Public Comments

Commissioners: I am following up my testimony on August 28 (given in light of my roles as a co-author of Amendments Y and Z and a Fair Lines Colorado lobbyist). It seemed that it may be useful for you to have the legal definitions of voter alignments that provide for a minority group’s exercise of its electoral influence, based on U.S. and Colorado Supreme Court redistricting decisions. Majority-Minority Districts: Majority-minority districts stem from Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. “In majority-minority districts, a minority group composes a numerical, working majority of the voting-age population.” Bartlett v. Strickland, 556 U.S. 1, 13 (2009). A majority-minority district is established only where certain additional conditions are met, see Beauprez v. Avalos, 42 P.3d 642, 650 (Colo. 2002) citing Thornburg v. Gingles, 478 U. S. 30, 51 (1986), including sufficient justification for the district that is not race-based. Abbott v. Perez, 138 S.Ct. 2305, 2314 (2018). Regarding concerns raised at the August 28 hearing and at the August 30 Congressional Commission meeting, there is no evidentiary basis that would support all factors required for a Colorado majority-minority Congressional district in 2021. In contrast, as to Legislative redistricting, the courts have determined that these factors can be met, at least in certain regions for State House and State Senate districts. See Sanchez v. Bond, 875 F.2d 1488 (10th Cir. 1989). Minority Group Electoral Influence Districts: Separate from majority-minority districts, the courts recognize additional minority group electoral influence districts that are not mandated by Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act: 1. a coalition district “in which two minority groups form a coalition to elect the candidate of the coalition's choice,” Bartlett, supra, 556 U.S. at 14; 2. a crossover district “in which the minority population, at least potentially, is large enough to elect the candidate of its choice with help from voters who are members of the majority and who cross over to support the minority's preferred candidate,” id. at 13; and 3. an influence district “in which a minority group can influence the outcome of an election even if its preferred candidate cannot be elected.” Id. “Influence districts” have been recognized by the Colorado courts as a meritorious consideration in redistricting. Beauprez, supra, 42 P.3d at 651 (citing district court finding that new district included 20% Hispanic population which “comes close to creating a minority ‘influence district’”). Of course, that decision preceded passage of Amendments Y and Z which established constitutional requirements for preserving minority group electoral influence during redistricting. As a reminder, under the Constitution, any redistricting map that “dilut[es] the impact of [a] racial or language minority group’s electoral influence” cannot be “approved by the commission or given effect by the supreme court.” Colo. Const., art. V, sec. 44.3(4)(b) and 48.1(4)(b). This is true whether the map was drawn for the purpose of achieving such dilution “or results in” minority group electoral influence dilution. Id. In other words, a map that violates this requirement need not be drawn for a discriminatory purpose. It is sufficient that the map has the effect of diluting the minority group’s electoral voice so long as that voice reaches a critical mass in terms of its percentage of the total voting age population of the district.

My name is Kristi Douglas and I had the pleasure of coming before the Commission last Wednesday evening in Brighton. My request was to keep Commerce City whole and put us all in the new CD8, and I was pleased to hear positive comments from the Redistricting Commissioners regarding my recommendation. However, I heard something that I felt was disturbing from one of Adams County Commissioners that was very far from the truth. I don't like challenging a Commissioners as such, but I feel that it is important enough to bring it to your attention. The statement was regarding Fracked Gas and Oil Development and how we in Adams really didn't like it, but were willing to put up with it and take one for the team. That is simply not true. It's one of the reasons that many of us felt that Broomfield aligns with our values. So many of us in Commerce City know that we have been a targeted dumping ground for the things that no one else will put up with - that includes Fracked Gas and Oil exploration. I know that there were people who felt Greeley should be included with Commerce City in CD8 because of the commonality of a large Hispanic population. If that works out, I would welcome Greeley because I know so many people in there who are very concerned about Fracking. Hispanic folks suffer from health issues disproportionately because of environmental racism. It's not right or fair. So the Commissioner was wrong, we DON'T want fracking in our backyards! None of us want to live with Fracking and we deserve representation that will protect us, not sell us out.

I have been a resident of Eagle County for over 35 years. The issues that mountain communities faces are totally different than those of Boulder and the surrounding communities. We need to Redistrict Eagle County to join other mountain communities so our combined voice of the mountain community can be rightfully heard and represented.

Dear Commissioners, My name is Jeffrey Bergeron, I have lived in Summit County for several decades and am a member of the Breckenridge Town Council. I write today to support including Summit County in the same district as I-70 and Front Range communities. Summit County is deeply linked with the Front Range. We are only ninety minutes away by car, making it very easy for day and weekend visitors to drive up. These visitors come from the Denver area, whether they live there full time or fly into Denver International. This tourism is the basis of our economy, we have no mining or farming to speak of. And since we have no airport, driving is the only way for tourists to get to us. I cannot overstate how dependent we are on I-70 and the Tunnel. Beyond the physical link, we are more like these Front Range communities than we are like the Western Slope. We are focused on green and sustainable development which is so important for our future, just like the Front Range which is also navigating a similar problem balancing growth and sustainability. We need to have someone in Congress who understands the vital link and common vision we share with the Front Range communities. Please keep this in mind when redistricting. Thank you very much. Regards, Jeffrey Bergeron

I think Eagle County should be part of the Western Slope districting. Currently the line runs right through Eagle county.

The redistricting of U.S. Congressional Districts to include mountain communities (Vail) within one district makes all the sense in the world as mountain communities share many of the same issues and concerns. Communities like Vail are simply not compatible with cities like Boulder. Redistricting to include Vail in the same district as other mountain communities is vital so our voices have meaning!

I have lived on the front range and in the mountains. Currently Vail and Boulder county are in the Same congressional district. This applies to other front range communities that are combined with mountain communities in the Same congressional district. As Colorado is gaining a congressional seat, the CIRS has come to it’s senses and is proposing Vail and all of eagle county shall be in CD3! Mountain communities should not be lumped together with front range districts. The concerns, desires and interests are different and should therefore have their own representation! This proposal will give Vail, Eagle County and our mountain neighbors one voice in Washington! The way it is supposed to be!

I'm not qualified to suggest any specific map suggestions. I am simply very concerned that Colorado's maps are FAIR and as non partisan as possible.

Please see attached letter of support of the CLLARO maps

I would like to see boundaries drawn to increase Latino representation in CD 1 & 2. This will give an important voice to an underserved community. I would like to se CD 3 broken redrawn so that it encompasses less geographical area and more political diversity.