legal advice is $160.00. Any and all
such advice would be predicated on the completion by
those attorneys of all due diligence necessary to provide
the advice. Associates and technical staff are billed at
an hourly rate from $50.00 to $150.00 based on
experience. The total cost of this alternative is highly
variable, but probably could be expected to be in the
range of $2,000 to $10,000.
The Honorable W. G. "Bill" Stacy
January 24, 1991
Page 2
Flat Fee Le al and Technical Assistance _____T~~hrou~~~h
Redistricting Process. T is irm wou a prepare~to
provide:
A. Legal assistance to Kerr County through the
redistricting process, including: (1) the design of
a process and necessary court resolutions intended
to achieve compliance with all applicable state and
federal laws in order to reduce the likelihood of
any litigation; (2) attendance at up to 3 County
Commissioner meetings and public hearings during
the adoption process; (3) a legal review and
analysis of all redistricting proposals; and (4)
the drafting of the submission of the County's
redistricting plan to the Department of Justice
under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.
B. Prepare and present for consideration by the
Commissioners Court of Kerr County up to three
redistricting plans based on census data, testimony
at public hearings and legitimate criteria
prescribed by the Commissioners Court.
The total cost of this alternative, including legal
assistance, would be $15,000. As a preliminary step for
this alternative, the firm would be prepared to make an
initial assessment of the possible need for county
redistricting. The cost of this initial assessment would
be $2,500, which would be credited toward the total cost
if the County then proceeded to redistrict using this
firm for legal and technical assistance.
The total cost figures are exclusive of travel, copying and
other customary expenses, which will be identified separately on
the statements. Certain possible eventualities, such as attendance
by a firm attorney at more than three meetings or hearings, a trip
to Washington, D.C. to obtain Section 5 preclearance, preparation
of software to include analysis of election results, the
preparation of more redistricting plans than initially agreed upon
by Kerr County, and the defense of the County in litigation are not
part of these proposals and, if necessary, would add to the cost.
However, such additional costs would occur only if requested or
approved by Kerr County.
The figure set out in alternative 2 represents a flat fee for
the services described. The flat fee provides some protection
against a higher than anticipated cost; however, it also presents
the possibility that the total fee may be more than would have been
the case under a straight hourly fee arrangement. The firm would
be willing to provide these same services on an hourly fee basis if
that is the option the County desires.
The Honorable w. G. "Bill" Stacy
January 24, 1991
Page 3
This firm will be pleased to work with Kerr County to come up
with the best possible arrangement for services. However, I urge
that the County carefully consider the second alternative, either
on a flat fee or an hourly basis. Improved availability in 1990 of
census data, software specifically designed for redistricting, and
persons experienced in use of such data and software now make it
possible for a firm like this one to efficiently draw districts.
We believe that this second alternative allows the County to
achieve the County's objectives without expenditures that otherwise
might be necessary for software, personnel or training and without
unnecessary intrusion on the limited time of county staff. Again,
however, we would be pleased to work on any mutually agreeable
basis.
Thank you for your consideration of this matter.
Sincerely,
B^MCtq ~ ~j ~~~
Thomas M. Pollan
TMP:ea
Enclosure
cc: Kerr County Commissioners
PROPOSAL FOR PROFESSIONAL
REDISTRICTING SERVICES
HICRERSTAFF, HEATH 6 SMILEY
INTRODUCTION
Bickerstaff, Heath & Smiley provides a full range of services
in local governments for redistricting because local governments
differ in the resources available to them. Some may be able to
perform virtually all of the redistricting work with their own
staff. Others, because of local circumstances, may choose to have
most of the redistricting work done by outside counsel on a
contractual basis. Whatever your situation, we are willing to work
with you and to provide you the appropriate level of assistance.
Whether the assistance needed is a consultation addressing your
concerns about the redistricting process or a full scale commitment
on our part to draw the actual district lines subject to your
guidance and approval, we are prepared to help you.
Depending upon the time involved, expertise needed, size and
complexity of your governmental entity, and other local
circumstances, the cost of professional redistricting services can
range from $1,000 to $20,000 or more. To the extent which you can
predict and explain your needs, we can provide an estimate of the
cost of redistricting services.
I. Exuerience and Qualifications
Bickerstaff, Heath & Smiley has been extensively involved
in redistricting law with representation limited to governmental
entities. We represented the State of Texas in the lengthy
litigation challenging the 1980 reapportionment of legislative and
congressional districts. The firm has also assisted numerous
governmental entities either by consulting with them or by actually
setting up and overseeing redistricting from notice of proposed
changes through submission to the Department of Justice for
preclearance.
II. Range of Poaaible Redistricting Services
The following is a listing of redistricting services that
Bickerstaff, Heath & Smiley offers.
A. Consult about proper approach to redistricting
(including initial preparation, ways to elicit
minority/community participation, and evaluation of
available local resources for staffing and data
gathering)
B.	Draft	notices,	resolutions, orders
C.	Help	establish	redistricting criteria
D. Conduct/address public hearings
E. Evaluate locally produced redistricting plans
F. Draw districts (with or without direction from city
council, commissioners court, or school board)
G. Prepare documents for Department of Justice
submission
H. Act as liaison with the Department of Justice
one of the purposes of following a careful redistricting
process is to minimize the possibility of litigation. However, if
a lawsuit is filed challenging the validity of the districting plan
adopted by your local government, the firm would be available to
discuss defending the plan.
III. Estimate of Cost
The following are cost estimates for redistricting
services. It is important to keep in mind that the more work that
is done locally, the less expensive it will be for your local
government. All estimates are exclusive of out-of-pocket and
travel expenses.
A. Consultations
Consultations will be beneficial if the local
government provides questions/background
information prior to the meeting. Fees are likely
to range between $1,000 to $2,000 based on the
complexity of the local situation.
B. Draft Documents (notices, orders, resolutions)
Fees generally range from $400 to $~5o depending on
the number and frequency of documents produced.
C. Establish Redistricting Criteria
Fees customarily range from $1,000 to $1,500
depending upon complexity of the local situation.
D. Conduct/Public Hearings
Fees range from $1,000 to $10,000 depending upon
the magnitude of preparations needed and number and
length of hearings.
-2-
E. Evaluate Locally Produced Districting Proposals
Fees range from $2,000 to $5,000 or more depending
upon the complexity of the local situation
including number of proposals.
F. Draw Districts
Fees range from $4,000 to $10,000 depending upon
the direction given from the local government and
the revisions needed.
G. Preparation of Department of Justice Documents
Fees range from $1,000 to $5,000 depending upon the
complexity of the submission.
H. Act as a Liaison with the Department of Justice
Fees range from $500 to $2,000 depending upon the
frequency of contact with the Department of
Justice.
IV. Litigation
In the event that your redistricting plan should be
challenged, we can provide litigation services. We have litigated
for counties, cities, school districts, and the State of Texas. We
have represented the City of Austin, City of Houston, City of
Midland and the City of Springfield, Illinois; the Texas
Association of School Boards; Jefferson County, Texas; Southwest
Texas Junior College District; and other political entities in
court proceedings. We have also consulted with numerous other
political subdivisions and their local counsel about how to handle
litigation or to assist with substantive legal issues.
CONCLUSION
If you have a redistricting budget, we can prepare a proposal
to provide redistricting services within that budget. We can also
assist you in preparing such a budget. We can recommend the mix of
services that we believe would be appropriate and assist you in
developing alternative approaches to reduce expenditures for
professional services.
we frequently advise local government clients that they are in
a position to do most of the redistricting work themselves. We
recognize the fact the local governments operate in a variety of
ways and we are willing to tailor our services to meet your needs.
We look forward to talking with you about your situation.
-3-
SELECTED E%PERIENCE REGARDING REAPPORTIONMENT
AND REDISTRICTING ISSUES
Legal Advisor on redistricting for Senate of the State of Texas following 1980 Census.
The firm represented the State of Texas in redistricting litigation, including Terrazas v.
Clements, 537 F. Supp. 514 (N.D. Tex. 1982) (3-judge court); Seamon v. Uoham, 536 F. Supp. 931
(E.D. Tex. 1982) (3-judge court); Uoham v. White, 639 S.W.2d 301 (Tex. 1982); Clements v.
Galles, 620 S.W.2d 112 (Tex. 1981); Graves v. Barnes, 446 F. Supp. 560 (W.D. Tex. 1977)
(3-judge court).
The firm has advised and, when necessary, represented dozens of political subdivisions in Texas
and elsewhere, including representation in cases such as Overton v. City of Austin, 871 F.2d
529 (5th Cir. 1989); McNeil v. City of Sorinofield, 658 F. Supp. 1015 (C.D. I11. 1987); and
Le aoue of United Latin American Citizens v. Midland I.S.D., 829 F.2d 546 (5th Cir. 1987) (en
banc).
The firm has prepared redistricting plans for numerous cities and counties, advised others, and
assisted cities from the original draft of enabling charter amendments to approval by the
Depaartme:it of Justice.
SELECTED PVHLICATZONS AND PRESENTATIONS
REGARDING REDISTRICTING AND REAPPORTIONMENT
Steve Biekerstaff
'Reapportionment by State Legislatures: A Guide for the 1980'x,'• 34 Southwestern Law Journal
607 (1980). (An expanded version of this article was published by the Texas Senate in Novembe:
1980.)
'Reapportionment by State and Local Governments: A Guide for the 1980's," (March 1981).
'Why Redistrict?'•, County Progress (June 1982).
C. Robert Heath
'Thornburc v. GinOles: The Unresolved Issues," 79 National Civic Review 50 (1990). (This
article relates to issues arising from the leading U.S. Supreme Court case on single-member
districts.)
'Effect of Annexation Prior to Preclearance Under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act,
presented to the Section on Zoning, Planning and Land Development of the National Institute o
Huaic ipal Law Officers, Washington, D.C. (March 16, 1986) (The National Institute of Municina
Lasr Officers is the national association for city attorneys).
'Recent Developments in Voting Rights Law,'• presented to the National Institute of Municipa
Lay officers, Seattle, Washington (October 1989).
i
'Preparing for Redistricting after the 1990 Census," presented to the National Institute o
Municipal Law Officers, Washington, D.C. (March 1990).
'Voting Rights: Defendant's Perspective," presented at "Suing and Defending Governmenta
Entities and Officials," State Har of Texas Professional Development Program, Dallas and 5a
Antonio, Texas (February 1990).
'Section 2, Section 5, One Man-One Vote--Surviving Redistricting Without Litigation," presente
to the National Institute of Municipal Law Officers, Boston, Massachusetts (September 23, 1990)
Suite 1800, San Jacinto Ce,uer 512/772.8021
TICKERS[',\FF, IIEATII 4 SNILEY 98 Sao Jacinto BoWerard FAX: 512132 0. 563 8
Austin, Te<at 78701-1079 TOLL FREE: 1-800.T~9-666