Public Comments

I am very concerned about the proposed plan to REDISTRICT my county of Delta. I DO NOT APPROVE Of proposed changes. All of Delta County should be kept whole and placed with Mesa County. It shares the same watershed and most of the Grand Mesa. As described above, splitting Delta County reduces its voice and places undue hardship on the citizens, businesses and governing officials of our county. Please listen to us! Thank you. Margaret Hollander in Paonia, Delta County

Please find the attached comments from Colorado Farm Bureau regarding the First Staff Plan maps.

1) The Second Staff Plan for Colorado Congressional Districts is Fair and Balanced and should be selected (and the First Staff Plan was terrible), i.e. the Western Slope should be kept whole and in CD3. 2) For the Legislative Senate District map – All of Delta should be kept whole and placed with Mesa County. It shares the same watershed and most of the Grand Mesa. They are much more unified communities of interest. Place Montrose County with Gunnison County, they have more shared interests then Mesa and Montrose Counties. 3) For the Legislative District map - All of Delta County should be kept whole and placed with Mesa County. It shares the same watershed and most of the Grand Mesa. As described above, splitting Delta County reduces its voice and places undue hardship on the citizens, businesses and governing officials of our county.

Congressional District - I support the second staff plan. It keeps the Western Slope whole. We have very little in common with the Eastern Slope and the large cities! Senate District - Keep Delta County whole and combine it with Mesa County. Many Delta County people work and shop in Grand Junction. House District - Keep Delta County whole and combine it with Mesa County. Again, many Delta County people work, shop, go to college and play in Mesa County. We have much in common, even agriculture.

As a former Routt County Commissioner (2003-2001) I have been in a unique position to understand the politics and growth of Northwest Colorado. The comments below are regarding Senate Districts 8 and 5: 1. Shared Interests: Routt and Eagle Counties were place together in a State Representative District in the redistricting in 2010. Routt and Eagle Counties have similar economies and interests due to tourism and world class ski areas. Routt and Eagle Counties should be in the same Senate District 2. Shared Interests: The Routt County Board of County Commissioners in 2021 withdrew from the Associated Governments of Northwest Colorado and voted to maintain their affiliation with the Northwest Colorado Council of Governments which includes not only Eagle County but also Jackson, Pitkin, Grand and Summit Counties. Grand and Summit Counties also are tourism economies with world class ski area with similar interest and issues as Routt and Eagle. These similar interests are: affordable housing, income inequality, population growth and protection of rural lands. Routt, Grand, Eagle, and Summit Counties should be in the same Senate District 8. 3. As a former County Commissioner who represented the Hayden Area I realize how important the future transition from a resource extraction and power generation economy will be for some communities of Routt County and the counties of Moffat, Rio Blanco, Garfield and Jackson. These counties are adjacent and contiguous to Routt County. Routt, Moffat, Rio Blanco, Garfield, Jackson and Eagle are contiguous to Routt County and should be in the same Senate District 8. 4. Geographical Contortions: The staff proposed Senate District 8 is a contorted district. It is like a half moon with the center taken out (District 5 with Eagle and Summit Counties and the Roaring Fork Valley). The proposed Senate District 8 is not a compact district. There should be a way to reconfigure these districts to better accommodate shared interests and geographical proximity. The Roaring Fork Valley with its population could be combined with the communities along I70 including Grand Junction to make a Senate District 5.

I'm writing to state that Puebloans have not had our interests represented under the current legislative district being with western slope communities. The Tafoya 005 map provides a much better division into "communities of interest."

I support the Tafoya map, as it seems to be a well balanced map. Tafoya, map makes more sense, as far as community of interests, considering our economic needs, lack of broadband, & resources. It ensures that the Third Congressional District, is geographically contiguousious district. Colorado legislative representation, seems to be fair, with HD-46 HD-47 HD-62, SD-2 as well as SD-3. Thank you, so much for your service to the citizens of Colorado! Pam DiFatta

It is obvious to us in Summit county that we do not want to be split into 2 different State House Districts. That is true for any local area, so I understand that it is difficult to draw the lines. We would argue that the community of interest is more important than the precise number of voters in each district which changes so easily. We obviously have a community of interest here in Summit County and do not want to be divided into 2 different House districts. Doesn't the commonality of sharing services, Road maintenance, I-70 coalition, ambulance, hospital, ski areas, State and local law enforcement, Schools, Workforce housing efforts, Climate action coordination override the need to draw a line for population reasons? Thank you for your work, Karn Karn Stiegelmeier

Hello, my name is Brita Horn. A mom, ranchwife, and volunteer fire chief. I have lived in Routt County for over 30 years and have been married to lifelong rancher Gary Horn and raised two daughters. I have also been the Routt County Treasurer and Public Trustee and served on the Routt County Planning Commission as the South Routt Representative. I am speaking for myself as a land owner and registered voter. I urgently request the commission to consider and adopt the Club 20 map that was submitted. It will keep our rural western slope whole. We have nothing in common with the urban Boulder and Larimer. Our community of interest is in the hard working class wearing blue jean and cowboy boots. Whether it’s water, forests, federal land, environment ( the original environmentalists are ranchers and farmers), agriculture or tourism (hunting); visitors think of our western slope as Colorado. My Colorado pioneer family, neighbors and friends employ the commission to keep western slope whole and adopt the Club 20 map. Thank you in advance for your consideration in this important matter, Brita Horn Routt County land owner.

I am concerned about the most recent proposed congressional map. All of Larimer County has been in the same congressional district since at least 1973, because the communities have similar interests. Many Loveland residents commute to Fort Collins and Boulder, and is centrally located between the two cities. Loveland has much more in common with Boulder and Fort Collins, and should be kept in the same district as such.