Salt Lake County should not be divided by any of the maps. It goes against the redistricting guidelines and is still trying to skirt the rules to try to gerrymander the best it can. Though, it is the best option of all of the maps.

This has some of the strangest peninsulas amongst the different maps and looks gerrymandered to me.

I do not support option E. Salt Lake County is split down the middle and added to the rural areas, misrepresenting the population. Needs to be proposed by a bipartisan committee

Better than some but still needs some improvement. Go with the Owens map.

This map really seems to divide the salt lake valley in a strange way. Having Riverton and Brigham in the same district while Millcreek is in a different district seems like a very inorganic grouping of folks in Salt Lake Valley.

This map goes to great lengths to split up Salt Lake County again...it's better than C, but still not great.

I do not support this map. As a resident of Cottonwood Heights, it does not feel appropriate to lump these neighborhoods with rural areas that have different needs.

This does not seem like a huge improvement. It still carves up SLC in a way that doesn't make sense.

This map appears to chop up Salt Lake County arbitrarily. It should be rejected.

This map does not accomplish the objectives of Prop 4. Communities are divided and lumped in with far-flung communities that have little in common with their needs and issues. Having rural-urban splits in a district makes it difficult for everyone within to be represented equally and fairly.

There is an obvious winner, the Escamilla/Owens map, it follows the requirements of compactness, community, and balance. This map simply lumps in three districts with odd borders and one Salt Lake District. This is a terrible option. It splits towns and counties and you end up with a mess for the Congressional representatives. How can we ask someone to listen to the needs of rural, urban, suburban, wilderness and balance them? I think the neighborhoods and communities of interest should be groups because it keeps people who share the same legislative goals together. This map just makes sure that rural Utahns get ignored.

I do not support Option E. This map splits communities across Salt Lake County and pairs urban neighborhoods like Holladay, Millcreek, and Murray with distant rural areas, diluting our voice and ignoring shared priorities like transit, housing, air quality, and public spaces. It continues the partisan gerrymandering Proposition 4 was meant to prevent. Utahns deserve maps that keep communities intact and ensure fair, focused representation.

Not a good option

Salt Lake County keeps getting divided into 4 sections. Why?

While this map is better than some, it still does not reflect political balance or keep communities whole. It sharply divides urban areas, including nearby areas I frequent, featuring absurd, sprawling shapes that do not follow natural features or facilitate easy travel through the districts without leaving them. It does not give equal voice to urban and rural areas. It directly opposes what Utah voters asked for in Prop 4. I object!!!

Map E does not match the requirements of Prop 4 and should not be used. It does not use compact districts, it splits multiple counties, and it does not preserve communities of interest – it splits urban areas, and also combines urban areas with rural areas, which does not allow fair representation for either urban or rural communities.

I oppose Map E because it continues to split up communities in Sandy and Salt Lake County, making it harder for us to have a unified voice in Washington. By combining urban and suburban voters with large, distant rural areas, this map weakens our representation and ignores the will of Utah voters who passed Proposition 4. Our community deserves a representative who understands our local priorities — not one whose focus is dominated by issues from completely different parts of the state. Map E also fails to create competitive districts, which means most elections will be decided in primaries rather than by the full electorate. This map does not reflect the values of fair representation or community integrity. Please reject Map E and choose a map that truly represents all Utahns — including those of us here in Sandy.

Redistricting should create districts that reflect the nature and common interests of the counties within them—urban or rural—as much as possible. To achieve this, Salt Lake County must be divided north/south. Forming two districts out of the densely urban Wasatch Front—one with the older northern SL County cities and adjacent southern Davis County cities and another with the newer/growing southern SL County cities with adjacent northern Utah County cities—creates two compact districts of counties with shared interests. This allows the creation of two more rural districts where rural/less urban counties can be grouped according to region and shared tourism/national parks/recreation, tribal, and farming and/or extraction industry interests. Map E’s east/west split of SL County is only slightly different than Map D’s. While it keeps Millcreek and Holladay in District 2 with Salt Lake City, it is a tortured shape, cutting out the older cities of Murray and Midvale but including the newer/growing cities of Riverton and Bluffdale. The combination of older and newer/growing cities is also found in the odd shaping of District 4, which is also attached to the more rural Tooele County. Map E’s District 1 has a similar odd combination of north and eastern counties that have different interests. It also separates Orem from Provo in District 2. While the public comment dots are mainly red/negative across Districts 1, 3 and 4, they are more balanced between red, green and yellow in District 2.

The shape of district 2 is wild, curving in such a bizarre way to break up communities. I don't support this map

This map really slices up the Salt Lake valley. I think the Salt Lake metro area has its own set of challenges that are very different from more rural areas. The maps drawn by the independent districting committee are better.

I appreciate how this map makes an attempt to have rural and urban communities in separate districts, however, it still splits up Salt Lake City in very odd ways. Please honor the will of Utah voters who demanded independent redistricting reform. Please honor Proposition 4.

Just wondering what my city is supposed to have in common with the East chunk of Salt Lake County & Bluffdale. Would make more sense if we were in a district with the West side of SL County.

Map E does not meet the requirements of Prop 4 and will not provide fair representation to Utahns. It does not use compact districts, splits multiple counties, and does not preserve communities of interest – it splits urban areas, and also combines urban areas with rural areas, which does not allow adequate representation for either urban or rural communities.

Splitting Summit County, while questionable, could make sense, but splitting off Park City from the Snyderville Basin splits obvious communities of interests. There is no reasoned basis to draw the split in this way.

Map Option E shows some improvement in compactness and population balance, but it still divides Salt Lake County in ways that weaken community cohesion and create geographically inconsistent districts. It does not sufficiently meet the standards of Proposition 4, especially regarding municipal integrity and natural boundaries. Further revision is needed to make this map a viable solution.

This map is not the worst of the options but it still doesn't adhere properly to the guidelines laid out in prop 4.

I don't think this map divides the districts as effectively as the Escamilla-Owens map. These districts divide communities in the Salt Lake Valley and lump together geographically dispersed regions. This map appears to have partisan aims, contrary to Prop 4.

This map disrespects the Utah voter's decision on Prop 4 to avoid gerrymandering.

This map in unfair to utah voters

Slightly better than map C, but still highly problematic. Voters explicitly asked for fair maps, and this map, like map C, does not meet the criteria. Why keep lumping rural and urban voters together? We'd like to represent our own interests for once. This is incredibly frustrating for both rural and urban voters whose voices keep getting diluted.

Do not split communities. Stop gerrymandering. Escamilla-Owens map is the one to go with.

This is very clearly gerrymandered, exactly the type of thing that Prop 4 was designed to prevent.

Do not vote for this map. Gerrymandering. This disregards Prop 4.

Prop 4 was passed by the voters. Why do you disregard the wishes of the voters? You work hard and are informed on many issues; nonetheless, follow our wishes. We want competitive elections and not ones that defy the will of the voters, unnaturally divides cities and and counties into multiple districts, and lumps together constituents who should not be lumped together. I am Republican, and I find the collective behavior of the Utah Legislature to be insulting. I don't feel represented. My town is split across four US Congressional districts. Enough is enough. Stop acting like a spoiled two year old; put on your big boy/girl pants and do the right thing.

Though it must be difficult to draw a map that is a fair to voters, this one does not meet that criteria either. Is the committee just trying to muddy the waters? I prefer the Escamilla/Owens map....please

Awkward carving up of northern Utah County and southern Salt Lake County. I get that irregular splits have to happen somewhere to make each district around the same population, but there are far too many in this map, violating several of Prop 4's guidelines. That being said, I like how southern Utah is essentially 1 district, it helps boost the compactness of the other districts while keeping that region of interest together.

This map violates the requirement of Prop 4 that the map not “unduly favor or disfavor . . . any political party.” Prop 4 requires that the Legislature evaluate maps using the best available methods, “including measures of partisan symmetry.” A standard and well-accepted method of partisan symmetry is the efficiency gap. Generally, maps with an efficiency gap above 7 or 8% are considered to be unduly biased in favor of a party (i.e., considered partisan outliers). When this map was uploaded to PlanScore, it calculated an efficiency gap of 17.0% (in favor of Republicans), which is well above the threshold at which a map evinces a strong partisan bias. Because this map violates Prop 4’s requirements, it should be disqualified from consideration. Any attempt by the legislature to dilute Prop 4’s requirement that the map not by unduly biased by amending the statute’s language (yet again) to cherry-pick standards for partisan bias that give the legislature essentially a free-pass to do whatever it wants would fly in the face of the people’s expressed intent and the Utah Supreme Court’s decisions.

Our current congressional map has been rightly criticized as senselessly dividing neighbors into different districts Although Utah's population distribution likely means we'll never be able to meet population requirements in all four congressional districts in ways that feel logical or natural, splitting Orem from Provo is a choice that seems made based solely on numbers rather than how those communities might best be represented. Orem and Provo are so close in distance and interests/affairs that it seems very unproductive to split them apart. Perhaps more of Salt Lake County can remain intact to allow Orem and Provo to stick together, and allow its future congressional representative to more effectively represent its collective interests. Furthermore, this strongly seems to violate the spirit of Proposition 4, and perhaps the letter of that law. It would be nice to not have more lawsuits needed to find a map that follows the law fairly elected by the people of Utah.

I dislike this map. We already had the bipartisan commission draw maps and should be using those maps.

This seems way too far north to have the dividing lines in terms of keeping values together. Also, what the heck happened south of Salt Lake?

This map unfairly represents the constituents of Utah

This map does not meet the redistricting guidelines. It splits up communities of interest along the Wasatch Front. It also dilutes the voice of rural voters by making them a minority in all of the districts. That being said, it does a better job than maps A, B, and C of keeping my neighborhood with other communities of interest. However, the areas south of my address are unnecessarily fractured.

SL County is large enough to hold its own district. One district should exist within the county. All your maps have SL County and the surrounding areas split between the 4 districts. So, I request that you reject all these maps and propose a map in true conformance with Proposition 4! Also please reject, Senator Brammer's proposed legislation. It is just a thinly veiled attempt to eliminate Prop 4 - which the citizens of Utah approved!

This map makes no sense. It looks like it is trying to carve out Salt Lake County between districts 1 and 4. The Luz Escamilla map is better.

This map does a poor job complying with the requirements. Salt Lake county is split into multiple districts. It commingles urban and rural and even suburban interests and does not keep communities of interest together - eg. you would drive through 4 districts just going from Sandy to Alpine which violates the contiguous districts that are not irregularly shaped. These boundaries do not follow the natural boundaries of cities or counties.

This map removes representation from both rural areas and urban areas. The way Salt Lake City is split makes no sense as the densely populated areas share similar needs and should be districted together.

This map is not as good the Escamilla map. It splits up Salt Lake County too much and does not meet the intent of prop 4.

This map arbitrarily lumps much of Salt Lake County in with Clearfield/Hill AFB, while cutting out the more similar and closer communities of Murray and Taylorsville. The Escamilla Owens map better represents these communities. However, this map is better than option A and C.

I do not like how this map splits up Salt Lake County. The intent of prop 4 is to have less gerrymandering and have more voices at the table. This map does not do that.

This map is still gerrymandered and does not comply with the requirements outlined in Prop 4. I do NOT support this map. Please use the maps created by the independent commission.

This map does a very poor job of meeting the requirements of Prop 4. It continues to split the Salt Lake valley into separate districts, thereby robbing its residents of fair and equal representation. It does not keep communities with similar concerns (urban vs suburban vs rural) together. This map continues to erode confidence in fair election processes.

I dislike how district 2 is almost all urban on this map, the other three districts at least have a mix of both. Also, why is district 1 gerrymandering around Salt Lake City all the way to the Uintas?

This map looks to be designed to intentionally split cities to reduce representation, as well as merging cities and open land that likely have different needs and require unique representation.

This is just more of the same. It doesn't meet the requirements of the proposition or pass the tests of fairness. Again, urban areas are lumped in with rural areas to overpower one or the others voice. At least much of Southern Utah is in the same district, but still don't like the split of Salt Lake Valley into rural districts.

This map is breaking up Salt Lake County while also including counties outside of Salt Lake County, why can't the legislature keep one of the districts completely inside of Salt Lake County?

Another map that cuts my community in half. I walk 300 feet south and I’m in another district. Use a bipartisan committee to create a fair map!

This map fails to meet the standards outlined in Proposition 4. The Escamilla-Owens map is the better option.

The whole point of this exercise is to develop a map that meets the law laid out in Prop 4, which was the will of the voters of Utah. This map is still gerrymandered with unnecessarily split municipalities and very oddly shaped districts.

This map ranks low in competitiveness, which means it is unfair.

Maps should be redrawn to represent the actual population of Salt Lake City. The current map does not represent the majority of the city because it include a number of other areas/cities/counties that do not make clear sense on why they should be included. And on the other side it splits the city and it's communites apart. The communities are aligned in their values and splitting them up to break up their representation does not make sense.

Weird split of Salt Lake County

The maps proposed by the Committee/Legislature need to score higher on competitiveness and proportionality. Utah is not a one party State and the districts should represent that.

I dislike this map because it splits up communities of people that have aligned values in order to give more power to the lesser majority. Equal rights should be considered when creating a voter map

I am strongly opposed to this map - why split communities apart in the greater salt lake city area?

Davis County and Salt Lake County have distinctly different personalities (I know because I've lived in both!). It does not make logical sense that they are merged and south salt lake is cut off. Further, this map also merges rural and urban communities, which have very different needs and should have unique representation.

Vote NO on this map. Parts of this map echo what we currently have. The Park City area is currently split in terms of representation. This does not remedy that "cracking" divide. Furthermore, the Wasatch Front is also divided. This map rates almost as poorly as Map C in terms of competitiveness, which is a major goal of Prop 4. This map violates the mandates inherent in Prop 4 that our next map is required to uphold.

This map is not good. It looks very intentionally designed to break cities into fractions to reduce their representation.

This map ranks 5th for me, just ahead of map c. The Prop 4 criteria of proportionality and competitiveness are most important to me, and this map ranks pretty low compared to others, plus several awkward splits. Not a fan.

Map E continues to split the Democratic-leaning Counties and Larger Cities into each of the four congressional districts. This deliberate cracking prevents all but the Republicans from forming a majority in any district. We have seen first hand - If one party's victory is virtually guaranteed, extreme policy outcomes prevail; elected officials become less accountable to the electorate and abuse of power corrupts the democratic process by prioritizing political interests over fair representation. Who will buy your housing when the Great Salt Lake blows away?

Map E continues to split the Democratic-leaning Counties and Larger Cities into each of the four congressional districts. This deliberate cracking prevents all but the Republicans from forming a majority in any district. It also splits my personal community, church, and family members.

I have lived in Utah my whole life. I now own two properties in Salt Lake County. This map is not a fair representation on my community. It won't allow for representation that knows the specific needs of my area. This is a jerrymandered map that will not allow for unbiased voting. My vote matters. My voice matters. I need representatives that represent me. Do NOT vote for this map.

This is the least representative map of all the options and does not meet the standards of prop 4.

Splitting up Salt Lake Country in an odd way does not represent that community. Does not meet requirements of Prop 4

Option E will not work with fairly representing the concerns and needs of Utah residents. Both Salt Lake and Utah counties are split up between the 4 districts in such a way that voters living within these heavily populated areas are able to dictate priorities without considering the voice of the rural voters.

This area of District 2 is awkward. Again, putting northern Utah with eastern Utah diminishes the needs of two very different places.

I do not support this map as it splits urban voices and priorities into separate districts & does not comply with the standards mandated in Proposition 4. The splitting of Salt Lake County diminishes the voice of both urban and rural priorities. I strongly prefer the Escamilla/ Owens Map.

I believe the rural part of the state have unique needs that the urban parts of the state do not. Our districts should represent the community they serve and that is impossible if they are trying to serve everyone. You also split Salt Lake County which disregards the needs of that community as a whole. I do not think this map represents our communities as needed.

I do not like how this map splits up Salt Lake County. In Holladay I live only a few minutes from Murray and it seems odd that would be a different district. Salt Lake County should remain intact for a map to be fair.

This map splits apart communities in a biased way.

This map does not align with Proposition 4. Dividing lines cut through urban/suburban areas in ways that do not achieve fair or balanced districts.

This map does not follow the requirements of Prop 4 and I do not support this map. District 2 is clearly gerrymandered with Salt Lake City grouped with Riverton, yet Murray is split out to District 4. How does that make any sense?

I oppose this proposal because it splits SLC county and will dilute the interests of rural and urban communities.

This map doesn't seem much different from map D in that it is very concentrated for Salt Lake and doesn't allow for a more well-rounded representation of all Utahns by our congressmen.

Strongly oppose. Unfairly splits salt lake county and eliminates opportunity/competition for proportional representation. Prefer Escamilla/Owens.

Oddly splits Salt Lake County. Really poor competition and proportionality. Does not best represent Utahns and keeps the current legislative supermajority in power without greater effort to hear every Utahn's voice.

This is splitting SLC county in very strange ways and appears to be gerrymandered. This map does not comply with proposition 4. I prefer the Luz/Escamilla map as it keeps SLC mostly together, and doesn't mix urban and rural representation.

This map unnecessarily splits many communities and do not think this is a good option for Utahn's.

This map does a better job at attempting to keep the urban Salt Lake areas together than maps A, B, or C, but still divides Salt Lake County in strange ways that do not meet the requirements of Prop 4. Why does District 2 group Salt Lake City with Riverton but not Murray? That makes no sense at all. Overall I do not support this map.

While better than some of the maps still too much rural mixed with and diluting urban interests. I grew up in rural farm country and have lived in urban areas as an adult. Neither gets fair representation when they are mixed as they have different issues/problems. This map is better than some but I don't believe it meets Prop. 4 spirit or requirements.

This map is not as effective in keeping the SLC community together.

Not in line with prop 4-breaks up the more urban areas so that they are watered down with rural areas and visa versa. still gerrymandering. Won't serve either rural or urban interests.

This map splits up the urban areas of Salt Lake Co. where there's a lot of cultural similarity and then combines those areas with more rural areas, watering down the influence of both voters. Not my favorite map.

I don’t support Map E. It breaks up communities unnecessarily and seems designed to dilute the voices of urban voters. This map does not fairly represent Utah’s diverse population.

It's hard to imagine that Salt Lake City will be properly represented with a map like this. Communities are broken up in this map in a very haphazard manner. Why are these the maps you've given us? Please draw something that's more coherent.

I like the Escamilla/Owens map. While not perfect, it does a much better job of distinctly representing our urban and rural areas. This allows for representation that can better use their limited attention and time on understanding the lifestyle and needs of their constituents. Prop 4 original maps could have been utilized as the judge did not disqualify them.

This map splits up urban areas with rural, which will dilute the interests of both.

As a resident of Park City, this map seems to violate standard 6 of Prop 4: Preserve neighborhoods and communities of interest. I live in Park City; my brother lives 10 minutes away, also in Park City. But this map would place us in different districts. Why divide a city like that?

This map does not follow Prop 4 guidelines and does not provide a fair and equal opportunity for communities and individuals to have their vote equally represented in the state of Utah. I oppose this option. The Owens map is the fairest map for Utah.

This map splits the most populous area of our state in a way that makes no sense from a community oriented perspective. Why would maps that divide and lump the needs of a major urban area in with some of the most rural areas that have completely different municipal and community needs even be considered? (That's a rhetorical question, we all know the answer.)

This map divides SLC and Salt Lake County, splitting my communities of like interest. My community of interest is SLC, University of Utah, East Bench, Millcreek, Olympus, Sugarhouse, Canyon Rim, Holladay, Sandy, Murray and nearby areas. I spend most of my days in these areas.

This map divides areas that have mutual interests. I'm most familiar with Utah County; having the areas split by this mapping would be counterintuitive and would negatively impact the needs of rural voters.

This is better than map C, bit still splits highly populated cities/counties in ways that don't make sense and don't seem to abide by prop 4.

I strongly disagree with this map because it clearly prioritizes political advantage over fair representation. The oddly shaped districts and divided neighborhoods show that the mapmakers were trying to protect certain incumbents or parties. Gerrymandering like this damages public trust, discourages voter participation, and undermines the principle of equal representation.

While there is an attempt to create an urban district, its appearance is quite insincere. Tooele has more in common with Logan and SL County is better split on a north-south than this very messy east-west preference from Dr. Trende. There are other problems, but this seems so glaring. Are we really trying?

I don't like this map and here's why: 1. If the goal is to remove gerrymandering, then why is the legislative committee so gung-ho on making even the SL county district so uncompetitive? 2. The legislative committee keeps saying it wants to keep communities of interest together, yet it keeps mixing urban, suburban, and rural areas together; each has different concerns, strengths, problems, and needs. 3. The committee touts the fact that the percentage of registered Democratic voters only number in the teens; they ignore the fact the Democratic candidates routinely capture 35-40% of the vote statewide. It’s not the percentage of voters that counts, it’s HOW they vote. 4. And finally, there are many ways to test for partisan bias, each test with its strengths, weaknesses, and appropriateness. The best way to test for bias is to use multiple tests that are appropriate to the situation. The ONE test the legislative committee uses is the least appropriate test for Utah.

I agree with Brita Engh's comment that SL Co has the largest number of voters in Utah out of any county, and it should have one district from it that is compact and undiluted by other counties. That would preserve conditions 1-7 for most of the county, which has the highest concentration of voters of any place in the state. The current districts that have both SLC and rural parts of Utah in every district have resulted in urban parts of our state being ignored by their representatives.

Tooele should be in district 1 with Logan; they have so much more in common than West Valley. SL County has to be split, and a North/South divide provides better proportionality than this messy East/West divide. Additionally, while this map only has SL County split into 2 districts, it's not a good faith effort when the boundary is deliberately stretching so far north.

All of the map choices are ridiculous. The point of having voting districts is to have the representative REPRESENT their constituents needs. The needs of rural and urban communities are simply different. Giving people "options" of multiple gerrymandered maps is a joke. Why is Utah afraid of real representation in our government?

Salt Lake County has the largest number of voters in Utah out of any county, and it should have one district from it that is compact and undiluted by other counties. That would preserve conditions 1-7 for most of the county, which has the highest concentration of voters of any place in the state. The current districts that have both Salt Lake City and rural parts of Utah in every district have resulted in urban parts of our state being ignored by their representatives.

This map does not keep communities together. There are unnecessary splits in counties like Summit and Salt Lake.

This map has a strange split though salt lake, keeping similar communities apart with dissimilar ones. Not great.

This map fails to keep Salt Lake County, the most populous county in our state with 34% of the entire state’s population as a single community of interest. This map goes against allowing a single group to choose its own representative. This map fails to meet the requirements mandated by court order. The power of the citizenry is diluted with any division of this county. Stop splitting this single most diverse community of interest

This map is clearly trying to dilute the voting rights of residents of Summit County; a bustling tourist center doesn't need to be combined with very rural Utah. This map should be rejected.

Utah's largest population center, Salt Lake City / Salt Lake County, does in fact constitute a legitimate community of interest. The ideas drawn up by the legislature pertaining to communities of interest are frankly arbitrary and meaningless, for example, that as long as institutions of higher education are not divided down the middle, that the intended community of interest standard has been met. Talk of an "urban rural mix" is mere partisan code for breaking up Salt Lake. Rural areas are represented and will continue to be represented however map lines are drawn; indeed, what is not currently represented is urban areas, particularly Salt Lake.

I do not think any of these maps are acceptable. I agree with comments regarding following the UIRC recommendations. Salt Lake County, in each option is carved up and should be its own district, dividing the rest of UT accordingly. Also, Northern UT and Eastern/Southern UT need separate representation.

While this one does try to keep Salt Lake County communities more intact, it does scores low on compactness, competitiveness and proportionality.

Combining metro with rural in every district leads to representation that doesn't effectively address the needs of either population (and is obviously done to water down liberals in SLC).

This map carves out communities in Salt Lake County and Utah county in ways that wouldn't represent the interests of those areas. It doesn't keep communities together in a fair way. One of the worse maps.

This map is less divided than the others, but it still splits Salt Lake County in unreasonable ways

As with the other maps, it breaks up communities. Not the worst of the map options, but still not good. The legislature needs to remember that the voters want fair districts. Please review the instructions.

This map fails to keep Salt Lake County, the most populous county in our state with 34% of the entire state’s population as a single community of interest. This map goes against allowing a single group to choose its own representative. This map fails to meet the requirements mandated by court order. The power of the citizenry is diluted with any division of this county. Stop splitting this single most diverse community of interest.

The proposed maps, A through E, fracture counties along the Wasatch Front and Back with a web of unnecessary lines, undermining the very communities they are meant to represent. This piecemeal approach to redistricting dilutes the collective voice of citizens and stands in direct opposition to the will of the people, who clearly endorsed fairer, community-focused maps through Proposition 4. For the sake of genuine representation, I strongly urge the committee to set these flawed proposals aside and adopt the coherent, minimally-split boundaries crafted by the independent redistricting commission.

I oppose Option E. While it’s a slight improvement over Option C, it still fails to meet the standards set by Proposition 4. The map unnecessarily splits Salt Lake County and continues to pair urban and suburban communities like Sandy with distant rural areas. This undermines fair representation and weakens the voice of communities with shared interests. Option D does a better job preserving community integrity and adhering to the law. I urge the committee to reject Option E and move toward a map that truly reflects the intent of Utah’s redistricting laws.

Option E appears to group disparate communities—ones with very different demographic, economic, or social interests—into the same district. That dilutes their shared voice and forces representatives to juggle conflicting priorities rather than championing coherent local goals.

I do not support this map. It breaks up SLC and splits many communities in Utah county. This map would not provide proper representation. This map does not make sense geographically.

While this map is better than what we have currently, this is still breaking up communities, and putting together disparate groups making it difficult for representatives to advocate for their constituents.

This map is unfair to the people of Salt Lake as it dilutes the urban areas and splits up communities.

Terrible option. It fails on numerous fronts including city/county splitting, competitiveness, and proportionality. The districts are clearly drawn to dilute votes from cities. Option E and Option C are the worst options and should not be considered.

Ugggh! Just don't adopt this one either. Seriously, after looking and commenting on all 5 maps, it's obvious to see that this doesn't keep communities together, either. It's diluting both urban and rural populations to influence voting bias, and no one is getting fairly represented. This one is slicing up everybody's counties and communities like a pizza again. People, people, people! Shake my head. Seriously. Listen to your constituents. You have to know that we care about how our state is represented, and we want our state to be represented fairly. Let us have a say.

Not a good map because of how it cuts up Utah County.

Absolutely biased

I do NOT support this map. This map does not follow the rules of Utah Law (proposition 4) and divides up Park City. There are too many splits among communities. This is against the spirit of Proposition 4 that I voted for years ago. It's time that the people who live in this state have a say. I've lived in Summit county for 20 years and I'm a business owner and a veterinarian. Over my time here, I have seen the maps change and I have lost my representation in congress. My city of Park City has been divided in half and Salt Lake City was split into quarters. My representative is now located far away in Ogden and spends his time up north. I have never had a chance to see him in my community. This map divides communities and removes my voice in Utah. Please no. Thank you for your time.

Not as bad as A or C, but please keep Salt Lake City and county as intact as possible. We want communities kept together

The strange hook-shape of district 2 is the dead giveaway that this map is gerrymandered when you consider which cities are included/excluded. Separating Provo from Orem is just plain unnecessary. The boundaries zig zag all over I-15. This map will NOT allow the voices of Utahns to be represented.

Very strange split of Summit County, as well as other counties. Like maps A, B, C, and D, map E is unacceptable; there are too many lines that split up counties, notably counties along the Wasatch Front and Back (Salt Lake, Summit, Utah, etc.). Chopping up counties and communities defeats the purpose of representation in Congress. Please go back to the maps created by the independent redistricting commission. They have minimal splits within counties and communities. Utah voters spoke: use the independently drawn boundaries as detailed in Proposition 4 of 2018.

None of the Legislative maps are as fair as the independent committee maps were. They all dilute Salt Lake County. They split counties, cities, and neighborhoods with similar interests. They combine urban and rural areas, which have completely different interests. They do not use natural boundaries. They do not represent fair, proportional and competitive maps and therefore do not meet the needs of the people and are not what the voters mandated in Proposition 4 . Salt Lake County represents the largest population and should be represented as one district, not split up and picked apart.

This map feels out of step with Proposition 4. Districts should be contiguous and support ease of travel, and the bulge at the bottom of District 2 for Riverton and Bluffdale really suggests gerrymandering. I have also lived in both Provo and Cedar City, and those voters have very different concerns and priorities. Putting them in one district would leave many without real representation for local concerns.

None of the Legislative maps are as fair as the independent committee maps. They all dilute Salt Lake County. They split counties, cities, and neighborhoods with similar interests. They combine urban and rural areas, which have completely different interests. They do not use natural boundaries. They do not represent fair, proportional and competitive maps and therefore do not meet the needs of the people and are not what the voters mandated in Proposition 4 . Salt Lake County represents the largest population and should be represented as one district, not split up and picked apart.

This map does not follow the requirements of Prop 4. It does not keep cities and counties whole. It does not have compact or contiguous districts. It has very irregular shapes.

Unnecessary split of Lehi City (not included in Dr. Trende's analysis).

Way too much carving up areas that aren't normal county borders to be following the prop 4 standards.

This map does not make sense. Why are Bluffdale, Riverton, and Draper looped in with Salt Lake? Looks like an obvious attempt at gerrymandering.

While I understand this is a municipality border, Herriman and South Jordan are basically indistinguishable here - not a good place for a district boundary.

This map clearly misses the mark set by Proposition 4. It breaks apart neighborhoods throughout Salt Lake City, weakening the cohesion of established communities. By lumping rural, urban, and suburban areas together, it overlooks the distinct needs and priorities of each, resulting in representation that is neither fair nor truly reflective of Utah voters.

This map strays far from the purpose of Proposition 4. By slicing through Salt Lake City neighborhoods, it pulls apart communities that should remain connected. Instead of grouping areas with shared concerns and priorities, it mixes rural, urban, and suburban regions into the same districts—an approach that dilutes voices and denies voters the fair, equal representation they deserve.

Bad since it make a representative only represent a small area of Utah.

None of the Legislative maps are as fair as the independent committee maps were. They all dilute Salt Lake County. They split counties, cities, and neighborhoods with similar interests. They combine urban and rural areas, which have completely different interests. They do not use natural boundaries. They do not represent fair, proportional and competitive maps and therefore do not meet the needs of the people and are not what the voters mandated in Proposition 4 . Salt Lake County represents the largest population and should be represented as one district, not split up and picked apart.

My area is lumped in with Tooele. My area is an urban area, that is much more similar to Salt Lake City. Why is Salt Lake Valley chopped up? The Salt Lake Valley needs to be kept together since the citizens share much of the same needs and views. This is not what the citizens of Utah VOTED for when we REQUIRED the legislature to use an independent commission.

This map is biased. So frustrating that none of your maps are following Prop 4. It is obvious you do not care about the 50% of voters that voted for a bipartisan group to create the maps. Rural and urban areas should not be in the same district, they have completely different needs. I do not want a rural person representing me, and rural people do not want an urban dweller representing them. Urban areas should not be divided into multiple districts. It is ridiculous and unethical.

again they break up urban and rural areas. not appropriate

This map does not align with Prop 4. It divides neighborhoods across Salt Lake City separating communities. It ultimately does not fairly represent the Utah voters because it does not group neighborhoods with common concerns and interests. Having these districts represent rural, urban, and suburban voters does not provide equal representation of the voters.

This map fails to meet the standards of Proposition 4 and selecting it will result in additional judicial action and wasted taxpayer dollars. It does a few things well, like creating a Southern Utah district which is logical for representation based on the needs of rural Utahns. However, that Southern district includes both Lehi and Provo but not Orem. Mixing urban and rural areas like this does not result in sufficent representation for rural areas. A representative who must split attention between urban and rural constituents will fail to adequetely do either. I'd encourage the commision to select an option beyond the A through E proposals and instead look to examples from the nonpartisan redistricting commission or even the Escamilla Owens map which does a much better job of creating distinct areas in Utah based on the needs of those communities.

This map makes no sense. Why is Orem being lumped in with Ogden? I would not consider my district one that is easy to travel through continuously without using the freeway. Utah County should be more compact and together.

This option is also horrible.

Absolutely not. Thank you.

This map cuts up Salt Lake County in way that makes no sense. it includes northern Weber County and much of the east bench before curving over to Bluffdale. It still manages to cut off a piece of western Millcreek from where I live in eastern Millcreek. Congressional districts are supposed to be compact and include a community of interest. My community of interest is with Salt Lake City (one street away), Holiday (12 blocks away), and Sandy (10 miles away) where I travel, not rural areas of Davis and Weber counties. Finally, any “political bias” test should be ignored. Such a test, directed primarily at states close to 50/50 party divides with “political packing” and not “cracking” problems like Utah, was described in an article published at the end of November 2018 (the earliest), long after Proposition 4 was drafted and after it was adopted by the voters. If the legislature and courts believe in original intent, “political symmetry” means what it did in early 2018 when Prop 4 gained enough signatures.

Just look at Eagle Mountain. Do the residents of Eagle Mountain, St George and Cedar city have the same needs/wants? No! This map geographically makes no sense.

I do not like this map. It splits way too many communities in Utah County with the east/west split. Salt lake county also has a weird split. I feel this map will not provide proper representation to any of the communities in the state.

I do not like that this map breaks Salt Lake County up into more than one district. It doesn't really make sense for a representative to represent the most populous city in the state and many rural areas because the interests of the constituents are likely not the same.

This is the least bad of the 5 legislative maps, but the Owens/Escamilla map (#249) is a lot better. Why are you putting the west half of Salt Lake County with Tooele, and Provo with all of southern Utah? Still mixing urban and rural in weird ways.

Another blatant gerrymandered map that invalidates my vote. Another carve out of your tax base which contains the highest population, industry and voters who do not support the Legislature agenda.

I oppose Option E. This map unnecessarily splits Salt Lake Valley/SL County communities. I live in Cottonwood Heights and this map would cause me to live in a different district than where I work! And what does the northern valley have in common with the southern valley that the central valley does not share? This dissection of the valley feels arbitrary and unnatural.

This map does not conform to the principles of Utah law as per Proposition 4. While it keeps some cities more whole than other maps (SLC), it still seeks to dilute votes from Salt Lake City and Salt Lake County. As a Salt Lake City resident, I want to be able to vote with people who share the same community ties as I do. This map does not represent that.

It doesn’t make sense to split summit county this way. The Utah legislature should use the maps drawn by the independent committee!

This map awkwardly divides up Salt Lake County. It doesn't makes sense to have districts include suburban areas and geographically distant rural areas.

This map falls short, it makes an attempt at creating a Northern Valley district, but makes the odd choice of pairing Park City with SLC as opposed to West Valley, Murray, and other similarly situated towns. In doing so it maintains the issues with the current maps, conflicting and differing interests from within the same districts.

This map does not give Salt Lake residents proper representation

This map splits up where I live, where I work, and where I spend many of my evenings (girlfriend's house)

This map does not all for proper districting of our most populous county. Salt Lake County is home to 1/3 of our population, it should not be split. It's needs should be represented as a whole. I am in south Davis County and would love to represented with the more urban area of Salt Lake, but that doesn't meet the criteria of Prop 4. Keep Salt Lake together and let them be represented properly.

Urban areas have totally different needs than rural areas.  Rural areas have 20% of the population but this map gives them 100% of the representation while the urban areas have 80% of the population and 0 representation.  The only thing this map accomplishes is total gerrymandering.  The Escamilla/Owens map is the only map that represents the state’s population.

I dislike that the west side cities (WVC, Taylorsville) are split off from Salt Lake proper. As a Salt Lake City resident on the west side, I have a more natual community interest with the west side. There is also more racial diversity in that section of the city, and we deserve shared representations.

While I appreciate that Millcreek and Salt Lake are paired together in Map E, I am concerned that this map dilutes urban voices by merging them with more rural areas. This blending does not accurately reflect the distinct values and priorities of these communities, ultimately leading to an unfair representation. We need a map that preserves the integrity and voice of urban communities.

This map arbitrarily splits my neighborhood, block by block in some cases. What happened to respecting community integrity?

Stop splitting SL County! This map attempts to silence the voice of SL County residents.

Although maps A, B, and C are far more unfair compared to this one, this still sees hundreds of thousands of Utahns losing their voices and votes by being grouped with communities that have very different concerns. This map is unfair.

This map does not allow SLC and SL County to have representation, seems unfair.

This map tears communities apart instead of keeping them together. It divides Salt Lake and Utah counties, pairing them with rural areas where priorities differ significantly. Proposition 4 was passed to guarantee fairness, compactness, and community-centered maps, but this proposal fails on every single one of those standards. My concerns are not being heard by those who represent me, and this map would only exacerbate the issue. Utah is home to a diverse population with varied needs and perspectives, and every resident deserves fair representation. This map does not make that possible.

This map weirdly divides Utah County and groups it with Eastern Utah, this map does not give fair representation.

This map is not true to the guidelines of Proposition 4. It should not be selected.

horrible map-- yet another attempt to mesh urban and rural voters so as to dilute both. I oppose this map!

I oppose this map. It ranks very low on competitiveness, and is poor on compactness and proportionality. This option does not meet the objectives of Prop 4 well. I also don't like the way it splits eastern Utah and lumps NW UT with NE UT which are very different places. This is not a good map

This is a poor option. It splits up salt lake county in an awkward way and splits too many counties. This is not in line with Prop 4.

The rules on whether or not something is gerrymandered created by the majority Republican legislatures are absolutely bonkers. I cannot in good conscience trust anything that comes from them or this "expert" that they hired.

This map does not follow the requirements of Proposition 4. It divides Salt Lake County into multiple districts in a way that stretches across very different regions and communities, which weakens compactness and undermines community representation. The map creates unnecessary splits that fail to keep communities of interest intact.

This is splitting the most populous county

This map splits Salt Lake County to severely. I want a bipartisan commission to supply maps. Utah voters have passed this amendment. The legislature should not be allowed to pick the voters.

I do not support this map. It seems biased.

This map seems biased. I do not support it.

I don't think this fairly represents the population of Utah

This option does not provide full representation in Washington, D. C. for the citizens of Utah.

My priority is to create voting districts that keep Urban and Rural communities together- so that each gets the representation they deserve for their unique circumstances. I believe Map E will unfairly minimize voter voices in, and the specific needs of, Urban areas. I support the Map preferred by the IRC over any put forth by the Legislature’s Redistricting Committee.

No. Does not fairly represent our population, which is the goal of Prop 4.

NO thank you

I am a public education teacher living in Murray and working in the West Valley area. Communities in Murray, Millcreek, and Holiday are completely divided and they need to ability to work together to improve their communities. I also feel that its unfair to divide communities like S. Jordan and Sandy from Draper and Riverton. I am opposed to this map. Our new map should bring communities together, not divide them.

An obvious Gerrymander in favor of GOP and the formalization of non-competitive elections. This map does not achieve the intent of Prop 4 and clearly demonstrates the GOP goal of a permanent super majority. To so brazenly attempt to bypass the will of constituents shows nothing but contempt for them and in your role in our democracy. The clear hurdles to making a public comment and obfuscating the fact that these are not the original Prop 4 maps speaks volumes about the intention eliminate minority voices.

Unnecessarily splits/dilutes SL City and County communities. Bottom line: Given demographics and political leanings, as much of east SL County as possible (instead of Davis County) should be in one district, perhaps with some tweaking to include the Park City area. Davis County folks would likely agree

Again, this divides Utah County in a way that doesn't make sense for the growth. These communities have substantial growth coming up and need to be grouped together to handle that growth effectively. The growing Urban areas are going to completely overwhelm the rural voices in this map.

This map is still quite gerrymandered, but it is better than option C. I like that Southern Utah is its own district instead of being mixed with SLC. I realize that SL County must be split based off population. SLC residents have more in common with residents of Park City and Murray which are both excluded from District 2 then they have in common with those in Kaysville. Honestly, this map seems quite gerrymandered. All the maps put forward by the GOP legislatures feel gerrymandered and not put forward in good faith based off what the population voted for in 2018. It's disappointing to have legislators who work so incredibly hard to grip on to their power and not listen to the voices in their state.

I still like map C better. With regard to not splitting up Salt Lake County, there is no real way not to do it.

Map E still cracks SL County across several districts. District 4 of Map E contains the greatest concentration of Salt Lake County residents at 762,581. An additional 55,323. individuals in Salt Lake County could still be included in District 4 without exceeding the population ceiling. Cottonwood Heights should be included in District 4 not District 2 and that portion of West Valley City east of the Jordan River and West of I-15 included into District 2. I urge you to honor the wishes of the people of Utah who voted in favor of Proposition 4, who want fair and honest maps, and believe every eligible voter should have a vote that carries equal weight and that has not been diminished by partisan politics.

This map is splitting SL county among too many districts. Not a fair map.

Low in competetiveness.

I live and work within a 10 minute drive and this map places those locations in two different districts. This would be two different districts for the same group of people who are working together to make north Utah county the best it can be. Also, when I see Ogden area split up in this map as well as some other communities I would imagine need fair representation, this seems like a red flag according to the court guidelines.

Not high enough in competitiveness and proportionality

This level of gerrymandering is so frustrating. I live in Cottonwood Heights and my neighbors a BLOCK away are carved into an East Bench neighborhood that we are for some reason excluded from? Hard no.

This map fails to meet the standards outlined in Proposition 4. The Escamilla-Owens map is the better option.

Another one I don't like. Is it just me, or are all the lettered maps terrible? It seems to have no respect for cities or municipalities, just slicing them up willy nilly. Another gerrymander. No.

Map E still smacks of gerrymandering. My local high school (less than half a mile away) is in a different district.

This is a better way to split SL County up although still seems unnecessary to do. But having Orem and Provo separated just seems ridiculous.

This map also fails to meet the standards set by Proposition 4, which was passed to ensure fair, transparent, and nonpartisan redistricting. The maps divide communities, reflect partisan bias, and lack transparency—directly contradicting the intent of Prop 4. Utah voters demanded fairness, and these maps do not deliver.

This map is not what the people of Utah voted for, it carves up individual counties, cities, and even towns into multiple districts. Each region with its own needs, resources, installations, and economies should be represented. Salt Lake City, as the state's capital and most densley populated area needs to be represented by its own member of Congress, while the 1st Congressional District should represent the federal military and civil service installations, the southern regions should be represented for their mineral intense economies, and areas like Orem and Provo for their technology and pharmaceutical industries.

I do not support this map, it is not the fair representation that Utahns deserve and voted for.

I do not support this redistricting map.

This map does a better job on consolidating Salt Lake County, but adding in Davis County cancels out the positives. Davis county residents are certainly part of the Salt Lake Metro community, but I would think that most folks in North Davis / Weber County have closer connections to Ogden and Logan vs Salt Lake.

As an engaged Utah voter, I strongly oppose this proposed redistricting map. It fails to provide fair representation and risks disenfranchising voters like myself by significantly diluting our electoral influence. This map does not adequately serve our communities and undermines the principles of equitable representation enshrined in the Utah State Constitution. Furthermore, I believe the Utah Supreme Court's ruling was misguided, prioritizing partisan interests and relying on a flawed justification to impose this redistricting process and maps like this one on voters. This proposal is inadequate and should be rejected in favor of Map C that truly upholds fair and representative districting.

Better than A, B, or C but still not great.

For Map E, District 4 contains the greatest concentration of Salt Lake County residents at 762,581 but the County is still cracked and well below the population celing of 817,904. An additional 55,323. individuals in Salt Lake County could still be included in District 4 without exceeding the population ceiling. Cottonwood Heights should be included in District 4 not District 2. I urge you to honor the wishes of the people of Utah who voted in favor of Proposition 4, who want fair and honest maps, and believe every eligible voter should have a vote that carries equal weight and that has not been diminished by partisan politics.

The division of Salt Lake County on this map (especially around the south end of District 2) does not make any sense except maybe to specifically dilute the voting power of Salt Lake County residents. While it might be better than some maps, it comes in after the Escamilla/Owens map (1st place) and map D (2nd place).

This is a no for me. As a resident of southern Utah, I don't think this is the best representation of our rural interests, nor do I think it is adequate for our urban areas. This is not sufficiently adhering to the Prop 4 guidelines.

This is an example of a gerrymandered map and does not meet Prop 4 regulations as it uses arbitrary lines to split up urban regions and tips the political scale towards one party over the other.

Not a natural separation between districts. This does not follow the rivers or mountains, or valleys. Splitting up Salt Lake County at all is absurd. Counties shouldn't be hacked apart. Remember the part where these need to be fair maps. What measures were considered here? I believe you are required to have 4. I only see 1. Nice try.

This map splits too many communities up. Not only does it split the urban population of voters in a way that divides communities that have similar needs, but it even splits up smaller communities like Granite and Cottonwood Heights. I don't think this map makes sense if we're trying to give these communities fair representation.

This map doesn't make sense as to why the boundaries are drawn they way that they are. There are better maps for representation than this one.

District 2 looks like it would be at home on those Gerymandered District socks. Why are Sandy and Draper separated, and why are Draper and Riverton included with Park City? This is a gerrymandering map and does meet the requirements of Prop 4.

This is an unfair map that does NOT meet the rules and regulations for Prop 4. It is not fair in any way shape or form, this is an unacceptable map.

Splitting most of the Urban areas down the middle like this seems like a terrible idea and just gives less representation to the voters here

This is an unfair map and does not meet the intentions of Prop 4. Division of Salt Lake County is diluting the voice of those voters in favor of rural less populated areas of the state. Prop 4 calls for keeping communities of interest intact to avoid favoritism of a political party. This map does the opposite.

The only legal and acceptable maps are those drawn by the independent redistricting committee.

Separating west jordan, WVC from the rest of the valley doesn't make sense. This map is not a good representation and continues to split up growing urban areas. Escamilla/Owens map is much more aligned with the Prop 4 criteria.

This map is not proportional in the way districts are represented. Regardless of party affiliation, everyone should be comfortable with districting that allows the electorate to be fairly represented.

This map does not seem to comply with the spirit of the law passed by voters and upheld by the courts. It splits both Salt Lake and Utah Counties, diluting the urban vote by unnecessarily pairing them with rural counties. This map, along with map A, B, and C, appear to continue gerrymandering, which was the specific issue the voters sought to correct with Prop 4. Don't resort on just the 'one fair test' approach! Uphold all of Prop 4!

This proposal is better than the first four, but is still another attempt to allow continued domination in all four districts by rural voters.

This map does not seem to comply with the spirit of the law passed by voters and upheld by the courts. It splits both Salt Lake and Utah Counties, diluting the urban vote by unnecessarily pairing them with rural counties. This map, along with map A, B, and C, appear to continue gerrymandering, which was the specific issue the voters sought to correct.

This doesn't follow Prop 4. This is still gerrymandering.

I do not approve of this map. While it is somewhat more equitable of the five maps drawn by the Legislature committee, it isn't as balanced as it could be.

This is Map E and it's unacceptable. I initially commented on the wrong map because I can't see the maps in the hideous commenting tool. There need to be 2 urban districts since Utah's population is 90% urban. Urban/rural splits have resulted in poor representation and Congresspeople who show overt contempt for urban voters.

This map violates the law. It violates rule 2 by splitting cities. It violates rule 3 egregiously by splitting so many counties. It violates rule 6 blatantly dividing communities that think similarly and combining rural and urban areas. It violates rule 7 by having extremely weird boundaries. This map is unacceptable and definitely does not provide fair representation for the people of Utah.

This seems to primarily attempt to just balance population and you get a weird swirl splitting up urban areas. This would result in contentious districts where a representative wouldn't be able to effectively represent their constituents needs.

Still carves up metro areas and gives much too weight to rural areas. This is a not a map that provides equal representation.

NO. Splits Salt Lake's urban constituency all over the place.

This map violates the principles of fair redistricting and Proposition 4. It tries to look "un-pizza-ed," but in fact still divides Salt Lake County to diminish our representation.

This map does not follow prop 4, voted for by Utahns and upheld by the judiciary. It does not keep cities and counties together.

This map splits my neighborhood and divides our community from the canyon that we live in.

This map only partly aligns with Proposition 4, it splits communities and is not geographically bound.

I oppose this map due to partisanship being at play. This map also mixes urban and rural residents together in a way that does not give either enough representation in Congress.

This map does not honor the intent of the independent redistricting ballot initiative that was passed by the majority of Utahns. It unfairly divides neighborhoods in densely populated urban areas, which should share a common representative. This map is a clear gerrymander and has clear partisan bias.

Now we are getting creative. I guess they didn’t feel like they could get away with presenting another cross that converges in the population centres. So somebody drew up this mess.

Prop 4 Standards: - Equal Population: Met with no deviations. - Minimize division of counties, cities, and towns: Not Met. Significant divisions in Summit, Salt Lake and Utah Counties. Numerous divisions of cities/towns. - Geographically compact and continuous districts: Partially Met. Districts 2, 3, and 4 are geographically compact. District 1 is less compact and continuous. - Preserve Traditional neighborhoods and communities of interest: Not Met. Divides counties/towns/cities extensively. Divides Park City area into multiple districts. Divides HAFB into multiple districts (1 and 2). - Follow natural and geographic features: Partially Met. Follows some natural and transit features.

Splitting cottonwood heights from the canyons does not preserve neighborhoods and communities of interest because those communities have similar interests, overlap, and priorities, and thus does not comply with prop 4.

These are some pretty weird shapes.

Orem is split from Provo, but combined with Logan? And Provo is combined with St. George? Murray is split from Salt Lake, but somehow the map wraps around to include Riverton with Salt Lake? Anybody who understands the dynamics of Utah communities can immediately see that these districts split communities with shared values rather than keeping them intact as intended by Prop 4. They also violate compactness requirements. Communities with shared values should be kept together so they can be represented by someone with their values.

This map is deeply flawed and should not move forward. It repeats the same gerrymandering tactics Utah Courts have already rejected, carving Salt Lake County into multiple districts and pairing urban neighborhoods with distant rural areas that share little in common. While it does manage to keep my city mostly in one district, adjacent ones just south and west of us are trimmed off in an effort to dilute the voice of Salt Lake City (and its included smaller cities like Millcreek). These choices ignore the requirements of Proposition 4—compactness, minimizing county and city splits, and keeping communities of interest intact—and instead dilute the voices of both urban and rural Utahns. Voters passed Prop 4 to stop exactly this kind of manipulation. Representation should be about keeping neighbors together, not dividing them for partisan gain. Reject this map.

This map is biased.

This map splits salt lake valley and groups them with rural areas and deprives people living in salt lake valley representation

This map is better than Options A, B, C and D, but it still does not meet the requirements of Prop 4 or Judge Gibson's order. It is clearly drawn to ensure Republicans control all 4 seats in the House.

I disapprove of this legislature drawn maps; the legislature should defer to the maps drawn by the independent commission as defined by Prop 4.

Fair representation, that is all the people want. Any map that combines a large rural area with an urban area will make everyone upset.

This map does not meet the intent or requirements of Proposition 4 and should be rejected. It splits Salt Lake County—the most populous part of the state—into multiple districts, diluting the voices of urban voters and forcing them into districts with far-flung rural communities that share few common needs. Provo and Orem are separated, Sandy is lumped with Tooele and other western cities, and Riverton and Draper are sliced apart arbitrarily. These divisions are illogical and weaken community representation, making it harder for residents to have their interests fairly heard. Rather than keeping cities and counties intact, this map “puzzle pieces” communities together in ways that feel like gerrymandering, prioritizing political outcomes over fair representation. The compactness and contiguity requirements of Prop 4 are undermined, and neighborhoods are carved up in ways that ignore natural and geographic boundaries. Urban and rural voters deserve representation on their own terms, not by being blended together to cancel each other out. While some aspects—like keeping Davis County whole—are improvements over other options, this map still fails the fundamental test of fairness. It breaks up the largest communities of interest, ignores demographic realities, and does not reflect the will of Utah voters who approved Prop 4 for exactly this reason. We deserve better than arbitrary divisions and partisan games. Salt Lake County should remain whole, urban areas should not be diluted, and communities should be kept together so all Utahns have a fair voice in Congress.

This map still carves apart SL urban communities.

Awful. Splits Salt Lake County far too much and disproportionately favors rural communities. Not the worst of the the horrible maps drawn by the legislature's committee, but close. I love how the committee is rigging the comments by soliciting feedback on their preferred map just like they are rigging the maps.

This map is better in that it at least has a SLC representation. However, it feels like it tries to put large areas of population into areas of rural needs as well. The large part of the population is in SLC - so it should also be represented fairly and not diluted by spinning off sections of it to be represented by the same person that a rural farmer would be in. These aren't the same needs. Our government isn't listening to the people, they are playing every game in the book. Stop playing games and represent the will of the people.

This map appears to prioritize maintaining rural communities but results in significant splitting of urban areas and communities, which can dilute the voices of residents in those densely populated regions. The compactness is preserved, but the map may benefit from a more balanced approach that keeps communities connected and ensures effective representation for all residents.

I think the current districting is gerrymandered and unfair representation. This map is not great. I have been so UNHAPPY with utah reps and they continue to make terrible choices with terrible consequences for your constituents. Do not use this map.

While this map does a better job at keeping like rural parts of the state together, there is a better drawn map that is more precise when it comes to the urban parts of the state.

This separates communities like Orem and Provo which would be in different Districts. The urban areas like Ogden, Salt Lake, Orem and Provo are all split in ways that seem like gerrymandering. Does not follow Proposition 4 intent to divide communities.

this one divides urban areas too much.

This map doesn't meet prop 4. Throw it out.

These districts are not continuous or concise. This map does not follow prop 4 which we voted for in order to keep cities and counties together in our voice/vote.

These districts are not continuous or concise. This map does not follow prop 4 which we voted for in order to keep cities and counties together in our voice/vote.

Better than some but still does not follow Prop 4. Arbitrary splitting up of neighborhoods- why should Sandy and Draper be split up. Use the one developed by the independent committee

the way communities are puzzle pieced together and don't follow the correct boundaries. this isn't what representative democracy looks like

Map E does not meet the criteria for Proposition 4. The criteria of 'Minimizing Divisions of Municipalities and Counties' is blatantly ignored (as you can see by the lines of District 2 & District 3). Which, also does not meet the criteria of 'Contiguity'.

This map does not follow the requirements of Proposition 4. It divides Salt Lake County into multiple districts in a way that stretches across very different regions and communities, which weakens compactness and undermines community representation. The map creates unnecessary splits that fail to keep communities of interest intact.

This map does not comply with the rules set by prop 4.

Again, this map was not drawn with the intent to honor Prop 4. This intentionally splits SLC communities , yet again! Needs significant improvements and needs to use multiple fairness tests to ensure court order is being adhered to. Fair maps means fair elections.

Wow I guess I'm not surprised that all of these maps just are poor and do not follow prop 4. slice and dice to get the voters you want is the key to all these maps I guess.

Dilutes voices in the most populated regions. Elected officials should represent the population they serve.

This map doesn't keep cities together or properly follow geographical areas.

This map is one of the two least fairly drawn maps. It harshly divides communities and does not appear to be concerned with city or county boundaries.

This map fails to keep Salt Lake County, the most populous county in our state with 34% of the entire state population as a single community of interest. This map goes against allowing a single group to choose its own representative. The power of the citizenry is diluted with any division of this county.

The needs of South Jordan, Riverton, Lehi, and Alpine have common ground in their needs due to relatively close proximity. Yet all of those geographically close communities would be in different districts that stretch to the far corners of the state. Additionally, district 3 has a vastly lower population of residents 18+ compared to the other districts. This map does not keep the adult population even among the districts.

Not as bad as option C but still pretty bad. Violates Prop 4. Needs significant improvements in proportionality, competitiveness, and and compactness.

This map obviously is gerrymandered. None of these districts make sense.

I got involved because I am a veteran and civil servant. I have seen firsthand that fairness and appropriate representation makes us all better together. Right now as lawmakers are drawing new maps, it is critical that communities are represented fairly. This matters because it is a chance to do better and keep communities like mine together and every part of Utah a real voice. This is what democracy looks like and what I served our country to protect. That's why I am asking the legislature to pass a map that reflects the intent of Prop 4 and Utah's residents. This map does not meet the Prop 4 intent and should be rejected in favor of the Escamilla/Owens map or Map B. If we do this every county will have fair representation.

This is not a good faith attempt to comply with Proposition 4.

This map clearly doesn't take the intent of Prop 4 into consideration. Communities need to be kept together and the boundaries of this one don't align communities.

Option E is an unacceptable map that does not follow the Prop 4 rules. This is not a viable option for the people of Utah who voted for Prop 4.

I agree that this map illogically splits up areas that belong together and is an attempt to gerrymander

This would result in my neighbors being in an entirely different US House district. People directly across the street who share every other interest should not be separated in who they can vote for. Literally in the same precinct but different house districts is nutty.

Repugnant redistricting map. Does not meet the Proposition 4 outlines. Keep urban communities and rural communities separate so that their issues can be advocated for. It is unjust to split communities apart and lump them in with vastly different communities. Demonstrates a lack of care for voters.

MAP E. Better than A, B or C. But Provo and Orem are separated in this map. That makes absolutely no sense to me at all. Provo again is combined with all points rural and south. Combining urban areas with rural areas does not assure representation for either group.

District 2 in this map does not make sense to me.

Option E is an unacceptable map that does not follow the Prop 4 rules. This is not a viable option for the people of Utah who voted for Prop 4.

This map does not align with proposition 4, splitting communities with clear disregard for city boundaries, and geographic boundaries.

This map avoids excessive splits of cities and counties, which is positive. However, several districts are drawn in ways that are less compact and less competitive than other alternatives. As a result, the map provides fewer opportunities for diverse voter voices to influence outcomes.

Map E raises real concerns about how connected communities are grouped. Sandy is not included with its natural peer cities like Draper, Holladay, Cottonwood Heights, and other nearby Wasatch Front suburbs. Instead, it’s lumped together with Tooele and far-west cities that have very different needs, priorities, and growth challenges. Sandy shares economic, transportation, housing, and education ties with the Salt Lake Valley communities right next to it. Grouping it with distant western cities dilutes those shared interests and risks under-representing the voices of Sandy residents. I urge you to adjust Map E so Sandy is aligned with its neighboring, like-minded communities rather than being pulled into a district that does not reflect its realities. Related community interests being diluted by district boundaries is the reason Prop 4 got so much voter support - the adopted map needs to minimize that as much as possible.

Map 237 shows incremental adjustments to congressional and legislative boundaries, reflecting attempts to balance urban and rural representation while addressing growth along the Wasatch Front. However, this map divides cohesive communities, particularly in Salt Lake County, diluting the political voice of urban voters by pairing them with distant rural regions. It does not reflect the spirit or intent of Proposition 4! DISLIKE!!!

Map E raises real concerns about how communities are grouped. Sandy is not included with its natural peer cities like Draper, Holladay, Cottonwood Heights, and other nearby Wasatch Front suburbs. Instead, it’s lumped together with Tooele and far-west cities that have very different needs, priorities, and growth challenges. Sandy shares economic, transportation, housing, and education ties with the Salt Lake Valley communities right next to it. Grouping it with distant western cities dilutes those shared interests and risks under-representing the voices of Sandy residents. I urge you to adjust Map E so Sandy is aligned with its neighboring, like-minded communities rather than being pulled into a district that does not reflect its realities.

This map is clearly divided in a way to silence urban voices. It does not logically group individuals in their communities with shared interests.

This divides salt lake county in a way that groups them with rural areas that have different needs and priorities, which will dilute the urban voices that need to be heard (and also at times the rural voices that need to be heard.

I dislike that this map doesn't score well on additional tests beyond the partisan bias test when evaluating boundaries. Using other common tests like The Efficiency gap, the mean-median difference, and an ensemble analysis should be a priority to the legislature.

why is district 2 shaped like a crescent that cuts out some suburbs and then scoops in more south of that? its obviously not following communities. another obvious attempt to silence voters who voted for fair maps

Horrible map that doesn't keep communities and cities together in an intelligible way. This is in no way representative of the cities and communities, and considering the memo the republican party that got released, I guess that is the point. This is a bad faith and negligent attempt to re-draw districts.

Map should not be splitting up cities

Not representative at all for the community of the salt lake city area.

This map concentrates too much around Salt Lake. Reps need to be able to represent a larger portion of the state, balancing power between urban and rural voices.

This map breaks up communities. It does not provide fair representation. It appears to be drawn for partisan purposes. It looks nothing like any of the maps drawn by the non-partisan independent redistricting committee in 2021. The district court is likely to reject this map if it is chosen.

This map is garbage. It's heavily biased and is an unfair distribution.

Not a fan of this map at all. I don't like the way it splits up my community and does not feel representative of our area. (reposting to mark as dislike)

I thinks this is a bad map. It looks like it was designed to carve up sections of Salt Lake County. As a Sandy resident I have more in common with others along the wasatch front than i do with those in more rural western utah.

Salt Lake County should not be split up in this fashion. We deserve to have a voice in Washington that is like minded. 1 party rule does not result in good governance as those in power have no reason to work for the people they represent. They know they will stay in power as long as they desire by simply having an (R) behind their name on the ballot. Salt Lake County deserves better.

Another one that puts my urban area in with farmland and my vote won't count.

Do Glendale and Bluffdale have more in common than the five cities between them that are not part of the same district? No.

Does not meet the requirements of Prop 4

This map splits up the highest population areas too much.

I don't think this is in the spirit of prop 4.

Not a great map at all, still quite gerrymandered.

This map is still to gerrymandered and does not provided competitiveness for the seats. does not follow prop 4

Pretty sure the guidelines were to keep counties, cities, and communities together as often as possible in order to fairly represent the population and needs of the district. I really don't see how this map provides that when it splits some of the most densely populated counties up and tries to combine them with the more rural areas of the state. Obviously the needs of these areas are going to differ so why not listen to the guidelines and allow both communities to have separate voices. All that this map is going to do is split a district representative's attention in too many directions which isn't helpful to any of us.

This does not follow Prop 4 guidelines and does not provide a fair and equal opportunity for communities and individuals to have their vote equally represented in the state of Utah.

I've lived in Cache Valley and Utah County my entire adult married life and recently moved to Weber County. This map looks like they just chopped up Salt Lake City to make the Population in the other areas look equal-ish. Things in Salt Lake are way different than other communities I've lived in. They need their own representation. Just as I don't want city opinions making water rights decisions for farmers, I don't want a bunch of country bumpkins who only go to the big city once or twice a year telling me what to do with the homeless population. If the people don't live in my community, they shouldn't be making up rules for me. This is not a good map.

Let's follow reasonable lines and support interest of all communities. While somewhat better than other options, this one is still clearly making attempts at diluting and dividing the voices of the Salt Lake area.

The boundaries in this map are intentionally drawn to favor a specific population.

Too much mixing of different communities again. We have different priorities and will vote differently. Again, this one does not match the intent of Prop 4.

I do not support this map and do not think it should be considered in the final decision as it is not representative at the national level of what the our people and population truly believe and need.

Does not follow Prop 4 requirements, and splits too many cities unnecessarily

This map does not support the goal of Prop 4. It divides a large population center into at least 3 districts. The fragmenting of cities and counties in maps A-E is inconsistent with the intent of Prop 4, and undermines fair representation. The only map that truly seems to embrace the intent of Prop 4 is the Escamilla/Owens map.

Wow... just no. Effectively representing communities cannot happen when communities are split apart. I realize that is not the legislature's goal, but it should be.

Once again, I want to like it but... I don't. At least this time Sandy is with South Jordan... but then a chunk of rural western Utah is included?? Why? I don't think I've ever been there and I don't think we have the same priorities. Also... why is the district for Salt Lake City coming around to loop in Bluffdale, Riverton, and Draper? They are nothing alike. They should be grouped with Sandy instead.

Flouts prop 4.

This map doesn't seem to uphold the goal of Prop 4. It divides a large population center into at least 3 districts. I do not believe this makes sense in any logical sense and is unfair to the community of Salt Lake City and Salt Lake County. The constant fragmenting of cities and counties I see in maps A-E is inconsistent with the intent of Prop 4, and undermines fair representation.

This map is inconsistent with the intent of Prop 4. It divides the largest population center and merges it with rural areas, while also fragmenting counties and cities, which undermines fair representation.

Gerrymandered to benefit Republicans during an unprecedented slide into authoritarianism... legislators should not be allowed to choose their voters. Democrats represent 1/4 of Utah voters (probably more now) and deserve representation in congress. This map does not come close to meeting the standards of Prop 4.

Still divides SL county. No map should divide the largest population center.

Combining Salt Lake County and Davis County does not demonstrate the intent of Prop 4. Salt Lake County should be its own district.

.

This one comes so close to being good, but needlessly carves up Salt Lake County for the sake of denying a cohesive voice to certain people. Just keep the county together as a whole, why is that so bloody hard?

This map is still gerrymandered, not as bad a map C, but not representative of the people nonetheless. SLC and surrounding area want a voice.

E and D are the two least fair maps, this map does not fit the rules laid out and is not the best option.

Splits my town

Does not represent Utahns

I dont think this hits the mark with accurate representation of the districts.

This map does not follow the requirements of proposition 4. Please use one of the maps that was put together by the independent commission that we voted for.

Another GOP gerrymander map. What common needs are between SLC and the west desert? This another map that gives the residence of SLC representatives that are useless and in the position for life. The current representatives do not provide any representation to SLC. Competition is what is needed to get the best candidate.

This map does not meet the criteria for prop 4. It splits up communities and boundaries are very odd and is not competitive at all due to splitting up Salt Lake County. Also compactness is terrible. Do better than this.

Whoever drew up this map was an idiot. How can this support the requirements of Prop 4 and put major city groups randomly with others across the valley. This is a bad map period. it divides my community and has no reasonable footing other than doing a poor job of creating districts.

Why would you cut Utah County in half?

District 3 on Map E is absurd! Not only is it too large for a single congressman to traverse, it requires even MORE hours of travel because it is divided by the Colorado Rive Gorge.

This map CLEARLY violates the requirements of Prop 4.

This map is blatantly, strategically dishonest by splitting the communities of the Salt Lake Valley and dowsing a significant chunk of them with rural voters who deserve their own representation. This is a significantly flawed map that should not be considered.

Ah hahahahah. This map is a joke, right? The splitting of districts at the point of the mountain between SLC/Utah Counties is a disaster. This map clearly does not meet ANY of the standards required in Prop 4. I vote NO on this map.

This is a bad map and does not follow the will of the people as put forth in Prop 4. The biggest problem is in how this divides communities. The dividing lines do not make geographic or demographic sense.

This map violates the requirements of Prop 4 because it splits both communities and counties -- for example, I live in Salt Lake City, and I frequently travel to nearby Murray (which is not in my district on this map, but does share interests), but rarely visit Clearfield (which is in my district on this map, and shares fewer interests). However, of the options generated by the legislature, I think this map violates Prop 4 the least, but I wish we had the option of the map generated by the independent redistricting committee, as stipulated by the ballot measure the voters passed.

NO! This is just more of a power grab by the Utah Super Majority Republican Legislature.

This map does not follow the requirements of Proposition 4.

This map does not meet the requirements of Proposition 4 and unnecessarily splits communities. We need a solution that closely matches the citizens' wishes as outlined in Prop 4.

Option E draws somewhat more compact shapes than D but still produces excessive municipal and county splits, especially in the Salt Lake Valley. This undermines community representation and fails to meet Prop 4’s standards

This map does not keep communities together. Why Draper shares a representative downtown but not Sandy is funky gerrymandering at best. Salt Lake County should be kept as a whole to better reflect urban interests.

This map splits communities in violation of the Proposition 4.

This map does not meet the requirements of Proposition 4. It is not fair, focused and functional. District 1 is irregularly shaped and not compact.

This map divides like-minded communities and does not follow the intent of prop 4.

This map does not meet the requirements of Proposition 4.

This map does not provide fair representation for Utahns and clearly ignores the intent of Proposition 4. By splitting up communities of interest, it weakens our collective voice instead of protecting it. Utah deserves maps that keep communities intact and ensure true, fair representation.

The rural parts of the start will not be well represented. With this map

This map does not appear to follow Prop 4 as approved by the voters. Urban and rural needs/interests do not always align.

This map does not align with the requirements of Prop 4, as it divides Salt Lake County in ways that group Rural and Urban interests together. These interests need to be separated, as to ensure each group receives fair representation.

This map does not accurately represent the city of Salt Lake.

This map does not do a good job of representing the state compared to others.

I live in downtown Utah, and this map splits the vote - even of friends of mine who only live a few blocks away. This does not adhere to Utah Prop 4. It's better than maps 1 & 2

This map does not give fair representation to Utahns and does not follow the requirements of Proposition 4. This fails to keep communities of interest intact providing for fair community representation.

This map would not solve the gerrymander problem that Utah has experienced for way too long and would NOT give fair representation.

I don't like how we are getting a bunch of provo-ites mixed with southern Utah. We have very different needs, and I don't see why we can't add more rural areas into southern utah. I realize it's a big area to cover, but we have electronic communication today and mostly just need groups with similar needs and wants to be represented.

This map does not match the letter or intent of Prop 4 and splits up like-communities to be paired with areas with regions holding no similar interests. It oddly divides Salt Lake County as well.

In the creation of this map the techniques of demographic "packing" and "cracking" have been applied to dilute urban votes. Giving an unfair advantage/bias to the rural populations when rural populations are very important, but quite small in Utah.

This map does NOT align with voter-supported Proposition 4. It does not create compact, contiguous districts nor does it keep municipalities and communities of interest together. It unnecessarily splits Salt Lake County. It supports the lie that congressional districts "should" contain equal amounts of urban and rural voters, a goal that simply serves to disenfranchise urban voters. Urban and rural UT interests are not sufficiently similar that they should be piled together; they NEED to be split. UT voters approved Prop 4 so that their needs could be adequately represented in Congress.

This is a ridiculous and embarrassing gerrymander. Despite Prop 4's rules to avoid splitting counties unless absolutely necessary, District 2 splits three counties arbitrarily; Salt Lake County obviously must be split but there is no reason for it to reach into pockets of Utah County for Thanksgiving Point or Summit Count for Park City when it could just as easily extend a little further into metropolitan Salt Lake and avoid splitting multiple counties. This map also breaks Prop 4's rule requiring districts to be compact and avoid irregular shapes. This map is filled with irregular shapes on the borders. I've already mentioned Thanksgiving Point, but that's actually just a tiny sliver of the bizarre protrusion formed around Draper and Riverton. District 2 completely skirts Sandy, Midvale, and Cottonwood Heights, keeping to the east, then stretches out west all the way to Herriman. This is the very definition of "sprawling and irregular." Other examples are the peninsula of District 1 reaching down on the eastern shores of Utah Lake near Lakeview and the protrusion of District 3 reaching east towards Rock Canyon Campground from Provo. The reason for both of these irregular shapes is not immediately apparent, as both are reaching into virtually uninhabited land and cannot be for population distribution reasons. Additionally, since both of these protrusions are somewhat reciprocal (District 1 and District 3 are each taking land from the other), it's not clear why these cannot both be removed in favor of much cleaner and more regular shapes with only a slight adjustment of the Provo/Orem border. As for the Provo/Orem border, why are they split up at all? I have lived in Provo for 7 years and Provo and Orem are the same community. They deserve to vote together on a state level. There is no reason for them to not be in the same district if this map was truly following Prop 4's rules of "preserving communities of interest." Breaking some of these rules to a minor degree is inevitable in a state as large as ours. But this map does not even try to minimize that. The only conclusion one can draw from this map is that the failure to follow Prop 4's rules is deliberate and is in bad faith. I urge the legislature to reject this map as it does not accurately reflect the principles of democracy or the American electoral process outlined in the Constitution.

This splits the maps for salt lake county in a silly way. This doesn't look like it is taking into account the needs of the people.

I Agree with Bradley North Why is Salt Lake so obviously split up here? This is another gerrymandering attempt. The Escamilla/Owens Map is much better. All Utahns deserve a voice of representation in Washington.

District 2 is a pretty obvious gerrymander, in violation of prop 4.

This map does not follow the law. It inappropriately splits Salt Lake County at the neighborhood level. Someone traveling for daily activities would easily cross district boundaries.

This map does not follow the requirements of Proposition 4. It divides Salt Lake County into multiple districts in a way that stretches across very different regions and communities, which weakens compactness and undermines community representation. The map creates unnecessary splits that fail to keep communities of interest intact.

This map does not meet the requirements of Prop 4! It split communities weakening their representation, has poor compactness, and stretches across very different regions and communities. This is a terrible map.

This map does not follow Prop 4. I do not support this map.

This is not a fairly drawn map. Blatantly disenfranchises voters

This map does not give proper representation of Utah in Washington DC.

This map flagrantly disregards the standards laid out by Prop 4: Salt Lake County is split 4 ways, the districts are not compact, the neighborhoods and communities within Salt Lake County are not preserved, and there is minimal regard for natural boundaries. This map is deeply against the spirit and intent of Prop 4.

Why is Salt Lake so obviously split up here? This is another gerrymandering attempt. The Escamilla/Owens Map is much better. All Utahns deserve a voice of representation in Washington.

This map does not meet the requirements of Prop 4. This map does not fairly split the state and does not meet the expectations of Utah voters. This map should not be chosen, as it is gerrymandered.

This one is just silly. It doesn't meet the requirements of prop 4.

This map has bizarre divisions in SL, Utah and Summit Counties. I cannot support it.

Option E creates fewer splits than Option D, while only slightly reducing proportionality and competitiveness. While I believe Option D is the more fair map overall, Option E would be a reasonable alternative if Option D is considered to have too many county splits. With only three splits, Option E is more compact. I do not think it fully meets all the requirements of Proposition 4, but I find it preferable to many of the other options presented.

As a resident of Sandy, I cannot support this map because it does not meet the requirements of Proposition 4. While it keeps Salt Lake County whole, it does so in a way that undermines fair representation. This map packs all of Salt Lake County into a single compact district. On the surface that looks neat and clean, but in practice it isolates the entire urban core of Utah into one seat. The rest of the state is divided into three districts that are overwhelmingly rural. That is not how people along the Wasatch Front actually live or interact. Our communities in Sandy, Salt Lake City, Davis County, and Utah County share schools, jobs, and transportation. By walling off Salt Lake County, this map severs those connections. Proposition 4 is clear that maps cannot be drawn to favor a party or group. Packing one large urban population into a single district while leaving the rest of the map dominated by rural areas is a classic example of gerrymandering. It reduces the ability of the Wasatch Front to have a meaningful voice in more than one district, even though this is where most of Utah’s population lives. For these reasons, this map fails to preserve communities of interest and fails the test of fairness set out in Proposition 4. I urge you to reject it.

This map does not follow the requirements of Proposition 4. It divides Salt Lake County into multiple districts in a way that stretches across very different regions and communities, which weakens compactness and undermines community representation. The map creates unnecessary splits that fail to keep communities of interest intact

This map splits 4 counties. Prop 4 asks for maps to keep counties and communities together as much as possible. A map with fewer splits does a better job following Prop 4's intent to be more concise and fair.

This map splits up far too many communities and counties. It even manages to split up Park City, which takes some effort to do.

This maps does not feel accurate to the spirit and direction of the voting proposition. I see concerns with combining rural and urban areas especially SLC that would dilute its votes. Seems like moving from gerrymandering to gerrymandering

There are 10 ways to Sunday to do these maps. Capturing THE MAJORITY of democrats and putting them essentially into 2 districts, can easily be perceived as GERRYMANDERING.

this map clearly does not honor the spirit of proposition 4.

This map does not comply with requirements laid out under proposition 4. It dilutes mine and my neighbors votes by grouping us with people who do not have similar living situations and concerns. This map should be discarded.

This map awkwardly stretches west Salt Lake County out into West Utah, violating the Proposition 4 requirements for compactness. It also divides south Salt Lake City in a way that does not maintain traditional communities.

This nap does not follow Prop 4 and should be drawn by the UIRC. It is much better than A, B and C, but isn't as good as the Escamilla/Owens Map. Draper and Sandy are a close community and it's weird to split that up.

Suburbanites have distinct transportation needs, jobs, socio-economic opportunities, interests, and lifestyles than rural folks. It doesn't make sense that folks in Daybreak and West Jordan should be represented by the same people representing very different people in rural areas.

This map is so bad! HORRIBLE. Splits up the city and rural areas. NO THANK YOU!

Splitting the Salt Lake Valley this way seems counterintuitive.

This map splits too many cities and counties. It also ignores the unique concerns of urban and rural areas.

This map should not be considered since it was not drawn by the UIRC. This does not meet the intent of Proposition 4 that was passed by voters.

This splits communities. How is this a fair representation? Stop gerrymandering and start being American. We need to represent communities and the only way to do that is to keep them together.

Horrible map for proper representation of Utah. This reminds me of a "good boys" club type of map where people in the big city don't care in the least bit about the rural areas, as if they're somehow less important.

Horribly gerrymandered map here. Obviously drawn by a democrat. People are complaining that those in Rural areas have different needs from a city as a reason to keep SLC together and separate from everywhere else. Answer this: How does Wendover in the same area as St. George make any more sense? Wendover with the west portion of SLC makes much more sense. Remember these CAN'T be neighborhood districts. That's not what CONGRESSIONAL districts are for. That's what City, County, and State districts are for. We have only 4 seats in congress and we need to make sure each representative in congress is aware that Utah has Urban AND Rural needs. Each of them needs to be in tune with that to help the state as a whole. Just because the Rural area is in your Urban area doesn't mean you'll be less represented or worse represented. It means your representative has other viewpoints to consider what is best for the state.

This map is not an adequate or equal representation of Utah population and is the definition of a gerrymandered map.

Perhaps not as ridiculous as some of the others, but still bad.

None of the Legislative maps are as fair as the independent committee's. They all dilute Salt Lake County. They split counties, cities, and neighborhoods with similar interests. They combine urban and rural areas, which have completely different interests. They do not use natural boundaries. They do not represent fair, proportional and competitive maps and therefore do not meet the needs of the people. Salt Lake County represents the largest population and should therefore be represented as one district, not split up and picked apart.

This map does not create equal districts with adequate representation

The boundaries on this map do not make sense are representing the state of Utah's population. I am failing the understand the reasoning of the different boundary splits.

This map does not allow for good exchange of ideas and concerns of Utahns to reach the halls where decisions are made. We can't afford to silence any voices in Utah.

This map keeps the skiing areas and rural areas together but it splits up my school from my house, and puts clear divides in areas I consider to be part of the same community.

This is another one that splits my city into two different districts. Why are my neighbors just down the street in a different district. It makes no sense.

Urban, suburban, and rural areas have widely different needs. Lumping the urban areas of the Salt Lake valley with suburban and rural areas in this way weakens urban interests. Don't use the "bias" measure. It is more properly called the "gerrymander success" measure. A 2-2 outcome assures that the members of the minority party have very little chance of representation. Use one of the IRC maps.%

This map also adds too many rural areas to bigger cities with different needs.

I don't like this map. Park City should be one District.

Still carves up Salt Lake county too much. It carves up Park city as well.

Carving out salt lake county in the way it is done for district 2 is a clear indication that you are doing something wrong. The east side of the valley has similar concerns and the salt lake valley as a whole has similar concerns and should be grouped together. Also Utah county is going to have different needs than st george which is not being addressed here. Representation should be done according to the needs of the communities, not split to dillute votes.

I'm confused why Cottonwood Heights/Sandy would be grouped with Wendover. The needs of those communities are very different. It seems strange to pull in all of northern utah with Park City, the East side of the valley. Again, those needs are very different.

This gerrymandering makes me sad and not proud to be a Utahn. We could lead out on fair representation for the country, but you are silencing our voices.

The Salt Lake Area is stretched out from north to south covering areas and cities in other counties leaving out the cities just west of the downtown area. This map is not inclusive of these cities with similar concerns and issues.

This map is not representative of the fair, proportional and competitive maps that voters mandated in proposition 4.

This just makes me angry and seems like a joke. Just a way to dilute the city. I am so tired of not having my voice heard, and this one would continue that.

Does not balance representation of ideas and issues in the State of Utah.

Poor map, pits urban and rural areas against each other

This map makes no sense and just looks like an attempt to dilute SLC.

This map is a perfect representation of gerrymandering. It is splitting up district with boundaries that are not using any discernable natural or community boundaries, splits up cities, school district, and counties in a way that does not give competitiveness in elections or proper representation to urban and rural communities. And for a person's typical drive to work, you would be driving through all 4 districts. I am very worried that these committees do not understand how Utah functions for the majority of the population and has zero understanding of the growth that has happened in the last 10 years.

The carve out of the middle of the valley disenfranchesis voters in both district 4 and 2 - I do not like this map

Better than the other 4 because it better represents my area, District 3. Southern Utah has a major tourist economy and this grouping shows that commonality. Otherwise, it artificially groups and divides more urban areas. The Escamilla_Owens_Map is far better.

Another attempt to dilute Salt Lake County, which represents the largest population in a single county.

This map splits urban areas and will not represent my neighborhood concerns adequately.

Maps should be drawn by an independent committee. This map is heavily gerrymandered and does not meet the requirements of Prop 4. It does not minimize city or county splits, or preserve communities of interest.

This map does not follow the guideline of keeping cities and communities of interest together!

This map divides communities in a nonsensical way. It is clearly intended to disempower the majority voices of Salt Lake County.

This map (Leg Map E) splits the Salt Lake Valley and does not preserve communities of interest in logical ways. The larger cities in the western portion of the Salt Lake Valley should be included in the same district as Salt Lake City as much as possible, rather than being carved out and included in a different district. Also splitting Park City into two districts does not make sense.

This map divides too many citizens who share similar concerns and groups them with people who have the opposite needs. It means our representives vote yes on something that only half of us want while conversely, voting against half their constituents. This makes no sense-- well, no good sense if our representatives are voting for us and not their own interests.

I hope that the people who drew this map did not hurt themselves with the contortions they must have gone through. The Independant Redistricting Commission proposed several perfectly well considered, fair maps that complied with the law. So why this??Urban and rural areas of the state have very different concerns and should not be lumped together. As in the past, the majority party in the legislature is trying very hard to dilute the urban vote by abitrarily dividing up the urban areas. This is a contorted attempt to do just that and is a clear attempt to ensure that a Democrate is never elected to Congress. This blatantly ignors the will of the people when we passed Prop 4.

The community considerations of Park City residents and Salt Lake City residents, although interconnected, differ significantly. Having Park City districted with Salt Lake City is a pure sign of partisan gerrymandering and this map should certainly be rejected.

This map lacks competitiveness and divides key communities of interest. By forcing unnecessary connections between urban and rural areas, it fails to provide fair representation and does not serve the people of Utah. I do not support this map.

Communities share common challenges and common needs. While we all share the common uniting feature of living in Utah, the communities along the urban corridor of the Wasatch front have unique and very real concerns that are much different than the equally real and unique concerns of rural communities. We do not live, operate, nor vote as once single statewide district, thus splitting urban communities and grouping them with rural ones only serves to dilute the voices of those communities, to the detriment of their very real concerns. This map artificially breaks up logical and functional communities. Please do not use this map.

Splitting Park City like this is wild. Snyderville basin is part of the Park City metro area. It's not even a very big community (<30,000 people) so it's odd that it would be split up this way. There are other communities on this map that are split up oddly, as well.

I grew up in rural Idaho and have now lived in Salt Lake for 15 years. This background has helped shape how I see political districts. I understand deeply how the needs and opinions of many people in rural and urban areas differ. Having appropriate representation is important not to ensure a partisan victory in one direction or another, but to help give Utahns people who are representing their specific interests rather than being pulled in multiple contradictory directions. Although this map doesn't split many cities, it does not do a good job at keeping communities of interest together. Because of that, I urge you not to use this map.

This map fails to reflect the intent of Proposition 4, the court’s order, and the will of the people. The proposed single partisan symmetry test compounds the problem. Please respect the will of the people and do better. We need maps that strengthen Utah, not divide and weaken our voices.

This is a ridiculous map. Voters should choose their representatives, not the other way around. Too many city and county splits, clearly a gerrymander.

This map continues with the gerrymandering we're already trying to escape. It divides SL and Utah counties, missing the requirement to keep communities together.

I like that Salt Lake City isn't cut in half but why is it segmented away from west valley and other surrounding suburbs that normally are considered extended salt lake area?

This one still gerrymanders SLC, breaking it apart on purpose. The only one I support is the Escamilla-Owens option.

This map still cuts up SLC unnecessarily. The best option is the Escamilla-Owens map.

Why is SLC community cut up and combined with Davis County? This feels very intentionally gerrymandered.

gerrymandering

I love Utah and I love my community and this map separates neighbors while forcing connections far afield. I have worked to support my community in community councils, and serving on local boards, it showed me that neighborhoods matter and local representation matters. Having to share a representative with folks clear across the state has meant I have never felt like my voice was heard in congress. Many of us in Utah share that same concern. These maps really matter, they are a chance ot keep communities together, to make sure the voices of all Utahns are heard and that our kitchen table issues make it to the halls of congress. That's why I'm asking the commission to pass maps that reflect the real Utah and respect Prop 4. If we do this, we have the chance to make sure all of our neighborhoods and local issues are seen and heard.

This is an absolutely terrible map. Draper is right next door to Sandy, but they're in separate districts? This is not accomplishing keeping communities of interest together in any way.

This map is worse than the previous maps that we were trying to make better. What do the Salt Lake suburbs have in common with all the rural areas they're combined with?

This map does not create equal districts with adequate representation.

I don't agree with the way that map A creates unfair proportionality. Democrats make up 1/3 of the state and the districts should reflect that.

This map does not create a competitive landscape for politicians making it too easy for elected officials to keep their seats.

This is a compromise map that at least preserves Salt Lake but dilutes the urban areas in the growing west and south parts of the wasatch front. Gerrymandering!

This map once again dilutes the voices of SLC and SL County by combining them with Davis County. And it still divides up SL County in unacceptable ways.

The artificial separation of Salt Lake County should make this map a non-starter.

Another terrible map. This splits urban areas that have the most in common. It ensures that I and my neighbors will have no voice in politics--it will all be drowned out by the least populated rural areas of the state. Go back to the maps produced by the independent commission.

Terrible map. It splits the state in ways that dilute the population into groups that have nothing in common. The whole point of a district map is for it to be from a "district"!!

This map once again eliminates the voice of Salt Lake City making it a bad map

Why is the church building I attend weekly in a a different district than my home? Salt Lake County deserves to choose our congressional representative. Listen to the voice of the people- it's in our state constitution. Didn't y'all swear an oath about following that?

This map splits the heavily developed suburban areas of the Wasatch Front and lumps them together with rural areas. The interests, concerns, and livelihoods of people in rural areas are very different from those on the Wasatch Front.

I do not see the logic behind this map divvying up Salt Lake valley. Why is Sandy in one district which shares a representative with Dugway, but Draper is in another, shared with Clearfield? There are other maps which attempt to preserve communities of interest more logically and intuitively.

This districting does not fairly represent Utahns and splits up salt lake county

This divides up too many communities. I don't like it.

Like option D, this map is more compact, but it still fails to anchor a district fully in Salt Lake County, which voters have long recognized as essential to fair representation

This map will not adequately represent the interests of many communities in the state--rural or urban. My interests will certainly not be represented in government if this map is chosen.

My interests will rarely if ever be fairly represented if this map is adopted.

At one time Carbon and Emery were one county. They are still similar and should be together.

This map is the worst. It does not allow rural residents to have a voice. There are much better options.

The Escamilla-Owens map does a better job of dividing the state by community boundaries

The Escamilla-Owens map does a better job of dividing the state by community boundaries

This map is not good. It divides counties and communities. This map does NOT serve the best interests of the residents of this state.

How in the world does this map represent local concerns? This doesn't make any sense to have my concerns diluted with rural concerns and vice versa. It honestly just disconnects me from my neighbors and puts me in a random bucket

By now, you should recognize the theme...I am not happy with the work this legislature is doing on this effort. Creating updated district boundaries is hard. It is hard when it is embarked upon with honesty and integrity. The previous legislature made redistricting infinitely more difficult on this legislature than it inherently is by destroying trust the first time around. This legislature isn’t helping itself in that regard. This map is not an example of trying to restore or reestablish trust. I strongly oppose map E for many of the reasons already stated in other comments. It unnecessarily splits communities to maintain a strong republican influence in all districts - as if that wasn't going to be the case anyway.

Of the five maps presented, this is possibly the least terrible. It preserves more urban and suburban communities, sure. But it also has very incontiguous boundaries, splitting counties and municipalities excessively, and combines communities with very different needs (Layton, Riverton, SLC) and splits other communities that have more in common (Ogden and Layton, Riverton and Herriman). the best option is clearly Escamilla/Owens map.

Divided in a way to discourage fair representation of the people of Utah.

STOP CUTTING UP SALT LAKE!!

Why not use the maps already drawn in 2021 by qualified people! Keep neighborhoods together. 2 districts - urban; 2 districts - rural Salt Lake County should be together

This map is okay and better than A-C but not as good as D. It has some confusing splits.

This option splits Salt Lake county right down the middle, splits the northern Wasatch front, and divides Utah County. This map does not meet the standard of keeping communities together. While better than the current maps, this one seems to intentionally seek to make sure no one along the Wasatch front is in the same district as the next town over.

We should use the Escamilla-Owens map

This division between districts 2 and 4 does not make the districts compact or contiguous. Riverton, Draper, and Bluffdale would fit much more naturally with District 4, while Murray, WVC, and Taylorsville would make District 2 more compact.

How in the world could a representative cover all of the area that covers the entirety of the South part of the state. It shows that they have no understanding of the many issues that face the Southern part of the state. There is absolutely no possible way for a representative to cover that much area and be one ounce of effectiveness. We simply must have representation from heavily populated areas and the most remote rural areas of the state. Water issues vary in many areas, taxing, transportation, economy, education, wildlife, judicial etc. We plain and simple cannot divide the state with anything that resembles this map.

a deliberate gerrymander by the gop. this map does not give equal representation

This is so confusing to me - not only is Salt Lake county carved up right down the middle in order to include Bountiful and Clearfield, the northern Wasatch front is carved up (Layton and Odgen in different districts?!) and so is Utah County (Provo and Orem in different districts?!). This map doesn't seem to do a good job of trying to keep communities together. While anything is better than the current maps, this one seems to excel in making sure no one along the Wasatch front is in the same district as the next town over.

This map puts me as an urban voter in the same district as some very rural areas and would cut me off from other similarly situated areas of Salt Lake County. It does not make sense to me and would not represent me well.

This map has strange loops and cut outs that make it feel gerrymandered. Why does district 2 do a loop to the east around middle of salt lake valley and then go back west in the southern part? Why does district one cut into the middle of Utah Valley (which should be a contiguous group)? Any map with weird limbs sticking out like the Bluffdale-Draper area doesn't make sense.

I do not support maps A, B, C, D or E, which do not follow the intent of Proposition 4, the court's order, or the will of the people.

I do not like this map

This maps looks like it is trying to have better use of urban vs. non-urban areas, but the lines being drawn through Salt Lake County are quite zig-zagged. This option doesn't meet the goals of fair districting such as not splitting urban cities, or counties, and avoiding irregular boundaries.

This is a poor split because it pulls out people from Salt Lake Valley voting with an area of the state they have nothing in common with. Parts of Salt Lake Valley should not be pulled into districts like this

I like that this map better matches county boundaries, but it's not as good as the Escamilla/Owens map (and even within the legislature-created maps, it's not as good as Option D).

This is another obvious gerrymander of Salt Lake County, but it is not quite as bad as maps A-C. Third place behind D, which is a distant second behind the Escamilla/Owens map in terms of logical borders.

Why are Provo and Orem separated? Why are Provo and American Fork included with the entire bottom half of the state? Also, why is Salt Lake cut into such a weird shape? Prop 4 requires that we try to keep communities together and try to draw lines along natural boundaries if possible.

This map violates the rules of Proposition 4. It splits multiple cities and counties that should remain intact and creates sprawling districts—how can American Fork possibly belong in the same district as the far corner of the state?

Like every other Leg drawn map, this divides Salt Lake City for no good reason. Salt Lake City and Salt Lake County should be as unified as possible in one district.

This map divides Salt Lake County in ways that weaken representation. Communities that belong together are carved apart and attached to regions with very different needs and realities. This map does not meet Prop 4's requirements. It stretches districts across areas that have little in common, leaving neighborhoods without cohesive representation. Utahns deserve districts that reflect real communities rather than artificial combinations. This map should be rejected.

These boundaries are not quite as clear cut as other maps, and divide communities that should be together in the same district.

This map does not follow Utah Code 20A-20-302(5)(a), (d), and (f)(iii). Please follow the law passed by a majority of voters statewide. Salt Lake County deserves to be represented in the US Congress.

I think the Independent Redistricting Maps should be used which is really what the voters asked for.

Salt Lake County should have its own district. This isn't the worst map but it's not the best

I think most of us can agree that Riverton and Bluffdale have vastly different interests than Salt Lake City.

You shouldn't skip over Riverton and Bluffdale to include Sandy in the same district as Tooele. I-15 is a logical border.

Ogden and Orem should not be in the same district if you have to go through all three other districts to travel between them. That's so silly.

This is not a good option in that the districts are a mix of urban and rural communities which often have different priorities. The "hub and spoke" approach divides communities.

This map is all over the place! And it breaks the Wasatch Front into multiple strangely shaped districts.

Dugway Proving Grounds, Hill Air Force Base, testing and practice areas, ATK, & IRS should all be in one area to ease the representation on federal locations.

I dislike this map immensely. I want to see more of SL County together. Let's minimize the amount of the county that is chopped up.

This map unfairly divides communities such as Park City which leads to unfair representation.

This map, while closer, is still splitting Salt Lake County. There is no reason to do this other than to dilute urban votes. The meandering line that cuts the west side of Salt Lake County and lumps it in with the West Desert needs to follow the Oquirrh Mountain Range, not be placed in the middle of the county. The West Side of Salt Lake County already feels dismissed. Now it won't even be represented by the same person in congress? No. This is not acceptable.

The fact that the republican members of the redistricting commission have started every meeting with complaints about how this process is unfair is really telling. They seem to have absolutely no sense of nuance with respect to the reason for the multiple cascading requirements of Proposition 4. Every map they have proposed is exactly down to a person equal for each of the 4 congressional districts, at the expense of some households, streets, communities, or cities. The 6th map has the largest deviation of only 37 voters, keeping communities together. If the only requirement was the number of voters, the republican commissioners would win a medal. Since there are other factors that should be weighed, they have failed miserably by hyper focusing and missed the forest for the trees.

It's comically bad how they carved up District 2. This unfair map appears to be the best of all the previous maps.

You can't get from Provo to American Fork all in district 3 without driving through district 4 short of driving around the south end of Utah lake. This split does not comply with the court order.

I have the same problem with this map that I do with Option D. The committee is using partisan knowledge of Salt Lake County to favor the legislature.

This map still splits urban communities, combining them with small towns and rural locales. As a current urbanite who originally from a small town, this approach serves neither population well. Rural folks need not be pawns to split urban representation because in the end, their representatives will still serve the higher population urban areas above rural needs. Use the prop 4 commission work vs. partisan legislative maps with only token representation from the minority party.

This is just more district splitting in obscure ways to continue to gerrymander. The IRC map is the only way to fulfill Prop 4 — what we, the constituents, voted on years ago.

Voters on the West side of Salt Lake County should not be grouped with further West rural constituencies. As the affordability crisis worsens, more and more urban voters are moving to the West side. From a socio-cultural, economic, and environmental standpoint, these voters have more in common with the rest of Salt Lake County than Tooele County. No map that splits up Salt Lake County can be considered a fair map!

Why can you just use the maps drawn in 2021? Why? What is so hard about that? Is it the fairness? The EQUALITY? The un-biased distribution of measurement? The impartiality of consideration for all eligible voting constituents? The actual will of the We The People? BIGGEST DISLIKE EVER!

I would like the independently designed maps that were proposed with Prop 4 to be used instead of the proposed maps. Those meet the guidelines in Prop 4.

Very hard for me to get behind any map that has this much of Salt Lake County in the same district as Tooele, Grantsville, etc.

You have gerrymandered Salt Lake so that you can screw Democrats, and it is why I left the Republican Party. You are dishonest and covering for fascists.

vernal and brigham city?

cannot drive to northern section of CD without leaving CD

Splitting Riverton from SJ, Herriman, and Bluffdale is bad for communities of interest

Lehi split 3 ways

Lehi City split

The cut between cities is a bad idea to begin with but this cut does not even follow the cities boundaries and chops up Provo

Major Provo City split

Millcreek City Split

This map would have me living in district 2 but working in district 4. It also has me within about 20 minutes of all districts in Utah. The folks of Provo has very little in common for a representative with the folks in southern and rural UT, as well. Salt Lake Valley should be kept together (in it's natural circular valley shape) as best as possible and not split into several separate districts stretching far and wide to Utah's rural borders.

Why should Salt Lake County be split like this? It doesn't make sense. It doesn't seem like a fair way to split Salt Lake County. Salt Lake County doesn't need to be slit this much to meet the population requirements of Prop 4. We deserve a map that was created by a nonpartisan group (IRC) that can be modified if needed to meet Prop 4. This still feels like it will favor one party over the other.

This map is gerrymandered to divide Salt Lake County's voters and doesn't represent the interests of both rural and urban areas.

All of these maps do not serve Utah as the voters voted. Use the independent commission maps. Communities should not be split. Keep urban areas together and rural areas together. The minorities in Utah deserve to be represented.

After listening to Mr. Trende speak I had high hopes for a fair map but one of the things he kept emphasizing was keeping cities together and the use of boundary lines, such as rivers, roads etc. It seems clear to me that I-15 is a major boundary and yet every map put forth has over lap on that boundary. All the maps seem to overlap and split cities, counties and overlap the existing boundary of I-15. It was extremely distressing to me to hear the chair cut of Mr. Owens when he ask for some clarification of how certain data was used. I soon guess and verified that Mr. Owens was a Democrat and the chair was shutting him down due because of that. By the way I am a Republican but I don't feel that the best interests of my community are served by the boundaries in any of the five Republican maps. I'm not sure I'm a fan of the Democrat map either but it appears to be more representative of the needs of my area.

Although this map is better than the current map--since Republicans only dominate by single digits in two districts--it still splits up communities of interest. While SL County must be divided, it makes no sense to divide it north to south.

Why would a judge accept any gerrymandered map produced by the Republican legislature. They have lost all credibility for fairness and demonstrated they are not trustworthy. I think a far more fair approach would be allow the entire salt lake valley area to be one district, rather than carving it up to dilute its liberal influence.

This cut out here is very strange and a violation of Prop 4 because it cuts up a community of interest and doesn't use natural boundaries.

This is a strange boundary here, this violates Prop 4 by not using the mountains as a guide - this area should be kept together as it is literally part of the same ski area and same mountains.

This violates prop 4 by cutting up Park City, a community of interest, into unnecessary confusing boundaries. Keep Park City together, do not it up like this.

This map still splits urban areas up while consolidating them with urban areas in nonsensical ways. Why is West Valley split from SLC but lumped in with Utah Valley? Why are parts of Utah Valley like Draper split from Sandy? This is another gerrymandered map we should reject.

Still not a great map. Better than most the others. I'm not sure why east Sandy is voting with Dougway. Sen. Escamilla and Rep. Owens map is the best.

A few issues: 1. Why in the world does South Jordan have a common district with Vernon/Dugway? 2. Why are we splitting up Utah County/Wasatch Front? 3. Districts are not particularly compact.

This does not represent the people of southern Utah (or rural areas in general) well. It purposefully splits up the salt lake area and mixes and matches bits of it with rural areas, which will disenfranchise the rural voices of the state.

This map lumps in West Valley into rural Utah and Herriman area to dilute those votes.

Map 2025SHNoSplit5 submitted by Stuart Hepworth addresses the Prop 4 criteria better than option E.

This one would actually be the 2nd favorite except for adding a ton of the Davis County suburbs into SLC. My parents live in Farmington and they have very different lives and concerns than those in my neighborhood.

Don’t crack salt lake county. We are one large community and our interests are distinct from the interests of rural utah. Let the city dwellers represent their interests.

More of the same political gerrymandering. The gall of this legislature to avoid the will of the people!

None of these maps reflect in effort to keep like-minded populations together. Prop 4 demands fair representation, not additional gerrymandering to preserve disproportionate representation. Salt Lake, Utah, Davis, and Weber counties can be divided into 2, but more than that is excessive. Keep rural counties together with other rural counties, and urban with urban.

The Wasatch Front should not be sharing representation with rural Utah. A donut map for one huge district encompassing 3 along the Wasatch Front is the ideal solution.

This map does not clearly show city boundaries, and thus makes it difficult to properly evaluate it. This feels slightly deceptive and not in line with Prop 4 guidelines.

Will the corruption ever end?

This just another partisan gerrymandered hack job on Salt Lake. Clearly the majority party members on the IC are utterly non-serious about creating fair maps. They need judicial supervision and cannot be trusted. Hard pass on this dumpster fire. - Disregard my comment in green.

This section of the map is not compact enough. A district does not need to look like Italy. Simply using optics, this looks gerrymandered.

This splitting of Utah County doesn't make sense, doesn't follow city boundaries. Additionally, Salt Lake County is divided too much diluting the democratic voice of the state. Use the maps by the independent redistricting commission.

As a resident of south Davis county, I am very confused why we would be grouped with the east side of SLC and the downtown area. Our needs are very different. We are very suburban and it would be hard for our represenative to meet the needs of all our interests, with such a strange district shape/size. I believe the independent residstricting commission may have more fair offerings, and I'd really hate to see this option selected. As the SLC end of this district is more populous, I'm pretty certain the needs and interests of our Davis community would not be met.

This map does not keep cities whole, keep counties whole, have compact districts, have contiguous districts, or preserve neighborhoods and communities of interest.

The five proposed maps clearly fail to meet the standards established by Proposition 4 and the Independent Redistricting Commission Act. Utah voters demanded transparency, fairness, and genuine public input when we passed Prop 4, and yet these maps disregard those requirements. The courts have already shown a willingness to hold the legislature accountable, and it is only a matter of time before these plans are overturned. Instead of wasting more taxpayer dollars defending indefensible maps, I urge you to follow both the letter and the spirit of the law: honor community boundaries, avoid partisan gerrymandering, and incorporate the independent commission’s recommendations. Utahns are watching. If you continue to ignore your constituents and the reforms they enacted, you risk not only judicial rejection but also electoral consequences. Do your job, respect the law, and give Utah the fair maps we voted for.

I live in this area of Utah county and the boundaries here feel very odd and unnatural. I do not like the split between American Fork and Pleasant Grove/Highland/Vineyard as well as the split between Orem and Provo.

None of these maps makes sensible and non-partisan division of Salt Lake County. These are obvious attempts to continue gerrymandering and should be rejected.

As pointed out by the current non-independent redistricting committee in their 9/22/2025 meeting, two cities in Salt Lake County have city boundaries located in two counties. The number of voters affected by that is so minute it will not change the outcome of the district(s) vote. Salt Lake County (SLC) is the only county, they claim, has a population large enough to justify dividing it. The maximum number of Congressional Districts in SLC or any other county in Utah should be limited to 2 districts . The small number of households affected by their city being located in two counties can not justify carving any county into four fragments. The Utah legislator's 2021 gerrymandered map that the Utah Supreme Court found to be illegal is the reason we need to use the 2021 maps drawn by the UIRC. All five examples we have been given to choose from in this exercise do not come close to meeting Proposition 4 standards. Looking at the current maps I feel like I'm living in a distorted version of The Wizard of Oz. We're being told by our elected overlords to not look at the people behind the curtain. We the voters, must try to keep the Legislative Wizards with their imagined perils in check. So, please dear overlords use the redistricting maps given to you by the independent commission in 2021, they were good, well thought out, "legal" maps. These five offerings at best would make poor butt wipe.

SLC leans left and every district on this proposed map leans right. This map is still gerrymandered and intended to make Democrats work harder than they should have to for representation in a Democratic region, thereby giving Republicans an unfair advantage.

As others have mentioned, this map does not, in good faith, follow the Prop 4 guidelines. Please follow the will of your constituents and use one of the maps drawn up by the independent commission. Everyone should be able to be represented fairly in Utah.

District 1 and 2 are crazy. Ogden and Orem in the same district as Carbon County. Good job with that one. This map is not representative of our state and population, and are a blatant disregard of the law as outlined in Prop 4

This one is egregious. How do you scoop Ogden and Orem into the same district with two other districts in between? And throw in Moab while we're at it? This is not a fair map.

This map does not follow all of the rules laid out in Proposition 4. There are multiple cities and counties that have been divided when they should be kept together, the districts are sprawling, how can American Fork be in the same District as the bottom right corner of the state. Dr Trende used Political Data to draw these maps, which goes against the Requirements of Prop 4.

Map Option E: Same as all the other maps. This map violates the law by not keeping counties whole, not keeping cities whole, they are not compact districts, it does not preserve neighborhoods of interest, they are not contiguous districts, and they are gerrymandered. We need to have a non-partisan independent group create new maps, not an out of state “expert”.

I feel like I'm living in an alternate reality where common sense doesn't exist anymore. The legislature clearly doesn't want to abide by what the people voted for in prop 4. My bet is that they know this wont fly, but they think they can get another election out of the current, heavily gerrymandered maps if they delay it long enough.

Please do this fairly and keep similar communities with similar communities. As a Salt Laker, I haven't had real representation for decades.

Districts should be drawn to reflect communities of interest and county boundaries. This map divides Lindon from Pleasant Grove, Provo from Orem, Sandy from Draper, and Riverton from South Jordan and Herriman.

I agree with detailed comments by Stuart Hepworth and prefer the map 2025SHNOSPLIT6 that he submitted. It represents all Utahns and meets the criteria of Prop 4 much better than the maps proposed by the Legislative Redistricting Committee.

This is what you did after the last census... took public comment, asked citizens to provide maps and then went NO here is our highly gerrymandered districts, patted yourself on the back and told yourself that it is the legislature that is charge... even if that means you cheated. The Independent Redistricting Committee presented you with much better maps than what has currently been submitted. Every map breaks apart Salt Lake County while it is so blaringly obvious that you try and keep Utah County together as much as possible. It is time to realize that there are people in this state who want AND deserve representation by someone with the same values.

This split of utah county, especially splittling provo and orem, and not even along city borders, is obviously unnecessary and against the directives of prop 4.

The only good thing about this map is that I would no longer be in district 4. Not a compliment. How did the legislature come up with these crazy dividing lines between districts? And still carving up Salt Lake County and its municipalities to dilute the Democratic votes they know are there. Please re-read Prop 4 (or have the judge read it to you slowly), and do a better job of actually being FAIR.

At first glance, this map seems like the most reasonable proposal. However, when compared to the UIRC Purple or Orange maps, which retain a level of compactness in Salt Lake and Utah Counties, it's clear that even the most reasonable proposal is still way off the mark. The UIRC maps are fair and follow the spirit of Prop 4. Be leaders in better governance and choose one of theirs.

I do not understand what possible reason there could be, besides actively seeking to gerrymander our state, to split up this map this way. Orem and Provo not being included in the same district when they share nearly the entirety of population demographics and social sentiments. Majorly separating a chunk of Salt Lake county from the rest for no obvious reason besides seeking to strip this region of accurate representation in line with their values and needs. Please use one of the maps recommended by the independent commission that will actually eliminate this issue of gerrymandering that seems to be the obvious goal of every single one of these maps being offered.

Grouping Cache Valley with the Uinta Basin and Eastern Utah makes no sense. As someone who lives in Cache Valley and has worked in Eastern Utah, I would argue that voters in the Uinta Basin/Eastern Utah have more shared interests with people in the rest of Southern Utah than Cache Valley. Also, what's up with the second district's weird wrap-around to southern Draper???

Oh look, yet another map making a weird split of SL county because why not. Just use the already compliant maps from the independent commission please.

If SL County population is too large to fit in one district why is it split in half stretching to either state border? A fair split would fit as much of SLC in a single district as possible, and some of the county could be combined with another district

As a constituent living in Rose Park - none of these maps reflect what the voters passed as law in prop 4. Communities should be kept together and given equal representation by having their own districts and their own rep.

Respect the voters choice and use the maps created by the independent commission.

All of these maps are still the majority's way of gerrymandering the state to their advantage and totally disregards the intent of Proposition 4 which we citizens passed by a clear majority. These maps should all be disregarded by the court and one of the proposed maps by the independent redistricting committee should be approved.

I hate all of these unfair gerrymandered maps! Stop splitting up Salt Lake communities and let us have a voice! Throw all of these out and use one of the maps from the Independent Commission!!!!

Why should residents of salt lake have to share representation with rural residents.

This is not a good map. The state legislature must follow the Prop 4 guidelines, and judicial instructions, to consider multiple fairness tests, not just the partisan symmetry test, to ensure each voter is heard, regardless of their politics. We want democracy, not gerrymandered autocracy.

I agree the map meets the eye test, not just the common sense test. Let an independent commission, not politicians draw the map.

This is my favorite map, but it's still not great.

Provo and Orem should not be split. These communities not only border one another, you can drive from one to the other without realizing you've changed cities. Both are part of the Provo–Orem metropolitan area, often referred to together as a single region in statistics and media. Both are hubs for education BYU, healthcare, and retail. Both have proximity to Utah Lake, Provo Canyon. Both are Served by I-15, UVX (Utah Valley Express) bus rapid transit, and UTA FrontRunner (commuter rail). Both have strong presence of Latter-day Saints (LDS), which influences community life, values, and activities in both cities.

Riverton and Herriman should not be separated. These communities both have rapid population growth, have similar transportation needs and families moving in from more urban areas. Both are served by the Jordan School District. Both are in proximity to outdoor recreation such as mountain biking, hiking, and nearby canyons.

Obviously there should be a district that is fully within Salt Lake County (and you can easily cut off a few cities at one end or the other as needed to get within the target population) to meet the requirements we voted for in Proposition 4 to keep counties and cities together as much as possible. The state legislature's attempt to dilute Salt Lake County's representation by dividing it evenly two ways is only slightly less crass and unrepresentative than dividing it four ways.

None of these maps make sense. They all split Salt Lake City and Salt Lake County too much. Use one of the UIRC maps.

This map is slightly better than the other options but still clearly gerrymandered. You are intentionally carving out parts of more Democratic areas (e.g., Cottonwood heights) and replacing them with Republicans one (e.g., Draper). Also, you're unnecessarily carving up counties again. It feels like this is being done intentionally - so that this map gets knixed in favor of other, even more gerrymandered maps.

I do not appreciate your continued splitting of Salt Lake County. All of these maps remain gerrymandered to disadvantage Democrats in some way or a another. In the last several elections, Democrats have won at least 25% of the vote in every recent statewide election. This shows that at least a 1/4 of Utah voters are Democratic-leaning, and so one of our four congressional representatives should, by simple reasoning and math, should be over a Democratic majority area. Please stop dividing up northern Salt Lake County, and ensure that one of the districts, based around Park City and Salt Lake City, is a Democratic majority voting district. This isn't about getting seats in the house, this is doing what's right. Don't be Texas or California. Be Utah, be fair, and give Democrats a real chance.

All of the current options for the four Congressional Districts are in violation of the Statewide Initiative -- Proposition 4, Nov. 6, 2018. There are good and valid maps from the original Utah Independent Commission UIRC, use them. Stop defying the Utah Constitution and the State laws you have sworn to uphold when you were elected. Stop carving up Salt Lake County, we deserve a fair opportunity to choose our elected Federal Representative(s).

Why in the fat hell would you put Riverton and Draper randomly in a district with Davis County and Salt Lake City? The answer: These areas of Salt Lake County are more Republican so you are trying to dilute the voters of Salt Lake City. You can easily put Riverton and Draper in a district with the southern cities of SLCo and with the northern cities of Utah County and Provo. And Salt Lake City should be with the cities that actually border it to its south. The way this is drawn now does not keep communities of interest together!

This is the least bad of the 5 proposed maps. It still is obviously shaped to break up salt lake county communities (the irregular arm splitting sandy and cottonwood heights to grab riverton and draper is bizarre). Prop 4 specified using an independent committee with a transparent process using multiple metrics, not one expert using one qualifying test.

Proposition 4 requires minimizing the division of counties, cities, and towns, as well as preserving traditional neighborhoods and local communities. In my view, minimizing the division of counties and preserving the local community of the county means keeping as many residents of the same county together in the same district as possible. I would like to see a map with a district that consists of 817,904 residents all from Salt Lake County. Every other county community gets to keep all their voters together in one district. This principle should also apply to Salt Lake County to the greatest degree possible -- i.e., allowing as many residents of SLCo as possible to belong to the same district.

Why not just include all the houses along 224 to I-80? Have I-80 be a line between Districts not cut out small neighborhoods in Snyderville Basin. It seems like gerrymandering.

This map is worse than D, but better than A, B, & C. It still splits up Salt Lake County unnecessarily. The voters of Salt Lake County have unique interests and deserve to have their own representative to advance those interests. Why not use the Independent Commission's maps? Those already did a much lengthier and more thorough review and those maps are ready to go.

Salt lake city area needs to stay together. The communities are seeing the same struggles, the same growth, and their voices will be represented. Didn't we vote for a 3rd party, independent review? Follow what we voted you to do

I vehemently oppose all five of the options presented by my legislature. Please adhere to what was voted on by your constituents (Proposition 4). You should not be afraid to implement the law of the people who elect you to power. Do what is right.

Balancing urban and rural areas should not be the legislatures priority. The focus should be preserving communities with shared needs, interests, and communities. None of your maps prioritize this as you divide up the urban areas in every map.

This is a blatant jigsaw of gerrymandering. Who lives in this district that is donating to the politicians in this state? This is an entire joke to have such an island. Please respect the will of the people who voted for this remapping. This is a disgrace.

This map continues to split in ways that do not make sense geographically. Go back to the maps the independent redistricting committee came up with, rather than continuing to try to thwart the will of the people of this state.

Park City, UT has very little in common with Salt Lake County. This should be be invcluded in the same district as Salt Lake County. Salt Lake County must have a devoted district. Any split to Salt Lake County is an abomination and is a blatant act of a power grab through a gerrymandered district.

Why do we continually have to endure blatant abuses of power and these transparent ploys to hold on to political power that was unjustly gained in the first place? The only thing that should be happening here is for the legislature to respect the while of the people and allow maps drawn up by the INDEPENDENT board to take affect. Anything less than that is a continued gross abuse of their power and a dereliction of their duties to follow the will of the people they represent!

Versions A, B and C are worth keeping. Salt Lake County numerically needs to be split. The other counties do not have to be split at all. See my updated Hat and 3 stripes submittal based on what I submitted in 2011.

Bluffdale and Riverton should be with Herriman. There are active construction projects due to the traffic problems between these communities because of shared interest

This map is so weirdly dividing of the Salt Lake metropolitan area. This does not represent the voters who live right next to each other. Why is Salt Lake so grossly split? Why are Orem and Provo split? These maps are not actually taking into the account the population and are just trying to balance votes in favor of whoever will be running for that district. Use the independent maps!!!!

Splitting Salt Lake county in this manner maximizes the number of voters without representation. It additionally violated Proposition 4 by splitting counties more than 2 times with clear cherrypicking of neighborhoods. Sandy in particular is subdivided into 3 districts, completely ignoring the common municipalities as outlines in todays meeting as a core goal behind the redistricting.

I live here and feel like my boundary should include SLC

What is the justification for dividing Orem and Provo like this? Similar absurd divisions certainly exist elsewhere on this map and all of the other map options, but as a resident of Utah County this looks particularly unjustifiable.

I live in Cottonwood Heights, and this map has us in the same district as West Wendover, a community with which I have no affiliation.

Like all the other maps, this one lacks a district that is solely within Salt Lake County. As a Millcreek resident, I have much more in common with a resident of Taylorsville or Midvale than I do Clinton or West Point.

The SLC Legislature is insisting that SLC be split up due to size, but the needs of a city and the needs of a rural community are different. All of these maps display that the legislature is scared and still not listening to the voice of the people.

Please use the UIRC maps. This is what Proposition 4 intended.

This boundary through Salt Lake County is very artificial and again splits communities with a lot in common into different districts.

This map is just as gerrymandered as the current map and unacceptable. Please use the Independent Redistricting Committee maps.

This District 1 is unwieldy; there's a natural district one that includes Davis County.

This is an island and has no access to the rest of the district

It doesn't make any sense to split Provo and Orem like this. This is not functional.

I do not see one of these maps that have SLC County together in one district. You are also cutting Davis county apart in these options. "Community of Interest" is more important that keeping population levels even. Try again, or use the original redistricting maps.

Cache County and the Basin have nothing in common as a matter of fact Northern Utah has nothing in common with Eastern Utah STOP GERRYMANDERING

Please consider this alternative map (proposal 3) that much more fairly and accurately represents the communities that live in Utah. file attached

Please consider this alternative map (proposal 2) that much more fairly and accurately represents the communities that live in Utah. file attached

Please consider this alternative map (proposal 1) that much more fairly and accurately represents the communities that live in Utah. file attached

If you're going to separate Orem and Provo (which you really shouldn't), then at least have the decency to split it along the city limits, instead of reaching into one city to grab just enough residents to make the maps have exactly equal populations. A hundred people off the ideal number is no big deal. Scooping out a pocket of Carterville neighborhood into a separate Congressional district is a much worse violation of the letter and spirit of the law.

Although Map E is better than A, B, and C, it still gerrymandered. Use the Independent Redistricting Committee maps. It's what the people of Utah want, it is fair and avoids breaking up communities, and the work has already been done.

Salt Lake City has more in common with Sandy than with Bountiful. Use the existing maps.

Why is slc split up like this and what's with these random alcoves, gotta keep the church separate from the other district? The whole slc valley should be one district otherwise this just looks gerrymandered

Oh my, you cannot split Utah Valley, that’s as silly as splitting up Salt Lake. Your job would be easier if you just chose one of the better boundaries maps. You would be done by now.

The UIRC maps did a better job avoiding arbitrarily diluting the urban/suburban communities of interest closer to Salt Lake into the rural/suburban communities of interest of Box Elder, Tooele, Cache, Weber, and Morgan counties. Please stick with the UIRC maps. This one, and option D make even less sense including the predominantly rural eastern side of the state. Totally different constituencies.

Agreed that WVC Should be with SLC

Use the existing fair maps, stop trying to get the most gerrymander you can out of this state.

This map has an arbitrary border between districts 2 and 4 that divides communities of interest and doesn't follow any nutural geographic features. Please propose the existing UIRC maps. They're fair and the work has already been done.

If it's too difficult to not make a pie-slice distribution, use the maps we made for you. Orem and Provo have shared municiple interests. Neither are a rural community. This map doesn't follow the law regarding compact districts, contiguous districts, natural boundaries, keeping the county whole, keeping cities whole, nor following federal law.

Davis county and Park City are entirely different economically and demographically. Why should Park City be cut off from the rest of Summit County?

Why is Snyderville so randomly divided?

Why is Utah county not contiguous? It does not have a large enough population to justify splitting it up like this.

Why does this map suddenly stop using the creek as the border between the districts when it hits state street? Should there not be a natural border that the maps follow consistently? Why does it switch from the creek to Van Winkle as soon as the border hits state street?

The legislature cannot claim to keep communities contiguous (in compliance with Judge Gibson's order) and then carve out this one neighborhood along Van Winkle to put it in a separate district than the entire other side of the street.

Add Davis to this district and cut out the Utah county portions as well as the Eastern and Southern Utah portions.

Utah County and Weber and Cache counties should not be in one district

WVC should be with SLC

Splitting South East SLCO makes no sense

Carbon and Weber, Box Elder, and Cache do not belong in the same district

Separating Murray from Millcreek and SSLC splits an important community of interest

SLCO and Summit should not share a congressional district

Riverton and Herriman should not be separated

very strange split of the city of Cottonwood Heights

Davis and SLC have no shared interests, one is urban, one is suburban, do not merge them.

Very strange draw of D4, most of the areas included with Tooele do not regularly interact with Tooele economically especially as it moves east

Draper and Salt Lake City should not be the only communities in Slco in the same district

this split of Utah county separating American Fork and Pleasant Grove is very strange

Orem and Provo should not be separated

Please just use the maps from the UIRC, the work is already done and it's a lot fairer than this map. It still suffers from the same problems as Option D where it seems fairer than the first three, but at a closer glance there's a lot of seemingly partisan weirdness. And Salt Lake county is still divided in half along very unnatural lines, and it still groups communities with very different interests into one group.

Not a fan of separating Provo and Orem.

No road connectivity between the northern and southern parts of Salt Lake County in this D2. Also this little bit of I-15 jutting out is actually in Draper and not Sandy, I think there's an error in the census place definitions.