Public Comments

I live in Buena Vista, Chaffee county, currently in congressional district CD5 ( Lamborn). Most of the population of CD5 lives in Colorado Springs and its suburbs. Therefore, our representative is mostly interested in supporting urban issues. Chaffee county with a population of about 20 thousand in an area of 1 thousand square miles, is rural and forest wilderness. Most residents enjoy the nearby wilderness and wilderness activities, such as hiking, skiing, fishing, and rafting. Much of our economy is related to wilderness tourism, and ranching. A large part of our economy is derived from activities related to the free flowing Arkansas River. By contrast, The front range cities like Colorado Springs view our river as a source of water for their faucets, and our forests as a source of lumber for housing. So it is difficult for our congress person to represent the interests of Chaffee county. There are numerous other issues separating urban and rural areas, including the availability of health care centers (hospitals), and broadband internet. I think it would be better if Chaffee county were represented in a more rural congressional district such as district 3 (currently Boebert). District 3 is adjacent to Chaffee. With reapportionment district 3 may not be the same but it still would be better if Chaffee could be allied with similarly aligned rural counties.

When we consider redistricting, or districting in general, we must understand what we are trying to accomplish through redistricting. Ultimately we are assembling the legislative function of our government, which absolutely is the predominate function of a collective governing system, all other departments are ancillary and subservient to the legislative function. A congress is a meeting of interested parties, in the case of the federal government those interested parties are the States, in a State government those interested parties are the counties, in a county assembly the interested parties are the cities of the county, in city assemblies the interested parties are the communities which make up the city. The members of a congress are the interested parties, meaning in the federal government the members of congress are the states, in state government the members of congress are the counties, and so on. The choice of assembly depends on the number of members and the disparity which exist, most notably in their population and wealth. A State can't attend the meeting, so representatives of the State must be selected to participate in the meeting on behalf of the State. If the meeting is a legislative assembly it must have specified requirements for the representation and suffrage apportioned to each member to participate through specified legislative processes to reach a majority consensus of the members themselves. These requirements of apportionment of representation and suffrage cannot be reapportioned or amended, neither can the legislative processes and what constitutes a majority consensus be amended or altered. And the members must have and protect their independent representation and suffrage in the assembly for the assembly to function as a legislative assembly, which is a collective governing assembly. The decision making process is what is governed, and the legislative processes to reach a majority consensus is the governor, and the members have agreed to the mode of assembly, distribution of suffrage, what constitutes a majority consensus, and a conflict and dispute resolution process which they have also agreed comply with the adjudication of those conflicts and disputes. This is the Starting point for any discussion for districting or redistricting, because the districts are fixed by the members, the State of Colorado is a district in the federal government system, as such, the State of Colorado is apportioned representation and Suffrage to participate in a legislative assembly of the United States, the united States, in congress assembled, and reach a majority consensus according to the mode of assembly, proportional in the House and as Equals in the Senate. Today the discussion of redistricting is primarily to determine the assembly of our governing institutions by party affiliation through competitive partisan elections, which in turn determines composition and control of our governing institutions by majority party affiliation. Given the contingent nature of this mode of assembly, the composition, distribution of representation and suffrage, the legislative processes, and what constitutes a majority consensus, is also contingent on the outcome of competitive partisan elections. The side effect of redistricting on partisan factors is that as you balance the power between the parties the system becomes more polarized leading to more dysfunction not less. The answer to this problem is the principles of republican government as established in Article 1 of the Constitution of the United States. To better understand these principles for assembly of a collective governing system I would propose an example, to assemble a Partisan Governing System by the principles of republican government as established in Article 1 of the Constitution of the United States. To set up our example we must set some minimum requirements for our government, all persons must be represented and participate in our government through representation, the composition, apportionment of representation and suffrage, the legislative processes to reach majority consensus, and what constitutes a majority consensus must be specified unalterably. In any group or club which have members, the members want to know before they join what the benefits, rights of participation, and cost of membership are, a government is no different. To begin our example we must first define the members of our system as any group or party with a national membership, as well as, a People's Party which would consist of all who do not choose to affiliate with a national party. By Article 1 Section 2 Clause 1 each party is free to choose their own representatives in a manner consistent with how they choose their own internal representatives and leadership within their own party. Each Party will be apportioned representation and suffrage in the House by their proportion of their number of members with respect to the total population not to exceed 1 representative for every 30,000 members of their party, but all qualifying parties will receive at least 1 representative. Each Party will also receive 2 Senators, each with one vote, to represent their party in a Senate. When the choice of President and Vice President are considered, each Party will choose a number of electors equal to the number of Senators and the whole number of representatives they are entitled in the congress. The electors for this purpose will be chosen on the same day and time within every party, then the electors will assemble within their party on the same date and time to give their votes by ballot, a date and time which is determined by the congress. The choices of the electors is restricted to persons who are natural born citizens, inhabitants of the United States for at least 14 consecutive years before selection, at least 35 years of age at the time of their selection, and at least one of each elector's choices must be a member of a party other than themselves, if the 12th amendment is considered, then each elector must indicate on their two ballots which was cast for President and which was cast for Vice President. List of all persons receiving votes, and for which office, shall be made and certified by the electors, sealed and transmitted to the seat of government directed to the President of the Senate. The certified list are then opened by the President of the Senate in the presence of the congress and compiled, the persons who have received the most votes, be it a majority of the electors, are then declared elected for the office of President or Vice President, but if no person receives the required majority, then an immediate election of the top 5 persons receiving electors votes will be conducted, each party will have 1 vote, and a majority of the parties is necessary to the choice. This example of assembly illustrates the most important requirements to assemble a collective government. Notice there are no competitive partisan elections, the composition and distribution of representation and suffrage are specified before any representatives are chosen, all persons participate equally through representation, and the President and Vice President are a collective choice, not a partisan choice. The side effect which I have only eluded to is the role of the political parties, they would only have power through their suffrage proportional to their proportion of the population, which for the Democrats is ~14% and for the Republicans is ~10% based upon their membership, the People's Party would then make up the majority of the House with ~75% of the representation and suffrage, which would be balanced by the equality of the Senate where all parties would have equal suffrage. The President and Vice President would not be of a specific party, not even the People's party could control the selection, because their electors would only be able to choose 1 person from within their party, their other choice would have to be from outside their party, both could still come from the People's party if the diversity of selection within the party coupled with choices from other parties resulted in the persons with the most electors votes would be from the same party. In our first presidential election 12 persons received elector's votes from 10 states, the State of Georgia's 5 electors chose 5 different persons, but they all chose Washington to place on one of their ballots, making Washington a unanimous choice. We have divided partisan government because we assemble divided partisan government, if we want a grassroots nonpartisan government of, by, and for the people, we need to assemble a collective nonpartisan government of all the people by the principles of republican government established in Article 1 of the Constitution of the United States. It's time for us to choose!

Colorado Springs overshadows our county, Chaffee. There is little room to express our concerns. The springs is based on the military and big commercial interests, whereas we are based on agriculture and tourism. Even being paired with small cities like Pueblo would be better for us than this.

Before you can solve any problem you need to properly define the problem, the most important question is; "What are we trying to accomplish by redistricting for both the State and Federal legislature?", which by the way are connected because of Article 1 Section 2 Clause 1 of the United States Constitution. "Article 1. Section. 2. The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature." If you don't understand the limitations and requirements established by this clause, I would suggest that you review Federalist #52 by Madison: The Federalist 52 "The House of Representatives" Hamilton or Madison From the New York Packet. Friday, February 8, 1788. To the People of the State of New York: "FROM the more general inquiries pursued in the four last papers, I pass on to a more particular examination of the several parts of the government. I shall begin with the House of Representatives. The first view to be taken of this part of the government relates to the qualifications of the electors and the elected. Those of the former are to be the same with those of the electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures. The definition of the right of suffrage is very justly regarded as a fundamental article of republican government. It was incumbent on the convention, therefore, to define and establish this right in the Constitution. To have left it open for the occasional regulation of the Congress, would have been improper for the reason just mentioned. To have submitted it to the legislative discretion of the States, would have been improper for the same reason; and for the additional reason that it would have rendered too dependent on the State governments that branch of the federal government which ought to be dependent on the people alone. To have reduced the different qualifications in the different States to one uniform rule, would probably have been as dissatisfactory to some of the States as it would have been difficult to the convention. The provision made by the convention appears, therefore, to be the best that lay within their option. It must be satisfactory to every State, because it is conformable to the standard already established, or which may be established, by the State itself. It will be safe to the United States, because, being fixed by the State constitutions, it is not alterable by the State governments, and it cannot be feared that the people of the States will alter this part of their constitutions in such a manner as to abridge the rights secured to them by the federal Constitution." Before we make any snap judgments about the interpretation of this clause, or Madison’s motivations for his explanation of this clause in the Federalist papers, we must remember that Madison was the principle author of Article 1 of the Constitution of the United States which establishes the assembly of the States by the principles of republican government which forms a Confederate Republic as assembled into a bicameral legislature as directed by Article 1 Section 1 of the Constitution of the United States which assembles the united States, in congress assembled, the Union, the Established Government Authority empowered by Article 2 of the Articles of Confederation. C.O.U.S. Section. 1. All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives. A.O.C. Article II. Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom and independence, and every Power, Jurisdiction and right, which is not by this confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled. These citations answer the question of districting, and redistricting, and the mode of assembly which must be used to assemble each States federal congressional delegation. However, if there is still a question then Article 4 Section 4 of the Constitution of the United States, coupled with Article 1 Section 2 Clause 3, answers any remaining questions definitively; Article 4. Section. 4. The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence. Article 1. Section 2. Clause 3. Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons. The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct. The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative; These citations from the Constitution of the United States tie our hands regarding the modes of assembly which are available to our State, both for our State legislature and our State’s federal congressional delegation, leaving the only real choice of what form of republican government, either simple or confederated, for our State’s legislature, they also define the districts as those used to form our State’s legislature which must then be used to form our State’s federal delegation in the House of Representatives. The districts, therefore, based upon the principles of republican government, are the counties of our State; representation and suffrage is then apportioned among the counties of our state per capita based upon an enumeration, which is a percentage, then that percentage is converted to a whole number of representatives by a proportionality constant and boundary conditions to define how to deal with the fractional representative. For our State with approximately 5,758,736 million persons, using a proportionality constant of 1 representative for every 10,000 persons in each county, would result in approximately 575.8736 representatives which after the boundary condition of not to exceed 1 representative for every 10,000 persons in each county, would result in a whole number of representatives of approximately 575 representatives in our State’s most numerous legislative branch. If Colorado decided that a simple republic was appropriate for our State, then these representatives would be assembled in a unicameral legislature, but if the disparity between our counties is large in population and wealth, then we would be forced to form a confederate republic which would be assembled in a bicameral legislature where each county would have one senator and each county would have equal suffrage for concurrence as a check to balance the legislative process and protect minority interest. Once this process of assembly of our State’s legislature is established in our States constitution, then when we select representatives for our federal House delegation, the proportionality constant of 1 representative for every 30,000 persons is used in place of the proportionality constant of 1 representative for every 10,000 persons of each county that was used to assemble our own most numerous legislative branch keeping everything else constant. Our State’s most numerous legislative branch is an exact representation of the population of Colorado, only smaller, and our federal delegation would then be an exact representation of our State’s most numerous legislative branch, again only smaller. This brings up an important point about Colorado’s current legislative assembly. We currently do not have a most numerous legislative branch, because both houses of our legislature are assembled by the same mode, a number of districts, 1 representative per district, 65 districts for the House, and 35 districts for the Senate, and they have no relationship with each other, therefore no balance can be achieved, and neither can be a check on the other. Furthermore, assembly by competitive elections does not comply with the principals of republican government, which is required due to Article 4 Section 4 of the Constitution of the United States. To form a confederated republic, the constituent parts must themselves be either simple or confederate republics. By the republican principle all composition, distribution of representation and suffrage, legislative processes, and what constitutes a majority consensus are specified for the legislative assembly and are unalterable, being rendered unalterable by tying the assembly to the assembly of each State’s own most numerous legislative branch, a process which is established in each State’s own Constitution, making the assembly unalterable by State or Federal Statute, or by Federal Constitutional Amendment, and if a State wishes to amend their own constitution, then they must amend the process for assembling their own most numerous legislative branch, but in amending that process they must still comply with the principles of republican government, which calls for per capita apportionment of representation and suffrage based upon and enumeration, a census. We have divided partisan government today because we assemble, improperly and unconstitutionally, divided partisan government. When we assemble by the principles of republican government, then there are no competitive partisan elections of party candidates, no gerrymandering, no control of our governing institutions by majority party affiliation, no gridlock, no straight line party votes, no bipartisanship, no money of any kind for campaign contributions or lobbying, no individual leadership and decision making, none of the things we profess to want to remove from our governing institutions and processes. I would suggest we stick with the Constitution of the United States, and a proper Constitution of Colorado, and leave partisan assembly and control to history by ending the Partisan Governing era. By the way, Colorado could end this governing mess that we call American democracy immediately, and it doesn’t take an election cycle or a decision by the Supreme Court, because Colorado is a member State in the Union, and as such, is entitled to a form of republican government, and to participate as a constituent part of the united States, in congress assembled, the Established Government Authority!

I would like each of the Independent and Republican Commissioners to answer whether they believe Donald Trump lost a legitimate Presidential election. A simple Yes or No at the next public meeting or posted via the redistricting website. I think Coloradans have a right to know what our redistricting officials believe on this important issue. Thank you.

Colorado Independent Redistricting Commissioners: I live in Nathrop, CO, Chaffee County. Chaffee's population has been growing, approx. 2,000 moved into the County over the past 10 years, but today, its population is quite small, i.e., just over 20,000. Residents include ranching families, whose ancestors settled in this area around the same time Colorado became a State. Numerous other families, notably from Italy, settled in Chaffee to work as miners and stone cutters. In recent decades, newcomers along with tourists are drawn to the County's rural and mountain lifestyle and opportunities for sports, both on the Arkansas River and the numerous mountain peaks. Our current public policy concerns are lack of affordable housing, an over-abundance of low-paying jobs that are reliant on tourism, and climate change. We share these concerns with other mountain communities. However our public policy concerns are invisible today, particularly in the U.S. House of Representatives. Chaffee is attached, or rather, gerrymandered into CD 5, which renders our public policy concerns invisible. CD-5 is dominated by Colorado Springs, a metropolitan area that has little in common with Chaffee. Chaffee was able to elect non-Republicans at the County, State and National levels in the November, 2020 election, but not in CD 5 (nor in HD 60). Our current Rep. Doug Lamborn (R) does not represent Chaffee's concerns; he closed his office in Buena Vista sometime in 2007-08. He is very unpopular among the County's Democrats, Republicans and the Unaffiliated. Residents in Chaffee socialize with their neighbors, send their children to one of the two school systems, worship in local churches, shop in the local grocery stores. In other words, there is no area outside of the County where Chaffee residents routinely travel to engage in any of these activities. "Support our Local Businesses" and "Buy Local" are slogans seen throughout our two towns, Salida and Buena Vista, and taken seriously by residents. For these reasons among others, Chaffee County should never be split apart in any future redistricting determination. Indeed, it should be connected to neighboring rural mountain counties.

Please keep Chaffee County together in any redistricting. Keeping Chaffee County with like small rural counties is important.

Take Pueblo out of HD62. It does not fit in with the rural communities that make up the rest of the district.

I have lived all over this great state and have spent time in every corner, so just making a recommendation on a single solitary community will not do. If it pleases the commission, I would like to submit the attached file as a recommendation for 2021's redistricted congressional map. CO-01 - The 1st would shed its northern and eastern portions while shifting south to accommodate the new 8th. It would be an extremely wealthy district containing the upper class suburbs of Denver, as well as Columbine, Ken Caryl, Centennial, and Highlands Ranch. CO-02 - The 2nd would shift eastward, shedding its mountain communities while taking in Greeley and Longmont to become a truly Northern Colorado district. CO-03 - The western-based 3rd would take in the mountain communities of the 2nd while letting go of historically, culturally, and hydrologically separate portions of southern Colorado. CO-04 - The 4th would become a Southern Colorado district, stretching from the south of Colorado Springs to Pueblo, down across the San Luis Valley, and concluding in Durango and Cortez. Additionally, this district would become the 2nd most diverse in the state, and an extremely competitive district at that! CO-05 - The 5th would be based in the north portions of Colorado Springs, an area unique to the south of the city in its demographics, wealth, and ties to the United States Air Force. It would take in the entirety of culturally similar Eastern Colorado, ensuring that this sparsely populated region of ~100,000 people would maintain its voice in Washington. CO-06 - The 6th would move out of Brighton and Thornton, with Parker absorbed in its entirety as it so closely resembles south Aurora in wealth, demographics, and travel habits. Previously the most malformed district the new 6th would be incredibly compact! CO-07 - The 7th remains largely unchanged, save for parts lost to the 8th and a continued move up I-25 as growing neighborhoods continue to sprout up from old farmlands. CO-08 - The 8th would be the most diverse district in the state, taking in the largely Hispanic portions for west Denver and Adams County. Previously divided between the old 1st, 6th, and 7th, this district would ensure a united voice for a previously underrepresented community in Colorado In summary: 4 districts are centered around Denver, matching the 50% of the state's population that lives in Denver, Adams, Arapahoe, Jefferson, Douglas, and Broomfield counties (i.e., the Denver Metro Area minus Boulder County). Four districts represent the four unique "corners" of our state outside of Denver: Southern Colorado, the Eastern Plains, Northern Colorado, and the Western Slope. These districts contain contiguous communities, following highways and major roads to ensure easy travel for our future representatives. Finally, they are of course as equal to one another in population as can be expected, however minor adjustments will likely need to be made once proper census numbers are made available. Thank you for your time. *Please note that previous attempts at this submission were made using .geojson and .csv files, however the website did not recognize them and produced an error. Therefore I have attached a .png, the only other functional format I have available.

Please consider in establishing new congressional districts the current political divide between the urban front range and the rest of the state which is primarily rural. Each congressional district should be representative of the entire state. I would prefer districts that include both urban and rural elements so that representatives of those districts have to consider both urban and rural issues and needs and better represent the entire state