Public Comments

I strongly disagree with the latest redistricting map! The preliminary map (attached below) was good as it kept communities together. We live in a rural community. Jefferson County does not share Park County rural values. Boulder County does not share the rural values of NW Colorado. It appears these two have been included with rural areas to turn them into democratic voting blocks. This is NOT what we are looking for in redistricting Colorado. Including large metro areas with rural areas does not meet redistricting goals of shared interests that unite our communities, not our community's public policy concerns. We live in a rural area to have more space and to have more independence from urban areas. There are other reasons too. But obviously our values, interests, and concerns are different. Remove Jefferson County and Boulder County and all other metro heavy areas from being part of the rural redistricting areas. Thank you!

9/8/21 Dear Commissioners, I object to redistricting that treats the western slope unfairly. I ask the commission to draw fair redistricting maps to benefit all Coloradans. Sincerely Kerry Richardson Boulder, Co 80303

This appears to be a PARTISAN attempt to give more control to the urban leftists of Denver and Boulder, and I am absolutely opposed to this travesty. NO DEMOCRAT REDISTRICTING!!!

I’m very concerned about the 1st staff map of possible redistricting. While Douglas County does have some rural areas, we have a large suburban population that does not have the same concerns as the rural counties in the plains of Colorado. Douglas County should be in the same area as Jefferson County or Arapahoe County.

Dear Sirs: I am opposed to the current proposed redistricting for Congressional District 4 and all other areas of the state that take away the voice of rural and Constitutionally minded Coloradoans. As currently proposed, Congressional District 4 now wraps up and around to include Fort Collins. Fort Collins, being a college town with a large majority of Socialist/Liberal Communists in mindset, do not reflect the opinions and wants of rural Coloradoans that will be grouped with their vote. I request that the Socialist/Liberal Communist strongholds be grouped by themselves (i.e.: Fort Collins, Boulder, Longmont, Denver) and break down the remaining counties by population into equivalent boundaries. There should be some caveat to allow those Constitutionally minded individuals stuck living in those cities, to be able to opt out their vote to a more conservative district if these cities don't reflect their values, such as a state wide vote in determining what is taught in schools (ban CRT!) or other state wide concerns. These municipalities do not represent the wants and values of the majority of Coloradoans and therefore we do not want their vote associated with rural, law abiding, Constitutionally minded Coloradoans. We certainly do not want them making determinations of what is or is not a "Community of Interest" decision for the majority of our great state. We're tired of what they and all other Socialist Democrats/Communists are selling! Sincerely, John Scott Franktown, CO

The inclusion of Douglas county with rural, sparsely populated counties of the eastern plains with primarily agricultural interests is completely illogical. Every aspect of our daily lives could not be more dissimilar - we are one of the most rapidly expanding counties in the state - but are being combined with counties that have stagnated or declined. Our needs at local, state and national levels will be drastically different over time. The most likely outcome is that the residents of Douglas county eventually outnumber the entire rest of the district, leading to unintended consequences for residents of both vastly separate and unique communities. You must strongly reconsider the implications of this choice.

2021 Congressional Redistricting Comments regarding Staff Map 1, dated September 3, 2021 by Diane Mitsch Bush Thank you very much for the opportunity to comment on Congressional redistricting. I am Diane Mitsch Bush. I first moved to Routt County in 1976. From 1983-1993 I commuted weekly during the academic year to Fort Collins to my job as a tenured faculty member at CSU. From 1996-2006, I served on the Routt County Planning Commission. From 2007 through 2012, I served as a Routt County Commissioner and Chaired the CDOT NW Regional Transportation Planning Commission (NWTPR). From 2007-2012, I was a Board member of Club20. I served on the Club20 Executive Committee from 2010-2012. I served as a Colorado State House Representative for HD26 (Eagle and Routt Counties) from 2013-2017, and was Chair of the House Transportation and Energy Committee and Vice-Chair of the House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee. I was involved in the outdoor manufacturing sector from 1988-2000. This September 3 “Staff Map 1” is a great improvement over the Preliminary map of June 23. I support the adoption of Staff Map 1. The staff Congressional Map 1, (9/3/21) complies with the constitutional criteria for congressional redistricting set forth in Section 44 of our revised Colorado Constitution Thank you for listening to us and responding with a map that complies with the 4 basic constitutional criteria in Article 5, Section 44 and that takes into account the many comments you received: 1. Population size of 721,714, plus or minus 1. The staff really hit this difficult target well. 2. Keeping Hispanic populations whole in conformance with the Voting Rights Act as required by the Colorado Constitution, specifically grouping Pueblo and the San Luis Valley together along with Hispanic communities along I-70 along and west of the Continental divide as many of us requested. 3. Keeping communities of interest whole, as much as is practicable given the population requirement of 721,714 and the Voting Rights Act requirements (Please see below for details and data on communities of interest) 4. This map makes for more competition within CD3, while still complying with the population size requirement, voting rights act requirements, and keeping communities of interest intact. Thus complying with the Article V, section 44.3 (3) (d) definition of “competitiveness” as “having a reasonable potential for the party affiliation of the district's representative to change at least once between federal decennial censuses. Competitiveness may be measured by factors such as a proposed district's past election results, a proposed district's political party registration data, and evidence-based analyses of proposed districts.” Some Specific Communities of Interest in the CD2 Proposed by Staff Map1 (9/3/21) Some comments on Staff Map 1 on the Redistricting Commission website confuse the City of Boulder with Boulder County as a whole and assert that neither Larimer county nor Boulder County are “rural”. In fact, the western portions of Larimer and Boulder counties are “rural” by any definition and share public policy interests with the Western slope in several ways. Three key issues for Western Slope “rural” counties are agriculture, public lands, and climate-induced drought. All of these three are related to our economies. Larimer and Boulder Counties share many similarities in term of communities of “rural” interests with Routt County Preserving family agriculture is a key shared policy interest in Routt, Larimer and Boulder Counties Routt County, Boulder County and Larimer County governments emphasize family agriculture as a key element for their counties in terms of tradition, quality of life, and economy. People in these counties have shown support for helping to preserve working agricultural lands. Voters in Routt County have twice (1996, 2006) approved taxes to help ranchers defray the costs of putting their land in conservation easements. Here are some comparisons of the counties proposed for the new CD2 in the Staff Map 1.These data show that these counties have significant agriculture. Number of farms, Acreage in Ag, average size of farm from USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2017 Census of Agriculture. Complete data available at www.nass.usda.gov/AgCensus. County breakdowns at https://www.nass.usda.gov/Publications/AgCensus/2017/Online_Resources/County_Profiles/Colorado/ To access the PDF report for a specific county, click on the map of counties in Colorado. This census is done every 5 years. Number of farms Acreage in Ag average farm size (acres) Boulder 1012 107,043 106* Garfield 661 475,166 719 Grand 290 240,980 831 Larimer 2,043 482,456 236 acres Moffat 462 953,100 2,063 Rio Blanco 320 410,923 1,284 Routt 887 465,119 524 *approximately 25,000 acres of agricultural lands in Boulder County are owned by the County. This designated Boulder County Open Space is leased out to farmers by Boulder County and does not count in this census of agriculture data because it is not privately owned by farmers or ranchers. https://www.bouldercounty.org/open-space/management/agriculture/#:~:text=The%20county%20owns%20approximately%2025%2C000,tracks%20rent%20and%20crop%20production Federal Public Lands Policy as a Shared Community of Interest for the people of Routt, Larimer, and Boulder Counties In terms of communities of interests, a major policy interest in Routt County is keeping US Forest Service (USFS) lands intact and whole for habitat, water shed health (especially headwaters), hunting, fishing, hiking, backpacking, biking, motorcycles and other outdoor recreation pursuits, as well as for agricultural grazing leases. This is an economic interest in Routt County, given the importance of outdoor recreation as a key element of our economic base. Boulder and Larimer counties share these policy interests. Similar to Routt County, large portions of both Boulder and Larimer counties are US Forest Service lands. Both Boulder and Larimer counties are headwaters counties and both share the concerns about catastrophic wildfires with Grand, Routt, and Garfield. While all of these counties also have significant acreage in State managed and locally managed public lands, Congress has no jurisdiction over management of state or local public lands. Congress and the Federal agencies that Congress oversees set federal public lands policy. The attached map shows federal public lands in NW Colorado. As you can see, Routt, Boulder and Larimer Counties have large proportions of their landmass in federal public lands (Larimer over 50%- mostly US Forest Service ( USFS) and National Parks (NPS). https://highways.dot.gov/sites/fhwa.dot.gov/files/docs/federal-lands/fla/co/12391/co_flmamap.pdf Please scroll down for the actual map of Federal Public lands. Detail 1 is NW Colorado. Climate Action and Climate induced Drought: Another shared policy interest Boulder, Larimer and Routt Counties all have robust climate action plans in place. Reducing the impacts of climate-induced drought is a major policy concern in these counties for water supply, wildfires, and economies. Water supplies in these counties rely on winter snowfall in the mountains. Climate action is critical not only for water and our environment in these counties, but also for agriculture and for our outdoor recreation economies. In particular, Eldora Ski area in Boulder County and the Steamboat Ski and Resort in Routt County are very concerned with climate change. Conclusion Thank you for taking our comments into consideration while complying with the redistricting requirements set forth in Article V, Section 44 of the Colorado constitution. I support Staff Map 1.

Our rural communities of interest must remain whole if we are to have suitable representation of our state in Washington, D.C. The redistricting must not eliminate the voice of rural Colorado!

Rio Blanco County is rural. Our votes matter but if they are lumped in with Boulder, we will never have a voice. The Constitution states the districts should be together with people of Common interests. Boulder county has nothing in common with rural western Colorado , agriculture and oil and gas. We need to make our own decisions and not be governed by city folks. Please reconsider the map configuration.

Ken Buck has an AR 15 above his desk- this does not represent me or my family in Douglas County (and we are gun owners). Ken Buck doesn't represent the values of Douglas County, our families, our education etc etc. Please do not put us in Ken Buck's district. Redistricting us is an attempt to end all competitive races in this district.