Public Comments

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. 

Rural Coloradoneeds to be represented as a whole and not divided. Rural plains and rural mountain areas have different needs and should get equal representation as the front range population.

I have seen the proposed new maps and am writing to say I do not approve. As a western Colorado voter I feel this new redistricting will completely split the voice of western Colorado. We have completely different issues and needs from other areas of the state and its not fair to us to weaken our vote.

Why would you even consider your Staff Plan map released on September 3rd it ignores the needs of rural Colorado 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. They are frontier counties and you are lumping them Urban counties. with This drastic departure from the current Congressional Districts is a disservice to both the residents of the Second and Third Congressional Districts. I would like the to keep your Western Slop in tack and you can keep the Eastern side of the state in tack. 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. I see this as a way for the Eastern side of the state to hurt the West Slope by taking our water.

As a Colorado native, please keep the western slope a whole district. As this area does not have anything in common with Boulder or anything near the front range. Their uniqueness entitles the residents a fair opportunity to maintain their own qualities. Infringe larger community mindset destroys small community values.

Your recent redistricting of Colorado western slope is NOT good. By giving more to the front range, you have AGAIN, YES AGAIN put our community interests her in Moffat Co. behind making sure your progressive platform of giving "everything" to your personnel interests. Note that we do have each and everyone of your names and that your progressive agenda and authoritarian attitudes will be stopped in the end. AND when this turnaround occurs, which is about to happen, YOU will be stripped of all your power and "put out to pasture" as you are now attempting to do to us out here. I strongly urge you to reconsider your thoughts and think about what Rep. Boebert is trying to help you folks do- which would be to take the right path. Please just remember, the best way, correct thinking will prevail. We are small but mighty. Thank you for your time and please consider this wisdom trying to be passed on to you. God blesses.......... This comment has nothing to do with political parties.

Rural Colorado, as with many rural areas of our great Country, has distinct cultural and political needs. To dilute this culture and political needs with urban, inner city needs is a disservice to our way of life, and ultimately to what makes Colorado the great state that it is. Our needs for quality internet ( not DSL), roads, water legislation, fire control, noxious weed control, large animal veterinary services, and many more are needs urban dwellers in Boulder NEVER consider. Add to that Colorado's Agriculture & Natural resources industries and an urban point of view would only exacerbate the attacks on those important economic drivers. Meat doesn't come from the grocery store and gas doesn't come from a magical pump. Please consider allowing rural Colorado be represented by someone who comes from and is vested in these values. Thank you for your consideration, Alan Lucas

Commissioners: The maps I have seen so far are clearly in violation of at least two provisions of the Constitution of the State of Colorado . The federal district map obviously destroys our long-standing 'community of interest' (48.1.2(a) in CD3. Further, it divides CD3 in such a way as to potentially oust our current representative (48.1.4(a) corollary). Likewise, the State House district(s) for Southwest Colorado, namely Montezuma County, does not maintain the 'community of interest' provision cited above. The existing districts must be maintained as best as can be considering the equality of populations required by the Federal Constitution. However, in drawing up a new district for our new CD8, it should be carved out of the area wherein the growth of population occurred--Denver-Boulder. That appears to be the case and in no way requires the drastic and unconstitutional changes proposed for the rest of the State. Creston O. (Bud) Garner, Jr. 608 N Washington Cortez, CO 81321

I support the TAFOYA-004 map that was presented on Monday (09/13/21) because the Tafoya Map solves three (3) major problems caused by the Coleman-004 Map: 1. Compactness; 2. Competitiveness; 3. Maintaining communities of interest. 1. FLYING or ZOOMING to talk to your congressperson will not be required in Tafoya-004 districts due to their smaller size. The huge size of CD-3 in Coleman-004 would essentially prevent residents in 13 of Colorado's poorest counties -- all in Southern Colorado -- from reasonable access to constituent services. Just buying the gas to drive to a congressional office would be difficult for many residents of Southern Colorado. Forget about flying. Also, Internet Service -- if any exists -- is usually weak in most rural areas, prohibiting Zoom meetings. ** I urge the Commission to choose the compact districts in Tafoya-004. 2. How does a 10-POINT EDGE by one political party make a district competitive? It does NOT, but such a 10-point spread exists in CD-3 on the Coleman-004 map. Competition -- meaning your party has the “possibility” of winning -- is required by the Colorado Constitution. More important, however, it is necessary for our Democracy to work. A political party with a 10-point advantage will probably select candidates only liked by their base instead of candidates interested in serving all people in the district. ** I urge the Commission to choose the Tafoya-004 map with its more competitive CD-3. 3. The Coleman-004 map “dilutes” several Southern Colorado communities of interest -- WATER and HISPANICS. Both will be “watered down” by inclusion of huge swaths of northwest Colorado, which are beautiful but have far different issues than Southern Colorado. The Tafoya-004 map would allow a CD-3 Congressperson to concentrate on WATER, which is key to survival in Southern Colorado and a critical issue of Federal Policy. This “Headwaters Map” would also give the CD-3 Representative incredible influence because of all the other states that rely on Colorado’s water. Finally, the Tafoya-004 map maintains the historical and cultural connections of Hispanics who are CONCENTRATED in Southern Colorado from the San Luis Valley to Pueblo. It maintains their community of influence. ** I urge the Commission to choose the Tafoya-004 map to assist Hispanics and Water issues.

I believe the commission should devote some of its next session to reviewing the maps on the redistricting gallery and discussing them. I think many of these submitted proposals are more reasonable than those drawn by the redistricting staff, who so far have not succeeded in putting together maps that meet the commission's goals. In particular, I believe it is very important that the commission draw at least 3 competitive districts, meaning that the district would have voted for at least one Democrat and one Republican in the 8 races the commission is considering. So far none of the maps the redistricting staff have produced have met this goal. However multiple maps on the redistricting gallery do achieve this split including Sarah Gatson's map and Oscar D'Emilio's map to name a couple. Perhaps consideration of the submitted maps will help move the commission closer to achieving a final version.