1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

 FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

2

 CASE NO. 1:22-cv-24066-KMM

3

4 GRACE, INC., et al.,

5 Plaintiffs,

6 vs.

7 CITY OF MIAMI,

8 Defendant.

_________________________________________

9

10

 DEPOSITION BY VIDEOCONFERENCE

11

 OF

12

 DR. CAROLYN ABOTT

13

14

15

 Monday, October 16th, 2023

16 9:03 a.m. to 1:29 p.m.

 By Videoconference

17

18

19

20

21

22 Taken on behalf of the Defendant by

23 Mayra Texeira, Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public

24 in and for the State of Florida at Large, pursuant

25 to Notice of Taking Deposition in the above cause.

Page 1

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 1 of

163
1 REMOTE APPEARANCES:

2

3

4 On behalf of the Plaintiffs: (Via Videoconference)

5 DECHERT LLP

 Cira Center-2929 Arch Street

6 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104

 BY: CHRISTOPHER J. MERKEN, ESQUIRE

7

8

On behalf of the Defendant: (Via Videoconference)

9

 GRAY|ROBINSON

10 301 S. Bronough Street

 Suite 600

11 Tallahassee, Florida 32301

 BY: GEORGE T. LEVESQUE, ESQUIRE

12

13

Also Present:

14

 Nicholas Warren, Esquire/ACLU

15

 - - - - - -

16

 I N D E X

17

 Witness Direct Cross

18

 Dr. Carolyn Abott 3,117 115

19

 E X H I B I T I N D E X

20

Defendant's Description Page No.

21

 Exhibit 1 Trial Report 123

22

23

24

25

Page 2

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 2 of

163
1 THE COURT REPORTER: Dr. Abott,

2 can you show your ID by holding it up to

3 the camera for me?

4 (Witness presented government-issued identification

5 and identity was verified.)

6 THE COURT REPORTER: Thank you. Please

7 raise your right hand. Do you swear that the

8 testimony you will give in this cause will be

9 the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the

10 truth so help you God?

11 THE WITNESS: Yes.

12 Thereupon:

13 DR. CAROLYN ABOTT

14 was called as a witness and, having been first duly

15 sworn remotely, was examined and testified as

16 follows:

17 DIRECT EXAMINATION

18 BY MR. LEVESQUE:

19 Q. Good morning, Doctor. My name is

20 George Levesque. I'm with Gray Robinson and we

21 represent the City of Miami in this case. Before we

22 get started, can you please state your full name for

23 the record.

24 A. Sure. It's Carolyn Abott. Carolyn Beth

25 Abott.

Page 3

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 3 of

163
1 Q. And have you ever been deposed before?

2 A. I have not.

3 Q. Have you ever given testimony live in

4 court before?

5 A. No.

6 Q. Okay. I'm going to go over a few of the

7 ground rules for this deposition this morning. One

8 of the ground rules is, particularly because we're

9 on Zoom and when people talk over each other it can

10 get a little confusing, the format is I'll be asking

11 questions, you'll be providing answers. If you could

12 wait until I finish my question and then provide

13 your answer, that will help the court reporter, who

14 is taking down everything that we say, transcribe

15 things accurately. If I ask a question and you

16 provide an answer, I'm going to assume that you

17 understood the question that I asked and are

18 answering the question that I asked. Is that fair?

19 A. Yeah.

20 Q. At various points your counsel may object

21 to questions that I ask. We may have a colloquy

22 related to his objection. But if -- unless he's

23 instructed you not to answer, I'll probably come

24 back to you and say if you understand the question

25 you can answer. And then if you understand the

Page 4

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 4 of

163
1 question, please answer. If you don't ask me to

2 repeat or rephrase and I can do my best to do that.

3 Is that fair?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Also, because we're on Zoom this might not

6 be as big of a problem, but there are going to be

7 certain questions that might be a yes answer or a no

8 answer. For the purposes of creating a record I'll

9 need you to answer audibly. If you shake your head

10 or nod your head, I can see it on video what you

11 mean, but it makes it a little more difficult for

12 the court reporter to take that down. I might say,

13 well, is that a yes or is that a no. I'm not doing

14 it to be rude. I'm doing it to make sure that we're

15 getting an accurate reflection of the record.

16 This morning, are you on any medication

17 that would impair your ability to testify truthfully

18 or recall your report in this matter?

19 A. No.

20 Q. How did you -- how did you --

21 MR. MERKEN: George, just quickly --

22 A. I am a Type I diabetic so I'm on insulin,

23 but at any point if my blood sugar starts going low

24 I'll need to take a break just so I can have some

25 glucose.

Page 5

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 5 of

163
1 Q. Understood. And this is not intending to

2 be the Spanish Inquisition or anything like that. If

3 at any point you need to take a bathroom break or if

4 you feel your blood sugar is dropping, please let us

5 know. We can take a break. The one thing that I

6 would ask -- obviously, if you're in a medical

7 emergency we can address that, but the one thing

8 that I would ask is if there is a question pending

9 that we answer the question pending and then we can

10 take a break. Is that fair?

11 A. Sure.

12 Q. How did you come to offer an expert

13 opinion in this case?

14 A. I was contacted by Nick Warren.

15 Q. And how do you know Mr. Warren?

16 A. He contacted me. I had not known him

17 beforehand.

18 Q. Okay. And what did Mr. Warren ask you to

19 do?

20 A. He asked me if I was available to serve as

21 an expert witness on this case versus the City of

22 Miami and the drawing of the maps for the districts.

23 Q. And did you agree to become an expert in

24 this case then?

25 A. I did.

Page 6

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 6 of

163
1 Q. And how much have you been compensated to

2 date for your services?

3 A. I don't know to date.

4 Q. What is your hourly rate?

5 A. $450.

6 Q. Can you ballpark how many hours you've

7 worked on it?

8 A. I can't. It's been over the course of a

9 year or so.

10 Q. Is it more than 10,000?

11 A. No.

12 Q. Is it more than 5,000?

13 MR. MERKEN: George, objection to

14 form. Are you asking the number of hours

15 or the dollar amount?

16 MR. LEVESQUE: I'm asking -- I'm

17 sorry. Fair point. I'll rephrase.

18 Q. Have you billed for your services in this

19 matter?

20 A. I have billed. Yes.

21 Q. Have you billed more than $5,000 in

22 services for this matter?

23 A. I don't know the answer to that. I'd have

24 to look at my records.

25 Q. So as we sit here today you have no idea

Page 7

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 7 of

163
1 how many hours that -- or how many dollars you've

2 billed for your services?

3 A. I can't give you a dollar amount right

4 now. It's been several, you know, checks that have

5 been written over the course of a year.

6 Q. So -- and, again, I'm not looking for an

7 exact dollar amount, I'm looking for a ballpark

8 range. Would it be more than $5?

9 A. Yes. It would be more than $5.

10 Q. Okay. Would it be less than $100,000?

11 A. Yes. It would be less than $100,000.

12 Q. Okay. So are you able to narrow it between

13 more than $5 and less than $100,000?

14 A. I would have -- it would be a guess. I

15 couldn't tell you for sure. But it's certainly less

16 than $50,000, certainly less -- not certainly. I

17 believe it's less than $20,000.

18 Q. Which attorneys have you communicated with

19 concerning this case?

20 A. I have communicated with Nick Warren. I've

21 communicated with Christopher. And Neil. And Kerri.

22 And I can't recall everyone's last name.

23 Q. And have they provided you with any facts

24 or data that you have considered in forming your

25 opinions?

Page 8

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 8 of

163
1 A. Yes.

2 Q. What facts did they provide you with?

3 A. They have told me the generals of the case

4 and what the case was about. They have provided me

5 with maps.

6 Q. Did they provide you with any data?

7 A. No.

8 Q. Now, when you reference the generals of

9 the case, what are the generals of the case to the

10 extent that you can recall?

11 A. The generals of the case are that after

12 the 2020 census, the City of Miami needed to

13 redistrict for population reasons. Their city

14 commission districts and the plaintiffs believe that

15 the districts were not drawn in such a way as to

16 take into account proper concerns, particularly with

17 regard to race and ethnicity.

18 Q. When you say that the districts were not

19 drawn to take into account proper concerns regarding

20 race and ethnicity, can you explain that?

21 A. I just need to say that they -- they were

22 sorting certain areas and precincts based upon race

23 and ethnic concerns and considerations.

24 Q. Did they provide any other background

25 information to you that you relied on in forming

Page 9

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 9 of

163
1 your opinions?

2 A. No.

3 Q. What did you do to prepare your work and

4 your opinions in this case?

5 A. Can you clarify what you mean by prepare?

6 Q. Sure. You have drafted a couple of

7 different reports that have been provided to us.

8 What did you do in preparation of those reports?

9 A. Do you mean beyond collecting data and

10 analyzing the data? I'm still not sure what you

11 mean by prepare.

12 Q. Well, let's back up. What did plaintiffs

13 ask you to do in this case?

14 A. So as I wrote in my first expert report I

15 was asked to use data from the census and from the

16 ACS, the American Community Survey, to look at

17 voting patterns within individual precincts and

18 portions of precincts to determine whether and to

19 what extent race can explain the shapes of the 2022

20 enacted plan and the changes between the 2013 and

21 the 2022 enacted plan. So that was what they asked

22 me to do.

23 Q. Okay. And what did you do to fulfill that

24 request?

25 A. I downloaded data from the census and from

Page 10

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 10 of

163
1 the ACS. What else? I received city commission

2 maps, incumbent addresses. And then other data was

3 downloaded from Verse, which is on Harvard's

4 website. And then another expert witness, Dr. Moy,

5 provided me with additional results. Once that data

6 was downloaded I was able to analyze the data, look

7 for patterns in the data, map them on to shape files

8 of maps and precincts, and come to conclusions based

9 on my analysis.

10 Q. And what methodology did you use to

11 perform your analysis?

12 A. Standard methodology. Looking at data.

13 Looking at patterns. At the very early stage looking

14 at relationships before and after the maps were

15 enacted, the 2013 to 2022 maps.

16 Q. Did you review any news articles?

17 A. I did see a handful of news articles.

18 Q. And the handful of news articles that

19 you're referencing, were those provided by counsel?

20 A. They were not.

21 Q. Is that research that you conducted

22 yourself?

23 A. It was.

24 Q. Do any of those news articles factor in to

25 your opinions that are detailed in your report?

Page 11

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 11 of

163
1 A. No.

2 Q. Did you do any historical research related

3 to the City's redistricting plans?

4 A. No.

5 Q. Is the CV that is attached to your report

6 current?

7 A. I don't have which CV you have.

8 Q. Okay. Give me one second. What I am going

9 to do is I am going to share in the Dropbox on the

10 chat your trial report. Let me see if I can --

11 MR. MERKEN: George, we also have a

12 copy of it in paper here if that's

13 easier.

14 MR. LEVESQUE: Is it the trial

15 report?

16 MR. MERKEN: Can I direct her to

17 that? Is that all right?

18 MR. LEVESQUE: Yes. That's fine.

19 MR. MERKEN: So this is at the end of

20 the second expert report. This is the CV

21 right here. So if you go to the end of

22 that, it's after page 22 of the second

23 report.

24 THE WITNESS: I see it. Okay.

25 MR. LEVESQUE: Okay. If we could go

Page 12

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 12 of

163
1 off the record very quickly.

2 (Discussion off the record.)

3 BY MR. LEVESQUE:

4 Q. Dr. Abott, you have your trial report in

5 front of you?

6 A. Yes. Yes.

7 Q. Are you able to refer to that and let me

8 know if that reflects the latest and greatest for

9 your work that is contained in your CV?

10 A. It is not the most up to date, but it

11 contains -- I mean, it's accurate. It's just --

12 there are a few additions since this printed.

13 Q. Okay. What are the things that would be

14 added to this?

15 A. Well, my book is under contract. I have

16 additional research in progress. Additional working

17 papers. Additional invited talks and presentations.

18 Additional grants.

19 Q. And were those all commenced after this

20 report was provided to us?

21 A. Correct.

22 Q. If I could ask you to refer to page 3 of

23 your report.

24 A. Is this the first report?

25 Q. Yes.

Page 13

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 13 of

163
1 A. Okay. Yeah.

2 Q. Under sources and methodology you say, in

3 preparing this report I've relied on my personal

4 knowledge gathered through my years of researching,

5 studying, and publishing.

6 Is there any knowledge or experience that

7 you would not have relied on in terms of forming

8 your opinions that are not detailed in your CV?

9 A. No.

10 Q. In the next paragraph you say, I also

11 utilized the standard methodology that political

12 scientists use when investigating precinct and

13 census data.

14 What exactly do you mean by standard

15 methodology?

16 A. I suppose I just mean what political

17 scientists do when they download and analyze data

18 from the census, and election data, which is what I

19 described earlier, looking for patterns.

20 Q. Is there a name for the methodology that

21 you've used?

22 A. I don't -- I don't believe -- I would say

23 it's quantitative, but nothing more specific than

24 that.

25 Q. Are there academic journals or other

Page 14

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 14 of

163
1 sources that one could go to to understand what

2 standard methodology you're referring to?

3 A. I don't believe there would be articles

4 written specifically about how to analyze election

5 data in particular. This analysis is typically

6 contained -- an explanation analysis is typically

7 contained in every article, a thorough explanation

8 of how the analysis was done, how the data was

9 collected. But, generally speaking, if you want a

10 primer on quantitative analysis, that's a more

11 general field that has been applied to election

12 analysis.

13 Q. Further down in that paragraph you

14 reference that you relied on the 2019 American

15 Community Survey five-year estimates. Would you

16 agree that the 2019 American Community Survey

17 five-year estimate data is an estimate?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. When were you first engaged to work on

20 this matter?

21 A. I would have to go back and look at my

22 e-mails.

23 Q. Is there a reason why you used the 2019

24 ACS data versus the 2021 ACS data?

25 A. I was asked by counsel to use that data. I

Page 15

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 15 of

163
1 can speculate about why, but I was asked to use that

2 data.

3 Q. Were you instructed not to use the 2021

4 ACS data?

5 A. No. No. No.

6 Q. What is your understanding of the

7 difference between the 2019 and the 2021 ACS data?

8 A. They take place in different years. Their

9 estimates are different points in time.

10 Q. Is that the only difference?

11 A. I don't know.

12 Q. You mentioned that the city commission

13 district maps and incumbent addresses were provided

14 to you by counsel. For the incumbent addresses, do

15 you recall what those were?

16 A. The actual address?

17 Q. Yes.

18 A. No.

19 Q. Well, for example, in District 3, if we

20 wanted to know where the commissioner in District 3

21 lives, how would we go about finding that in terms

22 of your consideration for your report?

23 A. Sorry. Can you rephrase that? I couldn't

24 hear you.

25 Q. Sure. If we wanted to know what your

Page 16

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 16 of

163
1 understanding of the address for the commissioner

2 for District 3, how would we figure that out?

3 A. My understanding of that?

4 Q. Yes.

5 A. How would you know -- how would you figure

6 it out? I suppose you would have to ask me. I

7 mean --

8 Q. Okay. Do you know where the commissioner

9 in District 3 lives?

10 A. I -- I could point to a general part of

11 the map. I couldn't tell you his actual -- his exact

12 address.

13 Q. Well, and I guess my question is, you

14 don't detail where the commissioners lived in your

15 report. Correct?

16 A. Correct.

17 Q. So if I wanted to verify that, yes, in

18 fact that is the commissioner's address, how would I

19 go about doing that?

20 A. Verify what is his address?

21 Q. What you believe to be his address.

22 A. It's not contained in the report so I

23 suppose you would have to ask me.

24 Q. Okay. Do you have notes that reflect that

25 information?

Page 17

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 17 of

163
1 A. I don't have notes. I have data. I have a

2 data file with their addresses.

3 Q. What format is that data file in?

4 A. An Excel spreadsheet.

5 Q. And that was provided to you by counsel?

6 A. It was.

7 Q. Why was the incumbent address information

8 important?

9 A. The incumbent address information was

10 important because we wanted to make sure that any

11 potential redistricting didn't take an incumbent

12 commissioner out of their district and perhaps pit

13 two incumbents against one another in a new

14 district.

15 Q. You also indicate on page 3 of your report

16 that you downloaded statewide election results from

17 Harvard's Dataverse; is that correct?

18 A. Correct.

19 Q. What years did you download?

20 A. It was the governor's election, so I

21 believe that was 2018. But I'm not -- I can't -- I'm

22 not positive.

23 Q. Did you look at any other election results

24 for any other years?

25 A. I believe in my second report I refer to

Page 18

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 18 of

163
1 the presidential election in 2020.

2 Q. Other than the governor's election or the

3 presidential election, did you look at any other

4 races in performing your analysis?

5 A. As I mentioned, Dr. Moy provided me

6 results for the 2020 county mayor race. I looked

7 very briefly at that.

8 Q. Okay. Other than these three races, did

9 you look at any other races?

10 A. I did not.

11 Q. What was important or probative about the

12 governor's 2018 race?

13 A. The governor's race was a partisan race

14 unlike the city commission elections. And there was

15 an alternative claim or argument to be made that the

16 districts were drawn in such a way as to bolster

17 partisan concerns. So by looking at an actual

18 partisan election I could show what evidence there

19 was for or against that.

20 Q. Would the same also be true for your

21 examination of the presidential election?

22 A. Correct.

23 Q. What about for the mayoral race?

24 A. The county mayoral race or the mayoral

25 race?

Page 19

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 19 of

163
1 Q. The county mayoral race.

2 A. Yes. Yes.

3 Q. Now, would you agree that partisanship is

4 closely aligned with ideology?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. So that if there are politically

7 conservative commissioners, regardless of whether

8 they're Republicans or Democrats in a nonpartisan

9 race, that might be a factor in terms of how the

10 districts were drawn. Would you agree with that?

11 A. No.

12 Q. Why not?

13 A. Partisanship is a label that is used as a

14 cue for voters. It is a way to organize political

15 activity at the government and at the electoral

16 level. Ideology is an indication of a preference or

17 a policy and the type of policy that gets enacted

18 that is related to but not identical to

19 partisanship.

20 Q. Is it your position that commissioners

21 might not be in touch with their constituents to

22 understand the ideology that they hold regardless of

23 their partisan affiliations?

24 A. I'm sorry. Can you rephrase the question?

25 Q. Sure. Would you agree with the premise

Page 20

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 20 of

163
1 that commissioners might have a good understanding

2 of the ideology of their constituents?

3 A. No. I can't speculate on that.

4 Q. So you have no idea whether city

5 commissioners may understand the ideology of their

6 constituents?

7 A. I have no idea.

8 Q. Okay. Did you examine any of the materials

9 that were provided in any of the elections that you

10 examined?

11 A. The material -- I don't know what

12 materials were provided you're referring to.

13 Q. You referenced that the city commission

14 races were nonpartisan. Correct?

15 A. Correct.

16 Q. Do you know if any of the candidates for

17 those races utilized language other than Republican

18 or Democrat that might be associated with Republican

19 or Democrat?

20 A. Are you referring to their campaigns?

21 Q. Yes.

22 A. No. I don't know anything about their

23 campaigns.

24 Q. So if any of the candidates ran on

25 antisocialist agendas, you wouldn't have any

Page 21

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 21 of

163
1 knowledge of that. Correct?

2 A. No knowledge.

3 Q. Would you agree that an antisocialist

4 agenda would be associated with, generally speaking,

5 a Republican party?

6 A. I wouldn't -- I don't want to say -- no. I

7 don't agree with that necessarily.

8 Q. Okay. So it's your understanding that

9 Republican endorse socialism?

10 A. No.

11 Q. Are you aware of Republican candidates who

12 speak out against socialism?

13 A. None in particular. I couldn't give you

14 any names.

15 Q. But are you aware of whether that is

16 something that many Republican candidates often

17 speak against?

18 A. To the same extent Democrats do. I don't

19 have any distinction between the two.

20 Q. Now, you indicated that Dr. Moy provided

21 you with election results for the 2020 county mayor

22 race. Why was this information important to you?

23 A. I was also asked to take a look at -- if

24 it was helpful to me to also look at the county

25 mayor race.

Page 22

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 22 of

163
1 Q. Was it helpful to you?

2 A. I didn't find it necessary.

3 Q. Have you ever drawn a redistricting plan?

4 A. For an official capacity?

5 Q. Yes.

6 A. No.

7 Q. Have you ever drawn a redistricting plan

8 as an academic exercise?

9 A. Sure.

10 Q. How many times?

11 A. Oh, I couldn't tell you. I don't know.

12 Q. More than five?

13 A. Sure.

14 Q. More than ten?

15 A. I don't know the answer to this question.

16 Sorry.

17 Q. Before you commenced your analysis of the

18 city maps, did you do an analysis of the city's

19 population?

20 A. The size of the city and the size of the

21 districts? Population size?

22 Q. Sure. We'll start with population size.

23 A. Yes. I was asked to look at the size of

24 the city and the districts.

25 Q. Did you also look at the racial and ethnic

Page 23

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 23 of

163
1 makeup of the districts?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Did you look at the racial and ethnic

4 makeup of the city as a whole?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Did you look at the racial and ethnic

7 makeup of where they live within the geographic

8 boundaries of the city?

9 A. Insofar as that I analyzed the districts

10 and the precincts and the blocks within the

11 district.

12 Q. When you're talking about your analysis of

13 the precincts and the blocks, were those only for

14 the areas that were moved or did you look at that

15 for the entire city area?

16 A. I did not look at precincts within the

17 core to the same extent. I looked at precincts on

18 the boundaries of the districts.

19 Q. When you were examining that information

20 related to the precincts and blocks related to the

21 core, did you look at the political performance of

22 those areas?

23 A. What do you mean by political performance?

24 Q. Whether they perform for a Republican or a

25 Democrat.

Page 24

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 24 of

163
1 A. I looked at the districts as a whole. Yes.

2 The cores of the district.

3 Q. Did you review any of the transcripts in

4 this matter?

5 A. No. No.

6 Q. Are you able to summarize your opinions in

7 this case?

8 A. My conclusions?

9 Q. Yes.

10 A. Sure. My conclusions were that precincts

11 and portions of precincts were moved with racial and

12 ethnic considerations in mind and that voters were

13 sorted into districts based on racial and ethnic

14 considerations.

15 Q. What were you told about the map drawing

16 process for the districts?

17 A. That the commission was responsible for

18 doing it. I was told that there was a three to two

19 final approval of the 2022 enjoined map. And I was

20 told that it was two Republican commissioners and

21 one democratic commissioner that voted the majority

22 for approval of the enjoined map -- the 2022

23 enjoined map.

24 Q. Do you know which two Republican

25 commissioners voted for the map?

Page 25

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 25 of

163
1 A. I can't recall at this time.

2 Q. Do you recall which democratic

3 commissioner voted for the map?

4 A. I believe it was District 5's

5 commissioner.

6 Q. Do you know District 5's commissioner's

7 name?

8 A. I don't.

9 Q. Are you aware of whether the commission

10 hired outside attorneys and people with experience

11 in map drawing to draw the commission maps?

12 A. The only person I'm aware of is the

13 consultant -- consultant De Grandy.

14 Q. And how are you aware of Mr. De Grandy?

15 A. I was given versions of his map that was

16 presented to the commission.

17 Q. Did you read any of Mr. De Grandy's

18 comments about his presentation of either the 2022

19 plan or the 2023 plan?

20 A. No.

21 Q. Would that information be important to you

22 in forming your opinions?

23 A. No.

24 Q. Why not?

25 A. I have the data. I don't need -- I don't

Page 26

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 26 of

163
1 need any additional comments.

2 Q. So is it -- I just want to be clear. Is it

3 your position that the data tells the entire story?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. So if there are other alternative

6 explanations as to why a line was moved, those would

7 be irrelevant for the purposes of your analysis; is

8 that correct?

9 A. It depends -- it depends on the

10 alternative explanation, but if -- if it can be

11 shown to be an inadequate explanation based on the

12 data, then that's all I need.

13 Q. But at this point the only alternative

14 explanations are the ones that are relayed to you by

15 counsel; is that correct?

16 A. The ones that I -- I list in my report.

17 Q. Did you review or analyze any of the

18 plaintiffs' plans that were presented?

19 A. No. I was given a map if I wanted to look

20 at it, but I did not review or discuss it in my

21 report.

22 Q. Do you recall which plan it was?

23 A. It was after the second -- it was when I

24 was writing my second report. So it was after the --

25 after the `22 enjoined plan. I don't know exactly

Page 27

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 27 of

163
1 which map. There was a lot of maps.

2 Q. Were you aware that plaintiffs have

3 proposed four alternative plans in this litigation?

4 A. I was not.

5 Q. If I could ask you to flip back to page 1

6 of your report. Your introductory sentence says, the

7 enacted Miami city commission districting plan is

8 the byproduct of many decades of racialized

9 commission maps.

10 What is your basis for that statement?

11 A. I was given the 2003 map and the 1997 map,

12 I believe it was. And they look, at first glance,

13 quite similar to the 2013 map and to the enjoined

14 2022 map.

15 Q. Okay. But I guess -- you're making the

16 statement here that the commission maps are decades

17 of racialized commission maps as a starting point.

18 What is your basis for concluding that the

19 commission maps were racialized as a starting point?

20 A. The cores. The districts as they have

21 existed for many decades have not changed

22 significantly except for pieces on the border. The

23 portions that have not changed have continued to be

24 highly segregated based on race and ethnicity.

25 Q. In your mind, is that improper?

Page 28

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 28 of

163
1 A. I have no opinion on that.

2 Q. So just to be clear, you don't have an

3 opinion on whether the historic maps from 1997

4 through 2013 considered -- improperly considered

5 race in the drawing of those maps?

6 A. I cannot say anything about proper or

7 improper.

8 Q. Okay. So you're just observing that from

9 1997 through 2013 there were maps that had five

10 districts, three of which would likely reliably

11 elect a Hispanic candidate and one of which would

12 reliably elect a Black candidate? Would that be --

13 A. Correct.

14 Q. And that same conclusion would be true for

15 the 2022 plan. Correct?

16 A. Correct.

17 Q. And the 2023 plan?

18 A. Is that the proposed remedy which is the

19 2023 plan you're referring to?

20 Q. Yes. So -- I'll try to refer to the plans

21 that the City passed by the year that they were

22 enacted. So we've got 1997, 2003, 2013, 2022, and

23 2023 for the plans.

24 A. So the proposed --

25 Q. Sorry. Go ahead.

Page 29

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 29 of

163
1 A. The proposed remedy was passed then?

2 That's currently enacted? I don't know.

3 Q. Have you examined the 2023 plan?

4 A. As the proposed remedy, yes, I have in my

5 second report.

6 Q. On page 2 of your report -- let me back

7 up. Going back to page 1, in the first paragraph,

8 second sentence you state, changes made from the

9 2013 enacted plan are also racially motivated,

10 though these changes are minimal compared to the

11 inherited racialization from previous plans. You

12 state that they were minimal.

13 How did you measure that?

14 A. I looked at the overall change to the

15 districts.

16 Q. Would you agree that the overall change to

17 the districts was not significant?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. Do you have any opinions on how the city

20 plan could have or should have been drawn?

21 A. Only to the extent of what I outline in my

22 report that there were alternative precincts and

23 portions of precincts that could have been moved

24 instead of the ones that were moved.

25 Q. On page 2 you state, based on my

Page 30

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 30 of

163
1 examination I reached the conclusion that areas

2 moved from one district to another were done so on

3 the basis of race and that other areas could have

4 been moved without further segregating the districts

5 by race.

6 Is it your opinion that there were moves

7 that further segregated the districts by race?

8 A. There were moves that exacerbated the

9 situation, yes.

10 Q. When you say exacerbated, does that mean

11 it made them more or less segregated?

12 A. More segregated.

13 Q. And how would you measure that?

14 A. I looked at the precincts that were moved

15 compared to the precincts that were not moved that

16 were nearby.

17 Q. From a quantifying standpoint how does

18 that translate to the 2020 plan district numbers?

19 A. The 2020 plan? Which is the 2020 plan?

20 Q. I'm sorry. 2022.

21 A. Okay. Sorry. Can you repeat the question?

22 Q. Sure. If you were to quantify that

23 exacerbation, how is that going to be reflected in

24 the 2022 plan numbers?

25 A. You have to compare what the

Page 31

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 31 of

163
1 hypothetical -- the counter possibility was and if

2 you compare it to what could have been moved versus

3 what was moved -- because there had to have been

4 changes because of population equality reasons.

5 Right? There had to be changes made. The changes

6 that were made compared to the changes that could

7 have been made made the districts more segregated

8 than they otherwise would have been.

9 Q. Did you draw any comparisons related to

10 the changes that were made to the benchmark

11 districts?

12 A. Can you repeat the question?

13 Q. Did you draw any conclusions related to

14 the changes that were made benchmark districts? And

15 when I refer to the benchmark districts I'm

16 referring to the 2013 plan.

17 A. Sorry. Draw any conclusions about changes

18 that were made to the 2013 districts. I mean, my

19 conclusions were that the changes were made based on

20 racial and ethnic considerations.

21 Q. Would you agree that if the three Hispanic

22 districts were drawn in such a way that the Hispanic

23 voting age population dropped in each of those

24 districts, that that undercuts the idea that the

25 districts were racially exacerbated?

Page 32

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 32 of

163
1 A. I don't understand the question. Can you

2 repeat it, please?

3 Q. We'll move along. I think it might help

4 when we start getting into some of the examples. In

5 that paragraph you say, I also have observed the

6 commission's practice of splitting precincts along

7 racial lines.

8 What is your basis for that statement?

9 A. The basis for my statement is that

10 precincts were split and the ones that remained in

11 districts versus the ones that were moved into new

12 districts looked different in terms of their race.

13 Each split looked different.

14 Q. Do you know if the map drawers paid

15 attention to precincts when they were drawing the

16 map?

17 A. I don't know.

18 Q. If they'd completely ignored precincts

19 because the new map would be re-precincted [sic],

20 does that change your opinion as to their

21 motivation?

22 A. No.

23 Q. Is it your belief that they intentionally

24 considered the splitting of precincts as they were

25 drawing the plan?

Page 33

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 33 of

163
1 A. I don't know.

2 Q. If I could ask you to flip to the bottom

3 of page 3. There you say that City of Miami had

4 inherited districts maps from 2013 and beyond that

5 exhibited clear patterns of racial segregation.

6 What is your understanding of how the

7 Voting Rights Act might apply to the city's

8 districts?

9 A. I don't know.

10 Q. Are you familiar with the Voting Rights

11 Act?

12 A. I have heard of it. Yes.

13 Q. Are you aware of whether the Voting Rights

14 Act requires there to be a district that will

15 perform for a Black candidate based upon the city's

16 ethnic and racial makeup?

17 A. I'm not a lawyer. I don't know the

18 specifics.

19 Q. Well, wouldn't whether a district needs to

20 be drawn in such a way so that it performs for a

21 Black candidate be relevant for your opinions?

22 A. No.

23 Q. Why not?

24 A. That wasn't what I was asked to do.

25 Q. So if the law requires that the district

Page 34

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 34 of

163
1 be drawn in such a way that it performs for a Black

2 candidate which would necessarily require the

3 consideration of whether there's a sufficient Black

4 population in the district, that wouldn't be

5 relevant for your analysis that examined race?

6 A. I wasn't asked to take that into

7 consideration.

8 Q. On page 4 you state, majorities tend to be

9 exaggerated in districts and identified Districts 1,

10 3, and 4 for Hispanics and District 5 for Black

11 voters.

12 Are you aware of other ways the districts

13 could be drawn that would not exaggerate the

14 minority -- I'm sorry -- the minorities in those

15 districts?

16 A. I don't know.

17 Q. That's not something that you explored?

18 A. It wasn't what I was asked to do.

19 Q. Are you aware of what the Hispanic voting

20 age population is for the city of Miami?

21 A. I'm not.

22 Q. Are you aware of what the Black voting age

23 population is for the city of Miami?

24 A. I believe it was 15 percent.

25 Q. In paragraph 4 of your report, you state,

Page 35

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 35 of

163
1 only one district, District 5, had equal or greater

2 Black VAP under the 2013 plan.

3 What are your referring to there?

4 A. Sorry. Which page are you on?

5 Q. Page 4.

6 A. Yeah. I see it. Okay. What am I referring

7 to in that sentence?

8 Q. Yes.

9 A. That District 5 was the only district that

10 had equal or greater than 14.8 percent Black VAP.

11 Q. Do you know what it was in the 2013 plan?

12 A. Do I know what what was in the 2013 plan?

13 Q. What the Black VAP is in the 2013 plan?

14 A. For the city?

15 Q. For District 5.

16 A. 52.9 percent.

17 Q. Do you know what the Black VAP was in the

18 2022 plan for District 5?

19 A. 15.3 percent.

20 Q. So at least in terms of drawing that new

21 district for the 2022 plan, the Black VAP decreased.

22 Correct?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. And if the Black VAP decreased from the

25 2013 plan, that didn't exacerbate the racial

Page 36

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 36 of

163
1 segregation, did it?

2 A. Again, it depends upon what you're

3 comparing it to. You can't compare it to the 2013

4 plan; you have to compare it to what needed to be

5 changed because of population reasons.

6 Q. Well, is there a predetermined change that

7 needs to occur for population reasons?

8 A. You needed to decrease the size of

9 District 2.

10 Q. And how overpopulated was District 2?

11 A. Under the 2013 plan there were 117,281

12 individuals compared to the other districts that had

13 somewhere between 80- and 83,000 people.

14 Q. And District 5 needed to gain population.

15 Correct?

16 A. It was the second largest so it could have

17 gained some or it could not have gained some, but

18 District 2 needed to decrease.

19 Q. You'd mentioned that the proper comparison

20 is not to the 2013 benchmark, but to the

21 alternatives that could have been considered. Why is

22 that?

23 A. Because the 2013 plan couldn't remain as

24 it was.

25 Q. But why wouldn't the 2013 plan be a proper

Page 37

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 37 of

163
1 comparator if you were utilizing the cores of

2 existing districts?

3 A. The changes that were made needed to be

4 compared to other possible changes. There was no

5 version of the world in which you could have had the

6 exact same map in 2013.

7 Q. I understand. I guess where I'm going at

8 is, why does it have to be alternative options to

9 what they considered versus we start from the

10 benchmark, that's the plan that we need to change,

11 we have a preset racial makeup, and you compare

12 it -- is it making it more racially segregated from

13 the 2013 plan or less racially segregated from the

14 2013 plan? Why would that not be a proper analysis?

15 A. Because I reject the idea that the 2013

16 plan is something to compare a new plan to when you

17 cannot have the 2013 plan in 2022.

18 Q. Are you aware of whether courts examined

19 the benchmark plan to assess what needs to be done

20 or whether a replacement plan is sufficient for

21 legal reasons?

22 A. No. I am not aware.

23 Q. Did counsel for plaintiffs direct you to

24 not make comparisons to the benchmark plan?

25 A. No.

Page 38

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 38 of

163
1 Q. On page 5, the last full paragraph at the

2 bottom of that page, in the third sentence -- I'll

3 go ahead and read for completeness. You reference

4 Table 3 depicts the racial VAP composition after

5 redistricting. And that sets up your comparison

6 that you're comparing the 2022 plan to the 2013

7 plan. Correct?

8 A. I don't know if it sets up the comparison.

9 It's a list of -- it's a description.

10 Q. Okay. The second sentence, overall Black

11 VAP in District 2 decreased slightly as a percentage

12 total of VAP from 7.7 to 7.2 percent as did Hispanic

13 VAP from 52 percent to 49 percent after

14 redistricting.

15 Are you comparing the 2022 plan with the

16 2013 plan in that sentence?

17 A. I'm comparing the -- I'm comparing the

18 Black and Hispanic VAP from the 2013 plan in

19 District 2 to the 2022 plan in District 2.

20 Q. And then you say, this was due to the fact

21 that white VAP increased from 34 percent to

22 37 percent after redistricting.

23 From a geographic standpoint, do you know

24 where those white voters lived?

25 A. No, I don't.

Page 39

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 39 of

163
1 Q. Did you do any analysis of where -- strike

2 that.

3 Did you do any analysis of whether there

4 were concentrated areas of minority population?

5 A. In District 2?

6 Q. Anywhere in the map.

7 A. No. I don't -- I don't know specifically.

8 I mean, I looked at -- I looked at individual

9 precincts and if I go back and look at my data I can

10 tell you if I looked where, but yes.

11 Q. But that's not something that you've done

12 to date in terms of looking at the map as a whole to

13 figure out where there might be concentrations of

14 minority voters?

15 A. I looked at portions of districts and

16 precincts to see the racial composition of those

17 areas.

18 Q. But just for those precincts along the

19 borders. Correct?

20 A. I did not, generally speaking, look at

21 individual precincts within the cores of the

22 districts, the internal portions of the district.

23 Q. Okay. So in the next sentence you state,

24 on the whole, however, there was no statistical

25 difference between voting age population or VAP by

Page 40

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 40 of

163
1 race before and after redistricting at the district

2 level.

3 If I understand that correctly, that means

4 that even though they redrew these districts, there

5 is still going to be three Hispanic districts, a

6 Black district, and a plurality district. Correct?

7 A. Correct.

8 Q. And your examination goes to a more

9 granular level to do that data analysis. Is my

10 understanding there correct?

11 A. Correct.

12 Q. Now, jumping into your analysis made

13 between the changes for the 2013 and 2022 plan,

14 starting with District 1. You would agree that

15 District 1 had to gain population. Correct?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. Do you know if District 1 assumes

18 District 2?

19 A. It does not.

20 Q. Okay. And in responding to that question,

21 what are you referring to that is in front of you?

22 A. My expert report.

23 Q. Is that the only thing that you have in

24 front of you at this time?

25 A. Correct.

Page 41

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 41 of

163
1 Q. Do you also have a computer in front of

2 you?

3 A. I do not.

4 Q. Okay. Is there a tablet?

5 MR. MERKEN: George, that's the

6 controls for the video screen.

7 MR. LEVESQUE: Thank you, Chris. I

8 was wondering what that was.

9 MR. MERKEN: It's just the Zoom

10 controls.

11 BY MR. LEVESQUE:

12 Q. So if District 1 needed to gain

13 population, how would it get population as part of

14 the map drawing process?

15 A. District 2 has to give precincts or areas

16 of the district to the joining -- the districts that

17 it touches, so District 5, 3, and 4 and then those

18 districts have to give portions of their district to

19 District 1, which they all touch.

20 Q. So for the purposes of the city

21 commission's work, District 2 could shed population

22 theoretically to one district and then you could

23 rotate the population all the way around or it could

24 give a little bit to all three districts and some

25 variation of those three districts would need to

Page 42

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 42 of

163
1 donate to District 1. Is that fair?

2 A. That sounds right.

3 Q. And there are lots of different ways that

4 the commission could make those population

5 adjustments; would you agree?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. From a race and ethnicity standpoint, what

8 is the makeup of District 1?

9 A. Just generally speaking?

10 Q. Yes.

11 A. It's a Hispanic super majority district.

12 Q. On that same page you say, the changes

13 under the 2022 enacted plan resulted in District 1

14 growing both in absolute and relative terms. And

15 you indicated is now the second largest district

16 after District 2.

17 What is the significance of that to you

18 for your analysis?

19 A. It just means that it gained more

20 population than maybe it absolutely needed to if you

21 want to keep the rank ordering of the districts the

22 same.

23 Q. Are you aware of anything that would

24 require one to keep the rank ordering of the

25 districts the same?

Page 43

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 43 of

163
1 A. No. No.

2 Q. Is there anything in your opinions that

3 suggests that not keeping the rank ordering is

4 problematic?

5 A. No.

6 Q. In the next paragraph you say, changes

7 made to District 1 occurred in tandem with changes

8 only to District 5.

9 Is that problematic?

10 A. No. Not in and of itself.

11 Q. If we could scroll down to Table 4. And I

12 think this reflects your analysis of the precincts;

13 is that correct?

14 A. These are splits, precincts splits.

15 Q. Okay. Are you aware of anything that

16 requires a map drawer to use precincts when drawing

17 plans?

18 A. No.

19 Q. If the city was going to be re-precincted

20 [sic] as part of the 2020 census process, do you

21 think it would still be important for the map drawer

22 to utilize precincts in drawing?

23 A. I don't know.

24 Q. If the city map drawer ignored precincts,

25 is that problematic to you?

Page 44

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 44 of

163
1 A. If he did so in a uniform way, probably

2 not.

3 Q. When you say in a uniform way, can you

4 explain that?

5 A. If all of the portions that were moved

6 were completely split and every -- in every way,

7 every time there was a move, I would say that would

8 be evidence that they did not take into account

9 precincts when they moved. The portions of the

10 district.

11 Q. And what would be something that would

12 indicate that they didn't do it in a uniform way?

13 A. If they split districts -- if they split

14 precincts sometimes and didn't split precincts other

15 times.

16 Q. And there is no chance that that could be

17 explained simply by where they were drawing the

18 district lines and where the precinct lines fall?

19 A. I don't know. I didn't look at that.

20 Q. So in looking at your Table 4, if I

21 understand correctly, you've got a District 1 split

22 column and a District 5 split column. Does that

23 indicate which precincts were placed into which

24 districts?

25 A. Yeah. Some of them remained in those

Page 45

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 45 of

163
1 districts, some of them were moved. But after --

2 under the 2022 enacted plan, the District 1 split

3 column are splits that remained or were moved into

4 District 1 and the District 5 split column were

5 precinct splits that were either moved into

6 District 5 or remained in District 5.

7 Q. Okay. And looking at Precinct 531 for

8 District 1, in Area 6, 27.2 percent Black population

9 either remained or was moved into District 1. Would

10 that have increased or decreased the BVAP in

11 District 1?

12 A. I don't know. It depends on the other

13 changes that were made.

14 Q. Well, that change by itself, do you know

15 if 27.2 percent is higher or lower than the existing

16 percentage for District 1?

17 A. It's higher.

18 Q. So that would have a tendency to increase

19 the BVAP in District 1. Correct?

20 A. Again, it depends on what other changes

21 you make.

22 Q. Sure. But in a vacuum, 27.2 percent higher

23 than the current BVAP in District 1, that would have

24 the effect of increasing it if all other things

25 remained equal. Correct?

Page 46

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 46 of

163
1 A. 27.2 percent Black VAP is higher than the

2 District 1 Black VAP under the 2013 plan. But as

3 I've said, other changes need to be made. So none of

4 this could have happened in a vacuum.

5 Q. And we'll go through the rest of the

6 changes. I just want to make sure we're

7 understanding what's going on with both the district

8 drawing and your analysis.

9 The second figure, 44.9 percent represents

10 white voting age population. Correct?

11 A. Correct.

12 Q. And all other things being equal, 44.9

13 percent would have boosted the white voting age

14 population in District 1. Correct?

15 A. 44.9 percent white VAP is higher than the

16 white VAP in District 1 under the 2013 plan.

17 Q. And 71.1 percent is lower -- well, let me

18 back up. I'm getting ahead of myself.

19 71.1 percent is referring to the Hispanic

20 voting age population in Precinct 531 that is either

21 kept or moved into District 1. Correct?

22 A. Yes. Correct.

23 Q. And that is lower than the existing

24 Hispanic voting age population in District 1.

25 Correct?

Page 47

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 47 of

163
1 A. Under the 2013 plan. Correct.

2 Q. And under the 2022 plan.

3 A. Correct.

4 Q. Now, you used percentages here. Do you

5 know how many voters were in Precinct 531 that we're

6 talking about?

7 A. I do not have the total population for

8 531. No.

9 Q. For any of your precinct analyses in your

10 first report, do you list the number of voters that

11 are impacted by the move?

12 A. I do have some of this in the appendix.

13 Q. And is that the table that begins on

14 page 25?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. And you've got a series of tables there

17 that begin on 25 and run to page 29?

18 A. Correct.

19 Q. Looking at Precinct 523 for District 1,

20 27.4 percent would be a higher Black voting age

21 population than what was included in the 2024 plan.

22 I'm sorry. 2022 plan. Correct?

23 A. For which district?

24 Q. For District 1.

25 A. Yes.

Page 48

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 48 of

163
1 Q. And looking at Precinct 529, 18.7 percent

2 would be a higher Black voting age population than

3 what is included in District 1 in the 2022 plan.

4 Correct?

5 A. Correct.

6 Q. And the same would also be true for

7 Precincts 512 and 522?

8 A. Correct.

9 Q. So every single precinct there would have

10 boosted the Black voting age population in a

11 Hispanic district. Correct?

12 A. Those areas that were moved had higher

13 Black VAP than the district that they were moved

14 into under the 2013 and 2022 plan.

15 Q. So those changes, then, would not have

16 exacerbated the racial segregation in comparison to

17 the 2013 benchmark. Is that fair?

18 A. Those changes were not made in a vacuum.

19 So, as I've said, I am not comparing what could have

20 been made -- what was made to the 2013 plan. I'm

21 comparing what was made to the 2013 plan in

22 comparison to what could have been made to the 2013

23 plan.

24 Q. Well, certainly they could have placed

25 those areas for that Black population in District 5

Page 49

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 49 of

163
1 to further boost the Black population in District 5,

2 couldn't they?

3 A. District 5 had to get rid of population if

4 they were being given more population by District 2.

5 As I note in my report, District 5 gave some areas

6 to District 1 and then District 1 turned around and

7 gave some areas to District 5. So it wasn't -- they

8 weren't even a net donor. They interchanged areas.

9 Q. I guess my question is, if they were doing

10 it for racial reasons, wouldn't you expect that if

11 District 1 was looking to shed Black voters and

12 boost Hispanic voters, wouldn't you expect the BVAP

13 that is being shifted to District 1 to be lower than

14 what is reflected?

15 A. No.

16 Q. Why not?

17 A. Because they had to change their map and

18 they had to change it in such a way that they were

19 using areas of the city that were on their border.

20 So they had to find areas that may not have had as

21 low Black population as the core or lower than the

22 core.

23 Q. What are the areas that could have been

24 moved for District 1 that would -- let me back up.

25 Regarding the changes to District 1, how

Page 50

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 50 of

163
1 was race a factor?

2 A. I don't understand. Can you clarify the

3 question?

4 Q. Sure. Based upon your analysis of the

5 data, you've reached conclusions about what was done

6 to District 1 and why it was done to District 1. So

7 my question is, what precisely was done to

8 District 1 and why was it done?

9 A. District 1 took on areas from District 5

10 that were lower in Black population, Black VAP, than

11 other areas that remained in District 5. And that's

12 why I have these splits in this table to show you

13 that precincts -- I'm using as the unit of analysis

14 here because it's a -- we know that that area is

15 close together -- the splits are very close to one

16 another because they're contained in the same

17 precinct. So there was a decision -- for instance,

18 for Precinct 531 there was a decision to take that

19 portion of that area into District 1 rather than the

20 part that remained or was moved into District 5

21 which had a higher Black population, higher Black

22 VAP.

23 Q. Okay. But that's not necessarily true for

24 all of the precincts, is it?

25 A. I looked at all of the precincts that were

Page 51

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 51 of

163
1 moved.

2 Q. Okay. Let's look at Precinct 529.

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. There is a percentage -- 18.7 percent was

5 moved to District 1 or stayed in District 1 whereas

6 for District 5, 13.3 percent Black voting age

7 population either stayed or was moved to District 5.

8 A. Correct.

9 Q. That's inconsistent with the narrative

10 that Black voting age population was boosted in

11 District 5 and Hispanic population was boosted in

12 District 1, isn't it?

13 A. This is -- 529 is one district where the

14 splits do not reflect the pattern I am referring to.

15 It is a small difference, 18.7 percent Black VAP

16 compared to 13.3 percent Black VAP. So a 5.4

17 percentage point difference compared to some of

18 these other precincts where the difference in

19 percentage points is almost 40 percentage points.

20 MR. MERKEN: George, can we take a

21 quick five-minute break when you're at a

22 good place. It's been about 90 minutes.

23 MR. LEVESQUE: Sure. We'll take a

24 break now. It's 10:30. Let's be back at

25 10:35.

Page 52

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 52 of

163
1 (Recess in proceedings.)

2 BY MR. LEVESQUE:

3 Q. Dr. Abott, going back to page 7 of your

4 report analyzing the 2022 plan, Table 4, you've

5 identified five precincts where you have identified

6 where the decisions were made deliberately on the

7 basis of race. Do I understand what is supposed to

8 be reflected in that report?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Did you examine all of the precincts that

11 were swapped between D-5 and D-1?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Are these the only five that you

14 identified where that was going on?

15 A. If those were the only ones listed then I

16 believe those were the -- those were the areas that

17 were moved.

18 Q. Okay. And if I can refer you to page 25

19 and 26 where in the area description we're talking

20 about areas that were moved from D-5 to D-1 starting

21 on page 25 first. About halfway down you've got

22 Riverside there moved from D-5 to D-1.

23 A. This is -- this is the February 7th draft.

24 Q. Okay. So is the draft -- if we wanted to

25 look at the 2022 enacted plan we should be looking

Page 53

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 53 of

163
1 at the report starting on page 26?

2 A. That's comparison of the February 7th

3 drafted to the enacted plan.

4 Q. Okay. So if we wanted to do a comparison,

5 then, of the benchmark plan, the 2013 plan to the

6 enacted plan, the `22 plan, we should look at

7 page 27?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. And so that plan also moved Precinct 530.

10 Correct?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. And that's not one that you identified as

13 being racially problematic. Correct?

14 A. Table 4 looks at just precincts that were

15 split. Just areas that were split. I used the

16 split -- I used the split precincts as a way to look

17 at areas that were very close to one another that

18 were in a preexisting geographical unit, although I

19 don't know if that's relevant, but they were areas

20 that were very close to one another. And reasonably

21 good comparisons to make with one another. If you

22 look at whole precincts you can compare any other

23 precinct on the border as an option. These were

24 areas that had natural comparisons that I wanted to

25 make.

Page 54

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 54 of

163
1 Q. Well, and I guess my question is, in

2 looking at the list of precincts that were moved

3 from D-5 to D-1, the only one that is identified in

4 your Table 4 that was actually moved from D-5 to

5 D-1 is 531; is that correct?

6 A. No. The first row of the table are areas

7 that were moved from D-5 to D-1 as well. So the

8 precinct splits at 512 and 522.

9 Q. Okay. So all together there were three

10 precincts that were moved from D-5 to D-1 that are

11 detailed in your table?

12 A. They were not moved wholly. These were

13 three precincts that were split that D-5 took on

14 from D-1.

15 Q. But the precincts that were split in 529

16 and 523 in Table 4, those were areas that were

17 already in D-1. Correct?

18 A. Correct. The split was moved into D-5.

19 Q. Dr. Abott, I'm going to try and share my

20 screen here. Are you able to see that document?

21 A. I can see it. I can't -- I don't think I

22 can read it that well. My eyes aren't the best,

23 but --

24 Q. Let me see if I can enlarge it here. Is

25 that helpful?

Page 55

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 55 of

163
1 A. Yeah. You have to scroll down for me to

2 see the whole thing. But yeah.

3 Q. And I'm going to represent to you that

4 this is Resolution R21-0485 that the city commission

5 adopted providing directions to its map drawers on

6 how they should rank criteria and address their map

7 drawing duties.

8 Are you able to read that criteria?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Was this information conveyed to you in

11 terms of how the city instructed its map drawers to

12 go about drawing maps?

13 A. No.

14 Q. Do you see anything on there that reflects

15 compactness?

16 A. Maybe E, but I don't know.

17 Q. Where it says maintain communities of

18 interest in neighborhoods where feasible?

19 A. Correct.

20 Q. Is it your understanding that that's the

21 functional equivalent of compactness in

22 redistricting parlance?

23 A. No.

24 Q. That would be two different things.

25 Correct?

Page 56

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 56 of

163
1 A. Sorry?

2 Q. That would -- those would be two different

3 things. Correct?

4 A. The way I understand it, yes.

5 Q. Were you aware that the city commission

6 rejected compactness as a redistricting criteria?

7 A. I was not aware.

8 Q. If the city commission directed its map

9 drawers to not worry about compactness when drawing

10 district lines, but to factor in normal things like

11 voter cohesion or maintaining the core of existing

12 districts, are those decision points that would

13 impact any of your opinions?

14 A. No.

15 Q. On page 7 of your report underneath Table

16 4 you indicated that the areas that were chosen were

17 deliberately done on the basis of race. Is that

18 statement in reference to the precinct splits that

19 were -- that you describe above?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. You would agree, though, that there were

22 other -- I'm sorry. You would agree that there were

23 other changes that were made that were not

24 necessarily reflected in those particular precincts.

25 Correct?

Page 57

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 57 of

163
1 A. Correct.

2 Q. So what is reflected there are just the

3 precincts where you were able to identify race as a

4 factor in the changes. Is that fair?

5 A. What's reflected here are areas that to my

6 political scientist mind represent good comparisons

7 and good counter hypotheticals for what could have

8 been done versus what was done.

9 Q. Well, you used an interesting description

10 there. Counter hypotheticals for what could have

11 been done. What other things for District 1 could

12 have been done that would not have taken race into

13 account?

14 A. There were other precincts or other

15 portions of precincts that could have been moved

16 that had different breakdowns of race and ethnicity

17 that would have not been as -- the degree of -- the

18 size of the Black VAP would have been lower, for

19 instance, in other places that could have remained

20 in District 5.

21 Q. Okay. We're talking about District 1,

22 though, right now.

23 A. Right. So areas that had higher Black VAP

24 than the ones that were moved into District 1.

25 Q. Well, all of the areas -- all of the

Page 58

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 58 of

163
1 precinct areas that we've identified there all had

2 higher Black voting age population than what was

3 reflected in District 1. Correct?

4 A. Correct. But they did not have higher

5 Black VAP compared to other possible precincts that

6 could have been moved in.

7 Q. And I guess what -- did you identify what

8 those area possible precincts are in your report?

9 A. In this table it looks at the other half

10 for the other portion of the precinct that was not

11 moved.

12 Q. So if I understand correctly, then, the

13 argument is that it could have incorporated some of

14 those other precincts. From a map drawing process,

15 did you look at where those precincts were

16 geographically in relation to the precincts that

17 weren't moved?

18 A. They were all on the border. Right? You

19 had to find areas that were on the border of these

20 districts. So I looked at other precincts or

21 precinct splits that were also on the borders.

22 Q. Well, let's look at Area 8 of your report.

23 I'm going to put it up on the screen if I can. Are

24 you able to see that?

25 A. Yes.

Page 59

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 59 of

163
1 Q. Okay. So we've got Precincts 512 and 522

2 in Area 8. When we look at Area 8 that is in

3 question here, are you able to see that?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Geographically in that area, do you know

6 where Precincts 512 and 522 are located?

7 A. I couldn't tell you from this map.

8 Q. Did you look at whether the precincts that

9 you were comparing are reflected geographically such

10 that where the City drew the line your precinct with

11 a higher Black voting age population would be in the

12 yellow portion or the blue portion or purple?

13 A. The area with the higher Black population

14 remained in the yellow portion, which is District 5.

15 Q. So if it wanted to include that portion,

16 it would need to go further into District 5.

17 Correct?

18 A. Not necessarily. It could have gone to the

19 right. To the east.

20 Q. Did you do analysis of that block to the

21 east?

22 A. It's not in the report.

23 Q. Do you know if the areas of Precincts

24 512 or 522 are to the east?

25 A. I'm sorry?

Page 60

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 60 of

163
1 Q. Do you know --

2 A. Say it again.

3 Q. Do you know if the areas of Precincts 512

4 and 522 are to the east?

5 A. I don't. I don't. They might be. I don't.

6 Q. From a redistricting standpoint, is there

7 anything unusual about the way those lines were

8 drawn, in your opinion?

9 A. Probably decreases a little bit of

10 compactness the way they were drawn.

11 Q. But that wouldn't be a problem if the city

12 commission decided not to use compactness as a

13 measure that it was going to observe. Correct?

14 A. Correct.

15 Q. At the bottom of page 8 and the top of

16 page 9 of your report it indicates three areas that

17 were moved from District 2 stand out. The first area

18 is 10 and 11 that was given to District 5. This

19 section of donated precincts had a lower white

20 voting age population, a greater Hispanic and Black

21 VAP compared to the areas that were not moved.

22 What is the significance of that

23 observation?

24 A. The significance is that areas that were

25 moved compared to areas that weren't moved shored up

Page 61

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 61 of

163
1 preexisting breakdowns of race in the districts.

2 Q. Do you recall what the Hispanic population

3 in that district was in District 2 in the 2013 plan?

4 A. 51.9 percent.

5 Q. And after the 2022 plan was enacted it was

6 less than that. Correct?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Is that a statistically -- I'm sorry. What

9 was the percentage difference between 2013 and 2022?

10 A. 2013 was 51.9 percent, 2022 was

11 48.6 percent.

12 Q. Is that a statistically different drop for

13 that district?

14 A. I don't know.

15 Q. Were you asked to reach an opinion whether

16 that was a statistically significant drop?

17 A. No.

18 Q. And if I understood some of our earlier

19 dialogue, when it comes to race and ethnicity on a

20 map-wide basis for each district, there are not

21 statistically significant changes that were made to

22 the map. Correct?

23 A. Across all five districts.

24 Q. What about in relation to any particular

25 district?

Page 62

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 62 of

163
1 A. I don't know.

2 Q. Now, the areas of the map that we're

3 talking about, Area 10 and 11 -- bring that back up.

4 Are you able to see that?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. What is your understanding of what is

7 going on with this geography in terms of housing?

8 What's there? Do you know?

9 A. I have no idea. I don't know.

10 Q. In terms of the map as a whole, do you

11 have any understanding of where the white voting age

12 population resides?

13 A. In District 2 for the plurality of them.

14 Q. So are you aware that District 2 is a

15 district that primarily runs along the coast?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. What is your understanding of where the

18 Hispanic population is largely concentrated?

19 A. Districts 1, 3, and 4.

20 Q. And so those would be the inland areas of

21 the city boundaries. Correct?

22 A. One and 4 are on the city boundaries.

23 District 3 is not on city boundaries inland. Or on

24 the coast either.

25 Q. What areas of District 2. Did you

Page 63

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 63 of

163
1 identify that could have been shifted to District 5

2 that did not have a problematic racial makeup?

3 A. There were two split precincts I list

4 here, precinct 534-A and 536-A. The split precincts

5 that were given to District 5 had higher Black VAP

6 than the portions that remained in District 2. It's

7 broken down in district -- broken down in Table 5.

8 Q. And looking at that map are you able to

9 identify where those districts -- I'm sorry. Where

10 the precincts would be?

11 A. I don't recall.

12 Q. At any point when you were doing your

13 precinct analyses did you drill down to the

14 geography to figure out where they were located?

15 A. Yeah. Using the shape files. The maps.

16 Q. So if a precinct -- let's say in that

17 example there is a precinct that you were drawing a

18 comparison with for 534 or 536-A that was closer to

19 what is the old district line for District 2, did

20 that weigh into your analysis at all about whether

21 you could give as much credence to the racial

22 disparity?

23 A. I primarily looked at the splits -- the

24 precinct splits. Just look at areas that were split

25 amongst District 2 and District 5 that were

Page 64

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 64 of

163
1 traditionally geographic units, preexisting

2 geographic units, and compared what those areas

3 looked like before and after the split.

4 Q. So you looked at the data, you didn't

5 necessarily take into account the geography or any

6 of the other information that might be impacting

7 where the City was drawing the line. Is that fair?

8 A. I don't know what specifically you mean by

9 geography, but I was not taking into account

10 anything other than the data and the maps.

11 Q. I guess, Doctor, let me ask it this way.

12 In this area of 10 and 11, what is your

13 understanding -- or do you have any understanding of

14 where white population might live within those

15 borders and where the Black population might live

16 within those borders?

17 A. No. Not at the block level. No, I don't.

18 Q. Would that be important to know as part of

19 your analysis?

20 A. No.

21 Q. Why not?

22 A. I don't see how it would impact my

23 conclusions or my analyses.

24 Q. Well, if one of the precincts that

25 reflects the racial disparity you're referencing is,

Page 65

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 65 of

163
1 say, located along this boundary (indicating), and

2 they're capturing all of the area outside of that,

3 they can't very well carve that out and put it into

4 District 2 to maintain that, could they?

5 A. Can you rephrase that? I don't know who

6 they is that you're referring to.

7 Q. Whoever is drawing the map. If someone is

8 drawing a map and they're going to take this entire

9 area (indicating), and let's say Precinct 534-A,

10 hypothetically speaking, were somewhere along this

11 area (indicating), they're capturing the areas on

12 the outside or at the top to make a clean line,

13 those are all decisions that might reduce or

14 otherwise explain why there's a racial disparity

15 there. Correct?

16 A. No.

17 Q. Why not?

18 A. They're taking -- they're taking portions

19 of the precinct. The other portion of the precinct

20 is contiguous -- geographically contiguous with the

21 other half of the precinct.

22 Q. But do you know which way the precincts

23 are running?

24 A. Not off the top of my head.

25 Q. Did you examine whether any of these

Page 66

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 66 of

163
1 boundaries were following major roadways?

2 A. No.

3 Q. Okay. I want to shift down to Area 13. Is

4 it your opinion that the racial disparities in the

5 precinct splits there explain why that area was

6 drawn that way?

7 A. No.

8 Q. What is your opinion concerning Area 13?

9 A. My opinion is that because the precincts

10 do not differ by race that there were other

11 considerations for why that area was moved. But

12 because that area was moved other areas needed to be

13 moved as well.

14 Q. Is it your conclusion that that area was

15 drawn so that they could move other areas?

16 A. No. I don't know. I don't have -- I don't

17 know the motivations.

18 Q. Did anyone ever inform you that at the

19 very lowest point of that Area 13 in that general

20 area where my cursor is (indicating), that that is

21 where one of the city commissioners maintains a

22 residence?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. And what is your understanding of that?

25 A. My understanding is that the commissioner

Page 67

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 67 of

163
1 had two homes, one of which was in District 3 and

2 the other one was not.

3 Q. Did anyone ever inform you that that area

4 was drawn so that his other residence would be

5 included in District 3?

6 A. No.

7 Q. You indicated earlier that there were news

8 reports that you had reviewed based upon your

9 research. What were those news reports?

10 A. News reports were about the politics and

11 the process and the conflict over the new maps or

12 the map drawing process, I suppose.

13 Q. Okay. Were those related to the map

14 drawing process that was commenced in 2022?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Did the news reports also cover the map

17 drawing process that was done in 2023?

18 A. No.

19 Q. Did it cover any of the prior map drawing

20 processes, whether it be `97, 2003, or 2013?

21 A. No.

22 Q. In 2022, how did it describe the politics?

23 A. They mentioned the commissioner's second

24 home. That seemed to be one of the biggest stories

25 that were mentioned. And that they were having

Page 68

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 68 of

163
1 trouble coming up with a consensus about a map.

2 Q. Did the article also cover other

3 circumstances as to why the commissioner might want

4 his second home in his district?

5 A. I don't know. I don't know in particular.

6 Q. Do you recall if you read that news story

7 before or after you finalized your first report in

8 this matter?

9 A. Before.

10 Q. Is there a reason you did not include that

11 in your report?

12 A. I couldn't speculate on motivation.

13 Q. Well, you considered incumbent addresses

14 as something to be included in your report. Correct?

15 A. I considered the primary addresses, the

16 homes of commissioners to determine whether any new

17 lines of the districts would draw the incumbents out

18 of their districts. He had a home in District 3 so

19 that home was never in risk of being drawn out of

20 District 3.

21 Q. Are you aware of any time he moved to the

22 residence that is located in the bottom of that

23 Area 13?

24 A. No.

25 Q. So if he had moved to that residence that

Page 69

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 69 of

163
1 was located in the bottom of Area 13, no one

2 informed you of that?

3 A. No.

4 Q. The residence that he was living at when

5 he was elected to office, that address would be in

6 your notes. Correct?

7 A. It's in the data files.

8 Q. Those are the data files that were

9 provided to you by counsel?

10 A. Correct.

11 Q. After reading that -- strike that. If I

12 could ask you to flip to page 9 in your report.

13 There you say, in Area 17 a former section of the

14 southwest part of District 2 directly below US-1 did

15 not substantially differ from the portions of

16 District 2 surrounding it. It did, however, differ

17 from -- markedly from the racial composition of the

18 receding District 4 which undercuts the argument

19 that commissioners were seeking to maintain four of

20 the districts' racial compositions.

21 Is it your understanding that the

22 commission intended to maintain the core of the

23 districts racial compositions?

24 A. I believe it was one plausible

25 explanation.

Page 70

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 70 of

163
1 Q. Would you agree that even separate from

2 racial compositions, that there could be core

3 geography that would be another measure or another

4 criteria in terms of maintaining the core of

5 districts? It doesn't have to be race. Correct?

6 A. I don't know what you mean by geography.

7 Q. Well, we're looking at these redistricting

8 plans. They cover land. Correct?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Let me share my screen. So in looking at

11 this map, District 4 covers a particular area of the

12 city. Correct?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. If one were to maintain as much of the

15 core of District 4, keeping in mind that District 4

16 would need to gain population, then one probably

17 wouldn't wholesale or rewrite Districts 2, 3, and 4.

18 Correct?

19 A. It depends what your priorities are. I

20 can't tell you how to draw a map about the -- you

21 know, the specific boundaries of the cores. If

22 that's a priority, that's the commission's priority.

23 Q. Do you know which commissioner voted

24 against the plan for the 2022 enacted plan?

25 A. I believe there were two. I don't know

Page 71

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 71 of

163
1 which ones.

2 Q. Is it your opinion that the city

3 commission was looking to maintain the core of the

4 districts based upon racial composition?

5 A. I don't know.

6 Q. You would agree that the changes there in

7 Area 17 appear to be at odds in terms of racial

8 motivations than those that we've discussed in

9 relation to Area 8 and Area 10 and 11. Would you

10 agree?

11 A. At least the splits -- the two precincts

12 that were split in Area 17 do look different from

13 one another racially.

14 Q. And so if the city commission was looking

15 to exacerbate the Hispanic population in District 4

16 they didn't do a very good job, did they?

17 A. I don't -- I'm not sure what you mean.

18 Q. Well, in describing some of the other

19 areas in the split analysis that you've conducted,

20 say for Area 10 and 11, comparing Districts 2 and 5

21 and Area 8 and 6 related to Districts 5 and 1, you

22 described those changes as exacerbating the existing

23 racial segregation. That's not true of Area 17, is

24 it?

25 A. The splits that were either given or

Page 72

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 72 of

163
1 remained -- the splits that were given to District 4

2 have greater Hispanic VAP than the splits that

3 remained in District 2.

4 Q. In examining the other areas of

5 District 2 that District 4 could gain from, did you

6 look at any of the areas directly adjacent to Areas

7 16 and 17 and 13?

8 A. I write in the first paragraph that

9 Area 17 did not substantially differ from other

10 portions of District 2 surrounding it.

11 Q. But, again, that's -- that's a scenario

12 where -- let me back up.

13 That's the exact opposite scenario that we

14 discussed related to District 1 and District 5.

15 Correct?

16 A. No. Because the precinct splits were still

17 designed around Hispanic VAP or still differed --

18 they differed based on Hispanic VAP.

19 Q. Those two precinct splits that you

20 identified for Area 17, do you know how many

21 residents from a numerical basis are included there?

22 A. At the bottom of page 9, the District 4

23 split of Precinct 584 contains 10 percent of the VAP

24 that District 2 split contains. It's 235 individuals

25 versus 2,108.

Page 73

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 73 of

163
1 Q. Okay. And so in unpacking those numbers,

2 does that mean the 235 is a reference to what is

3 retained in District 4?

4 A. What was given to District 4. Yes.

5 Q. And the 2,108, are those retained in

6 District 2?

7 A. Correct.

8 Q. From a statistical significance

9 standpoint, is 235 a statistically significant group

10 of voters?

11 A. Significant relative to what?

12 Q. To the district size.

13 A. I mean, I don't -- statistical

14 significance is about an estimate. It's about

15 understanding whether an estimate is likely to be

16 correct. So these aren't estimates.

17 Q. Can you repeat your answer related to --

18 A. There is a difference between statistical

19 significance and substantive significance.

20 Statistical significance refers to estimating

21 things. Whether -- an estimate has a confidence

22 interval. It has bounds. It could be X less than the

23 estimate or it could be X more than the estimate.

24 The 235 individuals is not an estimate, it's the

25 number of individuals that lived in that precinct

Page 74

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 74 of

163
1 split.

2 Q. So if we're dealing with -- and you will

3 have to forgive me. It's been almost 30 years since

4 I took statistics. So if you're talking about actual

5 numbers, I think you indicated, is that substantive

6 significance?

7 A. Substantive significance. Yes.

8 Q. Are 235 voters substantively significant

9 for a district size?

10 A. That's a subjective opinion. That's a

11 subjective decision. Subjective opinion.

12 Q. What would that subjective opinion be

13 dependent on?

14 A. It depends what your goals and your

15 preferences are about how the map should look or

16 how -- you know, whatever your opinion about what

17 matters in the map.

18 Q. Okay.

19 MR. LEVESQUE: I'm going to suggest

20 we take about a ten-minute break.

21 MR. MERKEN: Sounds good, George.

22 (Recess in proceedings.)

23 Q. Dr. Abott, if I can refer to you page 12

24 of that first report. I'm going to share my screen.

25 There again is a depiction of the areas. I want to

Page 75

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 75 of

163
1 talk about Area 14 and 15 now. If I understand

2 correctly, is it your opinion that Area 14 or 15 was

3 added to offset the addition of Area 13?

4 A. That is my speculation. Yes.

5 Q. Did you do any analysis of any of those

6 geographic areas where District 3 borders District 4

7 in terms of what the Hispanic voting age population

8 is in any of those areas?

9 A. In any of those -- I'm sorry; the last

10 part you said?

11 Q. In any of those areas related to the

12 border between District 3 and District 4?

13 A. I don't think I looked particularly at the

14 border over there.

15 Q. So it's possible that District 4 could

16 have picked up population in the corner where

17 District 4 and District 3 connect and that might

18 have had the same Hispanic voting age population

19 makeup that's reflected in Area 14 or 15; you just

20 don't know. Correct?

21 A. Well, that's what I say in this paragraph

22 that Area 14 and 15 does not strongly differ from

23 the areas immediately surrounding it either in

24 District 3 or in District 4.

25 Q. Well, I guess -- is it your opinion that

Page 76

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 76 of

163
1 that area was selected to offset the addition of the

2 Area 13 that had a heavier white voting age

3 population?

4 A. That was my speculation. Yes.

5 Q. You framed it as a speculation. Is that

6 one of your opinions in this case?

7 A. I cannot make judgments or draw

8 conclusions about specific motivations. I can just

9 tell you that the data suggests that Area 14, 15

10 offsets some of the whiter population that was added

11 by Area 13.

12 Q. You would agree that District 4 needed to

13 pick up population somewhere to make up that

14 difference. Correct?

15 A. Do you mean District 3?

16 Q. I'm sorry. Yes. District 3.

17 A. Let me see. Yes. District 3 needed to add

18 population. Area 13 contained 1,396 people, which is

19 only 18.6 percent of the total number of people that

20 were moved to District 3.

21 Q. So District 3 could have picked up

22 additional voters or residents from District 2 or

23 District 4 or District 1. If it's picking up voters

24 from District 4, I just want to be clear, you didn't

25 do any analysis as to whether -- and looking at my

Page 77

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 77 of

163
1 cursor kind of there in that corner -- whether

2 picking up these areas would be racially the same as

3 this area, did you?

4 A. I did. I looked at the surrounding areas

5 and the areas were similar. My point was that it

6 would have made more sense, from my perspective, to

7 pick up more areas from Area 2 which was the

8 district -- sorry. From District 2. Because

9 District 2 is the area -- was the district that

10 needed to shed population. So rather than take area

11 and take population from District 4, District 3

12 could have taken more area from District 2.

13 Q. Okay. I want to talk about the alternative

14 explanations that you rejected in your report. On

15 page 12 you reject partisanship as an alternative

16 explanation. And one of the bases is that the

17 districts are nonpartisan districts.

18 Why is the fact that the districts are

19 nonpartisan districts not indicative or not

20 appropriate for consideration of a partisan

21 gerrymandering?

22 A. It's not that the districts are not

23 partisan, the commission is not partisan. The

24 commissioners who serve in the commission are

25 nonpartisan and run in nonpartisan elections. The

Page 78

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 78 of

163
1 reason that partisanship is not an adequate

2 explanation right away is simply based on the fact

3 that elections are not done on a partisan basis.

4 They're not done on a partisan basis. And even

5 though it is somewhat easy to figure out the

6 partisanship of the candidate, or of the person

7 running the election, the commissioners who agreed

8 to this map did so across their party lines.

9 Q. What about consideration of issues such as

10 ideology?

11 A. What about them?

12 Q. Did you factor in the ideology of any of

13 the candidates or commissioners?

14 A. No.

15 Q. Do you know the ideology of any of the

16 commissioners?

17 A. No.

18 Q. You identified the fact that the 2022

19 enacted plan was passed on a 3-2 margin. Do you know

20 if there were other types of politics that might

21 have factored into that?

22 A. No.

23 Q. Do you know if that map was passed along

24 racial or ethnic lines?

25 A. Well, I know the commissioner from

Page 79

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 79 of

163
1 District 5 was a Black Democrat and the other two

2 Republicans who joined the Democrat, I don't know

3 their race. But they weren't Black.

4 Q. Do you know the race or ethnicity of the

5 two commissioners who voted against the plan?

6 A. I don't.

7 Q. Do you think that would be relevant in

8 terms of your analysis?

9 A. No.

10 Q. Have you done any research on the City of

11 Miami's electoral politics?

12 A. No.

13 Q. And in reaching your conclusions in your

14 first report, that is not something you factor into

15 your consideration. Correct?

16 A. Correct.

17 Q. In doing your analysis you relied

18 exclusively on the data to reach your conclusions.

19 Correct?

20 A. Correct.

21 Q. In reviewing the 2022 enacted plan, would

22 you agree with the statement that the plan generally

23 maintains the cores of the existing district?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. On page 16 you have a statement, a number

Page 80

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 80 of

163
1 of alternative maps were proposed but not enacted

2 and you state all maps tended to shore up existing

3 racial compositions with individual commission

4 districts, particularly those districts of 1, 2,

5 and 5.

6 So that would be true of not only the

7 enacted plan, but all of the versions that were

8 rejected by the commission as well. Correct?

9 A. All of the alternative maps that I was

10 given. Yes. All the alternative proposals that I was

11 given.

12 Q. And when you say the maps tended to shore

13 up existing racial compositions, what do you mean by

14 shore up?

15 A. What I mean is that areas that were moved

16 into those districts tended to look more like those

17 districts that they were moved into rather than

18 alternative options that were not moved into those

19 districts.

20 Q. And when you refer to the existing racial

21 composition, you don't have an opinion one way or

22 another on whether the city plan in 1997, in 2003,

23 or 2013 would have been impermissible racial

24 gerrymander, do you?

25 A. I do not have an opinion.

Page 81

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 81 of

163
1 Q. If I could ask you to flip to page 1 of

2 your second report you indicate that the city's

3 proposed remedy, Resolution 23-271 differs only

4 marginally from the enjoined plan. In comparing

5 those two plans, do you know if there were any

6 efforts to address any of the criticism of the

7 Court related to the enjoined plan?

8 A. I do not.

9 Q. Did you read the Court's order relating to

10 the enjoined plan?

11 A. I did not.

12 Q. So if the Court criticized a particular

13 area of the map and the city commission addressed

14 that, your opinion wouldn't take any of that into

15 account?

16 A. No.

17 Q. Is it fair to say that just like your

18 first report, your second report relies exclusively

19 on an analysis of the data to reach its conclusions?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. Under what circumstances would it be

22 appropriate to consider other factors other than

23 just the data when applying your standard

24 methodology?

25 A. I don't understand the question.

Page 82

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 82 of

163
1 Q. My understanding is you used a standard

2 methodology, that's the way you described it, in

3 analyzing the data related to the maps. Correct?

4 A. Correct. Yes.

5 Q. Are there circumstances where under that

6 standard methodology it is appropriate to consider

7 things other than simply the data to look for

8 explanations as to why a certain decision was made?

9 A. Not for the questions I was asked to

10 answer by counsel.

11 Q. And remind me again, what were the

12 questions that you were asked to answer?

13 A. In the second report I was asked to use

14 data on voting age population and citizen voting age

15 population and voting patterns within individual

16 city precincts in order to determine whether and to

17 what extent race can explain the overall shapes in

18 the districts in a proposed remedy as well as the

19 changes between the enjoined plan and the proposed

20 remedy.

21 Q. Would you agree that the 2023 plan,

22 Resolution 23-271, is substantially similar to both

23 the enjoined plan and the 2013 plan?

24 A. It is to the enjoined plan. I did not

25 compare it to the 2013 plan.

Page 83

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 83 of

163
1 Q. So as we sit here today you're not able to

2 offer an opinion on whether that's similar or not?

3 A. I did not compare it to the 2013 plan.

4 Q. Now on page 2, similar to your first

5 report, you indicate that you rely on the 2020

6 census data, but you also rely on the 2020 American

7 Community Survey five-year estimates. For the first

8 report you relied on the 2019 survey data. For the

9 second report, is there 2020 American Community

10 Survey data?

11 A. Can you say the last part again?

12 Q. Is there 2020 American Community Survey

13 five-year estimate data for 2020?

14 A. In the appendix. Yes.

15 Q. And is that -- do you know if the 2021

16 American Community Survey five-year estimate data

17 was available?

18 A. I don't know.

19 Q. Is there a reason why you used 2019 for

20 the first report and 2020 for the second report?

21 A. That's the data that counsel asked me to

22 use.

23 Q. Do you know when the 2021 American

24 Community Survey five-year estimates were released?

25 A. I do not know.

Page 84

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 84 of

163
1 Q. Do you know if it was available at the

2 time that you did this report?

3 A. I do not know.

4 Q. Do you know if the data would have

5 reflected something different either than 2019 or

6 2021?

7 A. I do not know.

8 Q. Do you know how many commissioners

9 supported the 2023 plan?

10 A. I do not know.

11 Q. And just like the first report related to

12 the 2022 plan, you didn't review any transcripts

13 related to the enactment of the 2023 plan. Correct?

14 A. Correct.

15 Q. Would you agree that if a city commission

16 draws a non-compact district that they can do it for

17 nonracial reasons?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. There might be any number of

20 constitutional reasons why they might draw a

21 non-compact district. Correct?

22 MR. MERKEN: Objection to the form to

23 the extent it calls for a legal

24 conclusion.

25 Q. You can answer, Doctor.

Page 85

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 85 of

163
1 A. There are other reasons -- there are

2 reasons why someone -- a commission might draw a

3 non-compact district that's not related to race.

4 Q. What are some of those otherwise

5 acceptable reasons why they might draw a non-compact

6 district that has nothing to do with race?

7 A. I cannot -- I can't speculate.

8 Q. I'm not asking you to speculate as to why

9 this particular city commission; I'm just asking you

10 are you aware of what other non-compact -- what

11 other reasons might exist for any commission to draw

12 a non-compact district?

13 A. Geographical features in the landscape.

14 Partisan concerns. The size of the population in

15 those areas.

16 Q. Is there a reason why you compared the

17 23-271 plan, the 2023 plan, to the enjoined plan and

18 not the benchmark plan?

19 A. That's what counsel asked me to do.

20 Q. Would you agree that under either the 2022

21 plan or the 2023 plan, that Districts 1, 3, and 4

22 became less Hispanic?

23 A. No. No. Under the 2022 plan, District 1

24 went from being 89.5 percent Hispanic VAP to 89.7

25 percent Hispanic VAP. District 3 went from 88.3 to

Page 86

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 86 of

163
1 84.5, which was a decrease. And District -- sorry.

2 What was the last one?

3 Q. Are you -- which plan -- which plan are

4 you -- it would be 4, but which plan are you

5 comparing to which?

6 A. The enjoined plan to the 2020 -- the 2022

7 plan to the 2023 plan.

8 Q. Okay.

9 A. Then in District 4, Hispanic VAP went from

10 89.5 percent to 90.0 percent.

11 Q. Okay. My question was -- and I'll break it

12 down. Because my question was actually related to

13 both, the 2022 and the 2023 compared to the 2013

14 plan.

15 A. Okay.

16 Q. Compared to the 2013 plan, the 2022 plan,

17 Districts 1, 3, and 4 become less Hispanic. Correct?

18 A. Correct.

19 Q. And District 5 becomes less Black.

20 Correct?

21 A. Between the 2013 and the 2022 plan, yes.

22 Q. Correct. And then comparing the 2023 plan

23 to the 2013 plan, the same is also true for all

24 three of those districts. Correct?

25 A. Yes.

Page 87

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 87 of

163
1 Q. And the same is also true for District 5,

2 the Black district?

3 A. Yes. Correct.

4 Q. Did you do any analysis as to whether the

5 city commission could have drawn districts that were

6 higher in Hispanic percentage for Districts 1, 3, or

7 4?

8 A. I did not.

9 Q. And the same question for District 5.

10 A. I did not.

11 Q. Did you ever speak with Dr. Moy?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. How many times?

14 A. In the capacity of working on this

15 case or --

16 Q. Yes.

17 A. I believe we e-mailed once or twice.

18 Q. Do you know if counsel was included on

19 those e-mails?

20 A. I cannot recall.

21 Q. Did you speak with Dr. McCartan at all

22 related to this case?

23 A. I did not.

24 Q. I'm going to share my screen a little bit.

25 We're going to talk through some of the changes in

Page 88

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 88 of

163
1 the map. Are you able to see that okay?

2 A. Yeah.

3 Q. Okay.

4 MR. MERKEN: George, could you

5 please make it a little bit larger?

6 MR. LEVESQUE: I can. How about I do

7 that. And I can scroll around to

8 different areas that we'll be discussing.

9 MR. MERKEN: Is that okay?

10 THE WITNESS: Yeah. That's fine.

11 MR. MERKEN: Thank you, George.

12 BY MR. LEVESQUE:

13 Q. The first area I want to talk about is

14 this area here (indicating). This area, District 1,

15 and this area is District 4. You're critical of the

16 move of that little sliver between District 6. Can

17 you explain why?

18 A. Are you referring to Area 6 right now?

19 Q. Yes. I apologize. Area 6. Can you tell me

20 why?

21 A. Yeah. One second. So what is -- can you

22 repeat the question about Area 6, please?

23 Q. On page 5, I'm trying to ascertain the

24 significance of both the table and the reference in

25 the paragraph above as to the significance of

Page 89

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 89 of

163
1 highlighting Area 6 in your report.

2 A. All of the areas that were highlighted in

3 teal in Table 3 are areas that were moved into

4 District 1 between the 2022 plan and the 2023 plan.

5 So it was a comparison of the two plans looking at

6 what was moved into District 1 from the previous

7 plan.

8 Q. Is the move of that Area 6 from District 4

9 to District 1 problematic in your mind?

10 A. I don't -- they -- it was an area -- Area

11 6 is a small population and it had a very high

12 Hispanic VAP, but I don't think I highlighted these

13 as -- because they were necessarily problematic. I

14 highlighted them to describe what changes were being

15 made between the two plans.

16 Q. Let me put it this way. You've identified

17 several areas there in Table 3 related to the

18 movements involving District 1. Which changes are

19 indicative of race-based criteria then?

20 A. I think my point in highlighting these was

21 that there was actually very little change between

22 the two plans.

23 Q. For District 1?

24 A. For District 1.

25 Q. Do you see any of the changes that were

Page 90

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 90 of

163
1 made to District 1 as being problematic?

2 A. I don't -- I'm not in a position to draw a

3 conclusion about whether they were problematic or

4 not.

5 Q. Let me -- I'll sort of rephrase it. Do you

6 see any of those changes that were made to

7 District 1 as being drawn in a way that race is the

8 predominant factor?

9 A. I don't -- I don't -- I don't -- I don't

10 have an answer to that. I don't -- I don't know.

11 Q. Okay.

12 A. Because the changes made were very

13 minimal. As I said in the second paragraph on

14 page 5, the districts are of similar racial

15 composition and this movement made little difference

16 to either of their overall racial VAP.

17 Q. Let's talk about some of the changes that

18 were made in District 2. Yo can see district -- that

19 Area 10 is being added back into District 2. Are you

20 critical of the commission's decision to add that

21 area back into District 2?

22 A. No.

23 Q. Are you critical of the decision to add

24 this area of 11 back into District 3?

25 A. I don't have an opinion.

Page 91

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 91 of

163
1 Q. Would you agree that that addition is very

2 similar to -- strike that. Let me ask this. Are

3 there any changes to District 2 that you feel were

4 drawn primarily on race-based criteria?

5 A. The areas that were moved into

6 District 2 look more similar racially to

7 District 2 than the donor districts.

8 Q. So is that -- can you translate that for

9 me?

10 A. Translate it into what? You want me to

11 rephrase it?

12 Q. Well, are the -- I'm trying to

13 understand -- my question was, do you feel any of

14 the changes to District 2 were made based upon

15 race-based criteria?

16 A. Between the `22 plan -- the 2022 plan and

17 the 2023 plan?

18 Q. Correct.

19 A. I don't have an opinion other than to say

20 that the districts -- the areas looked different

21 racially between the donor districts and the

22 recipient districts.

23 Q. Okay. But you don't have an opinion on

24 whether race predominated those decisions?

25 A. I don't. I wasn't -- I wasn't asked to do

Page 92

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 92 of

163
1 that. I was simply asked to compare the two plans.

2 Q. Well, were you asked to draw conclusions

3 related to the 2022 plan?

4 A. The changes to the `22 plan?

5 Q. No. I'm kind of backtracking a little bit

6 so I understand what you were asked to do. In

7 relation to the 2022 plan, were you asked to draw

8 conclusions from the data related to the changes

9 that were made to the 2022 -- I'm sorry. Changes

10 made to the districts to reach the 2022 plan?

11 A. I was asked to look at the differences

12 between the two plans.

13 Q. And when you say the two plans, are you

14 referring to 2013 and 2022 or are you referring to

15 2022 and 2023?

16 A. 2022 and 2023.

17 Q. So other than noting the differences

18 between 2022 and 2023, you weren't asked to draw any

19 conclusions as to what might have been the

20 motivating factors in those changes?

21 A. I didn't do the same sort of analysis I

22 did in the first expert report where I looked at

23 surrounding possible precincts that could have been

24 moved rather than the ones that were moved.

25 Q. And I think related to the 2022 plan, your

Page 93

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 93 of

163
1 opinion was that on a districtwide basis there was

2 not a racially significant change from 2013 to 2022;

3 is that correct?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Is the same also true for the 2023 plan?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. At the bottom of page 8 you state:

8 Collectively the areas moved out of Districts 1, 3,

9 and 4 have much lower Hispanic VAP -- turning over

10 to page 9 -- 58.8 percent than the enjoined

11 districts 85.6 and 89.6, making that three district

12 grouping more concentrated to a Hispanic VAP.

13 Is that just a factual observation that

14 you're making?

15 A. It is a factual observation I'm making.

16 Q. Are you drawing any conclusions from that

17 factual observation?

18 A. Not from that factual observation alone.

19 Q. Well, let me ask this. Is it your opinion

20 that the city commission drew the 2023 plan to shore

21 up the three Hispanic districts with additional

22 Hispanic voters?

23 A. I don't think the changes between the 2022

24 plan and the 2023 plan were notably different for

25 the Hispanic super majority districts.

Page 94

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 94 of

163
1 Q. Okay. So what conclusion would you be

2 drawing either in part or in whole from that factual

3 observation related to the three district grouping

4 being more concentrated in its Hispanic VAP?

5 A. Are you referring to specific areas or

6 just all of the -- all of the areas that were moved

7 out of the majority Hispanic districts?

8 Q. Well, I had read that sentence and I asked

9 if you were drawing any conclusions or relying on

10 that for any conclusions and you said not -- and I'm

11 paraphrasing. My impression from your answer was

12 that that would not serve as the basis -- the sole

13 basis for conclusion but it might factor into other

14 conclusions. I'm inquiring as to what those other

15 conclusions are that would rely on that factual

16 basis.

17 A. There are no other conclusions. But

18 conclusions -- the observations that the -- the

19 areas that were moved out of the Hispanic super

20 majority districts are lower in Hispanic VAP than

21 the areas that were moved out of the enjoined

22 districts.

23 Q. Okay. What effect would that have on

24 District 2?

25 A. It would shore up -- it would shore up

Page 95

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 95 of

163
1 District 2's racial composition.

2 Q. In which direction?

3 A. What do you mean by which direction?

4 Q. Well, related to Hispanic voters, what did

5 those movements do for District 2?

6 A. Sorry. Can we go back -- can you clarify

7 exactly which areas you're referring to? Just so

8 we're all on the same page.

9 Q. I'm referring to the areas that were moved

10 out of Districts 1, 3, and 4. Your statement at the

11 bottom of page 8.

12 A. Right. Are these areas that were moved

13 directly into District 2 that you're talking about?

14 Q. Yes.

15 A. Okay. Do we have a specific -- are you

16 looking at a specific table?

17 Q. Let's look at Area 10 that's on the screen

18 there.

19 A. Yeah.

20 Q. What effect would moving that into

21 District 2 have on District 2 in terms of Hispanic

22 voters?

23 A. It would probably not do much because it's

24 similar to the racial composition of District 2.

25 Relative to the 2022 plan it would add in -- it

Page 96

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 96 of

163
1 would add in some more Hispanic voters that had been

2 taken out. But the composition of that area is very

3 similar to the composition of District 2 as a whole.

4 Q. What about for Area 11?

5 A. Well, the same answer except it was

6 removed from District 2. So it was an area that was

7 very similar to District 2 that was removed from

8 District 2. But it was not similar to the district

9 it was moved into, which is District 3.

10 Q. Other than making those observations about

11 similarities and dissimilarities, you're not making

12 any conclusions from that related to these changes?

13 A. Not those specific changes, no.

14 Q. What about the changes to Area 12?

15 A. Area 12, it's that little --

16 Q. Right in there (indicating).

17 A. Okay. Similar -- moving a portion of

18 the -- moving an area that looks not like its donor

19 district, Area 3, which was super majority

20 Hispanic -- moving that area into -- back into

21 District 2, which looked more like District 2 as a

22 whole.

23 Q. Other than the factual observation, you're

24 not drawing any further conclusions from that?

25 A. No. Correct.

Page 97

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 97 of

163
1 Q. Area 9, other than making the factual

2 observations related to Area 9, do you draw any

3 further conclusions related to Area 9?

4 A. No. It was a high Hispanic area moved

5 between two high Hispanic districts.

6 Q. And what about for Area 20? Other than

7 making factual observations about the population

8 that is being moved, do you draw any conclusions

9 about the addition of that area to District 5?

10 A. No.

11 Q. What about for Area 19 that was moved from

12 District 5 into District 2? Other than making

13 factual observations about the move, do you draw any

14 conclusions from that move?

15 A. Well, so Area 19 had a lower Black VAP

16 than the District 5 as a whole and it was given to

17 District 2. So that it looked more like District 2,

18 the recipient district, which did affect or would be

19 more likely to affect the overall racial composition

20 of District 5.

21 Q. Do you know if the racial composition of

22 District 5 changed between the 2022 plan to the 2023

23 plan?

24 A. It did not.

25 Q. Okay. For Area 13 and 14 there, between

Page 98

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 98 of

163
1 District 1 and District 5, that little spot, other

2 than making factual observations about the

3 population being exchanged between those two

4 districts, do you draw any conclusions from those

5 changes?

6 A. Again, 13 and 14?

7 Q. Yes.

8 A. Area 13 had a higher Black VAP than

9 District 1 and that was moved into District 5 which

10 was majority Black. Area 14 has a high Hispanic VAP

11 compared to District 5, which is what it was being

12 moved from and a relatively low Black VAP.

13 Q. Other than the factual observations that

14 you just described, do you draw any conclusion --

15 did you draw any further conclusions from those

16 factual observations?

17 A. The changes to the Black VAP in the 2022

18 map was not changed significantly by the 2023 map.

19 Q. Do you reach the conclusion, then, that

20 those changes related to Areas 13 and 14 indicate

21 map drawing based upon race-based criteria?

22 A. Race was taken into account.

23 Q. It was taken into account for Areas 13 and

24 14?

25 A. They look different given that they were

Page 99

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 99 of

163
1 swapped from the same donor and recipient -- from

2 the same districts given that they were exchanged in

3 the swap and that they look racially different,

4 their composition is racially different. That

5 suggests to me that race was considered.

6 Q. Related to the changes to the -- in that

7 Area 13, do you agree that that would tend to make

8 District 5 a district with a 50.3 Black voting age

9 population less Black and more Hispanic?

10 A. Yes. But as I've said before, you have to

11 take into consideration alternative movements. But

12 yes.

13 Q. Well, in looking at at least one of the

14 alternative movements between District 3 -- I'm

15 sorry -- District 1 and District 5, in that Area 14,

16 that would make District 1, which is a Hispanic

17 district, more Black and less Hispanic. Correct?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. And so at least as it relates to 13 and

20 14, those are going against the majority population

21 in those districts?

22 A. There's a difference in population size

23 between the two areas as well. So there are -- you

24 know, much -- there are, what, a quarter of the

25 people in Area 14 as there are in Area 13.

Page 100

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 100 of

163
1 Q. Okay. Well, let's look at Area 15, then.

2 It was moved from 5 into 1. Would you agree that

3 that would also make District 1 more Black and less

4 Hispanic without having a significant change to

5 District 5?

6 A. Area 15 that was moved to District 1 has a

7 higher Black voting age population than district --

8 than Area 16. Yes. That is correct.

9 Q. And District 16 -- I'm sorry. Not District

10 16. Area 16 that was moved from District 1 into

11 District 5 would have a tendency to make District 5,

12 a Black district, more Hispanic and less Black.

13 Correct?

14 A. Correct. Compared at least -- without

15 looking at other options, yes.

16 Q. So at least in looking at those -- and you

17 would agree the change in 17 only involves ten

18 people. Correct?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Of the changes that are detailed in Areas

21 13 and 15, all of those areas fall -- are made in a

22 direction that would be opposite to shoring up the

23 district that is getting that population. Correct?

24 A. Without comparing it to other options,

25 that is correct. But noting also that the number of

Page 101

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 101 of

163
1 people moved to each of these areas is quite small.

2 Q. Okay. When you say they are quite small,

3 what are you referring to? What is your comparison

4 there?

5 A. I'm sorry. What was the last part you

6 said?

7 Q. What is your comparison?

8 A. To the overall number of people who are

9 moved in the 2022 plan.

10 Q. Okay. So in terms of all of the people

11 moved in all of the districts, these changes are

12 small?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. But if I understood correctly, you were

15 saying these changes were indicative of race-based

16 map drawing. Did I understand that correctly?

17 A. That they were or were not?

18 Q. That they were.

19 A. They take race into account. Yes.

20 Q. They do take race into account. How do

21 they take race into account?

22 A. They look different than the other areas

23 surrounding them or in the districts.

24 Q. Well, I guess, Doctor, what -- what are

25 the determining factors when you're moving an

Page 102

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 102 of

163
1 area -- into a district or out of a district as to

2 whether race is a criteria?

3 A. If the area looks different racially than

4 other areas or the districts.

5 Q. Okay. So let's break that down. If I'm

6 moving an area from District 1 into District 5 and

7 the racial composition is either the same as 1 or

8 the same as 5, I'm going from 1 to 5 -- let me start

9 my hypothetical over.

10 If I'm moving a population from District 1

11 to District 5 and the racial composition of the

12 district is the same as District 1, is that a

13 movement that would be indicative of race-based

14 decision-making?

15 A. If it looks different than the other

16 surrounding areas that could have been moved.

17 Q. Okay. For the 2023 plan, did you do any

18 analysis of the other surrounding areas?

19 A. No. Except for -- except for the Overtown

20 area.

21 Q. Okay. Apart from the Overtown, did you

22 analyze the surrounding areas for any of the other

23 changes that were made?

24 A. No. I was not asked to do that.

25 Q. So as we sit here today, then, you're not

Page 103

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 103 of

163
1 able to say one way or another whether any of the

2 other changes reflect race-based decision-making; is

3 that correct?

4 A. My conclusion from this expert report was

5 that the two maps were not substantially different

6 from one another.

7 Q. Okay. But other than that, you did not

8 examine the individual decisions like you did with

9 the 2022 plan. Correct?

10 A. I did not look at alternative options.

11 Q. And you would need to do that to draw the

12 conclusions as to whether a particular movement was

13 indicative of race-based criteria. Correct?

14 A. For each individual area and each

15 individual movement I would say that is correct. I

16 looked at Overtown and did a similar -- a similar

17 thing that I did with the first report.

18 Q. So talk to me about your work on Overtown.

19 What did you look at when evaluating the changes

20 that were made to Overtown?

21 A. I looked at what areas were moved and what

22 areas were not moved.

23 Q. Okay. And in terms of the map that we're

24 looking at, what areas reflect where Overtown is?

25 A. There are multiple definitions of

Page 104

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 104 of

163
1 Overtown.

2 Q. Do you have an opinion as to which

3 definition of Overtown should be used?

4 A. I do not.

5 Q. Do you know if the definition that is

6 reflected in the map that was put together at the

7 June 14th commission meeting reflects

8 Mr. De Grandy's understanding of where the Overtown

9 historic borders are or whether it reflects the city

10 commission's understanding where the Overtown

11 historic borders are?

12 A. I --

13 MR. MERKEN: Objection to form. You

14 can answer it if you understand it.

15 A. Yeah. I don't know the difference between

16 De Grandy's definition and the city's definition.

17 Q. All right.

18 A. Or the commission's definition.

19 Q. Now, as it relates to how the city drew

20 the borders of the Overtown area, what are your

21 conclusions about how the city drew the borders of

22 the Overtown area?

23 A. Do you mean De Grandy?

24 Q. I mean, the Overtown area that is

25 reflected in the 2023 plan.

Page 105

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 105 of

163
1 A. There is no designation of Overtown in the

2 2023 plan.

3 Q. Well, I guess -- Mr. De Grandy is the

4 city's consultant. Correct?

5 A. As far as I understand. Yes.

6 Q. I'll represent to you that he is the

7 city's map drawing consultant and legal counsel for

8 the purposes of drawing maps. The changes that are

9 currently reflected on the screen to Overtown, do

10 you understand those to be Mr. De Grandy's

11 alterations?

12 A. No, I don't.

13 Q. Okay. On page 11 of your report where you

14 refer to, overall, De Grandy's boundaries of

15 historic Overtown are considerably more restrictive

16 than both city code and the GMCVB/NET/MPD

17 definition. I guess, what description of boundaries

18 are you referring to when you refer to De Grandy's

19 boundaries?

20 A. I'm looking at Figure 3, the top left map,

21 top of panel where the yellow Area 34 is, according

22 to counsel, De Grandy's definition of historic

23 Overtown. Whereas that area plus the teal area,

24 Area 35, is more expansive is the definition that is

25 in the city code that's excluded from De Grandy's

Page 106

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 106 of

163
1 definition of historic Overtown.

2 Q. Would you agree that Figure 3, that top

3 left picture, generally would match the area that is

4 depicted in the changes to the enjoined plan and the

5 2023 plan that are reflected in that Area 16 and the

6 area north of 17?

7 A. I think that's correct, but I don't -- I

8 don't have the exact -- these are different maps so

9 I can't tell you for sure.

10 Q. The maps in Figure 3, did you draw those?

11 A. I did not.

12 Q. Do you know who did?

13 A. I do not.

14 Q. Were those provided to you by counsel?

15 A. They were.

16 Q. Related to your analysis of Overtown, what

17 were you asked to do?

18 A. I was asked to compare the areas -- the

19 racial composition of the areas that were included

20 in De Grandy's definition to the racial composition

21 of the areas that were excluded from De Grandy's

22 definition but included in other versions -- other

23 definitions of historic Overtown. Official

24 definitions from the city and from tourist --

25 tourism groups.

Page 107

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 107 of

163
1 Q. The definitions that you have cited in

2 your report, did you research and find those or were

3 those provided to you?

4 A. I think the city code text -- any other

5 text was provided to me were sources.

6 Q. What about the Miami Police Department or

7 the greater Miami, Miami convention and visitors

8 bureau definitions?

9 A. Yes. Both. All three.

10 Q. All three were provided? Were they --

11 sorry.

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Were there any definitions that you

14 researched that you found in addition to those

15 three?

16 A. No.

17 Q. Have you done any research on the

18 historical background of Overtown?

19 A. No.

20 Q. What is your understanding of what

21 Overtown is?

22 A. My understanding is that historic Overtown

23 is an area that -- part of which is -- has a high

24 Black VAP, but that other parts of historic Overtown

25 do not depending on the definition.

Page 108

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 108 of

163
1 Q. Do you know if the borders of what the

2 locals -- strike that.

3 Did you speak to anyone concerning what

4 those who live in that area would consider Overtown

5 to be now?

6 A. No.

7 Q. Are you aware of the history of Overtown

8 and the construction of I-95 through Overtown?

9 A. No.

10 Q. Did anyone discuss how the construction of

11 I-95 severed Overtown and over time the two sides

12 lost their joint identities?

13 A. No.

14 MR. LEVESQUE: Okay, Doctor. What I

15 would like to do is, I would like to take

16 a five-minute break and I think I can

17 sort of be in a position to make a final

18 push if that works.

19 MR. MERKEN: Sounds good. Thank you,

20 George. We'll be back at 1:00.

21 (Recess in proceedings.)

22 BY MR. LEVESQUE:

23 Q. Dr. Abott, in the final portion of your

24 second report you refer to the partisan motivations

25 not being an acceptable explanation as to why the

Page 109

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 109 of

163
1 changes were made to the 2023 plan. The changes that

2 were made to the 2023 plan, did they significantly

3 alter the performance of any of the districts?

4 A. What do you mean by performance?

5 Q. Where they would perform for a Republican

6 or a Democrat?

7 A. I only looked at the 2020 presidential

8 election. I didn't look at any subsequent elections.

9 Q. Did you also look at the 2018

10 gubernatorial election?

11 A. Not in this report.

12 Q. Okay. For either your work on the 2022

13 plan related to assessing partisanship as an

14 explanation or the 2023 plan, did you examine any

15 local elections as to how any of the commissioners

16 might perform in a given district?

17 A. I didn't look at any other elections.

18 Q. Okay. So what race or ethnicity is

19 President Trump?

20 A. White.

21 Q. And do you know the race or ethnicity of

22 Governor DeSantis?

23 A. I do not.

24 Q. Have you done any analysis as to whether a

25 Hispanic candidate running in one of the city

Page 110

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 110 of

163
1 commission districts would perform better or worse

2 compared to either President Trump or Governor

3 DeSantis?

4 A. I have not looked at city commission

5 elections.

6 Q. So if it's possible for a Hispanic city

7 commissioner to get a bump in a nonpartisan election

8 that would outperform either President Trump or

9 Governor DeSantis, that's not something you would

10 have any insight on because that's not an analysis

11 that you've conducted?

12 A. It is not.

13 Q. Would you agree, then, that your analysis

14 of partisanship based upon just those two elections

15 without considering how a Hispanic commissioner

16 running in a Hispanic district might not be fully

17 accounted for in terms of how the map drawing could

18 be done?

19 A. No. I was looking at partisanship, not at

20 race.

21 Q. Is sometimes race a factor that's -- well,

22 let me strike that.

23 Is race sometimes a factor that comes into

24 play in elections?

25 A. Yes.

Page 111

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 111 of

163
1 Q. And I think in regards to both your

2 assessment of the 2022 plan and that 2023 plan, your

3 conclusions are led by the data. Correct?

4 A. Correct.

5 Q. And at least as it relates to the city's

6 historical districts, you believe the data shows

7 that the city is racially segregated along district

8 lines. Is that fair?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. And in the course of this -- your work on

11 this litigation, you've not been asked to look at

12 any of the plaintiffs' plans for the purposes of

13 issuing opinions. Correct?

14 A. I was given one of plaintiffs' proposed

15 plans, but I did not look at it. I was given the

16 option to look at it. But I did not.

17 Q. Why didn't you want to look at their

18 proposed plan?

19 A. It was outside the scope of what the

20 directives were.

21 Q. If their three plans had super majority

22 Hispanic districts and a district that would perform

23 for a Black district similar to District 5, would

24 you agree that that is a racially segregated plan as

25 well?

Page 112

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 112 of

163
1 A. If the -- if the districts looked as

2 similar -- you know, if the districts looked as

3 similar to what they look like now under the various

4 plans, if they did in `97, 2003, and 2013, then yes,

5 the districts are racially drawn. Racially

6 segregated.

7 Q. And when you say if they look, are you

8 referring to a visual depiction or are you referring

9 to what the data actually says?

10 A. Both. The visual depiction is part of the

11 data, but yes.

12 Q. On page 12, at the bottom you say, further

13 Precinct 989, 78 percent Trump was moved in its

14 entirety from District 1 into District 3. In

15 exchange most of the less Republican precincts, and

16 you reference 997 and 971, were added to District 1

17 from Districts 3 and 4. These movements suggest that

18 enhancing Republican advantage in District 1 was not

19 a motivation behind the map.

20 Would you agree that both precincts

21 supported Trump based upon your numbers?

22 A. Which precincts are you referring to?

23 Q. 997 and 971.

24 A. Over 50 percent Trump. Yes.

25 Q. So you're certainly not doing damage to

Page 113

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 113 of

163
1 District 1 if you were trying to draw a Republican

2 district. Correct?

3 A. The claim is that -- the claim that I'm

4 addressing is that they are shoring up the

5 Republican advantage. Not maintaining Republican

6 control or a Republican majority, but that they are

7 shoring up the percentages of their Republican

8 voters.

9 Q. What is -- what is your understanding of

10 what the city commission's partisan goals were?

11 A. I don't know what the city commission's

12 partisan goals were.

13 Q. Okay. You address partisanship in both of

14 your reports. What were you told related to your

15 work on that particular aspect of your report?

16 A. I was asked to address the alternative

17 explanation that these districts were drawn and

18 changed in such ways as to shore up partisan support

19 within the district core.

20 Q. Did they provide any context for that?

21 A. No.

22 Q. So if the city adhered to a particular

23 configuration of Districts 1, 3, and 4 --

24 A. Sorry. You cut out. I couldn't hear you.

25 Q. So if the city adhered to a particular

Page 114

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 114 of

163
1 configuration of Districts 1, 3, and 4 that split

2 one of the western parts of the county -- I'm sorry.

3 Western parts of the city, that's not something that

4 you would have any knowledge of? That's not

5 something that factored into any of your analyses of

6 the maps that you reviewed. Correct?

7 A. No. No knowledge of that.

8 MR. LEVESQUE: Dr. Abott, that's all

9 the questions that I have right now.

10 MR. MERKEN: I just have a few,

11 George.

12 CROSS-EXAMINATION

13 BY MR. MERKEN:

14 Q. Dr. Abott, were you shown any of

15 plaintiffs' maps during this deposition?

16 A. During the deposition, no.

17 Q. Had you performed any analysis of any of

18 the plaintiffs' proposed plans before today?

19 A. No.

20 Q. Was any testimony today about any of the

21 plaintiffs proposed maps purely speculative?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. The city commission elections are

24 nonpartisan?

25 A. Yes.

Page 115

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 115 of

163
1 Q. Was any part of either of your two reports

2 based on whether a district -- whether a commission

3 district would elect candidates of a certain race?

4 A. No.

5 Q. You testified about conclusions you drew

6 in your second report, the report dated July 5th,

7 2023. Do you remember that testimony?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. On page 13 of that report there is a

10 section labeled conclusion. And I'm going to read

11 that in its entirety and just let me know if this is

12 an accurate reading of this. You write, quote, the

13 city's proposed remedy, Resolution 23-271, for the

14 Miami city commission has not been substantially

15 changed from the enjoined plan. The changes that

16 have occurred appear to continue to be designed

17 around racial and ethnic considerations. There is no

18 basis on which to make the argument that these

19 considerations were instead partisan in nature.

20 Did I accurately read your conclusion?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Is that your conclusion about the changes

23 between the 2023 map and the 2022 map?

24 A. Yes.

25 MR. MERKEN: Nothing further.

Page 116

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 116 of

163
1 MR. LEVESQUE: Okay. I have a few

2 follow-ups. Actually probably more than a

3 few to respond to that last question.

4 REDIRECT EXAMINATION

5 BY MR. LEVESQUE:

6 Q. Dr. Abott, related to the 2023 plan, and

7 your opinion that it continues to reflect a racial

8 gerrymander, that would also be true because it's

9 your opinion that the 1997 plan, the 2003 plan, and

10 the 2013 plan represent racially segregated

11 districts. Correct?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. And so any map that has super majority

14 Hispanic districts above 80 percent in number, any

15 map that has a Black voting age population within

16 two or three percentage points of 50 percent that

17 would reliably perform for a Black candidate are

18 going to be racially segregated districts in your

19 view. Correct?

20 A. Not necessarily.

21 Q. What are the circumstances where three

22 super majority Hispanic districts stand in either an

23 almost majority or majority Black district not be

24 racially segregated?

25 A. I would have to look at the map to make

Page 117

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 117 of

163
1 that conclusion.

2 Q. Okay. Dr. Abott, that is plaintiffs'

3 alternative plan 1 that was presented in this

4 litigation. That's not a map that you've analyzed as

5 part of your work in this case. Correct?

6 A. No. Correct.

7 Q. And I'll represent to you that Districts

8 1, 3, and 4 in that map have Hispanic voting age

9 populations of 70.1 percent, 90.8 percent, and

10 95 percent. And they have a Black voting age

11 population for District 5 at 45.2 percent. Given

12 those statistics, would it be your opinion that that

13 is a racially segregated map?

14 A. I would have to do more analysis. I don't

15 feel comfortable responding to that question.

16 Q. Okay. What more analysis would you need to

17 do?

18 A. I would need to look at the boundaries and

19 understand how the districts were drawn.

20 Q. Well, you didn't do --

21 A. And the white voting age population.

22 Q. You didn't do a boundary analysis for the

23 1997 plan or the 2003 plan or the 2013 plan to reach

24 the conclusion that those maps were racially

25 segregated districts. Correct?

Page 118

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 118 of

163
1 A. I did a visual inspection of how they

2 looked compared to the 2013 and the 2022 map and,

3 given my analysis of those maps, concluded that they

4 were very similar.

5 Q. But you came in with the conclusion that

6 the five districts were already racially segregated

7 because of the 1997 plan, the 2003 plan, and even

8 the 2013 plan. Did I not understand that correctly?

9 A. Well, I didn't come into this assuming

10 that. I compared them to the current -- to the 2013

11 and the 2022 plan.

12 Q. Well, in the opening statement of your

13 first report you say, the enacted Miami city

14 commission districting plan is the byproduct of many

15 decades of racialized commission plans. That would

16 seem to imply that the 2022 plan didn't make the

17 other plans racially racialized, it followed in the

18 footsteps of racialized commission plans. Correct?

19 A. Correct.

20 Q. And you didn't do a boundary analysis or

21 even an analysis of what the populations were in any

22 of the districts or the city as a whole related to

23 either the `97, the 2003, or the 2013 plan. Correct?

24 A. I looked at how similar the maps were to

25 the current plans -- to the more recent plans.

Page 119

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 119 of

163
1 Q. But you didn't do the boundary analysis

2 that you just referenced, did you?

3 A. To the `97 and 2003 plans?

4 Q. Or the 2013 plan?

5 A. I did not do a boundary analysis on the

6 earlier plans.

7 Q. But you still reached the conclusion that

8 they were racialized commission maps. Correct?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. And you did that simply because they had

11 large segments of minority population in one

12 district. Correct?

13 A. No. I did that because they looked very

14 similar to the 2022 and the 2013 maps.

15 Q. So you -- just so I understand, then, you

16 reached the conclusion that the 1997 plan and the

17 2003 plan and the 2013 plan were racialized maps

18 because they looked similar to the 2022 plan that

19 you analyzed?

20 A. There were very few changes over the

21 years.

22 Q. Okay. Give me one more second. Dr. Abott,

23 I'm going to represent to you that that is

24 plaintiffs' map 4 that was filed in this litigation

25 as an alternative remedy. Have you seen this map

Page 120

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 120 of

163
1 before at all?

2 A. I have not.

3 Q. You were not asked to do any type of

4 analysis on this map. Correct?

5 A. I was not.

6 Q. Generally speaking, if you've got the 2023

7 plan available to you, would you agree that

8 District 2 and District 5 visually are similar to

9 what is reflected in the 2023 plan?

10 A. They look different to me.

11 Q. Okay. What is different about them?

12 A. There are different portions of District 5

13 that look to have been moved into District 1 in the

14 2023 plan.

15 Q. Are they large areas that significantly

16 revamp the configuration of that district?

17 A. I don't know. I haven't done the

18 analysis.

19 Q. Do you know if the population figures are

20 substantially similar?

21 A. I don't know, but I know -- I can see from

22 this map on page 3 that the part of District 5 that

23 is in District 1 in the plaintiffs' map is downtown

24 so --

25 Q. Do you also notice a difference in the

Page 121

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 121 of

163
1 configuration of District 1 and District 4?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. You've examined the historical plans in

4 the 2022 and the 2023 plan. Are you aware of any of

5 those plans that configure Districts 1, 3, or 4 in

6 that manner?

7 A. I don't know. I don't have them in front

8 of me.

9 Q. Dr. Abott, do you recognize that plan?

10 A. It says the 1997 plan.

11 Q. Does that look like the 1997 plan that you

12 reviewed?

13 A. I believe so.

14 Q. And does that plan draw District 4

15 entirely within the western part of the city's

16 boundaries?

17 A. What do you mean the western part?

18 Q. This area here (indicating). There is an

19 area called Flagami.

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. Is District 4 entirely in that area or is

22 it split between Districts 1 and 4?

23 A. There is a portion of District 1 that's on

24 top of District 4 towards the west, but I don't know

25 about Flagami specifically.

Page 122

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 122 of

163
1 Q. Okay. No one has ever discussed Flagami

2 with you in terms of the analysis of the plans, have

3 they?

4 A. No.

5 Q. As part of your analysis, you've not done

6 any research or issued any opinions or conclusions

7 about neighborhoods and keeping them whole, have

8 you?

9 A. No. Other than Overtown.

10 Q. As part of your analysis, you've not done

11 anything to identify or assess voter cohesion, have

12 you?

13 A. No.

14 MR. LEVESQUE: That's all at this

15 time.

16 MR. MERKEN: All right. We're all

17 set. We will read.

18 MR. LEVESQUE: Okay. Madam Court

19 Reporter, we'll order a copy.

20 (Defendant's Exhibit 1, Report, was

21 marked for Identification.)

22

23 (Thereupon, the taking of the deposition was

24 concluded at 1:29 p.m.)

25 (Signature and formalities were not waived.)

Page 123

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 123 of

163
1 Christopher Merken, Esquire

christopher.merken@dechert.com

2

 (October 27th, 2023

3

RE: Grace, Inc., et al v. City of Miami

4 October 16th, 2023-Dr. Carolyn Abott

5

 The above-referenced transcript is available

6 for review.

7 The witness should read the testimony to

8 verify its accuracy. If there are any changes,

9 the witness should note those with the reason

10 on the attached errata sheet.

11 The witness should, please, date and sign the

12 errata sheet and e-mail to the deposing attorney as

13 well as to Veritext at Transcripts-fl@veritext.com

14 and copies will be e-mailed to all ordering parties.

15 It is suggested that the completed errata be

16 returned 30 days from receipt of testimony, as

17 considered reasonable under Federal rules*.

18 However, there is no Florida statute to this regard.

19 If the witness fails to do so, the transcript

20 may be used as if signed.

21 Yours,

22

23 Veritext Legal Solutions

24 *Federal Civil Procedure Rule 30(e)/Florida Civil

25 Procedure Rule 1.310(e).

Page 124

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 124 of

163
1 Grace, Inc., et al v. City of Miami

2 October 16th, 2023-Dr. Carolyn Abott

3 E R R A T A S H E E T

4 PAGE_____ LINE_____ CHANGE________________________

5 __________________________________________________

6 REASON____________________________________________

7 PAGE_____ LINE_____ CHANGE________________________

8 __________________________________________________

9 REASON____________________________________________

10 PAGE_____ LINE_____ CHANGE________________________

11 __________________________________________________

12 REASON____________________________________________

13 PAGE_____ LINE_____ CHANGE________________________

14 __________________________________________________

15 REASON____________________________________________

16 PAGE_____ LINE_____ CHANGE________________________

17 __________________________________________________

18 REASON____________________________________________

19

20 Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I

21 have read the foregoing document and that the facts

22 Stated in it are true.

23

24 ________________________________ _______________

25 DR. CAROLYN ABOTT DATE

Page 125

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 125 of

163
1 CERTIFICATE OF OATH

2 (VIDEOCONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS)

3 STATE OF FLORIDA )

COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE )

4

5 I, Mayra Texeira, Court Reporter and Notary

6 Public in and for the State of Florida at Large,

7 certify that the witness, DR. CAROLYN ABOTT,

8 appeared before me via videoconference on

9 October 16th, 2023 and was duly sworn by me.

10

11 Signed this 27th day of October, 2023.

12

13

14

15

16 <%20039,Signature%>

 ________________________________

17 MAYRA TEXEIRA, Court Reporter

18 Notary Public - State of Florida

19 COMMISSION NO. HH 12099

20 EXPIRES JUNE 26, 2024

21

22

23 Personally known _____

OR Produced Identification X

24 Type of Identification Produced NY DL

25

Page 126

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 126 of

163
1 CERTIFICATE OF REPORTER

2 STATE OF FLORIDA )

COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE )

3

4 I, MAYRA TEXEIRA, Court Reporter, do hereby

5 certify that I was authorized to and did

6 stenographically report the videoconference

7 deposition of DR. CAROLYN ABOTT; that a review of

8 the transcript was not waived; and that the

9 foregoing transcript, pages 1 through 123, is a true

10 and complete record of my stenographic notes.

11 I FURTHER CERTIFY that I am not a relative,

12 employee, attorney or counsel of any of the parties,

13 nor am I a relative or employee of any of the

14 parties' attorney or counsel connected with the

15 action, nor am I financially interested in the

16 action.

17 Dated this 27th day of October, 2023.

18

19

20 <%20039,Signature%>

21 MAYRA TEXEIRA, Court Reporter

22

23

24

25

Page 127

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 127 of

163
1

1 2:21 28:5 30:7

35:9 41:14,15

41:17 42:12,19

43:1,8,13 44:7

45:21 46:2,4,8,9

46:11,16,19,23

47:2,14,16,21

47:24 48:19,24

49:3 50:6,6,11

50:13,24,25

51:6,6,8,9,19

52:5,5,12 53:11

53:20,22 55:3,5

55:7,10,14,17

58:11,21,24

59:3 63:19

70:14 72:21

73:14 77:23

81:4 82:1 86:21

86:23 87:17

88:6 89:14 90:4

90:6,9,18,23,24

91:1,7 94:8

96:10 99:1,9

100:15,16 101:2

101:3,6,10

103:6,7,8,10,12

113:14,16,18

114:1,23 115:1

118:3,8 121:13

121:23 122:1,5

122:22,23

123:20 127:9

1,396 77:18

1.310 124:25

10 61:18 63:3

65:12 72:9,20

73:23 91:19

96:17

10,000 7:10

100,000 8:10,11

8:13

10:30 52:24

10:35 52:25

11 61:18 63:3

65:12 72:9,20

91:24 97:4

106:13

115 2:18

117,281 37:11

12 75:23 78:15

97:14,15 113:12

12099 126:19

123 2:21 127:9

13 67:3,8,19

69:23 70:1 73:7

76:3 77:2,11,18

98:25 99:6,8,20

99:23 100:7,19

100:25 101:21

116:9

13.3 52:6,16

14 76:1,2,19,22

77:9 98:25 99:6

99:10,20,24

100:15,20,25

14.8 36:10

14th 105:7

15 35:24 76:1,2

76:19,22 77:9

101:1,6,21

15.3 36:19

16 73:7 80:25

101:8,9,10,10

107:5

16th 1:15 124:4

125:2 126:9

17 70:13 72:7,12

72:23 73:7,9,20

101:17 107:6

18.6 77:19

18.7 49:1 52:4

52:15

19 98:11,15

19104 2:6

1997 28:11 29:3

29:9,22 81:22

117:9 118:23

119:7 120:16

122:10,11

1:00 109:20

1:22 1:2

1:29 1:16

123:24

2

2 30:6,25 37:9

37:10,18 39:11

39:19,19 40:5

41:18 42:15,21

43:16 50:4

61:17 62:3

63:13,14,25

64:6,19,25 66:4

70:14,16 71:17

72:20 73:3,5,10

73:24 74:6

77:22 78:7,8,9

78:12 81:4 84:4

91:18,19,21

92:3,6,7,14

95:24 96:5,13

96:21,21,24

97:3,6,7,8,21,21

98:12,17,17

121:8

2's 96:1

2,108 73:25 74:5

20 98:6

20,000 8:17

2003 28:11

29:22 68:20

81:22 113:4

117:9 118:23

119:7,23 120:3

120:17

20039 126:16

127:20

2013 10:20

11:15 28:13

29:4,9,22 30:9

32:16,18 34:4

36:2,11,12,13

36:25 37:3,11

37:20,23,25

38:6,13,14,15

38:17 39:6,16

39:18 41:13

[1 - 2013] Page 128

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 128 of

163
47:2,16 48:1

49:14,17,20,21

49:22 54:5 62:3

62:9,10 68:20

81:23 83:23,25

84:3 87:13,16

87:21,23 93:14

94:2 113:4

117:10 118:23

119:2,8,10,23

120:4,14,17

2018 18:21

19:12 110:9

2019 15:14,16

15:23 16:7 84:8

84:19 85:5

2020 9:12 19:1,6

22:21 31:18,19

31:19 44:20

84:5,6,9,12,13

84:20 87:6

110:7

2021 15:24 16:3

16:7 84:15,23

85:6

2022 10:19,21

11:15 25:19,22

26:18 28:14

29:15,22 31:20

31:24 36:18,21

38:17 39:6,15

39:19 41:13

43:13 46:2 48:2

48:22 49:3,14

53:4,25 62:5,9

62:10 68:14,22

71:24 79:18

80:21 85:12

86:20,23 87:6

87:13,16,21

90:4 92:16 93:3

93:7,9,10,14,15

93:16,18,25

94:2,23 96:25

98:22 99:17

102:9 104:9

110:12 112:2

116:23 119:2,11

119:16 120:14

120:18 122:4

2023 1:15 26:19

29:17,19,23

30:3 68:17

83:21 85:9,13

86:17,21 87:7

87:13,22 90:4

92:17 93:15,16

93:18 94:5,20

94:24 98:22

99:18 103:17

105:25 106:2

107:5 110:1,2

110:14 112:2

116:7,23 117:6

121:6,9,14

122:4 124:2,4

125:2 126:9,11

127:17

2024 48:21

126:20

22 12:22 27:25

54:6 92:16 93:4

23-271 82:3

83:22 86:17

116:13

235 73:24 74:2,9

74:24 75:8

24066 1:2

25 48:14,17

53:18,21

26 53:19 54:1

126:20

27 54:7

27.2 46:8,15,22

47:1

27.4 48:20

27th 124:2

126:11 127:17

29 48:17

2929 2:5

3

3 13:22 16:19,20

17:2,9 18:15

34:3 35:10 39:4

42:17 63:19,23

68:1,5 69:18,20

71:17 76:6,12

76:17,24 77:15

77:16,17,20,21

78:11 86:21,25

87:17 88:6 90:3

90:17 91:24

94:8 96:10 97:9

97:19 100:14

106:20 107:2,10

113:14,17

114:23 115:1

118:8 121:22

122:5

3,117 2:18

3-2 79:19

30 75:3 124:16

124:24

301 2:10

32301 2:11

34 39:21 106:21

35 106:24

37 39:22

4

4 35:8,10,25

36:5 42:17

44:11 45:20

53:4 54:14 55:4

55:16 57:16

63:19,22 70:18

71:11,15,15,17

72:15 73:1,5,22

74:3,4 76:6,12

76:15,17,24

77:12,23,24

78:11 86:21

87:4,9,17 88:7

89:15 90:8 94:9

96:10 113:17

114:23 115:1

118:8 120:24

122:1,5,14,21

122:22,24

40 52:19

[2013 - 40] Page 129

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 129 of

163
44.9 47:9,12,15

45.2 118:11

450 7:5

48.6 62:11

49 39:13

5

5 8:8,9,13 35:10

36:1,9,15,18

37:14 39:1

42:17 44:8

45:22 46:4,6,6

49:25 50:1,3,5,7

51:9,11,20 52:6

52:7,11 53:11

53:20,22 55:3,4

55:7,10,13,18

58:20 60:14,16

61:18 64:1,5,7

64:25 72:20,21

73:14 80:1 81:5

87:19 88:1,9

89:23 91:14

98:9,12,16,20

98:22 99:1,9,11

100:8,15 101:2

101:5,11,11

103:6,8,8,11

112:23 118:11

121:8,12,22

5's 26:4,6

5,000 7:12,21

5.4 52:16

50 113:24

117:16

50,000 8:16

50.3 100:8

51.9 62:4,10

512 49:7 55:8

60:1,6,24 61:3

52 39:13

52.9 36:16

522 49:7 55:8

60:1,6,24 61:4

523 48:19 55:16

529 49:1 52:2,13

55:15

530 54:9

531 46:7 47:20

48:5,8 51:18

55:5

534 64:4,18 66:9

536 64:4,18

58.8 94:10

584 73:23

5th 116:6

6

6 46:8 72:21

89:16,18,19,22

90:1,8,11

600 2:10

7

7 53:3 57:15

7.2 39:12

7.7 39:12

70.1 118:9

71.1 47:17,19

78 113:13

7th 53:23 54:2

8

8 59:22 60:2,2

61:15 72:9,21

94:7 96:11

80 37:13 117:14

83,000 37:13

84.5 87:1

85.6 94:11

88.3 86:25

89.5 86:24 87:10

89.6 94:11

89.7 86:24

9

9 61:16 70:12

73:22 94:10

98:1,2,3

90 52:22

90.0 87:10

90.8 118:9

95 109:8,11

118:10

97 68:20 113:4

119:23 120:3

971 113:16,23

989 113:13

997 113:16,23

9:03 1:16

a

a.m. 1:16

ability 5:17

able 8:12 11:6

13:7 25:6 55:20

56:8 58:3 59:24

60:3 63:4 64:8

84:1 89:1 104:1

abott 1:12 2:18

3:1,13,24,25

13:4 53:3 55:19

75:23 109:23

115:8,14 117:6

118:2 120:22

122:9 124:4

125:2,25 126:7

127:7

above 1:25

57:19 89:25

117:14 124:5

absolute 43:14

absolutely

43:20

academic 14:25

23:8

acceptable 86:5

109:25

account 9:16,19

45:8 58:13 65:5

65:9 82:15

99:22,23 102:19

102:20,21

accounted

111:17

accuracy 124:8

accurate 5:15

13:11 116:12

accurately 4:15

116:20

aclu 2:14

[44.9 - aclu] Page 130

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 130 of

163
acs 10:16 11:1

15:24,24 16:4,7

act 34:7,11,14

action 127:15

127:16

activity 20:15

actual 16:16

17:11 19:17

75:4

actually 55:4

87:12 90:21

113:9 117:2

add 77:17 91:20

91:23 96:25

97:1

added 13:14

76:3 77:10

91:19 113:16

addition 76:3

77:1 92:1 98:9

108:14

additional 11:5

13:16,16,17,18

27:1 77:22

94:21

additions 13:12

address 6:7

16:16 17:1,12

17:18,20,21

18:7,9 56:6 70:5

82:6 114:13,16

addressed 82:13

addresses 11:2

16:13,14 18:2

69:13,15

addressing

114:4

adequate 79:1

adhered 114:22

114:25

adjacent 73:6

adjustments

43:5

adopted 56:5

advantage

113:18 114:5

affect 98:18,19

affiliations

20:23

age 32:23 35:20

35:22 40:25

47:10,13,20,24

48:20 49:2,10

52:6,10 59:2

60:11 61:20

63:11 76:7,18

77:2 83:14,14

100:8 101:7

117:15 118:8,10

118:21

agenda 22:4

agendas 21:25

agree 6:23

15:16 20:3,10

20:25 22:3,7

30:16 32:21

41:14 43:5

57:21,22 71:1

72:6,10 77:12

80:22 83:21

85:15 86:20

92:1 100:7

101:2,17 107:2

111:13 112:24

113:20 121:7

agreed 79:7

ahead 29:25

39:3 47:18

al 1:4 124:3

125:1

aligned 20:4

alter 110:3

alterations

106:11

alternative

19:15 27:5,10

27:13 28:3

30:22 38:8

78:13,15 81:1,9

81:10,18 100:11

100:14 104:10

114:16 118:3

120:25

alternatives

37:21

american 10:16

15:14,16 84:6,9

84:12,16,23

amount 7:15 8:3

8:7

analyses 48:9

64:13 65:23

115:5

analysis 11:9,11

15:5,6,8,10,12

19:4 23:17,18

24:12 27:7 35:5

38:14 40:1,3

41:9,12 43:18

44:12 47:8 51:4

51:13 60:20

64:20 65:19

72:19 76:5

77:25 80:8,17

82:19 88:4

93:21 103:18

107:16 110:24

111:10,13

115:17 118:14

118:16,22 119:3

119:20,21 120:1

120:5 121:4,18

123:2,5,10

analyze 11:6

14:17 15:4

27:17 103:22

analyzed 24:9

118:4 120:19

analyzing 10:10

53:4 83:3

answer 4:13,16

4:23,25 5:1,7,8

5:9 6:9 7:23

23:15 74:17

83:10,12 85:25

91:10 95:11

97:5 105:14

answering 4:18

answers 4:11

[acs - answers] Page 131

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 131 of

163
antisocialist

21:25 22:3

apart 103:21

apologize 89:19

appear 72:7

116:16

appearances 2:1

appeared 126:8

appendix 48:12

84:14

applied 15:11

apply 34:7

applying 82:23

appropriate

78:20 82:22

83:6

approval 25:19

25:22

arch 2:5

area 24:15 46:8

51:14,19 53:19

59:8,22 60:2,2,5

60:13 61:17

63:3 65:12 66:2

66:9,11 67:3,5,8

67:11,12,14,19

67:20 68:3

69:23 70:1,13

71:11 72:7,9,9

72:12,20,21,23

73:9,20 76:1,2,3

76:19,22 77:1,2

77:9,11,18 78:3

78:7,9,10,12

82:13 89:13,14

89:14,15,18,19

89:22 90:1,8,10

90:10 91:19,21

91:24 96:17

97:2,4,6,14,15

97:18,19,20

98:1,2,3,4,6,9

98:11,15,25

99:8,10 100:7

100:15,25,25

101:1,6,8,10

103:1,3,6,20

104:14 105:20

105:22,24

106:21,23,23,24

107:3,5,6

108:23 109:4

122:18,19,21

areas 9:22 24:14

24:22 31:1,3

40:4,17 42:15

49:12,25 50:5,7

50:8,19,20,23

51:9,11 53:16

53:20 54:15,17

54:19,24 55:6

55:16 57:16

58:5,23,25 59:1

59:19 60:23

61:3,16,21,24

61:25 63:2,20

63:25 64:24

65:2 66:11

67:12,15 72:19

73:4,6,6 75:25

76:6,8,11,23

78:2,4,5,7 81:15

86:15 89:8 90:2

90:3,17 92:5,20

94:8 95:5,6,19

95:21 96:7,9,12

99:20,23 100:23

101:20,21 102:1

102:22 103:4,16

103:18,22

104:21,22,24

107:18,19,21

121:15

argument 19:15

59:13 70:18

116:18

article 15:7 69:2

articles 11:16

11:17,18,24

15:3

ascertain 89:23

asked 4:17,18

6:20 10:15,21

15:25 16:1

22:23 23:23

34:24 35:6,18

62:15 83:9,12

83:13 84:21

86:19 92:25

93:1,2,6,7,11,18

95:8 103:24

107:17,18

112:11 114:16

121:3

asking 4:10 7:14

7:16 86:8,9

aspect 114:15

assess 38:19

123:11

assessing

110:13

assessment

112:2

associated

21:18 22:4

assume 4:16

assumes 41:17

assuming 119:9

attached 12:5

124:10

attention 33:15

attorney 124:12

127:12,14

attorneys 8:18

26:10

audibly 5:9

authorized

127:5

available 6:20

84:17 85:1

121:7 124:5

aware 22:11,15

26:9,12,14 28:2

34:13 35:12,19

35:22 38:18,22

43:23 44:15

57:5,7 63:14

69:21 86:10

109:7 122:4

[antisocialist - aware] Page 132

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 132 of

163
b

b 2:19

back 4:24 10:12

15:21 28:5 30:6

30:7 40:9 47:18

50:24 52:24

53:3 63:3 73:12

91:19,21,24

96:6 97:20

109:20

background

9:24 108:18

backtracking

93:5

ballpark 7:6 8:7

based 9:22 11:8

25:13 27:11

28:24 30:25

32:19 34:15

51:4 68:8 72:4

73:18 79:2

90:19 92:4,14

92:15 99:21,21

102:15 103:13

104:2,13 111:14

113:21 116:2

bases 78:16

basis 28:10,18

31:3 33:8,9 53:7

57:17 62:20

73:21 79:3,4

94:1 95:12,13

95:16 116:18

bathroom 6:3

begins 48:13

behalf 1:22 2:4

2:8

belief 33:23

believe 8:17

9:14 14:22 15:3

17:21 18:21,25

26:4 28:12

35:24 53:16

70:24 71:25

88:17 112:6

122:13

benchmark

32:10,14,15

37:20 38:10,19

38:24 49:17

54:5 86:18

best 5:2 55:22

beth 3:24

better 111:1

beyond 10:9

34:4

big 5:6

biggest 68:24

billed 7:18,20

7:21 8:2

bit 42:24 61:9

88:24 89:5 93:5

black 29:12

34:15,21 35:1,3

35:10,22 36:2

36:10,13,17,21

36:24 39:10,18

41:6 46:8 47:1,2

48:20 49:2,10

49:13,25 50:1

50:11,21 51:10

51:10,21,21

52:6,10,15,16

58:18,23 59:2,5

60:11,13 61:20

64:5 65:15 80:1

80:3 87:19 88:2

98:15 99:8,10

99:12,17 100:8

100:9,17 101:3

101:7,12,12

108:24 112:23

117:15,17,23

118:10

block 60:20

65:17

blocks 24:10,13

24:20

blood 5:23 6:4

blue 60:12

bolster 19:16

book 13:15

boost 50:1,12

boosted 47:13

49:10 52:10,11

border 28:22

50:19 54:23

59:18,19 76:12

76:14

borders 40:19

59:21 65:15,16

76:6 105:9,11

105:20,21 109:1

bottom 34:2

39:2 61:15

69:22 70:1

73:22 94:7

96:11 113:12

boundaries 24:8

24:18 63:21,22

63:23 67:1

71:21 106:14,17

106:19 118:18

122:16

boundary 66:1

118:22 119:20

120:1,5

bounds 74:22

break 5:24 6:3,5

6:10 52:21,24

75:20 87:11

103:5 109:16

breakdowns

58:16 62:1

briefly 19:7

bring 63:3

broken 64:7,7

bronough 2:10

bump 111:7

bureau 108:8

bvap 46:10,19

46:23 50:12

byproduct 28:8

119:14

c

called 3:14

122:19

[b - called] Page 133

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 133 of

163
calls 85:23

camera 3:3

campaigns

21:20,23

candidate 29:11

29:12 34:15,21

35:2 79:6

110:25 117:17

candidates

21:16,24 22:11

22:16 79:13

116:3

capacity 23:4

88:14

capturing 66:2

66:11

carolyn 1:12

2:18 3:13,24,24

124:4 125:2,25

126:7 127:7

carve 66:3

case 1:2 3:21

6:13,21,24 8:19

9:3,4,9,9,11

10:4,13 25:7

77:6 88:15,22

118:5

cause 1:25 3:8

census 9:12

10:15,25 14:13

14:18 44:20

84:6

center 2:5

certain 5:7 9:22

83:8 116:3

certainly 8:15

8:16,16 49:24

113:25

certificate 126:1

127:1

certify 126:7

127:5,11

chance 45:16

change 30:14,16

33:20 37:6

38:10 46:14

50:17,18 90:21

94:2 101:4,17

125:4,7,10,13

125:16

changed 28:21

28:23 37:5

98:22 99:18

114:18 116:15

changes 10:20

30:8,10 32:4,5,5

32:6,10,14,17

32:19 38:3,4

41:13 43:12

44:6,7 46:13,20

47:3,6 49:15,18

50:25 57:23

58:4 62:21 72:6

72:22 83:19

88:25 90:14,18

90:25 91:6,12

91:17 92:3,14

93:4,8,9,20

94:23 97:12,13

97:14 99:5,17

99:20 100:6

101:20 102:11

102:15 103:23

104:2,19 106:8

107:4 110:1,1

116:15,22

120:20 124:8

chat 12:10

checks 8:4

chosen 57:16

chris 42:7

christopher 2:6

8:21 124:1

christopher.m...

124:1

cira 2:5

circumstances

69:3 82:21 83:5

117:21

cited 108:1

citizen 83:14

city 1:7 3:21

6:21 9:12,13

11:1 16:12

19:14 21:4,13

23:18,20,24

24:4,8,15 28:7

29:21 30:19

34:3 35:20,23

36:14 42:20

44:19,24 50:19

56:4,11 57:5,8

60:10 61:11

63:21,22,23

65:7 67:21

71:12 72:2,14

80:10 81:22

82:13 83:16

85:15 86:9 88:5

94:20 105:9,19

105:21 106:16

106:25 107:24

108:4 110:25

111:4,6 112:7

114:10,11,22,25

115:3,23 116:14

119:13,22 124:3

125:1

city's 12:3 23:18

34:7,15 82:2

105:16 106:4,7

112:5 116:13

122:15

civil 124:24,24

claim 19:15

114:3,3

clarify 10:5 51:2

96:6

clean 66:12

clear 27:2 29:2

34:5 77:24

close 51:15,15

54:17,20

closely 20:4

closer 64:18

coast 63:15,24

code 106:16,25

108:4

cohesion 57:11

123:11

[calls - cohesion] Page 134

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 134 of

163
collected 15:9

collecting 10:9

collectively 94:8

colloquy 4:21

column 45:22

45:22 46:3,4

come 4:23 6:12

11:8 119:9

comes 62:19

111:23

comfortable

118:15

coming 69:1

commenced

13:19 23:17

68:14

comments 26:18

27:1

commission

9:14 11:1 16:12

19:14 21:13

25:17 26:9,11

26:16 28:7,9,16

28:17,19 43:4

56:4 57:5,8

61:12 70:22

72:3,14 78:23

78:24 81:3,8

82:13 85:15

86:2,9,11 88:5

94:20 105:7

111:1,4 115:23

116:2,14 119:14

119:15,18 120:8

126:19

commission's

33:6 42:21

71:22 91:20

105:10,18

114:10,11

commissioner

16:20 17:1,8

18:12 25:21

26:3,5 67:25

69:3 71:23

79:25 111:7,15

commissioner's

17:18 26:6

68:23

commissioners

17:14 20:7,20

21:1,5 25:20,25

67:21 69:16

70:19 78:24

79:7,13,16 80:5

85:8 110:15

communicated

8:18,20,21

communities

56:17

community

10:16 15:15,16

84:7,9,12,16,24

compact 85:16

85:21 86:3,5,10

86:12

compactness

56:15,21 57:6,9

61:10,12

comparator

38:1

compare 31:25

32:2 37:3,4

38:11,16 54:22

83:25 84:3 93:1

107:18

compared 30:10

31:15 32:6

37:12 38:4

52:16,17 59:5

61:21,25 65:2

86:16 87:13,16

99:11 101:14

111:2 119:2,10

comparing 37:3

39:6,15,17,17

49:19,21 60:9

72:20 82:4 87:5

87:22 101:24

comparison

37:19 39:5,8

49:16,22 54:2,4

64:18 90:5

102:3,7

comparisons

32:9 38:24

54:21,24 58:6

compensated

7:1

complete 127:10

completed

124:15

completely

33:18 45:6

completeness

39:3

composition

39:4 40:16

70:17 72:4

81:21 91:15

96:1,24 97:2,3

98:19,21 100:4

103:7,11 107:19

107:20

compositions

70:20,23 71:2

81:3,13

computer 42:1

concentrated

40:4 63:18

94:12 95:4

concentrations

40:13

concerning 8:19

67:8 109:3

concerns 9:16

9:19,23 19:17

86:14

concluded

119:3 123:24

concluding

28:18

conclusion

29:14 31:1

67:14 85:24

91:3 95:1,13

99:14,19 104:4

116:10,20,22

118:1,24 119:5

[collected - conclusion] Page 135

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 135 of

163
120:7,16

conclusions

11:8 25:8,10

32:13,17,19

51:5 65:23 77:8

80:13,18 82:19

93:2,8,19 94:16

95:9,10,14,15

95:17,18 97:12

97:24 98:3,8,14

99:4,15 104:12

105:21 112:3

116:5 123:6

conducted

11:21 72:19

111:11

confidence

74:21

configuration

114:23 115:1

121:16 122:1

configure 122:5

conflict 68:11

confusing 4:10

connect 76:17

connected

127:14

consensus 69:1

conservative

20:7

consider 82:22

83:6 109:4

considerably

106:15

consideration

16:22 35:3,7

78:20 79:9

80:15 100:11

considerations

9:23 25:12,14

32:20 67:11

116:17,19

considered 8:24

29:4,4 33:24

37:21 38:9

69:13,15 100:5

124:17

considering

111:15

constituents

20:21 21:2,6

constitutional

85:20

construction

109:8,10

consultant

26:13,13 106:4

106:7

contacted 6:14

6:16

contained 13:9

15:6,7 17:22

51:16 77:18

contains 13:11

73:23,24

context 114:20

contiguous

66:20,20

continue 116:16

continued 28:23

continues 117:7

contract 13:15

control 114:6

controls 42:6,10

convention

108:7

conveyed 56:10

copies 124:14

copy 12:12

123:19

core 24:17,21

50:21,22 57:11

70:22 71:2,4,15

72:3 114:19

cores 25:2 28:20

38:1 40:21

71:21 80:23

corner 76:16

78:1

correct 13:21

17:15,16 18:17

18:18 19:22

21:14,15 22:1

27:8,15 29:13

29:15,16 36:22

37:15 39:7

40:19 41:6,7,10

41:11,15,25

44:13 46:19,25

47:10,11,14,21

47:22,25 48:1,3

48:18,22 49:4,5

49:8,11 52:8

54:10,13 55:5

55:17,18 56:19

56:25 57:3,25

58:1 59:3,4

60:17 61:13,14

62:6,22 63:21

66:15 69:14

70:6,10 71:5,8

71:12,18 73:15

74:7,16 76:20

77:14 80:15,16

80:19,20 81:8

83:3,4 85:13,14

85:21 87:17,18

87:20,22,24

88:3 92:18 94:3

97:25 100:17

101:8,13,14,18

101:23,25 104:3

104:9,13,15

106:4 107:7

112:3,4,13

114:2 115:6

117:11,19 118:5

118:6,25 119:18

119:19,23 120:8

120:12 121:4

correctly 41:3

45:21 59:12

76:2 102:14,16

119:8

counsel 4:20

11:19 15:25

16:14 18:5

27:15 38:23

[conclusion - counsel] Page 136

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 136 of

163
70:9 83:10

84:21 86:19

88:18 106:7,22

107:14 127:12

127:14

counter 32:1

58:7,10

county 19:6,24

20:1 22:21,24

115:2 126:3

127:2

couple 10:6

course 7:8 8:5

112:10

court 1:1 3:1,6

4:4,13 5:12 82:7

82:12 123:18

126:5,17 127:4

127:21

court's 82:9

courts 38:18

cover 68:16,19

69:2 71:8

covers 71:11

creating 5:8

credence 64:21

criteria 56:6,8

57:6 71:4 90:19

92:4,15 99:21

103:2 104:13

critical 89:15

91:20,23

criticism 82:6

criticized 82:12

cross 2:17

115:12

cue 20:14

current 12:6

46:23 119:10,25

currently 30:2

106:9

cursor 67:20

78:1

cut 114:24

cv 1:2 12:5,7,20

13:9 14:8

d

d 2:16,19 53:11

53:11,20,20,22

53:22 55:3,3,4,5

55:7,7,10,10,13

55:14,17,18

dade 126:3

127:2

damage 113:25

data 8:24 9:6

10:9,10,15,25

11:2,5,6,7,12

14:13,17,18

15:5,8,17,24,24

15:25 16:2,4,7

18:1,2,3 26:25

27:3,12 40:9

41:9 51:5 65:4

65:10 70:7,8

77:9 80:18

82:19,23 83:3,7

83:14 84:6,8,10

84:13,16,21

85:4 93:8 112:3

112:6 113:9,11

dataverse 18:17

date 7:2,3 13:10

40:12 124:11

125:25

dated 116:6

127:17

day 126:11

127:17

days 124:16

de 26:13,14,17

105:8,16,23

106:3,10,14,18

106:22,25

107:20,21

dealing 75:2

decades 28:8,16

28:21 119:15

dechert 2:5

dechert.com

124:1

decided 61:12

decision 51:17

51:18 57:12

75:11 83:8

91:20,23 103:14

104:2

decisions 53:6

66:13 92:24

104:8

declare 125:20

decrease 37:8

37:18 87:1

decreased 36:21

36:24 39:11

46:10

decreases 61:9

defendant 1:8

1:22 2:8

defendant's

2:20 123:20

definition 105:3

105:5,16,16,18

106:17,22,24

107:1,20,22

108:25

definitions

104:25 107:23

107:24 108:1,8

108:13

degree 58:17

deliberately

53:6 57:17

democrat 21:18

21:19 24:25

80:1,2 110:6

democratic

25:21 26:2

democrats 20:8

22:18

department

108:6

dependent

75:13

depending

108:25

depends 27:9,9

37:2 46:12,20

[counsel - depends] Page 137

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 137 of

163
71:19 75:14

depicted 107:4

depiction 75:25

113:8,10

depicts 39:4

deposed 4:1

deposing 124:12

deposition 1:10

1:25 4:7 115:15

115:16 123:23

127:7

desantis 110:22

111:3,9

describe 57:19

68:22 90:14

described 14:19

72:22 83:2

99:14

describing

72:18

description 2:20

39:9 53:19 58:9

106:17

designation

106:1

designed 73:17

116:16

detail 17:14

detailed 11:25

14:8 55:11

101:20

determine 10:18

69:16 83:16

determining

102:25

diabetic 5:22

dialogue 62:19

differ 67:10

70:15,16 73:9

76:22

differed 73:17

73:18

difference 16:7

16:10 40:25

52:15,17,18

62:9 74:18

77:14 91:15

100:22 105:15

121:25

differences

93:11,17

different 10:7

16:8,9 33:12,13

43:3 56:24 57:2

58:16 62:12

72:12 85:5 89:8

92:20 94:24

99:25 100:3,4

102:22 103:3,15

104:5 107:8

121:10,11,12

differs 82:3

difficult 5:11

direct 2:17 3:17

12:16 38:23

directed 57:8

direction 96:2,3

101:22

directions 56:5

directives

112:20

directly 70:14

73:6 96:13

discuss 27:20

109:10

discussed 72:8

73:14 123:1

discussing 89:8

discussion 13:2

disparities 67:4

disparity 64:22

65:25 66:14

dissimilarities

97:11

distinction

22:19

district 1:1,1

16:13,19,20

17:2,9 18:12,14

24:11 25:2 26:4

26:6 31:2,18

34:14,19,25

35:4,10 36:1,1,9

36:9,15,18,21

37:9,10,14,18

39:11,19,19

40:5,22 41:1,6,6

41:14,15,17,18

42:12,15,16,17

42:18,19,21,22

43:1,8,11,13,15

43:16 44:7,8

45:10,18,21,22

46:2,4,4,6,6,8,9

46:11,16,19,23

47:2,7,14,16,21

47:24 48:19,23

48:24 49:3,11

49:13,25 50:1,3

50:4,5,6,6,7,11

50:13,24,25

51:6,6,8,9,9,11

51:19,20 52:5,5

52:6,7,11,12,13

57:10 58:11,20

58:21,24 59:3

60:14,16 61:17

61:18 62:3,3,13

62:20,25 63:13

63:14,15,23,25

64:1,5,6,7,19,19

64:25,25 66:4

68:1,5 69:4,18

69:20 70:14,16

70:18 71:11,15

71:15 72:15

73:1,3,5,5,10,14

73:14,22,24

74:3,4,6,12 75:9

76:6,6,12,12,15

76:17,17,24,24

77:12,15,16,17

77:20,21,22,23

77:23,24 78:8,8

78:9,9,11,11,12

80:1,23 85:16

85:21 86:3,6,12

86:23,25 87:1,9

87:19 88:1,2,9

[depends - district] Page 138

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 138 of

163
89:14,15,16

90:4,6,8,9,18,23

90:24 91:1,7,18

91:18,19,21,24

92:3,6,7,14

94:11 95:3,24

96:1,5,13,21,21

96:24 97:3,6,7,8

97:8,9,19,21,21

98:9,12,12,16

98:17,17,18,20

98:22 99:1,1,9,9

99:11 100:8,8

100:14,15,15,16

100:17 101:3,5

101:6,7,9,9,10

101:11,11,12,23

103:1,1,6,6,10

103:11,12,12

110:16 111:16

112:7,22,23,23

113:14,14,16,18

114:1,2,19

116:2,3 117:23

118:11 120:12

121:8,8,12,13

121:16,22,23

122:1,1,14,21

122:23,24

districting 28:7

119:14

districts 6:22

9:14,15,18

19:16 20:10

23:21,24 24:1,9

24:18 25:1,13

25:16 28:20

29:10 30:15,17

31:4,7 32:7,11

32:14,15,18,22

32:24,25 33:11

33:12 34:4,8

35:9,9,12,15

37:12 38:2

40:15,22 41:4,5

42:16,18,24,25

43:21,25 45:13

45:24 46:1

57:12 59:20

62:1,23 63:19

64:9 69:17,18

70:20,23 71:5

71:17 72:4,20

72:21 78:17,17

78:18,19,22

81:4,4,16,17,19

83:18 86:21

87:17,24 88:5,6

91:14 92:7,20

92:21,22 93:10

94:8,11,21,25

95:7,20,22

96:10 98:5 99:4

100:2,21 102:11

102:23 103:4

110:3 111:1

112:6,22 113:1

113:2,5,17

114:17,23 115:1

117:11,14,18,22

118:7,19,25

119:6,22 122:5

122:22

districtwide

94:1

dl 126:24

doctor 3:19

65:11 85:25

102:24 109:14

document 55:20

125:21

doing 5:13,14

17:19 25:18

50:9 64:12

80:17 113:25

dollar 7:15 8:3

8:7

dollars 8:1

donate 43:1

donated 61:19

donor 50:8 92:7

92:21 97:18

100:1

download 14:17

18:19

downloaded

10:25 11:3,6

18:16

downtown

121:23

dr 1:12 2:18 3:1

3:13 11:4 13:4

19:5 22:20 53:3

55:19 75:23

88:11,21 109:23

115:8,14 117:6

118:2 120:22

122:9 124:4

125:2,25 126:7

127:7

draft 53:23,24

drafted 10:6

54:3

draw 26:11 32:9

32:13,17 69:17

71:20 77:7

85:20 86:2,5,11

91:2 93:2,7,18

98:2,8,13 99:4

99:14,15 104:11

107:10 114:1

122:14

drawer 44:16

44:21,24

drawers 33:14

56:5,11 57:9

drawing 6:22

25:15 26:11

29:5 33:15,25

36:20 42:14

44:16,22 45:17

47:8 56:7,12

57:9 59:14

64:17 65:7 66:7

66:8 68:12,14

68:17,19 94:16

95:2,9 97:24

99:21 102:16

106:7,8 111:17

[district - drawing] Page 139

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 139 of

163
drawn 9:15,19

19:16 20:10

23:3,7 30:20

32:22 34:20

35:1,13 61:8,10

67:6,15 68:4

69:19 88:5 91:7

92:4 113:5

114:17 118:19

draws 85:16

drew 60:10

94:20 105:19,21

116:5

drill 64:13

drop 62:12,16

dropbox 12:9

dropped 32:23

dropping 6:4

due 39:20

duly 3:14 126:9

duties 56:7

e

e 2:16,19,19

15:22 56:16

88:17,19 124:12

124:14,24,25

125:3,3,3

earlier 14:19

62:18 68:7

120:6

early 11:13

easier 12:13

east 60:19,21,24

61:4

easy 79:5

effect 46:24

95:23 96:20

efforts 82:6

either 26:18

46:5,9 47:20

52:7 63:24

72:25 76:23

85:5 86:20

91:16 95:2

103:7 110:12

111:2,8 116:1

117:22 119:23

elect 29:11,12

116:3

elected 70:5

election 14:18

15:4,11 18:16

18:20,23 19:1,2

19:3,18,21

22:21 79:7

110:8,10 111:7

elections 19:14

21:9 78:25 79:3

110:8,15,17

111:5,14,24

115:23

electoral 20:15

80:11

emergency 6:7

employee

127:12,13

enacted 10:20

10:21 11:15

20:17 28:7

29:22 30:2,9

43:13 46:2

53:25 54:3,6

62:5 71:24

79:19 80:21

81:1,7 119:13

enactment

85:13

endorse 22:9

engaged 15:19

enhancing

113:18

enjoined 25:19

25:22,23 27:25

28:13 82:4,7,10

83:19,23,24

86:17 87:6

94:10 95:21

107:4 116:15

enlarge 55:24

entire 24:15

27:3 66:8

entirely 122:15

122:21

entirety 113:14

116:11

equal 36:1,10

46:25 47:12

equality 32:4

equivalent

56:21

errata 124:10

124:12,15

esquire 2:6,11

2:14 124:1

estimate 15:17

15:17 74:14,15

74:21,23,23,24

84:13,16

estimates 15:15

16:9 74:16 84:7

84:24

estimating

74:20

et 1:4 124:3

125:1

ethnic 9:23

23:25 24:3,6

25:12,13 32:20

34:16 79:24

116:17

ethnicity 9:17

9:20 28:24 43:7

58:16 62:19

80:4 110:18,21

evaluating

104:19

everyone's 8:22

evidence 19:18

45:8

exacerbate

36:25 72:15

exacerbated

31:8,10 32:25

49:16

exacerbating

72:22

exacerbation

31:23

[drawn - exacerbation] Page 140

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 140 of

163
exact 8:7 17:11

38:6 73:13

107:8

exactly 14:14

27:25 96:7

exaggerate

35:13

exaggerated

35:9

examination

3:17 19:21 31:1

41:8 115:12

117:4

examine 21:8

53:10 66:25

104:8 110:14

examined 3:15

21:10 30:3 35:5

38:18 122:3

examining

24:19 73:4

example 16:19

64:17

examples 33:4

excel 18:4

except 28:22

97:5 103:19,19

exchange

113:15

exchanged 99:3

100:2

excluded 106:25

107:21

exclusively

80:18 82:18

exercise 23:8

exhibit 2:21

123:20

exhibited 34:5

exist 86:11

existed 28:21

existing 38:2

46:15 47:23

57:11 72:22

80:23 81:2,13

81:20

expansive

106:24

expect 50:10,12

experience 14:6

26:10

expert 6:12,21

6:23 10:14 11:4

12:20 41:22

93:22 104:4

expires 126:20

explain 9:20

10:19 45:4

66:14 67:5

83:17 89:17

explained 45:17

explanation

15:6,7 27:10,11

70:25 78:16

79:2 109:25

110:14 114:17

explanations

27:6,14 78:14

83:8

explored 35:17

extent 9:10

10:19 22:18

24:17 30:21

83:17 85:23

eyes 55:22

f

fact 17:18 39:20

78:18 79:2,18

factor 11:24

20:9 51:1 57:10

58:4 79:12

80:14 91:8

95:13 111:21,23

factored 79:21

115:5

factors 82:22

93:20 102:25

facts 8:23 9:2

125:21

factual 94:13,15

94:17,18 95:2

95:15 97:23

98:1,7,13 99:2

99:13,16

fails 124:19

fair 4:18 5:3

6:10 7:17 43:1

49:17 58:4 65:7

82:17 112:8

fall 45:18

101:21

familiar 34:10

far 106:5

feasible 56:18

features 86:13

february 53:23

54:2

federal 124:17

124:24

feel 6:4 92:3,13

118:15

field 15:11

figure 17:2,5

40:13 47:9

64:14 79:5

106:20 107:2,10

figures 121:19

file 18:2,3

filed 120:24

files 11:7 64:15

70:7,8

final 25:19

109:17,23

finalized 69:7

financially

127:15

find 23:2 50:20

59:19 108:2

finding 16:21

fine 12:18 89:10

finish 4:12

first 3:14 10:14

13:24 15:19

28:12 30:7

48:10 53:21

55:6 61:17 69:7

73:8 75:24

80:14 82:18

[exact - first] Page 141

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 141 of

163
84:4,7,20 85:11

89:13 93:22

104:17 119:13

five 15:15,17

23:12 29:9

52:21 53:5,13

62:23 84:7,13

84:16,24 109:16

119:6

fl 124:13

flagami 122:19

122:25 123:1

flip 28:5 34:2

70:12 82:1

florida 1:1,24

2:11 124:18,24

126:3,6,18

127:2

follow 117:2

followed 119:17

following 67:1

follows 3:16

footsteps 119:18

foregoing

125:21 127:9

forgive 75:3

form 7:14 85:22

105:13

formalities

123:25

format 4:10

18:3

former 70:13

forming 8:24

9:25 14:7 26:22

found 108:14

four 28:3 70:19

framed 77:5

front 13:5 41:21

41:24 42:1

122:7

fulfill 10:23

full 3:22 39:1

fully 111:16

functional

56:21

further 15:13

31:4,7 50:1

60:16 97:24

98:3 99:15

113:12 116:25

127:11

g

gain 37:14

41:15 42:12

71:16 73:5

gained 37:17,17

43:19

gathered 14:4

general 15:11

17:10 67:19

generally 15:9

22:4 40:20 43:9

80:22 107:3

121:6

generals 9:3,8,9

9:11

geographic 24:7

39:23 65:1,2

76:6

geographical

54:18 86:13

geographically

59:16 60:5,9

66:20

geography 63:7

64:14 65:5,9

71:3,6

george 2:11

3:20 5:21 7:13

12:11 42:5

52:20 75:21

89:4,11 109:20

115:11

gerrymander

81:24 117:8

gerrymandering

78:21

getting 5:15

33:4 47:18

101:23

give 3:8 8:3 12:8

22:13 42:15,18

42:24 64:21

120:22

given 4:3 26:15

27:19 28:11

50:4 61:18 64:5

72:25 73:1 74:4

81:10,11 98:16

99:25 100:2

110:16 112:14

112:15 118:11

119:3

glance 28:12

glucose 5:25

gmcvb 106:16

go 4:6 12:21,25

15:1,21 16:21

17:19 29:25

39:3 40:9 47:5

56:12 60:16

96:6

goals 75:14

114:10,12

god 3:10

goes 41:8

going 4:6,16 5:6

5:23 12:8,9 30:7

31:23 38:7 41:5

44:19 47:7 53:3

53:14 55:19

56:3 59:23

61:13 63:7 66:8

75:19,24 88:24

88:25 100:20

103:8 116:10

117:18 120:23

good 3:19 21:1

52:22 54:21

58:6,7 72:16

75:21 109:19

government 3:4

20:15

governor

110:22 111:2,9

governor's

18:20 19:2,12

19:13

[first - governor's] Page 142

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 142 of

163
grace 1:4 124:3

125:1

grandy 26:13,14

105:23 106:3

grandy's 26:17

105:8,16 106:10

106:14,18,22,25

107:20,21

grants 13:18

granular 41:9

gray 2:9 3:20

greater 36:1,10

61:20 73:2

108:7

greatest 13:8

ground 4:7,8

group 74:9

grouping 94:12

95:3

groups 107:25

growing 43:14

gubernatorial

110:10

guess 8:14 17:13

28:15 38:7 50:9

55:1 59:7 65:11

76:25 102:24

106:3,17

h

h 2:19 125:3

half 59:9 66:21

halfway 53:21

hand 3:7

handful 11:17

11:18

happened 47:4

harvard's 11:3

18:17

head 5:9,10

66:24

hear 16:24

114:24

heard 34:12

heavier 77:2

help 3:10 4:13

33:3

helpful 22:24

23:1 55:25

hh 126:19

high 90:11 98:4

98:5 99:10

108:23

higher 46:15,17

46:22 47:1,15

48:20 49:2,12

51:21,21 58:23

59:2,4 60:11,13

64:5 88:6 99:8

101:7

highlighted

90:2,12,14

highlighting

90:1,20

highly 28:24

hired 26:10

hispanic 29:11

32:21,22 35:19

39:12,18 41:5

43:11 47:19,24

49:11 50:12

52:11 61:20

62:2 63:18

72:15 73:2,17

73:18 76:7,18

86:22,24,25

87:9,17 88:6

90:12 94:9,12

94:21,22,25

95:4,7,19,20

96:4,21 97:1,20

98:4,5 99:10

100:9,16,17

101:4,12 110:25

111:6,15,16

112:22 117:14

117:22 118:8

hispanics 35:10

historic 29:3

105:9,11 106:15

106:22 107:1,23

108:22,24

historical 12:2

108:18 112:6

122:3

history 109:7

hold 20:22

holding 3:2

home 68:24

69:4,18,19

homes 68:1

69:16

hourly 7:4

hours 7:6,14 8:1

housing 63:7

hypothetical

32:1 103:9

hypothetically

66:10

hypotheticals

58:7,10

i

idea 7:25 21:4,7

32:24 38:15

63:9

identical 20:18

identification

3:4 123:21

126:23,24

identified 35:9

53:5,5,14 54:12

55:3 59:1 73:20

79:18 90:16

identify 58:3

59:7 64:1,9

123:11

identities

109:12

identity 3:5

ideology 20:4,16

20:22 21:2,5

79:10,12,15

ignored 33:18

44:24

immediately

76:23

impact 57:13

65:22

impacted 48:11

[grace - impacted] Page 143

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 143 of

163
impacting 65:6

impair 5:17

impermissible

81:23

imply 119:16

important 18:8

18:10 19:11

22:22 26:21

44:21 65:18

impression

95:11

improper 28:25

29:7

improperly 29:4

inadequate

27:11

include 60:15

69:10

included 48:21

49:3 68:5 69:14

73:21 88:18

107:19,22

inconsistent

52:9

incorporated

59:13

increase 46:18

increased 39:21

46:10

increasing

46:24

incumbent 11:2

16:13,14 18:7,9

18:11 69:13

incumbents

18:13 69:17

indicate 18:15

45:12,23 82:2

84:5 99:20

indicated 22:20

43:15 57:16

68:7 75:5

indicates 61:16

indicating 66:1

66:9,11 67:20

89:14 97:16

122:18

indication 20:16

indicative 78:19

90:19 102:15

103:13 104:13

individual

10:17 40:8,21

81:3 83:15

104:8,14,15

individuals

37:12 73:24

74:24,25

inform 67:18

68:3

information

9:25 17:25 18:7

18:9 22:22

24:19 26:21

56:10 65:6

informed 70:2

inherited 30:11

34:4

inland 63:20,23

inquiring 95:14

inquisition 6:2

insight 111:10

insofar 24:9

inspection

119:1

instance 51:17

58:19

instructed 4:23

16:3 56:11

insulin 5:22

intended 70:22

intending 6:1

intentionally

33:23

interchanged

50:8

interest 56:18

interested

127:15

interesting 58:9

internal 40:22

interval 74:22

introductory

28:6

investigating

14:12

invited 13:17

involves 101:17

involving 90:18

irrelevant 27:7

issued 3:4 123:6

issues 79:9

issuing 112:13

j

j 2:6

job 72:16

joined 80:2

joining 42:16

joint 109:12

journals 14:25

judgments 77:7

july 116:6

jumping 41:12

june 105:7

126:20

k

keep 43:21,24

keeping 44:3

71:15 123:7

kept 47:21

kerri 8:21

kind 78:1 93:5

kmm 1:2

know 6:5,15 7:3

7:23 8:4 13:8

16:11,20,25

17:5,8 21:11,16

21:22 23:11,15

25:24 26:6

27:25 30:2

33:14,17 34:1,9

34:17 35:16

36:11,12,17

39:8,23 40:7

41:17 44:23

45:19 46:12,14

[impacting - know] Page 144

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 144 of

163
48:5 51:14

54:19 56:16

60:5,23 61:1,3

62:14 63:1,8,9

65:8,18 66:5,22

67:16,17 69:5,5

71:6,21,23,25

72:5 73:20

75:16 76:20

79:15,19,23,25

80:2,4 82:5

84:15,18,23,25

85:1,3,4,7,8,10

88:18 91:10

98:21 100:24

105:5,15 107:12

109:1 110:21

113:2 114:11

116:11 121:17

121:19,21,21

122:7,24

knowledge 14:4

14:6 22:1,2

115:4,7

known 6:16

126:23

l

label 20:13

labeled 116:10

land 71:8

landscape 86:13

language 21:17

large 1:24

120:11 121:15

126:6

largely 63:18

larger 89:5

largest 37:16

43:15

latest 13:8

law 34:25

lawyer 34:17

led 112:3

left 106:20

107:3

legal 38:21

85:23 106:7

124:23

level 20:16 41:2

41:9 65:17

levesque 2:11

3:18,20 7:16

12:14,18,25

13:3 42:7,11

52:23 53:2

75:19 89:6,12

109:14,22 115:8

117:1,5 123:14

123:18

likely 29:10

74:15 98:19

line 27:6 60:10

64:19 65:7

66:12 125:4,7

125:10,13,16

lines 33:7 45:18

45:18 57:10

61:7 69:17 79:8

79:24 112:8

list 27:16 39:9

48:10 55:2 64:3

listed 53:15

litigation 28:3

112:11 118:4

120:24

little 4:10 5:11

42:24 61:9

88:24 89:5,16

90:21 91:15

93:5 97:15 99:1

live 4:3 24:7

65:14,15 109:4

lived 17:14

39:24 74:25

lives 16:21 17:9

living 70:4

llp 2:5

local 110:15

locals 109:2

located 60:6

64:14 66:1

69:22 70:1

look 7:24 10:16

11:6 15:21

18:23 19:3,9

22:23,24 23:23

23:25 24:3,6,14

24:16,21 27:19

28:12 40:9,20

45:19 52:2

53:25 54:6,16

54:22 59:15,22

60:2,8 64:24

72:12 73:6

75:15 81:16

83:7 92:6 93:11

96:17 99:25

100:3 101:1

102:22 104:10

104:19 110:8,9

110:17 112:11

112:15,16,17

113:3,7 117:25

118:18 121:10

121:13 122:11

looked 19:6

24:17 25:1

30:14 31:14

33:12,13 40:8,8

40:10,15 51:25

59:20 64:23

65:3,4 76:13

78:4 92:20

93:22 97:21

98:17 104:16,21

110:7 111:4

113:1,2 119:2

119:24 120:13

120:18

looking 8:6,7

11:12,13,13

14:19 19:17

40:12 45:20

46:7 48:19 49:1

50:11 53:25

55:2 64:8 71:7

71:10 72:3,14

77:25 90:5

96:16 100:13

[know - looking] Page 145

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 145 of

163
101:15,16

104:24 106:20

111:19

looks 54:14 59:9

97:18 103:3,15

lost 109:12

lot 28:1

lots 43:3

low 5:23 50:21

99:12

lower 46:15

47:17,23 50:13

50:21 51:10

58:18 61:19

94:9 95:20

98:15

lowest 67:19

m

madam 123:18

made 19:15

30:8 31:11 32:5

32:6,7,7,10,14

32:18,19 38:3

41:12 44:7

46:13 47:3

49:18,20,20,21

49:22 53:6

57:23 62:21

78:6 83:8 90:15

91:1,6,12,15,18

92:14 93:9,10

101:21 103:23

104:20 110:1,2

mail 124:12

mailed 88:17

124:14

mails 15:22

88:19

maintain 56:17

66:4 70:19,22

71:14 72:3

maintaining

57:11 71:4

114:5

maintains 67:21

80:23

major 67:1

majorities 35:8

majority 25:21

43:11 94:25

95:7,20 97:19

99:10 100:20

112:21 114:6

117:13,22,23,23

make 5:14

18:10 38:24

43:4 46:21 47:6

54:21,25 66:12

77:7,13 89:5

100:7,16 101:3

101:11 109:17

116:18 117:25

119:16

makes 5:11

makeup 24:1,4

24:7 34:16

38:11 43:8 64:2

76:19

making 28:15

38:12 94:11,14

94:15 97:10,11

98:1,7,12 99:2

103:14 104:2

manner 122:6

map 11:7 17:11

25:15,19,22,23

25:25 26:3,11

26:15 27:19

28:1,11,11,13

28:14 33:14,16

33:19 38:6 40:6

40:12 42:14

44:16,21,24

50:17 56:5,6,11

57:8 59:14 60:7

62:20,22 63:2

63:10 64:8 66:7

66:8 68:12,13

68:16,19 69:1

71:11,20 75:15

75:17 79:8,23

82:13 89:1

99:18,18,21

102:16 104:23

105:6 106:7,20

111:17 113:19

116:23,23

117:13,15,25

118:4,8,13

119:2 120:24,25

121:4,22,23

maps 6:22 9:5

11:2,8,14,15

16:13 23:18

26:11 28:1,9,16

28:17,19 29:3,5

29:9 34:4 56:12

64:15 65:10

68:11 81:1,2,9

81:12 83:3

104:5 106:8

107:8,10 115:6

115:15,21

118:24 119:3,24

120:8,14,17

margin 79:19

marginally 82:4

marked 123:21

markedly 70:17

match 107:3

material 21:11

materials 21:8

21:12

matter 5:18

7:19,22 15:20

25:4 69:8

matters 75:17

mayor 19:6

22:21,25

mayoral 19:23

19:24,24 20:1

mayra 1:23

126:5,17 127:4

127:21

mccartan 88:21

mean 5:11 10:5

10:9,11 13:11

14:14,16 17:7

[looking - mean] Page 146

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 146 of

163
24:23 31:10

32:18 40:8 65:8

71:6 72:17 74:2

74:13 77:15

81:13,15 96:3

105:23,24 110:4

122:17

means 41:3

43:19

measure 30:13

31:13 61:13

71:3

medical 6:6

medication 5:16

meeting 105:7

mentioned

16:12 19:5

37:19 68:23,25

merken 2:6 5:21

7:13 12:11,16

12:19 42:5,9

52:20 75:21

85:22 89:4,9,11

105:13 109:19

115:10,13

116:25 123:16

124:1

methodology

11:10,12 14:2

14:11,15,20

15:2 82:24 83:2

83:6

miami 1:7 3:21

6:22 9:12 28:7

34:3 35:20,23

108:6,7,7

116:14 119:13

124:3 125:1

126:3 127:2

miami's 80:11

mind 25:12

28:25 58:6

71:15 90:9

minimal 30:10

30:12 91:13

minorities 35:14

minority 35:14

40:4,14 120:11

minute 52:21

75:20 109:16

minutes 52:22

monday 1:15

morning 3:19

4:7 5:16

motivated 30:9

motivating

93:20

motivation

33:21 69:12

113:19

motivations

67:17 72:8 77:8

109:24

move 33:3 45:7

48:11 67:15

89:16 90:8

98:13,14

moved 24:14

25:11 27:6

30:23,24 31:2,4

31:14,15 32:2,3

33:11 45:5,9

46:1,3,5,9 47:21

49:12,13 50:24

51:20 52:1,5,7

53:17,20,22

54:9 55:2,4,7,10

55:12,18 58:15

58:24 59:6,11

59:17 61:17,21

61:25,25 67:11

67:12,13 69:21

69:25 77:20

81:15,17,18

90:3,6 92:5

93:24,24 94:8

95:6,19,21 96:9

96:12 97:9 98:4

98:8,11 99:9,12

101:2,6,10

102:1,9,11

103:16 104:21

104:22 113:13

121:13

movement

91:15 103:13

104:12,15

movements

90:18 96:5

100:11,14

113:17

moves 31:6,8

moving 96:20

97:17,18,20

102:25 103:6,10

moy 11:4 19:5

22:20 88:11

mpd 106:16

multiple 104:25

n

n 2:16,19

name 3:19,22

8:22 14:20 26:7

names 22:14

narrative 52:9

narrow 8:12

natural 54:24

nature 116:19

nearby 31:16

necessarily 22:7

35:2 51:23

57:24 60:18

65:5 90:13

117:20

necessary 23:2

need 5:9,24 6:3

9:21 26:25 27:1

27:12 38:10

42:25 47:3

60:16 71:16

104:11 118:16

118:18

needed 9:12

37:4,8,14,18

38:3 42:12

43:20 67:12

77:12,17 78:10

needs 34:19

37:7 38:19

[mean - needs] Page 147

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 147 of

163
neighborhoods

56:18 123:7

neil 8:21

net 50:8 106:16

never 69:19

new 18:13 33:11

33:19 36:20

38:16 68:11

69:16

news 11:16,17

11:18,24 68:7,9

68:10,16 69:6

nicholas 2:14

nick 6:14 8:20

nod 5:10

non 85:16,21

86:3,5,10,12

nonpartisan

20:8 21:14

78:17,19,25,25

111:7 115:24

nonracial 85:17

normal 57:10

north 107:6

notably 94:24

notary 1:23

126:5,18

note 50:5 124:9

notes 17:24 18:1

70:6 127:10

notice 1:25

121:25

noting 93:17

101:25

number 7:14

48:10 74:25

77:19 80:25

85:19 101:25

102:8 117:14

numbers 31:18

31:24 74:1 75:5

113:21

numerical 73:21

ny 126:24

o

oath 126:1

object 4:20

objection 4:22

7:13 85:22

105:13

observation

61:23 94:13,15

94:17,18 95:3

97:23

observations

95:18 97:10

98:2,7,13 99:2

99:13,16

observe 61:13

observed 33:5

observing 29:8

obviously 6:6

occur 37:7

occurred 44:7

116:16

october 1:15

124:2,4 125:2

126:9,11 127:17

odds 72:7

offer 6:12 84:2

office 70:5

official 23:4

107:23

offset 76:3 77:1

offsets 77:10

oh 23:11

okay 4:6 6:18

8:10,12 10:23

12:8,24,25

13:13 14:1 17:8

17:24 19:8 21:8

22:8 28:15 29:8

31:21 36:6

39:10 40:23

41:20 42:4

44:15 46:7

51:23 52:2

53:18,24 54:4

55:9 58:21 60:1

67:3 68:13 74:1

75:18 78:13

87:8,11,15 89:1

89:3,9 91:11

92:23 95:1,23

96:15 97:17

98:25 101:1

102:2,10 103:5

103:17,21 104:7

104:23 106:13

109:14 110:12

110:18 114:13

117:1 118:2,16

120:22 121:11

123:1,18

old 64:19

once 11:5 88:17

ones 27:14,16

30:24 33:10,11

53:15 58:24

72:1 93:24

opening 119:12

opinion 6:13

29:1,3 31:6

33:20 61:8

62:15 67:4,8,9

72:2 75:10,11

75:12,16 76:2

76:25 81:21,25

82:14 84:2

91:25 92:19,23

94:1,19 105:2

117:7,9 118:12

opinions 8:25

10:1,4 11:25

14:8 25:6 26:22

30:19 34:21

44:2 57:13 77:6

112:13 123:6

opposite 73:13

101:22

option 54:23

112:16

options 38:8

81:18 101:15,24

104:10

order 82:9

83:16 123:19

[neighborhoods - order] Page 148

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 148 of

163
ordering 43:21

43:24 44:3

124:14

organize 20:14

outline 30:21

outperform

111:8

outside 26:10

66:2,12 112:19

overall 30:14,16

39:10 83:17

91:16 98:19

102:8 106:14

overpopulated

37:10

overtown

103:19,21

104:16,18,20,24

105:1,3,8,10,20

105:22,24 106:1

106:9,15,23

107:1,16,23

108:18,21,22,24

109:4,7,8,11

123:9

p

p.m. 1:16

123:24

page 2:20 12:22

13:22 18:15

28:5 30:6,7,25

34:3 35:8 36:4,5

39:1,2 43:12

48:14,17 53:3

53:18,21 54:1,7

57:15 61:15,16

70:12 73:22

75:23 78:15

80:25 82:1 84:4

89:23 91:14

94:7,10 96:8,11

106:13 113:12

116:9 121:22

125:4,7,10,13

125:16

pages 127:9

paid 33:14

panel 106:21

paper 12:12

papers 13:17

paragraph

14:10 15:13

30:7 33:5 35:25

39:1 44:6 73:8

76:21 89:25

91:13

paraphrasing

95:11

parlance 56:22

part 17:10

42:13 44:20

51:20 65:18

70:14 76:10

84:11 95:2

102:5 108:23

113:10 116:1

118:5 121:22

122:15,17 123:5

123:10

particular 15:5

22:13 57:24

62:24 69:5

71:11 82:12

86:9 104:12

114:15,22,25

particularly 4:8

9:16 76:13 81:4

parties 124:14

127:12,14

partisan 19:13

19:17,18 20:23

78:20,23,23

79:3,4 86:14

109:24 114:10

114:12,18

116:19

partisanship

20:3,13,19

78:15 79:1,6

110:13 111:14

111:19 114:13

parts 108:24

115:2,3

party 22:5 79:8

passed 29:21

30:1 79:19,23

pattern 52:14

patterns 10:17

11:7,13 14:19

34:5 83:15

penalties 125:20

pending 6:8,9

pennsylvania

2:6

people 4:9 26:10

37:13 77:18,19

100:25 101:18

102:1,8,10

percent 35:24

36:10,16,19

39:12,13,13,21

39:22 46:8,15

46:22 47:1,9,13

47:15,17,19

48:20 49:1 52:4

52:6,15,16 62:4

62:10,11 73:23

77:19 86:24,25

87:10,10 94:10

113:13,24

117:14,16 118:9

118:9,10,11

percentage

39:11 46:16

52:4,17,19,19

62:9 88:6

117:16

percentages

48:4 114:7

perform 11:11

24:24 34:15

110:5,16 111:1

112:22 117:17

performance

24:21,23 110:3

110:4

performed

115:17

[ordering - performed] Page 149

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 149 of

163
performing

19:4

performs 34:20

35:1

perjury 125:20

person 26:12

79:6

personal 14:3

personally

126:23

perspective 78:6

philadelphia

2:6

pick 77:13 78:7

picked 76:16

77:21

picking 77:23

78:2

picture 107:3

pieces 28:22

pit 18:12

place 16:8 52:22

placed 45:23

49:24

places 58:19

plaintiffs 1:5

2:4 9:14 10:12

27:18 28:2

38:23 112:12,14

115:15,18,21

118:2 120:24

121:23

plan 10:20,21

23:3,7 26:19,19

27:22,25 28:7

29:15,17,19

30:3,9,20 31:18

31:19,19,24

32:16 33:25

36:2,11,12,13

36:18,21,25

37:4,11,23,25

38:10,13,14,16

38:16,17,19,20

38:24 39:6,7,15

39:16,18,19

41:13 43:13

46:2 47:2,16

48:1,2,21,22

49:3,14,20,21

49:23 53:4,25

54:3,5,5,6,6,9

62:3,5 71:24,24

79:19 80:5,21

80:22 81:7,22

82:4,7,10 83:19

83:21,23,23,24

83:25 84:3 85:9

85:12,13 86:17

86:17,17,18,21

86:21,23 87:3,3

87:4,6,7,7,14,16

87:16,21,22,23

90:4,4,7 92:16

92:16,17 93:3,4

93:7,10,25 94:5

94:20,24,24

96:25 98:22,23

102:9 103:17

104:9 105:25

106:2 107:4,5

110:1,2,13,14

112:2,2,18,24

116:15 117:6,9

117:9,10 118:3

118:23,23,23

119:7,7,8,11,14

119:16,23 120:4

120:16,17,17,18

121:7,9,14

122:4,9,10,11

122:14

plans 12:3 27:18

28:3 29:20,23

30:11 44:17

71:8 82:5 90:5

90:15,22 93:1

93:12,13 112:12

112:15,21 113:4

115:18 119:15

119:17,18,25,25

120:3,6 122:3,5

123:2

plausible 70:24

play 111:24

please 3:6,22

5:1 6:4 33:2

89:5,22 124:11

plurality 41:6

63:13

plus 106:23

point 5:23 6:3

7:17 17:10

27:13 28:17,19

52:17 64:12

67:19 78:5

90:20

points 4:20 16:9

52:19,19 57:12

117:16

police 108:6

policy 20:17,17

political 14:11

14:16 20:14

24:21,23 58:6

politically 20:6

politics 68:10,22

79:20 80:11

population 9:13

23:19,21,22

32:4,23 35:4,20

35:23 37:5,7,14

40:4,25 41:15

42:13,13,21,23

43:4,20 46:8

47:10,14,20,24

48:7,21 49:2,10

49:25 50:1,3,4

50:21 51:10,21

52:7,10,11 59:2

60:11,13 61:20

62:2 63:12,18

65:14,15 71:16

72:15 76:7,16

76:18 77:3,10

77:13,18 78:10

78:11 83:14,15

86:14 90:11

98:7 99:3 100:9

100:20,22 101:7

[performing - population] Page 150

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 150 of

163
101:23 103:10

117:15 118:11

118:21 120:11

121:19

populations

118:9 119:21

portion 51:19

59:10 60:12,12

60:14,15 66:19

97:17 109:23

122:23

portions 10:18

25:11 28:23

30:23 40:15,22

42:18 45:5,9

58:15 64:6

66:18 70:15

73:10 121:12

position 20:20

27:3 91:2

109:17

positive 18:22

possibility 32:1

possible 38:4

59:5,8 76:15

93:23 111:6

potential 18:11

practice 33:6

precinct 14:12

45:18 46:5,7

47:20 48:5,9,19

49:1,9 51:17,18

52:2 54:9,23

55:8 57:18 59:1

59:10,21 60:10

64:4,13,16,17

64:24 66:9,19

66:19,21 67:5

73:16,19,23

74:25 113:13

precincted

33:19 44:19

precincts 9:22

10:17,18 11:8

24:10,13,16,17

24:20 25:10,11

30:22,23 31:14

31:15 33:6,10

33:15,18,24

40:9,16,18,21

42:15 44:12,14

44:16,22,24

45:9,14,14,23

49:7 51:13,24

51:25 52:18

53:5,10 54:14

54:16,22 55:2

55:10,13,15

57:24 58:3,14

58:15 59:5,8,14

59:15,16,20

60:1,6,8,23 61:3

61:19 64:3,4,10

65:24 66:22

67:9 72:11

83:16 93:23

113:15,20,22

precisely 51:7

predetermined

37:6

predominant

91:8

predominated

92:24

preexisting

54:18 62:1 65:1

preference

20:16

preferences

75:15

premise 20:25

preparation

10:8

prepare 10:3,5

10:11

preparing 14:3

present 2:13

presentation

26:18

presentations

13:17

presented 3:4

26:16 27:18

118:3

preset 38:11

president

110:19 111:2,8

presidential

19:1,3,21 110:7

previous 30:11

90:6

primarily 63:15

64:23 92:4

primary 69:15

primer 15:10

printed 13:12

prior 68:19

priorities 71:19

priority 71:22

71:22

probably 4:23

45:1 61:9 71:16

96:23 117:2

probative 19:11

problem 5:6

61:11

problematic

44:4,9,25 54:13

64:2 90:9,13

91:1,3

procedure

124:24,25

proceedings

53:1 75:22

109:21 126:2

process 25:16

42:14 44:20

59:14 68:11,12

68:14,17

processes 68:20

produced

126:23,24

progress 13:16

proper 9:16,19

29:6 37:19,25

38:14

proposals 81:10

proposed 28:3

29:18,24 30:1,4

[population - proposed] Page 151

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 151 of

163
81:1 82:3 83:18

83:19 112:14,18

115:18,21

116:13

provide 4:12,16

9:2,6,24 114:20

provided 8:23

9:4 10:7 11:5,19

13:20 16:13

18:5 19:5 21:9

21:12 22:20

70:9 107:14

108:3,5,10

providing 4:11

56:5

public 1:23

126:6,18

publishing 14:5

purely 115:21

purple 60:12

purposes 5:8

27:7 42:20

106:8 112:12

pursuant 1:24

push 109:18

put 59:23 66:3

90:16 105:6

q

quantify 31:22

quantifying

31:17

quantitative

14:23 15:10

quarter 100:24

question 4:12

4:15,17,18,24

5:1 6:8,9 17:13

20:24 23:15

31:21 32:12

33:1 41:20 50:9

51:3,7 55:1 60:3

82:25 87:11,12

88:9 89:22

92:13 117:3

118:15

questions 4:11

4:21 5:7 83:9,12

115:9

quick 52:21

quickly 5:21

13:1

quite 28:13

102:1,2

quote 116:12

r

r 125:3,3

r21-0485 56:4

race 9:17,20,22

10:19 19:6,12

19:13,13,23,24

19:25 20:1,9

22:22,25 28:24

29:5 31:3,5,7

33:12 35:5 41:1

43:7 51:1 53:7

57:17 58:3,12

58:16 62:1,19

67:10 71:5 80:3

80:4 83:17 86:3

86:6 90:19 91:7

92:4,15,24

99:21,22 100:5

102:15,19,20,21

103:2,13 104:2

104:13 110:18

110:21 111:20

111:21,23 116:3

races 19:4,8,9

21:14,17

racial 23:25

24:3,6 25:11,13

32:20 33:7 34:5

34:16 36:25

38:11 39:4

40:16 49:16

50:10 64:2,21

65:25 66:14

67:4 70:17,20

70:23 71:2 72:4

72:7,23 79:24

81:3,13,20,23

91:14,16 96:1

96:24 98:19,21

103:7,11 107:19

107:20 116:17

117:7

racialization

30:11

racialized 28:8

28:17,19 119:15

119:17,18 120:8

120:17

racially 30:9

32:25 38:12,13

54:13 72:13

78:2 92:6,21

94:2 100:3,4

103:3 112:7,24

113:5,5 117:10

117:18,24

118:13,24 119:6

119:17

raise 3:7

ran 21:24

range 8:8

rank 43:21,24

44:3 56:6

rate 7:4

rather 51:19

78:10 81:17

93:24

reach 62:15

80:18 82:19

93:10 99:19

118:23

reached 31:1

51:5 120:7,16

reaching 80:13

read 26:17 39:3

55:22 56:8 69:6

82:9 95:8

116:10,20

123:17 124:7

125:21

reading 70:11

116:12

reason 15:23

69:10 79:1

84:19 86:16

[proposed - reason] Page 152

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 152 of

163
124:9 125:6,9

125:12,15,18

reasonable

124:17

reasonably

54:20

reasons 9:13

32:4 37:5,7

38:21 50:10

85:17,20 86:1,2

86:5,11

recall 5:18 8:22

9:10 16:15 26:1

26:2 27:22 62:2

64:11 69:6

88:20

receding 70:18

receipt 124:16

received 11:1

recent 119:25

recess 53:1

75:22 109:21

recipient 92:22

98:18 100:1

recognize 122:9

record 3:23 5:8

5:15 13:1,2

127:10

records 7:24

redirect 117:4

redistrict 9:13

redistricting

12:3 18:11 23:3

23:7 39:5,14,22

41:1 56:22 57:6

61:6 71:7

redrew 41:4

reduce 66:13

refer 13:7,22

18:25 29:20

32:15 53:18

75:23 81:20

106:14,18

109:24

reference 9:8

15:14 39:3

57:18 74:2

89:24 113:16

referenced

21:13 120:2

124:5

referencing

11:19 65:25

referring 15:2

21:12,20 29:19

32:16 36:3,6

41:21 47:19

52:14 66:6

89:18 93:14,14

95:5 96:7,9

102:3 106:18

113:8,8,22

refers 74:20

reflect 17:24

52:14 104:2,24

117:7

reflected 31:23

50:14 53:8

57:24 58:2,5

59:3 60:9 76:19

85:5 105:6,25

106:9 107:5

121:9

reflection 5:15

reflects 13:8

44:12 56:14

65:25 105:7,9

regard 9:17

124:18

regarding 9:19

50:25

regardless 20:7

20:22

regards 112:1

reject 38:15

78:15

rejected 57:6

78:14 81:8

related 4:22

12:2 20:18

24:20,20 32:9

32:13 68:13

72:21 73:14

74:17 76:11

82:7 83:3 85:11

85:13 86:3

87:12 88:22

90:17 93:3,8,25

95:3 96:4 97:12

98:2,3 99:20

100:6 107:16

110:13 114:14

117:6 119:22

relates 100:19

105:19 112:5

relating 82:9

relation 59:16

62:24 72:9 93:7

relationships

11:14

relative 43:14

74:11 96:25

127:11,13

relatively 99:12

relayed 27:14

released 84:24

relevant 34:21

35:5 54:19 80:7

reliably 29:10

29:12 117:17

relied 9:25 14:3

14:7 15:14

80:17 84:8

relies 82:18

rely 84:5,6

95:15

relying 95:9

remain 37:23

remained 33:10

45:25 46:3,6,9

46:25 51:11,20

58:19 60:14

64:6 73:1,3

remedy 29:18

30:1,4 82:3

83:18,20 116:13

120:25

remember

116:7

[reason - remember] Page 153

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 153 of

163
remind 83:11

remote 2:1

remotely 3:15

removed 97:6,7

repeat 5:2 31:21

32:12 33:2

74:17 89:22

rephrase 5:2

7:17 16:23

20:24 66:5 91:5

92:11

replacement

38:20

report 2:21 5:18

10:14 11:25

12:5,10,15,20

12:23 13:4,20

13:23,24 14:3

16:22 17:15,22

18:15,25 27:16

27:21,24 28:6

30:5,6,22 35:25

41:22 48:10

50:5 53:4,8 54:1

57:15 59:8,22

60:22 61:16

69:7,11,14

70:12 75:24

78:14 80:14

82:2,18,18

83:13 84:5,8,9

84:20,20 85:2

85:11 90:1

93:22 104:4,17

106:13 108:2

109:24 110:11

114:15 116:6,6

116:9 119:13

123:20 127:6

reporter 1:23

3:1,6 4:13 5:12

123:19 126:5,17

127:1,4,21

reports 10:7,8

68:8,9,10,16

114:14 116:1

represent 3:21

56:3 58:6 106:6

117:10 118:7

120:23

represents 47:9

republican

21:17,18 22:5,9

22:11,16 24:24

25:20,24 110:5

113:15,18 114:1

114:5,5,6,7

republicans

20:8 80:2

request 10:24

require 35:2

43:24

requires 34:14

34:25 44:16

research 11:21

12:2 13:16 68:9

80:10 108:2,17

123:6

researched

108:14

researching

14:4

residence 67:22

68:4 69:22,25

70:4

residents 73:21

77:22

resides 63:12

resolution 56:4

82:3 83:22

116:13

respond 117:3

responding

41:20 118:15

responsible

25:17

rest 47:5

restrictive

106:15

resulted 43:13

results 11:5

18:16,23 19:6

22:21

retained 74:3,5

returned 124:16

revamp 121:16

review 11:16

25:3 27:17,20

85:12 124:6

127:7

reviewed 68:8

115:6 122:12

reviewing 80:21

rewrite 71:17

rid 50:3

right 3:7 8:3

12:17,21 32:5

43:2 58:22,23

59:18 60:19

79:2 89:18

96:12 97:16

105:17 115:9

123:16

rights 34:7,10

34:13

risk 69:19

riverside 53:22

roadways 67:1

robinson 2:9

3:20

rotate 42:23

row 55:6

rude 5:14

rule 124:24,25

rules 4:7,8

124:17

run 48:17 78:25

running 66:23

79:7 110:25

111:16

runs 63:15

s

s 2:10 125:3

saying 102:15

says 28:6 56:17

113:9 122:10

scenario 73:11

73:13

[remind - scenario] Page 154

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 154 of

163
scientist 58:6

scientists 14:12

14:17

scope 112:19

screen 42:6

55:20 59:23

71:10 75:24

88:24 96:17

106:9

scroll 44:11

56:1 89:7

second 12:8,20

12:22 18:25

27:23,24 30:5,8

37:16 39:10

43:15 47:9

68:23 69:4 82:2

82:18 83:13

84:9,20 89:21

91:13 109:24

116:6 120:22

section 61:19

70:13 116:10

see 5:10 11:17

12:10,24 36:6

40:16 55:20,21

55:24 56:2,14

59:24 60:3 63:4

65:22 77:17

89:1 90:25 91:6

91:18 121:21

seeking 70:19

seem 119:16

seemed 68:24

seen 120:25

segments

120:11

segregated

28:24 31:7,11

31:12 32:7

38:12,13 112:7

112:24 113:6

117:10,18,24

118:13,25 119:6

segregating

31:4

segregation

34:5 37:1 49:16

72:23

selected 77:1

sense 78:6

sentence 28:6

30:8 36:7 39:2

39:10,16 40:23

95:8

separate 71:1

series 48:16

serve 6:20 78:24

95:12

services 7:2,18

7:22 8:2

set 123:17

sets 39:5,8

several 8:4

90:17

severed 109:11

shake 5:9

shape 11:7

64:15

shapes 10:19

83:17

share 12:9

55:19 71:10

75:24 88:24

shed 42:21

50:11 78:10

sheet 124:10,12

shift 67:3

shifted 50:13

64:1

shore 81:2,12

81:14 94:20

95:25,25 114:18

shored 61:25

shoring 101:22

114:4,7

shorthand 1:23

show 3:2 19:18

51:12

shown 27:11

115:14

shows 112:6

sic 33:19 44:20

sides 109:11

sign 124:11

signature

123:25 126:16

127:20

signed 124:20

126:11

significance

43:17 61:22,24

74:8,14,19,19

74:20 75:6,7

89:24,25

significant

30:17 62:16,21

74:9,11 75:8

94:2 101:4

significantly

28:22 99:18

110:2 121:15

similar 28:13

78:5 83:22 84:2

84:4 91:14 92:2

92:6 96:24 97:3

97:7,8,17

104:16,16

112:23 113:2,3

119:4,24 120:14

120:18 121:8,20

similarities

97:11

simply 45:17

79:2 83:7 93:1

120:10

single 49:9

sit 7:25 84:1

103:25

situation 31:9

size 23:20,20,21

23:22,23 37:8

58:18 74:12

75:9 86:14

100:22

slightly 39:11

sliver 89:16

small 52:15

90:11 102:1,2

[scientist - small] Page 155

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 155 of

163
102:12

socialism 22:9

22:12

sole 95:12

solutions 124:23

somewhat 79:5

sorry 7:17 16:23

20:24 23:16

29:25 31:20,21

32:17 35:14

36:4 48:22 57:1

57:22 60:25

62:8 64:9 76:9

77:16 78:8 87:1

93:9 96:6

100:15 101:9

102:5 108:11

114:24 115:2

sort 91:5 93:21

109:17

sorted 25:13

sorting 9:22

sounds 43:2

75:21 109:19

sources 14:2

15:1 108:5

southern 1:1

southwest 70:14

spanish 6:2

speak 22:12,17

88:11,21 109:3

speaking 15:9

22:4 40:20 43:9

66:10 121:6

specific 14:23

71:21 77:8 95:5

96:15,16 97:13

specifically 15:4

40:7 65:8

122:25

specifics 34:18

speculate 16:1

21:3 69:12 86:7

86:8

speculation

76:4 77:4,5

speculative

115:21

split 33:10,13

45:6,13,13,14

45:21,22 46:2,4

54:15,15,16,16

55:13,15,18

64:3,4,24 65:3

72:12,19 73:23

73:24 75:1

115:1 122:22

splits 44:14,14

46:3,5 51:12,15

52:14 55:8

57:18 59:21

64:23,24 67:5

72:11,25 73:1,2

73:16,19

splitting 33:6,24

spot 99:1

spreadsheet

18:4

stage 11:13

stand 61:17

117:22

standard 11:12

14:11,14 15:2

82:23 83:1,6

standpoint

31:17 39:23

43:7 61:6 74:9

start 23:22 33:4

38:9 103:8

started 3:22

starting 28:17

28:19 41:14

53:20 54:1

starts 5:23

state 1:24 3:22

30:8,12,25 35:8

35:25 40:23

81:2 94:7 126:3

126:6,18 127:2

stated 125:22

statement 28:10

28:16 33:8,9

57:18 80:22,25

96:10 119:12

states 1:1

statewide 18:16

statistical 40:24

74:8,13,18,20

statistically

62:8,12,16,21

74:9

statistics 75:4

118:12

statute 124:18

stayed 52:5,7

stenographic

127:10

stenographica...

127:6

stories 68:24

story 27:3 69:6

street 2:5,10

strike 40:1

70:11 92:2

109:2 111:22

strongly 76:22

studying 14:5

subjective 75:10

75:11,11,12

subsequent

110:8

substantially

70:15 73:9

83:22 104:5

116:14 121:20

substantive

74:19 75:5,7

substantively

75:8

sufficient 35:3

38:20

sugar 5:23 6:4

suggest 75:19

113:17

suggested

124:15

suggests 44:3

77:9 100:5

[small - suggests] Page 156

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 156 of

163
suite 2:10

summarize 25:6

super 43:11

94:25 95:19

97:19 112:21

117:13,22

support 114:18

supported 85:9

113:21

suppose 14:16

17:6,23 68:12

supposed 53:7

sure 3:24 5:14

6:11 8:15 10:6

10:10 16:25

18:10 20:25

23:9,13,22

25:10 31:22

46:22 47:6 51:4

52:23 72:17

107:9

surrounding

70:16 73:10

76:23 78:4

93:23 102:23

103:16,18,22

survey 10:16

15:15,16 84:7,8

84:10,12,16,24

swap 100:3

swapped 53:11

100:1

swear 3:7

sworn 3:15

126:9

t

t 2:11,19 125:3

125:3

table 39:4 44:11

45:20 48:13

51:12 53:4

54:14 55:4,6,11

55:16 57:15

59:9 64:7 89:24

90:3,17 96:16

tables 48:16

tablet 42:4

take 5:12,24 6:3

6:5,10 9:16,19

16:8 18:11

22:23 35:6 45:8

51:18 52:20,23

65:5 66:8 75:20

78:10,11 82:14

100:11 102:19

102:20,21

109:15

taken 1:22

58:12 78:12

97:2 99:22,23

talk 4:9 76:1

78:13 88:25

89:13 91:17

104:18

talking 24:12

48:6 53:19

58:21 63:3 75:4

96:13

talks 13:17

tallahassee 2:11

tandem 44:7

teal 90:3 106:23

tell 8:15 17:11

23:11 40:10

60:7 71:20 77:9

89:19 107:9

tells 27:3

ten 23:14 75:20

101:17

tend 35:8 100:7

tended 81:2,12

81:16

tendency 46:18

101:11

terms 14:7

16:21 20:9

33:12 36:20

40:12 43:14

56:11 63:7,10

71:4 72:7 76:7

80:8 96:21

102:10 104:23

111:17 123:2

testified 3:15

116:5

testify 5:17

testimony 3:8

4:3 115:20

116:7 124:7,16

texeira 1:23

126:5,17 127:4

127:21

text 108:4,5

thank 3:6 42:7

89:11 109:19

theoretically

42:22

thing 6:5,7

41:23 56:2

104:17

things 4:15

13:13 46:24

47:12 56:24

57:3,10 58:11

74:21 83:7

think 33:3 44:12

44:21 55:21

75:5 76:13 80:7

90:12,20 93:25

94:23 107:7

108:4 109:16

112:1

third 39:2

thorough 15:7

three 19:8 25:18

29:10 32:21

41:5 42:24,25

55:9,13 61:16

87:24 94:11,21

95:3 108:9,10

108:15 112:21

117:16,21

time 16:9 26:1

41:24 45:7

69:21 85:2

109:11 123:15

times 23:10

45:15 88:13

[suite - times] Page 157

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 157 of

163
today 7:25 84:1

103:25 115:18

115:20

together 51:15

55:9 105:6

told 9:3 25:15

25:18,20 114:14

took 51:9 55:13

75:4

top 61:15 66:12

66:24 106:20,21

107:2 122:24

total 39:12 48:7

77:19

touch 20:21

42:19

touches 42:17

tourism 107:25

tourist 107:24

towards 122:24

traditionally

65:1

transcribe 4:14

transcript 124:5

124:19 127:8,9

transcripts 25:3

85:12 124:13

translate 31:18

92:8,10

trial 2:21 12:10

12:14 13:4

trouble 69:1

true 19:20 29:14

49:6 51:23

72:23 81:6

87:23 88:1 94:5

117:8 125:22

127:9

trump 110:19

111:2,8 113:13

113:21,24

truth 3:9,9,10

truthfully 5:17

try 29:20 55:19

trying 89:23

92:12 114:1

turned 50:6

turning 94:9

twice 88:17

two 18:13 22:19

25:18,20,24

56:24 57:2 64:3

68:1 71:25

72:11 73:19

80:1,5 82:5 90:5

90:15,22 93:1

93:12,13 98:5

99:3 100:23

104:5 109:11

111:14 116:1

117:16

type 5:22 20:17

121:3 126:24

types 79:20

typically 15:5,6

u

under 13:15

14:2 36:2 37:11

43:13 46:2 47:2

47:16 48:1,2

49:14 82:21

83:5 86:20,23

113:3 124:17

125:20

undercuts 32:24

70:18

underneath

57:15

understand

4:24,25 15:1

20:22 21:5 33:1

38:7 41:3 45:21

51:2 53:7 57:4

59:12 76:1

82:25 92:13

93:6 102:16

105:14 106:5,10

118:19 119:8

120:15

understanding

16:6 17:1,3 21:1

22:8 34:6 41:10

47:7 56:20 63:6

63:11,17 65:13

65:13 67:24,25

70:21 74:15

83:1 105:8,10

108:20,22 114:9

understood

4:17 6:1 62:18

102:14

uniform 45:1,3

45:12

unit 51:13 54:18

united 1:1

units 65:1,2

unpacking 74:1

unusual 61:7

ups 117:2

use 10:15 11:10

14:12 15:25

16:1,3 44:16

61:12 83:13

84:22

used 14:21

15:23 20:13

48:4 54:15,16

58:9 83:1 84:19

105:3 124:20

using 50:19

51:13 64:15

utilize 44:22

utilized 14:11

21:17

utilizing 38:1

v

v 124:3 125:1

vacuum 46:22

47:4 49:18

vap 36:2,10,13

36:17,21,24

39:4,11,12,13

39:18,21 40:25

47:1,2,15,16

49:13 51:10,22

52:15,16 58:18

58:23 59:5

61:21 64:5 73:2

73:17,18,23

[today - vap] Page 158

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 158 of

163
86:24,25 87:9

90:12 91:16

94:9,12 95:4,20

98:15 99:8,10

99:12,17 108:24

variation 42:25

various 4:20

113:3

verified 3:5

verify 17:17,20

124:8

veritext 124:13

124:23

veritext.com

124:13

verse 11:3

version 38:5

versions 26:15

81:7 107:22

versus 6:21

15:24 32:2

33:11 38:9 58:8

73:25

video 5:10 42:6

videoconferen...

1:10,16 2:4,8

126:2,8 127:6

view 117:19

visitors 108:7

visual 113:8,10

119:1

visually 121:8

voted 25:21,25

26:3 71:23 80:5

voter 57:11

123:11

voters 20:14

25:12 35:11

39:24 40:14

48:5,10 50:11

50:12 74:10

75:8 77:22,23

94:22 96:4,22

97:1 114:8

voting 10:17

32:23 34:7,10

34:13 35:19,22

40:25 47:10,13

47:20,24 48:20

49:2,10 52:6,10

59:2 60:11

61:20 63:11

76:7,18 77:2

83:14,14,15

100:8 101:7

117:15 118:8,10

118:21

vs 1:6

w

wait 4:12

waived 123:25

127:8

want 15:9 22:6

27:2 43:21 47:6

67:3 69:3 75:25

77:24 78:13

89:13 92:10

112:17

wanted 16:20

16:25 17:17

18:10 27:19

53:24 54:4,24

60:15

warren 2:14

6:14,15,18 8:20

way 9:15 19:16

20:14 32:22

34:20 35:1

42:23 45:1,3,6

45:12 50:18

54:16 57:4 61:7

61:10 65:11

66:22 67:6

81:21 83:2

90:16 91:7

104:1

ways 35:12 43:3

114:18

we've 29:22

59:1 60:1 72:8

website 11:4

weigh 64:20

went 86:24,25

87:9

west 122:24

western 115:2,3

122:15,17

white 39:21,24

47:10,13,15,16

61:19 63:11

65:14 77:2

110:20 118:21

whiter 77:10

wholesale 71:17

wholly 55:12

wide 62:20

witness 2:17 3:4

3:11,14 6:21

11:4 12:24

89:10 124:7,9

124:11,19 126:7

wondering 42:8

work 10:3 13:9

15:19 42:21

104:18 110:12

112:10 114:15

118:5

worked 7:7

working 13:16

88:14

works 109:18

world 38:5

worry 57:9

worse 111:1

write 73:8

116:12

writing 27:24

written 8:5 15:4

wrote 10:14

x

x 2:16,19,19

74:22,23 126:23

y

yeah 4:19 14:1

36:6 45:25 56:1

56:2 64:15 89:2

[vap - yeah] Page 159

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 159 of

163
89:10,21 96:19

105:15

year 7:9 8:5

15:15,17 29:21

84:7,13,16,24

years 14:4 16:8

18:19,24 75:3

120:21

yellow 60:12,14

106:21

yo 91:18

z

zoom 4:9 5:5

42:9

[yeah - zoom] Page 160

Veritext Legal Solutions

800-726-7007 305-376-8800

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 160 of

163
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 

Rule 30

(e) Review By the Witness; Changes.

(1) Review; Statement of Changes. On request by the 

deponent or a party before the deposition is

completed, the deponent must be allowed 30 days 

after being notified by the officer that the

transcript or recording is available in which:

(A) to review the transcript or recording; and

(B) if there are changes in form or substance, to 

sign a statement listing the changes and the

reasons for making them.

(2) Changes Indicated in the Officer's Certificate.

The officer must note in the certificate prescribed 

by Rule 30(f)(1) whether a review was requested

and, if so, must attach any changes the deponent 

makes during the 30-day period.

DISCLAIMER: THE FOREGOING FEDERAL PROCEDURE RULES 

ARE PROVIDED FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY.

THE ABOVE RULES ARE CURRENT AS OF APRIL 1,

2019. PLEASE REFER TO THE APPLICABLE FEDERAL RULES 

OF CIVIL PROCEDURE FOR UP-TO-DATE INFORMATION.

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 161 of

163
VERITEXT LEGAL SOLUTIONS

COMPANY CERTIFICATE AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT

Veritext Legal Solutions represents that the 

foregoing transcript is a true, correct and complete 

transcript of the colloquies, questions and answers 

as submitted by the court reporter. Veritext Legal 

Solutions further represents that the attached 

exhibits, if any, are true, correct and complete 

documents as submitted by the court reporter and/or 

attorneys in relation to this deposition and that

the documents were processed in accordance with

our litigation support and production standards.

Veritext Legal Solutions is committed to maintaining 

the confidentiality of client and witness information, 

in accordance with the regulations promulgated under 

the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability 

Act (HIPAA), as amended with respect to protected 

health information and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, as 

amended, with respect to Personally Identifiable 

Information (PII). Physical transcripts and exhibits 

are managed under strict facility and personnel access 

controls. Electronic files of documents are stored

in encrypted form and are transmitted in an encrypted 

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 162 of

163
fashion to authenticated parties who are permitted to 

access the material. Our data is hosted in a Tier 4 

SSAE 16 certified facility.

Veritext Legal Solutions complies with all federal and 

State regulations with respect to the provision of 

court reporting services, and maintains its neutrality 

and independence regardless of relationship or the 

financial outcome of any litigation. Veritext requires 

adherence to the foregoing professional and ethical 

standards from all of its subcontractors in their 

independent contractor agreements.

Inquiries about Veritext Legal Solutions' 

confidentiality and security policies and practices 

should be directed to Veritext's Client Services 

Associates indicated on the cover of this document or 

at www.veritext.com.

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 130-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/10/2023 Page 163 of

163