Public Comments

Commissioner Coleman and Commission members, I was pleased to hear that Thiebaut2 was discussed during your earlier proceedings. I am trying to keep abreast of your discussions today. I am offering modifications to the “Coleman Map” by way of the newest Thiebaut map entitled “Thiebaut3,” which is linked below. Of course, Thiebaut3, as all my map submissions, follow constitutional criteria. In Thiebaut3 there is precise mathematical population equality; contiguity; compliance with the Voting Rights Act; an identification of communities of interest; respect for political subdivisions; compactness; and competitiveness. Let me take a moment to touch on two of these criteria. The Voting Rights Act: The potential opportunity minority districts include at least three districts: CD 1, 6 and 8; while Hispanic opportunity occurs in CD 1, 3, and 8. Communities of Interest (all but CD 1, 5, & 6): CD 2 includes Fort Collins and Boulder given their community of interest around higher education, as well as Longmont and Broomfield. CD 3 includes Moffat, Rio Blanco and Garfield Counties. The map recognizes the agricultural economy that is distinct from the Eastern Plains. It keeps the idea of a southern district, to the extent possible, from Utah toward the Kansas border. CD 4 includes Loveland and Windsor. And while it includes the eastern, rural area of Pueblo County, it also includes Crowley, Otero and Las Animas Counties. These areas link the Lower Arkansas Valley counties, which have considerable shared interests such as agriculture and water. CD 7 keeps Eagle and Summit Counties whole representing a community of interest around the ski and tourism industries and, coupled with Jeffco and Clear Creek Counties, the heavily trafficked stretch of I-70 through the mountains. Notably, Park and Teller Counties are together as a South Park community of interest. Lake and Chaffee Counties link to the Upper Arkansas Valley as well as with other mountain resort communities, especially providing affordable housing for their workforce. CD 8 includes Greeley. It accounts for the fact that Hispanics represent more and more of the population with common interests. Thiebaut3: https://davesredistricting.org/join/8c4c9ea6-41d3-48ff-b0ea-3bd43ed80dca

I'm a native rural Coloradoan and have seen the foundation of the rural lifestyle slowly being under represented due to the influx of urban growth. I understand the redistricting is up for approval by inflicting large metropolitan voters into the rural counties for distribution by head count. From a numbers prospective it may seem sound but from an ideology it weakens the rural perspective overshadowing the challenges and future of the agricultural industry. The urban mentality falls short in understanding the consequences when voting on laws affecting the agricultural industry. Colorado is a leader in vast agricultural support for urban existence throughout the nation. Watering down our voices reduces our ability to continue providing products to help support and secure our state. Also, the timing for allowing comments and discussion at the end of the week followed by a holiday weekend felt like an intentional means to sneak the redistricting borders to allow metropolitan strength to dictate Colorado's future and control the legislative process in an urban voice. Don't increase the rift between urban and rural connections by redistricting in the proposed mapping.

I live in Elbert County, It is very rural. We should not be re-redistricted with other non-rural areas. Same for Dist. 3. Nothing in common with Boulder and Summit Counties. What is the rational for this proposed redistricting?

I fully support a congressional map that keeps Colorado's 3rd and 4th congressional districts intact. Our family runs a 5th generation, Colorado Centennial ranch in Yuma County. Rural Coloradans and agricultural producers are a distinct 'community of interest' in this matter, and our voice should most definitely not be cancelled by larger urban areas and by representatives with no knowledge of the the unique and very pressing concerns of agriculture and Colorado's small towns. Thank you Sonya Shaw Joes, Colorado

Do not split the Western slope. Boulder does not fit into the values and ideas we have on the Western Slope. It appears that you want to take away our voice totally. We don't have a voice in general elections because of the rural communities don't have the same issues and concerns that the large cities do, but since they have the large populations the voice on the Western Slope is cancelled. Also, having Boulder effecting the vote on the Western slope is like reintroducing wolfs. Literally, Boulder doesn't think or care about the Western Slope, the will only cancel our voice. We would like to have another county that is rural that has similar values and ideas, but not Boulder!

Colorado Congressional Redistricting Commission 200 East Colfax #091 Denver, CO 80203 Dear Members of the Colorado Congressional Redistricting Commission: As representatives of rural Colorado families, small businesses, farms and ranches, we write to ask for your consideration at the start of the congressional redistricting process. 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. When the map drawing process starts, we ask that you start by drawing two whole rural districts from the 53 counties that are not part of the Front Range from Colorado Springs to Fort Collins. While these counties make up nearly three fourths of the state’s land mass, they are home to only a quarter of the population. Fortunately, that should be enough for two of our expected eight congressional districts. We know you have to start drawing lines somewhere; how about a West Slope-oriented district and another that is an agricultural community of interest? Even without access to the census block level information for being fully prescriptive, we trust that if you start with a goal of two rural seats, one as a west slope community of interest and one concentrating on agriculture and energy production, you will be able to draw two seats that won’t dilute the voices of the many people living in vast stretches of rural Colorado. Please be certain that these vital – and vast – regions of Colorado garner the representation they need and deserve. An example of a two rural districts footprint is included below. Thank you for your consideration

Midday and Rio Blanco counties are rural, agricultural, and have nothing in common with Boulder and Karimer counties. To lump them together would most assuredly leave the rural counties and their lifestyle with an unfair voice on all they want to keep. Please don’t put these counties in the same district.

Do not change Grand County's district from 2 to 3. We have no common interests with the West slope. I feel that you would be stealing my voting rights. We are fine the way we are. Regards, Gretchen Neudeck

The Western Slope and Boulder County have little in common. Our rural way of life and corresponding values would lose their voice if allowed to be combined with Boulder County. A tiny percentage of the land mass should never be allowed to represent the majority. What concern would Bounder County have for our farming ,ranching ,and mining issues ? None. A massive portion of the state would be disenfranchised. Please separarte Boulder County from the Western Slope in your district mapping.

I live in New Castle, CO and want to comment on proposed redistricting. It does not matter to me which districts I end up in, but I am opposed to splitting Garfield County at any legislative level.