Public Comments

Dear Colorado Independent Redistricting Commission, Please keep Fort Collins in District #2 where we belong with other mountain towns and counties. We do not have much connection Weld County which has predominantly a farming economy and Fort Collins has a diverse and high tech business economy. We in Fort Collins have a large and growing recreation and tourist industry with the proximity to foothills and mountain parks and trails to hike and camp and the Poudre River with fishing, kayaking and rafting. We have special and very different concerns with water use and conservation than the eastern plains. We also have connections with other I25 corridor communities who share many roads and bus routes and traffic problems that we are trying to work on together. Our philosophy is to reduce congestion, air pollution, fossil fuel use and maintenance costs, and improve safety, convenience and commute times to Denver. I hope you will consider keeping us with the mountain communities and counties and keep all of Larimer county in District #2. Thank you, Samuel Salas 1304 Green St. Fort Collins, 80524

To the Redistricting Committee members: The Western Slope must be preserved as a whole to satisfy its most productive role for growing a vigorous Colorado influence. Boulder and Larimer County have little in common with that portion of Colorado. Redistricting must reflect and support that fact. In addition, the Western Slope as well as the Eastern Plains of rural Colorado must equally be considered in planning for their rural needs specific these regions. Urban and rural are vastly different in their purposes and require different redistricting considerations. The wellbeing of the entire state requires wise planning from this committee given over to its regional redistricting assignment. To homogenize the regions with out regard to thoughtful planning is to restrict/jeopardize positive growth and healthy development. As a resident of Pueblo County, I would also ask the committee to keep Pueblo as a whole. The population requirement is well in line to satisfy the specification for an undivided apportionment. Thanks for your work on this important task. Sharon Scutti

Please keep the Western Slope of Colorado whole and allowing us fair representation in the state and federal level in addressing our shared concerns, including water rights, agriculture, and preserving our way of life. We should NOT be treated or represented like other parts of Colorado which are more suburban in nature and have different concerns in their counties and/or communities. Thank you for your consideration in this matter.

I request that Eastern and western Colorado be considered separate but equal “Communities of Interest”. The legislative and judicial redistribution map needs to reflect that. Agriculture and energy production on both eastern plains and western slope are 2 of the top 3 economic bases our state enjoys. You cannot discount..or… leave without representation those population bases. We deserve this consideration and appropriate representation since our areas provide such huge economic resources. Thank you.

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. Thank you

1. 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. Thank you

I have lived in Colorado for over 60 years, including about 30 years on the western slope and about 30 years in the Denver Metro area. There is absolutely NOTHING in common about Boulder County and Garfield County. In fact Boulder County and it's resident's interests are completely juxtaposed. The western slope needs control over the water flowing west thru the Colorado River basin, wildlife preservation, oil and gas reserves and general rural needs with regards to education and a rural way of life. Boulder County and the front range residents have little to no knowledge of these issues and would not reflect the needs of the rural half of our state to the bureaucrats in Washington,DC. It's totally irresponsible to break up the Western Slope resident's voice to protect our way of life. The revised redistricting map gives the front range complete autonomy over the state and will destroy the rural education system,the valuable water resources in the state,the protection of our forests and wilderness areas and wildlife resources, and the interests of our farmers and ranchers and small business owners who have for years fought for their livelihoods and rural values against the forces of urban America whose issues and concerns are contrary to those of rural America. Water preservation alone will be destroyed by the whims of urban greed for development and turning a quick buck without regard to long term need to preserve that invaluable resource. Respectfully submitted, Lee Krauth MD

The biggest theme for proper representation is the difference between rural and urban, from resources to social policies the needs and demands vary wildly. Thank you for taking time to consider the following points. 1. 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 water-related issues can best be addressed in Congress.

I've been a resident of Teller County since 2002. I moved my son to Teller County so as to raise him in a smaller community. One that isn't so exposed to the fast pace of the world. It's a small rural community. We don't resemble a metro district even right down town in the largest city in Teller County, Woodland Park. We actually close a state hwy for the Woodland Park HS homecoming parade!!! We again, are a small, rural community. We are located in the south west region of the state amongst other small rural counties. We have acres and acres of national forest and BLM. That is not what I think of when I think of a metro district. We should not be grouped in with a county such as Jefferson County or any other metro county. We are not them. They are not us. Their interests are not the same as ours. We would be better to redistrict with Park, Fremont and even El Paso County. Thank you for this opportunity to allow me to voice my concern that our small, rural community will be represented by metro thinking.

Hello, I am a teacher in the local Durango 9R school district. I am a full-time, 5 day a week, "super-sub", a highly valued employee who can fill in on short notice in English Language Arts (ELA), SAT Prep, welding, woodworking, physics, chemistry, math, and biology. Just ask Ms. Ann Duft, VP of DHS, if she values me - just today she informally offered me the long-term position of taking over an ELA class during the regular teacher's maternity leave. I have a BS in engineering from Stanford, an MBA from UCLA, and I enjoy the teaching without the evening and weekend workload as a 78 YO retired software engineer. I understand that their are parties -- Democrats ?? -- who want to add a HEAVILY Democrat area, Boulder, to CO-3, a nominally balanced "purple" district, maybe slightly leaning "red". The interests of Boulder residents, tightly bound with the University community and densely-populated areas, and not too distant from Denver, and dominated by big-city Denver media, could not be farther from the interests of we Western Slope residents. Residents of CO-3, the farmers, ranchers, and we residents who cherish and value small-town living have absolutely nothing in common with Boulder and its residents. Adding Boulder or any other major population center in the greater Denver area to CO-3 would be an intentional destruction of the Western Slope district. I urge you most strongly to LEAVE CO-3 ALONE!!!!! Sincerely, Ed Rathje Durango, CO