Public Comments

The interests of the western slope will not be represented in your proposed plan. Please leave all of the western slope together in one district.

My name is Charles T Holley (Tom) and I am a registered voter in Routt County, CO and live near Oak Creek. My ask is you Keep Communities as ONE as your rules PROMISE! I have said this before and will say it again that you are tearing apart communities of interest and making Colorado’s Congressional and Legislative Districts Geographical Nightmares! Why do you continue to force the I25 Corridor on the Western Slope? Why do you continue to FORCE your obvious bias toward the I25 Corridor superiority by including it in each map? Why are you dividing NW Colorado WHEN ALL OF THE WESTERN SLOPE ARE the Communities of Interest? You are blatantly violating the “Communities of Interest” fundamental principle of your own rules. With your current map you will suffocate the Rural CD3 Western Slope Conservative voices with a nearly 2:1 difference of Democrat vs. Republican registered voters in both Larimer and Boulder Counties. The front range deserves their own Congressional Voice and so does the Western Slope by keeping all Western Slope Counties together alone in CD3. Your June 23rd map or the Club20 map address all of issues that we continually testify to. We have written this that time and time again and I’m sorry but it doesn’t seem you want to listen. Do not make your 9/26 map your final submission!

I was pleased with the First Staff draft of the CO House plan for districts 52 and 53 which split Ft Collins along what is natural dividing line (hwy 287) that is used by businesses, the city, school district, higher education, etc. for planning and offering their services. I am very disappointed in how those districts, 52 & 53, were redrawn in the Second Staff map. My understanding is that the goal for districts is to create regions that reflect the community. This new map for 52& 53 is terrible for Ft Collins. It breaks some of our well recognized communities in two — splitting foothills neighborhoods between two districts; puts CSU and Front Range Community College in different districts; and the stair-step border cuts into existing neighborhoods, bus routes, school attendance districts. This Second Staff map must be reconsidered.

I just think the congressional redistricting isn't intuitive. It places way too much emphasis on competitiveness over representing Coloradans, so it ends up putting rural with urban, making jagged, non-compact districts that don't follow existing political boundaries that look gerrymandered. It's simple. The Denver metro has about 3 million residents. Give it four districts. The north Front Range gets a district, El Paso County is a district. Greeley is with the eastern plains. Pueblo and the San Luis are together and not put with areas west of the Continental Divide. 3 solidly blue and red districts each with a new South Metro district being competitive. This represents Colorado, not the current proposal. Here's a link to a map I made just to demonstrate how easy this is: https://davesredistricting.org/maps#viewmap::b9ada66f-3f6f-4746-a263-69c9a3d80366

To whom it may concern, After population equality and adherence to the Voting Rights Act the Colorado Constitution in Article 5, Section 44.3 directs the Commissions as follows, "As much as is reasonably possible, the commission's plan must preserve whole communities of interest and whole political subdivisions, such as counties, cities, and towns." Section 44 (3)(B) defines communities of interest as reflecting "Shared public policy concerns such as education, employment, environment, public health, transportation, water needs and supplies, and issues of demonstrable regional significance." Please do not redistricting this area. Thank you, Kristina Kahl

The Schuster Map keeps Southern Colorado’s water and other community interests intact. It allows Southern Colorado”s representative to travel more easily to all parts of the district and more appropriately represent constituents.

Greetings Commissioners and Staff, Again, thank you for your work on this complicated Colorado Redistricting project. In looking over the House District Staff Plan of 9/23/21 I feel this reshaping of HD#52 and HD#53 is not in keeping with the goals of the Redistricting guides. Although the Registered Voters seem relatively balanced, the neighborhoods are divided, the public transportation system organization is disrupted and CSU is separated from Front Range Community College. Why reshape what is working well? Please reconsider this reshaping and return to the Preliminary map of 6/29/21. Thank you for your attention. Dale Karlin

To whom it may concern, As a lifelong Colorado resident, I have followed this year's redistricting process with great interest. While I would like to see every district be competitive, I understand there are many considerations. I grew up on the Western Slope, but have lived in Pueblo for the last 20 years. I can safely say that our population would be better served if the Southern counties were grouped together. This would make sense for a number of regional issues, especially water, transportation and energy infrastructure. As it stands now, I would recommend the Tafoya Amendment to the Third Staff plan as a reasonable compromise. Thank you, Brian Taylor

To Whom It May Concern: Otero County should be with the other SE Colorado counties in a cohesive district. We share the same agriculture industry, shared water concerns, our schools are in the SE conference and we are high plains prairie as are the other South East Colorado counties. We have Tri County agreements with our county/Bent and Crowley counties and share county resources in these agreements. The other maps have us connected with mountain communities. We are to put it in simple terms, "flatlanders" and the map includes us with "highlanders". Our way of life differs greatly from the mountainous areas of the state due to our geographic features. Thank you for your time, Sincerely, Sharon Ghilarducci

Dear Colorado Independent Redistricting Commission, What the Heck?! The second staff map is totally different for the split between Legislative Districts 52 and 53. Not a good change! First of all, Fort Collins has been split down the middle with Hwy 287 as the border. It has worked well and the 2 sides , east and west of town do have different issues and concerns. CSU and Front Range Community College are both on the west side and the east side has the majority of the large shopping areas. Both east and west sides are growing north and south pretty equally so with continued growth they will remain balanced but not if the districts are split north and south. We are land locked east and west for much more growth. This is not a good change! What's more the train also cuts the town through the town north to south which is another dividing line just one block west of Hwy 287. Many of our major roads are north/ south that link our town to Loveland and Wellington which we share transportation issues like commuting, buses and biking trails. We are very oriented with the east /west split, not north/ south and are happy with the status quo. Please go back to that orientation. Thank you