Muskegon will completely control district 13

Another poor map which like the others combines Troy with east side cities where there is no community of interest. Troy is aligned with Bloomfield Hills, Auburn Hills, Rochester Hills, Birmingham, Royal Oak. Troy does not belong with Eastpointe, St Clair Shores, Mt Clemens, Clinton Township. Those east side cities belong with the suburbs north of M59.

I don't understand the logic of splitting South Lyon away from Oakland County and putting Plymouth with Oakland County. Swap the areas and the map is not bad. Rochester Hills, Rochester and Oakland Township are not communities of interest with St. Clair lake areas.

Kalamazoo is not represented well in this map.

Jamestown Charter Township is a mostly rural community, with barely 20% of the Township being serviced by Public Water and Sewer and about 2/3 of the Township is zoned Agricultural. As a resident, I am pleased to be a part of the interconnected community known as Ottawa County, a unique Community of Interest whose smaller cities and townships share economic and agricultural ties. Jamestown Charter Township should not be lumped in with Kent Count or the Grand Rapids area but remain with Ottawa County. Keep Jamestown Township as part of the Ottawa County Community when redistricting.

Please remove this cut out (Lyndon Township) and keep the Chelsea community and Washtenaw Co together. I see this proposed on many maps and strongly object. Please keep the county boundaries lines intact whenever possible.

This map hurts us in Monroe. It splits us off from our natural Downriver community of interest. All of our major corridors in the eastern part of Monroe: Telegraph, I-75, and I-275, and the lakefront and port, tie us to with the Downriver community. There are no major corridors that tie us way out west to Saint Joseph, or any of those rural areas. Tim Walberg put out a campaign for this map because it favors him. The people that submitted this map are tied to his campaign. This map serves him, it doesn't serve the public, especially not us in Monroe.

This map is too favorable to Republicans

It is completely inappropriate to put Black/African American communities in Muskegon and Muskegon Heights in a district that is 90% White and so heavily rural, especially because of the repeatedly voiced concerns about disenfranchisement. It would be far more appropriate to put it with other communities of color along the lakeshore or in Kent.

West Oakland Co. doesn't belong in the Thumb!

Maple map splits Oakland Co. in ways that disregard all our communities of interest. It doesn't work well and should be scrapped.

This map splits Oakland County in a way that is not consistent with communities of interest.

Please move the prison population to an overpopulated district to address prison gerrymandering.

Please move the prison population to an overpopulated district to address prison gerrymandering.

Birmingham does no belong in a district with Macomb County.

To address prison gerrymandering, move the prison population to an overpopulated district.

To address prison gerrymandering, move the prison population to an overpopulated district.

The map has split Oakland County in ways that are not consistent with any of our communities of interest.

District 8 looks like it was drawn by the sitting Congressman Tim Walberg. Its totally safe and will subject the district to more of the same representation we have now which ignores 1/2 his constituents. I worry the current Congressman who will feel embolden to do whatever he wants without any voter controls.

Birmingham does not belong in a district with Macomb County, this makes no sense.

District 8 benefits from the thousands of individuals housed in Jackson area prisons who are unable to vote or participate in civic activities, and most of whom have no ties to this community. Prison populations should be included in an overpopulated district in order not to sway the size of the actual community population of the district. Likewise, communities most impacted by incarceration (such as in Districts 1, 2, and 6 on this map) should be in underpopulated districts to compensate for their displaced population.

Troy, Rochester, Bloomfield, Farmington Hills, and other communities along the I-696/M-59 corridors have similar populations and similar interests. They should be included in a district together.

Bay City and Saginaw always go Democrat. Midland is usually Republican.

This splits Oakland County up in ways that are not consistent with any of our communities of interest. Birmingham does not belong in a district with Macomb County. Southfield belongs in a district with parts of Detroit.

Another map where Rochester hills is split from our Greater Rochester area. We are a tight community with Oakland Township, yet here we are separated, why? Was anyone in these communities consulted? How about looking at school districts? Our schools usually create a tight community, but you have failed.

The Downriver area would benefit more be more aligned with District 8 than District 7 given proximity and similar cultural communities in Monroe County Just a side comment - I saw many comments about reducing Republican votes in a district - that should not be a criteria for either party !

As an independent voter, this is a plan for Midland city and Midland county that I cannot support. Midland city and county should be in the same district. The city and county have the same flood issues and similar interests with the counties to the north and west.

Again, Troy is being included with cities far to the east and not with those we have more in common with to the west.

This map splits up Oakland county in ways that aren't consistent with any of our communities of interest.

This map is so bad it's hard to know where to begin. It separates strongly connected communities, such as Troy and Birmingham, and joins communities with no intrinsic connection, such as Troy and Clinton Township.

I am not in favor of having Troy, Rochester Hills and Birmingham being put in with great swaths of Macomb County.

Another map lumping Troy in with Macomb County. Unfortunately, Troy has little in common with most of the cities in Macomb County and the financial needs are not compatible. Most Macomb houses are older, their city infrastructure requires more care and their racial makeup is less diverse than in Troy. Please keep Troy in Oakland County.

Taylor, Allen Park, and Lincoln Park shouldn't be cut off from the rest of the Downriver community of interest in District 7. This map also only gives Detroit only 1 District in violation of the VRA.

Troy should not be lumped into any district with Macomb county. Terrible.

Southwest Oakland County shouldn't be group with Thumb communities. It is a three hour drive from Milford to Port Austin, and I don't think they have much that connects them.

This map has split Oakland County in ways that are not consistent with any of our communities of interest

This Map splits Troy and Rochester’s large Asian communities from their neighbors in Bloomfield, Farmington Hills, and Novi. Birmingham does not belong in a district with Macomb County, this makes no sense.

Calhoun County’s cultural, social and financial interests reside along the I94 corridor. We have very little in common with the southern counties. This is a bad map

This map does not think about the future of Midland or the Environment in which we live. We have a traditional legacy with Bay City and Saginaw, but none with Flint. We need to consider ESG (Environment, Social and Governance) in our plans for the future.

As a resident of eastern Ottawa county, I am deeply disturbed by how this map is drawn. The residents have much more in common with the rest of Ottawa county than Kent county. This seems to be a map load with gerry-mandering. Whoever thought this one up should be as ashamed!

Please don't use this map. Ottawa needs to be kept whole, that is why map 201 is best. We have too many differences with Grand Rapids and Kalamazoo.

I drafted a district maps that represents the Chaldean community. We stretch from Macomb all the way to the outskirts of Wixom! We are around 160,000 people in Metro detroit area alone and growing! Please use either district map: https://districtr.org/plan/68270 or https://districtr.org/plan/68275. Please do not dilute our Chaldean voices! We have lived and contributed to MI for over 100 years! Please give a voice! We are a community of interest! Thank you commissioners!

Map 219 is nonsensical. Wasn't the original purpose of the redistricting committee was to eliminate gerrymandering? This plan is gerrymandering to the Nth degree and worse than what we have currently.

Madison Heights does not belong with Wayne County.

Milford does not belong with the thumb. That makes no sense

B'ham and Macomb County together? That makes no sense

This is a terrible map and a dis-service to the residents of Midland City and the county of Midland. Midland and Flint have NOTHING in common to warrant grouping them together in a congressional district. Midland County should remain whole including the city of Midland and be combined with our true community of interest in our watershed neighboring counties. The project to re-build the watershed region should be paramount in the consideration of this commission regarding this region. Hundreds of millions of dollars and several years will be required to complete this process. We need focused representation to see this thru well.

Remove the Ottawa county areas from the Kent County district. They share little in common.

Although this Congressional District 4 is not as gerrymandered as the current Congressional District 2, it still manages to dilute the multicultural voices of Grand Rapids by pasting on the rural areas of Ottawa and Ionia counties. Grand Rapids is the second largest city in the state and it's not fair to try to mute the community's needs and identity by spreading it over 3 counties. Republicans already have plenty of district representation in the state; allow the Democrats of Grand Rapids an opportunity to be heard.

In 2020, in Michigan, Democratic voters had 53% of votes, it seems these maps should lean toward democrats having more representation than republicans.

This, and all three other currently proposed maps, lump Battle Creek and Calhoun County together with the southern tier of counties with whom we share very little. As previously commented and testified to, our strongest COI lies with Kalamazoo along the I-94 Corridor. There are other maps available that honor this COI. Please consider those instead.

This map fails at considering communities of interest but is the best choice of all the other proposed maps. There is no reason to carve out part of Jackson County and Monroe and Cass County share nothing with the counties of Branch, St. Joseph, Hillsdale or Jackson as far as community interests go. Please revisit the communities of interest as your primary focus, not partisan considerations.

Seeing a map like this makes me think that the commission did not listen to, in fact completely disregarded, public comment concerning communities of interest. Battle Creek and the surrounding area have no shared interest with this broad band of communities to the south that look like they were cobbled together because they happen to fit a pattern not because they share anything in common.

People in this area have connections and interests with Grand Rapids and Kalamazoo traveling the north/south 131 corridor.

Areas north of Rockford and east of Lowell share no common interests with the Grand Rapids area. GR is largely urban and industrial oriented while the areas north of Rockford and east of Lowell are largely rural and agricultural. the outlying non-urban areas deserve to represented by a rural district.

Ionia and Ottawa counties need to be kept separate from Grand Rapids. Their needs are very different from a metro area's needs. I do not agree with this map.

Splitting up the Downriver communities between the proposed Districts 1 and 7 is bad for our unique needs and interests. We want our own voice, not combined with the needs of Detroit or the Ann Arbor area.

Stop trying to lump Kalamazoo into a rural district!

Ionia County does not belong with Kent County. Very different populations. Better to include Muskegon in a district with Grand Rapids as they are much more similar.

Ottawa County should not be split up, and it should not be in with Kent County.

There is no reason to split the City of Midland away from its county. We are connected via watershed to our neighbors to our west and north. The City of Midland is connected to the entire county, supplying municipal water, solid waste solutions, watershed management, and healthcare. Keep Midland County Whole.

The map is still not a fair map. It has republican partisan bent. Particularly District 4 has packed all of Grand Rapids together and this will dilute the vote of this community. I suggest that some unpacking of urban voters happen here to make the overall map a more partisan-fair one.

As I stated on other similar versions for District 8, I strongly disapprove of any of the map versions that place Battle Creek with southern, rural counties. It has nothing in common with them and has stronger ties with Kalamazoo along the I-94 corridor, which includes economic, health, social, environmental, and educational interests. Please do not consider this or other versions that place Battle Creek with areas of little common interest. This worse than our current district of being included with Grand Rapids. Please consider the congressional map submitted by Promote the Vote Coalition.

These maps still tilt Republican, in a state that tends to lean Democratic in its voting. The party that gets more votes should have more seats. Please work to correct the partisan bias.

This is an obvious attempt at a partisan gerrymander to disenfranchise the people of the strongly Democratic city of Grand Rapids.

Ottawa County should not be split weirdly among three districts.

There is no commonality with the areas in this district number four. How could a Representative to Congress possibly deal with all the varied issues of these diverse areas and with some legislative wants actual being conflicting. There are urban challenges and farming area challenges. A district around Greater Grand Rapids that is primarily urban/suburban is needed for focused representation. Key areas that need improvement are public schools and transportation. In urban areas there are more feasible efficient opportunities for addressing climate issues with electric power because of the higher density population.

I will make the same comment I have made on every single other map: There is absolutely zero community of interest between Battle Creek/Calhoun County and Monroe and whatever other counties are south of Detroit. (I'm not even sure what counties they are.) There are no commonalities whatsoever. Any areas west of Hillsdale will be totally diluted and ignored in favor of Detroit-area communities. This map is totally unacceptable.

This map just perpetuates the Gerrymandering that the district has suffered in the past. The large number of Democratic voters in West Michigan will be split so there is no possibility of electing a candidate. All districts surrounding Grand Rapids area (second largest city in Michigan and twice the population of Lansing) strongly lean Republican, so the only way to draw a fair district to give Democrats a chance at representation is to draw a district that includes either Kalamazoo or Muskegon

This district does not give a voice to the largest minority population in West Michigan-210,000 people in the Greater Grand Rapids area. Minority issues of equal opportunity, inclusion and human rights will continue to be overshadowed and not addressed.

As drawn, district 4 isolates the large collections of minority populations in Grand Rapids, Muskegon and Kalamazoo (252,000 people). Their voting power is split and they would be disenfranchised. They have unique issues that need to be addressed – civil rights, inclusion, equal opportunity to name a few.

As drawn, this district #4 is a varied mix of working class, very affluent and rural farmers. How is a Federal Representative going to service all their needs? Also, city governments operate much different than Townships and the expectations for government provided services such as schools, public transportation and police/fire is much greater in cities.

This map shows many rural townships in adjacent Counties and north in Kent County attached to Grand Rapids Metro 6 cities. The rural townships have unique characteristics, challenges and needs such as rural school transportation, well water contamination, law enforcement by county sheriff, farming subsidy legislation, regional volunteer fire departments, housing and education of migrant workers county/state road maintenance and limits on taxation. These characteristics are completely different than Metro areas-how is a Representative to deal with all these issues in representing the diverse communities. Need to redraw this #4 district to include some more urban areas.

Thought the idea was that Ottawa County wanted to be together-why the townships in Ottawa in this map. Also, the Ionia County very rural townships do not want to be in district 4 with city people. There are no common issues or needs with these townships and Grand Rapids Metro 6.

There is no reason to overlap 3 counties with 1 district here. Please minimize county cross overs. Also, this will keep the African American representation from being lost. Here is my proposal: https://districtr.org/plan/47883

This Grand Rapids/Kent County map with the addition of townships in both Ottawa and Ionia Counties is a mix of completely different areas-high population cities and rural farming areas. There is no commonality within this area so a legislator will be dealing with conflicting priorities with the district. In this map, the concentration of Democratic voters in Grand Rapids (the second largest city in Michigan – twice the size of Lansing) is disenfranchised. The Grand Rapids area includes 492,000 people in the six-city area (5% of the population of all of Michigan) with 53% Democrats. This is the significant concentration of Democratic voters in West Michigan and it should not be subject to gerrymandering. All the surrounding areas are strong Republican no matter how they are configured. This map ensures that all the districts in West Michigan will be Republican and Democrats will not be represented despite their size.

In no universe should Macomb County and Birmingham be in the same district.

This map has a huge mix of demographics. Ottawa County should be out of the Kent district map

This district takes the kent county and puts it with rural counties of Ottawa and Ionia when it should be with Kalamazoo county that shares more of a community of interest both being more urban centers

I strongly oppose this map and encourage the commission to keep Ottawa County whole! Ottawa County is a community of interest. The county is unique with its Dutch heritage and vibrant diversity. Ottawa County also benefits from the Great Lakes. Even those on the eastern part of Ottawa County rely on the Great Lakes as a source of income or simple recreation. Ottawa County residents deserve a federal Representative who understands the importance of the Great Lakes and considers that while crafting policy in Washington. Currently, Ottawa County has a substantial voice in federal elections because the entirety of the county is in one congressional district. Splitting up the county diminishes West Michigan’s voice and leaves a situation where small business owners and local residents have an elected official who resides far away from the lakeshore and does not understand the importance of this natural resource. Please keep Ottawa County whole!

The proposed districts of this map have oddly-grouped populations with totally different needs and considerations. For example, in the proposed District 4, folks living in Grand Rapids metro have been grouped with rural folks in Ionia and Ottawa Counties. The only sense this proposed district map appears to have is in diluting any concentrations of likely Democratic voters and denying them representation.

Ottawa county is rural and has nothing in common with Kent County which is primarily metropolitan. Keep Ottawa in Ottawa county and not in Kent County. Same for Ionia County.

Combining Kent with parts of Ottawa and Ionia counties doesn't seem right. The latter counties are rural. Kent has more in common with Kalamazoo than the lakeshore or rural areas.

Thank you for serving on this commission. This map fractures the common interests in our West Michigan urban centers—Grand Rapids and Kalamazoo. Kept as it is, this map would divide the interests of the green area, making it very hard to represent. Please keep GR and Kzoo together—they have much more in common (diversity, industry, educational institutions, big-city policing needs, tech) than we do with other area outside the cities. The Lowell area and east is farm country—nothing in common with GR. Dividing the 2 cities and adding in more Republican farm country dilutes the Democratic vote and leaves it unlikely that the large number of Democrats in the West Michigan urban corridor will be represented.

Your maps unfairly benefit Republicans. Your job isn’t done until you fix that.

Grand Rapids is the second biggest city in Michigan. Ottawa and Ionia are rural counties. They do not belong together. This disenfranchises Grand Rapids voters.

Ottawa, Ionia, and Kent county do not belong in the same district. Kent is home to a major metropolitan area. The other two counties are rural.

This map still looks like gerrymandering to me! The largest constituency is the Grand Rapids Metro area mixed with a large rural area that dilutes the majority of people in Grand Rapids.

This map puts a rural farming community(Ottawa County) in a district with a major city (Grand Rapids). The interest and concerns of these communities are in direct conflict with each other. How is a representative supposed to represent both constituencies? Keep Ottawa County self contained in a district in Ottawa County and keep it out of Kent County. Same for Ionia County which is rural.

I live in Plainfield township. This map includes the urban GR area then it includes places like Cedar Spring and Sparta that are farming communities. City governments have a much different challenges for government services than rural townships. Some examples are fire/police/emergency service, public transportation water/sewer compared to county/state police and well water.

Lumping Kalamazoo with the rural farming townships in the west is a mix of completely different areas-high population cities and rural farming areas. This map also completely dilute the representation of the minority in the west Michigan area.

District 6 should remove Rochester and Rochester Hills. Place those in ten district instead and take district ten territory right underneath new Baltimore going east up to marine city. Put more rural areas into district 6. Make it more moderate.

Birmingham has no COI with Macomb County. It belongs with Oakland County. It is the heart of south Oakland County. Oakland County should not be split up into what looks like 5 different CDs.

Clarkston & Independence Township belong in 3, not district 10. If you have to move a community out, keep Lake Orion with Oxford, Brandon and Leonard. Swap South Lyon and Northville. Northville should be in 7, it is not even part of Oakland County. District 10 just looks like an attempt to pack republicans from various diverse areas into 1 district thereby marginalizing their voices.

Again another map that puts most of warren with areas that do not have the same values and requirements for representation. There seems to be a common theme of taking out the fairness of Macomb county in these maps.

Why are all these maps so dead-set on grouping Kalamazoo, Holland, and coastal Michiana together?

This map also does not reflect my COI (which is best represented with Ferndale, Royal Oak, Clawson, Madison Heights, south Troy, south Sterling Heights, north Warren, and Fraser). It also has really awful partisan fairness stats. This is definitely not in compliance with the law. While it's probably impossible to reflect everyone's COIs, it is possible to produce maps that are significantly more fair while providing decent representation a variety of COIs. This one also needs to be tossed.

Birmingham does not belong with Macomb county. They belong with the Oakland county cities that are connected along Woodward Ave - all a part of an economic community of interest - Bloomfield Hills, Berkley, Royal Oak.

Keep Macomb intact and separate from Oakland

The Congressional Map submitted by Promote the Vote Coalition is a FAR BETTER representation of how Calhoun County fits into the state economy. This map does not reflect the economic, social, health, education or environmental connections or Community of Interest between Calhoun County (I-94 Corridor). The southern tier counties have synergies along an economic corridor along Route 12. and M-60. This significantly dilutes the interests of Calhoun County.

Lyndon Township will be a very awkward and expensive split. If Western Washtenaw townships are going to be in different districts, it would be better to move the whole township.

This map has split Oakland County in ways that are not consistent with our communities of interest. Birmingham does not belong in a district with Macomb County Southfield belongs in a district with parts of Detroit.

Judith A. Sova is absolutely correct. Hazel Park should be with Ferndale due to overlapping school districts and interests.

This map does not properly represent West Michigan. Holland and Kalamazoo have little to nothing in common. Putting Grand Rapids and Kalamazoo is a far more compelling community of interest than trying to force Ottawa County communities in with Kent. Splitting Ottawa County into 3 different congressional districts essentially takes away any voice from the largest growing county in the state. Communities like Georgetown Township have social, economic, and historical ties to the rest of Ottawa County, not to Kent.

What is the logic in putting Hazel Park and Madison Heights in with a huge chunk of Detroit and down into Allen Park and Taylor. You're talking 3 very different areas. Hazel Park should logically be with Ferndale, Madison Heights, Royal Oak, etc. This is a complete lack of logic.

Muskegon needs to be in a district with Kent or Ottawa or at least other lakeshore communities to the north. We have nothing in common with mid-state communities.

Please take North or Northwest Oakland County out of District 10! This area has nothing to do with the Thumb Area, unlike Tuscola County which you put in District 11, as drawn. North Oakland County has much more to do with Genesee County as part of the I-75 Automation Alley corridor. We also have much more to do with District 3. Please do not do this!

This map would give Warren a chance at a representative of color, which is great, but I'm afraid that our voices, of all colors and backgrounds, would be lost with this map. Wayne County is so dominant that we in Warren would be an afterthought, even though we are the third largest city in Michigan.

Although Oakland Co is divided at least Rochester and Troy stay with Royal Oak and Ferndale. However, Hazel Park and Madison Heights belong with them as well. Also Warren still belongs together with the rest of Macomb in 6 and will not be sufficiently represented grouped with Detroit.

Every map the Commission posts continues to ignore the very real issues raised by numerous commenters on north and west Oakland County. Only the county's northeastern most townships (Addison, Oxford, Oakland), have any feasible connection with Romeo or Lapeer in District 10. The rest of the county should categorically not be paired with the thumb. Northern Oakland County shares a community of economic and personal interest with areas in the central part of the county - Pontiac, West Bloomfield, Commerce Township, Novi, etc. - and has no shared community at all with the rest of District 10. I've attached what an Oakland County-based district that unites these communities could look like here. Oakland County deserves the same standard of consideration that the commission has been applying to the rest of the state rather than being split into five or more districts.

Birmingham and Bloomfield should be kept together.

Keep more of Macomb together, don't combine it with Oakland

Keep all of Midland County together with its west and north boundary counties. You have heard "all" the reasons for this decision.

There has been a large amount of public comment from voters of color in Muskegon who are worried about being split off from other urban communities of color and grouped into a 90% white and rural district. Given this public comment, I'm surprised that the commission continues to draw the Western Michigan districts this way. It seems to me that there are multiple reasonable ways to shift things so that Muskegon is in either 9 or 4, which would be a much better fit for this community. I find it odd the commission keeps rejecting such plans because they're worried such a district would not be compact enough. The reality is that they are currently considering plans that are even less compact. #9 in this plan for instance has weird narrow stretches that extend out in Van Buren and Oakland counties. If you're going to do this, you might as well do so in a way that actually unites POC communities of interest. It is just so evident that this commission lacks representation from Western Michigan because the plans make no sense and the commission has devoted very little time to drawing reasonable districts here. Please listen to the public comment.

I thought you were supposed to keep communities of interest together? You have Muskegon mixed with the rest of the middle of the state all the way close to Midland. These are vastly diverse communities. Why have you not kept the lakeshore communities together? You could have stretched the district up to Traverse City, not across the state.

Nope. Highland, Milford and White Lake do not belong with the Thumb (and I am not in this district). This is not fair to anyone in that proposed district.