To determine whether there is polarized voting under § 15.7–103(b)(1) of this title, the court shall consider: the methodologies for estimating group voting behavior, as approved in federal case law, to enforce the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965; elections of the governing body of the county or municipal corporation; ballot question elections; elections in which at least one candidate is a member of a protected class; and other electoral choices that affect the rights and privileges of members of a protected class. Elections that are conducted before the filing of an action to enforce § 15.7–103(a) of this title are more probative to establish the existence of polarized voting than elections conducted after the filing of an action. The following may not preclude a finding of polarized voting that results in an unequal opportunity for a protected class to elect candidates of the members’ choice: the election of candidates who are members of a protected class and who were elected before the filing of an action to enforce § 15.7–103(a) of this title; nonquantitative or nonstatistical evidence; or low voter turnout or voter registration rates among members of the protected class. To establish the existence of polarized voting, the court may not be required to: use a set number or combination of elections; or consider the causes of or reasons for polarized voting, including partisan explanations or discriminatory intent. The fact that members of a protected class are not geographically compact or concentrated may not preclude a finding of polarized voting or a violation of § 15.7–103(a) of this title, but it may be a factor that is considered in determining an appropriate remedy.