Public Comments

I am extremely disappointed in the third staff map. Southern Colorado is once again left behind. Compactness and competitiveness, two of the four criteria, have not gotten better but worse. The commissioners are looking at small areas of the state to make better but have ignored the entire part of the southern end of the state. Commissioner Brawner mentioned there are strings that tie areas to Pueblo. She is accurate. The southwest ties to Pueblo and southeast ties to Pueblo. She doesn’t see ties between southeast to the southwest. My question is where are ties from the northwest part of the state? There are none. Pueblo is the big city, the hub, of southern Colorado. Please look for a different way to draw this map. Southern Colorado is asking for one representative. We are the most economically disadvantaged area of the state. Take the other seven and figure out the rest of the state. You are smart folks. You can do this. Southern Colorado is asking for your help. One last thing. Water, think about it. Water ties the southern part of the state together from the southwest to the southeast. It ties all peoples together. That’s what southern Colorado is all about, the people and their relationship to water. Remember, Water is life.

Larimer county is very diverse. However splitting the county among 3 districts that cover an area from Baca to Sedgwick to Routt is absurd. What happened to respecting political boundaries?

I am commenting on the proposal to move Loveland from CD2 to CD4. That move would end in both communities being outside their community of interest. According to the above-mentioned instructions, communities of interest are your primary concern. Loveland should not be sacrificed and moved outside its community of interest to satisfy a population number you are trying to satisfy. Loveland is a part of the front range area that together with Fort Collins borders forested and mountain areas to the west and I-25 to the east. Their common interests include Colorado State University and its economy to the north and Estes Park, Rocky Mountain Park and Poudre Canyon to the west. Loveland does not have a community interest with the areas along the east side of I-25 that make up CD4. Those areas are rural. I live in Loveland and I have only a very vague idea of what the community interests of the areas in CD4; Loveland simply does not have the same interests as CD4 and should be kept in CD2.

Hello! I know I'm not from Colorado so my comment doesn't really matter to you since you probably want people from Colorado, but I just thought maybe you could look at my redistricting idea. The populations may be a little off but that can be fixed. If you're not interested I totally understand just please at least take a glance so that all options aren't rooted out. Thank you for your time and have a good one

I've reviewed the 3rd Staff Plan and am appalled at the results: District 2 - The Continental Divide and Rocky Mountain National Park inappropriately separates Larimer and Boulder counties from the rest of District 2, and cannot be considered a community of interest. CU and CSU student populations are transient and as such, they don’t represent the intended definition of communities of interest, and they are not geographically close together. Also, together, the size of the Fort Collins and Boulder populations unfairly drown out the voice of all the smaller communities in District 2. Therefore, Fort Collins and Boulder should never be in the same District; and, together they do not help provide a competitive district wherever they might be placed. The other ski and Western Slope communities belong together, especially with I-70 connecting them all to the east. Fort Collins, Loveland and the surrounding unincorporated Larimer County areas belong together, as a closely connected community in many ways, including air quality, transportation, economic, job creation, recreation planning, water resources, and land use planning. All of Larimer County could be put in District 8. You could remove Adams County from District 8 and put Thornton back in, and adjust for the needed population numbers in District 4 and 8. Why not eliminate the destructive 3-way split of Larimer County? District 3 - Somehow the desire for a southern district evolved into a takeover of half of the previous Western Slope District 3 communities of interest, which are mostly all small counties; and, now east side Pueblo County has the largest population in that District, and is not at all in close connection or representation of the Western Slope communities. Why destroy the Western Slope communities’ representation? District 4 – No part of Larimer County, especially Loveland, should be in this District, as we are not closely connected to, nor a community of interest with, Highland’s Ranch or other parts of Douglas County.

See attached Third Set of Comments from LULAC and Colorado LULAC regarding the Staff's Third Congressional Plan. Also attached is the geojson file for LULAC Congressional Plan Option 2, which can also be viewed at: https://davesredistricting.org/join/ae6ce8c4-883e-42a1-be38-9eb85937e4c5

As a longtime resident of the San Luis Valley and the 3rd District, I am writing again in support of a Southern district to adequately represent the communities of southern Colorado. After perusing the maps, it seems to me that the Tafoya maps and the Schuster map that has received much support are the maps that best represent the shared communities of Southern Colorado. The newly released 3rd staff map does not adequately represent the southern region by again dividing up the southern counties and combining us with counties with dissimilar interests in the extreme northwest of the state. I would ask the Commissioners to adopt the Schuster map or one of the Tafoya maps to truly represent the interests of southern Coloradans and keep intact the voices of our native Latino/Hispanic communities. The Schuster Map seems to keep our communities of interest intact and make the district more competitive while protecting the shared interests of this region, such as agriculture, tourism, recreation, public lands and watersheds. Thank you for your consideration.

The area west of I-25 is the community of interest of Loveland and Wellington. Loveland, Wellington, Fort Collins, and Estes Park are all part of Larimer County. Fort Collins is bordered by Wellington to the north and Loveland to the south. Any federal funding associated with CSU would affect not only the Fort Collins economy, but also the economics of Loveland and Wellington. Both Wellington and Loveland are bordered to the west by mountains and forests. The 2020 wild fires in Estes Park and surrounding areas had a major impact on Loveland and Wellington. Federal regulation relating to forest management and fire prevention would affect both Loveland and Wellington. Therefore, Loveland and Wellington should have representation on the issues of federal funding as it relates to universities/research and federal funding and regulation as it relates to forestry and fire management. The area east of I-25 is more rural and that community does not have a shared interest in forestry and fire management or university/research funding. So, based on the shared interests that unite a community and a community's public policy concerns, areas east of I-25 should form a congressional district distinct from areas west of I-25; Loveland and Wellington belong in the same congressional district as Fort Collins and Estes Park (CD2) rather than CD4.

It is unfortunate that you cannot find a way to at least only divide Delta County once instead of in both the House and Senate maps. This makes it difficult to re precinct the county and create different ballots for district races. Please ... give some thought to why this county cant be in 1 Senate district as it has been.

Dear Commissioners, I want to thank you for your efforts to fairly balance and make sure that our state is well represented in congress. I am a travel hockey parent and have had the privideldge to travel to almost every ice rink in our state. I can say that our beautiful state is incredibly diverse, not only geographically but economically and industriously. The current map does a much better job of aligning regions with similiar industries and issues. I also own and operate businesses in the Roaring Fork Valley. I applaud the commissions understanding and need for this Valley to have one representative voice. Thank you for your thoughtful service and efforts to have a successful redistricting commission that has listened to the people of Colorado and tried to best respresent their needs. Kind Regards,