Public Comments

Hello, first let me thank you all for your willingness to take on such a Herculean task! I commend your efforts. You a working within a rather broad and vague “hierarchy of criteria,” and I as a member of the public would like to know exactly how you are interpreting these broad criteria. I have not been able to find this on the Commission’s portal. Could you please provide an easy-to-find and relatively easy-to-understand page which clearly and concisely defines these criteria and how you will measure them? 1. What is the Commission’s precise working definition of “equal population”? It seems like the population is shifting every day, so on what date does the population have to exactly match across all districts? How will you know that you have arrived at this “equal population”? 2. What is the Commission’s precise working definition of “compliance with the Voting Rights Act of 1965?” I am not a lawyer and I am unable to read or comprehend major Acts of Congress. What I do need is for this Commission to strip out the legal verbiage, enumerate in plain English & Spanish each individual requirement of the V.R.A. 65 that is relevant to this project, and tell me how exactly you intend to meet each requirement, and how exactly each requirement will be measured. 3. What is the Commission’s precise working definition of “contiguous?” I have a general idea of what this means, but I need you to be more precise. 4. What is the Commission’s precise working definition “whole communities of interest?” It appears that you are soliciting each “community of interest” to define itself, which is what I would expect. However, I need to understand, how exactly will you vet each of these communities of interest and verify that it is in fact a valid community? How exactly will the geospatial extent of each community be determined? What if such a community is not contiguous? What if multiple communities of interest overlap, how will you determine which gets priority? Will you be posting a detailed listing of each of these communities of interest, along with an exact description of the interest being served? 5. What is the Commission’s precise working definition of “preserve whole political subdivisions?” How would meeting this requirement even be possible, given that political subdivisions overlap? Which political subdivisions take precedence over others, and why? What if a current political subdivision is a gerrymander, such as the Jabberwock that that is Denver? 6. What is the Commission’s precise working definition of “compact?” I have a general idea of what this means, but I need you to be more precise. 7. What are the Commission’s precise working definitions of “competitive district” and “to the extent possible?” How exactly will the Commission measure whether a proposed district is competitive or not, and whether it is possible to create such a district? Finally, I ask this Commission to focus on clearly defining the rules, and not focus on drawing maps. This Commission can, and should, reduce each of these seven criteria (and sub-criteria) to geo-processing parameters, assign a weight factor to each, select a proposed centroid for each district, and let a geo-processing tool actually do the work of creating the maps. This is the only way to ensure that all criteria are met, while removing all political bias. Thank you for your consideration and for your willingness to serve the people of Colorado.

Congressional District 6 should include Arapahoe County and parts of Adams. Douglas County is a more rural community then the majority of Arapahoe County and should not be included in this Congressional District. The needs of these 2 communities are very different and should have different representation. Thank you, Christine Sweetland

I don't believe Larimer and Weld Counties ought to be combined in any district. Larimer County fits better with Boulder County because both counties have similar ecological sensibilities, major research universities, and similar commerce and industrial bases. With its base in agriculture and extractive industries, Weld County fits better with the Eastern Plains with which it has long been grouped. Boulder and Larimer counties' combined population is about 690,000 people, close to what's needed to make a district. It would make more sense to look to western exurban counties like Clear Creek to make up the difference, or maybe Broomfield County (which may make the district too large?)

Hello, My name is Faith Halverson-Ramos and I’m a mental health provider and business owner in the Longmont community. My husband and I have lived in Longmont since 2010. We purchased our home in 2013 because we knew we wanted to establish our roots here. Because I consider Longmont home, I wanted to provide a comment on the proposed redistricting the board has been working on. In particular, I wanted to make a comment on the proposed Congressional redistricting that affects Longmont. To do that I want to describe a bit about what I think makes Longmont special and compare the needs of the diverse communities that make up Longmont with the needs of the other growing communities of the Northern Colorado I-25 Corridor. To me, Longmont is a big small town with a “can do” attitude. People here value our small businesses, local farmers, artists and musicians. We especially saw this come out during the pandemic with various community organizations, businesses, farmers, artists and musicians coming up with novel ways to keep Longmont “Strongmont.” It may not surprise you to know, then, that Longmont was twice deemed an “All-American City.” The city most recently received this award due in part to the mental health initiatives created through collaborations with the city and members of the greater community. The Longmont police department has also established and maintained programs that are geared towards helping people with mental health concerns or substance use issues, rather than simply arresting people and throwing them in jail. The city’s population is relatively diverse for this area, although not as diverse as the Denver area. While the majority of Longmont’s population identifies as white, over a quarter of people living in Longmont identify as Hispanic or Latino, with smaller percentages identifying as Black/African American, Asian, or Biracial/Multiracial. People living in Longmont range from blue-collar to white collar, and through Boulder County, the city also has a community of housing units available for agricultural workers and their families. Like many communities in East Boulder County and Western Weld County, a sizable portion of the people who live in Longmont work outside of Longmont. Most of these people are commuting to Boulder, Denver, or Fort Collins. This means that transportation is an issue. A transportation model and plan based on individual people driving individual cars is not a sustainable option for the planet nor this region. Because of this, I think that it would be valuable for these communities located in parts of Larimer and Weld counties to be grouped together with Longmont as a Congressional District. We have similar transportation needs and could benefit from being part of a more formal public transportation corridor to better serve and connect these communities. With this, another common challenge Longmont and the immediate areas north and east of us face is affordable housing. People want to live here, but housing can be unaffordable for many. Those who have more money to spend on rent or a mortgage may move out further east where they can get more space for their money. This, of course, contributes to the transportation issue I previously mentioned. Lastly, another shared point of concern is the oil and gas industry. Longmont citizens voted to ban fracking within city limits, but our air quality is still affected by the nearby wells outside the city. With that, the people who have bought homes in East Boulder County and Western Weld County, where the wells are located, are also affected by this heavy industry happening near their homes and schools. The health and environmental concerns they express need to be understood as a community of interest that must be heard, too. To close this comment, I want to thank you for taking the time to read my thoughts about the Longmont community and the various communities of interest located within the city and within the area I believe should be made into Congressional District 8. I can appreciate that this has been a complicated task and I hope you’ll take my comments into consideration as you identify the most equitable and just ways for redistricting the state for both Congressional and Legislative Districts. Sincerely, Faith Halverson-Ramos 80501

This is a general comment, as well as specific to House Districts and Fremont County. A strong indicator of a community of interest is the footprint of the 911 dispatch centers. Agencies within Fremont and Custer Counties participate in the Combined Regional Communications Authority (CRCA). CRCA is composed of law enforcement and elected officials from both counties, working under an Intergovernmental agreement, to collaborate on they myriad of issues of mutual interest. And, of course, CRCA covers all of Fremont (and Custer) counties. In addition, elected officials of Fremont County's municipalities come together in different forums to discuss shared issues and challenges. These meetings are named the Mayor-Mayor meeting (Mayors of all Fremont County municipalities including Silver Cliff from Custer County), the City-City-County Meeting (Florence, Canon City and Fremont County), the various service clubs (Rotary, Elks, and Noon Lions), and the Fremont Economic Development Council (that has elected and appointed officials from the Pueblo Community College (Canon City campus), the school districts, the municipalities and the county). The shared interests that unite Fremont County are strong and vibrant, and should be honored in any redistricting.

Dear Commissioners: I have lived and worked in the Latino Community since I was a child. My father fought for my community earlier than I can remember, which led me to take a similar path. I am a political activist, social organizer, former school principal and public-housing officer which really sets me up to be able to talk about my community because I work with them directly. Our community has been fighting for our voice to be heard for decades. I commend the redistricting commission for developing a map that places the 8th congressional district north of Denver. A Latino district north of Denver will provide an opportunity for true representation for a rapidly growing population in our state. . The preliminary congressional staff map does not reflect or represent the growth of our state and the burgeoning Latino population. A district that unites the voices in Weld and Adams county will provide resources and opportunities for our community that we have lacked for decades.. Our communities in Adams and South West Weld County face similar challenges such as clean air and water, oil and gas climate impacts, educational funding and affordable housing. One representative one voice for the Latino community in the 8th district will better serve our community and our state. It is time for the key issues that continue to keep Latino communities marginalized be addressed by a representative that understands what is at stake. Being the largest and fastest growing demographic in our state means that adequate representation is imperative. . Financial security, access to a quality education, job opportunities and environmental concerns are top of mind for all Coloradans and Latinos are at the forefront of these issues. One representative that can represent the Latino community from Commerce City, to Thornton, to Federal Heights, to Greeley community in the Latino heavy district is the only solution that makes sense. Sincerely, Nita Gonzales

I posted this written testimony online. Use these points if you wish and or share them. Here are my thoughts; Statement of Support for the Southern Colorado River Basins District (SCRB) as a US Congressional District Common Geography, History, Culture, and Economy. This area is a cohesive Community of Interest. Geography and Economy. This area shares three watersheds: The Arkansas, San Juan, and Rio Grande Rivers. These rivers are of vast importance to the agricultural and tourist economies and the small towns of the region. Characteristics of this community. There is a large Hispanic/LatinX community that goes back several generations. There are three designated Hispanic Serving Institutions of higher education: Adams State, CSU Pueblo, and Pueblo Community College. Unfortunately, the SCRB is the most impoverished area of Colorado and desperately in need of excellent representation at the federal level. Fortunately, the SCRB is the developing Renewable Energy Capitol of Colorado. Medical facilities in Pueblo serve folks in the Arkansas river Valley. Fort Carson is in south El Paso County. Many of its families live in South El Paso County and Pueblo. Veterans are forced to go to the VA hospital in New Mexico. A strong federal representative could help bring a VA hospital to the SCRB. Only 65% of SCRB residents have High-Speed Internet compared to 85% of those outside the SCRB. This community needs help. The SCRB is a cohesive community of interest with many common needs and interests. Please support the designation of SCRB as a US Congressional District for Southern Colorado. Kevin GRUNEWALD, Las Animas County

It is imperative that Moffat and Routt counties be in the same congressional districts. We are people united by water, roads, energy resources, emergency resources, and employment. Decisions made at a federal level impact our shared resources and our communities equally, making consistenty and continuity between counties an upmost importance.

We would like to add some additional comments to our previous submittal regarding the current ongoing Congressional redistricting process. During the recent Highlands Ranch hearing, some commentators suggested that Douglas County had no similarities to the Eastern Plains. However, we have some issues with that viewpoint: 1) A large portion of Douglas County is still agricultural, as is a large portion of Elbert County. Development in both counties is centered around existing towns, Highlands Ranch, Lone Tree, Castle Rock and Parker in Douglas County; Elizabeth, Kiowa, Elbert and Simla in Elbert County. Other areas both counties remain agricultural, primarily livestock, grazing and hay production. 2) Both counties are “exurbs” and not suburbs of the metro area and culturally, they are more similar to the Eastern Plains than the Denver metro area. For example, both county commissions have established Second Amendment sanctuary status and have scoffed at, and actively opposed, mask mandates. These actions by the county commissions are more similar to actions taken by the vast majority of governing bodies on the Eastern Plains than they are similar to actions taken by Denver area governing bodies.This ties the political and cultural interests of Douglas County to the Eastern Plains rather than to the Denver metro area. 3) Wind energy is one of the chief sources of energy for the future. The largest wind farm in the State of Colorado has already been built and is on line in Elbert, Lincoln, Cheyenne and Kit Carson counties. A large portion of southeast Douglas County has similar topography and wind patterns to these four counties, suggesting that future development of wind energy is feasible in large areas of Douglas County. This also makes Douglas County dissimilar to the metro area where there is no ability to build large wind farms. In summary, Douglas County is much more similar to the Eastern Plains ideologically, culturally and geographically and therefore should be included in a Congressional District with Elbert County when considering communities of interest.

Dear Staff and Commissioners: Thank you for the opportunity to submit this letter to your attention and thank you for your tremendous service to the people of Colorado. I'm contacting you today to provide a more complete picture of the redistricting process. To quote the cover letter from Rick Enstrom (submitting legislative district maps for the big-spending independent expenditure committee, Better Jobs Coalition): “These maps were drawn without knowledge of incumbent addresses or considerations.” Mr. Enstrom provided the Commission with maps that groups a dozen Democrats in with one another. A couple of term-limited Republicans were placed in the same district. To say it never occurred to him to use legislator addresses in mapping was a “not guilty” plea before he was even charged. Mr. Enstrom’s Better Jobs Coalition is an independent expenditure committee that has spent almost $2.8 million in the last four election cycles to elect Republicans candidates for the state legislature, some of whom would directly benefit from his proposed maps. I’d like to tell you more about his group, but besides its Tracer reports that document this one-sided, partisan spending, we only know that it “is funded by several nonprofits that don’t disclose their donors” based on reporting by Sandra Fish in The Colorado Sun, “2020 battle for power at the Capitol starts with these big-money Colorado legislative primaries” (June 12, 2020). For all of his citations to the Colorado Constitution, Mr. Enstrom must hope that legislative staff and the Commission will ignore one key provision of Amendment Z. Section 48.1(4)(a) of Article V prohibits the drawing of a map “for the purpose of protecting… any political party.” By placing multiple Democrats in districts to run against other Democrats but protecting Republicans from intra-party battles, Mr. Enstrom is advising this Commission to run headlong into the Constitution and to violate this mandate. Only if the Commission wants the Supreme Court to tell it how to draw its maps should the Commission follow Mr. Enstrom’s counsel. Better Jobs Coalition should do a better job of reading the Constitution. I urge the Commission to ignore its flawed maps and hollow plea of innocence to attempted gerrymandering of State House and State Senate maps. Sincerely, Joe Miklosi Colorado Representative (2009 - 2013)