Public Comments

While I appreciate the difficulty of the task you have undertaken, and laud your courage in taking it on, I must object to how the most recently proposed map effects my community. I have lived in Colorado House District 53 for nearly 3 decades. I am distressed at the proposition of having my legislative district reconfigured in the manner proposed by the committee as submitted September 23. I see no logical reason to divide Fort Collins voters in this way. US Highway 287 (College Ave) has long served as a logical division and creates a primary boundary for districts 52 and 53. The newly proposed primarily dividing along a stairstepped North/South boundary simply makes no sense and runs counter the identity and integrity and shared interests of our neighborhoods. The Foothills neighborhoods share an identity which must be reflected in our district representation. Please retain the integrity of our Foothills community by retaining the primarily east/west, not north/south division of Fort Collins.

I see that the 9/28/21 plan appears to resolve my comments and concerns. However; I want to be proactive in saying that Western Colorado and Boulder County have very few limited similarities. We in Mesa, Delta, Montrose & Garfield counties geographically connected. Our way of life on the western border of the state is in direct conflict with the way of life in Boulder County. Having stated that, I feel that Congressional district 3 should stay intact as "Western Colorado & Rural Colorado". Western Colo has very little in common with Boulder & a liberal democrat congressman from Boulder would have NO interest in representing W Colo. Interests here are water, ranching, energy, tourism & maintaining our way of life. Legislative re-districting: The attempt of the committee is to break up communities. Mesa County & Garfield County should remain intact and not be governed by Mountain Districts or Front Range who have no interest in us, except to stop energy, stop ranching, take the water to the front range. Rural means a way of life & we should be able to maintain our communities of interest & have suitable representation who live here & understand how/where we live. Please do not separate these counties and communities which have similar concerns. We do not belong with Boulder County.

Please see the attached letter from Gunnison City Council.

Greetings Commissioners & Planning Staff, I am commenting on the "Second Staff Plan Legislative Redistricting" of the "Highlands Ranch Community Association" as a "Community of Interest" in regards to the currently proposed "House District 43" as follows: 1) The newest, largest, and most premier "Highlands Ranch Subassociations" have been removed from "House District 43" including..."Backcountry Subassociation (1252-Homes)"..."Firelight Subassociation (1863-Homes)"...and a large portion of the "The Hearth Subassociation (1652-Homes)". 2) Instead currently proposed "House District 43" includes "Unincorporated Douglas County" and "City of Littleton" commercial and residential areas...that are clearly not within the established boundaries of the "Highlands Ranch Community Association". 3) Removing these "Community of Interest" defining "Highlands Ranch Subassociations"...would be similar to removing..."Lodo"..."Wash Park"...and..."Capitol Hill" from any proposed "Downtown Denver Legislative Redistricting". Question: The current population of the "Highlands Ranch Community Association" (105,631) exceeds the "Target Population" of 88,826...so why include any outside areas in "House District 43"? Problem: The newest, largest, and most premier "Highlands Ranch Subassociations" have been removed from "House District 43"...while instead including "Unincorporated Douglas County" and "City of Littleton". Solution: Redistrict the "Highlands Ranch Community Association" without removing all of the newest, largest, and most premier "Highlands Ranch Subassociations" along the Southern boarder. (Note: Please review "First Staff Plan Legislative Redistricting" for "House District 43". Please help the "Highlands Ranch Community Association" receive "Fair and Effective Representation" in the currently proposed "House District 43 Legislative Redistricting". Thank you for your time and consideration, Kurt Huffman PS - Please note that Highlands Ranch is a "Community of Interest" as the 1st largest Community Association in Colorado...3rd largest Community Association in the United States...and if incorporated it would be the 7th largest City in Colorado. CRS Section 46 (3) Definitions (b) (I) "Community of Interest" means any group in Colorado that shares one or more substantial interests that may be the subject of state legislative action, is composed of a reasonably proximate population, and thus should be considered for inclusion within a single district for purposes of ensuring its fair and effective representation.

The prior map, which was close to our current district 52 and 53 boundaries, makes much more sense by dividing Fort Collins East/West at College. the current strange map stair-steps across neighborhoods, communities, school districts and bus routes, separating them in a very strange fashion. It separates Front Range from CSU, when this in fact should be in the same district as it has a common purpose, many of its courses are transferable, and many students start out at Front Range for economic or academic reasons, as a stepping stone to CSU. Geographically, all the Foothills Communities have common geographically-related concerns, while communities on the West side of College have different geographical and growth concerns. The new map makes so sense from the standpoint of neighborhood, education, geographical concerns, but rather fragments existing cohesion. Either your prior map, similar to or our existing boundaries, should be used, or don't change what is working well for Fort Collins and our neighborhoods, and currently has fair and effective representation, which would be disrupted by the latest maps. Thank you. Rose Lew

Stop grouping cities in with large rural districts! The voters wanted an independent group to stop this gerrymandering, and yet this “independent” group continues to try to lump Fort Collins/ Loveland/ Wellington with the entire eastern rural area. Cities and rural areas have different needs and deserve different representation. All these towns should NOT be removed from the rest of their county and placed with the entire eastern side of the state that has different needs.

Obviously, those on the Congressional Redistricting Commission could care less that Highlands Ranch, Lone Tree, Castle Pines, Roxborough, north Parker, and north Castle Rock are more Denver-metro affiliated than Greeley is. Why can the Commission not understand that those of us in Highlands Ranch do not see ourselves as having any association or needs like those who live on the Eastern Plains? We are part of the Denver-metro area and this "accepted" map does not represent us properly. The needs of northern Douglas County residents will not be met by a District 4 representative who has no idea what Denver-metro needs we have. We have needs that deal with urban and suburban issues, not rural issues. Water rights, land rights, oil rights - these are the needs of the Eastern Plains, not northern Douglas County. I honestly think the Commission was not listening to the needs of all the areas of the State of Colorado and looking out for our best interests. It was all about political motives and population. Greeley being pulled out of District 4 and placed in District 8 is ridiculous - Greeley has nothing to do with Broomfield, Thornton, or Brighton. Greeley should be moved back into District 4 and be the large population center there, and Highlands Ranch, Lone Tree, Roxborough, Castle Pines, north Parker, and north Castle Rock should be included in either District(s) 6 and/or 7. I seriously hope the Colorado Supreme Court does not accept this map and understands how this map does not reflect the interest of all the people of Colorado. Some areas besides mine are also not being fairly represented. I thought having an "impartial" Commission would have worked to fairly bring areas together that have similar issues to deal with; but obviously that has not happened. This Commission did not correctly/properly do the job they were selected for.

Rural Colorado has "nothing" in common with Boulder County. It makes no sense to divide Garfield and Mesa County who operate together with so many common interest.

To include Western Colorado with Boulder is a blatant attempt to control politics in Colorado. We appreciate our small RURAL communities. An urban area such as Boulder has a very limited concept of rural Colorado as evident in the attempt to pass recent legislation concerning animals. The citizens should make that decision, not government. Not only that but by putting Western Colorado in with Boulder we lose our voice. Our population should be listened to just the same as any of the other populations in Colorado not bulldozed by a larger area.

Do not split Broomfield City/County. Keep our City and County whole.