The "Independent Commission" is bogus as expected. The goal is clearly to favor Democrats as much as possible by lumping large swathes of rural areas with dense urban areas in order to swing seats blue. District 6 is a prime example of this, but you see it all over the map, particularly in the southeast.

With this map, the minority will drown out the voice of the majority! This is the worst map and very unfair!!

Has anyone anywhere on any of these boards said: "This map favors the Democrats"? Not that I can see. Instead, it seems the Republican partisans are haggling over splitting Midland or some such masquerade. We are arguing in all of this over how far away from partisan fairness we can tolerate. To my mind a little sickness is still not healthy. A little unfair is still unfair. We are asked to choose among maps that are grossly tilted toward the Republicans, or only those that are a wee bit unfair, or even ever so rarely one (Szetela Congressional) that actually carves out partisan fairness and meets other constitutional criteria. Wow! If that can be done once, it should be possible for all the electoral contests. Great that you've talked to each other, great that you've done a lot of hard, hard work, but most of the results aren't there yet. Sorry it's been a slog. Trump screwed up the census, and the virus didn't help. But democracy's more important than all of that. Keep working to get really fair maps. Lange Congressional is a dog. We could have gotten this from the current legislature, but the voters said, "No more!". Please listen. Throw this map out. Favor Szetela for Congressional seats, and work to improve the Senate maps toward Linden, and the MI House maps, which are especially bad. Really bad. Hickory is over on the edge of passable, but far from good enough. Thanks for taking the comments and bearing with all this. Democracy is messy, but still the best system, and we should try it in Michigan. We haven't had it for quite a long time.

A truly dreadful map that cannot be called representative in any sense. The worst of the Congressional drafts. Profoundly partisan and extremely unfair. We will get rotten, oppressive government from this. A hack job. Toss it out.

This is the worst map—it likely guarantees that Republicans will win the most seats, even when Democrats get the most votes. Please do not endorse this map.

Chestnut map is better. This map does not keep rural communities whole.

I am very disappointed in the Congressional 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.

Midland needs to be unpacked. This is the worst of the worst of all the maps. Please do not consider this map.

this is the worst map. This map makes it likely Republicans win most seats even when Democrats get most votes. To say this map is horrible is an understatement.

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.

these maps are unfair. It takes the County of Wayne and breaks it in different pieces.

This map 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.

This map does not reflect the non-partisan, anti-gerrymandering that was voted for in 2018. Please please reject this map. Szetela, BirchV2, and Chestnut are all much less biased and are preferred to this map based on review of the data.

REJECT THIS MAP. It is way too partisan. This map makes it likely Republicans win most seats even when Democrats get most votes. This map does not provide the anti-gerrymandering that we voted for in 2018.

This map discourages appears to be aimed at splitting up communities of interest with the intent of discouraging others from participating in the election process. Please do not consider this map.

This map divides Jackson County, please keep our County whole.

Downriver area deserves its own area of Representation. District 6 extends to Ann Arbor and Grass Lake. Not even the same neighborhood.

This is NOT a good map for most of the state. Please choose BirchV2 instead for Michigan's Congressional Map, for it will be the most fair; and that is the point of this whole exercise--Prop 2. thank you!

Lange is flat out wrong for Michigan! Maybe California could appreciate this monkey business, there's absolutely no need for this nonsense around here.

This map does not represent communities of interest.

This map is cleaner than Birch but it's still pretty bad for Muskegon because we're in a district where we can't elect someone who will represent our diverse interests. People of color are a community of interest.

dislike. fractures Jackson County and runs way to Far East, Detroit area. Big differnces.

This map should be rejected. It is not fair and does not represent the communities of interest.

I think this map is not a good map for Michigan.

This district goes too far west.

all theses maps seem to shove taylor into a position with no voice

We have nothing in common with Monroe.

Can someone explain how the desire for separating “urban” areas from “rural” places is tossed out the window when it comes to the City of Midland? Com. Lange is the champion of the need to keep rural areas rural, because wells and market access etc. Why should the Dow chemicals company town be the exception to the rule?

I am not a fan of some of the other areas on this map as a whole. My own district does not differ much from all the other collaborative options. Why did this commissioner change her own draft map for this area? It was the only different configuration offered during the previous public hearing period. A shame - now every map looks remarkably similar to the current Congressional 12th wherein the Ann Arbor/Ypsilanti area is connected to the hour distant Downriver communities by snaking along the southern boundaries of Wayne County. Don’t publish some propaganda in the “Candid Conversations ” video telling me this commission didn’t even look at the current maps and started from scratch on everything. How else did this commission arrive at the decision to combine Downriver(minus Dearborn) with Washtenaw County. As a community of interest, Downriver asked to be kept together, not placed with a neighboring county. I can recall no COI proposals that suggested Wyandotte has strong economic or cultural ties to Dexter or Ann Arbor. Your individual draft did link Livingston and Washtenaw and that has had public comment supporting the connection. Shared services and state funding for connecting infrastructure further reinforce the economic ties between Brighton/Howell and Ann Arbor/Ypsilanti. Oh well, forgone conclusion.

I don’t like this map very much.

This is better than AppleV2, but still not the best. It divides Jackson and places Battle Creek and Albion with Hillsdale and Branch Counties, two different places with different needs. See my comments on AppleV2 for why.

As a Midland resident, nothing about our commerce, culture or future growth indicates eyes to the West. We seem to be all about the Tri-Cities (historically and economically) thus it makes sense that our political districts should too! Thanks for the opportunity to comment.

Dislike

I do not like the LANGE congressional map because it does not keep Jackson County whole. Like Lenawee and Hillsdale, Jackson is primarily rural. I don't think the chunk of Washtenaw belongs with Jackson Co. Please don't adopt this map. The Chestnut map is much better. Thank you.

Grand Rapids is I believe one of the larger cities in Michigan besides Detroit. The people there will not be represented as this district combines them with a majority of farm area voters in other counties. I am sure these farm townships do not want to be in this district as well. There will be many conflicting priorities for a representative to address. This map has the worst seats to vote ratio for Michigan statewide

This is the worst, least fair of all this batch. Please reject.

What an awful map! Why in the world would Midland be combined with rural towns to the west? This is a terrible map with a strong partisan lean to favor the GOP. Please reject this map. Thank you for the persistent hard work!

Please do not use this map. It is not fair and does not represent the communities of interest.

Work to improve Szetela and don't waste any time on this unfair and undemocratic map!

This map is outrageous and should be resoundingly rejected as undemocratic.

This map clearly cracks the voting strength of Kalamazoo and puts it in with a large rural area.

This map does not keep the Tricity area together. We have more in common than we with the West Coast

I dislike this map. I don't shop in Washtenaw County and people in Washtenaw certainly don't shop in Jackson County. I think these should be kept separate.

I prefer Birch

This is an undesirable map. I have another preference.

Please do not advance this map. It continues the gerrymandering of the last two decades by separating Midland from the other two Tri-Cities. It does not recognize the common interests of Mid-Michigan. The rural and shoreline communities west of Midland do not share the industrial and manufacturing interests or the cultural interests that Midland has in common with Bay City, Saginaw, and Flint. The Chestnut map is a much better choice for my area.

West Michigan city populations are not represented in this map. Grand Rapids is a very large city, but the large amount of surrounding rural areas in this district dominate the population. This map is not representative for cities such as Grand Rapids or the state of Michigan in general.

This map absolutely does not represent Midland well at all. This this map is the epitome of gerrymandering and was not created in the spirit of the redistricting initiative. The city of Midland is part of the Tri-Cities and Mid-Michigan. As a resident of Midland I am far more connected to Bay City and Saginaw then the other communities Midland is grouped with in this map. Removing Midland and putting it with rural areas reeks of a personal agenda by this commissioner.

This is the worst of all of the choices. All of the maps have a Republican bias but this is the worst.

This map does not reflect that the municipalities of Midland, Bay City and Saginaw have much in common as public policy priorities given their significant industrial economic bases or that people live in one and work in another. This would put the city of Midland back into a largely rural district with which we have little in common. Our current district was gerrymandered, and this just perpetuates that illogical grouping. I implore you not to select this map. I appreciate the significant work the commission has done, but this map is a dud for me.

Gives unfair partisan advantage to one party. We want competitive districts.

I dislike this map. I feel that this plan does not follow the constitutional requirement to be based on a Communities of Interest criteria and is gerrymandered based on partisan considerations in violation of the constitutional requirements and should be rejected.

I encourage you to keep Jackson and Washtenaw counties separate as they are very different in needs and interests.

The western Michigan area contains the only other large city population besides Detroit in Michigan. By combining Grand Rapids with the adjoining rural townships in Kent, Ottawa and Ionia counties, the percentage of rural population is so large that the priority needs of the city will be completely discounted. All the other areas of Michigan are small town/rural so there is no other opportunity to represent city type areas. The city areas of western Michigan deserve representation (over 500,000 people in Grand Rapids and over 200,000 in Kalamazoo). This map is just as bad as the Birch map. This is the most unfair map for Michigan and western Michigan. Please do not select this map.

I do not like this map. Commissioner Lange clearly has an agenda because every map she has drawn takes Midland from the Tri-Cities and Mid-Michigan and places us with counties we have little in common with. This District 2 does not reflect the reality that Midland has been and still is part of the Tri-Cities and part of Mid-Michigan. There are so many reasons that these communities fit together, and yet Commissioner Lange continually chooses to ignore those facts for her own agenda. Please do not choose this map.

This map is not optimal because it breaks the large metro population of grand rapids into small subsections all weakened from rural nearby counties.

I do not like the Lange congressional map. It combines 3 low density Townships in the eastern portion of Jackson County with Washtenaw County. These 3 Jackson County Townships are very rural communities with almost no city services (water, sewer, broadband, public transportation, etc). Ann Arbor and large portions of Washtenaw County have all of these things. If this map were to be used, these Townships would not have a voice in Congress. Please don't adopt this map. The Chestnut map is much better. Thank you.

Looks like district 3 was drawn to intentionally add significant rural population to offset the urban influence of Grand Rapids. Grand Rapids has significant industry, business, higher education and medical activity. Being the second largest city in Michigan, it has problems/needs consistent with metropolitan areas. Combining a significant rural population in adjacent counties does not support or compliment this community. Both Apple V2 and Chestnut maps respect the community of interest aspect much better. In addition, this map is the worst for fairness across the state of Michigan.

To say this map is horrible is an understatement.

The urban/suburban populations in west Michigan are not represented in this map. Grand Rapids, Kalamazoo and Muskegon are all grouped with rural areas. No better than the current Congressional district maps for the state.

This is a terrible map.

Unfair statewide and has boundaries throughout that are poorly defined.

I do not like the Lange congressional map because it does not keep Jackson County whole.

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.

This map is the worst of the proposed maps; the least fair, least reflects the electorate, most partisan imbalance.

While I like the configuration of Macomb County and Sterling Heights in this map, it does not achieve partisan fairness in a close election. This map is biased in favor of the Republican party and should not be adopted. This district configuration is present in other proposed maps with better partisan fairness measures.

The Lange congressional map does not keep Jackson County whole. It combines the eastern portion of Jackson County, including Waterloo Township, with Washtenaw county. Waterloo Township is a very rural community with no city water, no city sewer, no broadband, and no public transportation. The city of Ann Arbor and much of Washtenaw County has all of these things. If this map were to be used, Waterloo Township would not have a voice in Congress. Please don't adopt this map. The Chestnut map is much better. Thank you.

This map doesn't make since Grand Rapids and Kalamazoo are not communities of interest.

Districts do not follow natural boundaries or clear community connections. It gives the appearance of political influence and undermines the confidence (and voice) of the voters.

this map totally fails at communities of interest and the lines dividing many counties are just bizarre.

This map violates the state constitution. I don't think more needs to be said than that. (d) Districts shall not provide a disproportionate advantage to any political party. A disproportionate advantage to a political party shall be determined using accepted measures of partisan fairness. (e) Districts shall not favor or disfavor an incumbent elected official or a candidate.

This map is unacceptable because the resulting political party scores are grossly off. Please choose the Skelela map so our votes are accurately reflected.

Splintering Downriver taking away their voice and identity with this gerrymandering next step, political castration then their local autonomy.

All of Downriver is a community of interest. Basically we are one community. It seems these maps are dividing communities of interest rather than grouping them together for a more fair election. Wyandotte has very little in common with the Ann Arbor area and the more rural communities in the proposed District 6. Downriver communities work together for the benefit of the whole area. Many residence have very little to do with the western cities included in this map.

This map reduces the voice of minorities by putting many rural voters with city voters. The city votes where most of the minorities live are divided up in different districts to reduce their effect.

Not a good map for West Michigan representation. Same situation as the current district 3 Gerrymander. There is some merit to combining city like areas like Grand Rapids and Muskegon, but there are too many country areas for fairness. Better to go with Apple V2 to better represent all these areas.

Why is Taylor being grouped with Detroit? These two cities have NOTHING in common. Downriver communities should have been grouped together.

This map is similar to the current congressional district 3. The map is constructed to add many rural areas to the greater Grand Rapids area to eliminate the possibility of getting a Democratic candidate elected.

Unfair map because Grand Rapids is with so many rural areas. Will have the same effect as the current district 3 Gerrymandered congressional map. The influence of large population Grand Rapids metro city areas is discounted. Go with Apple V2 to better represent all these areas.

This congressional plan looks to be the worst of the lot. It makes sense to keep Clinton, Eaton and Ingham together. Just looking at the shape of the 7th district screams gerrymander.

All the maps are unfair but the Lange map is the worst. It has Republican bias. It breaks up the Lansing region, while the others do not. Chestnut, Birch and Szetala are preferable. Map for Lansing Region district is less compact.

This is an unfair map for Michigan voters. Also, not a good map for Asians. Combines city areas with country areas to reduce the significance of our votes and divide priority for our needs in the city. Definitely a Republican influenced map.

Please keep Clinton County whole

This is an unfair map for Michigan voters. Also, not a good map for Asians. Combines city areas with country areas to reduce the significance of our votes and divide priority for our needs in the city.

This is an unfair partisan map for West Michigan and the state as a whole. It weakens the vote of large population Grand Rapids metro city areas by combining with rural townships. Apple V2 or Chestnut are much better to represent all these areas.

Lange is a Republican gerrymander. Republicans would have won in 2020, which was a Democratic year. It also splits up the Lansing region to accomplish that. Chestnut, Birch and Szetela are much fairer. You want to choose fairness, not bias.

Troy, Michigan belongs in Oakland County, not Macomb County.

This is an unfair partisan map for West Michigan and the state as a whole. This map has similar effects to the current district 3 Gerrymandered congressional map. It dilutes the influence of large population Grand Rapids metro city areas by combining with rural townships in Barry, Allegan and Ionia Counties. These townships do not want to be in the same district with Grand Rapids city as well. Better to go with Apple V2 or Chestnut to better represent all these areas.

When will this commission draw a map that respects communities of interest for Washtenaw County?? I live in rural Saline Twp. District 6 would extend to Gross Ille, Southgate and Flat Rock?? Do your duty under the MI Constitution to keep communities of interest together.

The interests of Rochester Hills, Troy, Royal Oak and Ferndale are similar and interconnected (by Woodward Avenue and I75). Those interests are disconnected from Sterling Heights, St. Clair Shores and communities to the East. To expect a member of the U.S. House of Representative to adequately represent a hodgepodge of such very different communities is, I fear, asking too much.

This map is yet another disregard for the distinctions between Oakland and Macomb county cities and voters. Troy, and the cities north and south of it should be aligned with other Oakland County communities,

The worst of all the maps

THis is the worst of all the maps presented. This map looks like it was drawn specifically to give the most seats to the party that has the fewest votes.

This map does not keep Jackson County whole. Rather it puts the county in three different districts and splits off the rural eastern portion of the county and joins it with Washtenaw county, specifically Ann Arbor. You could not pick two dissimilar areas to put together. It would definitely leave these people without a voice. What a mess!

Lange is the most discriminatory map. It is seriously biased Republican and breaks up communities of interest. Please do not used this unfair map.

This is the least desirable proposed map for the Lansing Tri- county area . It is much more partisan and less compact than any of the other alternatives proposed for this area .

I don't like this map: All the maps are unfair however this is the worst. Map for Lansing Region district is less compact. It undoes the work of other maps to treat Ingham-Eaton Clinton as a unified region.

This map doesn't represent the diversity of the capital city. It only includes parts of Clinton County and adds Jackson. The Birch Map seems more far to both parties and represents the regional culture and people better.

This map appears not to be very compact; it groups together diverse areas that are parts of several different metro areas, areas that do not necessarily have the same interests. This map appears to be biased towards rural areas and dilutes the influence of the largest population communities.

Although all of the maps have a Republican bias, the Lange Map is the most biased of the choices. It splits up the Lansing region. Chestnut and Birch v2 are more fair choices.

This map is problematic in several ways. Statewide, it includes much more partisan bias than other maps. Adopting this map would be an endorsement of partisan gerrymandering, rather than a remedy for it. Also, it misses the boat on other constitutional criteria, such as compactness. Splitting the Ingham/Eaton/Clinton community of interest is also a problem. Chestnut and Birch are better choices for the commission.

As a resident of Lyndon Township, I am strongly opposed to splitting Lyndon Township between two districts. With few exceptions these residents are all in Washtenaw County school districts, in the Chelsea Area Fire Authority, in the Chelsea District Library, and share the Lyndon Township municipal fiber network. It is unfair to group northeastern Lyndon residents with a county with which they do not identify.

Clearly with such large districts, many districts are going to capture a wide diversity of communities. Given all the maps I've looked at, and all the comments, I still like map 42172 the best - https://districtr.org/plan/42172 - chunky districts, follows county and municipal boundaries better than other maps I've seen

There are several much better maps: Sztela, Birch v2, Chestnut.

This map is yet another disregard for the distinctions between Oakland and Macomb county cities and voters. Troy, and the cities north and south of it should be aligned with other Oakland County communities, which are largely professional and service businesses, retail and office, while Macomb is far more marine and industrial oriented. This district will be continuously in major conflict.

Awful map. Does not keep COI together. Split up in odd ways apparently only to even out numbers of voters, not COI's.

Not a good choice, since it only creates one competitive district. It is probably the MOST GERRRYMANDERED proposal of all. Chestnut is much better.

The Apple V2 map divides counties that should be kept whole. The Chestnut congressional map is a far better option since it is less disruptive of county lines. This will disenfranchise many rural voters. Cities do not share the same concerns such as broadband internet. I implore you, please do not adopt this map.

This is the most unfair of all the proposed congressional maps.

I dislike this map. It does not keep Jackson county whole and needlessly divides it.

This is the most unfair map. All are biased in favor of Republicans by the commission's metrics of lopsided margin, mean-median difference and efficiency gap. This is the worst. It also is the least compact for the Lansing area. It undoes the work in other maps to treat Ingham-Eaton-Clinton as a unified region. Chestnut is best. Birch and Szetela are much better.

This is the most unfair of all the proposed congressional maps.

Made a mistake and hit wrong opinion button on previous comment. This is the most unfair of all proposed Congressional maps. Strongly dislike.

Thank you for taking the time to create so many maps. It feels like many of them contain the same districting, which makes them all feel suspect. District 10, which combines Troy, Royal Oak and Rochester and Berkely with St. Clair Shores and other eastern areas will quickly become unworkable, as it combines newer neighborhoods that have specific needs with older ones that have different needs. That's in infrastructure, schools, safety and nearly every other category.

This is the least fairest of all the maps.

This map is the worst of the maps for the US House of Representatives. The map for the Lansing region is less compact.

Boo. Keep Jackson county in the same district.

This map is not balanced and unfairly represents urban areas

I do not like the LANGE V2 Congressional map because it does not keep Jackson County whole. It combines the eastern portion of Jackson County, including Waterloo Township, with Washtenaw County. Waterloo Township is a VERY rural community with no city water/sewer services, no broadband and no public transportation. Ann Arbor has all of these things. If this map was used, Waterloo Township would not have a voice in Congress. Please do NOT use this map. The CHESTNUT Congressional map better represents my community of interest. Thank you.

This proposed map unnecessarily divides up the eastern side and the northern portion of Jackson County completely splitting up our current Community of Interest. Please do adopt this map.

The Lange congressional map does not keep the counties whole and appears the least reasonable for rural Jackson County of all the 5 options. It not only combines the eastern portion of Jackson County with Washtenaw County but also combines the northern portion of Jackson County with Ingham County. Please do not adopt this map. The alternate Chestnut congressional map keeps the counties more whole and as such is the best option. Thank you.

This is a horrible map. It splits counties apart and "unpacks" Ann Arbor, which is simply a code word for gerrymandering for partisan purposes. Chestnut is a much fairer map.

Terrible map. Don't go there.

Chestnut remains the most fairly representative congressional map. This map pushes Troy with communities too far to the east to be able to provide fair representation. There are no COIs between the Oakland County jurisdictions here and the eastern jurisdictions of Macomb County.

This is not a good map for keeping Jackson County whole.

Bad map. Keep Jackson with the rest of the county!

This map is horrible. Splitting up our Jackson County community into 3 awkward districts? No, thank you.

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.

This map breaks up Jackson County and the community it serves into 3 different directions! This is a terrible map! Please remember that the law states that communities of interest must be a priority and that districts should not provide a disproportionate advantage for any political party. This map does not solve the issue of gerrymandering.

This map is less fair than other choices (Chestnut, Birch and Szetela)

By far the worst example of of keeping our communities of interest and the best example of bias. As a Jackson city and Blackman Township resident and taxpayer I can find no logic in clumping our residents into Ingham County other than to pack and appease a Democrat agenda.

This map is the worst one of this group. It is very unfair from a partisan perspective and packs Democrats in too many places.

The Lange congressional does not keep Jackson County whole. It combines the eastern portion of Jackson County, including Waterloo Township, with Washtenaw county. Waterloo Township is a very rural community with no city water, no city sewer, no broadband, and no public transportation. Ann Arbor has all of these things. If this map were to be used, Waterloo Township would not have a voice in Congress. Please don't adopt this map. The Chestnut map is much better. Thank you.

This map is biased towards Republicans and packs Democrats

This map is very unfair. Please don't pack Democrats. Pass Birch or Szetela.

As in the Birch V3 plan, Muskegon County has no common interests with the mid state counties.

We already explained this to you on the comment portal.(w5859) You are either very dim or are a vicious anti-democratic bigot who doesn’t care about fairness, Ms. Weleski. I suggest the commission check said referenced exchange before deciding how much value to accord your comments on any proposed maps.

Western Washtenaw and Eastern Jackson county should not be lumped in with Ann Arbor and eastern Washtenaw county. These are communities of interest that do not support the policies of eastern Washtenaw county and belong in district 5 or 7.

Why would we separate outlying areas of Clinton County from their more common neighbors with a district that is so oddly shaped. Move western Clinton County and Ionia County to District 2 and eastern/southern Clinton County to District 7.

Still don't like the sliver of Lyndon Township that gets placed separately from the rest of Washtenaw County

Still very disappointed to see this area zoned into district 9 instead of district 11 or 10. It doesn't make any sense to put any parts of Oakland county with district 9 and the entire thumb of Michigan. It makes even less sense to put this specific part of Oakland township into district 9 considering it is zoned into Rochester Community Schools yet most of the area zoned into this school district is in district 10 or 11. I am asking this area be zoned into district 10 or 11 for the sake of continuity for having constituents with common characteristics in the same district together.

Salem Township should be associated with Lyon Twp and South Lyon, as opposed to Ann Arbor, Plymouth and Northville. The majority of Salem Twp is South Lyon Schools. Most residents of the township would consider themselves part of the South Lyon area (especially since most have a South Lyon address). They go to South Lyon/Lyon Township for shopping, dining, church, etc.

I can not think of any reason why Battle Creek would be in this district and excluded from communities like Kalamazoo and Jackson. It very disappointing and bad district for my community and doesn't reflect anything I know from living in the area.

The Commission received clear feedback that Clinton, Ingham, and Eaton should be together. Why put Clinton in the 2nd District instead of Ionia?

This does not reflect any effort to make the district reasonably compact, respect municipal boundaries or reflect communities of interest, three of the required criteria.

Midland belongs with the Tri-Cites. The other commissioner's already made a compromise with Commissioner Lange that Midland would its own State House seat, but she totally ignores that and makes both a State Senate and Congressional Seat that takes them away from the Tri-Cites. Midland City is not rural and we belong with other local cities that would better represent us.

This map dilute Chaldean voices in Rochester Hills, Troy and Sterling Heights. Apple V2 is the best congressional map!