Public Comments

I reside in Montezuma county. These maps are trying to break up and split my county in two. You are trying to lump my small population into La Plata county and the other half of us with Dolores/Telluride. We are a small population that resides over a large span of land, only 25,000 of us. We have one county clerk. Now you want to divide us and lump us with areas that do not represent us as a population group. Please hear the people, please hear the county. We do not want to be divided.

The initial districting proposal is great. This state needs to be TRULY reflective of the citizens of Colorado and not the pocket of Denver/Boulder/ Aspen liberal idiots who have no concept of farming, ranching, hunting, and family values.

I think redistricting in Colorado Springs should include consideration of income disparities as well. Colorado Springs has racial integration only in areas where incomes are less than 50,000 yearly. The South East side of Colorado Springs has the highest crime rates and the lowest incomes as well as the broadest range of etnicity. With property prices soaring this disparity will grow without equal representation in all levels of voting rights. Local State and Federal.

Hello Commission. Thank you for your service. I am a long-time resident of Canon City. I understand that because of population growth in Colorado Springs, Fremont County will no longer be included in district 5. I have heard that the commission plans to move us to district 3. I do not think this makes much sense. Our county has much more in common with the counties in district 4 and so it would be more sensible for us to be moved to that district instead. Next to Colorado Springs, the city we are most connected to is Pueblo. Many residents of Fremont work and access resources such as healthcare there. Given that we will no longer be in the same district as Colorado Springs, I think it is especially important that we be grouped with Pueblo. Thank you for reading my comments and suggestions.

It is not right to separate Montezuma County into two separate districts! This makes it hard for everyone involved i.e. county clerks, etc. We are totally against the plans to divide Montezuma County. Please re-think what you are doing. The Colorado Constitution states: (I) "Community of interest" means any group in Colorado that shares one or more substantial interests that may be the subject of federal [state] legislative action, is composed of a reasonably proximate population, and thus should be considered for inclusion within a single district for purposes of ensuring its fair and effective representation.

I disagree with putting parts of Jeffco with Douglas County as we could not be more different in terms of our values and interests. Jeffco values public education and neighborhood schools. We fought to keep extremists off our school board. We want our children to be safe and overwhelmingly support mask mandates in schools and gun reform. Dougco is the opposite. jeffco citizens value our diverse communities and tend to work, play and shop within Jeffco. I do not have an affinity for traveling to Dougco for shopping or recreation or work. Trying to align us will lessen our voices and community.

This map should be considered a replacement for the previous Willis CD maps. This is the shapefile of my final Congressional District map using the final Census numbers. It is very similar to the previous map I submitted, but those final numbers did require a little adjustment. All districts are within 1% of the perfect number for equal population, there are only 8 county cuts, all along the urban/I-25 corridor (and mostly because our counties and cities are not all contiguous). There is one district (CD6) that has more than 50% minority population. All districts are as compact as our spread-out state allows. The southern/southwestern COI is preserved. JeffCo and DougCo are both completely in one district each with the exception of the small piece of Aurora that is in DougCo. City of Aurora is contained within 1 district. Competitiveness: 2 districts (1 & 2) are strongly Dem. 2 districts (4 & 5) are strongly GOP. The remaining 4 districts are within the competitive range.

Pueblo County and all of southern Colorado have more things in common than stretching out our District to include all of eastern Colorado. Southern Colorado includes agriculture, but we are also a growing part of the state that hopefully will include many more solar industries well as others. Our demographics are similar in this area as are our cultural ties to the Latinx and Indigenous peoples, European cultures who came for the mines and mills, agricultural communities that share the infrastructure as well as the history, tourism that involves the great plains, the history of the peoples of the area, rivers, and mountains but not so much skiing as mountain biking, camping, hiking, and fishing. We share low income and disparities in housing, education, transportation, and healthcare. We refer to ourselves as Southern Colorado.

I am writing in support of the preliminary Commission plan for both the House and Senate districts in Pueblo County. Because the population of Pueblo county is too large for one Senate or House district, the plan maintains important communities within the county in the new districts. For example, the eastern/mesa portion of the county which is largely agricultural is linked to other rural/agricultural areas and the largely Hispanic area on the east side of Pueblo is connected with the San Luis Valley, with which it has historical and cultural ties. This design allows the diverse constituencies within the county to have a voice in selecting legislators who share their interests.

I wish to add to comments that I submitted about 10 days on the proposed map for State House Districts. I attended the hearing held in Boulder on August 11. Looking at the map, it struck me that there appears to "packing" of a number of House districts in urban areas. It clearly seems to be the case in Boulder but I noticed it in other cities. Given the political divides between urban, sub-urban, and rural areas, packing is likely to yield less competitive districts. Instead creating districts that combine urban, sub-urban, and even rural areas will create more competitive districts and yield more moderation in the State House. I advocated combining the city of Boulder with mountain areas to the west. Instead of one district for the city of Boulder, I prefer to see at least two districts that each would have the city of Boulder, sub-urban areas and mountain areas. Thank you for your consideration of my comments. Joel B. Smith