2020 Census and Redistricting Thread: Michigan

[Idaho Conservative]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/435dcad3-d0f2-435b-abe8-c5eee7aa8575
In this map we have:
a 1st district more along the lines of the 2000s iteration of the district
a Flint-Thumb district, with Saginaw and Midland thrown in a Lansing district
a nice, neat, compact Grand Rapids seat
1 seat nested entirely within Macomb, another nested solely within Oakland, and 2 nested solely with Wayne, and then 2 seats around those, enveloping them
Kalamazoo and Battle Creek are kept in the same seat
the Macomb CD and Flint CD are the tipping point districts

I like your map, it does split counties more than mine but I'd say respects COIs a bit better.  I see you made the Lansing district more dem but the Flint district is more competitive.  Some might criticize your map due to the tipping point districts being red leaning in 2016, but down ballot Flint and Macomb are more Dem than they are presidentially so those districts would be closer to true tossups.  I like how you fixed my long western MI strip and made more compact districts.  My only criticism of your map is the UP-Bay City district.  I'd trade Traverse City and Bay City between their respective districts.  Other than that, I would support this map as a commissioner. 

[Idaho Conservative]

I don't really see the point of Oakland getting it's own district.   It seems...meaningless.  Oakland is huge and very diverse,  both with income and demographics.    It's as though it's making a district simply to follow county lines and literally nothing else. 

It makes the most sense to have southern Oakland cross into either Wayne or Washtenaw,  depending on what communities you want to put together. 

I could understand a Macomb-exclusive district though.   That makes way more sense since it's much more White Working Class and generally is it's own community.

Oakland isn't as cohesive as other counties but I don't get how splitting it up better reflects COIs.  The main divide in Oakland is exurban vs suburban, and both my map and the speaker's map keep those areas together.  I do see potential merit in having some black areas in Oakland go to Wayne because they would probably be better represented by Lawrence than Levin; and such a move might be necessary due to population loss in Wayne.  But Dems would probably prefer keeping the county border unbroken, more blacks in Levin's district will make it safer but pushing it out further into the exurbs could endanger him.  I know incumbent interests aren't taken into account, but partisan fairness is, and a safe Dem district in Oakland is fair. 

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/435dcad3-d0f2-435b-abe8-c5eee7aa8575
In this map we have:
a 1st district more along the lines of the 2000s iteration of the district
a Flint-Thumb district, with Saginaw and Midland thrown in a Lansing district
a nice, neat, compact Grand Rapids seat
1 seat nested entirely within Macomb, another nested solely within Oakland, and 2 nested solely with Wayne, and then 2 seats around those, enveloping them
Kalamazoo and Battle Creek are kept in the same seat
the Macomb CD and Flint CD are the tipping point districts

I like your map, it does split counties more than mine but I'd say respects COIs a bit better.  I see you made the Lansing district more dem but the Flint district is more competitive.  Some might criticize your map due to the tipping point districts being red leaning in 2016, but down ballot Flint and Macomb are more Dem than they are presidentially so those districts would be closer to true tossups.  I like how you fixed my long western MI strip and made more compact districts.  My only criticism of your map is the UP-Bay City district.  I'd trade Traverse City and Bay City between their respective districts.  Other than that, I would support this map as a commissioner.  

for what its worth you could shift Bay, Arenac, Iosco, Omegaw, Roscommon, and Gladwin into the Muskegon seat and Grand Traverse, Wexford, Mason, Manistee, Benzie, and Leelanau into the UP district. But this overall arrangement hurts compactness a bit. UP is 58 and Muskegon is 43 - in my original its 59 and 88, respectively.
And in all honesty I'm not sure if UP is necessarily a better fit with any specific area of the LP besides the counties immediately to its south in an around the Mackinac bridge. At least here we have Western Michigan less divided.

[Nyvin]

I don't really see the point of Oakland getting it's own district.   It seems...meaningless.  Oakland is huge and very diverse,  both with income and demographics.    It's as though it's making a district simply to follow county lines and literally nothing else.  

It makes the most sense to have southern Oakland cross into either Wayne or Washtenaw,  depending on what communities you want to put together.  

I could understand a Macomb-exclusive district though.   That makes way more sense since it's much more White Working Class and generally is it's own community.

An all-Oakland seat is logical especially because 8 Mile Road is better not crossed if one can help it and/or its not absolutely essential to one's plans elsewhere. The main benefit is not necessarily in a homogenous CoI but better districts elsewhere. There is much reason and much elegance in two exurban districts wrapping around the more urban metro Detroit districts.

The 8 mile rd thing is more for the Macomb-Wayne border than Oakland,  since it's what separates Black Detroit from White Macomb (the difference really is pretty stark).   In Oakland you have Oak Park and Southfield areas to the north of Detroit which are both pretty black, and the difference between the two is minimal further west.

But you don't have to reach into Oakland for an adequate black district, and the more areas you take from Southern Oakland the more you need to eat into exurban metro Detroit, which is a CoI worth keeping together.
So crossing 8 Mile is still undesirable in most cases.

Even then,  Detroit is in Northeastern Wayne, and southeastern Oakland is more "Metro" and urban than southern Wayne.    There's exurban metro Detroit in western and southern Wayne, and suburban Detroit in Oakland.  

Anyway you put it the county borders don't really mean much in Detroit,  at least in respect to Oakland and Wayne.  

The current MI-11 was probably drawn as a Suburban district surrounding the AA districts (to the benefit of Republicans at the time), which puts all the communities of interests together, and the current MI-9 is pretty close to the Macomb working class district.

[Oryxslayer]

I don't really see the point of Oakland getting it's own district.   It seems...meaningless.  Oakland is huge and very diverse,  both with income and demographics.    It's as though it's making a district simply to follow county lines and literally nothing else.  

It makes the most sense to have southern Oakland cross into either Wayne or Washtenaw,  depending on what communities you want to put together.  

I could understand a Macomb-exclusive district though.   That makes way more sense since it's much more White Working Class and generally is it's own community.

An all-Oakland seat is logical especially because 8 Mile Road is better not crossed if one can help it and/or its not absolutely essential to one's plans elsewhere. The main benefit is not necessarily in a homogenous CoI but better districts elsewhere. There is much reason and much elegance in two exurban districts wrapping around the more urban metro Detroit districts.

The 8 mile rd thing is more for the Macomb-Wayne border than Oakland,  since it's what separates Black Detroit from White Macomb (the difference really is pretty stark).   In Oakland you have Oak Park and Southfield areas to the north of Detroit which are both pretty black, and the difference between the two is minimal further west.

But you don't have to reach into Oakland for an adequate black district, and the more areas you take from Southern Oakland the more you need to eat into exurban metro Detroit, which is a CoI worth keeping together.
So crossing 8 Mile is still undesirable in most cases.

Even then,  Detroit is in Northeastern Wayne, and southeastern Oakland is more "Metro" and urban than southern Wayne.    There's exurban metro Detroit in western and southern Wayne, and suburban Detroit in Oakland.  

Anyway you put it the county borders don't really mean much in Detroit,  at least in respect to Oakland and Wayne.  

The current MI-11 was probably drawn as a Suburban district surrounding the AA districts, which puts all the communities of interests together, and the current MI-9 is pretty close to the Macomb working class district.

The current MI-09/11 were drawn to to maximize GOP potential in the Metro region. The 9th packs in the near suburbs which at the time were the solid obama parts of the region. The 11th is designed to squiggle around and collect the 'further' suburbs which at the time were more GOP friendly. As people moved further out, as the exurbs got pushed further back, and as attitudes changed, this no longer was a viable dichotomy that made much sense. Instead, the defining divide is now between the well understood 2016 style coalitions. In fact, one could say those coalitions are even more stark here because this is Detroit, the epicenter of the financial crash where it all began. Looking to these districts for guides on....anything is a horrible choice.

[Idaho Conservative]

I don't really see the point of Oakland getting it's own district.   It seems...meaningless.  Oakland is huge and very diverse,  both with income and demographics.    It's as though it's making a district simply to follow county lines and literally nothing else.  

It makes the most sense to have southern Oakland cross into either Wayne or Washtenaw,  depending on what communities you want to put together.  

I could understand a Macomb-exclusive district though.   That makes way more sense since it's much more White Working Class and generally is it's own community.

An all-Oakland seat is logical especially because 8 Mile Road is better not crossed if one can help it and/or its not absolutely essential to one's plans elsewhere. The main benefit is not necessarily in a homogenous CoI but better districts elsewhere. There is much reason and much elegance in two exurban districts wrapping around the more urban metro Detroit districts.

The 8 mile rd thing is more for the Macomb-Wayne border than Oakland,  since it's what separates Black Detroit from White Macomb (the difference really is pretty stark).   In Oakland you have Oak Park and Southfield areas to the north of Detroit which are both pretty black, and the difference between the two is minimal further west.

But you don't have to reach into Oakland for an adequate black district, and the more areas you take from Southern Oakland the more you need to eat into exurban metro Detroit, which is a CoI worth keeping together.
So crossing 8 Mile is still undesirable in most cases.

Even then,  Detroit is in Northeastern Wayne, and southeastern Oakland is more "Metro" and urban than southern Wayne.    There's exurban metro Detroit in western and southern Wayne, and suburban Detroit in Oakland.  

Anyway you put it the county borders don't really mean much in Detroit,  at least in respect to Oakland and Wayne.  

The current MI-11 was probably drawn as a Suburban district surrounding the AA districts (to the benefit of Republicans at the time), which puts all the communities of interests together, and the current MI-9 is pretty close to the Macomb working class district.

County borders aren't perfect but at least ensure relative compactness.  Arms going this way or that in Detroit are really easy to gerrymander with going either way, at least compact sensibly shaped districts limit gerrymandering.  I have seen some really funky Detroit maps here favoring both sides, I think the county based division is the most fair and generally avoids ripping up communities.

[Idaho Conservative]

I don't really see the point of Oakland getting it's own district.   It seems...meaningless.  Oakland is huge and very diverse,  both with income and demographics.    It's as though it's making a district simply to follow county lines and literally nothing else.  

It makes the most sense to have southern Oakland cross into either Wayne or Washtenaw,  depending on what communities you want to put together.  

I could understand a Macomb-exclusive district though.   That makes way more sense since it's much more White Working Class and generally is it's own community.

An all-Oakland seat is logical especially because 8 Mile Road is better not crossed if one can help it and/or its not absolutely essential to one's plans elsewhere. The main benefit is not necessarily in a homogenous CoI but better districts elsewhere. There is much reason and much elegance in two exurban districts wrapping around the more urban metro Detroit districts.

The 8 mile rd thing is more for the Macomb-Wayne border than Oakland,  since it's what separates Black Detroit from White Macomb (the difference really is pretty stark).   In Oakland you have Oak Park and Southfield areas to the north of Detroit which are both pretty black, and the difference between the two is minimal further west.

But you don't have to reach into Oakland for an adequate black district, and the more areas you take from Southern Oakland the more you need to eat into exurban metro Detroit, which is a CoI worth keeping together.
So crossing 8 Mile is still undesirable in most cases.

Even then,  Detroit is in Northeastern Wayne, and southeastern Oakland is more "Metro" and urban than southern Wayne.    There's exurban metro Detroit in western and southern Wayne, and suburban Detroit in Oakland.  

Anyway you put it the county borders don't really mean much in Detroit,  at least in respect to Oakland and Wayne.  

The current MI-11 was probably drawn as a Suburban district surrounding the AA districts, which puts all the communities of interests together, and the current MI-9 is pretty close to the Macomb working class district.

The current MI-09/11 were drawn to to maximize GOP potential in the Metro region. The 9th packs in the near suburbs which at the time were the solid obama parts of the region. The 11th is designed to squiggle around and collect the 'further' suburbs which at the time were more GOP friendly. As people moved further out, as the exurbs got pushed further back, and as attitudes changed, this no longer was a viable dichotomy that made much sense. Instead, the defining divide is now between the well understood 2016 style coalitions. In fact, one could say those coalitions are even more stark here because this is Detroit, the epicenter of the financial crash where it all began. Looking to these districts for guides on....anything is a horrible choice.

I could see a Stevens vs Levin primary happening, since those districts are getting reconfigured big time.  Unless Levin runs in a swing Macomb district, but I think he'll want to stay in Oakland.

[Nyvin]

I don't really see the point of Oakland getting it's own district.   It seems...meaningless.  Oakland is huge and very diverse,  both with income and demographics.    It's as though it's making a district simply to follow county lines and literally nothing else.  

It makes the most sense to have southern Oakland cross into either Wayne or Washtenaw,  depending on what communities you want to put together.  

I could understand a Macomb-exclusive district though.   That makes way more sense since it's much more White Working Class and generally is it's own community.

An all-Oakland seat is logical especially because 8 Mile Road is better not crossed if one can help it and/or its not absolutely essential to one's plans elsewhere. The main benefit is not necessarily in a homogenous CoI but better districts elsewhere. There is much reason and much elegance in two exurban districts wrapping around the more urban metro Detroit districts.

The 8 mile rd thing is more for the Macomb-Wayne border than Oakland,  since it's what separates Black Detroit from White Macomb (the difference really is pretty stark).   In Oakland you have Oak Park and Southfield areas to the north of Detroit which are both pretty black, and the difference between the two is minimal further west.

But you don't have to reach into Oakland for an adequate black district, and the more areas you take from Southern Oakland the more you need to eat into exurban metro Detroit, which is a CoI worth keeping together.
So crossing 8 Mile is still undesirable in most cases.

Even then,  Detroit is in Northeastern Wayne, and southeastern Oakland is more "Metro" and urban than southern Wayne.    There's exurban metro Detroit in western and southern Wayne, and suburban Detroit in Oakland.  

Anyway you put it the county borders don't really mean much in Detroit,  at least in respect to Oakland and Wayne.  

The current MI-11 was probably drawn as a Suburban district surrounding the AA districts, which puts all the communities of interests together, and the current MI-9 is pretty close to the Macomb working class district.

The current MI-09/11 were drawn to to maximize GOP potential in the Metro region. The 9th packs in the near suburbs which at the time were the solid obama parts of the region. The 11th is designed to squiggle around and collect the 'further' suburbs which at the time were more GOP friendly. As people moved further out, as the exurbs got pushed further back, and as attitudes changed, this no longer was a viable dichotomy that made much sense. Instead, the defining divide is now between the well understood 2016 style coalitions. In fact, one could say those coalitions are even more stark here because this is Detroit, the epicenter of the financial crash where it all began. Looking to these districts for guides on....anything is a horrible choice.

Thanks for the history lesson, but that completely misses the point.  

MI-11 was drawn to maximize GOP influence in the district, by incorporating certain groups of people in it, and MI-9 was drawn as a vote sink with other groups of people.  

The districts have changed their voting patterns, but the people are still there generally.  Northwest Wayne has way more in common (today) with parts of southern Oakland than it does with other parts of Wayne, the vice versa is still true today.

Anyway,  I'll drop the point,  doesn't seem anyone here really agrees.

[Oryxslayer]

I don't really see the point of Oakland getting it's own district.   It seems...meaningless.  Oakland is huge and very diverse,  both with income and demographics.    It's as though it's making a district simply to follow county lines and literally nothing else.  

It makes the most sense to have southern Oakland cross into either Wayne or Washtenaw,  depending on what communities you want to put together.  

I could understand a Macomb-exclusive district though.   That makes way more sense since it's much more White Working Class and generally is it's own community.

An all-Oakland seat is logical especially because 8 Mile Road is better not crossed if one can help it and/or its not absolutely essential to one's plans elsewhere. The main benefit is not necessarily in a homogenous CoI but better districts elsewhere. There is much reason and much elegance in two exurban districts wrapping around the more urban metro Detroit districts.

The 8 mile rd thing is more for the Macomb-Wayne border than Oakland,  since it's what separates Black Detroit from White Macomb (the difference really is pretty stark).   In Oakland you have Oak Park and Southfield areas to the north of Detroit which are both pretty black, and the difference between the two is minimal further west.

But you don't have to reach into Oakland for an adequate black district, and the more areas you take from Southern Oakland the more you need to eat into exurban metro Detroit, which is a CoI worth keeping together.
So crossing 8 Mile is still undesirable in most cases.

Even then,  Detroit is in Northeastern Wayne, and southeastern Oakland is more "Metro" and urban than southern Wayne.    There's exurban metro Detroit in western and southern Wayne, and suburban Detroit in Oakland.  

Anyway you put it the county borders don't really mean much in Detroit,  at least in respect to Oakland and Wayne.  

The current MI-11 was probably drawn as a Suburban district surrounding the AA districts, which puts all the communities of interests together, and the current MI-9 is pretty close to the Macomb working class district.

The current MI-09/11 were drawn to to maximize GOP potential in the Metro region. The 9th packs in the near suburbs which at the time were the solid obama parts of the region. The 11th is designed to squiggle around and collect the 'further' suburbs which at the time were more GOP friendly. As people moved further out, as the exurbs got pushed further back, and as attitudes changed, this no longer was a viable dichotomy that made much sense. Instead, the defining divide is now between the well understood 2016 style coalitions. In fact, one could say those coalitions are even more stark here because this is Detroit, the epicenter of the financial crash where it all began. Looking to these districts for guides on....anything is a horrible choice.

Thanks for the history lesson, but that completely misses the point.  

MI-11 was drawn to maximize GOP influence in the district, by incorporating certain groups of people in it, and MI-9 was drawn as a vote sink with other groups of people.  

The districts have changed their voting patterns, but the people are still there generally.  Northwest Wayne has way more in common (today) with parts of southern Oakland than it does with other parts of Wayne, the vice versa is still true today.

Anyway,  I'll drop the point,  doesn't seem anyone here really agrees.

Well, I agree with you on the  topic of wayne parts vs other wayne  parts, I just think the pop and the commission rules favor the later. It also allows the west suburbs to go potentially with Ann Arbor and Washtenaw, which they also share common traits with. Or they could go with other wayne towns like Dearborn and bits of detroit part of a Arab access seat.

While we are  on this topic though, I'm surprised there are not many maps that try to get a non-detroit seat purely in Wayne, something like what occurs below. I guess it's because the numbers are less favorable this cycle when compared to the last when it comes to wayne vs the suburbs. Such a seat would have cascading effects like requiring both minority seats to head north and then push the suburban seats even further north. Livingston couldn't be paired fully with Oakland. Maybe I will play around with it since it will Allow Livonia & Co. to be paired with the near side of Oakland, even though it would be in a AA seat.

[dpmapper]

I would think Romulus and Inkster should be in the AA districts to get their numbers up. 

[Idaho Conservative]

I would think Romulus and Inkster should be in the AA districts to get their numbers up. 

They likely will be, that's what my map did.  With population decline in Detroit it's possible the black district will need Pontiac too, I'm not sure though.  But with 2010 demographics it isn't necessary.

[EastAnglianLefty]

I don't really see the point of Oakland getting it's own district.   It seems...meaningless.  Oakland is huge and very diverse,  both with income and demographics.    It's as though it's making a district simply to follow county lines and literally nothing else.  

It makes the most sense to have southern Oakland cross into either Wayne or Washtenaw,  depending on what communities you want to put together.  

I could understand a Macomb-exclusive district though.   That makes way more sense since it's much more White Working Class and generally is it's own community.

An all-Oakland seat is logical especially because 8 Mile Road is better not crossed if one can help it and/or its not absolutely essential to one's plans elsewhere. The main benefit is not necessarily in a homogenous CoI but better districts elsewhere. There is much reason and much elegance in two exurban districts wrapping around the more urban metro Detroit districts.

The 8 mile rd thing is more for the Macomb-Wayne border than Oakland,  since it's what separates Black Detroit from White Macomb (the difference really is pretty stark).   In Oakland you have Oak Park and Southfield areas to the north of Detroit which are both pretty black, and the difference between the two is minimal further west.

Most of Detroit itself is suburban sprawl, there's extremely little true "Metro" in the sense of what you see in Los Angeles or New York in Detroit.

If you compare the 2010 precincts on DRA with the 2016 ones, it looks like that doesn't really apply to Macomb-Wayne any more. Eastpointe is on the path to becoming black-plurality and the bottom few rows of precincts in Warren have pretty high black populations these days. There's still a divide between 90% black precincts and 40% black ones, but on the west side of Macomb it doesn't become super-white until 9 Mile or 10 Mile Road.

I don't really see the point of Oakland getting it's own district.   It seems...meaningless.  Oakland is huge and very diverse,  both with income and demographics.    It's as though it's making a district simply to follow county lines and literally nothing else.  

It makes the most sense to have southern Oakland cross into either Wayne or Washtenaw,  depending on what communities you want to put together.  

I could understand a Macomb-exclusive district though.   That makes way more sense since it's much more White Working Class and generally is it's own community.

An all-Oakland seat is logical especially because 8 Mile Road is better not crossed if one can help it and/or its not absolutely essential to one's plans elsewhere. The main benefit is not necessarily in a homogenous CoI but better districts elsewhere. There is much reason and much elegance in two exurban districts wrapping around the more urban metro Detroit districts.

The 8 mile rd thing is more for the Macomb-Wayne border than Oakland,  since it's what separates Black Detroit from White Macomb (the difference really is pretty stark).   In Oakland you have Oak Park and Southfield areas to the north of Detroit which are both pretty black, and the difference between the two is minimal further west.

But you don't have to reach into Oakland for an adequate black district, and the more areas you take from Southern Oakland the more you need to eat into exurban metro Detroit, which is a CoI worth keeping together.
So crossing 8 Mile is still undesirable in most cases.

Has anybody successfully made 2 VRA districts solely in Wayne in this thread? It was certainly doable in 2010, I'm not convinced it is any longer.

I'm also not convinced it would be that controversial on a partisan level. You have to put a lot of SE Oakland into a Detroit district before a district entirely in Oakland starts looking competitive.

[Oryxslayer]

I don't really see the point of Oakland getting it's own district.   It seems...meaningless.  Oakland is huge and very diverse,  both with income and demographics.    It's as though it's making a district simply to follow county lines and literally nothing else.  

It makes the most sense to have southern Oakland cross into either Wayne or Washtenaw,  depending on what communities you want to put together.  

I could understand a Macomb-exclusive district though.   That makes way more sense since it's much more White Working Class and generally is it's own community.

An all-Oakland seat is logical especially because 8 Mile Road is better not crossed if one can help it and/or its not absolutely essential to one's plans elsewhere. The main benefit is not necessarily in a homogenous CoI but better districts elsewhere. There is much reason and much elegance in two exurban districts wrapping around the more urban metro Detroit districts.

The 8 mile rd thing is more for the Macomb-Wayne border than Oakland,  since it's what separates Black Detroit from White Macomb (the difference really is pretty stark).   In Oakland you have Oak Park and Southfield areas to the north of Detroit which are both pretty black, and the difference between the two is minimal further west.

But you don't have to reach into Oakland for an adequate black district, and the more areas you take from Southern Oakland the more you need to eat into exurban metro Detroit, which is a CoI worth keeping together.
So crossing 8 Mile is still undesirable in most cases.

Has anybody successfully made 2 VRA districts solely in Wayne in this thread? It was certainly doable in 2010, I'm not convinced it is any longer.

I'm also not convinced it would be that controversial on a partisan level. You have to put a lot of SE Oakland into a Detroit district before a district entirely in Oakland starts looking competitive.

This depends entirely upon how we define AA seats in this context. The 2010 GOP believed in packing said seats to the brim with as many AA voters would be allowed before the map ran became an example of racial packing. In this regard, they all passed 50%. Now, it is still possible to get two seats out of the entire metro above 50% if you use the 2016 data and ALL areas of AA concentration. There is even enough leeway in the 2016 data for it to still work in 2020 after four more years of pop decline.

However, it is unlikely the commission takes this approach since it would require the destruction of almost every other Metro COI in favor of the AA community. Instead, we should perhaps look to CA, where we got Asian access seats like CA39 and two AA access seats in west LA. All three seats have the relevant demographic far below 50%.

So then we should lower our criteria. Is it AA plurality? Can it be lower, to something like AA greater than 40%? Do the other voter groups matter? Is a white republican who will not vote in the AA dominated dem primary equal to one who will? How one defines an AA seat will  decide how much of near Oakland, if any at all, is required to make the seats pass the minimum criteria.

[Idaho Conservative]

I don't really see the point of Oakland getting it's own district.   It seems...meaningless.  Oakland is huge and very diverse,  both with income and demographics.    It's as though it's making a district simply to follow county lines and literally nothing else.  

It makes the most sense to have southern Oakland cross into either Wayne or Washtenaw,  depending on what communities you want to put together.  

I could understand a Macomb-exclusive district though.   That makes way more sense since it's much more White Working Class and generally is it's own community.

An all-Oakland seat is logical especially because 8 Mile Road is better not crossed if one can help it and/or its not absolutely essential to one's plans elsewhere. The main benefit is not necessarily in a homogenous CoI but better districts elsewhere. There is much reason and much elegance in two exurban districts wrapping around the more urban metro Detroit districts.

The 8 mile rd thing is more for the Macomb-Wayne border than Oakland,  since it's what separates Black Detroit from White Macomb (the difference really is pretty stark).   In Oakland you have Oak Park and Southfield areas to the north of Detroit which are both pretty black, and the difference between the two is minimal further west.

But you don't have to reach into Oakland for an adequate black district, and the more areas you take from Southern Oakland the more you need to eat into exurban metro Detroit, which is a CoI worth keeping together.
So crossing 8 Mile is still undesirable in most cases.

Has anybody successfully made 2 VRA districts solely in Wayne in this thread? It was certainly doable in 2010, I'm not convinced it is any longer.

I'm also not convinced it would be that controversial on a partisan level. You have to put a lot of SE Oakland into a Detroit district before a district entirely in Oakland starts looking competitive.

This depends entirely upon how we define AA seats in this context. The 2010 GOP believed in packing said seats to the brim with as many AA voters would be allowed before the map ran became an example of racial packing. In this regard, they all passed 50%. Now, it is still possible to get two seats out of the entire metro above 50% if you use the 2016 data and ALL areas of AA concentration. There is even enough leeway in the 2016 data for it to still work in 2020 after four more years of pop decline.

However, it is unlikely the commission takes this approach since it would require the destruction of almost every other Metro COI in favor of the AA community. Instead, we should perhaps look to CA, where we got Asian access seats like CA39 and two AA access seats in west LA. All three seats have the relevant demographic far below 50%.

So then we should lower our criteria. Is it AA plurality? Can it be lower, to something like AA greater than 40%? Do the other voter groups matter? Is a white republican who will not vote in the AA dominated dem primary equal to one who will? How one defines an AA seat will  decide how much of near Oakland, if any at all, is required to make the seats pass the minimum criteria.

I'd argue it would need to be high 40s, which is possible without weird shaped districts.  In the 2012 election Gary Peters was able to win a primary with a plurality against multiple non white candidates.  Even with a black majority seat there is not a guarantee it will elect the black candidate (Peters likely won due to the Oakland County portion of the district which isn't as black, due to the odd nature of the race it's likely Peters did not win a majority of the black vote).   Due to this fact the vra districts should try to get as close to 50% aa as possible with compact districts.  Since it has been demonstrated a 58% black district in Detroit can "fail" under the right circumstances, a 40% black district would be FAR more likely to not elect a black candidate. 

[Tekken_Guy]

Some thoughts on incumbents:

-John Moolenaar and Dan Kildee live not too far from each other. They could potentially be in a district together.
-Elissa Slotkin wil almost certainly have her hometown of Holly be put into a Solidly R district. She’d probably have to run to Lansing to be viable.
-Andy Levin is also in deep trouble. Assuming he gets a district entirely in Macomb County, he’ll be a heavy underdog. His opponent will most likely be the next MI-10 rep.
-All of the major MI-3 candidates are from the Grand Rapids area which means it’s clear what district they’ll be running in in 2022.
-Fred Upton will almost certainly retire in 2022 if he doesn’t do so this year.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I don't really see the point of Oakland getting it's own district.   It seems...meaningless.  Oakland is huge and very diverse,  both with income and demographics.    It's as though it's making a district simply to follow county lines and literally nothing else.  

It makes the most sense to have southern Oakland cross into either Wayne or Washtenaw,  depending on what communities you want to put together.  

I could understand a Macomb-exclusive district though.   That makes way more sense since it's much more White Working Class and generally is it's own community.

An all-Oakland seat is logical especially because 8 Mile Road is better not crossed if one can help it and/or its not absolutely essential to one's plans elsewhere. The main benefit is not necessarily in a homogenous CoI but better districts elsewhere. There is much reason and much elegance in two exurban districts wrapping around the more urban metro Detroit districts.

The 8 mile rd thing is more for the Macomb-Wayne border than Oakland,  since it's what separates Black Detroit from White Macomb (the difference really is pretty stark).   In Oakland you have Oak Park and Southfield areas to the north of Detroit which are both pretty black, and the difference between the two is minimal further west.

But you don't have to reach into Oakland for an adequate black district, and the more areas you take from Southern Oakland the more you need to eat into exurban metro Detroit, which is a CoI worth keeping together.
So crossing 8 Mile is still undesirable in most cases.

Even then,  Detroit is in Northeastern Wayne, and southeastern Oakland is more "Metro" and urban than southern Wayne.    There's exurban metro Detroit in western and southern Wayne, and suburban Detroit in Oakland.  

Anyway you put it the county borders don't really mean much in Detroit,  at least in respect to Oakland and Wayne.  

The current MI-11 was probably drawn as a Suburban district surrounding the AA districts, which puts all the communities of interests together, and the current MI-9 is pretty close to the Macomb working class district.

The current MI-09/11 were drawn to to maximize GOP potential in the Metro region. The 9th packs in the near suburbs which at the time were the solid obama parts of the region. The 11th is designed to squiggle around and collect the 'further' suburbs which at the time were more GOP friendly. As people moved further out, as the exurbs got pushed further back, and as attitudes changed, this no longer was a viable dichotomy that made much sense. Instead, the defining divide is now between the well understood 2016 style coalitions. In fact, one could say those coalitions are even more stark here because this is Detroit, the epicenter of the financial crash where it all began. Looking to these districts for guides on....anything is a horrible choice.

Thanks for the history lesson, but that completely misses the point.  

MI-11 was drawn to maximize GOP influence in the district, by incorporating certain groups of people in it, and MI-9 was drawn as a vote sink with other groups of people.  

The districts have changed their voting patterns, but the people are still there generally.  Northwest Wayne has way more in common (today) with parts of southern Oakland than it does with other parts of Wayne, the vice versa is still true today.

Anyway,  I'll drop the point,  doesn't seem anyone here really agrees.

Well, I agree with you on the  topic of wayne parts vs other wayne  parts, I just think the pop and the commission rules favor the later. It also allows the west suburbs to go potentially with Ann Arbor and Washtenaw, which they also share common traits with. Or they could go with other wayne towns like Dearborn and bits of detroit part of a Arab access seat.

While we are  on this topic though, I'm surprised there are not many maps that try to get a non-detroit seat purely in Wayne, something like what occurs below. I guess it's because the numbers are less favorable this cycle when compared to the last when it comes to wayne vs the suburbs. Such a seat would have cascading effects like requiring both minority seats to head north and then push the suburban seats even further north. Livingston couldn't be paired fully with Oakland. Maybe I will play around with it since it will Allow Livonia & Co. to be paired with the near side of Oakland, even though it would be in a AA seat.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/f9f2fff2-6ca3-4bd6-a202-511f71a26636
This is my take on this concept. Two black seats forced north into Oakland > rest of Oakland+Macomb CD makes Bay City-Thumb district inevitable > Flint+Saginaw seat formed and whole county district formed in SE MI east of Wayne > Livingston threw in with Lansing metro and Calhoun added for partisan balance reasons and Grand Rapids-Muskegon CD also created for partisan balance reasons > the rest of map draws itself.
(ignore the district numbers - assume they'd be numbered in a continuity-driven matter)

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/b99a88d3-23fe-4d86-a4e3-8a237a3424da
another map, the aim here was (unsuccessfully) a nice, compact, whole county CD with Washtenaw in it, and for the all-of-southern Wayne district to move south if so necessary. I compromised and then the rest of the map basically fell into place into place. On a sidenote: this makes the Muskegon-Grand Rapids more natural looking on the map, due to Ottawa having to pair with Michiana as opposed to areas north and east of Grand Rapids. Overall the Washtenaw CD becomes more marginal, going down to D+2. The Oakland district's partisanship is barely affected despite its losing its tiny share of Macomb, as Southern Oakland is paired with southern Macomb. The Thumb-Bay City district loses Midland as it is pushed further south, forcing Saginaw to separate from Flint due to the need to avoid Midland, Saginaw, and Bay City all ending up in different districts. Flint's district is forced south into Metro Lansing, and the Lansing CD switches out Battle Creek for Kalamazoo. Saginaw and Midland meanwhile are thrown in with a wide area of rural Michigan.
This map is a bit more D-favorable and an argument could be made it is D-leaning.

[Idaho Conservative]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/b99a88d3-23fe-4d86-a4e3-8a237a3424da
another map, the aim here was (unsuccessfully) a nice, compact, whole county CD with Washtenaw in it, and for the all-of-southern Wayne district to move south if so necessary. I compromised and then the rest of the map basically fell into place into place. On a sidenote: this makes the Muskegon-Grand Rapids more natural looking on the map, due to Ottawa having to pair with Michiana as opposed to areas north and east of Grand Rapids. Overall the Washtenaw CD becomes more marginal, going down to D+2. The Oakland district's partisanship is barely affected despite its losing its tiny share of Macomb, as Southern Oakland is paired with southern Macomb. The Thumb-Bay City district loses Midland as it is pushed further south, forcing Saginaw to separate from Flint due to the need to avoid Midland, Saginaw, and Bay City all ending up in different districts. Flint's district is forced south into Metro Lansing, and the Lansing CD switches out Battle Creek for Kalamazoo. Saginaw and Midland meanwhile are thrown in with a wide area of rural Michigan.
This map is a bit more D-favorable and an argument could be made it is D-leaning.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/945fa102-1e26-4ee0-859a-1fbe56ec6af2 I made this based on your map, but united Ottawa and Kent instead.  The shifts is causes are particularly noticeable in Detroit, including a swing seat nearly all in Wayne, which I didn't know was possible.  I'd say this is more fair, but dems have big potential if they can keep improving in the suburbs since there are 3 suburban swing seats.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/b99a88d3-23fe-4d86-a4e3-8a237a3424da
another map, the aim here was (unsuccessfully) a nice, compact, whole county CD with Washtenaw in it, and for the all-of-southern Wayne district to move south if so necessary. I compromised and then the rest of the map basically fell into place into place. On a sidenote: this makes the Muskegon-Grand Rapids more natural looking on the map, due to Ottawa having to pair with Michiana as opposed to areas north and east of Grand Rapids. Overall the Washtenaw CD becomes more marginal, going down to D+2. The Oakland district's partisanship is barely affected despite its losing its tiny share of Macomb, as Southern Oakland is paired with southern Macomb. The Thumb-Bay City district loses Midland as it is pushed further south, forcing Saginaw to separate from Flint due to the need to avoid Midland, Saginaw, and Bay City all ending up in different districts. Flint's district is forced south into Metro Lansing, and the Lansing CD switches out Battle Creek for Kalamazoo. Saginaw and Midland meanwhile are thrown in with a wide area of rural Michigan.
This map is a bit more D-favorable and an argument could be made it is D-leaning.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/945fa102-1e26-4ee0-859a-1fbe56ec6af2 I made this based on your map, but united Ottawa and Kent instead.  The shifts is causes are particularly noticeable in Detroit, including a swing seat nearly all in Wayne, which I didn't know was possible.  I'd say this is more fair, but dems have big potential if they can keep improving in the suburbs since there are 3 suburban swing seats.

Interestingly this only further highlights the rotation involved.
Calhoun and Branch taken from Washtenaw CD forces it to take in the rest of Washtenaw and most of Monroe > southern Wayne CD takes in Livonia and other areas > NW Detroit CD takes in SE Oakland > almost-all-Macomb CD is created > Bay-Thumb CD takes in Saginaw > Midland CD takes in Muskegon > Grand Rapids CD has to take in most of Ottawa County.
I would like to assume that the double splitting of both Jackson and Hillsdale counties was a mistake - that's not something permitted under Michigan law with the sole exception of VRA compliance (something that MI Rs used in 2011).

[Idaho Conservative]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/dc4df638-b30d-48ba-bbf2-4fdc6fd78031
competitive district map.  8/13 districts are competitive ('16 margin 10 points or less for either candidate) with 5 being highly competitive.  Of course if the state continues to trend red like it did last decade this turns into an R gerrymander.  I like how I made a tossup entirely within Wayne and 2 tossups in central MI. 7 Trump 6 Clinton

[EastAnglianLefty]

Two versions of possible maps for the Michigan State Senate, based on 2018 population estimates:

https://davesredistricting.org/join/04f91558-5287-438a-8efe-aa9246cbef8a

https://davesredistricting.org/join/17d7f5ff-be35-4006-95c0-9cf51d2c0e52

They're pretty similar, with the differences limited to the Tri-Cities area where I couldn't quite decide which option was superior. As I'm depending on estimates, I tried to avoid having seats right at the top or bottom of the population deviation range, unless it was unavoidable. Although the 2016 block groups I drew it with don't always respect township boundaries, in actual fact the only municipalities I had to split were Detroit, Dearborn Heights (avoidable if you're willing to use touchpoint-contiguity) and Sterling Heights (I couldn't see a way to avoid it, but it may exist.)

Highlights worth pointing out:

• On 2020 numbers, Wayne County could just about have 7 districts but in practice it isn't really feasible now and it won't be at all by 2020
• Wayne and Macomb combined are entitled to almost exactly 10 Senate districts, which is a better fit than you can get with Wayne and any other one county. I acknowledge the problems with crossing 8 Mile Road, but it makes it a lot easier to maintain 5 VRA districts in Detroit.
• I think the districts I drew in Oakland are rather neat, except for the somewhat ugly pairing of Troy and Pontiac (which I think was just about avoiding splitting municipalities.) Nevertheless, they are pretty decent lines for Democrats and would undoubtedly be controversial, especially if the final census numbers do allow alternate configurations. District 11 is drawn as a black-opportunity district.
• Livingston and Washtenaw are now two large to share two senate districts, but Washtenaw plus Monroe works perfectly. Yes, this has a definite partisan effect, but I don't see a whole-county alternative. Swapping Ypsilanti for rural Washtenaw would probably make Republicans happy, but would look ugly (though maybe not worse than my district 22?)
• I don't love my district 19, so if you're looking to avoid a Washtenaw-Monroe combination, hopefully the solution would improve that too.
• I tried to draw a majority-minority Grand Rapids district, but the numbers aren't there for it.
• It's not very competitive right now, but back in 2012 district 34 would have been great for Democrats. Incidentally, does anybody know why Lake County was so Democratic up until 2016? It really shows up on a map, but I have no idea what prompts it

In a neutral year, I suspect this would be something along the lines of 22-16 or 21-17 Republican, but a Democratic majority looks like a very hard ask - it would probably entail running the table in the Detroit metro, locking down the Saginaw-Bay district, winning the Muskegon district and somehow getting over the line in either the Jackson district or the UP district.

[Tintrlvr]

Two versions of possible maps for the Michigan State Senate, based on 2018 population estimates:

https://davesredistricting.org/join/04f91558-5287-438a-8efe-aa9246cbef8a

https://davesredistricting.org/join/17d7f5ff-be35-4006-95c0-9cf51d2c0e52

They're pretty similar, with the differences limited to the Tri-Cities area where I couldn't quite decide which option was superior. As I'm depending on estimates, I tried to avoid having seats right at the top or bottom of the population deviation range, unless it was unavoidable. Although the 2016 block groups I drew it with don't always respect township boundaries, in actual fact the only municipalities I had to split were Detroit, Dearborn Heights (avoidable if you're willing to use touchpoint-contiguity) and Sterling Heights (I couldn't see a way to avoid it, but it may exist.)

Highlights worth pointing out:

• On 2020 numbers, Wayne County could just about have 7 districts but in practice it isn't really feasible now and it won't be at all by 2020
• Wayne and Macomb combined are entitled to almost exactly 10 Senate districts, which is a better fit than you can get with Wayne and any other one county. I acknowledge the problems with crossing 8 Mile Road, but it makes it a lot easier to maintain 5 VRA districts in Detroit.
• I think the districts I drew in Oakland are rather neat, except for the somewhat ugly pairing of Troy and Pontiac (which I think was just about avoiding splitting municipalities.) Nevertheless, they are pretty decent lines for Democrats and would undoubtedly be controversial, especially if the final census numbers do allow alternate configurations. District 11 is drawn as a black-opportunity district.
• Livingston and Washtenaw are now two large to share two senate districts, but Washtenaw plus Monroe works perfectly. Yes, this has a definite partisan effect, but I don't see a whole-county alternative. Swapping Ypsilanti for rural Washtenaw would probably make Republicans happy, but would look ugly (though maybe not worse than my district 22?)
• I don't love my district 19, so if you're looking to avoid a Washtenaw-Monroe combination, hopefully the solution would improve that too.
• I tried to draw a majority-minority Grand Rapids district, but the numbers aren't there for it.
• It's not very competitive right now, but back in 2012 district 34 would have been great for Democrats. Incidentally, does anybody know why Lake County was so Democratic up until 2016? It really shows up on a map, but I have no idea what prompts it

In a neutral year, I suspect this would be something along the lines of 22-16 or 21-17 Republican, but a Democratic majority looks like a very hard ask - it would probably entail running the table in the Detroit metro, locking down the Saginaw-Bay district, winning the Muskegon district and somehow getting over the line in either the Jackson district or the UP district.

If you're trying to draw a map that doesn't guarantee a GOP majority, you should be able to create a Lean R (and trending D) seat and a Safe R seat (instead of two Safe R seats) out of districts 14 and 15 by concentrating one seat in the suburbs (Novi to the areas west of Pontiac) and the other in the exurbs.

[Oryxslayer]

Anyway here's the results of my investigation into the Wayne non-AA seat style map. Like the others upthread discovered, this leads to the rotation of districts around that state. Now I didn't intend for it to become a D-Gerry/D-Favoring map at the start. However, once I saw how the Detroit Metro seats (first drawn) basically favored the Democrats to an unfair degree, I kinda made that unfairness part of the map. I do not endorse this plan, and I think it should show why an anchored Wayne  non-AA seat is probably asking the data to provide something that isn't available.






Districts 11, 12, 13 are Safe D (The Wayne Seat is right there is a D gift)

District 9 is probably Likely D (Clinton+10, D+4 CPVI, Sunk Livingston is growing just like Ann Arbor)

Districts 3 and 10 are marginal Clinton with D+1 CPVI's, but they are both moving towards the Dems

District 5 is marginal Clinton with D+4 CPVI, but it is moving towards the GOP (yep Clinton won a majority of seats...)

District 7 is marginal Trump with a R+1 CPVI, but moving towards the Dems

Districts 1, 2, 4, 6, and 8 are safe GOP, all with CPVI's above R+8 and an average Trump win of 58% - 37% (one seat a bit above that trump win, one seat a bit below that).

[Idaho Conservative]

Anyway here's the results of my investigation into the Wayne non-AA seat style map. Like the others upthread discovered, this leads to the rotation of districts around that state. Now I didn't intend for it to become a D-Gerry/D-Favoring map at the start. However, once I saw how the Detroit Metro seats (first drawn) basically favored the Democrats to an unfair degree, I kinda made that unfairness part of the map. I do not endorse this plan, and I think it should show why an anchored Wayne  non-AA seat is probably asking the data to provide something that isn't available.

An all Wayne non AA seat doesn't have to cause the map to favor dems tho.  Having the Ann Arbor district go into southern Oakland instead of red exurban/rurals could be done. 

[Idaho Conservative]

Anyway here's the results of my investigation into the Wayne non-AA seat style map. Like the others upthread discovered, this leads to the rotation of districts around that state. Now I didn't intend for it to become a D-Gerry/D-Favoring map at the start. However, once I saw how the Detroit Metro seats (first drawn) basically favored the Democrats to an unfair degree, I kinda made that unfairness part of the map. I do not endorse this plan, and I think it should show why an anchored Wayne  non-AA seat is probably asking the data to provide something that isn't available.






Districts 11, 12, 13 are Safe D (The Wayne Seat is right there is a D gift)

District 9 is probably Likely D (Clinton+10, D+4 CPVI, Sunk Livingston is growing just like Ann Arbor)

Districts 3 and 10 are marginal Clinton with D+1 CPVI's, but they are both moving towards the Dems

District 5 is marginal Clinton with D+4 CPVI, but it is moving towards the GOP (yep Clinton won a majority of seats...)

District 7 is marginal Trump with a R+1 CPVI, but moving towards the Dems

Districts 1, 2, 4, 6, and 8 are safe GOP, all with CPVI's above R+8 and an average Trump win of 58% - 37% (one seat a bit above that trump win, one seat a bit below that).

how do you put photos directly in?  When I put them in it on ImgBB just becomes a link