Public Comments

Please see the attached comments, on behalf of Summit County and the Town of Breckenridge. Proposed maps are available at https://davesredistricting.org/join/efab1039-4e18-4f36-82a0-f94325d25b15 and https://davesredistricting.org/join/27893bc7-a12d-4e9d-8186-660ad5bda72f.

I live in Boulder, in one of these so-called "small mountain towns" that are being considered to move to district 3. There is nearly no commonality between my community and the ones on the western slope and it is asinine for you all to clump us together because we are small. Colorado is divided geographically by mountain ranges. We are on the east side of the continental divide and I use a Boulder mailing address. I shop for groceries in Boulder, I get gas in Boulder, heck the mayor reports to Boulder to operate. It would be short sighted of you to divide the mountain towns in Boulder County out of the district to one who operates across multiple mountain ranges. We would never see our representative. Draw bridges, not walls.

Please please as you redistrict make your goal giving voice to the the people . Both parties seem more interested in retaining power for their political agenda which is not always in accord with the well fair of the people.

After the census information came out I checked over information on the congressional districts and I noticed several comments related to proposed districts related to Boulder and Larimer County. There seems to be some believe that these two counties should be in the same district. This of course is ridiculous as there is no connection between the two. No one from Fort Collins or Loveland regularly travels to boulder. Similarly no one from Boulder ever travels to northern Colorado. There is substantial economic and personal travel between Fort Collins and Loveland to and from Greeley in Weld count. Further, as Boulder County is extremely democratic in voting, this makes it very difficult for representation from Larimer County. CD2 is a safe democrat district (I would like to mention I am indeed a democrat, and have voted for Representative Joe Neguse in the last several elections). However, in order to win a primary one must be from Boulder County which has more democrat voters. As such we have not had a representative from Fort Collins since 2010, despite Fort Collins being the 4th largest city in the state. As Larimer and Weld County are much more similar it is more likely for Northern Colorado to be represented by someone from Northern Colorado. Further, a district comprised primarily of Larimer and Weld Counties would instantly be a highly competitive seat while violating no other districting procedures. As such I would like to strongly advocate for Larimer County to not be located in the same district as Boulder County.

The western slope of Colorado is composed of what should be considered two distinct Congressional districts. One consisting of counties such as Grand, Routt, Park, Eagle, Pitkin, Chaffee, Gunnison and Lake which are solid mountain areas that are united behind skiing, tourism, seasonal economies, climate change, and as water providers. Agriculture makes up a small portion these counties employment. By contrast, the remainder of Colorado's west is heavily directed towards farming and ranching. For any one representative to try and effectively represent the critical issues associated with each of these areas is overwhelming. The western slope encompasses a vast area that makes travel complicated and time consuming. Those logistics make any kind of interaction with citizens and their representative on the west slope difficult at best and impossible for most of the areas citizens. In the past, Colorado's western slope has always been under-represented compared to the over-represented Front Range. This is very evident, for example, in the state's water policies which ignore the damages being inflicted on Colorado's mountains and its aquatic resources which support the tourism so important to local communities. Western slope communities pay more for water, health care, and basic services and receive less support when dealing with issues such as the opiod crisis. The western slope deserves to have at least two Congressional Districts so that effective representation can be had by its citizens especially when conflicting interests of the Front Range and Western Slope are being considered.

Dear Commission: I have attached the GeoJSON data for a revised version of the Congressional map that I originally submitted to the Commission in early July 2021. This revised map takes into account the recently-released granular 2020 US Census results. You can also view this new map on Dave's Redistricting website at: https://davesredistricting.org/maps#viewmap::61ea57de-e691-47ad-aa1a-0f4b5eb39eb7 I became interested in this process as a mapping and community nerd (rather than a political guru), after becoming aware that the initial preliminary plan cut my home city of Boulder off from the western part of Boulder county. I don't think that is a good idea -- Boulder is so linked to the communities to the west in the foothills up to the Continental Divide, and vice versa. So, I wanted to put my GIS background to work and help the Commission and staff envision alternate configurations of districts which solve that issue. In this new map based on the 2020 Census, I took much greater care to not split municipal boundaries between different districts. All Congressional districts are within +/1 person of the target population. Also, after reviewing a number of the public comments here and ones made during hearings, I put in my best effort to capture several communities of interest in this revised map: 1) SLV counties kept whole and associated with district 3 2) Multiple El Paso County military installations all kept together in district 5 3) Continental Divide used as natural boundary for much of the northern Front Range (keeping Boulder, Gilpin, and Clear Creek counties together in district 2 along with all of Larimer Co.) 4) Arkansas River valley kept together below Salida (running downslope/east through Pueblo County, etc) 5) Northern Douglas County allocated to a southern/western Denver metro district (7th district) 6) 7th district is made to be extremely competitive (within 1 point based on the 2016-2020 composite competitiveness score) 7) New 8th district centered solidly in north Denver metro (northern JeffCo, Broomfield, western Adams, far southwestern Weld) 8) Denver City/County kept whole with only minor population-balancing nibbles Thank you for your continued work and consideration. Sincerely, Laura J. Westerfield

I am a resident and teacher in central Jefferson County. I have been an active campaigner in every election season since 1998, when I moved to Edgewater. My community has little to nothing in common with Douglas County. We are a racially and economically diverse area that leans to the left (mostly and not always), unlike Douglas County’s affluent and mostly white population. The folks in my area are fearful of their voices being lost in a cacophony of conservatism that is Douglas County. Please reconsider and do not join Jefferson and Douglas Counties.

Submitted by Sharon Malloy, 2113 Rangeview Lane. Longmont 80501. Resident since 1984. 8-22-2011 Thank you for my comments regarding redistricting for Longmont. I have divided my comments between Colo. Legislature and Congressional district. I. RE: Colorado House & Senate lines: Leave Longmont's senate (SD 17) and house (HD 11 & 12) districts as they are. Both have worked very well for the last ten years. Both continue to have shared communities of interest and don't currently dilute the Latino neighborhoods. RE: SD 17 and HD 12, it makes sense & has been working to keep Longmont, Lousiville and Lafayette together. All have very different priorities than neighboring municipalities in Weld County. Some examples of different interests/priorities and why these are communities of interest include: +Latino communities – all growing according to the recent census + Fracking, Oil & Gas Development – Longmont passed a Fracking ban in 2013 with 60% of voters supporting. Lafayette residents has similar interests/priorities. +Energy policy/interests - Longmont has own municipal services for electricity and passed a 100% renewable energy resolution by 2050. In contrast, Weld Co. relies heavily on Oil and Gas revenues from Fracking and hasn't demonstrated any issues with the environmental and health impacts of Fracking. + Environmental Protection/Air Quality: Longmont is currently monitoring air quality due to resident and municipal leadership concerns about toxins caused by fracking in Weld County. +Transportation – These communities are all in the RTD district for bus transportation now and NW rail in future. Likewise, these communities of interest are also all actively pursuing development that is less car dependent an alternative transportation (ie. Bike friendly etc.) 2. Regarding redrawing/adding Congressional District Lines Put Longmont in the proposed new 8th District. On the Commission’s preliminary map, the 8th includes northern Denver suburbs, highway 36 corridor up to Broomfield, and I-25 corridor up to Frederick, plus rural areas northwest of Longmont. The same community of interests continues to apply for putting Longmont the 8th with Northern Denver Suburbs. Again, these include: + Keeping growing Latino communities together to a significant extent. This approach has been encouraged by Latino groups. + Fracking, Oil & Gas Development + Energy policy/interests + Transportation **Do NOT Put Longmont in the 2nd District, along with Boulder. Longmont is distinct Community of interest from Boulder and Longmont residents what to keep it that way.

Dear CIRC, I am a small farmer from Paonia,CO and water is constantly on our minds. Our irrigation water just got shut off and, despite yesterday's wonderful rain, we are staring down a potentially hot, dry fall. It is very important that the local people in the Gunnison River Watershed have a say about what happens with our water. So I am writing to you today to ask you to stand up for our watersheds. Preliminary State House district 53 and 55 and the proposed State Senate district 6 and 7 maps released by the Independent Redistricting Commission arbitrarily split Delta County and the North Fork Valley. As a resident of the North Fork Valley I want representation on the most important legislative issues affecting our future here, such as—water, watershed and ecosystem protection, climate change and climate action, wildfire and geologic hazard mitigation, regenerative agriculture, protection of public health, safety, welfare, the environment and wildlife. Delta County has been split between House District 61 and House District 54 west of Cedaredge and Orchard City and east of Delta for a decade and that split has worked. The current split preserves communities of interest based on city and town subdivisions, shared agricultural, economic development, education, infrastructure, and transportation interests. Commissioner Suppes stated in his testimony to the Redistricting Commission and at the August 3, 2021 Delta Board of County Commissioners’ Meeting that having two representatives for Delta County increases Delta County’s representation in the State Legislature and ultimately benefits the county. However, the proposed split of Delta County between State House District 53 and 55 that divides unincorporated Hotchkiss and Paonia and between State Senate District 6 and 7 west of Cedaredge and Orchard City makes no practical or representational sense for Delta County, Cedaredge, Orchard City, Hotchkiss, or Paonia. Ensuring representation on legislative issues is more important than keeping the county whole or intact. With respect to the North Fork Valley, putting it in a district with Mesa County in proposed Senate District 6, and with Mesa County and a portion of Garfield County in proposed House District 55, with which it does not share the same watershed, economic development vision, climate action planning, and more, effectively Please make sure that the North Fork Valley is not left without representation on the critical issue of water within its watershed. The North Fork Valley’s watershed originates in Gunnison County, which the current State House and Senate District maps respect and acknowledge. Main Points: • The current State House and Senate district maps work for Delta County. • Ensuring representation on legislative issues is more important that keeping the county whole or intact. • If the county is to be split, the current dividing line for Delta County between House District 54 and 61 works and should be maintained in any redistricting efforts. Keep the watersheds intact by including the North Fork Valley and that eastern portion of the dividing line in a district with all of Gunnison County keeping this portion of the Gunnison River Basin intact. • If the county is kept whole, then ensure that Delta County is part of a district with all of Gunnison County keeping this portion of the Gunnison River Basin intact. I trust you will make your best effort to provide fair representation for us in the North Fork. Best, Timber Moreland 15878 Black Bridge Rd. Paonia, CO 81428

I am concerned that the redistricting effort may put Summit County in with counties with which we have no affinity, taking away the representation that reflects our current embracing of outdoor recreation (summer and winter), environmental protection, "Denver suburb" issues, artistic and cultural lifestyle, water issues, short-term rental/rental/second home issues, political will, and massive transportation issues. Staying in a district with Boulder County far more reflects every aspect of our Summit County lifestyle.