Public Comments

When I first sent you written comments I believed I was alone in advocating for multi-member districts. I am pleased to say that with the congressman from Colorado's CD2 as a co-sponsor of HR 3863, he is also supporting and advocating for multi-member districts not only in Colorado but in all states where there are multiple members of the House of Representatives. My friend Jesse Kumin from Boulder has also spoken to you in support of multi-member districting and proportional election methods. The only place where the three of us might differ is in the election system used to achieve a fair and democratic result. The great thing is though that proportional election systems vary widely in the methods employed and in my opinion each and every one of them is far in advance of the 'single member, first past the post' gerrymandered districting that is now the rule. It also must be mentioned that the total number of House districts hasn't changed in over 90 years while the US population has nearly tripled. Commenters on your web page who denounce the mixing of rural and urban districts and the constant threat to true rural representation might turn their attention to the size of the House of Representatives, because that's where the problem lies. When the House, in its infinite wisdom, decreed that 435 was a magic number and could not be changed, each House district had fewer than 250,000 people. This time around it will be above 750,000. I have constructed a districting scheme for the General Assembly that follows the example of multi-member districting that is used in almost all of the democratic world, and is composed of 12 districts almost all following county borders and geographic boundaries. While small adjustments will need to be made following the release of final Census numbers, that appears also to be true of your efforts, and it also appears you are accepting the '5% above and 5% below' guideline for population standards in each district. One other major difference between your proposals and mine is my addition of a 66th seat in the Assembly. That seat would be reserved for a Native American representative who would be chosen in a manner decided by Native Americans themselves. The reasons seem obvious enough and I'll just add here that 30 nations around the world (all of which use proportional election methods by the way) use such set asides for minority communities within their borders for representation in their national legislatures. I have not drawn a State Senate map because I can't understand any good reasons for keeping such a body. Nebraska seems not to have any more difficulties with their one house legislature than do other states with two, and I think your neighbors to the east are on to something. I have read some dozens of pages of public commentary on your website and while most is concerned with local matters of exactly where to draw a particular line there are many that are troubling. Many commenters appear to be partisan Republicans or Democrats who desire a particular outcome that gives advantage to their party, and to themselves. These comments should be of no concern to you beyond noting that these people have not yet grasped that yours is an 'independent commission' that is not beholden to one party or the other, or even to 'bipartisanship', since your mandate for both legislative and congressional districts demand 'political neutrality'. It is therefore difficult for me to see how the 2/3's of the membership of this commission who are 'bipartisan' will judge these issues. I do understand that each of the two major parties have factions that, in a proportional election system, would likely be separate parties, and it is my hope that you will each accept that you don't speak for the entirety of your parties, and that you will accept the requirement for considerations of small d democracy above all other considerations as you deliberate. I like to fondly remember that Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said in 2019 soon after she was elected to the House of Representatives, "If this was any other country, Joe Biden and I wouldn't be in the same party." I'm certain that she was referring to proportional representation countries when she said 'any other country' because that's where you will find multiple parties of the left, right, and center. Those are also countries where political renewal is possible, unlike here where it is blocked at every turn, and it sometimes appears that the two major parties achieve their greatest successes at cooperation when they block and obstruct any outside competition to their complete domination and control of the political system. Pete Healey Colorado Springs phealey3@gmail.com

What is being done to ensure people of color are fully represented

It is disturbing and disheartening to see the effort being expended to separate areas in Colorado Springs who are either strongly democratic or culturally adhesive, such as the Hillside area. I am unable to understand how combining Manitou Springs with the Tri-Lakes area is anything but the worst kind of gerrymandering and goes against what I had believed was the purpose of this committee. Both of the geographical changes appear to be an effort by those on the right to dilute the energy of those areas and reduce the excellent representation they have elected into office for many years. If you can't agree on the geographic changes needed here in Colorado Springs, then leave them alone. Please don't succumb to the politically-motivated gerrymandering that is destroying our country. Thank you.

My community is a diverse and welcoming one that needs all its voices put together in order to keep it that way. However, with the legislative redistricting we are being split up and put with predominantly white communities who know nothing about diversity and it’s uniqueness. This isn’t the right thing to do, please redraw the map to fit to the diversity that is Harrison School District 2.

To the Colorado Redistricting Committee: I wish to go on the record to object to the preliminary State House Map as it pertains to El Paso County. I have serious concerns that as drawn, revisions will: - discriminate against communities of color - eliminate the possibility of competitive districts - erode and/or destroy the likelihood of free and fair democratic elections in El Paso County. What is the rationale to break up current House Districts 17 and 18? Both districts are comprised of communities of interest. House District 18 includes and connects Manitou Springs Old Colorado City and downtown Colorado Springs. This area is comprised of neighborhoods of older homes and many small, local businesses, with much in common in terms of interests and needs. House District 18, in its present form, serves well the needs of people in Southeastern Colorado Springs. Proposed changes to HD 17 will dilute the communities of color that lie within its boundaries. Both HD 17 and HD 18 are competitive districts. Changing them would nullify that fact and certainly make them non-competitive. And what about proposed changes to House District 49? As it would cover only half of the Tri-Lakes area, how does that help those residents act cohesively about common concerns? The Tri-Lakes area is also a community of interest and should be kept together as a geographically contiguous district. The Tri-Lakes area of Monument and Palmer Lake is an area with totally different needs and concerns than people share further south in Colorado Springs. Colorado Springs should definitely not be apportioned to the proposed House District 49. It is my sincere hope that the next iteration of this State House Map contains competitive districts and accommodates communities of interest. The mandate for your commission is to support genuinely representative democracy in our state. Please take thoughtful, balanced action – we are a stronger Colorado when the voices of all citizens have a fair chance to be heard at the ballot box. Respectfully submitted, Kady Hommel 11 West Jefferson St. Colorado Springs, CO 80907

As a Veteran and as a resident of Colorado that grew up in our rural and agricultural communities of the west slope and now live in the Colorado Springs area, I would like to thank the commissioners for creating such good initial maps. I appreciate your creation of two rural districts in the Congressional map that help define the communities of interest for rural Colorado. With the growing urban and suburban areas of Colorado, I feel that it is important to maintain adequate representation of our rural and agricultural communities. My entire family is comprised of farmers and ranchers that have been farming here since before Colorado was a state. Our rural communities are vital to the state's economy and deserve equal representation of their unique situations. I support maintaining the representation between east and west makes the most sense for the two rural districts. I support Colorado Farm Bureau's legislative redistricting map. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Mi nombre es Nancy Margarita Díaz Escápite y ​​estoy escribiendo en nombre de Lamar Unidos. Lamar Unidos es una de las únicas organizaciones de base activas que se enfoca en apoyar a los inmigrantes, muchos de los cuales son indocumentados, y a las comunidades de habla hispana del Suroeste de Colorado. Las prioridades de la comunidad con la que trabajamos son justicia migratoria, equidad educativa y de salud, justicia laboral, justicia climática, salud mental de la comunidad Latinx y asistencia con el programa de licencias SB-251, entre otros. También somos miembros de la Coalición por los Derechos de los Inmigrantes en Colorado; la coalición de derechos de inmigrantes y refugiados más grande de Colorado que ha testificado en apoyo de los mapas de CLLARO en audiencias anteriores. Creemos que la comunidad inmigrante e hispanohablante específicamente en el condado de Prowers es una comunidad de interés que debe protegerse. En nuestra comunidad somos muy unidos, las familias apoyamos fuertemente a nuestros jóvenes en las actividades educativas y extracurriculares - deportes por ejemplo. Lamar Days es uno de los eventos que reúne a nuestras familias para celebrar a nuestra comunidad en general. La comunidad inmigrante de está región siempre apoya y participa con gusto en los estos eventos que se celebran en nuestra ciudad. Siendo una comunidad pequeña donde todos nos conocemos y buscamos apoyarnos unos a otros, los inmigrantes siempre trabajamos duro en todo tipo de negocios que impulsan el desarrollo económico de nuestra comunidad, ya sea como empleados agrícolas, de la industria de servicios, empresarios, etc. Nuestras familias están bajo el estrés de la vida diaria y también el miedo por la situación migratoria y el racismo. La comunidad inmigrante del condado de Prowers y el resto del Suroeste de Colorado tiene especial interés en que se cree un camino a la ciudadanía lo más comprensiva posible. Por lo que nuestros esfuerzos en el tema migratorio se centran en lograr un cambio en el sistema migratorio actual para que sea accesible, justo y comprensivo para con la comunidad inmigrante. Nuestros esfuerzos de colaboración con otras organizaciones nos han permitido organizarnos para que se abriera una oficina local del Departamento de Motores y Vehículos en Lamar que ofrece servicios del programa de licencias SB251 y además sirve de tiempo completo a toda la población de nuestro condado, SB19-139 ha permitido que esto fuera posible en Lamar después de años de no contar con una oficina que operara de tiempo completo en nuestra localidad . Como organización de base, en Lamar Unidos creemos firmemente que esta comisión debe tener en cuenta la protección y el mantenimiento de nuestra comunidad de interés al finalizar los nuevos mapas legislativos de Colorado. La forma más eficaz de hacer esto es adoptando los mapas legislativos estatales de CLLARO, ya que crean un poder comunitario significativo para las personas de color tanto en el condado de Prowers como en todo nuestro estado.

Looking at the proposed map and Attachment F (Revised Election Results and Voter Registrations) I believe these results look very gerrymandered for political affiliation. The 55.9% Democratic Differential for CD1 is very problematic -- no district should be so heavily slanted toward one party. It would appear to be the 'trick' of making one district heavily in favor of one party so as to dilute that party's influence in other districts. The two districts that lean the most toward the Republican party, CD4 and CD5, added together they only have a Republican Differential of 43.5%. Those two districts together are still 10% less-favorable to Republicans than CD1 is favorable to Democrats. CD1 is far too skewed compared to all other districts. There is NOTHING competitive about the make-up of CD1. Plus, the reality is that there is no reason to keep Denver in one district. The concerns of east Denver are very similar to Aurora. The concerns of NW Denver are very similar to Wheat Ridge and Arvada. Stacking one district to be SO heavily favored by one party actually means less representation for that party. CD1 should be divided up so that no district has more than about a 20%-ish differential. CD7 and CD8 should both get sections of CD1 (maybe CD6 gets some of the Democrats from CD1) so that CD1 is down to about a 20% Democratic differential. Last point for reducing the huge Democratic advantage in CD1 is that the district hasn't been competitive in nearly 50 years. Adding Republicans and Independents to the District will help make it more competitive, which is one of the mandates for the commission. Representation for Colorado Democrats is significantly reduced because this one district is so heavily slanted.

I support the independent redistricting process and the emphasis on competitive districts. However, the process should acknowledge the fact that the state is trending Democratic and not convey an undue benefit to the Republican party by creating uncompetitive districts for them that they can win without competing for voters beyond their base. In particular, the Town of Parker where I reside is split into 2 districts; the 6th and 7th; even thought it is one community of interest that shares more with the heavily suburban 6th district than it does with the exurban 7th or rural 4th. The map should be revised to include more of Parker or all of Parker in the 6th with which it has a community of interest related to concerns about economic vitality, growth/development, transportation, quality of life, public safety and sustainability. Finally, I support the creation of 1 or more districts that reflect the growth in minority populations over the past 10 years especially the latino/hispanic population and provide this population with the opportunity for greater representation in state and federal elected offices.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/b7545193-0740-4cdf-a79e-c5cf418a54a7