Public Comments

I am writing to make it know that I strongly oppose the proposed redistricting. I don't usually write public comments, but in this case, I feel it is warranted. Western Boulder county has very different priorities and methods of approach to the issues we deal with. Yes, we are all part of the larger Colorado mountain community, but we align much more strongly with the views on the eastern slope, and don't feel that a western slope congressperson can adequately represent our voice over here on this side of the Divide.

I’m a resident of Steamboat and representing my family of four and many of my friends and neighbors who are not here tonight. I would like to request that any redrawing of political boundaries recognize that Routt county and many if not all of those counties in the western slope are rural in nature comprised of many smaller towns and communities. I think it would be a mistake to include western slope counties with highly populous counties located on the front range. The combining of rural counties and densely populated counties would represent a definite conflict of interests and lifestyles between two different communities of interest that would likely ensure one is not represented fairly.

The preliminary congressional map proposes taking the western part of Boulder County and lumping it with the western slope congressional district on the other side of the continental divide. This would be a huge mistake. Our school district is Boulder County, indeed our districted high school is Boulder High School. To combine our town in Boulder County with western slope concerns makes me feel like my interests will not be represented. Additionally, my families representation will be completely cut off from the rest of our school district and home schools and be completely inconvenient for any representatives to both visiting. While we live in the mountains in the town of Jamestown, CO, we are a mere 12 miles from the city of Boulder and have absolutely no interest in the things that affect the western slope such as tourism and ski areas as they are hours and hours removed from our town. It would be the equivalent of putting the city of Boulder alongside Pueblo.

I request that the GOP redistricting map, illustrated here https://davesredistricting.org/maps#viewmap::3bcda5e2-90b0-423a-88d9-39281912ab73 and attached, be rejected by the Colorado Independent Redistricting Commission. I live in Fort Collins. I’m concerned that the GOP map cuts State House representation for CSU off from most of the rest of Fort Collins. CSU is an integral part of Fort Collins. Why isolate the university and the students and faculty who live near the university from the rest of Fort Collins? Isolating the CSU community detracts from fair and effective representation for the CSU community and Fort Collins as a whole. Also, a natural border for State House representation along College Avenue makes sense. Those on the west side of Collage Ave. live in mostly suburban areas and are in close proximity to the foothills west of Fort Collins. The residents of the area are concerned with environmental issues and protecting the open spaces that lead into the foothills. All of Fort Collins west of College Ave should be included in one house district and the area east of College Ave should be included in one house district. Thank you for your consideration.

As a 79 year native and resident of Craig, I ask that you do not divide the Western slope on the Congressional map. Our cultures are diverse , as well as our industries, from the I-25 corridor. We do not desire to be in competition with the metro areas, we would just request equal representation in Washington and on the hill in Denver. Thank you for serving on the Commission. It is not an easy task. Regards, Pamela Pleasant-Foster 657 Taylor Street Craig, CO 81625

The preliminary congressional map proposes taking the western part of Boulder County and lumping it with the western slope congressional district on the other side of the continental divide. This is ridiculous! Boulder County is not connected to the western slope in any literal or figurative way. In case nobody has looked, there is a giant mountain range that divides the two areas--the CONTINENTAL DIVIDE! There are three population centers in the western part of Boulder County: Nederland, Jamestown and Allenspark. We all either work locally or commute to Boulder, Lyons or points east. No one drives across the continental divide to work, shop or do any other kind of commerce. There’s only one road from Boulder County across the divide. It is a jeep trail that is closed all winter. Our approach to issues in western Boulder County is much different than on the western slope of Colorado. For example we support the natural rights of nature, including Boulder Creek and Lefthand Creek, to be healthy and flourish. I view western slope interests to be taking all the water possible out of the Colorado river basin for irrigation. My interests would not be adequately represented by a congressperson from the western slope.

The preliminary congressional map proposes taking the western part of Boulder County and lumping it with the western slope congressional district on the other side of the continental divide. This would be a huge mistake. There are three population centers in the western part of Boulder County: Nederland, Jamestown and Allenspark. We all either work locally or commute to Boulder, Lyons or points east. No one drives across the continental divide to work, shop or do any other kind of commerce. There’s only one road from Boulder County across the divide. It is a jeep trail that is closed all winter. Our approach to issues in western Boulder County is much different than on the western slope of Colorado. For example we support the natural rights of nature, including Boulder Creek and Lefthand Creek, to be healthy and flourish. I view western slope interests to be taking all the water possible out of the Colorado river basin for irrigation. My interests would not be adequately represented by a congressperson from the western slope.

Thanks for your time and work on this redistricting issue. I am a resident of the Wind Crest retirement community in Highlands Ranch. I am requesting that our community be included within only one legislative district and not two separate districts as is currently proposed. In the most recent preliminary legislative district map, it appears our campus would be split between District 22 and District 33. Wind Crest is a community of seniors who live, eat, and participate in activities throughout the campus which straddles the Highline Canal. We are also very active voters. Having our community located in two districts would create confusion among people who are and want to continue to be engaged in political activities. Please consider keeping the Wind Crest community in one district. Thank you.

Comments on Proposed House District 57 from Commissioner Beth Melton, Routt County Communities of Interest The Redistricting Commission is tasked with creating a map that preserves whole communities of interest. This is an important concept, because any elected representative will be tasked with making decisions that represent the interests of their district. In a district in which communities of interest are not preserved, the a representative has to choose between representing one or the other, which necessarily results in a lack of representation. Resort Rural as a Community of Interest The self-sufficiency standard (see pages 3-4) provides an important example of “resort rural” communities as a community of interest, and demonstrates why it is so critical for resort rural communities to be in-district with one another. To me, a resort rural community is one in which one of the key economic drivers for the county is a ski resort. A resort rural community is unique in that it is rural, but also possesses many of the economic and social characteristics of an urban area. Our interests are often “part-rural, part-urban.” Colorado Self-Sufficiency Standard “This measure describes how much income families of various sizes and compositions need to make ends meet without public or private assistance in each county in Colorado. The Self-Sufficiency Standard is a measure of income adequacy that is based on the costs of basic needs for working families: housing, child care, food, health care, transportation, and miscellaneous items, as well as the cost of taxes and the impact of tax credits. In addition, this report provides for each family type, in each county, the amount of emergency savings required to meet needs during a period of unemployment or other emergency.” http://www.selfsufficiencystandard.org/sites/default/files/selfsuff/docs/CO18_SSS_Web.pdf House District 57 (as proposed) When looking at the self-sufficiency standard for families with children, Routt County requires the 3rd highest income in the state to be self-sufficient, following only Pitkin and Summit Counties (both resort rural). The self-sufficiency standard in Garfield, Moffat, and Rio Blanco Counties is significantly lower than Routt. Routt County’s high cost of living is driven by the resort rural economy, which none of the other three counties in the proposed district have. Fair and Equal Representation Routt County’s concerns, pain points, and issues are generally related to our status as a resort rural community, and we need our state representatives to be able to truly represent us and our needs, as do the other counties in our district. Forcing a representative to choose between counties in taking votes and putting forth legislation does not serve anyone well. Currently, Routt County is in HD26 with Eagle County – another resort rural county. This has served us very well, as the issues and concerns of the counties are very aligned. Our Representative has been able to bring forward and vote on issues that reflect the interests and needs of both counties. For example, early childhood education has long been identified as a priority for both Eagle and Routt Counties, both the county government and the residents at large. Both the cost and availability of care are incredibly challenging to the working families in our resort rural counties, and our Representative has sponsored bills to help address the issue every year that he has been in office. One important example was a bill, SB20-126 that would make it easier for people who live in condos and townhomes managed by an HOA (which dominate much of our housing stock in resort rural areas) to have family childcare homes. This was a priority for our resort rural area and demonstrates the part-urban, part-rural priorities of such an area. A representative of the proposed HD 57 would have been unlikely to be able to make this a priority bill, but in HD 26 (Routt and Eagle) it was. Being the lone resort rural county in a sea of counties with very different economies and needs will not serve anyone in the district well. Routt County will lose the shared interests we currently have in HD 26, and we will not receive adequate and fair representation in the proposed HD 57. Please consider resort rural a critical community of interest and leave Routt County in a district with other resort rural counties to ensure that the voice of Routt County is represented at the state capitol.

Dear Redistricting Commission, I write to comment on the preliminary maps for house and senate representation. I love and work in Routt County and have been here since 2014. I work throughout the Western Slope and have a good sense of the culture, ideology and values of our region. Routt Country should be grouped with similar communities with high influxes of ski and mountain recreation tourism, like Eagle, Summit, Garfield, Pitkin, and Lake counties. Routt County is currently place in house district 57 and senate district 3, along with several, more rural, counties (Grand, Moffat, Rio Blanco). this seems flawed and I urge the commission to reconsider grouping Routt Co along with Eagle, Summit, Pitkin, Garfield and Lake instead. Thank you, Patrick Staib