My Districting | MICHIGAN
Enterprise Redistricting Software & Services by Citygate GIS
Szetela Congressional
Loading geometries...
District 1
District 2
District 3
District 4
District 5
District 6
District 7
District 8
District 9
District 10
District 11
District 12
District 13
Census Legend
Labels visible at zoom level 10.
Labels visible at zoom level 13.
Labels visible at zoom level 15.
Labels visible at zoom level 17.
Current Map Zoom: 8
2020 Census PL 94.171 Data
Loading...
Carolyn M Mayne
Keep Midland County whole
Christian & Jenee Velasquez
The city of Midland belongs with the County of Midland. As a like community or community of interest, this is one of the worst proposals for redistricting. This is opposite of what voters thought would happen and opposite of the wording of what they voted on. This is gerrymandering.
Tim Brewer
This is the least desirable. Seems to be too specific to water down certain viewpoints.
Kathy A Swartz
Chestnut is the better option. This map combines Jackson with Washtenaw county, so does not keep communities of interest separate and whole.
M Dame
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.
Scott William Miller
Keep City of Midland with Midland County.
David Johnson
Keep Midland and Gladwin counties together and whole.
Charlee Simanskey
Please keep Midland and Gladwin united by preserving and respecting current geographic boundaries and keeping the Tittabawassee watershed communities together.
Dennis Quehl
Absolutely PERFECT example of gerry mandering. Take a city away from its joining county and stick us with a larger metropolitan city of which we have no similarities that are in the guidelaines given to the commissioners. That is why there sre so many dislikes!!!
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
Johanna I Clarke
terrible option
Gaye Terwillegar
Not acceptable to slice out the city of Midland separate from the rest of the county, bad for rebuilding dams, future flood mitigation, healthcare system, economics. Totally fractures our community.
Todd Cassiday
No. As separately commented on other maps, it is a distortion & misrepresentation to slice & dice Midland County to districts to the South. Keep Midland whole, as it has been and as proposed under the Lange Map with Gladwin and counties to the North & West.
Chris Moultrup
This map separates the County Seat from the Count. Leave the City of Midland with the County of Midland. We are one community of interest.
Chris Moultrup
This map removes the City of Midland from the County. As the County Seat, the City should be included with its community of interest.
Brenda Guest
Stop The Pluck! The Szetela Statehouse Map - The “Robot Arm Map” is the worst of the bad choices. How dare you politicians responsible for textbook Gerrymandering claim to “represent the people!” The City of Midland has always been connected to Midland County and must stay connected. Midland County has always been connected with Gladwin and must stay connected. Midland has nothing in common with Flint. Flint’s issues are not Midland’s issues. Midland and Gladwin are still working TOGETHER to overcome major hardships brought on by flooding and the breaching of dams. The City of Midland and Midland County deserve REPRESENTATION. We Voters Will Not Forget.
Martha Magurno
Strongly opposed to the Szetela Map. The city of Midland must be connected to Midland County and Midland County connected to Gladwin County as per the Lange map.
Brad Blasy
Bad idea.
MARGARET M GILLEAN
Don't do this one
Patrick Smith
This map is unacceptable
Brian T Pankow
Midland does not have any commonalities with southern counties. Its has ties with Gladwin and Beaverton, as many residents of those town work in Midland.
Cathy Leikhim
This comment and map portal vote is made on behalf of the 725 voices (and still growing) of ‘Gladwin-Midland United’. Since there are no collaborative map choices that reflect the needs of our community of interest, we support the Lange Congressional map; we do not support the Chestnut map; the Birch or the Apple maps. ‘Communities of Interest’ must be given higher weighting than ‘partisan fairness’, per the new constitutional amendment passed in 2018. Our Community of Interest requests that you keep the City of Midland connected to the county of Midland, and the entire county of Midland connected to Gladwin County.
Robert G Dvorak
This map really does not make sense to this resident; it separates this senatorial district arbitrarily. I would be working in 1 district a few miles away and living in a separate district. Midland and Gladwin county common watershed would lose representation; this will hurt residents impacted by the 2020 flood.
Mike Scott
This map is gerrymandering. Not a good map.
Justin Scott
This is a terrible map. The people in the rural areas of Midland county have a deep connection with the city community. They need to stay together.
Jane Scott
Do not remove the city of Midland from the rest of Midland County and the rest of the watershed. Put Midland back together!
Cathy Lunsford
Removing the City of Midland from the rest of Midland County does not make sense. The City of Midland belongs with Midland County and shares interests with Gladwin and other counties to the west.
Mary Ann Allore
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.
Sean M McCormick
Overall, on the partisan fairness index, this maphas done a great job. However, on neatness and county splitting, this map could do a better job. I like more of the districts than not, but the Grand Rapids-Muskegon area district by far is the one on this map that makes me question my support for it. Why is Ottawa County in three districts, why are a large number of staunchly conservative exurbs and rural areas in Ottawa lumped in with Muskegon and Grand Rapids, when they could extend this district a bit north to reduce county splits ofOttawa to 2, add more of Muskegon's suburbs (or most or all of Muskegon County, ideally), put more of Grand Rapids' suburbs into this district, and move the Jenison area into District 4. Do this, please, even if it means greatly altering Districts 2 and 4. It would put communities that are more alike together and ensure this district is more diverse.
Kelly Schrubba
The wrapping of this area is partisan. Overall, this map is good.
Rebecca S Smith
Need to keep Midland with counties to the west and keep it WHOLE.
Randall J Clough
Midland City has common interests with Midland and Gladwin Counties.
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 split up the city of Midland from Midland county.
James Cameron Hart
This mind seems focused in splitting up communities of interest, and promoting partisan interests. Please do not use this map.
Janine Iyer
No, Birch is better.
Anne Van Hulle
Keep Midland and Gladwin counties together as a whole. To carve out Midland City from Midland County is just wrong. Focus on the people's needs and do not dilute their voices.
Anne Van Hulle
Keep Midland county whole and together with Gladwin county. Focus on the people's needs. Carving out Midland city from Midland County is just wrong.
Jennifer Majorana
As a resident of Midland county and the city of Midland, I'm so disappointed and frustrated by these efforts to group our representation with urban areas like Saginaw and Flint. We have completely different interests and needs than these areas. Say no to Szetela - it's NOT a fair map. Please listen to the many voices on this portal begging for fair representation!
Christa Krohn
Please do not remove the city of Midland from the county.
J Michael Dizer
Taking the City of Midland out of the CD that includes the rest of Midland County and putting this in with the district that includes Saginaw and Flint is exactly opposite of what the Commission is supposed to do, (keep COP's together). The City of Midland belongs with the rest of Midland County!
Jon Lynch
Taking Midland out of Midland County makes no sense.
Mary Lou McEwan
The congressional map slices City of Midland out of Midland County. Keep Midland City connected to Midland County and Gladwin County. No Gerrymandering.
Francis A McEwan
This congressional map slices City of Midland out of Midland County. Keep Midland City connected to Midland County and Gladwin County. No Gerrymandering.
Aaron Majorana
This is a bad map because it combines Midland with Bay City, Saginaw, and Flint and cuts Midland out of Midland County. It's the very definition of Gerrymandering 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.
MARCIA BLACKSON
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
So you take one city and just move it over for balance ? You can't drive through midland county and think this is fair
Laurence Richard Larson
The city of Midland should remain with Midland County.
Daniel Kozakiewicz
This map is unfair.
Cindy Kallgren
No, Just no. Looke at Midland Gerrymandered. My Subdivision is a Carved out Penninsula into another District. Keep Midland County and Gladwin Together. This is where we live and work.
Cindy Kallgren
No. Stop Carving up Downriver.
Amanda Oster
Keep Midland County whole!
Larry Schuelke
This looks to be the worst of the congressional maps. Weird splits in many areas-looks like serious gerrymandering going on here. This splits up Midland county and puts us with unrelated southern cities and separates Sanford which is only a few miles away. Please don't use this one.
Carole J Chi
Again, this map has problems. It's not the best for our Congressional map. Please choose BirchV2 instead. thank you.
Stephanie Riley
No on this map. It does not keep Jackson whole as a county.
Jeannie Brown
i don't like that map.
Drew Wagener
Nope Szetela map needs Ozzy to interpret. WOW!
Daniel Schifko
This map does not represent communities of interest.
Eric Kyle Schichl
this will drowned out taylors voice
Carly Moran
This map needlessly divides Jackson County, and includes Battle Creek in our rural District 5. Chestnut and Birch V2 are better options.
Melitz Mike
Dislike
david Berry
I do not like the SZETELA congressional map because it does not keep Jackson County whole. It combines the eastern portion of Jackson Co. with Washtenaw Co. Another reason is: Waterloo Township is a very rural community with no city water, no city sewer or public transportation. Ann Arbor has all of these things. Please don't adopt this map. The Chestnut map is much better. Thank you.
Stephen Stackable
This version continues to split up Midland county and the city of midland, and put Midland city in the same district with Flint and Saginaw. Midland city and county are more closely related to counties to the north and west.
John Michalski
Many of the proposed maps for District 9/10 have the small extension north of Hall road into Macomb Twp by Tilch Rd. Why does this very, very area be separated from the rest of Macomb TWP. This anomaly occurs in many of the proposed maps. Have to ask which politician lives in the area?
Rebecca Mayer
I do not like this map. It does not keep Jackson County whole and separate from Washtenaw County.
Elizabeth Bonner
I prefer Birch
Melissa Gutzwiller
This doesn't allow for normal natural boundaries.
Nancy Mroczkowski
This map includes the city areas of Muskegon and Grand Rapids. However, the large amount of surrounding rural areas selected in this district dominate the population. This map discounts the only main large city in western Michigan, Grand Rapids and the only large city in Michigan beside Detroit. Also, does not represent the state of Michigan well.
Jo-Anne Woodard
I do not like this map. It eliminates the majority minority districts. I would recommend going back to work to create a new map.
Colleen Quinn
This map doesn't appear fair or reflective of desired communities of interest
Anne Wallin
I appreciate that this map kept the city of Midland with Bay City and Saginaw. The three cities have much in common given their significant industrial economies. However the Chestnut map keeps more of Midland county in the district to I prefer that map. I do like the better efficiency gap of this map. It is an acceptable map even though I prefer the Chestnut map.
Lisa P LaGrou
I dislike this map. Please do not select this map. I feel that this plan does not follow the constitutional requirement to be based on a Communities of Interest criteria.
Donna Farris
By combining Grand Rapids and Muskegon, this district population contains many city residents, however, because of the smaller size of Muskegon compared to Kalamazoo, the percentage of rural population (even more than the Chestnut map), is such that the priority needs of the cities will not be considered. This map is not good for Michigan and western Michigan. Please do not select this map.
Patrick Richardson
I do not like the Szetela 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.
Cary Fleischer
Putting Muskegon in the same district 3 with Grand Rapids creates a district with an urban population. However, this map district adds a significant rural population that does not support or compliment this community. 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.
Douglas Helzerman
4 partial counties in district
Timothy D Delong
Troy belongs in Oakland County. We have more in common with our neighbors to the north and west.
Dorothy Munson
Even though the cities of Grand Rapids and Muskegon are together in one district, there is so much rural population in this district, that the voters in these urban/suburban areas will have no voice. This map is unfair overall for the state.
Dr. Jack Holmes
This plan reaches across the entire southern edge of the state to create a district whose elected representative would represent a mix of counties who have very little in common and whose Congressperson would be hard pressed to push any agenda in Washington, D.C. However, if the same counties were placed with adjoining counties, they would be well represented. The Commission saw the wisdom of placing Northern Michigan together, but instead of working to settle a few districts in West Michigan, it mixed us up with the with the heavily populated Southeast. That left us with three out of five questionable choices when it had two opportunities to avoid splitting Ottawa or Kent Counties which both are top ten population counties with no members of the commission. It just seems like the process got broken down after the closed session of the commission.
Brian Baker
This map gives such influence to the Detroit Metro area. The rest of Michigan will suffer under this map. No voice when it comes to Michigan.
Michael Cameron
I do not like the Szetela congressional map because it does not keep Jackson County whole.
Erin MacGregor
Whatever happened to keeping the districts as square as possible? Isn't that supposed to be a main goal when redistricting occurs? This map is a terrible mess.
Sharon Elaine Houck
The Szetela 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
Chris Wingate
Splits up communities of interest. Chestnut, Birch or Lange better options.
Michael Novak
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.
Kim K Lindsey
This map fails at both communities of interest and is too partisan.
Penny K Wingate
Chestnut, Birch V2 and Lange gets my thumbs up over this. Again, I have a problem with the breaking of areas near Detroit and putting them with Ann Arbor area.
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.
Julia Lindsey
Lange, Birch V2, & Chestnut are all better options than this one, but this would be an acceptable map.
Suzanne L Zavala
Not sure how Wyandotte is a community of interest with Ann Arbor and not Taylor and Allen Park. Downriver by itself is a community of interest. Please keep Downriver together.
merlin steffes
There is no community of interest between the city of Grand Rapids and the city of Muskegon. Keep all of Kent county in the same district. That is a community of interest.
Lisa Lamancusa
Appreciate that the Commission has generated a Communities of Interest district centered around cities in West Michigan. Muskegon and Grand Rapids have many commonalities but this map has so much rural population, that these voters will not be represented. However, the Apple V2 map has a much higher percentage of city people in the district. Thanks for working to provide a voice to the urban areas in West Michigan.
Yim Kong
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.
Steve Fish
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.
Jason Taylor
Basically the same map as Lange for my city and a complete joke. Gerrymander much?
Wayne R Meulendyk
NO to this map. I looked only at Kent County. I think it is best to work geographically, ignoring political party and cultural heritage, keeping the district as geographically cohesive as possible.
Arend Gilligan
Keep Ottawa county together. Another map lumping large cities with rural areas. We live in Ottawa county to get away from Grand Rapids. Looks like a gerrymander map just to get to Muskegon. The worst for common interests. Of the last four, APPLE V2 map is the best for West Michigan.
Pat Dawson
Grand Rapids and Muskegon are with too many farming communities. Not a good district. Either of these separate communities want to be with like areas. Muskegon is chopped up.
Zach Rudat
Please keep Clinton County whole
Sam Chu
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.
Patricia DiVirgilio
Mount Clemens is located in Macomb County (not Oakland) and has nothing in common with Royal Oak, Ferndale, Rochester, etc. How could an elected official for such diverse groups identify with or accurately represent our needs??!!!
Bruce Roller
This map continues the historical Gerrymandered congressional map. The large number of people int eh Grand Rapids area are not well represented. Rural townships are combined with city like areas. 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.
Allen Salyer
Troy, Michigan belongs in Oakland County, not Macomb County.
Karen Lawrence
This is an unfair partisan map for West Michigan. This map has similar effects to the current district 3 Gerrymandered congressional map. Even though it attempts to combine city like areas like Grand Rapids and Muskegon, it dilutes the influence of large population Grand Rapids metro city areas by combining with rural townships in Ottawa and Muskegon 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.
David R. Luther
This map diminishes the voices of West Michigan in Washington by attempting to force competing interests into the same Congressional District. Grand Rapids does not belong with Muskegon any more than Holland belongs with Kalamazoo. This map makes very little sense for West Michigan.
merlin steffes
Although all the maps have a democrat bias, this map is better than the Szetela 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"!
Sue Macrellis
This map does not keep Jackson County whole. Rather it 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.
Mollie Schairer
I am a resident of rural Washtenaw County. This map clearly splits up communities of interest. Rural eastern Jackson County and rural areas of Washtenaw County in the same district as Wyandotte and Gross Ille?? No and no. I am seeing many comments giving this map a thumbs up because it is "politically balanced" and "partisan neutral." Per the MI Constitution, the Commission cannot lawfully consider "party balance" / "political fairness" / "party neutral" as a factor. Communities of interest must stay together. And what is up with excluding a slice of northwestern Washtenaw County and putting it with District 7?
Candice DeHaan
Jamestown Charter Township is a rural community. The northern part of Jamestown is slowly being developed, but the southern half is mostly farms. Barely 20% of the Township is serviced by Public Water and Sewer and about 2/3 of the Township is zoned Agricultural. As a resident of Jamestown Charter Township, I am pleased to be a part of the interconnected community known as Ottawa County. Keeping us connected with the lakeshore is important as well as recognizing Ottawa County as a unique community of interest, whose smaller cities and township's share economic and agricultural ties. Jamestown should definitely not be lumped in with Kent Count or the Grand Rapids area but remain with Ottawa County. I urge you to keep Jamestown Charter Township as part of the Ottawa County Community when redistricting.
Candice DeHaan
Jamestown Charter Township is a rural community. The northern part of Jamestown is slowly being developed, but the southern half is mostly farms. Barely 20% of the Township is serviced by Public Water and Sewer and about 2/3 of the Township is zoned Agricultural. As a resident of Jamestown Charter Township, I am pleased to be a part of the interconnected community known as Ottawa County. Keeping us connected with the lakeshore is important as well as recognizing Ottawa County as a unique community of interest, whose smaller cities and township's share economic and agricultural ties. Jamestown should definitely not be lumped in with Kent Count or the Grand Rapids area but remain with Ottawa County. I urge you to keep Jamestown Charter Township as part of the Ottawa County Community when redistricting.
Dave Frey
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
Ruth A Kell
This is just another map that illustrates how the commissioners, who I know are trying to be fair, do not seem to understand how different the COIs of Macomb and Oakland County are. Troy, Royal Oak and Ferndale are intertwined, business and culture-wise, with cities to the west, also in Oakland County. Anyone representing this district will have a struggle.
Richard Michalski
Not a good choice, since it only creates one to maybe two competitive district. Chestnut is much better.
Anna Hicks
Why are you trying to lump rural eastern Jackson County with the city of Ann Arbor. This makes no sense and will leave the people in eastern Jackson county voiceless. The map divides counties that should be kept whole. It instead combines the eastern parts of Jackson County with Washtenaw County. The Chestnut congressional map is a far better option since it is less disruptive of county lines. I implore you, please do not adopt this map.
Paul Hauglie
I dislike this map. It does not keep Jackson county whole and needlessly divides it. Unless gerrymandering is the goal.
merlin steffes
When you democrat partisans get your marching orders and all of you say the same thing it is obvious. Every democrat partisan is saying "fair or unfair".
merlin steffes
This map is very unfair and gerrymandered.
David J Houck
None of Jackson county should be lumped into a district with a district that includes Ann Arbor. It just doesn't make sense, unless gerrymandering is the goal.
Lindsey Brayton
I do not like this map because it does not represent rural communities
Cynthia Richardson
I do not like the Szetela 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 adopt this map. The CHESTNUT Congressional map better represents my community of interest. Thank you.
Brian Boyer
This proposed map unnecessarily divides up the eastern side of Jackson County splitting up our current Community of Interest. Please do adopt this map. The Chestnut map keeps the Jackson Community of Interest together.
Doug Swartz
The Szetela congressional map does not keep the counties whole. It instead combines the eastern portion of Jackson County with Washtenaw 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.
Jackie Leslie
Not a good map for Jackson County
Laurie E.
As with the other individual map, this map pushes Troy with communities too far to the east to be able to provide fair representation. Troy and Rochester should not be with Eastpointe, Fraser, Roseville, St. Clair shores. There are no COIs between the Oakland County jurisdictions here and the eastern jurisdictions of Macomb County making representation not very representative. Keep Oakland County communities within Oakland County.
merlin steffes
Districts should be created starting from a large urban nucleus. A congressional district is 775,000. If the urban nucleus population requires more people then add surrounding urban cities. Only three counties have a population greater than 775,000 people so neighboring counties should be combined to form districts. Try to minimize breaking county boundaries. Very simply. Only becomes complicated when gerrymandering is attempted. If people with the same views wish to live next to each other then they should be in the same district. If people wish to "unpack" themselves then move out of the comfortable urban center to a area where the mall is 70 miles away. Yeah right they would say just make those rural people live under my urban rule instead is the reply.
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
This map splits up Jackson County and the communities of interest it serves. It does not solve the issue of gerrymandering.
William Richardson
The Szetela 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. 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.
TIMOTHY DEBLAEY
Political gerrymandering at its best! Once again diluting the shorelines counties common issue by being dumped stacked with Grand Rapids. No, no, no, no!
ED BLISSICK
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.
Craig Michael Flietstra
This map appears to be trying to gerrymander a certain outcome in West Michigan. The other map is a much better fit for the lake shore counties.
Justin Voss
Why have the Hastings area in District 2 when it is more similar to District 4 or 7 and have western Clinton County in District 7 when it is more similar to District 2, especially when the district lines divide closely related communities.
Luke Dornon
Gerrymandering to get Muskegon and GR together for partisan voter concentration.
Nabil Chamra
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.
Patrick Maguire
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.
Carol Heron
This is a least desirable. Congressional map for the Tri-City area. it drops off Bay County shoreline. It includes Tuscola County which is better off with the Thumb. Chestnut map is still the winner for our area.
Joe Fresard
This breaks up communities of interest, unnecessarily crosses municipal boundaries and is not at all compact. This is not what people voted for.
Jaime
Macomb County has never been with Wayne county! I also don't recall Macomb ever being with Oakland county either. Northern Macomb belongs with St. Clair county. Keep the counties together!!!
Yousif
This map dilute Chaldean voices in Rochester Hills, Troy and Sterling Heights. Apple V2 is the best congressional map!