Public Comments

Please keep all of Boulder County in CD2. The proposed CD2 map removes the mountain areas of western Boulder County around Allenspark, Ward, and Nederland from CD2 (into CD3), which would wrongly divide these areas from strongly shared and common interests with Boulder County and areas to the east in Boulder County. The mountain areas in western Boulder County are tied to Boulder County and to the area east by shared economy, transportation, governmental and private sector services, and landscape / watershed / ecology, much moreso than to areas farther west across the Continental Divide. A sensible boundary between CD2 and CD3 is the western border of Boulder County, which is also the watershed/ecological boundary (Continental Divide). Putting the mountain areas of western Boulder County into CD3 makes NO SENSE in terms of shared economy, transportation, schools, water districts, fire and emergency services, local government and democracy. I am a property owner in western Boulder County and do not believe that I will be well represented by getting lumped into CD3. Please keep Boulder County sensibly together in CD2.

I would like to commend you for your desire to create a non-partisan committee with the goal of avoiding gerrymandering and creating a fair and effective representation of all voices. My name is Michael Dobersen and I am here as a citizen of Grand County. Grand County's community of interest is a tourism-based economy. Jessica Valand, the Director of Colorado Rural Workforce Consortium reported that Grand County has a high tourism base with many jobs coming out of the service sector. Winter Park Resort, Devil's Thumb Resort, Granby Ranch Ski Area, Snow Mountain Ranch at YMCA and last but certainly not least, Rocky Mountain National Park, all draw tourists and define our economy. To support these industries, restaurants, ski shops, hotel and second home owners all have proliferated. This tourism industry contributes 4x the economic power in contrast to the ranching/agricultural base. The Grand County Board of County Commissioners are on record claiming, erroneously, that Grand County is primarily a ranching/agricultural community in their contention that we should be grouped with other western slope counties. However, we share our community of interest with Summit County, a low wage service tourist economy with affordable housing deficits. Also, we share our community of interest with Boulder and Larimer, Front Range counties that recreate in Grand County and have 60% of our housing stock as second homes. Grand County is facing an affordable housing crisis, compounded by low paid service jobs with high cost housing. This is another community of interest that we share with other contiguous counties. Summit County hires workers that can only afford to live in Grand County and commute on HWY 9 to work. Also Summit County hires workers who have to live in Park County and again commute to work. Both counties have high levels of second homes, using short term rentals that drive up the cost of housing. Federal labor laws that impact highways (1-70) would apply to this transportation\housing community of interest. Boulder County and Larimer County have second homes in Grand County and use this interstate highway to recreate in Grand County. Because of Grand County's significant influence of public lands and tourism, we share our communities of interest with Boulder, Larimer and Summit Counties. Our challenges are the same, we can share our solutions. We need to be grouped with mountainous, tourist based economies, not agricultural counties such as Mesa on the western slope. Thanks for your consideration. In answer to Commissioner Espinoza's question as the what is the commonality with Larimer and GC on wildfires? Northern Water (Larimer) and Grand County are co-sponsors on the $35 million Emergency Watershed Protection projects that were identified after the East Troublesome Fire, each contributing 25% of the cost. Northern Water receives water from areas that have burn scars due to the East Troublesome Fire. Also wildfire prevention, fair and equitable insurance reimbursement, mudslides and flooding, are all challenges that Larimer and Grand County will have in common. Restoration of the watersheds is of prime importance in both counties. Flash flooding piled up mud, trees and debris last weekend to shut down Grand Lake's hydro plant. Because the creek that flooded was on national park land, the Nation Park Service is involved. In answer to Commissioner Tafoya's question as to what Grand County has in common with the 1-25 section of Larimer County? From Denver, traveling north on 1-25 leads to Hwy 34 at the Loveland exit and continues west into Estes Park, the Larimer County section of Rocky Mountain National Park. Both Grand County and Larimer share Rocky Mountain National Park. Larimer County also is the home of Colorado State University, and it's Forestry Department is the site for Colorado State Forest Service. CSFS offers training, education in community wildfire protection plans, wildfire mitigation, and Firewise (an education and recognition program for wildfire mitigation). Therefore, Grand county and Larimer County share many communities of interest. Grand County needs to be kept with mountainous, forested tourist regions to share communities of interest, not Mesa County. Thank you for your consideration. Michael Dobersen

Redistricting Testimony (given via zoom) CD6/7, HD 43 (HD 22 and 33) Kathleen Boyer 8/3/21 My name is Kathleen Boyer, I live in Highlands Ranch, currently in Congressional District 6 and State House District 43. I am here to speak about the proposed changes to both congressional and state legislative districts. I live in West Highlands Ranch. I am currently in CD 6, represented by Jason Crow. I am familiar with Congressman Crow and his staff. I feel well represented by him. When my family needs medical care, we drive 3.5 miles north to Littleton, where all of our doctors, dentists, and hospital of choice are. When we dine out, we often do so on Main Street in Littleton, about 6 miles north. When we ride light rail, we do so from the Littleton Mineral Station. For 14 years we have attended a church in Douglas County, just 1 mile south of the County Line, with a catchment area that includes neighborhoods in Arapahoe County. My kids played in a Littleton soccer league, and many people live in Highlands Ranch and send their kids to Littleton Schools. All of the members of my household with jobs work in Arapahoe County, 2 of us just over the county line in south Littleton. My bubble, so to speak, is West Highlands Ranch and Littleton. Rarely do I drive the 17 or so miles to Castle Rock or Parker in my day to day life. I consider myself more closely aligned with and part of the Littleton community than I do with the rest of Douglas County, particularly the rural parts. Highlands Ranch shares a Fire District and a Transportation District with the nearby suburbs, but not with the rest of Douglas County. I believe that, for redistricting purposes, Highlands Ranch should be included with the similar suburbs in Arapahoe County, rather than the rural areas of Douglas County. Currently I live in State House District 43. I am a former Precinct Organizer, and have spoken to many neighbors in West Highlands Ranch over the past several years. The map, as proposed, would split our community in half, into HD 22 and 33, and would not be aligned with the criteria to preserve communities of interest. West Highlands Ranch is a cohesive community, where residents utilize the same library, the same recreation center, and attend the same middle and high schools. Most notably, the proposed map would split in half Windcrest Retirement, a cohesive community within the West Highlands Ranch community. I ask that you keep West Highlands Ranch unified and consider placing us with adjacent suburbs, rather than rural areas to the south and east. Thank you for your time.

I testified last night, Aug. 3, 2021. I am writing my testimony as I didn't get a chance to finish it and the chair woman suggested that I finish it in written form. I would like to commend the redistricting committee for your service on a non-partisan committee with the goal of avoiding gerrymandering and creating a fair and effective representation of all voices. I am a native of Denver and was educated in the Denver Public School System. I graduated from Colorado State University and my husband and I retired 8 years ago in Grand County after 40 years of work in the healthcare industry. Sadly, Grand County's community of interest is the devastating mega wildfires that happened in 2020. The East Troublesome Fire (Grand County) and the Cameron Fire (Larimer) were the largest in Colorado history and destroyed over 350 dwellings in Grand County alone. Both of these fires impacted Rocky Mountain National Park, as well as critical water sheds in both counties. A current example is that our county seat is unable to use the Colorado River for its water as the runoff from burns scars has made the river turn black with sludge. Summit County and Boulder also have frequent wildfires where fire mitigation is critical. Just because Grand County is on the other side of the continental divide from the Front Range counties of Larimer and Boulder doesn't mean their communities of interest stop at the mountains that divide us. Remember, that our communities share wildfires, recreation, homes and transportation that effects all of our interests. Keeping Grand County in a district with Larimer, Boulder and Summit County would continue access to leaders who understand wildfire prevention issues (CSU Forestry Department) and challenges and putting us in with the entire western slope would pull us away from our communities of interest. Water is another important community of interest. Grand County is the headwater for the Colorado Fraser Rivers. Over 70% of our water goes to Denver (Denver Water) and Larimer County (Northern Water), where 40% is spent on watering lawns. We pay twice as much for our water as do Front Range developments, and yet our environment is being damaged. Willows that the moose love to feed on and trout are stressed and dying from low water flows and increased water temperatures as water is taken from our streams and rerouted to the Denver/Larimer areas. Our Grand Lake and Shadow Mountain Reservoir are in poor shape. Northern Water is currently working alongside Grand County on the Emergency Watershed Protection projects identified after the East Troublesome Fire (SkyHiNews.com Vol 13, No. 79 Aug. 4. 2021). A single western slope district would make representation very difficult. We need strong representation which we can't get with one Congressional district for the entire western slope. Mesa counties are an agricultural district, not tourism, not mountainous and our challenges are different. Our communities of interest place us with Boulder, Larimer and Summit Counties. In addition, we've been in HD13 approximately 10 years, and it is a good fit. We feel that our interests have been heard, that we share values of concern over the drought, conservation and climate change. We share tourism and transportation issues (I-70). I want the best representation for our county. Thank you for your consideration. Deb Thomas-Dobersen

We in eastern Colorado are very appreciative of you coming out to Lamar and Burlington for hearings on the preliminary maps. This allowed us to voice our opinions without having to make the drive to the metro area, and allowed each of you to see for yourselves how different eastern Colorado farms, ranches, and rural towns are from the urban regions of Douglas County and the malls of Castle Rock. Please keep our eastern Colorado region as a community of interest in both the 4th Congressional District as well as the state legislative map.

My name is Brian Wagenaar, I am a Master's of Environmental Management student at Western Colorado University in Gunnison, Colorado working on issues surrounding clean water, air, and sustainable food within the North Fork Valley, an area which previously has been in legislative voting districts with its neighbor Gunnison County to the east. I am writing out of concern that severing the North Fork Valley (NFV) from my new home in Gunnison County, with which the NFV shares a watershed, is a mistake which will weaken the ability to manage that watershed (and a very stressed and limited supply) appropriately, especially amidst worsening climate change that is contributing to reduced runoff and increasing the overall volatility of regional water supplies. An easy demonstration of the inter-reliance between the NFV and the western portion of Gunnison County is the fact that the Paonia Dam and Reservoir, a critical water storage facility for the area, rests within Gunnison County. In a region of the country so uniquely driven by water availability and management, and in an area that is currently facing massive, historic droughts with enormous, disparate impacts, grouping watersheds into the same political districts could not be more crucial to ensure the fair representation of citizens' interests. In addition to watershed concerns, he North Fork Valley has spent years diversifying its economy, and has built up an impressive array of sustainable farming operations that serve as an economic and cultural backbone for this community. Carving out the NFV from both the rest of Delta County to the south, and from Gunnison County to the east, not only shakes up the surrounding area's political scene, but serves to counteract the efforts that the NFV, and the surrounding region, have taken to break free from economic reliance on a fossil fuel economy. To the north, both Mesa and Garfield counties, the NFV's new political neighbors under these proposed maps, have a far larger reliance on oil and gas extraction, as well as local governments that have actively sought to promote these extractive ventures at the expense of their constituents health, and the long-term wellbeing of their communities. We now have hard evidence of this political reality with the recent release of information showing that Garfield County representatives used taxpayer money to hire consultants and lawyers with the intent to ward off oil and gas regulations designed to protect communities from harm. This behavior does not reflect the intentions of the NFV community, which relies on an economic combination of agricultural, food and beverage, and tourism industries that are hard won after years of collaboration and development, but could be easily lost should significant drilling negatively impact the surrounding watershed. The NFV shares both a watershed and a slew of other economic and cultural priorities and values with Gunnison County, and so I ask that the Colorado Independent Redistricting Commissions reconsider the decision to separate these two community partners.

As CD 3 is configured now, Durango is out of sync with the very small towns and rural areas which comprise the majority of the district. We are a tourist destination and have concerns and needs which more closely align with other mountain towns and tourist destinations. Our proximity to San Juan National Forest demands that we understand the effect climate change has on the increased challenges our forests face. Concerns regarding the increases in wildfires, I’m sure are concerning to rural areas, but they aren’t threatened with loss of life and business like we are. Nor are rural areas concerned with preserving our national parklands as we are. They are more concerned with oil and gas production while we are concerned with maintaining our pristine lands to be enjoyed by us and the tourists who drive the economics of our area. We deserve to be aligned with other mountain towns, National Parks and Forests which have the same economic drivers as we do. Just as the rural areas deserve to be aligned with other rural areas so their unique needs can be addressed. Please remove Durango from this predominantly rural district.

I disagree with the proposed district 8 including the rural town of Platteville. Our needs would be overshadowed by the majority who are in a much more urban setting. Platteville has been and should continue to be properly represented by those in district 4.

Durango is a very special place with unique qualities...mountain, ski resort, desert, college, tribal lands, river, water reservoirs, rural college, agriculture/local farmer support, great and healthy school community,, train, tourist industry focused, etc. We need to vote with people and communities who have these shared interests. We need the CD3 and the HD59 to bring these like communities together rather than have us voting against each other and basically nullifying our vote. Let us have our vote with communities that share our interests!

Over the last several weeks, I know that you have heard a lot of arguments that revolve around differences between Douglas and Jefferson Counties. This letter is intended to highlight an issue that has not been discussed, Cannabis. Jefferson County has three times the number of medical Cannabis card holders than does Douglas County. Douglas County has no Medical or Recreational Cannabis shops compared to Jefferson county that has 24 licensed Medical and 17 Recreational shops. The Cannabis Industry is generating 2 billion dollars of sales a year for our state while employing over 40,000 Coloradans. Accordingly, Congressional representation is a very important topic for our state. While Colorado is permitted to operate, per the state constitution, we remain in conflict with Federal laws that prohibit Cannabis production and sales. This has led to banking and funding issues resulting in many difficulties in operating Cannabis businesses in our state. Today, Douglas County faces no difficulties related to Cannabis business banking, funding, etc., as there are no Cannabis businesses in the County. Jefferson County, however, where there are Cannabis businesses in need of banking and funding, needs Congressional support to enable the industry to progress and to meet the demands of county citizens. Until Congress is able to clarify the laws and to pass new legislation removing Cannabis from the Controlled Substances Act of 1970, Counties and States that allow for Medical and/or Recreational Cannabis sales will continue to need Congress people who will fight for this issue. Accordingly, it makes sense for Counties that allow for Cannabis production and sales to be represented by Congress people who are in tune with the topic and are there to support the industry. Every County that prohibits the production and sale of Cannabis is in CD3 and CD4of your preliminary staff map, with the exception of half of Douglas County that has been placed in the preliminary plan's CD7. Moving all of Douglas County into CD4, would align two Congressional Districts with zero Cannabis priorities and allows for the other six Congressional Districts to continue to work with their representatives to fight to protect the Cannabis industry and its 40,000 workers. I urge you to consider the enormous impact the Federal Government has on the Cannabis industry in Colorado and the people who depend on it to survive both economically and for health-related reasons. Thank you