Skip to main content

Public Comments


Filter or Sort Public Comments

Joseph Caldara

Commission: both

Zip: 80017

Submittted: September 15, 2021

Comment:

Please do not split the Western Slope into multiple congressional districts and include counties like Moffat and Routt with areas like Boulder. Colorado has many vastly different areas with vastly different perspectives. Specifically, the perspective of those living near the I-25 corridor differ wildly from those who live far from it. I believe Colorado should have as many congressional districts as possible that don't include some portion of the I-25 corridor. The current redistricting plan would silence millions of Coloradans.

David Freestone

Commission: both

Zip: 81321

Submittted: September 15, 2021

Comment:

The current proposed map smells of gerrymandering. Plain and simple

Joyce Marino

Commission: congressional

Zip: 81007

Submittted: September 15, 2021

Comment:

As a member of Congressional District 3, I strongly support the plan proposed by Tafoya. The alternative proposal assumes some sort of affiliation with northwestern Colorado that does not address common problems/interests. Not all rural areas have the same needs/conditions. The alternative map with have stakeholders competing for totally diverse interests. Please strongly consider the Tafoya map.

Angela M Tripp

Commission: both

Zip: 81402

Submittted: September 15, 2021

Comment:

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. 2. 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. 3. 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. 4. 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. 5. 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. 6. 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 ourfederal 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. 7. 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. 8. 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. 9. 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. 10. 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. 11. 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 wat

Merry Freestone

Commission: both

Zip: 81321

Submittted: September 15, 2021

Comment:

I hate that you feel it necessary to redo strict. It was better the way it was. We were able to get strong conservative people to represent us the way it was, and no doubt, that is the reason for dividing up our areas. You are not representing the desires of the people with your revisions of the districts. It is obvious what you are trying to accomplish. Leave it the way it was!

Karen Ouye-Selbe

Commission: both

Zip: 81639

Submittted: September 15, 2021

Comment:

Thank you. My name is Karen Ouye-Selbe.I am a Colorado native born in Fort Collins. My heritage is over 120+ years in the state. Firstly there is a reason for the Continental Divide. 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.

Dorothy D Mitchell

Commission: congressional

Zip: 808070238

Submittted: September 15, 2021

Comment:

Rural Eastern Colorado is a Community of Interest that must be considered in the Congressional redistricting process. We are culturally, economically, & politically distinct from the rest of the state. The proposed First Staff Plan map would split up rural Colorado and mix our votes with that of suburban & urban voters. It would effectively leave us & rural Western Colorado without representation in Congress. The First Staff Plan map also mixes the Eastern Plains with the Western Slope. These regions are quite different and have differing interests. They really should be separate. Eastern Colorado needs to remain together if we are to have a voice at all, as does Western Colorado. Please consider going back to the Preliminary Congressional map and starting over from there. Thank you for your time.

Tony Cinocco

Commission: both

Zip: 81001

Submittted: September 15, 2021

Comment:

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.

Kevin Grantham

Commission: congressional

Zip: 81212

Submittted: September 15, 2021

Comment:

I am writing in opposition to the current version of the Congressional maps that include Fremont County with the metro area Jefferson County. Fremont, as well as Park and Teller have no commonalities with Jefferson. Each are distinctly agricultural in nature and have rural mountain characteristics. In addition, Fremont has a mix of the mountain ranching community as well as the eastern plains farming community and the Arkansas River corridor. Fremont could fit well in either a eastern plains district (4) or a west slope (3) district. However, it has no business being lumped in with a metro area county. Thank you, Kevin Grantham Fremont County Commissioner

Cynthia Cinocco

Commission: both

Zip: 81001

Submittted: September 15, 2021

Comment:

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. DON’T DO IT. Boulder and Larimer counties have NOTHING in common with the Western Slope!