Public Comments

Thank commissioners for the time and effort you have put into creating good initial maps. The development of the two rural districts is greatly appreciated and making the western and eastern districts makes good since because while we are all rural, we have "specific communities of interest" based on the issues and landscape. An example is the amount of public lands and how that significantly impacts the economies and influences the culture. While some have suggested combining the two may "bridge the divide between rural and urban" it will not. It will only add to the divide because the rural communities will have no voice. It is critical that the rural / agriculture (food producing) communities not be lumped into urban areas because the minority (rural) voice will be diluted at best and most likely drowned out by the numbers in the urban area. Please ensure the rural areas remain separate in both legislative and congressional redistricting. We provide the food and fiber for this State and Country, and therefore must have a voice to ensure policies do not harm our communities and in turn be negative for the health and prosperity of this State and Country. Again, thanks for the opportunity to provide input and for all your work.

Weld County is a very productive area of state total income. We have a large oil and gas production, irrigated crops ( alfalfa , silage corn, sugar beets, vegetables, grain corn and irrigated grass ) also dryland wheat and dryland pastures . The cattle and livestock industry is huge and provides an income for many ranchers and feeders , along with providing a large number of jobs. Weld County farm and ranchers are generations old and need to be able to pass on the operation to future generations. The population of Weld County is small compared to the large cities , but needs additional representation to continue are high level of production. Gerald Roth

Disenfranchisement. That’s the first word that comes to mind when looking at the proposed map for State House districts for Eastern Boulder County. If the intent was to make the area more politically competitive, it also will succeed in diminishing the sense of community, of common purpose. Will the districts have similar opinions on important local issues: agriculture, energy, land use? One State Representative cannot support both sides of these issues. My corner of Lafayette (West of US 287, south of South Boulder Road) is in a proposed district that stretches beyond Evergreen to Aspen Park and Conifer. That is a “can’t get there from here” situation. A person has to drive through two or three other proposed State House districts to reach the other side of my new district. The land may be adjacent, but there are no joining roads directly from Lafayette/Louisville/Superior to the southern part of the proposed district. That violates the idea of "reasonably proximate." Also, I believe the town of Erie has more in common with Lafayette than with Dacono and Frederick and Ft. Lupton. And why is a small chunk of the south side of Longmont not kept with Longmont (east of South Hover St. and south of Pike Road)? That looks like a gerrymander. Let’s go back to the drawing board on the splits in Eastern Boulder County.

The preliminary house-district map splits communities of interest in the Boulder area, where I live. It makes little sense to have a city like Lafayette, and large swaths of eastern Boulder, grouped together with communities in the foothills just west of Boulder. The foothills communities often grapple with common issues that require government intervention and oversight, including wildfires (and floods after fires), wildlife, forest management, reservoir management and expansion, and mountain recreation, to name a few. Communities like Lafayette and those in eastern Boulder County do not face wildfires or floods nearly as often, if ever, and do not grapple with mountain recreation or forest management concerns. Instead, those communities often deal with issues like mineral rights and exploration and agriculture, to name a few. So it makes little sense to group disconnected communities like Lafayette with those in the foothills, which face very different issues and challenges. Given the population of Lafayette as compared with those in the foothills, it is likely that the house representative for proposed district 36 would be from Lafayette, meaning someone from that community would be responsible for state-level policy for the donut-shaped ring around Boulder, which as explained are not sufficiently connected to be communities of interest. I live in the SW part of Boulder, and our community, while not in the foothills, does face wildfire and flood risk, often has wildlife interaction, and is adjacent to the foothills. While I am currently in the proposed District 36, I am right on the Western edge of that new district, and it strikes me as very odd that the person representing the interests of the foothills and adjacent communities (like mine) would likely be from Lafayette. This makes little sense and should be revisited.

Please accept a draft new map of proposed House district 62.

My name is Beth Amsel and I currently reside in Nederland, CO. I’ve lived in Nederland on and off since 1992, but as recently as early this year, I lived in Carbondale, CO in Colorado’s third congressional district. We are not well suited to join D3. We are a front range community concerned with issues of transportation, educational access, diversity and social justice, conservation and forest stewardship. The third district’s issues, in comparison, are ranching, mining, water rights, rural internet access and infrastructure, and expanding access to quality medical care. We are rural communities up here in the Indian Peaks, but our proximity to Boulder and Denver means we do not have the same isolated pressures that befall most of D3. Joe Neguse accurately represents us. A Lauren Boebert type politician, someone who, apparently, the western slope thought would best represent their issues in Washington, will not fly here. We will not be well represented by being lumped in with the western slope. That’s a mad calculation that makes no sense. Please. I have lived in both areas and the communities’ interests could not be more different. Please don’t isolate us from the communities that matter to our daily lives. Thank you, Beth Amsel

Western Boulder county ( Nederland area) has nothing in common with the western slope . Really we are much different . We are “ mountain people “ they are ranchers , farmers and oil company’s. We have none of that here. We care about climate change and are making laws to protect out area of the state., they may not agree. We care about ending Covid and are taking actions in that direction . We will be in constant conflict with them. They are having a drought , we don’t even have the same climate as the western slope. Please keep us zoned with rest of Boulder county.

Hello, I appreciate your time and effort in this process. As a resident of Erie, I wanted to raise a concern in the preliminary congressional district map. This would result in shifting my representation from CD 4 to CD 2. The community of Erie while growing, very much combines a small town feel combined with the "more rural" draw of Northern Colorado. Frequently the Erie community Facebook group will have a post indicating there is a loose horse, goat, cow, or chicken running around town, in addition to the various banana jokes (long story). Additionally one thing I look forward to each month is receiving the Carbon Valley Consumer Report, a local newspaper publication that has various stories of community events from festivals to local students being awarded scholarships. It serves our community: Frederick, Firestone, Dacono, Erie, Mead, & east Longmont. I am concerned that the proposed change would seperate Erie from proper representation. The community of Erie would be better served being included in the newly proposed CD 8, being represented along with the Dacono, Frederick & Firestone towns. Thank you for your consideration in this regard. Jeff Percell Erie, Colorado

I do not believe that redistricting Routt County with Moffat County will benefit the residents of Routt County. I would like to request that we remain with Eagle County. Thank you.

I live in Rural South Routt County. Our community, interests and values are very similar to Eagle county. Please leave Routt county in the same legislative district as Eagle county to maintain our equitable representation in Denver. Our agriculture, recreation and housing challenges are very different from our friends in Moffat county. Do not redistrict us into a district with Moffat county. Thank you for your work in maintaining legislative fairness.