My Districting | MICHIGAN
Enterprise Redistricting Software & Services by Citygate GIS
051524_SD_COrton_V1 Final
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
Red
Yellow
Green
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...
Number of Comments Displayed (Zoom in to show less): 0
Jeanette A LaMere
Orton is an unfair map that adds bias to Republicans
Claire S Vial
This map is isolating democratically "safe" districts to try to gain advantage for republicans in surrounding districts
Carrie Hatcher-Kay
Please reject this map! LOW partisan fairness. 2 VRA districts. It shows no respect for communities of Interest. How would suburban Sterling Heights go with Rural Macomb? And the Chaldean community voice is entirely diluted as they are gerrymandered!!!!
Timothy King
As a Livonian, I prefer a Wayne County centered district. The district lines here are not as bad as some of the other proposed maps, but the best ones place Livonia, Redford Twp., a portion of NW Detroit, Garden City, part of Westland, maybe Inkster or part of Dearborn Heights together. The VRA/Opportunity District profile is weaker here than other maps including Heron, Kellom, Szetela.
Lauren Ruth Johnson
This map has a low partisan fairness score and doesn't give equal rights to black voices.
Katie Olsson
Partisan fairness score is too low as is VRA compliance. Again, worse than our current map! We passed 18-2 to improve our maps and get rid of gerrymandering. This map does not do that.
Wendy Steadman
This is a bad map. It provides fewer opportunities for people of color to have a voice. It divides the Chaldean community. It has an unacceptably low partisan fairness score. This map should absolutely not be chosen.
Judithe Stone
This map offers fewer Voting Rights Act districts for communities of color. It's a terrible map in terms of partisan fairness scoring. Should be rejected.
Mary Coffey
I do like the fact that this map keeps together Farmington and Farmington Hills. However, it is not good for the state as a whole. It has the worst score of any proposed map on mean-median difference with a 3.4% advantage to republicans; for reference, the current map has a 1.3% score for this metric. Both the 3rd and 6th districts have more than 75% African American voters according to the VRA analysis; this reduces the influence of these voters elsewhere in the state. Please do not accept this map; there are maps which address the court ruling concerns which do much better on partisan fairness than this map.
Lisa Goldstein
I do not like this map. It does not perform well on partisan fairness and is one of the worst options being presented for this criteria. It also only has two VRA disticts.
Robert Piper
Low partisan fairness, disenfranchises black voters and puts together communities that have little in common. Do not vote for this map.
Claudia Kraus Piper
I do not like this map. It has a low partisan fairness score as well as less opportunity for representation of communities of color. It is worse than the status quo. It also puts Sterling Heights together with rural Macomb County- two communities that are not at all connected. It also dilutes the voice of the Caldean community
Linda Kahn Gale
Please do not choose this map. It has a low partisan fairness. It has few opportunities for non white representation.
David Ware
Not representative of constituency
Lisa F Peers
This map is too broad and partisan and doesn't represent the Birmingham community well. Please do not use this map.
Peggy Roberts
I don't think this Orton map should even be considered since it does not reduce partisan fairness, which is the reason the Commission was voted into existence.
Eve Mokotoff
This is a highly partisan map- not fair to non white voters- approving this goes against the whole reason the state wanted citizen redistricting. Do not approve it.
Cory Joyrich
This map lumps Macomb County with Sterling Heights. It's poorly constructed in many other ways as well and is highly partisan. Do not use this map.
Carole Murphy
The Orton Map has a high efficiency gap and a high lopsided margin advantage; 2 of the factors of partisan fairness. Relative to some of the other maps, Orton is unacceptable. Thank you for your work.
Pam Shore
This map is unfair and doesn't give fair representation to my community.
Leora Druckman
Very bad map. Poor partisan fairness. Bad for Michigan and bad for Democracy. Reject and redo please!
Anna Kristina Johnson
Low partisan fairness score.
Lynda L Pawloski
This map lacks partisan fairness. The MICRC was created to address this problem. Please do not adopt this map.
Tim Sawmiller
Fails at communities of interest and partisan fairness
Janet Prange
Horrible map - please reject!
Sharon McNeil
Don’t think this map is fairly drawn , please reject Thank you
Robert D Thomasson
Unfair Republican domination
Brian L Burnett
Please delete. While it works for my community, it's not good for the state.
Catherine Lippert
The Orton Map does not display fairness to both parties equally
KRIS BUROW
This district has numerous poor scores for partisan fairness. Voters want FAIR districts created - as designed in Prop 2.
Ann Rodgers
There are better maps in terms of lopsided margin advantage, and this one has only 2 majority minority districts. Please reject it.
Timothy Hughes
Overtly partisan to favor Republicans.
Iris Rosen
I don’t think this map is fairly sectioned.
Melany Mack
Orton scores poorly on partisan fairness and should not be adopted.
Rena Seltzer
This is one of the worst maps. It has a very low partisan fairness score. It puts people in Rural Macomb county and Sterling Heights together in a way that makes no sense.
Laura J Hunt
This map does not promote partisan fairness which, after all, should be the purpose of redistricting.
Shannon Falkenhagen
I dislike this map. I live in Macomb County and it groups suburban and rural communities that do not share the same interests.
Lauren Lisi
This map is not fair.
Elizabeth Kaufman
Yet again a terrible map that scores abysmally on partisan fairness. Please vote NO.
Ronald Hoffman
I do not believe this map believes for partisan fairness.
Louis J Porter
Partisan fairness is a constitutional mandate. This map fails to meet that constitutional mandate.
Erica Brown Ackerman
This is the second worst map for partisan fairness of all the maps that have been proposed. Please reject this map.
Nomi Joyrich
Dilutes the Chaldean voice. Has no partisan fairness. Has fewer opportunities for non-white representation.
Violet E. Anderson
This map has a low partisan fairness, it has few black voting opportunity, it splits up the Warren Communities, dilutes the Chaldean community voting block with the rural community. Not a good map for fairness.
Allegra Pitera
This is the 2nd worse map for partisan fairness. 2 VRA districts.
Shadia Martini
One of the worst maps. Does not have any partisan balance.
Deborah Kraus
There is very little partisan fairness on this map. We didn't go to all the trouble of the 2018 ballot initiative to end up with this.
Allen Ralph Wolf
Please reject. Ok on community of interest but terrible on partisan fairness.
Jonathan T Weinberg
This appears to be a step backwards from the Linden map.
Charles Hodgman
This map scores poorly in terms of Voting Rights Act partisan fairness and should be rejected.
Frances E Chudnow
This map is not acceptable as it does not meet non partisan fairness.
LAURIE KIMMEL
This is the 2nd worse map. Not fair. Map isn't partisan reflective and wouldn't help my community
Jody W Schottenfels
This map does not reflect my community and does not meet non-partisan fairness.
Lois Ann Furry
Not a fair map.
Abby Schwartz
This map has an unacceptable partisan bias.
Daniel W. Berland
Not acceptable partisan neutrality
Alexander J Owski
This map does not offer fair representation to the residents of Southfield, Oak Park, and Detroit.
Rochelle Rubin
This map is not acceptable as an option. It is does a terrible job of meeting non-partison criteria. Do not adopt this map.
Elizabeth Buckner
This one of the worse maps for partisan fairness. Please do not adapt this map!
Elizabeth Buckner
this map is not fair to all parties, and does not address the needs of black communities
JOHN LEON
THIS MAP IS WAY TOO PARTISAN AND SHOULD NOT BE ACCEPTED.
Virginia Preuss
This map does not maintain partisan fairness. Please do not select this map.
Nomi Joyrich
Please do not adopt this map. It does not have partisan fairness and it's not good for my community.
Sherry B Trezise
Why choose a map which does NOT increase partisan fairness on a statewide level? Please so not adopt this map.
Mary Brown
Partisan fairness is lacking here. A statewide vote in 2018 suggests that voters want partisan fairness.
Robert Swartz
district 1 is not well balance in this map
Stephen Abbott
I don't mind this one. Would be ok for groups and communities across teh area
lori A Boyce
The reason we had the 2018 ballot initiative was to end gerrymandering in Michigan. This map throws partisan fairness out the door. Do not adopt.
Cindy Michniewicz
In this map you have included a northern portion of Westland with Livonia. Attatched is the Liv School map. I grew up in Westland and went to Livonia Schools. I identified with Livonia more tha Westland. If you look at the map the east west line below Churchill is Joy Rd and sounth of that is Westland and I think the entire Westland portion of Livonia Schools should be included. The very southern border of the school district (the Squiggley line) I is Warren Rd except for that little irregular jog up.