My Districting | MICHIGAN
Enterprise Redistricting Software & Services by Citygate GIS
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
Claire S Vial
This map is isolating democratically "safe" districts to try to gain advantage for republicans and additionally disadvantages the black vote
Carrie Hatcher-Kay
This is not a fair map and does not support the voices of communities of color in Michigan.
Timothy King
Livonian here: I don't know what COI supports a district incorporating far flung communities of Livonia, Orchard Lake, Keego Harbor. This 13th district looks like the snake like districts VNP depicted on materials promoting Prop 2 in 2018, lines meandering all over between counties.
Katie Olsson
Again, poorer scores than our current map! Not enough VRA compliance and scores too low on partisan fairness.
Mary Coffey
Fewer districts with opportunity for AA voters and 2 packed districts for AA voters. Poor on partisan fairness as with Wagner. Appears to be unfair with respect to dilution of black vote and partisan fairness both. Please reject this map.
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--so low in fact it should not be up for consideration.
Robert Piper
This map unfairly dilutes the Black vote.
Linda Kahn Gale
Please do not choose this map. It.s one of the worst for low partisan fairness. It gives few opportunities for non white representation.
Claudia Kraus Piper
I do not like this map. It has a low partisan fairness.
Laurie Krauth
This is a terrible map, providing no partisan fairness.
Emily Jernberg
This map is awful for the Chaldean community, which it gerrymanders and erases their input. It is unfair for Black voters -- more than the Linden map. In general this map is very unfair and violates the Voting Rights Act.
lori A Boyce
This map makes no sense to me. It really dilutes the black vote. Dilutes the interests of the lake and river districts, It splits up each Madison Heights, Warren and Sterling Heights. It is poor on partisan fairness and may not comply with VRA. This appears to be a very unfair map and one that should be soundly rejected.
Lisa F Peers
This map is too broad and doesn't represent the Birmingham community well. Please do not use this map.
Eve Mokotoff
This is another poor map choice. Too partisan- not fair to non white voters and goes against the whole reason that we undertook the redistricting process. It should not be approved.
Cory Joyrich
This map is terrible for Chaldeans, lumps Sterling Heights with Macomb County, and is highly partisan. Do not use.
Anna Kristina Johnson
This map is very unfair to Detroit residents, and especially black voters. This is new map is more discrimatory that the current Linden map. This map should not be considered.
Leora Druckman
Terrible map. Gerrymanders and reduces voting opportunities for communities. Just Nope.
Pam Shore
This map seems very unfair and disenfranchises the black community.
Lynda L Pawloski
Partisan Fairness is poor on this map in comparison to Linden, as well as complying with the Voting Rights Act.
Tim Sawmiller
Fails at communities of interest and partisan fairness
Janet Prange
NO! Not a good map at all, Please reject!
Brian L Burnett
This is not acceptable.
Reject this district - does not serve like communities well.
Rena Seltzer
This map is even worse for Black voters than the current map, and has lower partisan fairness. This is a very poor solution.
Shannon Falkenhagen
I dislike this map as it groups suburban and rural communities that do not share the same interests.
Lauren Lisi
This map is not partisanly fair.
james ward leyerle
Splits SE Oakland 3 ways, maintains 8 mile border which is not desirable
Carol Lessure
This map is the definition of gerrymandering - ie drawn to distort political power that would result in a less representative state Senate. It ignores communities of interests and municipal boundaries. Please reject it.
Allegra Pitera
Gerrymanders the Chaldean community and dilutes their voice.
Erica Brown Ackerman
This is a very partisan map that offers Blacks fewer opportunities than the current map. Please reject this map.
Frances E Chudnow
This map does not maintain partisan fairness. Do not select this map
Frances E Chudnow
This map does not maintain partisan fairness. Do not select this map
Violet E. Anderson
This map lumps Sterling Heights and Macomb rural county together. It dilutes the huge Chaldean voting community and does not represent a Bi-Partisan community.
Lori Orel
Very much a gerrymandered district. We are trying to get away from this!
Shadia Martini
This map does not solve the problem of representation and has no partisan balance.
Allegra Pitera
This map is unfair to the Chaldean community of interest. Please reject.
Nomi Joyrich
This dilutes the Chaldean voice. This has terrible partisan fairness score. This is one of the WORST maps.
Deborah Kraus
This map is blatantly unfair and deeply partisan. Please reject.
Allen Ralph Wolf
Someone may have been high on drogs when they drew this map. Look at District 10. You have the most gerrymandered looking district ever. It goes from an almost urban setting in Royal Oak to rural parts of Waterford. What community of interest could possibly be captured here. The partisan fairness is non-existent. REJECT please.
Jonathan T Weinberg
This appears to be a deeply partisan and unfair map.
Charles Hodgman
This map scores poorly in terms of Voting Rights Act partisan fairness and should be rejected.
This isn't reflective of my community
Abby Schwartz
This map does not improve racial equity and increases partisan bias over the current map.
Alexander J Owski
This map does result in fair representation of Detroit residents. That's the whole point of lawsuit and this redistricting process.
Elizabeth Buckner
this map is not fair to all parties, and does not address the needs of black communities
Virginia Preuss
I do not like this map due to is lack of partisan fairness. I entered another comment, but unfortunately it defaulted to green, which I did not notice until after I hit enter. I don't know how to change that comment, so wanted to clarify here that I DISLIKE 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
This map does not accomplish racial equity. It also adds bias to the statewide map, thereby diminishing statewide partisan fairness. Clearly, should not be adopted.
Deborah Bohm-Rosenman
Concerned about partisan fairness
Mary Ann Fontana
This map does not correct the reason for the lawsuit. It will offer fewer opportunity districts for black voters to chose their candidate.
Lori Boyce
this map does little for the black voters this lawsuit was about and should not be adopted
Karen Adams
This map is too gerrymandered and does not fulfill the goal of the politicians picking their voters instead of voters picking their representatives.