My Districting | MICHIGAN
Enterprise Redistricting Software & Services by Citygate GIS
Cherry V2
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
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
Comment Toggle
All Comments
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
Number of Comments Displayed (Zoom in to show less): 0
Patricia Banner
This map does not represent where my family works, attends school, or spends our time and money. We should be included in the Fenton district.
Carolyn M Mayne
Keep Midland County whole
Christian & Jenee Velasquez
Makes no sense to split up Midland and Saginaw counties. This also goes against intent shared in original vote for redistricting.
Kathy A Swartz
Palm is the best option, this map is bad because the rural voices of Jackson county will not be fairly represented.
M Dame
I am very disappointed in the State Senate maps presented. I have to agree with SOOO many people who stated the maps have been gerrymandered to falsely promote “political fairness” while at the same time dismissing “communities of interest”. This experiment in “redistricting” is proving to be a farce. I have to agree with the masses who believe your prioritizing process has been unconstitutional and I hope these maps are challenged in court.
Scott William Miller
Keep Midland County whole.
David Johnson
Keep Midland and Gladwin counties together and whole.
Brenda Guest
No to Cherry V2. It is a bad map as it slices up Midland County.
Anne Van Hulle
This map is not good. it slices up Midland county which dilutes midland county voices
Dennis Quehl
Again a perfect example of true gerrymandering. This map is a great example of commissioners slicing up COI, contiguity, and slicing up Midland County for political reasons.
R& B Keenan
Keep Midland city and county with like communities. Representation voices the community’s needs and isn’t about political correctness or political advantage. Use common sense. This is not a map which represents like communities
Gaye Terwillegar
Do not slice up Midland County- unacceptable
Chris Moultrup
The City and County of Midland need to remain in place, together.
Please reject this map. It is not fair and does not represent my communities of interest.
This map does not appear fair and it does not represent my communities of interest.
Brad Blasy
Bad idea.
Not working for us in MIdland and Gladwin
Mike Scott
Not a good map because it is splitting up Midland County.
Justin Scott
Midland county needs to stay whole.
Jane Scott
Keep Midland city and county together! Stop splitting us up! Our city and county work hand in hand on many issues and the lines between us are virtually non-existent. We are one community!
Larry Schuelke
Keep Midland and Midland county together. Separating it from Sanford which is so linked with the shared watershed. Looks like Gerrymandering to split up the county only to mix with Bay City and Saginaw. Totally different cities and issues.
Cathy Lunsford
This map cuts the County of Midland into separate districts and makes no sense. The County of Midland needs to remain whole and with counties to the north and west.
Mary Ann Allore
This map is terrible. It does not keep Jackson County together as a community of interest despite the comments made by so many citizens at the public hearings to do so. Please keep to the promises made to us back in 2018 – follow the Communities of Interest submitted by the people of Michigan.
Kelly Schrubba
School districts should be kept within one mapped district. Walled Lake schools is broad but should not be split for us to have fair representation. This map is more fair than some, but still needs work. Thank you.
Kelly Schrubba
This map is more fair, but still unfair in ways that it is splitting communities.
Rebecca S Smith
Need to keep Midland with counties to the west and keep it WHOLE.
Kurt H Schindler
The map could do better (Linden), and it could be worse (Palm).
Joseph Lunsford
This map fractures Midland County and makes the least sense. Almost 55 years in Midland County and I would like to continue to share interests with friends and family to the north and west.
Greg Rogers
Makes no sense to separate the City of Midland from Midland County
James Cameron Hart
This map appears to go out its way to promotes large urban center and take away the voices of smaller rural areas. While maps will not be perfect they should at least attempt to be fair, and I don't believe this map promotes fairness.
Janine Iyer
NO! This map does NOT represent communities of interest. Scrap it.
This map has better partisan fairness than others. The Constitution requires that partisan fairness be prioritized.
Jennifer Majorana
Please listen to the many voices on this portal begging for fair representation! Midland county should not be sliced and diced up. Families in the city of Midland and Midland/Gladwin counties have so much more in common with education, the watershed, law enforcement, etc., than the city of Midland does with Saginaw or Bay City. Midlanders are asking you for fair representation, please. Thank you for your hard work and we are trusting you to do the right thing.
Karen lynn Lindholm
J Michael Dizer
Splitting Midland and Saginaw counties and putting parts of each into separate CD's does not support the Commissions stated goals and does not keep the Midland or Saginaw County COP's whole.
Jon Lynch
Dividing Midland County makes no sense
Mary Lou McEwan
The state senate map slices up Midland County. Keep Midland City connected to Midland County and Gladwin County. No Gerrymandering.
Francis A McEwan
This state senate map slicies up Midland County. Keep Midland City connected to Midland County and Gladwin County. No Gerrymandering.
Aaron Majorana
This is a bad map because it splits up Midland County and combines Midland with Bay City, Saginaw, and Flint. As someone who lives in Midland, travels to Saginaw for work, visits Bay City often, and grew up in Genesee County, there is absolutely nothing in common with these communities and Midland. Midland county deserves a unified voice.
Again you are splitting up Midland County. Keep Midland City with it's county and North and Western Neighbors. This makes no sense as you don't need the added population to the already really big cities.
David E Kepler
A map that has a district that wraps around several counties, is unfair to Midland County and the communities around it
Daniel Kozakiewicz
I disagree with this map.
Cindy Kallgren
No, just no. Midland needs to be attached to the West.
Amanda Oster
Keep Midland County whole!
rural Calhoun and Jackson resident
We rural voters are too stupid to vote right. Thankem for our urban democrat elite masters in Ann Arbor to control us in the right path of Marxism.
Leigh Fehr
This is crazy! What is with District 15? Why would you split Ann Arbor and give them voices alongside rural areas stretching half way across the state? it is a clear effort to drown out rural voices. I don't see how anyone can say they think this is a fair map. Please don't vote for this.
Carole J Chi
This is much better than the Palm map, but is only second to the Linden map. And this one seems to have a lot of problems in District 5. So I'd recommend again that you stick to the Linden map for the most competitive Senate districts over all of the state of Michigan. Choose the LINDEN Senate Map please. thank you!
Sara Weertz
The Linden map keeps East English Village together in District 10.
This map is gerrymandered. Look at district 15?????????
Sara Weertz
The Cherry version 2 map keeps our neighborhoods together in District 10.
Drew Wagener
Did someone give a toddler hopped up on sugar some crayons? How could anyone capable of clear thought support Cherry V2?
Daniel Schifko
This map does not represent communities of interest.
John Leon
The Linden is best for partisan fairness. Splitting some of the larger downriver cites apart doesn't make a good map.
Alex R. Weddon
No on Cherry v2 map. Tragic mix of rural Jackson co with densely populated areas.
Rebecca Mayer
This is a bad map as it divides Jackson County and combines the rural area of Jackson County with the City of Ann Arbor. This is not good.
Dee J Maybee
This map should be rejected. It is not fair and does not represent the communities of interest.
Carly Moran
This feels gerrymandered to me. There is no need to snatch away the top of Hillsdale County, when the needs of Moscow and Jerome are very similar to the rest of us.
Antoinette Spears
In the Cherry map, Webster Twp. is separated from its main COIs with Dexter, Dexter schools, and Washtenaw County services. The Linden map is much better and retains a Webster with northern Washtenaw County.
Stephen Sadlier
Troy should be kept with similar communities to the south, Clawson, Birmingham…
Ronald Martin Lacher
This is an acceptable map with partisan fairness scores only slightly higher than Linden, and it has the Tri-Cities Senate district so many of us have asked for. Thank you for consistently listening to the citizens of Mid-Michigan in order to give the people of Michigan fair districts to ensure fair elections. I do prefer the Linden Senate Map because it has a lower lopsided margin than Cherry V2. Linden is the best map for the state of Michigan of the available 3 though none of them achieve proper partisan fairness scores.
Melitz Mike
Jane Lacher
This is an acceptable map with partisan fairness scores only slightly higher than Linden, and it has the Tri-Cities Senate district so many of us have asked for. Thank you for consistently listening to the citizens of Mid-Michigan in order to give the people of Michigan fair districts to ensure fair elections. I do prefer the Linden Senate Map because it has a lower lopsided margin than Cherry V2. Linden is the best map for the state of Michigan of the available 3 though none of them achieve proper partisan fairness scores.
Ethyl Rivera
While this map may be good for other areas, it is lacking in all of the attributes which were supposed to be included in the original redistricting process. That Oakland County, for instances, has seven (7) areas that cross county lines -- for no good apparent reason -- is inexplicable. Please redraw those areas that fail the political fairness, VRA and other requirements.
david Berry
I do not like the CHERRY V2 map because it strings the Ann Arbor area way out into the "rural" areas! Those areas need a voice that reflects the "rural" area it is set in, not the "urban" Ann Arbor sound. Please don't adopt this map. The PALM map is much better. Thank you.
Stephen Stackable
This map again is splitting up Midland county and Midland city. Midland county should remain together in one district. Please stop gerrymandering Midland county
Elizabeth Bonner
I prefer Palm
Timothy J Quinn
Please do not use this map. It is not fair and does not represent the communities of interest.
Lynn Pottenger
Although this Cherry V2 map is an acceptable map for State Senate districts—with the Tri-Cities district so many of us have asked for, it does have partisan fairness scores slightly higher than the Linden map. Indeed, the Linden Senate Map has a lower efficiency gap and less lop-sided margin than Cherry V2. Out of the three proposed maps for State Senate districts, Linden is the best map for the state of Michigan, although none of them achieve proper partisan fairness scores. You should consider working on improving the partisan fairness scores; perhaps reducing Tuscola County and adding more of Midland County would help achieve this. Thank-you for your hard work.
Jessica Swartz
It doesn't make sense to keep Kalamazoo and Battle Creek in separate districts.
Melissa Gutzwiller
This one is way off to how our communities are really reflected.
Eric Kyle Schichl
this district is dumb.
merlin steffes
The Cherry map is not a fair map. Please vote NO on Cherry.
Colleen Quinn
This map doesn't appear fair or reflective of desired communities of interest
Lisa P LaGrou
I dislike this map. Please do not adopt this plan.
Kathy McClinchey
I dislike this map. I encourage you to keep Jackson and Washtenaw counties separate as they are very different in needs and interests.
Ann Arbor does not belong with rural Hillsdale, rural Calhoun, and rural Jackson. The Commission has a responsibility to place communities of interest together and this map fails that clear Constitutional criteria.
Ann Arbor is a community of interest and should be together in one district. Joining part of the city of Ann Arbor with Hillsdale, Calhoun and Jackson counties is the exact gerrymandering this commission was supposed to avoid.
This map is a textbook example of partisan gerrymandering. I am disappointed that this commission would split up so many communities of interest Jackson, washtenaw, Calhoun and Hilldale deserve better than this. Respectfully, Megan
Sarah Paige McNally
We dislike this map. This is gerrymandering. Don’t split up Ann Arbor.
This map does not reflect my community of interest, splitting up Ann Arbor is a partisan gerrymander. This was supposed to end gerrymandering.
Milene P
This is a bad map that does but recognize our communities
anne smith
Do not divide a small town area into two distinctly different districts.
David J Houck
Not a good map. Keep waterloo out of the same district as Ann Arbor.
Teri G Frantz
Not the best, but not the worst. I like Linden better.
Michael Sklar
This map is a decent map but it's not quite as fair or as logical as Linden regarding partisan fairness, VRA concerns, or the districting in Washtenaw County (where I lived for over a dozen years).
Mary Ann Fontana
This map is better than Palm but Linden is the best of the State Senate maps.
Patrick Richardson
I do not like the Cherry V2 State Senate map. It divides Jackson County and combines rural areas of Jackson county, which is rural in character, with densely populated areas in Washtenaw County, including half the city of Ann Arbor . Ann Arbor has public utilities, widely available broadband, and public transportation. Most rural areas don’t have these public services (and don’t need them). These different communities have different needs and require different legislative representation. Please adopt instead the “Palm” State Senate map. It keeps Jackson County whole and combines it with more rural sections of adjoining Counties. Thank you.
Anne Wallin
Cherry V2 is an okay map that is a bit more fair. It also keeps the Tri-city area of Midland/Bay City and Saginaw together which is sensible from a public policy perspective. They have similar interests relative to rural areas. But for me Linden is a better map that is less lopsided.
Brian Baker
This map doesn't serve the city of Grand Rapids well. It would be better to have Grand Rapids as one district and Wyoming/Kentwood/Grandville and separate districts. Those areas are growing and need different representation than Grand Rapids.
Michael Cameron
I do not like the Cherry V2 State Senate map because it combines rural areas with the city of Ann Arbor. Ann Arbor has vastly different resources and services than rural areas do and therefore need different representation.
Erin MacGregor
Whatever happened to keeping the districts as square as possible? Isn't that supposed to be a main goal when redistricting occurs? Why is it assumed that people have the same interests/opinions just because they are the same race or ethnicity? That's an offensive assumption. This map is a terrible mess.
Joe Fuhker
This map does not demonstrate partisan fairness which is your constitutional duty to uphold. Please accept Palm.
Sharon Houck
I do not like the Cherry V2 State Senate map. It divides Jackson County and combines rural areas of Jackson county with half of the city of Ann Arbor . Ann Arbor has public utilities, widely available broadband, and public transportation. Most rural areas have none of these things. These different communities have different needs and require different legislative representation. Please adopt instead the “Palm” State Senate map. It does a much better job of satisfying the ‘communities of interest’ objective of this committee. Thank you
Larry Parsons
Why split Ann Arbor?? They should have their own voice. You didn't split Flint or Kalamazoo, but Ann Arbor? That's garbage.
Deandre M
Prop 2 promised to end drawing lines for political reasons, or gerrymandering. This map makes it even worse by breaking up united communities for blatant political purposes. This map is not TRULY fair to both parties like we were promised.
Chris Wingate
Does not follow constitutional guidelines, splits up communities of interest.
Kim K Lindsey
This map groups too many varied and different counties together, blowing up the communities of interest criteria.
Merlin Steffes
This map is gerrymandered to bias the democrats. Do not use. Use the fairer Palm map instead.
Terri McCormick
Agree with Richard Wochoski - this is better than splitting Troy into Macomb County, but would like to see a map keep Troy completely in Oakland County. This is a pretty hard county line regarding COIs.
Penny K Wingate
A Very Big NO! What does Hillsdale have in common interest with New Buffalo and Constantine? Why are 3 of our county townships pulled away from us and given to the Ann Arbor area for? They are OUR communities of interest, as is Lenawee and Jackson counties!! Go with Palm on this one!!
Jackson County should be left with the rural counties to the south and west...Jackson County does not belong with Washtenaw County.
Jay R Taylor
Terrible split of Oakland County just to please and reward Democrat strongholds. Need to keep large cities intact and have smaller townships intact.
Andrea Poehl
A truly fair map is one that respects communities and their interests and gives both parties a chance to win majority. This map is not that.
M. Radtke
I believe this map disenfranchises Sterling Heights, the state’s 4th largest community, by drawing it into different districts, where no area of Sterling Heights is a majority.
Linda Lauer
Monroe shares important and pressing Lake Erie and lakeshore issues along with the I75 corridor that needs to coordinate with downriver business and industrial development.
Linda Lauer
Monroe County has more in common with the Downriver area. We share Lakeshore issues and the I 75 corridor for business and industrial development.
Abigail Nobel
The most bizarre stair-step striping I've ever seen through West/SW MI. This looks a lot more like gerrymandering than a recipe for good representation.
Sonja Marie Patrick
This is the worst map of them all. Why would you split calhoun 3 ways, diluting our voices. What on God's green earth does the little town of Homer have in common with Ann Arbor? Apparently their voices mean squat and they don't deserve a representative because no one ever goes to visit Homer, unless you live in Calhoun County and you know that a gem like Homer exists. If you pick this map, there will be even more law suits for how gerrymandered this map is.
Nancy M Howk
Please DO NOT vote this map in, the west side of Calhoun County has NOTHING in common with a majority of the District represented here. Why would a Single District snake for such a length, but if only to cancel out voices. Thank you.
Deandre M
Any map that Splits Ann Arbor is an insult to the people of Ann Arbor, Jackson, and Michigan. Creating a democratic majority at the expense of communities of interest is a joke.
Holly Armstrong
Genesee County have 5 senators??? this is wild. It washes out the communities of interest. this is the 5th largest county in the state and should remain in place.
Zach Rudat
Please keep Clinton County Whole
Dominic Jakubowski
I would be living in district 12 (clay township), as a young voter in southern st.clair county I belong in district 25. We as a community group have more in common with people that live in St.Clair county then those that live in Detroit. We have different interests and needs as a community.
Alia Mulbagal
I don't agree with these new borders. Canton is already a really crowded place and expanding these borders to Inkster will make it even harder for minority groups to be represented. It also makes it harder for elections. Plymouth and Canton are usually viewed as one entity so it would be easier to include Plymouth instead of Inkster. Also, the demographics of Canton vs. Inkster are completely different and would mess with the funding system.
Gareth Miller
As a student from PCEP, I believe that we should keep Canton and Plymouth together in District 5. The two cities are very similar, and because they share a school system, the Plymouth-Canton residents all share similar experiences and history. I find it odd that Plymouth was grouped into District 13, when geographically it is far away from west bloomfield which is also in district 13. I don't think that Plymouth shares nearly as many similarities with West Bloomfield as it does Canton. Having the maps drawn like this, there would be an issue of people with different experiences cancelling out each other's votes.
Shruva Kambhammettu
I think these proposed district lines are not well-suited for the community. For starters, I think a positive of this plan is that the district does have more racial diversity than others, at around 66%. However, this plan divides Plymouth, Canton, and Wayne, which are relatively similar in racial backgrounds, as well as the fact that these cities share a school district and similar cultural backgrounds. It would not make sense for students who live so close to each other and attend the same school have different districts. Additionally, different cities like Northville, Westland, and Inkster have different needs as the latter are more working class populations whereas the former is more wealthy and diverse. I think the borders should be expanded to include Plymouth and Canton in one district and include cities like Garden City and Inkster in district 2.
Alex Uranga
I think that this district's boundaries are ok. The deviation of the target population is not bad. However, the main issue I have with the district is that the diversity of it is not exactly equal to that of the surrounding districts. Additionally, I feel this district, Canton, could be shaped a little bit differently. It seems a little too rigid around the edges. It would be better if cleaner boundaries were made. It would be even better if Canton (distinct five) somehow combined with Plymouth (district 13). They both share the same school district, PCEP, and it would get rid of the weird shape of district 13. It was also combined similar parts of the two separate districts.
Elizabeth Kelly
Overall, I believe the district lines should be redrawn. The cities of Plymouth and Canton interact on a regular basis, and even share the same school district. Redrawing district lines would advance the diversity among the two cities. Canton contains a wider variety of people compared to Plymouth, therefor, combing the two would create an even wider spread of people to be represented. Challenges are always going to be inevitable when it comes to redistricting. For one, representation won't be equally layed out, as some areas will contain people with similar beliefs, while other areas will be more diverse. Taking all of this into account, district lines should be redrawn because it will diversify the representation of the two cities and makes the most sense in the long run.
Alisha Shaik
I believe it is unnecessary that Plymouth is part of district 5 instead of district 13. It is a better idea for both to share a district because they could also share a school district. District 5 is off of the target by 4302 people and District 13 has an extra 2688 people. This completely throws off the balance.
Salem Ben-Kalefa
I dislike the district borders due to how first the unevenness of it causes it to cut Livonia in half and as it looks like much of District 5 is going into District 4. Nonetheless, Plymouth is separated by Canton which makes little to no sense due to the similarity between them and the many things they share like schooling. The districts themselves are separated fairly equally in population, but disregard race. Many areas like canton have many different races, but if you were to look at nearing Districts many have little diversity which is something that should be taken into account when districting.
Madeleine Brugman
In my opinion, district 13 is more diverse regarding race, compared to other suburban town groups in the Western suburbs. So in that sense, the voices of many communities will be present in this proposed district. However, while I know it is inevitable to split towns in half during re districting, Farmington Hills and Farmington are in completely different districts, and Commerce Charter Township (and a little bit of Walled Lake) are completely cut in half. This makes me concerned about how the districts will tackle education if they are splitting up towns. As a resident of Plymouth, our school districts are connected with Canton’s - and Canton isn’t even included in this district. It’s obviously not just about Canton and Plymouth’s needs, but considering we have an extremely large school district and are correlated in many different ways, I believe they should be in the same district.
Nolan Johnson
This districting map splits up Plymouth and Canton, two cities that are pretty much one and the same. I go to PCEP high school, which has students from both Canton and Plymouth. Because of this, I, and many of my fellow students, feel that we are of the same community. Additionally, Plymouth and Canton share a similar demographic, so it only makes sense to group the two together to ensure representation of the ethnic groups in the area. Not to mention the border boundaries look very odd, with district 13 stretching all the way down from Novi to incorporate Plymouth.
Minh-Y Nguyen
As a student at PCEP, I find that it is unnecessary that plymouth isn't included with district 5 and is instead with district 13. District 5 is deviating from the target by lacking 4302 people. District 13 has an excess of 2688 people. As such it would make more sense for plymouth to just join district 5, seeing as how they share a school district together and are similar in many regards. This would make both the districts closer to the target, while maintaining a fairly accurate representation of the towns and individuals living there.
Anna Vega
I believe that the separation between Canton and Plymouth is unnecessary and will be confusing considering the fact that the two communities are so closely connected. They share similar diversity demographics as well as a major school district (Plymouth Canton Community Schools) so dividing the two would create a large change in many aspects. One issue is transportation for schooling as bus routes are already designed to cover the entire area.
Samantha Emery
I think splitting Plymouth and Canton into two different districts is not a good idea. While the two communities do have their differences, I believe that the consequences of splitting up the two communities will outweigh the benefits. The racial diversity, political diversity, and economic status demographics are quite similar in both communities. I think the most important part is actually that Plymouth and Canton share a schooling district. Splitting up these two communities has the potential to create conflicts within the school system and may damage the operation of the system entirely. Therefore, I think that district 5 should be expanded to involve Plymouth.
Morgan Haynes
I would say it is very well drawn. But they should have included Plymouth and canton together. They are very similar through diversity along with economic status wise. Plus they a very much related and work together. Such as having a shared school district, libraries, etc. Which causes them in a way to be a whole.
Soumya Kaparthi
The district line between Plymouth and Canton is unnecessary, and could cause a lot of disturbances between the communities, since they are connected, by schools. Separating Plymouth and Canton would disrupt school districts and communities. The district line is unnecessary because both districts are able have a similar, diverse demographic and are economically similar. Dividing Plymouth and Canton would cause issues that could be easily avoided. Even though, some areas of either cities have different socioeconomic factors, they are still very similar.
Abhijay Das
I don't think drawing the line between Plymouth and Canton is a good idea. The populations of Plymouth and Canton are similar in terms of things like economic status and racial diversity. They also share a school district so splitting them apart could cause lots of problems.
Syamala Machiroutu
As a member of Canton Township, I believe that the separation of Plymouth and Canton is not a good idea. This is because both Plymouth and Canton share a school district. This would cause school transportation systems (such as buses) to be disrupted if the boundaries were changed. Also, most of the ethnic groups in both the Plymouth and Canton are largely well-respresented resulting in their being no need to make the change.
Samantha Emery (for a friend)
I don't think drawing the line between Plymouth and Canton was a beneficial idea. The populations of Plymouth and Canton are similar in terms of economic status, racial diversity, and political diversity. Plymouth and Canton also share a school system so splitting them into two separate districts has the potential to cause more conflicts that could negatively impact the efficacy of the current system.
Aydaan Jilani
I believe the division of Canton and Plymouth will cause more issues than solutions, as these towns have historically been united for long, and dividing them will only create more problems. Canton and Plymouth are already similar, and PCEP, the district that I attend, has three of the biggest high schools in all of Michigan, with around 2,000 students in each school. However, aside from the division of Canton and Plymouth, I believe these changes are good in eliminating borders that could benefit one political party over another, which helps keep our elections fair. If the new borders did not divide Canton and Plymouth I would support this change, but due to it, I am divided on the issue leading to my vote.
Arav Kulkarni
As someone who has lived in Canton, Michigan since birth, I think that Westland and Canton should be split. I also think that the line between Plymouth and Canton is unnecessary. This is because both towns/cities have very similar population demographics. They also have a joint school district and transportation system.
Nadia Halim
I think this map would be better drawn with Plymouth (13) and Canton (5) shown as more closely related. This could include adjusting the district lines to combine the two into one district. I find this important because the two are very closely interwoven. For example, the school district in these two areas is shared under the name "Plymouth-Canton Community Schools". Students from each area attend the same schools and intermingle with those from the other area.
Deepak Raju
I don't think the line drawn between Canton and Plymouth is necessary. This is because both Canton and Plymouth have similar demographics with substantial populations of many ethnic groups. Also, Plymouth and Canton share a similar education system. If the border was drawn, transportation systems for the school system would be disrupted creating unnecessary hassle.
Sarah Balfoul
The district boundaries are good because it ends Republican gerrymandering to give parties a better chance of sharing power in Lansing which ensures partisan fairness. There seems to be more evenly divided between Republicans and Democrats, and these lines don't benefit a political party that holds power when they were drawn. A challenge of the district map if approved is city splits because this breaks economic and cultural ties between towns and counties. If we include parts of cities with other cities this may not include the interests of everyone because they will be overshadowed with the most populous of the areas we are combining.
Chae Eun Park
I believe that the borders themselves are well established, but there are issues within for the state senate district map of Canton and Plymouth. The two cities are separated, despite having the same school district of PCEP. I believe this should be changed to more accurately depict the population of students in the two cities. Also, the racial gap between majority and minority groups is large here, despite there being a large percentage of many ethnic groups in Canton and Plymouth.
Chae Eun Park
I believe that the congressional district borders are well drawn for several reasons. The first is that the borders of Canton and Plymouth are connected, which makes sense given that there share a school district. Second, the borders are clear and there is no marginalization, meaning they are clear cut and easy to distinguish. Lastly, there is a reasonable amount of space covered in the areas, and they include cities that are reasonably in the same district.
Rahul Aree
I don't think the separation of Plymouth can canton is a good idea. The Plymouth Canton community schooling is a good schooling system and would face problems if Plymouth was separated from Canton. The diversity and demographics are also very similar in these two cities. This is why I think the boundary of district 5 should be extended to include plymouth
Akshayapriya Saravanan
I believe that the District 5 borders are fine where they are. The total population of this district is close in number with other districts, and there is also good racial diversity, showing that the borders have been drawn accordingly. However, I do not agree with the split between the Plymouth and Canton districts. District 5 divides the PCCS Community School District as well as the Wayne-Westland Community School District, which are both close-knit communities for people within the cities and would have impacts on the social and educational happenings. Nonetheless, this doesn’t seem to be a major problem, since not many conflicts would happen.
Chae Eun Park
I disagree with the state senate district borders around Canton and Plymouth. There are borders separating the two cities, despite the unison of school districts at PCEP. I believe that the district boundaries could use improvement, specifically in representation of minority groups. There is a large proportion of the majority racial group in Canton and Plymouth, despite the diversity of the area there.
Heldius Zeqo
I believe that the separation of Canton and Plymouth districts would not be a good idea. Our communities are too alike and doing something of this scale really puts a burden on the people. While reading through the comments I see many people sharing the same doubts as I. As a student who goes to a PCEP school the separation of the district will create differences among us that are not currently there and Id like for it to stay that way.
Savana Gabor
Personally, I believe the proposed district map does not represent the interests of everyone. For one, it splits up Canton, Plymouth, and Westland, all of which a large majority of PCEP students come from. This could cause issues with funding and districting for who can go to PCEP. In addition, it splits Livonia in half which could cause issues with voting in Livonia. Overall, the proposed district does have some benefits, but I believe it would not be the best decision for everyone.
Nia Ahmad
While District five seems to be drawn out fairly, there are still some downsides. One good aspect is the population amount in comparison to the surrounding districts, which appears to be fair. Another good quality is the diversity and representation which is present, as well as the socioeconomic diversity. Despite these factors, I believe Plymouth should still be included in District 5 based on social patterns and school districts, because of its many similarities to Canton, a major city in district 5.
Sasha Qureshi
District 13 seems to be well drawn in terms of population and diversity. By including Novi (23% asian, ~10% African American) and Farmington (20% African American, 14% Asian), it ensures diversity. However, it does break what is a close knit and diverse community of Canton and Plymouth. Canton and Plymouth are integrated in terms of people, economic activity, and education. Breaking that could introduce inequity and nullify the minority vote, specifically in Plymouth which is 90% white.
Ayushi Chaube
In my opinion, District 5's borders could be drawn better. While considering things like population and diversity, I would say District 5 was drawn correctly. But upon closer inspection, I saw that Plymouth and Canton are separated. It makes no sense to do this, as they share a school district and are generally looked at as the "Plymouth-Canton area." Putting them together would be more beneficial for everyone involved due to their shared qualities.
Shlok Masurkar
I think there could be some benefits to redistricting, like increasing the diversity of the area. District 5 is about 66.55% white, and while that is more diverse than some areas it is not as much as others. I think a good thing that comes with this is the relatively large Asian community. However, other communities (such as the Native American community) are not as present or prevalent. Overall, the district borders are drawn well, but can be drawn better in the future.
Charvi Rayarapu
I do not think the District 5 lines are that bad. This district has good racial diversity and communities in the district have a similar demographic. However, I think changes should be made. This district divides the Plymouth-Canton School district, which is a closely tied community through education and social events. It also divides the Wayne-Westland School District, which is another big school district in Michigan. Splitting up closely tied communities and districts could cause conflicts of interest, but overall, this isn't a major problem.
Viraj Gummadavelli
While District 5 has a lot more variety than other districts and represents the perspectives of minorities, I feel there are a few things that may be done to improve the district system for the city and its neighbors. To begin with, there should not be a boundary between Canton and Plymouth. Both of these towns have comparable demographics and are served by the Plymouth-Canton School District, which is a big school system. If they were gathered together, the school system would be improved even more, and community people would have a say. Northville and Novi also have different needs and perspectives than Plymouth, reducing their impact in the district. As a result, I feel that Plymouth and Canton should be combined, as this would benefit both areas.
I don't think it is a good idea to split up the University of Michigan North Campus from the South Campus. This map cuts off the North Campus Residence halls from the rest of the University.
Aditi Kulkarni
I think that Canton shouldn't be separated from Plymouth because they fall under the same school district and the new districts would affect the school population. Also with the new district lines there would be less diversity in the population. This is because most of the people living in Westland, Garden City and Inkster have more working class people, whereas in Canton and Plymouth there are people with a more diversified background and occupation.
Haiqa Tanveer
I believe that these new borders are not ideal. It's splitting up Canton and Plymouth. The diversity within the new borders is not as diverse as the current borders. Plymouth and Canton are also school districts together, and splitting it up would cause new conflicts.
Jorrawar Grewal
One aspect of this map that I agree with is that it does not have much population deviation in district 5. I also disagree with a lot of things such as the unusual shape of this map, which may leave out communities of interest. For example, district 5 also includes Inkster, which may not have the same groups or interests as Canton. It also includes part of Livonia, which is not representative of Canton. Overall, I would suggest a few changes such as taking out Inkster.
Maisy Schmitt
I think that the borders drawn are pretty good. The only thing that I would say may be an issue is diversity. While Plymouth/this area isn't completely lacking, places such as Canton are far stronger in this area. Canton is also very connected in the Plymouth-Canton Schools. However, I realize that other cities, such as Northville, are closer/more compatible with this district, and this is barley an issue.
Jillyn Schultz
You've got Milan on the wrong side of the fence here. For years Milan's Washtenaw County residents have been represented by people in the Ann Arbor area. Many residents of Milan City proper, both in Monroe and Washtenaw counties are people who are from the Ann Arbor area and moved to get affordable housing. This map disenfranchises people in Milan, especially the Washtenaw County carve out, as we will not be well-represented by anyone coming from District 16. Either split at the county line or carve out southern Milan and put it in with Ann Arbor in District 15.
Brooklyn Radwan
I do not agree with the way the district borders are drawn out, and they should be changed to include Plymouth and Canton in the same district. Canton and Plymouth share a similar demographic and population. They also have very connected communities, such as the shared school district, more so than Plymouth and Northville or Canton and Inkster and Westland. Also, adding Plymouth to the district would increase diversity in the area. The district could be expanded to include Northville as well, but it should at least include Plymouth and Canton together.
Param Patel
I don't think a line was needed to be drawn between Canton and Plymouth. Canton and Plymouth are very similar. For example, they have very similar demography and are part of the same school district. The voters' influence of both Plymouth and Canton is going to go down because of the divide. Overall, Plymouth shares more similarities with Canton than it does with Northville or Novi, so, therefore, Canton and Plymouth should be included within the same district.
Rahul Nanwani
District 5 is not a good fit for what needs to be done. Plymouth-Canton community schools is a very good schooling system that would be disrupted if Plymouth were to be separated from Canton. On top of this, for anything to be done in both canton and Plymouth, both districts have to request what needs to be done. This is not to mention the demographics and diversity of Canton and Plymouth, which are very similar. Therefore, I believe that the line of district 5 should be extended to include Plymouth.
Kunal Patel
I believe that while District 5 has much more diversity than other districts and represents the views of minority groups, there can be a few changes to help make the district system better for the community and its neighbors. Firstly, there should not be a line drawn in between Canton and Plymouth. Both these communities share similar demographics and share Plymouth-Canton Schools, which is a large educational system between these. If they were grouped together, it could enhance the education system even further and would provide a voice for members of the communities. Also, Northville and Novi have other necessities and opinions than those of Plymouth, which decreases their influence in the district. Therefore, I believe that Plymouth and Canton should be grouped together which would be beneficial for both communities.
Laurie E
Please keep Troy with other Oakland County jurisdictions, such as Clawson and/or Birmingham to the South rather than putting it in a district with Macomb County/Sterling Heights. Troy COI , as noted by others, align with Oakland County and keeping it so districted would provide fairer representation.
Joey Pierson
I disagree with the map where canton and plymouth fall. Canton should be included in plymouth district for many reason. They are in the same school district (Plymouth-Canton Community Schools) so that should be a sign that they should be together. Also they are much more similar to that district and most of the towns in there rather than the towns in its district like westland and inkster. I do understand there is never going to be a perfect map and that no one is ever going to agree so it could be a lot worse.
Kenneth Fistler
Canton should not be in the same district as Westland. Instead they should be with Plymouth, Northville, and Novi. Not only does Canton share a school district with Plymouth, but in culture Canton shares much more in common with Plymouth, Northville, and Novi. In general Canton is seen to have a good amount of money like Plymouth, Northville, and Novi. In general people are more alike depending on how far up, and down river they are. It is hard to make this district map because there are so many small districts and people in SE Michigan, but to make the districts more effective with the people inside them being more similar, Canton should not be grouped with cities South or East of them, only North
Sarah Islam
Hello everyone my name is Sarah I and I don't believe the line between Canton and Plymouth is needed. Canton and Plymouth pretty much the same demographic and community. One problem out of many is that they share their school districts. What will happen to it if Canton and Plymouth are separated? Plymouth has many connections and has many smaller interconnections that may be affected if these two cities are broken up. If we were to expand the border however we should expand it to Northville as the community much like Canton and Plymouth. We should do this because not only the community but also the amount of "wealth" in this area. So to sum up: don't break up Canton and Plymouth, But if you want to expand, add in Northville
Kerby Fannin
This is a very poorly drawn map because it mutes the voices of rural voters in Hillsdale and Jackson Counties.
Alan P
Splitting Ann Arbor and Jackson, are you serious? Can the commission give an honest answer for how that is justified by VRA or community of interest considerations?
David S.
Jackson should not be included with Ann Arbor
Margaret Chinoski
Troy COI deeply align with Oakland county and have little in common with Macomb county
Nikhil Akkala
I don't think the line between Canton and Plymouth was necessary. Both Canton and Plymouth are very similar, and they have a similar demographic. They also share the same school district, as they are closely connected. If Canton and Plymouth were grouped together, the quality of education would significantly increase. Overall, Plymouth shares more similarities with Canton than with Northville, and thus, they should be included within the same district.
Kelly Jones
Troy has far more in common with Clawson and Madison Heights than with Sterling Heights/Utica. I believe Troy should be drawn within Oakland County
Yash Bingi
I don't think think district 13 was drawn very well. District 13 is mostly Plymouth Northville, and Novi. I think that Northville and Novi have a different demographic than Plymouth and the two places will have different interests. Also, the voting influence of Plymouth residents will go down because the needs and priorities of the Northville and Novi residents will outnumber those of the Plymouth residents.
Yash Bingi
I don't think there was a need for a line to be drawn between Canton and Plymouth in district 5 and 13. This is because both of the places are similar, with a similar demographic. Also, the people share things like a school district and many parks, which is why they should be grouped together. The people will have similar interests and their population together would equal around what the populations of the other districts were, which is why those two should be together.
Ella Washnock
I believe the map should be drawn differently to combine Plymouth and Canton, with other areas such as Westland, Garden City, and Livonia combined separately. Because Plymouth and Canton share a school district, especially with the high school, it would make more sense to combine the two communities since they always have been very intertwined. There is also a significant wealth gap between Plymouth and Canton vs. many of the other cities in district 5, such as Westland and parts of Livonia, so putting those two different communities together could cause issues with equal representation and education opportunities. The boundaries of districts 5 and 13 should definitely be reconsidered because they would divide diverse cities that have always worked well together and combine cities that have significant wealth gaps and school district differences between each other.
Ariana Marie Faulkner
In my opinion I think we should keep the districts how they are. I feel if we combined the two districts it would be two big of a city. The taxes would most likely go up as well because we could be considered a city. Also in my opinion I feel there is a clear income difference between plymouth and canton which I feel should stay separate. And as I've said before I feel a lot of people would lose their jobs if the two districts were to combine.
Ava DeVliegher
The district lines should be reevaluated based on the shared cities within each district because District 5 should be grouped with the city of Plymouth rather than the city of Westland. In terms of schooling, Westland schools are placed under the Wayne-Westland Community School District, while Canton schools are placed under the Plymouth-Canton Community School District. Plymouth and Canton are already such a diverse and intertwined community due to the shared public schools where people of all backgrounds have created a sense of community and camaraderie. Having our schools shared makes us close, but if our cities were joined into one district, we could all work together to continue our diverse community and accommodate for all of the interests of the people in both Plymouth and Canton, bettering our schools and the children being educated within them. Overall, Canton and Plymouth share a more common interest than the interests shared between Canton and Westland.
Ariana Marie Faulkner
It would be better financially because we would gain more government dollars. We would be more recognized in washington dc because both canton and plymouth combined would be a bigger city. We would gain more resources by combining the two districts as well. We could also attract more companies to move to our area.
Sumanyu Kotala
Overall, I believe that district 5 is well drawn, but there are a couple downsides to it. The deviation between the target population and our actual population is very low (-1.62%), which is a good thing. Also, the population of white people and the population of people with heritages of black, native, asian, islander, etc. are more balanced that in say district 12. This means that other communities are well represented and their voices are being heard. One issue I have with the district borders is that Canton and Plymouth aren't grouped together which is a downside to our school district (Plymouth-Canton). If they were grouped together, the quality of education and schooling in general will increase.
Maddie Andrews
I think this map could be drawn differently. District 13 seems to include wealthier areas which mean those people will be represented in that district. The cities in district 13 are not all in the same county and don’t interact as frequently. I think it could be redrawn to include more diversity. I think Canton and Plymouth should be included in the same district because the communities interact together especially due to the shared school district. Canton is very diverse and having the two together would allow for a wide variety of people to be represented. It is hard to draw district maps because there are always going to be some communities with a lot of diversity and some where people have very similar beliefs and backgrounds.
Jacob Dalebout
I continually am confused at why Plymouth and Canton are split on these redistricting maps. The two cities are nearly inseparable, have one school district centered around a combined group of high schools. How is it that families with students in the same school district would be in different voting districts. I am possibly more confused at why in its place Inkster is included. I can't say that I even know anyone from Inkster, and it changes the population and financial makeup of the voting district.
Jonathan Wylie
No map ever drawn will be perfect and satisfy everyone. That being said, there is one striking feature of this map that I question. I don't understand why Plymouth and Canton are separated. It's not as if their combined population is too great to be a part of one district, and as a Canton resident, I can say that residents of these towns hardly distinguish the two. People from these communities share a school district (along with a large high school campus), so it doesn't make sense why Plymouth is paired with Northville rather than Canton.
Carter Adamski
I agrees with putting Northville and plymouth together, as they are two towns with similar, suburban type population. What I find weird is that Canton and Plymouth are not in the same district, because we probably share even more similarities with them than Northville. Heck, we even share a high school with eachother. In the end, DIstrict 13 is good, but in order to improve it, you must include Plymouth and Canton to the same district.
Chris Jiang
Overall, District 5 is decent, especially in terms of the population. The Asian community is well grouped and well represented compared to the overall white population and the other districts, where voting is also reasonable. However, I do not believe Canton and Westland should be grouped together because Canton and Plymouth would make much more sense. For instance, the prominent public schooling of Plymouth-Canton provides for an important factor, which is not represented very well at all. Currently, Plymouth is in District 13; allowing Canton and Plymouth to be integrated together will severely improve the quality of Plymouth-Canton schools and the thousands of students that attend by allowing better, continuous communication and beliefs.
Summer Xiong
When looking at the map as a whole, I feel like the borders might need some work. Looking at the racial diversity of each district, there are pretty big variations. Some have an overwhelmingly white population. In addition, all districts are majority white. I understand that this may just be a reflection of the whole Michigan population. Specifically looking at district 5, I have doubts about putting Westland and Canton together. From my experience living in Canton, I would say that putting Canton and Plymouth together may be better. Minor changes can be considered overall.
Alexander Huey
I feel like this district, though similar in population to all other districts, exceeds particularly in the amount of land it covers. I believe these voting districts should represent similar land areas, as well as population, but while I think it is difficult to do so, I believe different townships could be included to make the area smaller, while still representing the same amount of people.
Yash Kalani
I approve of this map, as it helps emphasize diversity, as the diversity of this district in Asian population is larger than other districts. However, I think that Canton and Plymouth should be grouped together in a single district as they are grouped together in many of the other districting efforts. In addition Canton also has a similar demographic to that of Plymouth. This district includes a 'dip' at the land at the bottom. This could have been expanded to reach lower deviation from the rest of the map.
Cal Morton
I agree with Kristine S Detmers comment posted in Michigan State House Pine V5 map, "... All these maps should have been drawn with a color blind eye and based on population alone! Gerrymandering at its worse!". The data shown in these maps should have only provided the "Total Population" and the "Voting Age Population". All other numbers are injecting race and ethnicity which overlooks the most important fact, "We are ALL Americans"!
Yash Kalani
I approve of this map, as it helps emphasize diversity. However, I think that Canton and Plymouth should be grouped together in a single district as they are similar and are grouped together in many of the other districting efforts. In addition this district includes a diagonal triangle shaped piece of land that could have been expanded to reach lower deviation from the map.
Jaya Choudhary
The state senate districts are evenly drawn just in terms of population. However, the districts are very uneven in terms of diversity. Certain districts have a very heavy bias towards the white population, with over 90% of the population being white. This may lead to issues with the representation of the people. Additionally, some borders split cities that are very integrated communities. For example, the border between districts 5 and 13 split Canton and Plymouth. This is an interesting choice considering that Canton and Plymouth are very integrated in terms of people and education. Separating them into different districts messes up the representation of a connected population. Overall, the district borders have been drawn well, but some of the smaller details in certain communities should also be considered when creating these districts.
Julie Wuerfel
Keep Berrien whole.
Jishnu Borra
Overall, the map for this district looks rather well-drawn. However, it seems to split Livonia into two parts, which may cause divides in communities. However, the map does do a good job of connecting other cities with similar populations, like Westland and Canton. There is a pretty large racial bias towards the White population, but that seems to be a thing with the population of Michigan as a whole. In the end, it is a strong map with a few things that could possibly be changed
Kristine Yeutter
Your constitutional duty is to consider communities of interest. This map divides our rural voices with that of major metropolitan areas. We ask for fairness, not divisions with attempts to divide us and give unfair advantage to big cities. Please consider the PALM map, which allows our rural voices to have fair representations.
Kathleen Goodin
It may make more sense for Troy/Rochester to be included with Birmingham/Clawson and removed completely from Sterling Heights.
Sue Macrellis
This is not a good map for Jackson County as it splits it in two - and both halves get attached to Washtenaw County and the university city of Ann Arbor. There could not be two more dissimilar communities of interest - rural, small manufacturing vs big university city. These communities do not share similar needs or solutions. The Palm State Senate map is a better option.
It seems that the map for redistricting is fairly well drawn except for a few key flaws. I believe the map also splits up communities that would do well together. There is not much relation between those in the Canton and those who live all the way out near Inkster. It makes sense that Canton would be grouped with Westland, but it seems that Plymouth and Canton would be best if put together due to their close relations. This map does seem to also split Livonia and connect it to Westland, which is an interesting choice to say the least.
Raj Patel
I don't mind this map redistricting because It does connect Canton with similar areas. I don't think it's the best and I do think that changes can be made such as redistricting Plymouth and Canton together because of their heavy similarities. I think the map separates cultures and interests which is one flaw I see. Lastly, I think that this map helps significantly towards the Westland and Livonia area which have always been heavily seperated.
Joshua Przygocki
Maps gives disproportionate advantage to one party and does not reflect obvious COIs in south-central Michigan. This violates the spirit of Prop 2 by ignoring communities and party-favoritism.
Elizabeth Pell
I do not like how this map is drawn. I think it splits up communities that work well together and limits diversity. It does not provide adequate resources for everyone now. It also takes away the large variety of cultures and interests. I think the cities will benefit more from being grouped with many different types of people.
Dave Frey
Just NO. Everywhere. Just NO. Horrible map.
This map does not align with the "communities of interest" principle as well as the Palm map. Too much combining of rural and metropolitan areas. Looks like lots of gerrymandering to favor the Democrat Party it appears. I thought the commission was about "people and not politics".
What a crazy convoluted map. I have no knowledge of the communities that snake to the east. Some of these maps leave me suspicious of the true intent of the constitutional amendment.
Richard Michalski
Does not create as many competitive districts a Palm proposal.
Amanda Bobrovetski
This definitely does not keep the communities of interest together. It cuts Grosse Pointe Park into three pieces.
Anna Hicks
This map is outlandish. What rational reason, other than gerrymandering, could there possibly be for dividing 2 counties in half. All this does is give the larger urban area of Ann Arbor more of a voice than the small rural areas of Jackson County. This committee was supposed to be impartial and take politics out of it. The PALM map is the best of the options for fairness in redistricting. Please DO NOT select this map. Please DO SELECT PALM. Thank you.
Jennifer Leigh Umphress
This district does not represent my community.
Ronda VanStempvoort
This is the worse map of all. Separating Jackson County in half. The voters of Jackson will never be given a fair chance at reprensentation.
Aaron Haury
This map is acceptable. However, Linden is a better map reflecting statewide voting patterns and communities of interest.
Paul Hauglie
I dislike this map. It does not keep Jackson county whole and needlessly divides it. Jackson county should never be lumped into the same district as Ann Arbor, unless gerrymandering is the goal.
Sarah Abbott
This Ann Arbor split is bizarre. It may make the Ann Arbor democratic activists happy that they can supersede the Jackson folks and guarantee a democratic majority, but it has no basis in communities of interest. Nor is it fair, as anything other than a 19-19 split is a disproportionate advantage.
Jared Boot
This map is acceptable. However, Linden is a better map reflecting statewide voting patterns and communities of interest.
Richard Wochoski
All the State Senate maps seem to be the same in Southeastern Michigan. If the only differences are in the outstate areas, it would be nice to know why. Is there no other combination of COI's to be found for us?
Larry Parsons
There is ZERO reason to split Ann Arbor for community of interest reasons. The only reason to do such a thing is to unfairly give democrats an insurmountable edge. We were told this commission would respect communities of interest. This map does NOT do this.
Lindsey Brayton
This map is not balanced and unfairly represents urban areas
Cynthia Richardson
I do not like the Cherry V2 State Senate map. It divides Jackson County and combines rural areas of Jackson County with half of the City of Ann Arbor. Ann Arbor has more public service offerings, widely available broadband, and public transportation. Most rural areas, like Waterloo Township, have none of these things. Rural communities have VERY different needs and require different legislative representation. Please use the PALM State Senate map. It better represents my community. Thank you.
Brian Boyer
This proposed map unnecessarily divides up Jackson County splitting up our current Community of Interest. Please do adopt this map. The Chestnut map keeps the Jackson Community of Interest together.
Russ Jennings
Do not like
Doug Swartz
The Cherry V2 State Senate map combines rural areas of Jackson County way too much with the urban area of Washtenaw County. I am disappointed to see how unfair these map options are for those of us living here in Jackson County. This map appears to have been designed to drown out our rural Jackson voice as the Senate representatives would be too busy bending to the specialized needs, demands, and ultimately ‘dollars’ of Washtenaw County. Please do not adopt this map. The alternate Palm State Senate is the better choice. Thank you.
Jackie Leslie
This is not good for Jackson County as a whole.
Richard Baker
This splits the entire East Side, home of the Allen neighborhood Center and very involved Neighborhood organization and residents out of Lansing and puts them into E Lansing/Meridian where there is no community of interest with the EastSide.
Richard Baker
This splits the entire East side of Lansing from the city. Its integral to the city, not to East Lansing, Meridian et al.
Don't split up North and South Jackson Co. Ridiculous!
Jennifer Biddinger
It is obvious what you are doing by splitting up three different counties to create new districts! Let Jackson Co. have our district, and Washtenaw Co. have theirs. No common interests
E. Woodman
This map seems mostly fair, as the population sizes in each district are similar and shaped normally. Communities of interest are mostly represented. I think that District 15, where I am from, is one of the most interestingly drawn districts. The city of Ann Arbor is split up, and grouped with cities that have different needs, such as Jackson county.
Bernard Allore
City folks don't understand the issues and needs of farming communities. This map lumps urban and rural areas together and this will leave farmers without a voice because there is such a lack of ties to agriculture today. Please keep Jackson County together in one district. I am a senior citizen and I rely on services in my community of Jackson. Thank you.
Barbara Dame
Priority should be based on community of interest. This maps splits up Jackson County and the community of interest it serves! This is partisan gerrymandering. Please remember that the law states that districts should not provide a disproportionate advantage for any political party.
Caron Maria Wootten
This map is absurd, it guarantees that Jackson County voters will not a voice to represent them. With the nod given recognizing communities of interest in the Congressional mapping, this is a slap of recognition that it isn't being taken into consideration at all here.
Bill Richardson
I do not like the Cherry V2 State Senate map. It divides Jackson County and combines rural areas of Jackson county with half of the city of Ann Arbor . Ann Arbor has public utilities, widely available broadband, and public transportation. Most rural areas have none of these things. These different communities have different needs and require different legislative representation. Please adopt instead the “Palm” State Senate map. It does a much better job of satisfying the ‘communities of interest’ objective of this committee. Thank you.
I support this map in that COI’s are together in the tri-cities (district 35). Please let partisan fairness and allowing all voices to be heard guide you in making the final decision and not gerrymandering. However, please consider putting Bridgeport, Hemlock, and Thomas Township in district 35 as well. They are very much a part of our COI and do not belong in a separate district.
Close, but no cigar! The industrial economic resources of ports, roads, and proximity to Chicago are shared with shoreline counties of Muskegon, Ottawa, and south ... not north with the vacationland counties.
Craig Michael Flietstra
I think the rural area of northeast Ottawa county would be better served if they were included with the rest of Ottawa county.
Justin Voss
This is a really bad map for mid-Michigan. It splits Lansing and East Lansing and groups them each with their own rural areas. The focus should be on creating a district (or two) that represents Lansing/East Lansing and one (or two) that represent the more rural areas.
Jack Bengtsson
I was a fan of the Eid map, but that doesn't appear to be available any longer. Perhaps you've incorporated some of that into one, or more, of the maps that are available. If so, great. Other than that, except for Lange, there doesn't seem to be a lot that separates these maps from a West Michigan perspective. So, except for Lange, pick one that's closest to what the Eid map looked like.
Jazmine Early
You can't be serious with this map. It certainly shows the bias of the committee. I an insulted that as an immigrant, you separated my district making it a mess.
Patrick Maguire
This is ridiculous. Having Salem Township be a part of this gerry-mandered district that includes Livingston and Jackson counties makes no sense. Most of the folks in Salem Township have a South Lyon address. Most consider them a part of the "South Lyon" area. They go there to shop, dine, socialize, go to church, etc. Salem Township should be in the same district as South Lyon and Lyon Twp.
Alan Poehl
This is absurd. There is no reasonable explanation to split the city of Ann Arbor besides trying to guarantee a democratic majority. That is not the job of the commission. They should respect communities of interest. Any changes for blatant partisan reasons like this is pure gerrymandering.
Jim Lax
The Commission has done a commendable job on the Congressional and State House district maps keeping Kent County reasonably intact. The proposed State Senate maps are another story. All three collaborative maps have Kent County fragmented into 5 pieces. Each map has southern Kent County combined with Benton Harbor/St. Joseph, as well as other district boundary irregularities. The proposed maps for State Senate are not reasonable and may be worse than the previous gerrymandered maps. It surprises me that this fragmentation is not obvious to the Commission, and that the Commission considers these maps acceptable. I oppose the three proposed State Senate maps. The proposal to combine southern Kent County with Benton Harbor/St. Joseph is absurd. The citizens of Benton Harbor have major concerns with lead in drinking water. How well would their concerns be addressed if their state senator lived in far-away Kent County? Maybe the Commission hasn’t heard from Benton Harbor. The residents of Benton Harbor have to worry about their day-to-day drinking water and do not have the luxury to monitor Commission proceedings. It would be nice to think that everyone has an equal opportunity to participate, but that’s not how the real world works. It’s up to the Commission to use best judgment and to develop reasonable district boundaries. The Commission considers Grand Valley State University (GVSU) a Community of Interest and has based one senate district on this premise. The student population is about 25,000. This compares with a senate district size of 260,000. What about the other 235,000 people in the district and their communities of interest? Much has been made of urban communities versus rural. The northern Kent County communities of Sparta, Rockford, and Cedar Springs are an easy commute to Grand Rapids, and northern Grand Rapids can be linked as a Community of Interest with them. Another thing that the Commission has not considered is the population growth of Kent County. The areas that are considered rural are already becoming more urbanized and will become more so in the next ten years. Connecting disparate communities into one district does not foster consensus needed for representative government to flourish, and this action ultimately defeats the whole process of redistricting. Representative government benefits from cohesive districts, where common community goals, objectives, and consensus can be formed. I believe that truly representative government is essential in dealing with the challenging issues of today. Today’s issues are too critical to wait another ten years for new redistricting to occur. Citizens trust the Commission to do the right thing. Please do the right thing and redraw the State Senate maps keeping Kent County intact. I have a proposed map, p6745, that you can use as a starting point. Thank you.
Rodger Wolff
One of the key issues of redistricting is the grouping of minorities into areas with limited voice. This is one reason why we have toxic water without redress in Flint and Benton Harbor. It takes real vision to assure a voice for large but marginalized populations.
Robert Dragan
The boundary between district 30 which cuts across Grand Rapids along Fulton should be moved south to Wealthy St. when making its border to district 29 to the south.
Robert Dragan
None of Ottawa CO west of Kent CO should be in the same district with Kent CO and should be removed from district 30. If you then need population to add to district 30 take portions of northeast Kent CO around Cannonsburg and add them to district 30. This would also help to keep Kent CO whole.
Mark Theobald
The municipality of Detroit had a 2020 census population of 639,111 according to the 2020 census, making it the 27th-most populous city in the United States. Michigan Senate 265,193 Ideal per district 639,111 / 265,193 = 2.4 districts ? 7 districts cross into Detroit ??? Any Partinishit ????
Sarah Weaver
This districting "solution" represents a partisan attempt to force together communities which have little in common. Whether intentional or unintentional, the result of such a map will be the dilution of the political voice of the people of Hillsdale and Jackson, who have little to nothing politically in common with the voters of Ann Arbor.
Chris Roosen
All three of these maps are bad because they split the city of Livonia in two and divorce it from neighboring communities of interest in Western Wayne County. Please go back, stop trying to "unpack" Detroit in strange ways, and draw districts that let Detroiters represent Detroit. This will then allow you to keep Livonia and Western Wayne County communities together as they are in today's Senate District 7.
Susan Shink
This district, because of the heavy partisan lean, invalidates my vote. Districts should be as close to equal as possible. There is nothing about this area that requires such a gap.
Mark Bosler
I do not understand why the part of Section 3 in Oakland and Macomb Counties is not exchanged with the part of Section 10 in Wayne County. It would seem that county affiliation has a higher commonality of interest than most other factors, yet these districts are misconfigured to achieve some other purpose.
Christian Warner
Districts 14 & 15 are nothing but partisan gerrymandering. The interests of Jackson county and of Hillsdale, in particular, will not be represented under these proposed districts. A district is supposed to preserve the distinct characteristic of a particular community so that it can be represented. There is nothing with districts 14 and 15 that preserve the distinct interests of Jackson county. These districts are anathema to both fairness and republican government.
Districts 14 & 15 are absurd and are nothing more than gerrymandering. Ann Arbor districts that extends across 1/2 the state, come on. Other than a highway which runs through the area, there is little commonality between these areas and will result in these communities' voices being drowned out by Ann Arbor. Completely unfair!
Dennis Clark
Districts 14 and 15 render the rural interests of the Hillsdale and Jackson county subservient to the neoliberal and urban interests of Ann Arbor and Yipsi
John Moriarty
The citizens of Jackson County and particularly Hillsdale have no interests or sentiments in common with the people of Ann Arbor. These districts would in no way promote so called "partisan fairness." They essentially crack the votes of rural and conservative voters across two districts which will be dominated by the more populous and liberal cities of Ypsilanti and Ann Arbor. There is nothing fair about turning a traditionally conservative district into two liberal ones.
Joshua R.
I am honestly bewildered by the unequitable drawing of districts 14 & 15. I thought we were trying to avoid districts tortuously drawn for political advantage! What do Spring Arbor and Ann Arbor have in common besides the name "arbor"?? Jackson county people share workplaces, playgrounds, neighborhoods, churches, and all the other venues where community happens---all the traits of authentic community that they do not share with Ann Arbor, which of course has its own community. Wouldn't it make more sense for Jackson and Washtenaw counties to be their own districts? Ann Arbor's population is greater than all the towns in Jackson County combined, so pairing the two would effectively silence Jackson voices. (Notice that the favorable comments are all from Ann Arbor area... it's human nature to not mind getting disproportional influence...) I appreciate the hard work of the commission, but unfortunately, it seems all too clear that the old ideological and special interests are trying to surreptitiously influence the commission to sneak in gerrymandering through the backdoor.
Joshua Paladino
What do the people of Hillsdale County have in common with the people of Ann Arbor? These may as well be different nations. They share almost no interests in common. One thrives on agriculture and industry, the other on technology, education, and service jobs. Their political and social beliefs diverge as starkly as any two communities in the nation. How will the small, rural pockets in Moscow, Somerset, and Mosherville have their voices heard amid the overwhelming influence from Ann Arbor? Half a dozen densely packed apartment complexes in Ann Arbor outweigh an entire township in northern Hillsdale County. Before the non-partisan redistricting committee came to power, this was not an issue. Hillsdale County was not gerrymandered and its interests were not diluted by crowded cities. Please correct this error and restore northern Hillsdale County to District 17.
Bryan Richardson
The lines drawn for Districts 14 and 15 are naked attempts at a partisan gerrymander to dilute the interests of rural voters in northern Hillsdale County and Jackson county by swallowing them up with voters in Ann Arbor. The Michigan Constitution states that lines should be drawn with a view to grouping voters based on the views of "communities of interest." Voters in Ann Arbor have no common interests with those of rural communities. This is a shameful map designed to to give more power and influence to those in more affluent and suburban and urban neighborhoods. These districts should be redrawn with a better eye towards preserving counties together and with a greater consideration for which voters should actually be grouped together based on their genuine common interests.
Paul C.
District 15 is swallowed up by city interests and will not represent the predominantly conservative and rural voters of northern Hillsdale County. In that respect, it appears to be classic gerrymandering, designed to dilute or destroy the representation of disfavored voters. Please reconsider this portion of the District 15 map. Thank you.
Christina S.
Explain to me how the strange way that districts 14 and 15 are drawn protects "communities of interests." It's obvious to everyone that this new map is meant to dilute and disregard the interests of rural communities in the Hillsdale and Jackson counties by lumping them in with urban Ann Arbor. Southern Michigan does NOT share the same interests as Ann Arbor. This new independent redistricting commission is using the same old partisan gerrymandering to give an unfair advantage to urban districts!
Carl L Hamann
I oppose this map due to the fact it divides Midland County. I am a councilman for the Village of Sanford. We work very closely with Midland county and the City of Midland . We need to have a single voice representing our issues. As of last years national disaster we need focused representation to help us rebuild the massive destruction of our area and communities!!
Zak Garriss
Examine the substance of the comments on the map. Those who oppose the attachment of rural and conservative communities in Districts 14 and 15 to Ann Arbor offer a reason: the larger number of liberal votes in Ann Arbor functionally silences the fewer conservatives who would now be attached from the areas of Jonesville, Jerome, Somerset, etc. Look at the comments of those in favor - they make claims without proof, saying that representation of diverse interests will be the result without offering any explanation of how, directly contrary to simple logic. This is clearly a gerrymandering initiative being supported here in this forum by people with partisan interests without the benefit of reason or facts. Let's be better than this.
Barbara A Conley
I think district 37 is a reasonably fair district. Overall I thank the commission for paying attention to partisan fairness. The state Senate maps are now a toss up, by the metrics we can access!
Drew P.
I live in Hillsdale County and the citizens of my region of Michigan have very little in common with those in Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti. My region and that of Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti share neither cultural nor economic interests. District 15 is a clear violation of Michigan Constitution's Art. 4§6(13)(d), which proscribes drawing districts in order to advance the political interests and electoral advantages of a particular political party. This effort *clearly* constitutes partisan gerrymandering in order to dilute the political efficacy of GOP voters in Jackson and Hillsdale in favor of the Democratic Party. Willful distortions of true political representation, the cornerstone of our popular government, is not something Michiganders can abide.
Ben Crenshaw
I live in Hillsdale County and I can tell you the people of northern Jonesville, Jerome, and Somerset have little in common with those in Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti. These are not "communities of interests" that share cultural, historical, or economic interests (per Michigan Constitution, Art. 4§6(13)(c)). District 15 is a violation of Art. 4§6(13)(d) that prohibits drawing districts in such a way to give disproportionate advantage to any political party: liberal Dems in Ann Arbor will clearly dilute if not utterly drown out conservative GOP voters in Jackson and Hillsdale. This districting is obviously gerrymandering for partisan purposes.
Drew Jones
Please shuffle these districts around. First, the border of the southern Kent County seat should be Wealthy, not Fulton. Also, Cascade makes more sense to be in the southern half of Grand Rapids because of the airport and not East Grand Rapids. Lastly, please shift the surrounding districts . District 20 contains Byron Township in the North and Benton Harbor to the South. These areas have nothing in common. District 33 has bits and pieces of 7 different counties. District 18 is grabbing parts of Kent County that belong with the other Kent County areas. I believe you can shift these seats around to make every one look better than currently drawn.
Nathan Neveau
Districts 14 and 15 - the districts regarding Ann Arbor - are problematic. As a resident of Hillsdale County, I am especially disappointed in district 15. Members of our community ought not be scooped out and thrown in with the voters in Ann Arbor. Splitting up Hillsdale County divides conservative voters and dilutes the conservative vote in Michigan. If you adopt this map, you will have failed in you efforts to curtail gerrymandering. Please reconsider the Senate districts.
Stephen Richmann
This is map is either malicious or braindead moronic. Whichever it is, it doesn't serve the residents of northern Hillsdale very well. It is and ought to be understood as a giant middle finger to those constituents.
Dylan Croup
Districts 14 and 15 are egregious examples of partisan gerrymandering. They subordinate rural interests to the urban centers like Ypsilanti and Ann Arbor.
Colin Brown
Districts 14 and 15 are ridiculous and totally disregard the rural communities of interest in Hillsdale and Jackson counties. What does Jerome or Moscow have in common with Ypsilanti? Same with Albion and Ann Arbor?
Timothy Young
District 32 doesn't work well for me. I'm just inside the northern edge even though my work, civic and social life all take place north of me. But hey, I get it. I'd rather it be fair for the greatest number than simply work for me. Nice job.
This one again is gerrymandering. Please stop and consider the population requirements for redistricting. This suggestion far exceeds that requirement and therefore only leaves one deduction, you are gerrymandering. We voted for the people by the people and I am very disappointed, except for Commissioners Clark, Lange and Wagner who seem to be contemplating why the people chose citizens to accomplish this process. The families in the City of Midland and the County of Midland have more shared concerns with education, employment, law enforcement, social welfare... than they do with the people in nearby cities. Keep Midland County together, please. Gladwin is part of our watershed district and if not kept together we could loose the much needed help to recover from the dam damages over the next 10 yrs.
Joan Long
The boundary between Senate districts should be Wealthy St , NOT Fulton. Wealthy St. follows the ward line which are core Communities of interests.
Joan long
The 4 Ottawa County Townships are rural and do not belong with Metro Grand Rapids. Cannon and Algoma Township can be added to balance the population.
Griffin McHaffie
The way district 15 just swoops over to scoop up some of Hillsdale County's voters is obvious political partisanship to dilute the effect of those conservative voters. We see what you're doing. You are abusing the authority entrusted to you.
Kevin Dolin
In this map I count 8 districts that cross Wayne county boundaries. My own city of 100,000 is portioned. How does this promote communities of interest?
Ryan Waddington
This is now the 3rd version of the map that I have been told is "Fair". I fail to see how it keeps getting "fairer". With this one, it is clear you are gerrymandering the other way, with all the contorted district shapes. Neighbors should share representation. I live in Webster Township technically, but 3 minutes after I get in my car I am in downtown Dexter. So now you’ve sliced the northern reach of Washtenaw County from the Dexter city limits north and replaced it with Stockbridge? Doesn’t make any sense. Districting should respect county lines wherever possible. Start with each of the counties and then either combine or split as necessary to balance total number of votes and get the right number of districts. Get as close as you can and then stop. But please - no more contorted district lines!!!
Jeannette Richard
The way that districts 14 and 15 have been drawn is shameful partisan gerrymandering. Hillsdale County and Jackson County have nothing in common with the liberal Ann Arbor. They have clearly been lumped in with Ann Arbor in order to allow Democrats to overwhelm the rural population in these areas and effectively deprive these communities of representation. This independent commission was supposed to fix gerrymandering, not make it worse!
Cathy Leikhim
Midland and Gladwin counties should be connected in any version of a Senate map. Please provide a Senate map option that reflects the voices of the Tittabawassee watershed communities.
Daniel G
These districts are ridiculous and disrespectful of the right of the people of Jackson County to have representation. Ann Arbor is a unique brand of liberalism way more liberal than most democrats. It is fundamentally undemocratic spread Ann Arbor's influence beyond its city limits.
Jacob Nelson
If there is any care at all for representing the distinct interests of entirely different communities, Districts 14 and 15 must be redrawn. Make no mistake, these proposed districts are no attempt to ensure that every vote matters and that every voice is heard. In actuality, it ensures that the interests of places such as Jackson, Northern Hillsdale County, and various rural areas will be overlooked on account of their inclusion in the same district as Ann Arbor. These very different sets of interests do not admit of mixture. Ann Arbor will dominate and effectively disenfranchise those living in areas that hold different interests. In the spirit of true fairness and representation, these proposed districts must be redrawn.
Rachel Cram
Neither Hillsdale County nor Jackson share common interests with Ann Arbor. To combine rural geographic communities with a heavily partisan and populated metro area could be seen as an intentional act to undermine the voting power of the citizens of Hillsdale and Jackson Counties.
Jose Arevalo
No part of Jackson or Hillsdale county should be lumped with Ann Arbor. They are worlds apart and share no interests. Ann Arbor couldn't care less about the issues that are important the rural areas around. It should be lumped in with Ypsilanti. To do otherwise is clearly gerrymandering.
Douglas Wright
District 14 is a disaster. How anyone with half a brain would think that is a representative district is beyond me. Jackson and Ann Arbor similar, since when? All this will accomplish is massive rural areas being ruled over by the leftists in Ann Arbor.
I thought all of Ottawa was a community of interest and would not be split up.
Please do not join rural area in Ottawa with the City of Grand Rapids mi these are not communities of interest
Emma Davis
Thank you for improving the partisan fairness on this map. I still have concerns around VRA districts in Detroit. Several VRA districts have been combined with suburbs; the west side of Detroit with Farmington and Redford Charter Twp for example. This disadvantages Detroit, a minority-majority city, and means that residents will never be able to elect a candidate of their choice to represent them in the State Senate. Please reconsider this and respect the rights of VRA districts.
Kris DeAngelo
This is NOT my community. I do not travel to Fenton or Fowlerville. This effectively nullifies my vote because my views are not similar nor will anyone elected from this district represent or listen to my or my neighbors south of 8 miles.
Rich Thrush
District 30 north Grand Rapids should not include these 4 rural townships in Ottawa county. District 30 can easily be improved ( without affecting the balance of the state map districts) by adding Cannon and Algoma townships in Kent county and moving these 4 Ottawa townships to like district 33. Then only minor adjustments to districts 18 and 20 will be necessary. This will vastly improve the communities of interest of each of these districts and keep district 30 area contiguous with Grand Rapids 6 city area and all in Kent county
Brandon DuBois-Jones
Boundary line needs to be moved from Fulton St to Wealthy St or even to Hall St. Then move further into Gaines Township and Byron Township.
Adam Kroczaleski
The number of communities, individual cities, and even precincts you have split to gerrymander these senate districts is an embarrassment to the idea of a citizen redistricting commission. You could have set a gold standard, but you have done a worse job than the politicians because it is clear you don't understand the communities all across out state. You consistently have put Arenac County with northern counties we have no ties to, and kept us separated from Bay County because it helps you draw partisan Democrat maps. Unacceptable.
Rebecca Wilson
Hillsdale County does not share a community interest with the area surrounding Ann Arbor. So called "partisan fairness" should not take precedence over the Commission's Constitutionally mandated directive to create districts representative of COIs.
Samuel Lair
This is not what the Commission was tasked with doing. It was supposed to create districts which represented communities of interest. Northern Hillsdale County and the Jackson are not within the same community of interests as Ipsi and Ann Arbor. So called "partisan fairness," should NOT take precedence over communities of interest, as illustrated in the Michigan Constitution.
Soh Suzuki
I appreciate that the three neighborhoods on the far east side of Detroit are together (East English Village, Morningside, Cornerstone Village). However, I'm still challenged that the district extends far north into Macomb County, where their area is being split into three sections, when they can be in the same district. Why not extend District 10 into Grosse Pointes, instead of streching it out beyond the county line? If communities of interests are to guide the process, then please respect municipal and county lines.
Margo Czinski
As a resident of Augusta Township who previously worked and lived in Ann Arbor for many years, I fear that my views will not be represented by being in the proposed District 16. I don’t feel that I belong to the community that district encompasses.
Melissa Andersen
While I appreciate the changes that have been made to make the districts more accurate there is still along way to go there are still many areas that are misrepresented here including areas that are two counties away. Why? What good does that serve in representing our local concerns? Being from Manchester which has become a commuter's burb of Ann Arbor is slumped in with those votes from Homer and Clarendon and Jerome?
Christa Krohn
The City of Midland and Flint should not be in the same Congressional district. None of your maps provide an option that addresses this. Your maps simply cater to Democrat demands. Independents and Republicans live in these areas too and deserve to be heard in this process. Stop ignoring us. A city of 40,000 has vastly different needs than a city of 100,000. Please change one of your 3 congressional maps to separate Midland from Flint.
Terri Voepel-Lewis
My small area below Joy Road and above Eastgate has split our community which belongs with Dexter/Ann Arbor and put us into the Brighton, Fowlerville, Livingston County area. This will invalidate my vote and voice.
William Chtisten
This does not look right. Why is a portion of District 22 sticking down into District 14. The area around Chelsea is missing a quarter of its school district. Then there is a square of District 14 placed northwest of Chelsea into another District (light green). District 14 extends too far to the west. I thought there was a program that mathematically balanced population with geography. This looks like political "calculations" not science.
Judy Davis
I do not support the Cherry V2 map, as it splits Southfield and Lathrup Village from Oak Park. These 3 communities comprise contiguous African-American and Jewish COIs and this map unfairly separates our communities of interest.
Roger Rittenhouse
These Ottawa County townships do not share a commonality of interest with the Grand Rapids community. They are rural and do not share the urban concerns and interests of the Grand Rapids area. They would be better served by joining them with the rest of Ottawa County. The Cannon and Algoma townships are a much better fit in terms of interests with the Grand Rapids area.
CJ Marshman
Great map overall EXCEPT Kentwood and East Grand Rapids do not belong together. Maybe Cascade and East Grand Rapids could trade districts?
Alexander McKay
I'm really not seeing the logic of district 15. It snakes over 4 counties and connects communities that have very little in common or connections. I kind of see some logic on 14 in that it follows the I94 corridor, but 15 feels a lot like the bizarre, out-of-touch districts we're trying to get away from.
Richard Paas
On the whole this map has shaped up well. However, for the second time now - Ottowa county rural farmlands shouldn't be grouped in with the West Grand Rapids district.
Patrick John Quist
I just do not understand the commission's reasoning for District 20. Exurb Grand Rapids is not even remotely a community of interest with the lakeshore or South Haven or Benton Harbor! Please reconsider this district!
Daniel Harris
I only count one district that is plurality black and zero that are majority black. This map is begging to be struck down by courts on VRA grounds.
Daniel Harris
Splitting cities like Grand Rapids is indefensible if the commission is supposed to be following criteria like communities of interest and avoiding chopping up municipalities. It is extremely easy to draw a clean district with a population extremely close to the target by combining all of Grand Rapids, Kentwood, and East Grand Rapids. Please revise the lines to do this.
merlin steffes
A State Senate district consist of 265,000 people. The City of Grand Rapids is 200,000 people. Splitting the City of Grand Rapids into two different districts violates municipal boundaries in an obvious intention to guarantee another democrat senator. The whole City of Grand Rapids must be in the same district since this is a community of interest that is being split. The City Ann Arbor should not be split for the same reasons. The City of Lansing should be in the same district with East Lansing and surrounding communities. The gerrymandering is grotesque.
This area belongs to Ottawa not Kent.
Nancy Mroczkowski
Ottawa County should be kept whole, there is much more community of interest between the rural twps. than with the city of Grand Rapids. You could add Algoma and Cannon Twps to the east of Grand Rapids to balance the populations distribution from removing the Ottawa County Twps. If you look at a map drawn in ( you would see that change.
Nancy Mroczkowski
Thank you for unpacking Grand Rapids, but can you please move the northern boarder line between #29 & #30 to Wealthy St from Fulton St? Wealthy St is a Ward boundary, has been for 40 years and this change would better reflect communities of interest in the city. If you look at a map drawn in ( you would see that changes.
Kim Gates
Please make the boundary between the Senate Districts #29 and #30 Wealthy St not Fulton. Wealthy St follows the Ward line inside of Grand Rapids and the Wards are core to communities of interest.
Kim Gates
Please remove these few Ottawa townships from Kent County.
Cindy Krieg
These rural communities would be better represented if included with an Ottawa County community of interest. There is little in common with Grand Rapids and the Ada area.
Cindy Krieg
The second ward boundary in Grand Rapids is at Wealthy St, rather than Fulton. Moving Senate District 30 to Wealthy St would keep the second ward community of interest in one district, rather than cutting out one section.
Fredric Overeem
It makes since to move the boundary between districts 29 and 30 to Wealthy street. That way neighborhoods are not divided.
Fredric Overeem
These Ottawa townships are rural and have little in common with suburban and metro Grand Rapids
Pei-Lan Tsou
Thank you for unpacking Grand Rapids, the district line should be moved though to better reflect our community of interest by tweaking this map and add the precincts north of Wealthy to the district #30. That is the natural boundary for the city.
Pei-Lan Tsou
Ottawa County should not be link to Metro Grand Rapids. This is rural area with their own specific issues. Keep Ottawa County together.
The boundary in Grand Rapids between Senate Districts #29 & #30 should be move South to Wealthy Street which aligns with neighborhoods as demarcated by the city. using Fulton Street as a boundary cuts a neighborhood in half. the neighborhoods in Grand Rapids are communities of Interest
The boundary in Grand Rapids between Senate Districts #29 & #30 should be move South to Wealthy Street which aligns with neighborhoods as demarcated by the city. using Fulton Street as a boundary cuts a neighborhood in half. the neighborhoods in Grand Rapids are communities of Interest
The rural Ottawa County Township should not be link to Metro Grand Rapids these are two distinct demographics and each have their own specific issues. they should be in the same district as the rest of Ottawa County
Robert Dragan
This map is an improvement over the past maps for State Senate districts around Grand Rapids. However the Commissioners keep putting Ottawa CO townships in with Ada Township which is an eastern suburb of Grand Rapids. Ottawa CO should be removed from district 30. District 30 should have its western border right down the western edge of Kent CO. None of Ottawa CO is in my COI. Areas north and east of Ada Township in Kent CO are more of my COI's. Also the north-south line that separates districts 29 and 30 should be Wealthy St., not Fulton St., because Wealthy St. has been the border line between wards for 40 years. These ward lines are important to Grand Rapids residents. Replace Ottawa CO townships with Cannon and Algoma Townships, these second two also being in Kent CO, helping to keep Kent CO whole. Thank you for unpacking Grand Rapids which makes these maps more partisan fair. Look at suggested map attached in
Loida Tapia
I like that you have worked on partisan fairness in this map. But my community of the west side of Detroit is lumped in with Farmington and Redford Charter Twp this is to a disadvantage to Detroiters who will never be able to win a candidate of their choice to represent them in the State Senate. Please reconsider Detroit's VRA districts.
Please do not include townships from Ottawa County in Senate District 30. Ottawa County's interest are more focused on rural and small-town issues and solutions. Senate District 30's problems and solutions are increasingly those of a metropolitan area.
I was at the public meeting in Grand Rapids. I think that the boundary between districts 29 and 30 should be Wealthy Street, not Fulton as in the present mapping. I am a strong believer in city wards as important political communities, since we have city commissioners elected within those wards. Please make the southern boundary Wealthy Street.
How is this not a gerrymander? I'd love to see someone try to explain how this is a community of interest. It was clearly done for partisan reasons and is an insult to the jackson and western Washtenaw community.
Matthew Haupt
It may make more sense for Troy/Rochester to be included with Birmingham/Clawson and removed completely from Sterling Heights.
How does this represent a community of interest? You think the people in Calhoun have more in common with northern AA than the people in southern AA? This is ridiculous.
Please include East Sterling Heights with rest of Sterling Heights and Troy. Do not disenfranchise the Chaldean communities living in East of Sterling Heights. Map p7997 does this. Thank you commissioners.
That anyone of you can say in good conscious that this district will adequately represent the people in the Jackson (I do not live here) area is very telling. They will have their voices drowned out by the Ann Arbor area. The point of this exercise is to give the people in any given district a rep who can advocate for the district; how much attention is really going to be paid to these residents? They deserve effective representation as well. Quit trying to spread Ann Arbor across half the state.