My Districting | MICHIGAN
Enterprise Redistricting Software & Services by Citygate GIS
10-1-21 HD RAS VRA V2
District 1
District 2
District 3
District 4
District 5
District 6
District 7
District 8
District 9
District 10
District 11
District 12
District 13
District 14
District 15
District 16
District 17
District 18
District 19
District 20
District 21
District 22
District 23
District 24
District 25
District 26
District 27
District 28
District 29
District 30
District 31
District 32
District 33
District 34
District 35
District 36
District 37
District 38
District 39
District 40
District 41
District 42
District 43
District 44
District 45
District 46
District 47
District 48
District 49
District 50
District 51
District 52
District 53
District 54
District 55
District 56
District 57
District 58
District 59
District 60
District 61
District 62
District 63
District 64
District 65
District 66
District 67
District 68
District 69
District 70
District 71
District 72
District 73
District 74
District 75
District 76
District 77
District 78
District 79
District 80
District 81
District 82
District 83
District 84
District 85
District 86
District 87
District 88
District 89
District 90
District 91
District 92
District 93
District 94
District 95
District 96
District 97
District 98
District 99
District 100
District 101
District 102
District 103
District 104
District 105
District 106
District 107
District 108
District 109
District 110
Comment Toggle
All Comments
Red
Yellow
Green
Comment Added
Your comment has been added to the map.
Census Legend
Labels visible at zoom level 10.
Labels visible at zoom level 13.
Labels visible at zoom level 15.
Labels visible at zoom level 17.
Current Map Zoom: 8
2020 Census PL 94.171 Data
Loading...
Number of Comments Displayed (Zoom in to show less): 0
Joshua Schriver
Keep Oxford Twp in MI46 with Addison. They have the same school system and are a non-partisan community of interest.
David Bricker
I like the 96th District on this map and the previous one (#193). Keeping Byron Township together with Gaines Township (our neighbor to the east) makes a lot of sense. Byron and Gaines coordinate on utilities and emergency departments and are very similar in community makeup. Combining them with the more rural communities to the south is, I think, a better choice than combining with the urban area to the north. Byron and Gaines are still mostly rural.
Sharon Baseman
I thought the last version of this map was bad, but this may be even worse. A number of the inner ring suburbs that have always been together should have been kept together -- Huntington Woods, Oak Park, Ferndale, Pleasant Ridge, etc. We have nothing in common with the part of Detroit that this map puts us with. And splitting Oak Park makes no sense whatsoever. It should be kept together. This House map should not be combining Oakland County and Wayne County. It should be a totally Oakland County seat made up of a group of the inner ring suburbs.
Joel A Sheltrown
More fair than the old 103rd
Christopher W. Mitzel
On this map #194, district #31 appears considerably more efficient and has a better chance of reflecting common experiences in the electorate, than our preexisting district. As to the equitable distribution of voters within the new district, please reference Fair Maps -- AFL-CIO maps with 0% Efficiency Gap. We deeply appreciate your concerted efforts to produce competitive districts. Once relative fairness is achieved in a district we would expect you to vigorously defend that model. If this can be accomplished without undue partisanship would be Excellent!
Ben McLeod
It must be challenging for the commission to determine what exactly the COI Delton and Mason have with each other...
Catherine A Macomber
I am supportive of this map. I believe it keeps communities of interest in mind for the district that includes Linwood.
Tom
Why is this very small (Elizabeth Lake Road to Cass Elizabeth Lake Road) area of Union Lake and Waterford in a district with Pontiac and removed from the rest of their community? Auburn Hills and Lake Angelus actually have ties to Pontiac, but you choose to include communities that do not? The shapes of these districts make it obvious that this is splitting of these voters communities. These are terrible maps.
Lisa
Why is a tiny slice of Waterford and Union Lake separated from their communities and shoved into a Pontiac district with whom they share no COIs, economic, educational or social interests? Auburn Hills, Lake Angelus (share COIs, schools, social and economic interests) and even Sylvan Lake (shares school district) are better aligned to Pontiac than the area of Waterford/Union Lake in this map.
Vicki Barnett
As Mayor of Farmington Hills and a former State Representative, I strongly object to splitting Farmington and Farmington Hills into 3 separate districts. During the last 40 or more years, these 2 communities have always been in the same district! To break them up is a disservice to the residents of these municipalities that share a common public school district, joint programs and joint citizens commissions are truly ONE COMMUNITY!
Bonnie Jill Haver-Crissman
This Map #194 does a good job with regard to district #31 keeping Midland Co. intact and including the part of Gladwin Co. that shares the Tittabawassee watershed. Also, District #50 keeps Mt. Pleasant with Alma -- both college towns. Thank you for all your hard work to make our districts as fair as possible.
Amanda Klein
Several communities in southeast Oakland County along the 9 mile corridor should be kept together. In Hazel Park we share all of our park services with Ferndale and Oak Park. Our local governments also work together with grant applications and what not. Why- why would we be linked up to Clawson and a small part of Troy? We literally have nothing in common with those communities. Not surprised- you've cut off Hazel Park and Madison Heights from the rest of the county in every other version of your maps. And Highland Park up to Clawson? The district as drawn currently would leave the southern portion of the district with little to no representation-the bulk of voters in a primary would come from Troy and Clawson, which again are places that have zero in common with a Hazel Park or even a Highland Park.
Jeff Ridsdale
The districts in south Oakland county just keep getting worse. It seems like trying to make them racially diverse, which I generally support, they are sacrificing all other priorities. As they are they look very gerrymandered and don't represent any coherent COI.
cheryl scales
Why would you put a small area of Kent County in 100? Move them to 99. You have split up Kent county so many ways, please try to keep more if it together.
cheryl scales
This is better, but it still splits Plainfield Township. If you squared off the line on the south you would included Plainfield in 98 it would work.
Scott Stewart
The entire southern portion of Oakland County is wild in this iteration. Strongly believe it should be changed to reflect the real communities of interest. This definitely just looks randomly thrown together.
Scott Stewart
Adding Pontiac and Auburn Hills would make way more sense than the sliver of Waterford currently included.
Lisa
Still terrible with oddly shaped districts. Livonia is a little better, but look at districts 5,9,16, 21, 29 and 38. A razor thin slice of Waterford and Union Lake are still separated from the rest of their community to be shoved in a Pontiac district, when Auburn Hills is much more closely aligned to Pontiac and would correct the absurdly shaped district 29. Fix it!
Lynn Pottenger
Thank-you for your hard work on this very difficult and extremely important effort. This Michigan House District map (#194) does a good job, keeping Midland County as a single entity, along with some of Gladwin County to provide adequate numbers with very low deviation. This map also keeps Alma & Mt Pleasant, both college towns, together, as district #50. As drafted, this district #31 can address upper Tittabawassee watershed issues, which have been frequently mentioned in others’ comments on different maps. Although City of Midland is not rural, like northern & western Midland County, we do function as an entity already, so this could work well to share Michigan House representation.
Sonja Marie Patrick
The commissioners are still not listening to Calhoun County. You eliminated the hearing for Kalamazoo, and took away any chance I had to speak. You separated the military establishments, which shows very little respect for me and the other Veterans living here. Calhoun County does not need or want to be with Kalamazoo County. Kalamazoo County does not NEED Calhoun County. Kalamazoo County has the population for 3 house Districts without splitting in multiple ways keeping the residents from electing a representative focused solely on Kalamazoo. This makes no sense