This is another good make and keeps Midlands focus on ESG. We will have a greater impact on improving the environment, social, and governance of the area. Midlands future is to the North and South.

This map is better than the other later maps - Grosse Ile has more in common with Wyandotte, Southgate, Trenton, etc and more in common with Ann Arbor and Ypsi than it does the very, very rural areas in the later maps.

The democrats are gerrymandering with the 4th.

This is a great map. Keeps Midland County whole. We are grouped with rural areas around Midland. Many of the workers at my business are coming to Midland from the Gladwin and Isabella counties. This map keeps the City of Midland together with the areas that have experienced the issues with the dams failing and flooding. We have very little in common with Flint and Saginaw. We have very different school systems and the crime rates are very different. The issues that require significant work in Flint and Saginaw are much different than those in the City of Midland. This is a great map.

I truly appreciate this district as mapped. It has connected communities of similar population, industry, and activities. It gives a voice to communities that have shared ideals & outlook that may not be heard otherwise. Thank you for your hard work, dedication, & commitment to our state.

Thank you! I appreciate our rural areas being kept together in District 8 and our communities of interest being considered, i.e., Raisin River, farming communities and lakes communities, schools, hospitals.

This map is good as it keeps Midland County together and with our watershed partner Gladwin county. Midland does not have the urban issues facing Saginaw and Flint and we should be separate in our representation.

If I have clicked on the correct button for my district which includes the City of Jackson in which I live, I wish to thank you for what I believe to be a fair representation of my community. I cannot speak for those several outlying areas that got included which are not in Jackson county, but I do believe that we in Jackson county benefit from working together and being represented together. Thank you.

I like that my community stays in tact. I was worried the lines wouldn't be fair but this looks pretty good and I feel we would be represented in a fair way. Thank you

Thank you for listening to our opinions and concerns. I own properties and have several clients in different rural counties. It helps when these areas share common government regulations and concerns. I appreciate your hard work in all of this! Thank you!

I appreciate that you have kept Lenawee County included with other border counties in the proposed Congressional District 8 map. These counties all have similar demographics, being largely rural and small town communities. As such they share many of the same challenges. Including them in the same district is important in helping their common needs to be efficiently met. Thank you for your consideration in this matter.

I think District 3 mostly makes sense for the City of Pontiac. Including it in a district with Southfield and the southern parts of Oakland County make sense. I do agree that Madison Heights should continue to stick with its Oakland County communities as it has been similar to the changes occurring at the southern part of the county and fits with communities of interest there. This is NOT partisan, my family grew up in Madison Heights and lives in Troy and there's a lot of connection there.

I appreciate the effort you have made in keeping communities of interest intact. I am a board member of the Jackson District Library and spoke at the initial districting meeting stressing the importance in keeping all 13 branches of the Jackson County library community in the same district as we offer many important services to our community. This current map keeps 12 of the branches together, but excludes the Grass Lake Branch located at 130 W. Michigan Ave. in Grasslake, MI 49240. I suggest possibly swapping the small portion of Berrien County with Grasslake (keeping Jackson County whole) to keep the Jackson District Library community of interest whole. Thank you for your consideration!

I like this map. It keeps Calhoun County complete, and doesn't lump us in with Kalamazoo. I feel that my voice would be lost by lumping us in with Kalamazoo and Portage. This map does a wonderful job of keeping my Community of Interest intact. Great job!

Thank you commissioners for your time on this project. I like that you have kept the rural border counties intact (district 8). I think this is important for our communities.

I believe the commission is on the right track here - Including Muskegon with the GR area is probably the fairest outcome in any scenario. The population of the 3rd district without it would have to expand either into rural areas - favoring the GOP - or grab voters from Kzoo and Battle Creek - favoring Dems - to make up for the shortfall. The current layout is rated to have a partisan lean of R +1, which I believe is much closer to the reality of the population in the area trying to be represented. While Muskegon may be on the lakeshore and is certainly distinct in ways from GR, I can only imagine how different Muskegon would be from Mt. Pleasant or any of the rural areas that comprise most of the 13th. Even a short trip up to Sparta or to Newaygo county shows the already stark differences in population, despite their proximity relative to GR. The fine details and compaction can be sorted out with time, but please keep this idea intact. Thank you.

I like this layout.

I really like this map. Lenawee county has a lot of connections and similar interests to the areas you put in District 8. I hope you keep this.

Thank you for all the hard work drawing the congressional district maps. The 8th district does represent our communities of interests with the other rural/border counties. Thank you for keeping rural counties together. Please keep this map as drawn.

I want to thank you for listening to our voices in the more rural counties, by uniting us so that our voices don't get lost, mixing us with more metropolitan areas. Our livelihoods, school districts, and community concerns are similar in these areas, as opposed to those of more urban areas. Also, the counties you have left together share funds, resources, and often collaborate educationally.

Good job keeping the rural aspects of the district intact.

Thank you for your hard work commissioners! Those negative comments in district 6 and 1 are partisan. Warren and Madison Heights fit better with District 1. Troy, Rochester Hills, Sterling Heights belong together. This also represent the Chaldean community! Hopefully we will have a bigger voice and a representative who would care about our values! Please Keep this map as is! Thank you commissioners! :)

This map makes the most sense as it gives those of us in rural communities representation For too many years we were lumped in with big cities and our voices were not valued Our needs are not the same as people who live in bigger cities

This CD is perfect, many shared similarities between the communities. Good job.

I believe keeping Washtenaw whole is important and the Plymouth-Canton community is the most natural partner. Thank you!

I agree this needs to be modified to be a more reasonable shape. That being said, it is absolutely essential that a district like this be drawn. I live in Norton Shores and work in Muskegon public schools. Our school district is a majority students of color including one third Black and 10% Latinx. Nearly 90% of our students receive free or reduced lunch and 25% don't have internet at home. This is the reality of living in a community faced with historical racism and disinvestment. Our kids face real challenges that students in white, more affluent schools generally do not. It is essential that we be grouped with other diverse communities facing similar challenges so that we will have a representative who is fighting for our kids and making sure we have the funding we need to give them the same opportunities their white peers have. #BlackKidsMatter

This is a fair map for the Livingston County area. It's a 50/50 map for partisan purposes. It also respects the wishes of the majority of commenters to keep Livingston County whole and not put us with Washtenaw County.

Battle Creek does not belong with Kalamazoo. I live in Emmett Township, I was injured in Iraq in 2003 from a mortar round. I am unable to move because my home had to be adapted to my limitations. If you put me with Kalamazoo, I will never have a voice. The University students will overshadow me. There are more Veterans here in similar situations. Please don't take away any chance we have left to have a representative who will work on behalf of Veterans. Thank you

Not sure if it's possible to see the map I attached, so I'll describe my suggestion in words: District 4 should include the Muskegon area (Laketon, N. Muskegon, City, RP, Norton Shores, Heights, Musk Twp, Eggleston, Fruitport), the Grand Haven area (GH, Spring Lake, GH Twp, Spring Lake Twp), and the Kent County Grand Rapids Metro (Core 6 plus the first ring of Townships without going into Ottawa County). They should be linked by the portion of Ottawa County that is north of the Grand River (Coopersville, Marne, etc). Then District 9 should get the rest of Ottawa County. To make up for the extra population, District 13 should get Barry County and Richland and Ross Townships in Kalamazoo County.

Putting my dot next to Shannon Moore to piggy back on her comment. Attached is a suggestion on how to draw Districts 4, ,9 and 13 to create a Muskegon-Grand Rapids district that unites communities of interest, rather than just linking townships in a straight line. The entire Muskegon area, entire Grand Haven area, and the entire Kent County Grand Rapid metro area are included, linked together by I-96 and the Grand River. District 9 then includes all of southern Ottawa County - Holland, Zeeland, Hudsonville, Jenison, Allendale. District 13 gets Barry County and a couple townships in Kalamazoo County, which makes it huge and sprawling, but that's what happens when we lose a district and, at the same time, the population consolidates into metro areas like GR, KZoo, and Holland. This suggestion would not change districts 5 or 7.

Muskegon belongs in a diverse district like this, not with a 90% White district where we can't be heard. Please make a more compact version of this.

This map works for the midland county residences

This is a much better placement for Muskegon than the 90% White, very rural district in other drafts. It clearly needs to be fixed up though. Take out Jamestown and Georgetown and add townships in north Ottawa county. Caledonia and Cannon can also be removed if necessary. This will be a much better shape.

Robert Wolfer is incorrect about the VRA. A Muskegon-Grand Rapids district would be about 30% minority, which certainly does not constitute packing from a VRA perspective. In fact splitting these areas could be considered a "crack" under the VRA. Cracking is a bigger concern than packing when you have smaller clusters of concentrated minority population as opposed to very large concentrated minority population like in Detroit.

Like this map

I think it is a good idea to include Muskegon with Grand Rapids because Muskegon has a large Black population. However, this plan was haphazardly drawn and does not do a very good job executing this goal. I'm afraid the public will shoot it down because it's poorly drawn, not because putting Muskegon with Grand Rapids is a bad idea. Many people on the portal have provided ways to make a more compact version of District 4. I think the commission has an obligation to put forward a more reasonable and compact version of this plan for consideration given the public comment regarding disenfranchising Muskegon and western communities of color. What I recommend is extending 4 into Northern Ottawa and removing more exurban parts of Kent and placing them in 13. Then put Southern Ottawa into 9. Move Barry county into 13. Move Southern Berrien (south of St. Joseph) to 8. And extend 9 to Battle Creek. Then adjust from there for population This will create compact and more diverse districts in Western Michigan where voters of color are not being diluted and so heavily split across 4 districts. It also has the added benefit of extending 8 across the entire southern border.

This stretches the definition of "contiguous", but I really do like adding grand rapids and Muskegon together.