My Districting | MICHIGAN
Enterprise Redistricting Software & Services by Citygate GIS
10-04-21 CD V3b AE
Loading geometries...
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
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
Stefanie Sedlar
Gratiot County and Isabella Counties share an RESD. Please do not split them across 2 different Congressional Districts.
Anthony Scannell
D1 loos like a bowtie. Hardly any difference than the collaborative one. Virtually just switches-out Warren for Taylor . . really couldn't come up with ANY other configuration for Detroit?
Cassandra M Foley
Midland should not be separated from the Bay City and Saginaw! The Tri-Cities and Flint should be in the same district so that there is a voice in Congress for their common interests. Midland is an active, growing city; we are not focused on rural concerns. This map ignores that fact.
District 10 is horrible. Western Oakland County does not belong in a district with the Thumb.
Sean M
I ask you to keep my county (Muskegon County) undivided on your congressional map. Maps 205, 200, 187 and 180 do this very well. Our county is very interconnected economically and culturally and would be poorly served by being divided between districts. We are a lakeshore community with a maritime focused economy and lifestyles and as such share common interests with similar communities up and down the lakeshore like Holland, Grand Haven, Pentwater, and Ludington. Please group us with similar communities to our north and south, not with Grand Rapids to our east. Grand Rapids is a large city that dwarfs Muskegon. Your maps such as 203, 195 and others that try to connect us to Kent County would be a major detriment to our ability to have our unique concerns heard in Congress. Grand Rapids is not a maritime community, they are a large metropolitan city with very different concerns, and their size guarantees their voice would always be louder than ours. Muskegon would get ignored.
Molly Morrissey
This map is terrible! It places Alma which is a much smaller town than Midland in with Saginaw, Bay City and Flint. Midland is part of the Tri-Cities and should not be seperated from them.
Ethan Edward Fick
The Tri-cities and Flint should be within the same district. These regions share the same watershed, have similar economic activity, and share the same infrastructure. Further, the tri-cities and Flint are witnessing a declining population, due to a lack of new economic activity. Young people are leaving for college and not coming back. The only difference between these communities is their racial/ethnic make-up. Saginaw and Flint have significant Black communities, while Midland and Bay City are majority-white. Although, Bay City has a large Hispanic population. The individuals who believe these communities are different, only do so because of those racial differences. They rationalize this belief by stating they have more in common with the rural 2nd district. However, the only commonality they have with the 2nd district is that it is also majority-white. When these individuals say that they don't want to be within a district, which combines the tri-cities and Flint, because of so-called differences; They are talking about those racial differences. These beliefs are purely based on their individual racism.
Carl L Hamann
Midland county needs to stay on one district!!
Jesseca Elza
Thank you for keeping the City of Midland together with Midland County. My concern is the farming communities like Ingersoll, Mt. Haley, Porter and Jasper (also in Midland County) do not have much in common with Flint/Saginaw communities. Please reconsider adding them back to the rest of Midland County.
Thank you for recognizing that the City of Midland should go west, but farming communities like Ingersoll, Mt. Haley, Porter and Jasper (also in Midland County) do not have much in common with Flint/Saginaw communities. Please reconsider adding them back to the rest of Midland County.
Joseph Sova
This map is acceptable. Thank you for keeping the City of Midland in the westward facing portion of the district.
Amanda Oster
Thank you for recognizing that the City of Midland should go west, but farming communities like Ingersoll, Mt. Haley, Porter and Jasper (also in Midland County) do not have much in common with Flint/Saginaw communities. Please reconsider adding them back to the rest of Midland County.
Ted Dyson
Bad map. Divides Muskegon needlessly and draws half our county in with Grand Rapids where they will be overshadowed and ignored next to that huge city. Please adopt map #205. That is a much superior plan that keep Muskegon and adjacent lakeshore areas together as a community of interest, and allows Grand Rapids and it's surrounding suburbs to be their own separate community of interest focused on their own concerns.
katrhleen curell
This map took Midland out of the Great Lakes region, away the TRI CITIES and Flint, and grouped it with a big western area of the state. Im not at all in favor of it.
cheryl scales
Keep Kent County together. Better that you have Rockford with Grand Rapids, but surrounding townships of Algoma and Courtland should be with Rockford in Kent County.
Jennifer Austin
Not in favor of this district at all. The City of Midland should be in District 11 with Saginaw, bay City and flint. Tuscola County should be with the Thumb, which would allow for more of Midland County in this district and less taking from Macomb and Oakland in the Thumb district.
This doesnt represent Troy, Rochester Hills and Sterling Heights.
Merlin Steffes
Kent, Ottawa, and Muskegon counties are being split so as to create a district favorable for a democrat. Folks, this is called gerrymandering. Check out the 3rd. "Independent Commission" since you are so determined towards splitting the City Of Grand Rapids up for state senate and rep. districts, advantage democrats, then surely you don't mind splitting the City Of Grand Rapids, democrat vote, into two different congressional seats
Cassandra M Foley
This map doesn't keep the Tri-Cities together in the same district. It ignores the strong ties that Bay City, Midland, Saginaw, and Flint have with regards to industry, medical systems, culture, and educational systems. Other maps are much better in supporting these communities.
Judah Karesh
Overall changes to Oakland County are a step in the right direction, but in my opinion this configuration is still somewhat flawed. Southfield Twp (not the city to its south) is heavily white and makes no sense as part of a VRA district. Simple fix would be to exchange it for Oak Park and Royal Oak Twp (not the city to its north), which are majority Black, though this would leave #12 ~15k over and #9 ~15k under, but this could be solved by shuffling population through Novi and parts of Wayne county using #8 as an intermediary. On a similar note, either Novi or Rochester/Rochester Hills would be a better fit for #9 than White Lake. I see two potential solutions. Solution one would be to add Rochester/Rochester Hills and push #11 north into #10, and add White Lake and most of Waterford into #10. Solution two would be to add all of Novi to #9 (I think this would more or less balance out, if the Southfield/Oak Park swap is made), add White Lake to #10, and find a way to shuffle pop into #8 from #10.
Lauren Lisi
I can't tell if I like this map or not because I HAVE NO IDEA IF IT IS FAIR.
Sharon Baseman
Version 10-05-21 v1 CD DW made much more sense for a good part of Oakland County. Putting Southfield/Lathrup Village with the other southeast Oakland County cities made far more sense. Breaking off Southfield/Lathrup Village/Beverly Hills/Franklin and putting them with that huge part of Wayne County makes no sense. Those cities should be kept with the neighboring communities of Oak Park, Huntington Woods, Ferndale, Berkley, Royal Oak, etc. as they were on the last iteration of this map. They have far more in common.