Public Comments

Against the redistricting of counties our rural communities with large metro counties. Our communities refuse to allow metro ideals in our rural way of life.

Oh, hell no! Not in Fremont County’s best interest! Do not Jeffco-niate Fremont County!

Please include Wellington, Larimer Co. up to at least East Cty Rd 70 into district 2. Wellington is a rapidly growing area closely connected to Ft Collins and does not get urban representation by being put into the rural outlook of Weld County. This is true for the nearby areas surrounding Wellington as well. Being placed in District 2 at the last redistricting was the first time in 35years, I felt that we had our views represented by our elected officials. Don't change it back. Sincerely Dianne McQuaid

I'm in favor of the Schuster map. It seems fair and results in competitive districts.

Highlands Ranch should not be co mingled with rural communities. How does that serve our population?

The map of hd52 and hd53 released September 23 is a solution where there is no problem. Presently, Fort Colllins has two districts, hd52 is east of College Ave. and hd53 is west of College Ave. The new proposed map splits Fort Collins into a north district and a south district. School boundaries in Fort Collins are more east/west than north/south. Kids friendships, recreation, and hence parent contacts follow school boundaries more east/west than north/south. If the new map is adopted, many kids living in 53 will be going to school in 52. The new map will have economic demographics that are out of balance as 52 will have a number of more expensive homes and more new development than 53. The people living nearby the foothills north and south, all on the west, have more in common than people living nearby the foothills have in common with people living further from the foothills. So why this new map? While comments should be about communities of interest, it is clear the proposed map is a blatant attempt at stealing a district for political gain. The north district will be a concentration of Democrats and will remain so into the future. The south district can still be won by Democrats now but development patterns will make the south district more and more Republican in the near future. This map is in conflict with the purposes of the independent redistricting commission. The old east side/west side districts will grow more competitive but reflect the politics of Fort Collins into the future.

Hello commissioners - Thank you again for all the hard work and dedication you have given to this endeavor. It is clear that you and the non-partisan staff have been paying attention to the public comments. Each map released has something to gain and something to lose, it seems, so there will always be lines to fight about, it seems. I'd like to voice support for the map that is being referred to as the "Schuster" map. While I think is a community proposal, not one drawn up by staff, I believe it hits a fair balance for communities of interest and keeping or creating competitive districts. This "Schuster" map keeps a strong Latino/Hispanic voice together, it does not give outsized advantages to urban communities over rural communities, and it creates the greatest number of competitive districts. When I testified before you on your visit to Durango, I advocated for the inclusion of the San Luis Valley with the west slope. While I understand that making districts more competitive may not be first in line of requirements, it was certainly in the forefront of the voters' minds when we created this independent commission. And if there's a map, such as the "Schuster", which can take into consideration more than one community of interest and be competitive, then I would strongly urge you adopt the one that does that- the "Schuster" map. Thank you very much! Becca Conrad-Whitehead

I support the Second Staff Plan dated September 15, 2021.

Dear Commission, Again, thank you for volunteering to serve on the redistricting commission. It is vitally important to our democracy. I am writing to express my disappointment with the staff's third plan submitted September 23, 2021. I don't expect everyone to know the nuances of every corner of the state. However, I must point out what I think is a glaring oversight. By putting the entire Town of Windsor in District 4, you are dividing parts of Larimer County, which is where I live. Windsor is in two counties ... Weld & Larimer. I live in Larimer, my kids go to school in Larimer (Poudre School District), and we are served by the public library in Larimer. I am within 1/2 mile of I-25 in a very urban area. I do not think it is appropriate to include this community in District 4, which is predominantly rural and stretches all the way to the borders of Wyoming, Nebraska, Kansas, and Oklahoma. The Eastern plains are vitally important to our state. However, our interests our very different and I don't believe my community would be properly represented in this district. We would be completely disenfranchised. As I have written in the past, if your goal was 8 competitive districts, I would NOT care. I would LOVE to live in a competitive district. However the reality is that District 4 is not competitive. Finally, we were moved to District 2 ten years ago and now you want to move us back. Why are we the community that gets tossed around like a football? We should be left in District 2 and not be the pawn that has to move between Districts 2 & 4 every 10 years to fulfill some population requirement. I ask that you do the research and reconsider this map. It is disappointing. Thank you! Myles

I live in Highlands Ranch. Highlands Ranch is a suburb, akin to its neighbors Littleton and Centennial. Highlands Ranch and Lone Tree do not belong with southern Douglas County and the Eastern Plains. I strongly object to grouping our suburb with the rural areas, with which we have little or nothing in common.