We are writing this letter today to express my concerns over the various proposed versions of the State House map that have been presented for public feedback. As residents of the City of Roseville, we are especially troubled with the prospect of splitting of the city into multiple districts. In each of the proposed maps, Roseville, a city with just over 47,000 residents, is divided into two districts; which to our knowledge has never occurred previously. Generally, the proposed maps have several of our most northern precincts in a district that goes all the way to Anchor Bay, creating a significant socioeconomic and geographic disparities while the rest of Roseville in a district that encompasses Eastpointe and portions of northeastern Detroit. The division of Roseville as proposed in these maps would present a significant weakening of our representation in the Michigan Legislature. A district that divides Roseville would not be able to properly address the unique economic challenges, infrastructure needs and interests of our residents. Each proposed map dilutes and minimizes the importance Roseville has, as each district would be anchored in different municipalities with significantly different needs and interests. Roseville should be kept whole in any iteration of a State House map because it has a strong historical foundation and a strong working-class background that deserves fair representation by its state house member. Roseville is a city that is around 5 square miles and is a major transit area that is serviced by interstates, I-94 and I-696, and two major state highways (M-1 Gratiot/M-97 Grosebeck). It is a community that has a significant population of older residents, as well as similar demographical and socioeconomic characteristics with a strong sense of togetherness and community. These proposed maps do a disservice to the community by dividing our voice and placing us in districts where Roseville’s needs will not be addressed or be an afterthought. Roseville is connected closely to its neighbors in Macomb County. We share common school districts (for example, Fraser Public Schools and Roseville Community Schools) and shared common government services such as Parks and Recreation (Roseville and Eastpointe) and emergency dispatch services (Roseville, St. Clair Shores and Fraser). In addition, Roseville and Fraser both share the same District Court (and elect the judges), and shares the current county commission lines. Previous iterations of the state house district have had the entire city of Roseville as its anchor and has include parts of Fraser, St. Clair Shores, Warren and Eastpointe in Macomb County in various forms. The seat has always been in Macomb County. Each city shares common economic, social and political interests as inner ring suburban communities looking to continue their rebirth. To cross county lines into Wayne County would be a disservice to both counties as the needs are much different. As an older, built out suburban community to a major Midwestern city, we also have unique needs that can not be adequately met by dividing our city into multiple districts that will have very few common interests. Our water infrastructure is dated. Public safety is paramount and with a heavy older adult population, adequate housing and services for that population are required. The Groesbeck (M-97) corridor is an industrial hub that the City of Roseville (and surrounding communities) have worked hard to reinvigorate with the assistance of legislative representation that is based from the community who addresses the needs of our community. This industrial hub also extends through the cities of Warren, Fraser and Clinton Township. In addition, the Gratiot (M-1) coordinator is a thriving commercial center that the city is trying to continuously update and improve upon. The City of Roseville also boasts a successfully redeveloped Macomb Mall that is booming when so many shopping centers are not. It is imperative that these economic hubs also continue to be represented by a single representative to help further its redevelopment. Despite great strides, similar surrounding communities that contain Gratiot Avenue (including Eastpointe and Clinton Township), share the need for continued redevelopment of this commercial center that would be best served by a representative who understands these needs and can work in conjunction with the communities along that corridor. One of the major concerns is that in the current proposed maps, it will be very difficult for the City of Roseville to have the Representation it needs in Lansing to allow it to continue to thrive. We all understand the need for fairness in the new map, and it is compounded by population shifts with the need to comply with state and federal statutory requirements. However, if the commission decides to finalize the maps in which the City of Roseville is split in two; we believe that the commission not only fails in its requirement to keep communities of interest together, but that it deliberately breaks one apart. As such, it is critical that any legislative map includes Roseville as a community interest and maintains the entire city within one legislative district; as has been done for decades previously. Sincerely, Zvonko and Lisa Blazevski Roseville MI 48066

I agree with the other commenter. Pontiac has a COI with Auburn Hills (schools, both are manufacturing related economies, social interests and other concerns). To include a random portion of the southern Lakes district in Waterford is ridiculous. There is no COI and very few if any other shared concerns (Waterford is a Township form of government and does not handle its own roads (Pontiac is City), it has its own police department (Pontiac uses County Sheriff), Waterford has its own water system (Pontiac uses GLAA, most Waterford students go to school in Waterford, a large portion of Pontiac students go to school in West Boomfield)). There is no logical reason for this pairing and it is unfair to all; due to the disparate nature of the communities and their needs and concerns, neither will receive effective and efficient representation from the house rep. Fix this.

Troy is in Oakland County and should be associated with cities like Rochester, Rochester Hills, and Bloomfield. We share common interests and goals.

Please change this district. Albion and Battle Creek have significant African-American populations which should be aligned as communities of interest. Both are industrial towns and share institutions of higher education. You could achieve this by drawing a district similar to the current maps.

Please keep our small town communities together! Our small towns in Van Buren are very similar and share many interests. Their communities spread into the outlying rural areas and border one-another. It would be a disservice to break them apart. Van Buren county is one big cohesive community. Breaking it up makes no sense whatsoever.

Splitting the city of Manistee from Manistee county doesn't align with industry and transportation. Manistee and Filer Township have common interests with Onekama and Frankfort in the growing tourism industry (i.e., establishment of major beach front hotels and Little River convention center). Manistee also differs from Mason county and others southward because it is not connected to a four lane highway that facilitates different kinds of economic growth.

Same thing I say on all the maps. I have no idea if they are fair or not, since this information isn't tabulated for me here. Voters who should decide on who has the majority in the state house, not geography. This is especially true in a relatively evenly divided state like Michigan, where voters should actually get what they voted for. A map I made in an hour or two does this. https://districtr.org/plan/50744. Is this true for this plan as well? No idea. Someone clearly knows, but it isn't readily accessible to the public.

Creates disproportionate partisan advantage for Eaton County by packing most Democratic Delta Township in with Lansing. Better idea to keep Delta Township in Eaton County district and replace those voters in the 92d District with southern Ingham County voters (Aurelius, Mason, Onondaga, Leslie, Bunker Hill, Stockbridge)

Southern Oakland County doesn't make sense. The entire southern part of the county - Oak Park, Hazel Park, Madison Heights, and Ferndale, probably Southfield as well - have changed in significant ways at the same time over the last decade and have major interest in staying together.

You've cut the village of Luther in half. Luther has a total population of 306. Do they really need different state reps here?

1. Albion has a significant percentage of African-American residents. I do not believe Albion should be disconnected from Battle Creek. 2. Marshall, like Albion, has much more significant ties to Battle Creek than to all these Calhoun and Jackson County townships.

Silly to break up a County.

I believe that keeping lakeshore communities together in a State House District is most important. Coloma and Hartford have much more in common with Paw Paw than does South Haven. South Haven should be in a district that runs along the west coast of Michigan - included with Benton Harbor and St. Joe. The communities west of I-196 need representation that will advocate for the challenges and concerns of our lakeshore communities, as do the more rural communities east of I-196.

This is obscene. The population of Barry county does not justify being represented in 3 districts... For that matter neither does Van Buren county. Barry and Van Buren residents would find themselves a minority interest in most of those districts. I would hope the commission starts over and chooses to keep as many counties whole. Especially rural, smaller counties.

Battle Creek and Albion should be put together like before. This one misses the population mark of only 89k, off by 2368. This one should look more like the district does now.

This district is significantly too large in population. It exceeds the recommended limit of 91,612 by over 10,000 people. I'm not quite sure why Montrose and Montrose Township were wrapped into this district. Taking those two jurisdictions out would lower the population overage to just 2,400.

Warren is Michigan’s third largest city. Yet under this set of maps, Warren will have no chance of electing a single state representative from within its borders. You have carved our collective power up and distributed it to other cities. This is wrong. The proposal that appointed you specifically requires you to respect city and county borders. No respect was shown here. Michigan’s third largest city is disrespected and destroyed on this map.

This map is ridiculous and offensive. The area north of Dearborn through Lake Orion Township is completely carved up into unrecognizable and disparate districts that defy common sense. Districts 14, 15 and 17 and 21, 22, 23, 30 and 39 are especially egregious. Oak Park and Southfield should remain as one district, especially given the large Jewish populations there. Franklin, Birmingham and Beverly Hills and a portion of Bloomfield should be in 1 district. Pontiac should be in a district with Auburn Hills, and Waterford should remain whole. Royal Oak, Ferndale and Berkley should be in 1 district. This map looks like it was drawn for political reasons and NOT to give fair representation to the communities it encompasses. This is shameful.

Why is Van Buren County carved up like a jigsaw? Van Buren needs to be represented as a whole as one. not divided up into 3 different districts!

I strongly dislike how the Commission has handled Southeast Oakland County. It is very easy to draw a VRA compliant district that keeps Berkley with Huntington Woods and Northern Oak Park, which all share a school district. Additionally, this map splits Ferndale from Southern Royal Oak; two areas which are very similar and have major downtown shopping and commercial districts. Northern Royal Oak is far more "suburban" in the traditional sense, while Southern Royal Oak (specifically looking at south of Catalpa/Gardenia) is far more in-line with Ferndale. Southern Royal Oak has a much greater concentration of medium and high density housing, and faces similar issues to Ferndale when it comes to issues of Housing Affordability, Zoning, and new Downtown Developments. I also oppose splitting Madison Heights from Hazel Park. Ferndale, Pleasant Ridge, Hazel Park, Madison Heights, Southern Royal Oak, and the portion of East Oak Park in the Ferndale School district should be one district. I encourage the Commission to draw VRA districts out into areas that have a history of backing similar candidates in Democratic Primaries (see 2018 Gubernatorial and 2020 Presidential primaries for reference), unlike this Southeast Corner of Oakland County which has a strong record of backing different candidates from not only Detroit, but also the surrounding Suburban areas.