Opinion
359554
01-20-2022
In re Apportionment -- Macomb County -- 2021
Kathleen Jansen Presiding Judge, Elizabeth L. Gleicher, Colleen A. O'Brien Judges
ORDER
Petitioners' request for relief is DENIED for lack of merit, and the petition for review of the Macomb County Apportionment Plan is DISMISSED without a full hearing on the merits. MCR 7.206(D)(4).
Petitioners' arguments that the plan was drawn to effect partisan political advantage contrary to MCL 45.505(2) and 45.514(1)(b) is not supported by the record. Petitioners did not meet their burden of presenting actual evidence that partisanship was a prominent consideration in the adoption of the plan, or that the adopted plan unfairly alters the existing allocation of political power vis-à-vis voting strength. In re Apportionment of Clinton Co - 1991 (After Remand), 193 Mich.App. 231; 483 N.W.2d 448 (1992), lv den 439 N.W.2d 975 (1992); In re Apportionment of Kent Co Bd of Commissioners, 40 Mich.App. 508, 513-514; 198 N.W.2d 915 (1972), lv den 388 Mich. 757 (1972).
The apportionment plan meets the requirements of the laws of this state and is a "reasonable choice in the reasoned exercise of judgment." Apportionment of Wayne County Board of Commissioners - 1982, 413 Mich. 224, 264; 321 N.W.2d 615 (1982). The adopted plan presents a population deviation of 6.4% between districts, less than the plan proposed by petitioners, and so meets the equal population requirements of MCL 45.505(2). The districts in the adopted plan are contiguous, more compact and squarer than the districts proposed by petitioners and so meets the requirement that districts be "contiguous, compact, and as nearly square in shape as possible." MCL 45.505(2). While the adopted plan divides cities and townships between districts and combines cities and townships to make up districts, it does not do so any more than the plan proposed by petitioners. Furthermore, those divisions and combinations appear necessary to meet the population standard as allowed by MCL 45.505(2).