Public Comments

Thank You Commissioners for your work and dedication to this project. First, I am grateful that the SLV is kept whole for both Congressional and Legislative maps, this is a priority. Second, concerning the Congressional Dist., I believe the SLV is best grouped with the eastern plains. Agriculture is one of the biggest economic drivers in the Valley and aligns our priorities more with the Eastern plains than our mountain neighbors to the west. However, keeping the Valley whole is more important than which district we are put in. Third, I would like to know the reasoning behind the peninsula on the Legislative map that reaches up to encompass parts of Pueblo. It seems to go against keeping communities of interest intact.

I am a resident in the 3rd Congressional District. It is critical that the redistricting be fair and representative of the communities within it. Democrat and Republican voters in the district must be balanced as is required by law. Communities of like-interest should make up the district. That means the counties that share agriculture and outdoor recreation industries in western Colorado should be in one district. There should be no urban counties in our district—they do not share our interests, our economy, or our more rural lifestyle. I propose that Fremont, Teller, and Park counties be eliminated from the 3rd Congressional District. Gilpin, Mineral, Saguache, RioGrande, Alamosa, Conejos, Costilla should be added back to the District.

We care about all of Denver and want communities of color to continue to be represented on City Council.

Leave things the way they are! Tired if Democrats Gerrymandering!

We have reviewed the maps submitted by the Commission and the Republican party. It is our understanding that the committee is charged with developing a plan that is balanced and fair to all. Districts should show balance that allows all citizens of that district to feel that their vote is important. The proposal submitted by the Republican Party for District 61 clearly reduces the balance within the district by increasing Republican votes. This will lead to the potential election of candidates who are less engaged with the shared interests of the entire constituency of the district. We have lived within the current district for over 45 years and we oppose the creation of a district that does not recognize our shared interests and provide an equal voice for all.

First of all, I think the proposed redistricting maps are very promising. They reflect what appears to be a thoughtful process based on the guidelines the Commission was tasked to follow. Also, there has been a concerted effort that I appreciate to provide opportunity for input from Colorado communities such as online commentary and public hearings. My husband and I took the opportunity to attend the meeting in Steamboat Springs on July 23rd. I did not speak at this event, but would like to comment on my concerns regarding a few of the objections made to the proposed redistricting brought up during the meeting. 1. Many of the objections centered around the proposal to split Eagle County from Routt County and combine Moffat County with Routt County. The objector's reasoning appeared to be based on what should be local issues (and should be dealt with at the local level). These included such things as housing prices, wages, and climate action plans, rather than more important district issues such as the Western Slope geography, water, agriculture & mining, as well as relationships with the Forest Service and BLM. 2. The town of Steamboat Springs was represented as the focus for the entirety of Routt County although it is less than half of the population. The other half of the more rural portion of Routt was disregarded in their arguments and in some cases factually misrepresented. 3. There was an overemphasis on types of industry, i.e. ski resorts having to be in the same district. This is not only impractical, but also disenfranchising to the rural aspects of the county. Industries have associations, such as the National Ski Association, that are prevalent and perfectly able to communicate industry concerns and issues, without expecting the commission to prioritize grouping these types of industries together, especially when it's impractical to do so. In summary, I'm in favor of the proposed redistricting plans that have been presented and heard nothing during the meeting that would justify changes. Thanks to all the commissioners for their hard work in this important matter. Anne Lowe Resident of Unincorporated Routt County

Summit County residents do not have interests in common with the farther west part of the state. We are focused on the ski industry, tourism and protection of our wild and open spaces. We point toward Denver and the front range, not the west, with friends and family, jobs and cultural interests. It would be in our best interest to stay in a district including the front range and Denver.

I would to first thank the committee for all their time and effort these past few weeks. Once again as a Steamboat resident I feel it is in the best interest to keep the western slope intact and keep Steamboat aligned with Mofitt County. Steamboat was founded on its ranching and farming history. I understand that tourism is also a part of our community but feel strongly in my above statement and hope that the committee also understands this position. Thank you Bruce Breslau

The commission is bound, by Colorado law to make the districts competitive. The state's proposed map does not accomplish that. It gives republicans and 8 point margin, guaranteeing no democrat can be remotely competitive for the next ten years. If the commission removes Teller and Fremont counties and includes part of north Park and the western part of Jefferson Larimer and Boulder Counties, you meet the populations requirements for the 3rd congressional district, and make the district truly competitive. The commission is also bound by law to make districts fairly comprised of communities of like-interest. The proposed map does not accomplish that either. Fremont and Teller counties do NOT belong in CD3. They do not share the same economic drivers as the rest of the district. They are suburban commuter communities for Colorado Springs. The western slope have more in common with those based in agriculture and outdoor recreation. We are also supply water to the rest of the state and our communities should be kept together. All mountain resort communities, driven significantly by agriculture and outdoor rec. tourism shoud be included in the district including Gilpin county and the western parts of Larimer, Boulder and Jefferson counties. The San Louis Vally should be retained, having a history of over 50 years in CD3 and shared water, ag, publick lands and national park interest wit the rest of the district. A CD3 map must achieve the following: competitiveness: reward workhorse, practical polititians, rether than base extremists and allow for accountability at the ballot box in the event of any broadly unpopular actions. Democrats AND republicans along with stakeholders should welcome such a district. Economic: Create a definitive outdoor economy district in the entire mountain west bringing all Colorado national parks, ski areas and mountain tourist towns into one district along with the vast majority of the state's public lands. This district would be a powerhouse in these policy areas in D.C. Water, fir, public lands: preserve the vast majority of the Colorado River watershed, along with other key rivers, the vast majority of wildfire territory and public lands, and the Western Slope's ag economy in a single district. I have attached an example of a more competitive and, I think, logical map below.

1. The commission is bound by Colorado law to make the districts competitive. The initially proposed map does not create a competitive district with the western part of the state, which is illegal. The map that has been proposed that leaves out Teller and Fremont counties, and includes San Luis Valley (because of its history in CD3) will let the western part of the state remain more competitive, as the law requires. 2. The commission is bound by law to work to create districts fairly comprised of communities of like-interest. Fremont, Teller, and Park don’t belong in the 3rd Congressional District. All mountain resort communities that are sharing water, agriculture, economic, and public lands interests should be included in the 3rd CD. This will give these communities a voice for their concerns and let the more suburban areas have a representative that will give voice to their different concerns. Fremont and Teller counties do not share the same economic drivers as the rest of the district and thus will create conflicting issues that one representative has to balance, creating a lose/lose situation for everyone. Communities with shared interests need those interests to have a voice. Thank you for your attention to these important concerns. Corinne Scheman