Orange County redistricting committee advances two maps, rejects five after marathon public comment

The Orange County Mid Decennial Redistricting Advisory Committee voted Wednesday to advance two proposed county commission district plans to the Board of County Commissioners while rejecting five other proposals after a night of extended public comment and committee debate.

The committee approved Map 1 (the Alphonse map) with a late amendment to return the Woodlands of Windermere and Woodlands Village neighborhoods to District 1, and it also advanced Map 7A (the Henry/Charleston coalition map) with a separate amendment agreed during committee deliberations. The committee rejected Maps 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6B.

Why it matters: the committee’s two recommendations will be forwarded to the county commission, which will hold its own public review. The maps under consideration redraw Orange County’s eight commission districts to reflect population changes since the 2020 census and to create two new districts as required by growth patterns in the county.

Most urgent actions and votes

- Map 1 (Alphonse) — Approved by the committee after an amendment to restore the Woodlands neighborhoods to District 1. The amendment and the final motion to advance the map were approved during roll call votes. The committee’s consultants reported the amendment kept the plan within acceptable population deviation limits.

- Map 7A (Henry/Charleston coalition) — Advanced after committee amendment (the committee adopted a technical change during deliberations). Committee members and consultants said the plan keeps many communities intact while creating compact districts that reflect public testimony.

- Rejected maps — The committee voted to remove Maps 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6B from consideration. Where the transcript records vote totals, those counts are noted below in “Votes at a glance.”

Public comment and community concerns

The meeting drew a long public-comment session in which dozens of residents and municipal leaders urged the committee to keep historic communities and ‘communities of interest’ together.

Mayor DeCiccio of Winter Park told the committee that Winter Park and Maitland should remain contiguous, arguing those municipalities share services and civic ties and that “we deserve not to be gerrymandered into oblivion.” Jared Cornell, senior legislative aide to District 5 Commissioner Kelly Martinez Semrad, delivered a written statement for the commissioner urging the committee to advance only a narrow set of maps that balance incorporated and unincorporated areas.

Many speakers from West Orange and the Lake Avalon/Lars/Lake Avalon rural settlement area argued against Map 2, saying that plan would split Horizon West from its long-standing ties to Winter Garden and risk future annexation or mismatched representation. Maria Estela Casanova Baker cited the Florida Constitution’s fair-districting principles (Article III) while urging the committee to keep those communities intact.

Residents of the Woodlands of Windermere community repeatedly said they were moved into District 6 by mistake in 2022 and asked to be returned to District 1. Several speakers said they had received conflicting voter information since 2022 and that their neighborhood had long worked with the District 1 office; those requests were reflected in the committee amendment to Map 1.

Committee discussion and legal guidance

County attorney staff clarified legal limits for the committee. Attorney White told members that the Fair Districts amendment in the Florida Constitution applies to state legislative plans and “does not apply to county level redistricting,” but added that the committee should follow traditional redistricting principles it has been applying. White also reminded members that citizen voting-age population percentages do not, alone, establish minority‑vote dilution; voting patterns must be considered in a Section 2 analysis.

Committee members said they sought compactness and to preserve communities of interest while recognizing competing commissioner preferences. Co-chair Evans thanked the public and staff, and several committee members praised the maps that kept municipalities and long‑standing communities together.

Votes at a glance (formal actions taken at the meeting)

- Approval of minutes (agenda item: approval of minutes): motion to approve minutes — outcome: approved (roll-call vote recorded as passed in meeting minutes). (motion type: motion; notes: clerk performed roll call; quorum present.)

- Map 1 (Alphonse) — Amendment to add Woodlands of Windermere and Woodlands Village back into District 1: mover: Member Bobby Ocheski; seconder: Member Gordon Spears. Outcome: amendment approved (committee counsel and consultants reported the change kept the plan within legal population deviation limits). The committee then voted to advance Map 1 as amended; outcome: advanced to the Board of County Commissioners. (motion type: motion; tally: amendment recorded as passed by roll call; final tally recorded as passed.)

- Map 2 (Washington 2) — Motion to reject: mover: Member Bobby Ocheski; seconder: Member Alejandro Fonte. Outcome: rejected by the committee (roll-call result recorded in transcript: motion carried, 11–3). Several municipal leaders and the West Orange Chamber had urged support for Map 2, but committee members cited community-splitting concerns raised in public comment.

- Map 3 — Motion to reject: outcome: rejected (vote recorded as carried in meeting transcript).

- Map 4 (Calon 2) — Motion to reject: outcome: rejected (vote recorded as carried in meeting transcript).

- Map 5 (Henry 1) — Motion to reject: outcome: rejected (vote recorded as carried in meeting transcript).

- Map 6B (Afont 2 variant) — Motion to reject: outcome: rejected (roll-call result recorded in transcript: motion carried, 10–4).

- Map 7A (Henry/Charleston coalition) — After a committee amendment (technical adjustments agreed by staff and members), the committee voted to advance Map 7A to the county commission (motion passed by roll call; outcome: advanced).

Discussion vs. decision

Committee members generally kept debate separate from their formal action. Several members said they would rather advance maps that preserve communities of interest and allow the Board of County Commissioners to make any final technical adjustments. Attorney White cautioned members about treating race as a predominant factor and explained the legal standards the county staff would use if a Section 2 Voting Rights Act issue were raised.

What happened next / next steps

The committee will reconvene on September 3 to finalize findings of fact. The committee’s two recommended plans will be presented to the Orange County Board of County Commissioners at a public meeting scheduled for the afternoon of Sept. 16 for further consideration and possible modification.

Ending note

Committee co-chair Evans closed the meeting by thanking the public and county staff for participating in the lengthy process and reminded members that one more committee meeting remains to prepare the package for the county commission.

Selected direct quotes (from meeting transcript)

- "We will always recognize electeds first" — Co-chair Perez during the public-comment announcement. (procedural remark)

- "We will not be voting for any map that does not keep our community center in District 1." — Commissioner Nicole Wilson (public comment recorded during the meeting).

- "This map brings balance to my small community." — Rose Henderson (Tildenville resident, public comment).

- "The fair districts amendment ... does not apply to county level redistricting." — Attorney White (legal clarification to the committee).

- "We support map 2" — Nancy Borkas (Woodlands of Windermere resident, public comment).

(Quotes used above are verbatim from the meeting record and attributed to speakers appearing in the transcript.)