Public Comments

The preliminary map places Pitkin County in a state house district separate from Garfield and the portion of Eagle that is in the Roaring Fork Valley. The Roaring Fork Valley is a community of interests. We live in Aspen, while our adult children and grand child live in Carbondale. Many other families are split among the communities in the valley. People live in one town and work in another. From Glenwood to Aspen is a tightly connected community of interest. I also have traveled extensively around the western slope. I have found that communities like Delta and Grand Junction reflect similar ties to each other. Especially, Delta has much in common with Fruita, Palisade, Gateway, Collbran. Small towns like those should have their own state house seat, much as the Roaring Fork Valley should have its. I believe the Vanwinkle map proposed to the commission in Grand Junction would have this result and suggest it be strongly considered.

Dear Commissioners, I have lived in Boulder Colorado since 1994. For the first twenty some years I lived in North Boulder near the mountains. Now I live in Central Boulder. Throughout my time here, I’ve been engaged in many community activities, starting with my synagogue, organizations that deal with the climate crisis (and its impacts on Colorado), issues of lack of affordable housing and homelessness and the ongoing needs of people who are chronically mentally ill. Safety and the climate crisis seem to me to be shared issues among the residents of Boulder. In terms of redistricting, I am particularly concerned that areas of like concern (fires, water needs, etc.) will share the same representatives. From the point of view of a more general principle, looking at the proposed map, I don’t see that it makes it possible for minority groups to have adequate representation. This principle, written to the law, should be kept in mind as you plan Colorado’s redistricting. To begin with geographical concerns and continuity: I don’t see any reason to change the way Boulder is currently divided, west and east of Broadway. The western portion of Boulder County and the western end of the city of Boulder have faced significant public safety challenges over the decades. Wildfires, floods and wildlife management are all issues that have become exacerbated as Boulder continues to grow and expand into previous wilderness areas. These contiguous and tightly knit communities share many interests as they relate to challenges around water conservation and water strategy, overall environmental stewardship, conservation, and recreation. Similarly, it seems that our connections with Nederland, Eldorado Springs and unincorporated areas are natural. We share the same challenges and should not be split up. These mountainous communities are tied to the City of Boulder through their jobs, community engagements and recreational activities. We share environmental issues. They should have the same legislative representation as Boulder does. As we continue to grow into our mountainous areas, our challenges will multiply. As climate change intensifies we will need strong, unified representation for these communities that have already dealt with the uncertainty and fear of fires and floods. Please unify these neighbors under one district so our representative can be as focused as possible on these critical issues, rather than having to balance disparate needs from constituents with little in common when it comes to their legislative priorities. Where would I change your proposed map: with a more rural, mountainous Boulder seat likely extending farther into the mountains than the limits of Boulder County, it makes far more sense to include the western portions of the city Boulder that face similar issues before expanding toward Estes Park, Grand County, or other areas. The staff map inexplicably divides these communities into three districts and even bizarrely places Nederland and Allenspark with Wellington and Timnath, communities that have few of the same issues and interests. Thank you for your attention and your commitment to working on these issues. Rabbi Deborah Ruth Bronstein

Hello, I am very concerned about the preliminary maps that have been drafted regarding our state congressional and legislative districts. As currently drawn, the maps seem to violate a variety of things that you claim are of interest. Dividing cities as has been done in Boulder County does not seek to unite community interests but instead seems more likely to divide them. Further, separating out parts of western Boulder and Boulder mountain communities does much to limit cohesion on issues such as disasters (i.e., wildfires that can spread from city to rural and vice versa such has occurred several times in the past decade; flooding--do I need to say more). Furthermore, the map shows divisions across school districts, making it even more confusing for school district connections across different political boundaries. It doesn't have to be this confusing and seemingly random. I trust you will take some of these comments and those of others into serious consideration and revise the maps to be more equitable regarding the goal of uniting communities. Aren't we divided enough already? Please don't go forward to divide our communities even further. Sincerely, Neil Fishman

The North Fork Valley and the Paonia area where I live have qualities that are hard to find in one geographic location. Gardening and elk and deer hunting, cross-country skiing and hiking are all important to me. Here I can have an organic garden, hunt deer outside my backyard and elk 45 minutes from my house. In addition, I fish, and gather mushrooms in the summer. Grand Mesa Nordic Council, an almost all volunteer non-profit organization grooms 31 miles of trails in the national forest 1.5 hours from my house. On top of all that, it’s a beautiful place to live. Unfortunately, our area, like much of the west is threatened by severe to exceptional drought exacerbated by climate change. Additionally, our geographic area is heating up faster than much of the west. Drought threatens our water supply. The current redistricting maps split us off from our watershed which is in Gunnison County. It’s important that our district encompasses our watershed and the life- and economic-sustaining clean water to the farms and citizens downstream. The North Fork Valley should be in the same district as Gunnison County where our watershed is located. Having the same representation for our watershed and the citizens benefiting from that watershed will enable us to implement policies that increase resiliency. The North Fork Valley has been transitioning away from fossil fuels and is more closely aligned with Gunnison County’s agricultural, ranching and hunting based economy than Mesa County, which relies more on fossil fuels. Two of the three coal mines have closed and the 3rd is projected to close within five to 10 years. Instead of boom-and-bust fossil fuels, our economy is focusing on agriculture including value-added products, agritourism, the arts and tourism. Agriculture encompasses both regenerative organic and traditional agriculture and is wide ranging. Orchards, vineyards, and vegetable farms dot the valley. Farmers raise various breeds of sheep, goats, beef, chicken and hogs. The pandemic and food supply chain interruptions have made me realize how crucial it is to have access to local food. I buy chickens, fruit, pork, beef and vegetables from local farms. This agricultural bounty helps to insulate us from supply chain interruptions. The West Elk Scenic Byway, which brings tourists from across the state and beyond for various festivals and events, runs through Gunnison, Delta Counties ending in Pitkin County. Our community events, including Mountain Harvest Festival, West Elk Wine Trails, Cherry Days and Pickin’ in the Park are well-attended. City dwellers yearning for a taste of farm life can stay and/or dine in an orchard or vineyard. The current split of Delta County between House District 54 and 61 is working and should be maintained. This recognizes the diversity of Delta County and assures appropriate representation for the citizens. The district line should include Paonia, Hotchkiss and Crawford and be in the same district as Gunnison County.

I was at your public hearing last week at Golden High School. I'm a resident of Evergreen and I agree with the many people who testified regarding the inappropriate inclusion of Superior and Louisville into our Congressional District 7. The majority of our current district is rural so your including such urban towns, albeit suburban towns of Superior and Louisville conflicts with our population, our community interests and it is certainly not contiguous. Our problems are much different than those two cities. The suggestion to include Golden, Gilpin and Douglas County would be more suitable given our characteristics. Thank you for your service to the communities of Colorado in this critically important task!

I reside in the Nederland greater area, approximately 4.5 miles north of the town of Nederland. Nederland is a mountain community on the eastern slope of the Continental Divide located in Boulder County and 18 miles west of Boulder up the Boulder Canyon. To my knowledge, we have always been represented in the same Congressional district as Boulder. However this preliminary plan proposes to carve out the town limits of Nederland as part of District 3, which is primarily comprised of communities on the western side of the Continental Divide. Here are several reasons this makes no sense: Economic - We are economically interdependent with Boulder. We shop and use services primarily down Boulder Canyon in Boulder. We depend on front range visitors from Boulder and Denver to infuse money into our local restaurants, stores, and services. Government: We have always been part of District 2 with Boulder, we pay Boulder County taxes, we are part of Boulder Sheriff's jurisdiction, and we are part of Boulder Valley School District. Community: The proposed redistricting draws lines through the Nederland greater area on both the north and south side. There are many residential areas surrounding Nederland (including mine) that are in the District 2 zone while downtown Nederland is proposed to be in District 3. We are one community with shared schools, fire fighting services, community library, community churches, Nederland Community Center, and other businesses and services. Geographic: We are a high elevation front range community on the eastern slope of the Continental Divide. There is no direct road from Nederland due west across the mountains, so to reach any of the other communities on the western slope in District 3 is at least a 2-hour drive. Boulder is 20 minutes down the Canyon. Please do not isolate downtown Nederland from its greater residential neighborhoods or its larger Boulder County social, economic, and political communities. Keep Nederland in District 2.

Summit County should be joined with CD3, which will keep us united with counties whose needs and challenges are similar to ours. Jefferson and Boulder Counties are far more densely populated with full-time residents and closely affiliated with the front range. Summit County is a resort destination with entirely different needs. Thank you for soliciting feedback!

I support the redistricting as proposed. We have nothing in common with the Front Range deranged LPS/SJW/Wokes

I support a new Southern District from the Eastern to Western boarder of Colorado similar to the proposal by the Southern District River Basin. This creates a much more realistic division based on water basins, economic handicaps that the rest of the state is exempt from, farming and ranching, and renewable energy potential.

Hello Commissioners: I attended the Commission’s meeting in Durango on the 7th of August. Like many of the speakers, I too wish to thank you. As an elected official in La Plata County (County Commissioner), I do not feel it is my role to submit a map. I do wish to make some points for your consideration. 1_ In a representative democracy, our elected officials are supposed to do just that – represent us. The current configuration of the C3 means that one political party dominates and that is not healthy for ensuring that all people feel (and truly are) represented. It is not conducive to electing people who then have a mandate to serve everyone. The current draft C3 map being considered actually exacerbates this problem. I would encourage you to do more research and craft a C3 map that is more competitive. Further research is warranted on if this approach could also make the C2 more competitive, something I support as well. 2_ I do not prescribe to the argument that the San Luis Valley is more closely tied to Pueblo than the Western Slope. The SLV is a region unto its own and it’s a full 2.5 hours to Pueblo - a historic steel town. The main industry in the SLV is of course agriculture and they rely on a very complicated water delivery system unique in all of Colorado. Like many parts of the Western Slope, they also rely heavily on growing tourism and arts/culture, a National Park, four national National Wildlife Refuges and three State Parks plus vast public lands. Many people there are still tied directly to the public lands for herding, hunting, grazing or outfitting and of course, water. I don't see how that way of life has much in common with Pueblo's economy? 3_ One speaker made a very compelling case for having a Congressional Third District with the main theme(s) of water, forests, climate change and climate resilience, infrastructure, public lands management, National Parks and other protected areas, wildfire prevention and management, etc. I ask that you give that idea a lot of consideration because these topics are inter-related, complex and require Federal assistance, innovation, policy and action. 4_ I do not believe that pitting agriculture communities against outdoor recreation communities makes sense. It is polarizing and is not the way we live our lives in our Western Slope/C3 communities. The reality is that I think most people in the outdoor recreation and tourism economies or "mountain towns" highly value agriculture and what it brings: local food, open space, a small-town and community way of life, wildlife habitat, heritage and more. So, I ask that you do not define "agriculture" and "tourism" as separate communities of interests. 5_ Finally, you have put the north-south map idea on the table. I do not prefer this approach because it mean we are in a district with the Eastern Plains. There is no compelling argument to create that map. I am for keeping a west-east map and tweaking "around the edges" so it’s more politically-balanced and fair, and meets the "communities of interest" test. In closing, I have a new appreciation for how hard your job is... and again, thank you for service. These views are expressly my own. Marsha