Public Comments

Good afternoon, My name is Benjamin Waddell. I am an Associate Professor of Sociology and Criminology at Fort Lewis College. I write you in my support of the Schuster Map, which creates two highly competitive districts for the Western Slope. I have spent my entire life in Southwestern Colorado. I was born in Telluride, raised in Norwood, and lived for nearly a decade in the San Luis Valley. In addition, I've traveled extensively throughout my region. Today, I live and work in Durango. The Schuster Map best captures the diverse constituencies in our region. Keeping southern Colorado in one district will allow for unique cultural groups--such as Hispanics, Latinxs, and Indigenous tribes--to share a common representative. This is important, in particular for minority groups who have traditionally lacked political representation, and have suffered as a result. Several years ago I interviewed hundreds of Hispanic farmers and ranchers who suffered from discriminatory lending during the 20th century. As a result of this, many were forced to leave the lands they had long called home. If the state were to divide southern Colorado, it would essentially divide Hispanic and Latino groups into two districts, thus diluting their ability to influence policy makers. This would further aggravate the historic traumas that this group has suffered. A similar argument can be made for Indigenous groups in the area. I strongly support a unified southern district. The Schuster Map delivers this, while establishing 3 competitive districts in Colorado. Please take the time to consider my input, and should you have questions, reach out via my e-mail (benjaminjameswaddell@gmail.com) or my cell (719) 480-0479. For your consideration, I'm attaching a paper I published in 2019 regarding discriminatory lending in the San Luis Valley. Respectfully, Benjamin James Waddell, PhD

Please see the attached

Loveland belongs in District 2!!! Pat McVey 2421 Logan Dr Loveland

I am in favor of the Schuster Map. It keeps like communities together, such as the SLV where I live, with Chaffee, Pueblo and southern and southwestern counties. It has both CD2 and CD3 as ‘highly competitive’ instead of one being overwhelming Democratic and one overwhelmingly Republican. I spoke at the Alamosa meeting and have been watching the maps progress. This Schuster Map is the best answer that I have seen. Thank you.

I previously submitted comments (August 10, 2021) based on the first redistricting map. I now see that the second redistricting map is out and the area of south Jeffco in which I live once again has been separated from the rest of Jeffco. I don't understand why this area of south Jeffco continues to receive "special" treatment. I can only assume that this area of south Jeffco is a reliably conservative leaning population that is being used to make the voter registration report numbers look respectable. There is still a significant gap between Republican/Democrat registration, although not as large as when a part of the previous District 1. We will never be represented as long as we are used in this way and separated from the rest of Jeffco.

I live in Highlands Ranch, on the western edge of Douglas County. I am writing to express my desire to see Highlands Ranch included in a Congressional District that reflects its urban connections. This part of Douglas County is far more connected, via I-25 and C-470, to the Denver metropolitan area and other nearby urban connector corridors like Littleton and Centennial than it is to the Eastern Plains. I'm currently in CD6 and feel that moving my area into CD4 would result in my community having less of a voice on important issues like transportation.

The Schuster map makes good sense. Community balance and competitiveness is important. td

I would like to thank the commission for their second draft map. This map is a more complete representation of how the Western Slope should be represented. Thank you for your time and consideration of all of us here in Western Colorado.

It appears only two factors are being considered for Community of Interests: politics and race. The latter is a major concern as we are violating the Civil Rights Act by discriminating on race. The attempt at such a community of interest will result in segregated communities rather than integrating. Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka was a landmark 1954 Supreme Court case in which the justices ruled unanimously that racial segregation of children in public schools was unconstitutional. Brown v. Board of Education was one of the cornerstones of the civil rights movement, and helped establish the precedent that “separate-but-equal” education and other services were not, in fact, equal at all. (https://www.history.com/topics/black-history/brown-v-board-of-education-of-topeka, Sept 23, 2021) HA.001 Perez, dated Sept 17. Disappointingly, this map is politically drawn for the communities as reported on the supporting material. District 17 in this map, for instance, has low-income and focuses on Unaffiliated and Democrat interests. The issue is that these areas have poor voter turnout because of a lack of confidence in representation. For instance, the city district that represents this area of town is overlapped by the 17 map. In the last city election, April 2021, less than 5,000 votes were cast compared to other areas where 15,000 or more people voted. In fact, since the city districts were drawn a few years ago, the voter turnout in the city district overlapping District 17 has dropped significantly by several thousand. District 21 in this map also has an issue. It does not include Ft Carson and the better part of the installation’s residents live in District 21. Post workers tend to live within a five-mile radius of the main gates, which includes 17, 21, and 20. This map has District 19 representing the post, disenfranchising the spouses and families from representation. HA.002, Barry, Schepper, Uzeta O'Leary, dated Sept 19. Attempting to examine equity, this map looks at racial representation in the districts as shown. The standard deviations are wildly different and so the map fails to use race as a means of establishing a community of interest. Frankly, I appreciate the attempt, but it also demonstrates the variable incomes and racial integrations within Colorado’s communities and neighborhoods. That integration makes using equity as a community of interest a poor metric. HA.005, Greenidge, dated Sept 19. Attempting to examine equity, this map looks at racial representation in the districts as shown. The standard deviations are not as wildly different as HA.002, but the map fails to use race as a means of establishing a community of interest. Frankly, I appreciate the attempt, but it also demonstrates the variable incomes and racial integrations within Colorado’s communities and neighborhoods. That integration makes using equity as a community of interest a poor metric. District 17 lacks continuity. There is a pocket of District 21 within the District 17 boundary. The additional squiggly lines are very concerning. An added issue is that the District 17 boundary contains demonstrated poor voter turnout because of a lack of confidence in representation. For instance, the city district that represents this area of town is overlapped by the District 17 map. In the last city election, April 2021, less than 5,000 votes were cast compared to other areas where 15,000 or more people voted. In fact, since the city districts were drawn a few years ago, the voter turnout in the city district overlapping District 17 has dropped significantly by several thousand. District 21 in this map also has an issue. It does not include Ft Carson and the better part of the installation’s residents live in District 21. Post workers tend to live within a five-mile radius of the main gates, which includes 17, 21, and 20. This map has District 19 representing the post, disenfranchising the spouses and families from representation.

"Under the First Staff Plan and Second Staff Plan maps, rural Coloradans in counties such as Park, Teller, and Fremont have effectively been silenced. Residents in front range communities maintain important interests and values, however they are in no way similar to ours. Whether we look at our local economic interests, such as energy and agriculture, or the needs of our public lands and waters, one can easily discern that these interests are not shared with folks living in suburban communities. While we believe that the interests of those in counties such as Jefferson and Douglas are of critical importance to the state of Colorado as a whole, combining them with rural communities would not result in fair representation for anyone aside from those in densely populated areas on the front range. Rural Coloradans not only deserve a voice, but representation that truly understands the issues they face on a daily basis in order for their government to deliver them the results they deserve and need. If Teller, Park, and Fremont counties are no longer going to be in the Fifth Congressional District, then they should be in the Third Congressional District with other communities of interest not lumped in with Jefferson County and other suburban counties."