‍Winter Garden speaks out 

District 3 Commissioner Mayra Uribe said at the start of the meeting that she considered Map 2 to be “very inconsistent.” However, residents and representatives of Winter Garden disagreed as they spoke en masse during public input to support the map.  

Winter Garden resident Nichole Calvert said she had raised her three children in the city and had become involved in the community she’d watched grow over the years. 

“I say all this because I'm concerned about the possibility of our city being split between the many maps being considered,” Calvert said. “Winter Garden is where my daily life is centered, and it's where I feel the strongest connection. I have seen firsthand the differences between these areas, and I am grateful that I am located in Winter Garden, an area rich in tradition, history and a strong sense of belonging.”

She said that’s why she hoped the committee would support Map 2. 

“It allows Horizon West to get the focused attention it deserves as a rapidly growing community while keeping historic Winter Garden united and represented in a way that reflects who we are,” Calvert said. “I have heard resident after resident speak in support of separating these two areas. Washington-2 [Map 2] is the only map that does this correctly without breaking the city of Winter Garden apart.”

Planning consultant Ed Williams, representing the City of Winter Garden, said the city’s government wanted the adoption of Map 2, pending some revisions. 

“That particular map joins Oakland, Winter Garden, Ocoee and Apopka,” Williams said. “We have strong working relationships with each of those municipalities. We have territorial agreements. We work on development projects together … We would like to see Map 2 with its incorporation of those four municipalities together and the smaller Horizons West area.”

However, Winter Garden resident Sarah Hibbs disagreed with her neighbors' support of Map 2, as it would remove the city from District 1 and leave Winter Garden and Horizon West in two different districts. She took issue with the move, as she said both communities often shared resources and had overlapping issues like traffic that would be complicated by separating. 

“The principles that I developed [while creating a now withdrawn map] are based on the idea of keeping like with like and the things that influence each other together,” Hibbs said. “I feel like pulling Winter Garden out of District 1 is not doing those things…We shouldn't be split apart.”

Instead, she recommended that the committee support other proposals, like the recently approved Map 7 (formerly known as the Henry-2 map), which its co-creators lobbied the committee for its support that night. 

“Folks thought that we should do our best to make a map that is both equitable and fair,” co-creator and Pine Hills resident Seven Charlestin said. “I think our map did a good job of keeping all the municipalities outside of the city of Orlando together. We're one of the few maps where we try to create a minority access district for the African American community.”

Co-creator and Orlando resident David Caicedo added that their Map 7 didn’t separate communities. Still, it would split Orlando by giving a portion of District 5 along East Colonial Drive and North Magnolia Avenue to District 3.

“We didn't split Census Designated Places,” he said. “We were intentional not to split neighborhoods or communities. Unlike many other maps, we were wanting to not split Pine Hills and make sure that we kept it united.”

Residents of Pine Hills have repeatedly asked the committee to be unified under one district, which Map 7 does, but it also keeps Winter Garden, Oakland, Windermere, Horizon West and Tildenville together in District 1 and maintains Ocoee in District 2.

Caicedo said Map 2 would satisfy residents who wish to see the county’s traditional western communities together, but also split other communities in the west and east like Clarcona, Alafaya and Pine Hills — unlike Map 7, where he said the needs of all communities were considered. 

“We made sure to prioritize fairness and the needs of our communities,” Caicedo said. “[Map 2] works for a few communities, but our Map 7 actually took more than just our community of concern into consideration."

‍Amending process begins  

In their next two meetings, committee members will begin the process of amending and narrowing down maps with help from their consultants. 

The deadline to submit initial amendments to accepted maps was Aug. 12. When none were submitted, the deadline was extended to Aug. 14. Four were later sent before the deadline. 

Assistant County Attorney Shonda White said committee members will use the same process to submit amendments, original or sponsored, as they had for submitting maps. She said members also have the opportunity to withdraw their map as part of the first step of the amending process, if they desire. 

“Committee members, who still have a map that is in the running for consideration, will be provided an additional five minutes to represent their map or review their map with the committee, after which debate and discussion will follow,” White said. “And then at that point, you all will entertain any motions for either approval or rejection as well.”

White said if there are more than two map proposals remaining at the time of the committee’s final meeting on Sept. 3, members will be asked to list their two favorite ones by ballot. 

“Each ballot will be read into the record for transparency,” White explained. “At that point, the two maps that have the highest number of votes will proceed as either your recommendation or if we make it to the Sept. 3 meeting, depending upon if we finished on Aug. 28, those two maps will be advanced to the Board of County Commissioners at your recommendation.”

“I want to be clear, this is the exact same process we used last time and we found it fairly successful,” committee co-chair Tico Perez said, before emphasizing the committee must decide by Sept. 3.

Committee member Angel de la Portilla asked how many maps the committee planned on submitting to the county. The 2021 redistricting committee submitted two maps.  

Perez and co-chair Camille Evans agreed that two maps were sufficient.

“I think if we submit more than that, I'm not sure we've done our job. Our job is to make this easier for the county commission,” Evans said.

‍Committee determines priorities 

Perez also asked committee members about their top priorities during the process of eliminating maps “to get a sense of where we are.” 

“It doesn't have to take a lot of time, but because we have so many maps to manage, and we have so many divergent interests … What's a driver for us, what's a non-starter for us?” he said. “I think it's important to at least have that conversation out there as we move into the next couple of meetings, because we have seven maps and two meetings left to deal with them.”

Evans agreed and reminded the committee of the importance of following traditional redistricting principles, including compactness, contiguity, preservation of municipal boundaries and prior districts, protection of incumbents and maintaining communities of interest. 

“Looking at what we've had and where we're headed, I think the preservation of cores of prior districts makes that very important in maintaining communities of interest, allows communities who come to articulate their concerns the opportunity to make sure that their representation reflects the concerns that they raise,” she said.

Committee member Erica Jackson said fellow members should not support “reckless maps” that could have an impact on people’s lives, pointing to her own experiences living in District 1 for 25 years in both Winter Garden and Horizon West. 

“I've heard a lot as we all have differences between Horizon West and Winter Garden, and it baffles me, because we share addresses, we share schools, we share roads,” Jackson said. “What happens in Horizon West directly affects Winter Garden and vice versa. So it has been very challenging for me to listen to people say how we're so different, yet we're joined at the hip.”

See the committee’s approved maps below. View data comparisons for each map here.

‍Upcoming Meetings:

Aug. 18

Aug. 28 

All meetings take place at 6 p.m. in the Board of County Commissioners Chambers at the Orange County Administration Center at 201 South Rosalind Avenue. Meetings are also live-streamed on Orange TV.