Public Comments

The communities of Northwest Colorado value independence and self-governance. Public policy concerns are focused on effective and productive management of federal lands. Government overreach and regulations are other concerns that unite our communities. We have very little in common with Boulder County and see ourselves better aligned with the rest of the Western Slope like we historically have been.

I really liked the first map, because it reflected strong community affinities. I believe we need a district in the southern part of the state that can grow into a majority Native American district. I think the proposed 8th that follows the I-25 corridor appropriately reflects the needs of Colorado’s new communities, without diluting the competing interests of the plains citizens. And the proposed second district reflects a community bound by fire and drought and forests. I think we especially need to focus our efforts into designating districts that are similar in needs — the plains have specific needs that do not overlap with very young suburban commuter communities. East of the Divide and west of the Divide have very little in common, except in the southern counties. No single representative should be pulled by both Western Slope water interests and Front Range water concerns. It’s not fair to the rep, and it’s not fair to the citizens. I do not like this second map. I think it ill serves the least served counties by forcing their reps to travel enormous distances, or just ignore parts of their districts. You were on to something with the first map.

I strongly object to the Colorado Independent Redistricting plan as drawn on September 15, 2021, AKA the Second Staff Plan. Boulder and Larimer Counties are mostly metropolitan areas and those counties have nothing in common with Eagle and Routt Counties, therefore Routt, Jackson, Grand and Eagle Counties should remain in CD 3. CD 3 should also include Lake and Chaffee Counties. CD 7 should include Larimer and Boulder Counties. Summit County interests would match those of CD 7 better than CD 3. HD 57 and HD 26 should be combined except for Pitkin County which would fit better with HD 58. HD 49 should include all of Routt County and none of Larimer County. The map as drawn by the commission does not appear to be Bi-partisan.

If you redistrict and divide the counties into anything other than the Preliminary Congressional map, you will be excluding the voices of rural communities. We need to have a voice in Congress, both state and national. If you do this, rural Colorado will never be heard again and you will be telling us that you don’t care about the voice of those who produce and grow your food. Our community of interest (eastern Colorado farmers and ranchers) is already underrepresented. Please don’t do this.

Please keep Colorado’s water first. We don’t belong to other silly states that seem to think they own us. The water recycles itself. Some day your gonna beg for a shower if you allow other states to make you do what they want

I am concerned that district 7 has been drawn on the September 15th map to include rural areas such as Williamsburg (where I live), Guffey and Victor. I moved out of Arvada and out of District 7 to live in a rural, less crowded area that does not resemble the big city that Arvada and Jefferson County has become. The lifestyle in rural counties is far different than in metropolitan Jefferson County. We do not have light rail, high speed electric trains, major sections of interstate highways. We do not receive our power and water from the same sources that metropolitan Colorado does. We avoid some of the public health concerns present in densely populated metropolitan areas. In short, we are a rural county of farmers, ranchers, small businesses and family oriented communities who do not share the same concerns as metropolitan front range residents. If lumped together in District 7, our representative would be forced to choose which constituents to represent and which to ignore, thus leaving us as the unrepresented minority. The United States government is a representative republic. In a representative republic, even the minority gets to be represented. This map will not suffice to meet our constitutional model or the representation of rural counties such as Park, Teller, Lake, Chaffee, Fremont and Custer. Therefore, I recommend these counties be included in District 3 with other rural counties that share the same legislative concerns, thus ensuring fair and effective representation. Thank you for your consideration.

Eagle County has absolutely nothing in common with Summit County or Boulder or elsewhere and is exactly fine where it is in CD3. 1. Why does the Commission seem incapable of drawing a map that doesn’t include some part of the I-25 corridor in almost every CD? We do not have anything in common with the I-25 Corridor or Boulder. Colorado is a lot more than the I-25 corridor. This Violates the most fundamental principle of congressional redistricting: that communities of interest have representation in our Congress. Give those areas on the Front Range their Congressional voices, and give a voice to the Western Slope by keeping all of the Western Slope in CD3. 2. The Western Slope’s vital relationship with water alone is enough to designate it as a community of interest bound by the shared responsibility of stewardship. However, the Western Slope also has commonalities regarding how the region uses water. The Western Slope’s agricultural, industrial, and recreation economies rely on well-informed local representatives to protect the community’s water at the state and federal levels. To split the Western Slope in any way would compromise the unity required to properly represent water interests in the region. There is also a clear divide between the Western Slope and front range communities, clearly designating western Colorado as a community with unique federal interests. Though many of our communities do not have the tax base of their front range counterparts, they still must provide the essential services of government: safe roads and bridges, law enforcement, public schools, and critical infrastructure with minimal resources. These challenges are not experienced by front range communities where virtually no federally owned lands exist. While federal lands are preserved for the benefit of all Americans, the day-to-day responsibilities of preservation fall upon those who live closest to those lands. These lands are managed for multiple uses – from livestock grazing to energy extraction to outdoor recreation. Over generations, communities on the Western Slope have worked with federal agencies to develop and demonstrate best practices for multi-use lands for the country and these uses are limited to county border. The Western Slope must be maintained as a result. Colorado has more than 24.4 million acres of forestland and many of these forests include the headwaters of rivers that provide reliable, affordable water supplies which are foundational to the environment, economy, and quality of life in rural Colorado. In fact, rangeland and forest are the predominant land uses in the Colorado Basin (85%), with forested land present throughout many parts of the basin. A substantial portion of the basin is comprised of federally owned land, with livestock, grazing, recreation, and timber harvesting as the predominant uses on those lands. A Colorado Statewide Forest Resource Assessment identified 642 watersheds susceptible to damaging wildfire, and 371 forested watersheds with high to very high risk from post-fire erosion, many of these watersheds, encompassing about 9.4 million acres of spruce-fir, aspen and pine forests that contain critical infrastructure for municipal drinking water supplies., ALL of these forests reside west of the continental divide. The San Luis Valley has unique agriculture interests and should not be divided. This region should be kept whole and united with other communities of interest. All of these above needs are best accomplished through the map released with the preliminary plan in June. I ask the Commission to adopt a map that closely resembles that initial plan. 3. Residents of rural Colorado have unique interests and need representation in Congress whose constituency does not have divided priorities. Our voices deserve to be heard, undiluted by inclusion in a district with suburban and urban residents. Whether agriculture or energy production, public lands, water, natural resources, or cooperative businesses, most of our issues and needs in Congress differ from those of our Front Range urban and suburban friends and fellow Coloradans. We all care about education and transportation, but no rural county has (or will have) light rail, and no urban county will understand the needs of a small ranch operation. We deserve representation in Congress that isn’t forced to choose between our needs and the issues that matter to suburbia. The June preliminarily plan contains the best map for rural America and will ensure that our voice is heard through two distinct rural districts. Furthermore, if Teller, Park, Chaffee and Fremont counties are no longer going to be in the Fifth Congressional District, then then should be in the Third Congressional District with other communities of interest not lumped in with Jefferson County and other suburban counties with which they have nothing in common. 4. Unfortunately, the first Staff Plan map released on September 3rd ignores the needs of rural America by removing rural counties in the current Third Congressional District that include Moffat, Rio Blanco, Routt, Garfield, Jackson and Grand counties and lumping them in with Boulder and Larimer, two counties with which they have little to nothing in common. This drastic departure from the current Congressional Districts is a disservice to both the residents of the Second and Third Congressional Districts. 5. CD3, as drawn in the preliminarily plan released in June, made great improvements that unified communities of interest and shared public policy concerns. Tourism, education, public health, education, transportation, water and other mutual issues of concern for our residents were well represented on that map. I was excited about the possibility of a district that ensured the people of the Third District were well represented and connected. Unfortunately, the first staff plan released September 3rd decimates the rural voice in northwest Colorado and disregards the critical communities of interest that make up the fabric of western Colorado. These recent changes to the map ensure that residents on the other side of the mountains and in Denver who share little in common with us are responsible for making decisions on behalf of rural Coloradans. Whether you are living in Craig, Durango, or Yuma - these changes to the map do not allow our voice to be heard or our interests to be fairly represented. 6. The Rocky Mountains create a natural boundary between the eastern and western parts of the state. The Western Slope has unique infrastructure, outdoor recreation and tourism challenges that unify our counties and communities of interest. Our infrastructure is not mainly centered around growing populations as it is in the front range, but around the mountain passes, rivers, and lands that make up the Western Slope. The heavy snow and other similar weather patterns in the west also connect the similar kinds of needs for roads, which vary from the eastern and front range part of the state. The economy, with regard to tourism and outdoor recreation, of the western slope contains almost all of the ski areas and encompasses what people think of when they think of Colorado: hiking, mountain biking, hunting, camping, fishing, skiing and snowmobiling. It is because of these reasons that I support the preliminary plan for CD-03 released in June. Whether we are speaking regarding shared interests such as our energy grid on the Western Slope, or our values at home, rural Coloradans on the Western Slope cannot be fairly represented without the region being kept intact. Keep the West Slope whole. 7. The preliminarily plan released on June 23rd is the fairest map that is consistent with the Congressional Constitutional language approved by voters. The Rocky Mountains provide the obvious divider between the western slope and front range communities. However, once Colorado’s water basins and federal lands are taken into consideration, the east-west configuration seems to be the only way to accurately represent Colorado’s population across the state. The Western Slope is responsible for the roughly 80% of water that leaves Colorado; this means that those of us who live in the Western Slope are responsible for maintaining the water basins. Water is often a major issue and it is important that we have one Congressman who is able to represent ALL of the water on the Western Slope. Additionally, federal lands comprise more than 55% of the land in western Colorado, which is in stark contrast to the front range. This necessitates the need for a single Congressman , and points to the reality that the daily responsibilities of upkeep for our federal lands are taken on by locals all across the Western Slope; we must be united to tackle these tasks. Please keep the Western Slope intact. 8. As a long-term resident of western Colorado, I always wonder how redistricting will affect our part of the state. The map released with the June 23 preliminarily plan respected our way of life and the geographical areas connected to that. The Western Slope is united in many ways, the large amount of federal lands and tourism being some of the top ways. The front range communities steward different types of lands and engage in different kinds of economic activities than we do on the West Slope, both of which need accurate representation. The preliminary plan serves the West Slope best. I urge the Commission to adopt a map that mirrors than plan. 9. The Western Slope is home to a majority of the state's forests and with the multitude of forest fires in the west slope over the last three decades, it is of utmost importance to keep the western portion of the state together so our representative can most effectively address this issue. Just over 55% of the western land in Colorado is federally-owned, so in order to get the management solutions we need for our forests on a federal level, we must keep the West Slope together. 10. Two rural districts currently make up a large portion of the state, representing various issues, industries and communities that require specific representation. The eastern plains and San Luis Valley are the home to many people that work in agriculture. We need to make sure the agriculture industry maintains a strong voice for these communities of interest at the federal level. Meanwhile, the Western slope is home to significant energy, tourism and public land communities. Ensuring two rural districts that include all communities of interest, as drawn in the map for the June preliminarily plan, will ensure Colorado’s urban and rural communities are best served by all of our Representatives. 11. The ski industry is one of the driving forces for tourism in Colorado and unites the western part of our state, as almost all ski resorts are west of the Continental Divide. It makes the most sense to keep all ski areas together in one district. Additionally, the mountainous area in the West that allows for such great skiing also creates unique challenges for infrastructure. While the front range can align infrastructure changes with growing populations, we in the West have to consider geography and weather in addition to population density. Keeping the Western Slope whole will put a Congressman in the best position to improve our infrastructure and best serve our ski communities. 12. Colorado generates over 95-million-acre feet of water annually, and about 10-million-acre feet leave the state through its borders. Of the 10-million-acre feet that leave Colorado, 81%, or 8.1-million-acre feet, exit through the Western Slope. This means that the Western Slope is responsible for stewarding a large portion of Colorado’s water, which will be made far more difficult if the Western Slope is split up. Communities like Moffat, Rio Blanco and Garfield will be ignored by their Representative and not receive the attention they deserve, particularly when it comes to water, if they are lumped into the Second Congressional District and removed from the Third. Please keep the Western Slope whole so our water-related issues can best be addressed in Congress.

Boulder county is a county so why do they halve their hands in all thee districts. Please do not californicate my beautiful state. I’ve lived in vail for 32 years and all I’ve seen is that you continue to place the city like boulder into the farmers and ranchers or the small towns that hate cities. It’s like you just don’t get it. Or maybe your to much of a commie 😜

I strongly object to the Second Staff Plan for the Colorado Congressional districts. Eagle and Routt Counties have nothing in common with the Republic of Boulder or Larimer County. Routt, Jackson, Grand and Eagle Counties should remain in CD 3. Lake and Chaffee Counties should be part of CD 3. Larimer and Boulder should be combined with CD 7. Summit County could go either way if needed to equal out the population but it would fit in with the interests of CD 7 better than CD 3. HD 49 should include all of Routt county and none of Larimer County. HD 57 and 26 should be combined with the exception of Pitkin County which should be combined with HD 58.

I am writing about a new map for HD 13 that includes neighborhoods from NW Longmont (east of 75th, north of 17th Ave/Hygiene Road, and south of Hwy 66). These neighborhoods have been part of Longmont city boundaries for about 50 years and more rightfully and consistently belong in the St. Vrain Valley School District. Please keep this area in HD 11, where interests are more closely aligned and where residents will be better represented. Since the HD 13 map probably needs to be extended to include a part of Longmont, it makes more sense to include neighborhoods in southwest Longmont. This area is relatively new, with fewer ties to Longmont and has many residents who commute into Boulder for work. Rather than splitting up the school district, as the current proposal would do, including the southwest section of Longmont into a new map for HD 13 would have both the middle and high school together. Please redraw the map to take out the northwest portion of Longmont and include instead the southwest portion of Longmont. Thank you.