Redistricting Miami 

Revised Districting Plan

February 22, 2022

Miguel A. DeGrandy, Esq.

Holland & Knight 

701 Brickell Avenue, Suite 3300 

Miami, FL 33131

Telephone: 305-374-8500

Stephen M. Cody, J.D.

Consultant

Telephone: 786-252-6918

REDISTRICTING MIAMI 2022 - DEGRANDY & CODY 1

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 171-17 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 1 of

33
Table of Contents

Executive Summary 3

I. The Need to Redistrict

II. The Directions Given By the City Commission

III. The Revised Plan

IV. The Areas of Movement to Rebalance Population

V. Coconut Grove

Conclusion

REDISTRICTING MIAMI 2022 - DEGRANDY & CODY 2

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 171-17 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 2 of

33
Executive Summary

The Need to Redistrict

An analysis of the current plan shows an overall deviation of over 42%, thus, the 

current plan is malapportioned and may not be used in future election. A new plan must be 

developed. 

The Direction Given By The City Commission

At the second public hearing on redistricting on December 9, 2020 the city commission 

directed that the following redistricting criteria be used in developing a new plan and their 

order of importance.

• Achieve substantial equality as opposed to mathematical equality in 

order to accommodate redistricting criteria (overall deviation of 10% or less)

• Maintain the core of existing districts and configuration

• Voter cohesion

• Preserve traditional Neighborhoods and communities of interest 

together when feasible. 

The Proposed Plan and the Revised Directions

On February 7, 2022, the consultants presented a plan to the City of Miami City 

Commission and the public. At that time, the areas of change were highlighted. The 

Commission discussed that preliminary plan and provided additional direction including 

allowing use of population south of US 1 to be moved to other districts as needed to balance 

population. Additional changes were requested including restoring some areas back to their 

original district.

REDISTRICTING MIAMI 2022 - DEGRANDY & CODY 3

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 171-17 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 3 of

33
The Areas of Movement to Rebalance Population

Some significant movements of population were made in order to comply wit

Constitutional requirements. In total, consultants moved almost 24,000 of the more than 

28,000 excess population of D2 into other districts. Of those:

• Approximately 10,500 people were moved into D5

• Approximately 12,100 people were moved into D4

• Approximately 1,400 people were moved into D3

• Slight adjustments were made to the north boundary between D1 and D5

• Roughly 6,100 people were moved from D4 to D3

• A net of roughly 5,300 were moved from D5 to D1

The Revised Plan

Revisions were made to the Preliminary Plan we presented based on additional 

direction provided at the February 7, 2022 meeting by the Commission. Some of the 

highlights of the Revised Plan include: 

• Reduction of the number of residents moved from the Grove to other 

districts in the Preliminary Plan by more than half, from 6,384 to 

2,989.

• Reduction in the number of black residents moved from D2 to D4, 

from 497 to 114.

• The MRC returned to D5.

• Slight increase in the total Black population of D5.

• Slight increase of the Black voting age population in D5 above 50%.

• Increase in overall deviation from 3.81% in our preliminary plan to 

7.6% in the Revised Plan.

REDISTRICTING MIAMI 2022 - DEGRANDY & CODY 4

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 171-17 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 4 of

33
I. The Need to Redistrict

This is the City of Miami. Each of the bounded areas within the heavy black outline is a 

Census block. The term “Census block” is a bit of a misnomer, because a Census block can 

actually contain more than one area bounded by all sides by streets, highways, waterways, 

coastlines, or any other natural or manmade boundaries. 

In 2010, the total population of the City of Miami was 399,489. By the time of the 2020 

Census, that number had grown to 442,241, an increase of 42,752 residents or a 10.7 percent 

increase in population. 

One of the core terms in redistricting is the idea of “ideal population”, that is, taking the 

total population for the jurisdiction and dividing it by the number of districts. For Miami, 

REDISTRICTING MIAMI 2022 - DEGRANDY & CODY 5

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 171-17 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 5 of

33
that would mean dividing the population of 442,241 by five districts, which would mean tha

a “ideal” district would have a population of 88,448.2. The amount of population over or 

under the ideal is the amount of deviation and the amount of deviation divided by the ideal 

district size is the percent deviation. 

The population of the five existing City Commission districts, the deviation, and th

percentage deviation was as follows on April 1, ,2020: 

District 2 has the highest deviation at 32.09 percent and District 3 has the lowest 

deviation at -10.26 percent. Combined, the plan has a total deviation of 42.35 percent, more 

than four times higher than permitted. Thus, the present plan could not be used in the 2023 

election. 

District Population Deviation % Deviation

1 80,863 -7,515 -8.50%

2 116,742 28,364 32.09%

3 79,309 -9,069 -10.26%

4 81,800 -6,578 -7.44%

5 83,176 -5,202 -5.89%

REDISTRICTING MIAMI 2022 - DEGRANDY & CODY 6

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 171-17 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 6 of

33
II. The Direction Given By The City Commission

The Miami City Commission provided direction with regard to the criteria that were to 

be used in drafting a new redistricting plan. The “prime directive” was that any plan 

developed to redistrict the City had to first comply with the United States Constitution an

the Voting Rights Act. The Commission then ranked several other common redistricting 

criteria, as follows:

Maintain the Core of Existing Districts

The new plan should maintain the core of existing districts to avoid voter confusion. 

The maintenance of the core of a district will keep as much of the population of an existing 

district together as feasible, to the extent possible in meeting constitutional and statutory 

criteria.

Substantial Equality of Population

The next criteria adopted by the City Commission was that the plan should achieve 

substantial equality of population, as opposed to strict mathematical equality. Congressional 

plans must meet the equal protection requirement of the Fifth Amendment of the 

Constitution. Courts have interpreted this to mean that districts must be as nearly equal as is 

practicable. For example, in the reapportionment after the 2000 Census, the Florida House 

adopted a Congressional map where the difference between the most populous district and 

the least populous was one person. Under the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause, a 

plan with a total deviation under 10 percent will carry a rebuttable presumption of 

correctness. 

REDISTRICTING MIAMI 2022 - DEGRANDY & CODY 7

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 171-17 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 7 of

33
Maintain Communities of Interest and Neighborhoods

The third criteria is that 

the plan should strive to 

maintain communities of 

interest and neighborhoods, 

where feasible. The City has 

numerous recognized 

neighborhoods. The authors 

of this plan were cognizant of 

these different 

neighborhoods. The map to 

the right shows the 

approximate locations of the 

neighborhoods. 

Many of these 

traditional neighborhoods were already split in the current plan. Moreover, the direction to 

keep as much of the configuration and core of the districts, as well as the need to balanc

population did not allow for full implementation of this directive.

Factor in Voter Cohesion

The final traditional redistricting factor was that the plan should factor in vote

cohesion. This criteria involves examining how an existing district tends to vote in high 

profile elections, how areas that are moved from one district to another vote, and how th

new districts tend to vote as a whole. 

Common Redistricting Criteria Not Included

Two common criteria which were not included on the list of redistricting factors the 

authors of this Report and the Revised Plan were directed to follow were contiguity and 

compactness. 

Contiguity is the ability to travel from one area of a district to all other areas without 

having to traverse another district. There is no requirement in either the Florida Constitution, 

state statutes, or the City of Miami Charter that mandates that municipal districts be 

REDISTRICTING MIAMI 2022 - DEGRANDY & CODY 8

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 171-17 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 8 of

33
contiguous. However, the authors of this Report and the Revised Plan designed each of the 

five districts to be contiguous

Requiring districts to meet some mathematical goal in terms of their compactness 

would be difficult, if not impossible, when considered in light of the criteria adopted by th

Commission for two reasons. First, the size and shape of the City of Miami augers against 

trying to make the districts compact. Portions of the City’s boundaries follow disjointed 

roads and streets, rivers, and a long and varied coastline. Second, the criteria that were 

adopted, such as maintaining the core of existing districts, maintaining neighborhoods and 

communities of interest, and factoring in voter cohesion are not items that are dependent on 

how equidistant the theoretical center of a district is to its outer boundaries. For instance, 

given the directive to attempt to maintain the core of existing districts and the long coastal 

nature of present District 2, there was no attempt made to try to shoehorn this district into a 

more compact shape. Accordingly, no attempt was made to try to make the five Cit

Commission districts compact.

REDISTRICTING MIAMI 2022 - DEGRANDY & CODY 9

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 171-17 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 9 of

33
III. The Revised Plan

Taking the criteria adopted by the City Commission and taking into consideration the 

discussion of the Preliminary Plan, the authors of this report drafted a Revised Plan. 

The Revised Plan meets and balances the criteria adopted by the City Commission. It 

meets the requirement of the 14th Amendment in that the population deviation, which was in 

excess of 42 percent has been reduced down to 7.6 percent. The population and the 

deviations for the Revised Plan are shown in the table below.

District Population Deviation % Deviation

D1 88,108 -360 -0.41%

D2 93,300 4,832 5.46%

D3 87,658 -810 -0.92%

D4 86,694 -1,774 -2.00%

D5 86,578 -1,890 -2.14%

REDISTRICTING MIAMI 2022 - DEGRANDY & CODY 10

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 171-17 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 10 of

33
The five districts in the Revised Plan will allow the election of the preferred candidate

of the City’s constituent minority groups, satisfying the demands of Section 2 of the Voting 

Rights Act. 

What follows below is a district-by-district explanation of the demographics of the fiv

City Commission districts. Two elections, the Presidential election in 2020 and the Governor’s 

race in 2018, the two most high profile elections in those respective years, are used a

exemplars on how the districts would perform in future elections. A high resolution map of 

the Revised Plan follows this section of the Report.

REDISTRICTING MIAMI 2022 - DEGRANDY & CODY 11

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 171-17 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 11 of

33
District 1

District 1 is shown above in green. It has a total population of 88,108, with 4,011 (4.55%) 

Single Race White residents, 6,968 (11.08%), 9762 (11.08%) Black residents, and 77,604 

(88.08%) Hispanic residents. District 1 of the Revised Plan keeps 92.07% of the population of 

existing District 1.

District 1 of the Revised Plan has a deviation of -0.41%

The voting age population is 72,844, with Single Race WhiteVAP at 2,523 (3.46%) 8037 

(11.03%) Black VAP, and 65,206 (89.51%) Hispanic VAP. District 1, with a majority Hispanic 

population and VAP would be resistant to a challenge under the Voting Rights Act.

The total vote in the 2020 Presidential election was 26,805 with 13,520 (50.44%) for Joe 

Biden and 13,165 (33.82%) for Donald Trump. In the 2018 Gubernatorial election, the total 

vote was 17,048 with 6,897 (40.46%) for Ron DeSantis and 9,818 (57.59%) for Andrew Gillum. 

REDISTRICTING MIAMI 2022 - DEGRANDY & CODY 12

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 171-17 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 12 of

33
District 2

District 2 is shown to 

the right and runs along 

Biscayne Bay. It has a total 

population of 93,300, with 

34,530 (37.01%) Single Race 

White residents, 6,968 

(7.47%) Black residents, and 

45,415 (48.68%) Hispanic 

residents. The voting age 

population of the District 

was 81,454 with 30,444 

(37.38%) Single Race White 

VAP, 5,902 (7.25%) Black 

VAP, and 39,562 (48.57%) 

HispanicVAP. 

District 2 is a plurality 

districts that will be “up for 

grabs” in foreseeable 

elections between the 

Hispanic and Single Race 

White populations, with the Black population likely to cast the deciding votes. 

The total vote in the 2020 Presidential election was 40,036 with 26,261 (65.55%) for Joe 

Biden and 13,540 (33.82%) for Donald Trump. In the 2018 Gubernatorial election, the total 

vote was 26,615, with 7,650 (28.74%) for Ron DeSantis and 18,766 (70.51%) for Andrew 

Gillum. 

As noted above, over 79 percent of the population of existing District 2 is in District 2 in 

the Revised Plan. 

REDISTRICTING MIAMI 2022 - DEGRANDY & CODY 13

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 171-17 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 13 of

33
District 3

District 3 is shown above in light blue. It has a total population of 87,658, with 7,438 

(8.49%) Single Race White residents, 4,700 (5.38%) Black residents, and 76,485 (87.25%) 

Hispanic residents. The voting age population was 72,466, with 5,611 (7.74%) Single Race 

White VAP, 3,897 (5.38%) Black VAP, and 63,965 (88.27%) Hispanic VAP. 

All of present District 3 is within the boundaries of District 3 of the Revised Plan — old 

District 3 plus subareas 13, 14, and 15. (The subareas are described in the next section of this 

Report.) New District 3 maintains 100 percent of the core of existing District 3. 

The total vote in the 2020 Presidential election was 26,975, with 13,719 (50.86%) for Joe 

Biden and 13,073 (48.46%) for Donald Trump. In the 2018 Gubernatorial election, the total 

REDISTRICTING MIAMI 2022 - DEGRANDY & CODY 14

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 171-17 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 14 of

33
vote was 18,117, with 7,642 (42.18%) for Ron DeSantis and 10,177 (56.17%) for Andrew 

Gillum. 

District 4

District 4 is shown above in yellow. It has a total population of 86,694, with 7,553 

(8.71%) Single Race White residents, 2,774 (3.20%) Black residents, and 76,478 (88.22%) 

Hispanic residents. The voting age population was 73,781, with 5,618 (7.61%) Single Race 

White VAP, 2,267 (3.07%) Black VAP, and 66,055 (89.53%) Hispanic VAP. 

District 4 of the Revised Plan retains 92.54 percent of the population of existing District 

4.

The total vote in the 2020 Presidential election was 35,461, with 15,477 (43.65%) for Joe 

Biden and 19,757 (55.71%) for Donald Trump. In the 2018 Gubernatorial election, the total 

vote was 24,313, with. 12,428 (51.12%) for Ron DeSantis and 11,521 (47.39%) for Andrew 

Gillum. 

REDISTRICTING MIAMI 2022 - DEGRANDY & CODY 15

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 171-17 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 15 of

33
District 5

District 5 is shown to the 

right in purple. It has a total 

population of 86.578, with 

8,310 (9.60%) Single Race 

White residents, 45,182 

(52.19%) Black residents, and 

34,571 (39.93%) Hispanic 

residents. The Revised Plan 

preserves 91.59 percent of the 

population of existing District 

5. 

The voting age 

population was 68,734, with 

7,243 (10.54%) Single Race 

White VAP, 34,551 (50.27%) 

Black VAP, and 27,929 

(40.63%) Hispanic VAP. 

The population of 

District 5, with Black 

population and VAP 

majorities satisfies th

requirement of the Voting Rights Act that the Black population not be diluted such to deny its 

members a district in which they can elect candidates of their choice. 

The vote in the 2020 Presidential election was 31,418, with 26,109 (83.10%) for Joe Biden 

and 5,084 (16.18%) for Donald Trump. In the 2018 Gubernatorial election, the vote was 22,919, 

with 1,940 (8.46%) for Ron DeSantis and 20,786 (90.69%) for Andrew Gillum. 

REDISTRICTING MIAMI 2022 - DEGRANDY & CODY 16

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 171-17 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 16 of

33
IV. The Areas of Movement to Rebalance Population

In order to rebalance the population among the five City Commission districts, a total o

11 discrete subareas were identified for movement from one district to another  District 2, th

most overpopulated district, was the most frequent donor district with six areas designated 

for movement. The other five movement areas were among and between Districts 1, 3, 4, an

5. 

The map above separately labels the movement areas as districts with numbers higher 

than 5.

Each of the areas are demographically described below as well as shown on individual 

submaps, the narrative shown below also contain data on the estimate of how the voters in 

REDISTRICTING MIAMI 2022 - DEGRANDY & CODY 17

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 171-17 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 17 of

33
each subarea voted in the 2020 Presidential election between Donald Trump and Joe Biden 

and the 2018 Governor’s race between Ron DeSantis and Andrew Gillum. 

Area 6

The area is moved from District 5 to District 1 and is described as follows: Begin at the 

Miami River and Dolphin Expressway, then northeast to NW 7th Avenue, then south to NW 

8th Street, then east to I-95, then south on I 95 to the Miami River, then NW on the Miami 

River to the point of origin. 

It has a total population of 5,993, with 581 (9.69%) Single Race White residents, 1,337 

(22.31%) Black residents, and 4,138 (69.05%) Hispanic residents. The voting age population 

was 5,155, with 501 (9.72%) Single Race White VAP, 1,088 (21.11%) Black VAP, and 3,647 

(70.75%) Hispanic VAP. 

REDISTRICTING MIAMI 2022 - DEGRANDY & CODY 18

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 171-17 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 18 of

33
The vote in the 2020 Presidential election was 2,278, with 1,528 (67.08%) for Joe Biden 

and 731 (32.1%) for Donald Trump. In the 2018 Gubernatorial election, the vote was 1,432, 

with 325 (22.70%) for Ron DeSantis and 1,081 (75.49%) for Andrew Gillum.

Area 7

Area 7 moves the area shown from District 1 to District 5 -It can be described as: begin 

at NW 36 ST and I-95, then west on NW 36 Street to NW 8th Avenue, then south on NW 8th 

Avenue to NW 32nd Street, then east on NW 32nd Street to I-95 , then north to the point of 

origin. 

It has a total population of 329, with 10 (3.04%) Single Race White residents, 120 

(36.47%) Black residents, and 216 (65.65%) Hispanic residents. The voting age population was 

240, with 5 (2.08%) Single Race White VAP, 89 (37.08%) Black VAP, and 160 (66.67%) Hispanic 

VAP. 

REDISTRICTING MIAMI 2022 - DEGRANDY & CODY 19

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 171-17 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 19 of

33
The vote in the 2020 Presidential election was 83, with 60 (72.29%) for Joe Biden and 23 

(27.7%) for Donald Trump. In the 2018 Gubernatorial election, the vote was 54, with 8 

(14.81%) for Ron DeSantis and 46 (85.19%) for Andrew Gillum.

Area 8

Area 8 moves a portion from District 5 to District 1 which can be described as follows: 

begin at NW 36 Street and NW 12 Avenue, then north on NW 12th Avenue to the 112 

Expressway, then west along the 112 to the City boundary, then south on NW 19th Avenue to 

NW 36 Street, then back along NW 36th Street to point of origin.

It has a total population of 995, with 32 (3.22%) Single Race White residents, 309 

(31.06%) Black residents, and 749 (75.28%) Hispanic residents. The voting age population was 

791, with 12 (1.52%) Single Race White VAP, 261 (33.00%) Black VAP, and 606 (76.61%) 

Hispanic VAP. 

The vote in the 2020 Presidential election was 422, with 363 (86.02%) for Joe Biden and 

56 (13.3%) for Donald Trump. In the 2018 Gubernatorial election, the vote was 323, with 21 

(6.50%) for Ron DeSantis and 301 (93.19%) for Andrew Gillum.

REDISTRICTING MIAMI 2022 - DEGRANDY & CODY 20

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 171-17 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 20 of

33
Area 10

Area 10 is the area 

shown in red to the right 

and was moved from 

District 2 to District 5. It 

can be described as: 

begin at Biscayne Blvd 

and I-195, then west on 

I-195 to NE 2nd Avenue, 

then south on NE 2nd 

Avenue to NE 22 Street, 

then west on NE 22nd 

Street to NW 1st 

Avenue, then south on 

NW 1st Avenue to the 

I-395 Expressway, then 

east on the I-395 to NE 

2nd Avenue, then north 

on NE 2nd Avenue to 

NW 36 Street, then east 

on NW 36th Street to 

Biscayne Blvd , then 

north to the point of 

origin.

It has a total 

population of 7,859, 

with 2,358 (30.00%) Single 

Race White residents, 834 (10.61%) Black residents, and 4,304 (54.77%) Hispanic residents. 

The voting age population was 7,164, with 2,169 (30.28%) Single Race White VAP, 721 

(10.06%) Black VAP, and 3,930 (54.86%) Hispanic VAP. 

The vote in the 2020 Presidential election was 2,905, with 2,016 (69.40%) for Joe Biden 

and 870 (29.9%) for Donald Trump. In the 2018 Gubernatorial election, the vote was 1,384, 

with 288 (20.81%) for Ron DeSantis and 1,089 (78.68%) for Andrew Gillum.

REDISTRICTING MIAMI 2022 - DEGRANDY & CODY 21

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 171-17 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 21 of

33
Area 11

Area 11 is shown above in lime green. It moves population from District 2 to District 5 

and can be described as: begin at NE 2nd Avenue and I-395, then west on I-395 to NW 1st 

Avenue, then south on NW 1st Avenue to NE 10 Street, then east on NE 10th Street to NE 2nd 

Avenue, then north to the point of origin.

It has a total population of 44, with 0 (0%) Single Race White residents, 23 (52.27%) 

Black residents, and 25 (56.82%) Hispanic residents. The voting age population was 30, with 0 

(0%) Single Race White VAP, 19 (63.33%) Black VAP, and 18 (60.00%) Hispanic VAP. 

The vote in the 2020 Presidential election was 12, with 8 (66.67%) for Joe Biden and 3 

(25.00%) for Donald Trump. In the 2018 Gubernatorial election, the vote was 7, with 0 (0%) 

for Ron DeSantis and 6 (85.71%) for Andrew Gillum.

REDISTRICTING MIAMI 2022 - DEGRANDY & CODY 22

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 171-17 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 22 of

33
Area 12

Area 12 is shown on the right 

in orange and moves population 

from District 2 to 5. It can be 

described as: begin at corner of NE 

2nd Avenue and NE 8th Street, 

then west on NE 8th Street to the 

Metrorail tracks, then south on the 

Metrorail tracks to SW 3rd Street, 

t=en east on SW 3rd Street to South 

Miami Avenue, then north on 

South Miami Avenue to SW 2nd 

Street, then east on SW 2nd Street 

to SW 2nd Avenue, then north on 

SW 2nd Avenue to the point of 

origin. 

It has a total population of 

2,593, with 556 (21.44%) Single 

Race White residents, 826 (31.85%) 

Black residents, and 1,224 (47.20%) 

Hispanic residents. The voting age 

population was 2,494, with 543 

(21.77%) Single Race White VAP, 

804 (32.24%) Black VAP, and 1,166 

(46.75%) Hispanic VAP. 

The vote in the 2020 

Presidential election was 419, with 

277 (66.27%) for Joe Biden and 133 

(31.80%) for Donald Trump. In the 2018 Gubernatorial election, the vote was 221, with 51 

(23.08%) for Ron DeSantis and 169 (76.47%) for Andrew Gillum.

REDISTRICTING MIAMI 2022 - DEGRANDY & CODY 23

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 171-17 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 23 of

33
Area 13

Area 13 moves population from District 2 to District 3. It can be described as: begin at 

US 1 and Alatka Street, then head southwest on US 1 to 22nd Avenue, then south on SW 22nd 

Avenue to Bayshore Drive, then northeast on Bayshore Drive to Alatka Street, then north on 

Alaska Street to the point of origin.

It has a total population of 1,392, with 710 (51.01%) Single Race White residents, 38 

(2.73%) Black residents, and 533 (38.29%) Hispanic residents. The voting age population was 

1,068, with 556 (52.06%) Single Race White VAP, 28 (2.62%) Black VAP, and 402 (37.64%) 

Hispanic VAP. 

The vote in the 2020 Presidential election was 816, with 533 (65.32%) for Joe Biden and 

280 (34.00%) for Donald Trump. In the 2018 Gubernatorial election, the vote was 669, with 230 

(34.38%) for Ron DeSantis and 169 (76.47%) for Andrew Gillum.

REDISTRICTING MIAMI 2022 - DEGRANDY & CODY 24

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 171-17 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 24 of

33
Area 14

Area 14 moves population from District 4 to District 3. It can be described as: begin at 

NW 7th Street and 27th Avenue, then go west on NW 7th Street to NW 32nd Avenue, then 

south on NW 32nd Avenue to Flagler Street, then east on Flagler Street to NW 27th Avenue; 

then north on NW 27th Avenue to the point of origin.

It has a total population of 2,103, with 67 (3.19%) Single Race White residents, 71 (3.38%) 

Black residents, and 1,999 (95.05%) Hispanic residents. The voting age population was 1,820, 

with 43 (2.36%) Single Race White VAP, 59 (3.24%) Black VAP, and 1,752 (96.26%) Hispanic 

VAP. 

The vote in the 2020 Presidential election was 809, with 284 (35.11%) for Joe Biden and 

522 (54.50%) for Donald Trump. In the 2018 Gubernatorial election, the vote was 556, with 335 

(60.25%) for Ron DeSantis and 217 (39.03%) for Andrew Gillum.

REDISTRICTING MIAMI 2022 - DEGRANDY & CODY 25

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 171-17 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 25 of

33
Area 15

Area 15 from moves population from District 4 to District 3. It can be described as: 

begin at Flagler Street and 27th Avenue, then go west on Flagler Street to SW 32nd Avenue, 

then south on SW 32nd Street to SW 8th Street, then east on SW 8th Street to SW 27th Avenue, 

then north on SW 27th Avenue to the point of origin. 

It has a total population of 3,994, with 157 (3.93%) Single Race White residents, 127 

(3.18%) Black residents, and 3,782 (94.69%) Hispanic residents. The voting age population 

was 3,331, with 87 (2.61%) Single Race White VAP, 101 (3.03%) Black VAP, and 3,201 (96.10%) 

Hispanic VAP. 

The vote in the 2020 Presidential election was 1,383, with 566 (40.93%) for Joe Biden and 

810 (58.60%) for Donald Trump. In the 2018 Gubernatorial election, the vote was 904, with 492 

(54.42%) for Ron DeSantis and 401 (44.36%) for Andrew Gillum.

REDISTRICTING MIAMI 2022 - DEGRANDY & CODY 26

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 171-17 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 26 of

33
Area 16

Area 16 is shown above in lime green and moves population from District 2 to District 

4. It can be described as: beginning at SW 27th Avenue and US 1, then southwest on US 1 to 

the City Boundary, then north on the City Boundary to SW 25 Street, then east on SW 25th 

Street to SW 27th Avenue, then south on SW 27th Avenue to the point of origin.

It has a total population of 10,496, with 1,464 (13.95%) Single Race White residents, 377 

(3.59%) Black residents, and 8,541 (81.37%) Hispanic residents. The voting age population 

was 8,912, with 1,208 (13.55%) Single Race White VAP, 320 (3.59%) Black VAP, and 7,291 

(81.81%) Hispanic VAP. 

The vote in the 2020 Presidential election was 3,966, with 2,142 (54.01%) for Joe Biden 

and 1,798 (45.30%) for Donald Trump. In the 2018 Gubernatorial election, the vote was 2,626, 

with 1,105 (42.08%) for Ron DeSantis and 1,489 (56.70%) for Andrew Gillum.

REDISTRICTING MIAMI 2022 - DEGRANDY & CODY 27

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 171-17 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 27 of

33
Area 17

Area 17 moves population from District 2 to District 4. It can be described as: begin at 

the corner of US 1 and SW 27th Avenue, then southwest on US 1to Bird Avenue, then east on 

Bird Avenue to SW 27th Avenue, then north on SW 27th Avenue to the point of origin.

It has a total population of 1,597, with 520 (32.56%) Single Race White residents, 114 

(7.14%) Black residents, and 924 (57.86%) Hispanic residents. The voting age population was 

1,314, with 417 (31.74%) Single Race White VAP, 93 (7.08%) Black VAP, and 778 (59.21%) 

Hispanic VAP. 

The vote in the 2020 Presidential election was 856, with 629 (73.48%) for Joe Biden and 

222 (25.90%) for Donald Trump. In the 2018 Gubernatorial election, the vote was 656, with 140 

(21.34%) for Ron DeSantis and 507 (77.29%) for Andrew Gillum.

REDISTRICTING MIAMI 2022 - DEGRANDY & CODY 28

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 171-17 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 28 of

33
VI. Coconut Grove

The traditional boundaries for Coconut Grove are recognized as roughly bound by 

North Prospect Drive to the south, LeJeune Road (42nd Avenue) to the west, South Dixie 

Highway (US 1) and Rickenbacker Causeway to the north, and Biscayne Bay to the east. 

(This includes a portion of land to the west of the City of Miami boundaries.) for the 

purposes of this analysis, Coconut Grove will be assumed to include the land bordered by the 

City boundary at US 1, along US 1 to the Rickenbacker Causeway, the Rickenbacker to 

Biscayne Bay, then across Biscayne Bay to the City’s southern boundary at North Prospect 

Drive, then along North Prospect Drive to the western City boundary, then along the western 

City boundary back to the point of origin. The demographics of Coconut Grove is as follows: 

The Preliminary Map moved an area bounded by Day Avenue to the south, 27th 

Avenue to the east, and US 1 to the north from District 2 into District 4. That area had a 

population in excess of 5,000 persons. The Revised Map does not go as deep into Coconut 

Grove as the Initial Map did. The Revised Map, as previously discussed, took a triangle that 

is bordered by US 1 to the north, Bird Avenue to the south and SW 27th Avenue to the east. 

The demographics of this smaller triangle are as follows: 

Table 1 - Population and Voting Age Population of Coconut Grove - 2020 Census

Total Population 21,301

 Single Race White Population 9,260

 Black Population 2,647

 Hispanic Population 8.516

Voting Age Population 17,245

 Single Race White Voting Age Population 7,675

 Black Voting Population 2,097

 Hispanic Voting Age Population 6,843

REDISTRICTING MIAMI 2022 - DEGRANDY & CODY 29

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 171-17 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 29 of

33
While the entire Grove as defined above has a population of 21,301, this area that wil

adjoin District 3 south of US 1 has a population of 1,597, with a Black population of 114, or 

about 0.54 percent of the total population in the Grove and 4.31 percent of the Grove’s Black 

population. 

There is a second portion of the Grove, presently in District 2 that has been moved into 

District 3. That area was referenced in the preceding section of this Report as Area 13 which 

can be described as: Begin at US 1 and Alatka street, then SW on US 1 to 22nd Avenue, then 

south to Bayshore Drive, then northeast on Bayshore Drive to Alatka, then north on Alatka to 

the point of origin. The demographics of this area are: 

Table 2 - Population and Voting Age Population of Area 17 - 2020 Census

Total Population 1,597

 Single Race White Population 520

 Black Population 114

 Hispanic Population 533

Voting Age Population 924

 Single Race White Voting Age Population 417

 Black Voting Population 93

 Hispanic Voting Age Population 778

Table 3 - Population and Voting Age Population of Area 13 - 2020 Census

Total Population 1,392

 Single Race White Population 710

 Black Population 38

 Hispanic Population 533

Voting Age Population 1,068

 Single Race White Voting Age Population 556

 Black Voting Age Population 28

 Hispanic Voting Age Population 402

REDISTRICTING MIAMI 2022 - DEGRANDY & CODY 30

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 171-17 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 30 of

33
This triangle south of US 1 has a population of 1,392, with a Black population of just 38, 

or about 0.18 percent of the total population in the Grove and 1.44 percent of the Grove’s 

Black population. 

It is the opinion of the authors of this Report that the movement of a total of 5.75 

percent of the Black population of the Grove out of District 2 will not give rise to a successful 

challenge under either the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution or under 

Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. 

REDISTRICTING MIAMI 2022 - DEGRANDY & CODY 31

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 171-17 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 31 of

33
Conclusion

The Revised Plan was drafted to meet the requirements of the 14th Amendment. The 

total deviation — the measure between the district that is most above the ideal population 

and the most below the ideal — is 7.6 percent, well below the accepted 10 percent bright line. 

Further, the plan as drawn was not driven by racial considerations. However, 

consultants were conscious of race and ethnicity to the extent necessary to comply with the 

Voting Rights Act. The former is illegal. The latter is permissible. In short, the Revised Plan 

was drawn in a manner that gives minority voters an equal opportunity to elect candidates of 

their choice. 

The Revised Plan meets the prime directive that the plan should abide by the 

Constitution and the Voting Rights Act. The Revised Plan also substantially meets each of the 

other adopted redistricting criteria. 

The Revised Plan meets the requirement of maintaining the core of existing districts. 

District 2, the most over populated district, still kept 79.92 percent of its prior population in 

District 2 of the Revised Plan. The area of each of the other districts that was not moved 

ranged from 91.60 percent in District 5 to 100% in District 3.

The Revised Plan also has substantial equality of population. Rather than trying to 

achieve strict mathematical perfection, the plan stays well within the allowable 10 percent 

deviation threshold. This permits the creation of a District 5, with a majority of Black 

population and voting age population and three districts, Districts 1, 3, and 4, with majority 

Hispanic population and voting age populations. District 2 will continue to be a swing 

district with a plurality of Single Race White and Hispanic populations.

The revised plan also takes into account to the extent practicable, issues of voter 

cohesion. When possible, the consultants looked to bring areas into a district that had similar 

demographics and voting patterns. This could not be fully achieved based on the overriding 

need to balance population and stay within acceptable deviation parameters.

The final criteria, to be followed where practicable, was to respect communities o

interests and neighborhoods. There was some pushback from the dais and the public 

speakers over the splitting of Coconut Grove. In the prior redistricting of the City of Miami 

after the 2000 and 2010 Census enumerations, the authors of this Report were able to treat US 

1 like the Rubicon, a line that would not be crossed. However, ten additional years of 

development and population growth meant that we were not able to hold this line.

REDISTRICTING MIAMI 2022 - DEGRANDY & CODY 32

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 171-17 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 32 of

33
 To the south, District 3 had to acquire population from District 2. The preliminary Plan 

saw a portion of lower District 2 comprising over 5,000 persons moved into District 4. By 

making movements in other areas, the authors of this Report were able to lower the 

population from south of US 1 that was needed to shore up District 4 to 1,597, a reduction of 

about 70 percent. 

In summary, the Revised Plan is legally sound and substantially meets all of the criteria 

adopted by the Miami City Commission.

REDISTRICTING MIAMI 2022 - DEGRANDY & CODY 33

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 171-17 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 33 of

33