Worst House map yet for Oakland County. Like the Senate maps, you continue to split up Oakland County into many different pieces and not with communities of interest. There are more House seats here than current. And each is a smaller portion of Oakland County further diluting the voters voices. Stop gerrymandering.

Midland City and Bay City have more in common with each other than with the surrounding rural areas. Placing them together would make for a more representative (and competitive) district and less political bias.

"Independent Commission" , you are suppose to have open meetings to the public. Why are you having closed meetings? What information are you hiding. Should you be disbanded?

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

I agree with the Trasks that Dickinson County should not be split and Dickinson should not be put in the same district as Marquette county of which I am a resident. They are quite different and may dilute each others' influence such that no one will be happy with their representative in the State house.

Do not split counties in the U.P. The current proposal shows no understanding of the Upper Peninsula populations and cultures. I'm submitting a more fair division of districts in the Upper Peninsula for your consideration and request that this be adopted instead.

This is an unfair redistricting proposal. Dickinson County should not be split into two districts. This will create excessive work for county clerks, confusion among constituents during election time and will negatively impact our precinct delegates. Our county is united in many ways and holds to traditional values and attitudes. Dividing our county would undermine this. We do not want to be in the same district as Marquette County or Houghton County, which are more socially progressive. Keep Dickinson County united and redistricting the same as it's always been in the Upper Peninsula--especially the current 108th district.

We are writing 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

All of Lake Orion should stay in 46 and makes absolutely no sense moving to share with the other cities in lower 29! Interests, schools, etc do not align and are not shared in anyway. We must keep Lake Orion with Oxford, etc.

Thank you for your efforts. I am another who is going to ask you to listen to comments about District 29 drawn from Oxford to W Bloomfield & insist that it be changed. Once again, the city of Oxford itself should of course not be divided. Lake Orion & Oxford are considered as 'sister cities', therefore are very closely COIs and should not be divided either. These communities also share interests with Oakland Twp. (parts attend LO schools) Lapeer & Brandon. West Bloomfield community does not share the same interests as these more rural areas. This needs to be looked at closer and corrected.

Why split the boundaries of the Township of Plainfield, the Township of Gaines, and City of Wyoming? "Independent Commission" you can create two districts out Grand Rapids and a district with Kentwood, East Grand Rapids, the remaining part of Grand Rapids, and part of Grand Rapids Township. Walker has more ties to Alpine Township and Tallmadge Township than to the City of Grand Rapids. Ahh, you are trying to create an extra democrat seat by gerrymandering. Why not come out and say so, people are confused by the meandering boundary lines.

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

The separation of Oxford and Lake Orion does not make sense, in other maps they are included in larger areas. L.O. is also referred to as "Lower Oxford" as our communities, enjoy a friendly rivalry and many citizens travel between the two.

This is a terrible proposal for district 40 - the northern Monroe County area including Carleton has no commonality with the city of Taylor.

Why after many, many displeased comments on all the previous maps (going back to the beginning of the drawing of this district), have you not corrected these egregious districts that serve to dilute the voices of Pontiac voters and other communities as well? The residents of these communities will not accept the "it's too much work" answer. Commenters from Lake Orion, Oxford, Clarkston, Independence Township, Waterford, Auburn Hills, Bloomfield and Pontiac have all stated that these districts do not preserve COIs and do not represent the communities involved in any way. Fix this!

I don't live in or near this district. It is obvious from the shape that it was constructed based on who lives there and how they are likely to vote, otherwise it would not have this contorted shape. This is the definition of gerrymandering and is exactly what the commission was supposed to correct.

I understand the challenge of producing maps that make geographic sense while weighing other factors. This map isn't terrible geographically, but by separating Bay City and Midland it ignores partisan fairness completely. Bay City and Midland are closely aligned economically, as many residents live in one area and work in the other. Please consider putting Bay City and Midland back together. Thank you.

While this district may make sense geographically, it does not add to the overall partisan fairness of the entire map. I suggest going back to the MIdland and Bay City house district. These 2 cities are closely aligned economically, culturally, and through the arts and school systems. Please continue to improve the maps until the seat shares match the vote shares of the state (54% D / 47% R)

Im not at all in favor of this map. The City of Midland does not belong in a district with a large rural area. Bay City should not be in a district with a big rural area. It appears to ignore COI, and partisan fairness.

Midland City is not rural, and should be included with Bay City in a State House district. These two cities have more in common with each than the rural districts surrounding them. This would be more representative as a community and political bias is closer to zero, which will make the district more competitive, and allow for better representation. And this is the goal of Proposal 2. Thank You! Please continue to improve the maps until the seat shares match the vote shares of the state (54% D / 47% R)

I dislike splitting the towns of Midland and Bay City into different districts. Many people live in one city and work in a different one. As municipalities with a industrial bases, we have many similar interests from public policy. I am unconvinced that the floods and watershed make a significant COI. There is more logic to urban versus rural interests when creating a COI. I also urge you to keep districts competitive from a political party perspective if feasible. Thank you for your work.

Splitting the city of Dearborn, and the burgeoning Arab American community, into 3 different house districts is entirely unacceptable. Using the VRA as an excuse is also a cop-out since Arab Americans are considered a protected class by the Supreme Court (since 1987). Census data does not accurately reflect the composition of SE Michigan (intentionally), and I was under the impression this commission is supposed to factor communities of interest. AFL-CIO fair maps initiative had a much better approximation for House maps (pg. 25, 42) (minus a few precincts, but MUCH better still). Note Dearborn heights as well, providing another opportunity seat (pg. 38). Dearborn faces unique infrastructure challenges, language access, educational, economic, and environmental issues that require state level representation. This existing map would marginalize our growing city for the next decade or more.

While this district may make sense geographically, it does not add to the overall partisan fairness of the entire map. I suggest going back to the MIdland and Bay City house district. These 2 cities are closely aligned economically, culturally, and through the arts and school systems. Please continue to improve the maps until the seat shares match the vote shares of the state (54% D / 47% R)

I am not impressed at all with this map. This is the worst case of gerrymandering you could come up with in the North. The split counties and the projected new borders are very much political gerrymandering and not for the good of the citizens. Common sense is what is needed here.

I do not want to be moved out of the 105 district. This new map splits towns close to each other to different districts such as Mio and Fairview. Leave it like it was.

Lake County already has numerous ballot styles at election time because of all the school districts we have. Splitting us on another level is only going to add even more ballot styles to our elections.

The Downriver cities from Melvindale in the north to Flat Rock in the south have always thought of themselves as one geographical area with unique needs and interests. I believe most of the people in these cities consider themselves from the Downriver region and would like to see united representation.

I don't like the way district 33 is drawn. It gives far too much preference to the republican leaning North and West. My part of commerce township has far more in common with areas to the south and east. So follow the community of interest guideline and balance out a non-partisan mix for our region.

Area 81 Why is Berrien County split into three different districts? This does not give us fair representation. This map reminds me of the maps I saw in textbooks when I was back in high school to teach us about gerrymandering. To me it is quite obvious what is being done. I think what we have now has been pretty well. Berrien County should be as one.

Berkley should not be split into two districts, and there is no reason North Royal Oak should be included in this district. School districts should be kept together in these maps to the extent that is reasonable.

Please keep Northville and Plymouth together. Our communities share resources, such as fire departments. We have common concerns, especially when addressing the landfill nearby since it affects both of our communities. As a Northville resident, I vote on elections that affect Schoolcraft Community College, not Oakland OCC. Northville needs to stay with Plymouth and Wayne County, not Novi. Our communities are very similar, everything from our homes, walkable downtowns, and even our friends and community events. I urge you to reconsider these maps and district lines.

Why is Berrien County split into three different districts? This does not give us fair representation. This map reminds me of the maps I saw in textbooks when I was back in high school to teach us about gerrymandering. To me it is quite obvious what is being done. I think what we have now has been pretty well. Berrien County should be as one.

I have noticed several 'dislike' online comments regarding proposed maps that merge rural and urban areas. I also am unhappy with the proposed State House Representative/‘Pine’ map for District 69. I live in Waterloo Township, Jackson County. Merging Waterloo Township with northern Washtenaw County communities is a poor idea. Waterloo Township is VERY rural. We do not have the public services that Ann Arbor, Dexter or Scio Township residents have such as public water/sewage, police, or broadband services to name a few. Please keep ‘like’ communities together. As a member of the Waterloo Township Planning Commission, I would like to see our Township continue to work with communities such as Henrietta Township, Grass Lake Township and Leoni Township which are all within Jackson County. Please do not carve out Waterloo Township from Jackson County and lump with Washtenaw County townships. Don’t lump unlike communities together for the sake of making a map. The end result will hurt our township. Thank you.

In this map, Berrien County will have 3 Representatives. That is not community of interest. Prioritizing Partisan fairness is Gerrymandering. Keep our county intact with 2 representatives. If it goes outside the county borders to make the 2 complete, then that is different. But to draw around a community of interest to make it partisan is wrong.

It makes no sense to put the city of Bay City in with a bunch of rural areas. Urban voters will be drowned out completely by a population we have nothing in common with.

Map 248-District District 31 and District 53 include two large urban areas that have close ties culturally and economically and they should be in the same district so that the citizens in these similar communities will have their voices heard in congress. By separating them and then including each into a very rural areas, their voices are again diluted and drowned out. All voices need to be heard and communities with like minds, needs and interests must be together so they are represented.

While this district may make sense geographically, it does not add to the overall partisan fairness of the entire map. I suggest going back to the MIdland and Bay City house district. These 2 cities are closely aligned economically, culturally, and through the arts and school systems. Please continue to improve the maps until the seat shares match the vote shares of the state (54% D / 47% R)

It makes no sense to have St. Clair Shores in 3 districts.

Please stop including Pontiac and the small sliver of Pontiac together. In discussions with many individuals in the city, it has been agreed that the two cities are not aligned, as one of the commissioners previously stated.

This map can not address the issue of political bias in both Midland and Bay City. You have diluted the urban voter in both of these counties and placed them in rural areas when their population does not dictate such action. The urban voters will not have their voices heard and this will lead to extreme politicians.

This map does not respect the long standing relationship between Midland and Bay City. So many people live in one city and work in the other.

This does not address the political bias issue in the region. Please use the maps that have Bay City and Midland together. This map will not help with extremist influence on Politian's. I think the improved balance will create and support moderate Politian's and prevent them from being held hostage by extreme bases.

There is no reason to have so many county boundaries crossed by districts of this size. Please consider my map which minimized county and city cross overs and also has a very low population deviation of 1.37% max. https://districtr.org/plan/49177

Once again, a map that diminishes the voices of voters in the entire district by putting communities together that don't have much in common. We just need FAIR MAPS!

Please remove Waterloo Township from proposed district 69. This District somehow connects a large section of the city of Ann Arbor with Waterloo Township, which is in Jackson County. Waterloo township has no water or sewer service, no broadband, and no public transportation. Ann Arbor on the other hand has all of these things. How will a Representative vote on legislation addressing any of these things? Waterloo township will be left without a voice. Please consider exchanging Waterloo Township in Jackson County with Sylvan Township, which is in Washtenaw county. Sylvan Township includes the small town of Chelsea which is a very similar community as Ann Arbor. This would leave Waterloo Township connect with rural Jackson county. This would provide much more consistent "communities of interest" for both resulting districts (69 & 71). Thank you for your consideration.

The city of Novi should be kept together in 110. Splitting up our community will disempower our diverse community's voice, especially our large AAPI population.

This district makes sense geographically, and it's not a "bad" district, but if the overall partisan fairness for the state doesn't meet zero political bias and erase the vote efficiency gap, then I suggest you use the Bay City/Midland House district I've seen in several maps. Bay City and Midland are two closely aligned cities and they have been for a long time. Please continue to make the maps better so that the share of possible seats a party can win matches their vote share in the state.

Keep Novi together. This map limits the impact of our AAPI voters in Novi. Having a couple precincts in a separate district does not make sense.

This map is just another version of terrible. It splits communities and dilutes the voices of Detroit voters. KEEP COMMUNITIES TOGETHER!

Municipal boundaries are violated for example Grand Rapids and Ann Arbor. The State of Michigan might as well have a permanent democrat dictatorship or an "Independent Commission", democrat party controlled, which is the same thing.