Daytona Beach commissioners hear consultant’s redistricting maps and direct staff to prepare ordinance based on Map 1

City Attorney Gross and consultant Kurt Spitzer presented eight draft redistricting plans to the Daytona Beach City Commission at a workshop, emphasizing legal deadlines, minority‑district protections and tradeoffs among population equality, compactness and communities of interest.

The commission was told the city must adopt a new redistricting ordinance at least 270 days before the Nov. 3, 2026, general election — a statutory deadline that consultants and attorneys identified as Feb. 6, 2026 — and that the last day to establish residency in a zone to qualify for the 2026 election would be Dec. 8, 2025. City Attorney Gross said the commission had committed earlier this year to adopt a plan complying with applicable legal requirements for the 2026 municipal election.

Spitzer, the contract consultant, walked commissioners through redistricting criteria and the eight map alternatives he and staff prepared. “Redistricting is the process by which you adjust boundaries of the districts or the zones so as to equalize or try to equalize the population within those districts,” Spitzer said. He emphasized equal population as the dominant criterion while noting local governments have some leeway and also must avoid diluting minority voting strength.

The consultant showed that the city’s current district population spread was roughly 46–47 percentage points — well above commonly accepted local safe harbors — and that most of his draft plans achieved spreads below 10 percent. Alternative 1 had a population spread of about 6.5 points and preserved two majority‑minority districts (Zones 5 and 6) while creating a minority‑influence district in Zone 3. Alternatives labeled 1a and 1b made minor adjustments to Alternative 1 (including placing a park in Zone 1 under 1a/1b and keeping Cypress Street Park in Zone 6 under 1b); Alternative 1b had an 8.33‑point spread. Other plans that split the city’s Barrier Island among only two districts generally failed to preserve both majority‑minority districts and, in several cases, produced spreads exceeding the 10 percent threshold recommended to reduce litigation risk. Spitzer noted one plan (3b1) came close but left Zone 5 below 50 percent African American (49.4%) while increasing Zone 6 to about 58% African American.

Commissioners raised neighborhood and practical concerns: several asked that Main Street merchants and both sides of the street be kept in a single district where feasible; others said the city’s Barrier Island has distinct community interests and some favored preserving representation by multiple commissioners there. Commissioners also discussed the legal limits from Florida statute 166.0321 and House Bill 411 (2023) barring redistricting drawn to favor or disfavor a candidate based on residential address, and the recent Florida Supreme Court guidance requiring a factual showing when preserving majority‑minority districts.

After discussion, commissioners signaled enough consensus to direct staff to prepare an ordinance for first reading based on Alternative 1 (Map 1), with staff and the consultant to attempt minor adjustments to keep Main Street whole and to preserve the majority‑minority districts where possible. The commission did not take a formal vote at the workshop; the clerk and staff will prepare ordinance language and maps for a future public reading and formal action.

Spitzer and Gross repeatedly advised adopting a final ordinance sooner rather than later to provide a long lead time between adoption and the ordinance’s effective date, which can help demonstrate the map was not drawn to advantage or disadvantage incumbents or challengers. Gross noted the city previously repealed a 2023 redistricting ordinance via Ordinance 2025‑16 and has pledged to adopt a compliant replacement before the statutory deadline.