I;L=F3CL_lJT'7:01~I AT)(.7F''T':f IJG (:;I~T:1 E::f2I:f1 FiC.=I)T'aT'FiSC'T'TIJCi C'FiC]CI.::ii (h~ 'th:is •thc. F_'3rd de± c:>'F rerl:istr:ir_t:inng f?E)(8:L prcrcF:•ss„ COMMISSIONERS' COURT AGENDA REQUEST PLEASE FURNISH ONE ORIGINAL AND NINE COPIES OF THIS REQUEST AND DOCUMENTS TO BE REVIEWED BY THE COURT. MADE BY: Fred He ~ OFFICE: County Judge MEETING DATE: April 23, 2001 SUBJECT: (PLEASE BE SPECIFIC) TIME PREFERRED: 4:00 Consider and discuss adoption of criteria to govern development of redistricting plans. EXECUTIVE SESSION REQUESTED: (PLEASE STATE REASON) NAME OF PERSON ADDRESSING THE COURT: ESTIMATED LENGTH OF PRESENTATION: IF PERSONNEL MATTER -NAME OF EMPLOYEE: Time for submitting this request for Court to assure that the matter is posted in accordance with Title 5, Chapter 551 and 552, Government Code, is as follows: Meeting scheduled for Mondays: THIS REQUEST RECEIVED BY: THIS REQUEST RECEIVED ON: County Judge 5:00 P.M. previous Tuesday. All Agenda Requests will be screened by the County Judge's Office to determine if adequate information has been prepared for the Court's formal consideration and action at time of Court Meetings. Your cooperation will be appreciated and contribute towazds you request being addressed at the eazliest opportunity. See Agenda Request Rules Adopted by Commissioners' Court. Sample Redistricting Criteria The court will observe the following criteria, to the greatest extent possible, when drawing district boundazies: Where possible, easily identifiable geographic boundaries should be followed. 2. Communities of interest should be maintained in a single district, where possible, and attempts should be made to avoid splitting neighborhoods. To the extent possible, districts should be composed of whole voting precincts. Where this is not possible or practicable, districts should be drawn in a way that permits the creation of practical voting precincts and that ensures that adequate facilities for polling places exist in each voting precinct. 4. Although it is recognized that existing districts will have to be altered to reflect new population distribution, any districting plan should, to the extent possible, be based on existing districts. Districts must be configured so that they are relatively equal in total population according to the 2000 federal census. In no event should the total deviation between the largest and the smallest district exceed ten percent. The court will attempt to achieve a deviation that is less than ten percent under either set of data released by the Census Bureau.` 6. The districts should be compact and composed of contiguous territory. Compactness may contain a functional, as well as a geographical dimension. ~ It is possible that the Census Bureau will release both head count data and data that has been adjusted by the use of a statistical sample. As a practical matter, we believe the choice of one set over the other is unlikely to have a significant effect at the local level. We believe that the best course is to be sure that any plan meets the ten percent deviation limit under both sets of data. This should not be overly difficult in most plans. Following this strategy should make it more difficult for persons on both sides of the census adjustment debate to challenge the ultimate plan on the basis of the numbers that were used. z Functional compactness is a sometimes controversial notion that has appeazed in some cases. Basically, the concept is that compactness is not simply a matter of geography but can include considerations such as (1) the availability of transportation and communication, (2) the existence of common social and economic interests, (3) the ability of the districts to relate to each other, and (A) the existence of shazed interests. We do not anticipate that we will rely heavily on functional compactness, but there may be instances in which it comes into play. For example, we might be able to draw a very geographically compact district by including land on both sides of a river. If, however, the nearest bridge is several miles away, our geographically compact district may not be functionally compact. Saying that compactness has a functional dimension gives us flexibility [o address this type of situation. Consideration may be given to the preservation of incumbent-constituency relations by recognition of the residence of incumbents and their history in representing certain areas. The plan should be narrowly tailored to avoid retrogression' in the position of racial minorities and language minorities as defined in the Voting Rights Act with respect to their effective exercise of the electoral franchise. 9. The plan should not fragment" a geographically compact minority community or packs minority voters in the presence of polarized voting so as to create liability under section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1973. The commissioners court will review all plans in light of these criteria and will evaluate how well each plan conforms to the criteria. Any plan submitted to the commissioners court by a citizen for its consideration should be a complete plan-i. e., it should show the full number of districts and should redistrict the entire county. The court may decline to consider any plan that is not a complete plan. All plans submitted by citizens, as well as plans submitted by staff, consultants, the citizens advisory committee, and members of the commissioners court should conform to these criteria. ' Retrogression is the standazd used by the Departrnent of Justice and the courts to determine if a plan can be precleared under section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. Basically, a redistricting plan is retrogressive if "its net effect would be to reduce minority voters' `effective exercise of the electoral franchise' when compared to the benchmark plan." 66 Fen. REG. 5412, 5413 (Jan. 18, 2001) (Department of Justice, Guidance Concerning Redistricting and Retrogression Under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1973c; Notice), quoting Beer v. Unrted States, 425 U.S. 130, 141 (1976). The benchmark against which retrogression is measured is the last legally enforceable redistricting plan-typically the plan that was drawn under the prior decade's census and is now being replaced. Fragmenting or fracturing occurs when a geographically compact area of minority voters is split into two or more districts when, if the area had been put in a single district, it would have had greater voting strength. s Packing refers to concentrating excessively large numbers of minority voters in a single district. For example, if a district is drawn to be 90 percent African-American, that group's influence may be limited to that single district when, if it had been split, the group might have had an opportunity to elect candidates of their choice in two districts. ORDER NO. ~ (~ 9 9 (~ THE STATE OF TEXAS § THE COUNTY OF KERR § KERR COUNTY RESOLUTION ADOPTING CRITERIA FOR USE IN REDISTRICTING 2001 PROCESS WHEREAS, this Commissioners Court has certain responsibilities for redistricting under federal and state law including, but not limited to, Amendments 14 and 15 to the United States Constitution, U.S.C.A. (West 1987), and the Voting Rights Act, 42 U.S.C.A. § 1973, et seq. (West 1987 and Supp. 1999); Article 5, Section 18 of the Texas Constitution (Vernon 1993 and Supp. 2000); and Tex. Gov't Code Ann. §§ 2058.001 and 2058.002 (Vernon Pamph. 2000); and WHEREAS, on review of the 2000 census data it appears that a population imbalance exists requiring redistricting of the County's Commissioner Precincts; and WHEREAS, it is the intent of the County to comply with the Voting Rights Act and with all other relevant law, including Shaw v. Reno jurisprudence; and WHEREAS, a set of established redistricting criteria will serve as a framework to guide the County in the consideration of districting plans; and WHEREAS, established criteria will provide the County a means by which to evaluate and measure proposed plans; and WHEREAS, redistricting criteria will assist the County in its efforts to comply with all applicable federal and state laws; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the County, in its adoption of a redistricting plan for Commissioner Precincts, will adhere to the following criteria: 1. Where possible, easily identifiable geographic boundaries should be followed. 2. Communities of interest should be maintained in a single district, where possible, and attempts should be made to avoid splitting neighborhoods. 3. To the extent possible, districts should be composed of whole voting precincts. Where this is not possible or practicable, districts should be drawn in a way that permits the creation of practical voting precincts and that ensures that adequate facilities for polling places exist in each voting precinct. 4. Although it is recognized that existing districts will have to be altered to reflect new population distribution, any districting plan should, to the extent possible, be based on existing districts. 5. Districts must be configured so that they are relatively equal in total population according to the 2000 federal census. In no event should the total deviation between the largest and the smallest district exceed ten percent. The County will attempt to achieve a deviation that is less than ten percent under the data released by the Census Bureau. 6. The districts should be compact and composed of contiguous territory. Compactness may contain a functional, as well as a geographical dimension. 7. Consideration may be given to the preservation of incumbent-constituency relations by recognition of the residence of incumbents and their history in representing certain azeas. 8. The plan should be narrowly tailored to avoid retrogression in the position of racial minorities and language minorities as defined in the Voting Rights Act with respect to their effective exercise of the electoral franchise. 9. The plan should not fragment a geographically compact minority community or pack minority voters in the presence of polarized voting so as to create liability under section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1973. BE IT SO ORDERED. Adopted on this day of ,0-lips, 1 , 2001. KERB COUNTY, TEXAS ,' Fre ennel e, ounty Judge A. Precinct 1 ~ ~ ~~`.~'p William Williams, Commissioner, Precinct 2 ~f ~ c ~ t ='1° ~9~' "'~•...,.,..•~'' ~`~~ Jona etz , Co missioner, Precinct 3 OUNrY t~.~,P ~ .. Larry Gri~f~r, Comrr 4~i~ner, Precinct 4 ~~ Z~ rr County Clerk 2 Order 26996 RESOLUCION DE LA CORTE DE COMISIONDADOS ESTADO DE TEXAS § EL CONDADO KERR § RESOLUCION DEL CONDADO KERR APROBANDO EL CRITERIO PARR EL PROCESO llE REFORMACION DE DISTRITOS ELECTORALES EN 2001 CONSIDERANDO QUE, La Corte de Comisionados del Condado ("Condado") tiene ciertas responsabilidades de reformulaz los distritos electorates bajo leyes federates y estatales, incluyendo pero no limitandose a las enmiendas 14 y 15 de la Constitucion de los Estados Unidos, U.S.C.A (West 1987), y la Ley del Derecho de Votaz, 42 U.S.C.A. § 1973 et. seq. (West 1987 y el Sup. 1999); Articulo 5, Section 18 de la Constitucion de Texas (Vernon 1993 y Sup. 2000); y el Codigo de Gobiemo de Texas § 2058.001 y § 2058.002 (Folleto Vemon 2000); y CONSIDERANDO QUE, al repasar information del censo 2000 aparecen desequilibrios de poblacion que requieren reformation de el Condado; y CONSIDERANDO QUE, es intention del Condado cumplir con la Ley del Derecho de Votar (Voting Rights Act) y con las otras leyes relacionadas, incluyendo la jurisprudencia de Shaw v. Reno; y CONSIDERANDO QUE, un conjunto de criterion ya establecidos paza la reformation de distritos esta disponible como mazco por el cual el Condado se puede guiaz al consideraz los planes de reformation de distritos; y CONSIDERANDO QUE, este criterio establecido pars la nueva formulation de distritos proporcionaza al Condado los medios de evaluaz y asesoraz los planes propuestos; y CONSIDERANDO QUE, el criterio para la nueva formulation ayudara al Condado en sus esfuerzos de cumplir con todas las leyes federates y estatales aplicables; AHORA POR LO TANTO SE RESUELVE, que el Condado de Kerr, al aprobar el plan de reformation paza los Recintos de Comisionados, se apegara al siguiente criterio: 1. Cuando sea posible, se deberan formulaz limites geograficos identificables. 2. Comunidades de mutuo interes deberan mantenerse en un solo distrito cuando sea posible, y se trataza do cvitar divisiones de los bamos. 3. Cuando sea posible, distritos deberan componerse de recintos electorates integros que ya existen. 4. Aunque se reconoce que quizas los distritos actuales deberan modificazse paza mejor distribuir aumentos en poblacion, cualquier plan de reformacion de distritos debera basazse to mas posible en los distritos actuales. Distritos deberan disenarse tomando en cuenta que cada uno deberia tener aproximadamente el mismo numero de habitantes de acuerdo con el censo federal de] ano 2000. En ningun caso debera haber desviacion total de mas del diez por ciento entre el distrito mas grande y el mas Chico. El Condado tratara de lograr desviaciones de menos del diez por ciento de la informacion detallada por el Buro del Censo. 6. Los distritos deberan ser compactos y compuestos de territorio contiguo. Lo compacto del distrito debera incorporaz funcion y geografia. 7. Debera tomarse en cuenta la conservacion de relaciones entre oficiales en puestos electos y los electores, tomando en cuenta la residencia de oficiales actuales y su historia como representantes de ciertas areas. EI plan debera acoplarse precisamente para evitaz degeneracion en la posicion de grupos minoritarios raciales o de idioma, como se define en la Ley de Derechos de Votar (Voting Rights Act) respecto al ejercicio efectivo del derecho electoral. 9. El plan no debe dividir a ninguna comunidad minoritaria que sea geograficamente compacta, ni deberia amontonaz votantes minoritarios para cumplir con Seccion 2 de la Ley del Derecho de Votar (Voting Rights Act), 42 U.S.C. § 1973, y no perjudicaz votantes minoratorios. QUE ASI SE ORDE1~iE. Aprobado este 23 dia de ~i f , 2001. Fred Henneke, Juez del Condado H.A. Baldwin, Comisionado, Recinto 1 William Williams, Comisionado, Recinto 2 Jonathan Letz, Comisionado, Recinto 3 Larry Griffin, Comisionado, Recinto 4 DOY FE Secretario/a del Condado