Colorado Reapportionment Commission (06/13/2011)

Final
STAFF SUMMARY OF MEETING

COLORADO REAPPORTIONMENT COMMISSION

Date:	06/13/2011	ATTENDANCE

Time:	11:01 AM to 02:29 PM	Atencio	X
		Berry	X
Place:	LSB A	Carroll	X
		Jones	X
This Meeting was called to order by		Loevy	X
	Mario Carrera	Nicolais	X
		Salazar	X
This Report was prepared by		Tool	X
	Bo Pogue	Witwer	X
		Webb	X
		Carrera	X
		X = Present, E = Excused, A = Absent, * = Present after roll call

Bills Addressed:		Action Taken:
Executive Session on Racial Bloc Voting Consideration of Region 2 Plans Discussions of Locations and Possible Dates Public Testimony		Witness Testimony and/or Committee Discussion Only House Plan Passed Direction for Commission Staff Regarding Staff Plans Witness Testimony and/or Committee Discussion Only

Note: This meeting summary is not an official record of the commission or of the meeting. It is not intended to serve as a transcript or minutes of the commission meeting. The audio recording of the meeting is the official record of the meeting. This summary may be used as a guide to the audio recording. To access the audio recording of a commission meeting, visit the Colorado Joint Legislative Library located in the State Capitol, Room 048 (basement/ground floor level). You will need to note the date, time, and location of the meeting to access the audio recording. Copies of the audio recordings may be obtained at the library if you bring with you blank, recordable compact discs or a flash drive. Librarians are on site and available to assist you with accessing an audio recording.

11:02 AM -- Executive Session on Racial Bloc Voting

The commission was called to order. A quorum was present. Mr. Jeremiah Barry, Reapportionment Commission Staff Director, provided some introductory remarks on the issue of racial bloc voting analysis.


BILL:	Executive Session on Racial Bloc Voting
TIME:	11:03:57 AM
MOVED:	Atencio
MOTION:	Moved to enter into an executive session to consult with commission legal counsel on the subject of racial bloc voting. The motion passed on an 11-0 vote.
SECONDED:	Carroll
		VOTE
	Atencio	Yes
	Berry	Yes
	Carroll	Yes
	Jones	Yes
	Loevy	Yes
	Nicolais	Yes
	Salazar	Yes
	Tool	Yes
	Witwer	Yes
	Webb	Yes
	Carrera	Yes

Final YES: 11 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS

11:05 AM

The commission entered into an executive session to discuss racial bloc voting. The session was recorded, but it is not part of the public record.

11:28 AM -- Consideration of Region 2 Plans

The commission returned to order. The commission considered plans for Region 2, consisting of the following counties: Logan, Sedgwick, Phillips, Morgan, Washington, Yuma, Elbert, Lincoln, Kit Carson, Cheyenne, Kiowa, Crowley, Otero, Bent, Prowers, and Baca. Commissioners received copies of three proposed House plans, which contain maps and demographic reports (attachments A through C). The commission discussed the process by which maps for Region 2 would be selected by the commission. The commission first considered Region 2 House plans. Commissioner Tool discussed the process by which he conceived of the plan labeled H2001 (Attachment A), and made comparisons of this plan with the other House plans. Commissioner Tool read into the record a portion of the Colorado Supreme Court decision in In re Reapportionment of the Colorado General Assembly, 45 P.3d 1237 (Colo. 2002), and discussed the importance of ensuring that certain counties receive the number of House seats entitled to them based upon population. Discussion ensued regarding the differences between plan H2001 and plan H2002 (Attachment B), and the merits of both of the plans.

11:38 AM

Discussion continued regarding the benefits of adopting H2001 or H2002, as opposed to H2003 (Attachment C). Commissioner Tool responded to questions about the splitting of Fort Morgan in plan H2001. Commissioner Carroll discussed the division of Arapahoe County by plan H2003. Discussion returned to the treatment of Fort Morgan by plans H2001 and H2002. Discussion ensued regarding where the current House incumbents reside in the three plans. Mr. Troy Bratton, Reapportionment Commission Staff, provided input on the location of incumbents on these plans. Discussion followed regarding the need to ensure that certain adjacent counties receive the number of districts to which they are entitled based upon population. Mr. Bo Pogue, Reapportionment Commission Staff, provided the rationale behind the drafting of plan H2003.

11:49 AM

Commissioner Tool moved for the adoption of plan H2001. Discussion ensued regarding how to number the districts in plan H2001, and creating a numbering convention in general that helps to avoid future confusion in numbering the districts. Director Barry provided input on the issue.


BILL:	Consideration of Region 2 Plans
TIME:	11:49:13 AM
MOVED:	Tool
MOTION:	Moved to adopt House Region 2 district plan H2001v1. The motion was amended to label the northeastern district on the map as District 65. The motion passed on an 11-0 vote.
SECONDED:	Webb
		VOTE
	Atencio	Yes
	Berry	Yes
	Carroll	Yes
	Jones	Yes
	Loevy	Yes
	Nicolais	Yes
	Salazar	Yes
	Tool	Yes
	Witwer	Yes
	Webb	Yes
	Carrera	Yes

Final YES: 11 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS

11:54 AM

Commissioner Tool discussed the potential for drawing a third eastern house district with portions of Weld, Adams, and Morgan counties, and questioned in which region such a district should be included. Commissioner Nicolais discussed the benefits of his footprint model for drafting plans by region based on population. Discussion ensued regarding how to ensure that map drawing by region meets the criteria expressed in the previously referenced Colorado Supreme Court decision, especially with regard to ensuring that counties receive the proper number of House districts based on population. Commissioner Tool volunteered that he would draw an additional map based on population representing fractional House districts from Weld, Adams, and Morgan counties. Commissioner Nicolais expressed concerns about the commission not hearing testimony from residents of adjacent counties that may be affected by future rounds of map drawing, such as those adjacent to counties in Region 5 that may be affected by a Region 5 plan.

12:02 PM

The commission proceeded to considering Senate plans for Region 2. Commission members received two proposed Senate plans for Region 2, including maps and associated demographic reports (attachments D and E). Ms. Kate Meyer, Reapportionment Commission Staff, made some introductory remarks about the Senate maps. Ms. Meyer responded to a question about the number of people from El Paso County included in Senate District 1 in plan S2002, the plan drawn by Reapportionment Commission Staff. Ms. Meyer discussed the rationale behind the drafting of plan S2002. Discussion ensued regarding the relative merits of plan S2001 and plan S2002. Ms. Meyer responded to questions regarding the number of people included in District 1 from Weld County in plan S2002. Discussion followed regarding the potential for including Elbert County in Senate District 1 on plan S2001, rather than portions of Weld County.

12:12 PM

The commission discussed the merits of Senate plan S2001. Commissioner Atencio discussed the potential for drafting more Senate maps for Region 2 to entertain more options and consider testimony from residents of Larimer and Weld counties. Ms. Meyer reiterated the number of Weld County residents included in District 1 of Senate plan S2002. Discussion ensued regarding the potential for redrawing the Region 2 Senate plans, and the benefits of hearing testimony from those living in the eastern portions of certain Front Range Counties, as balanced against the need to adhere to the commission's current schedule. Commissioner Loevy suggested including far eastern portions of certain Front Range counties in an Eastern Plains Senate district. Discussion followed regarding the need to act immediately on Region 2 Senate plans, rather than delaying action. Commissioner Carroll expressed concerns about splitting Front Range counties to add population to eastern Senate districts. Commissioner Atencio moved to defer action on Region 2 Senate districts to allow for testimony from Weld County residents. Commissioner Webb discussed the options available to the commission in drawing these counties, and the effect of delaying action on Region 2 on the commission's schedule. Commissioners Nicolais and Berry requested a no vote on the motion, and discussed their reasons for doing so. Commissioner Jones discussed the cultural dynamics of Weld County and the counties to the east of it, and the importance of hearing testimony from Weld County before acting on Eastern Plains Senate districts. Discussion returned to the need to act immediately on Region 2 Senate plans. Commissioners Tool and Berry expressed their opinions on the motion before the commission.


BILL:	Consideration of Region 2 Plans
TIME:	12:22:18 PM
MOVED:	Atencio
MOTION:	Moved to defer action on Region 2 Senate plans in order to allow for the creation of additional plans and to allow the commission to hear testimony from residents of Weld County. The motion passed on a 6-5 vote.
SECONDED:	Webb
		VOTE
	Atencio	Yes
	Berry	No
	Carroll	Yes
	Jones	Yes
	Loevy	No
	Nicolais	No
	Salazar	Yes
	Tool	No
	Witwer	No
	Webb	Yes
	Carrera	Yes

Final YES: 6 NO: 5 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS

12:29 PM

The commission recessed.

01:01 PM -- Discussions of Locations and Possible Dates for Public Hearings Throughout the State

The commission came back to order.

01:02 PM

Commissioner Carrera brought up the policy of requiring staff to draw maps for consideration by the commission every week. Commissioner Witwer discussed his preference for having a staff map for every region. He indicated that the staff maps have helped generate conversation about the regions. Commissioners Nicolais and Tool agreed with Commissioner Witwer's comments. Commissioner Jones expressed his opinion that staff only provide maps on a week-to-week basis. Commissioners Salazar, Carroll, Atencio, Webb, and Carrerra agreed with Commissioner Jones' position. Discussion ensued about the relative benefits of staff maps.


BILL:	Discussions of Locations and Possible Dates
TIME:	01:06:57 PM
MOVED:	Witwer
MOTION:	Direct commission staff to continue drawing maps for every region in the state. A substitute motion to have staff draw maps only on a week-to-week basis passed on a vote of 6-5.
SECONDED:	Nicolais
		VOTE
	Atencio
	Berry
	Carroll
	Jones
	Loevy
	Nicolais
	Salazar
	Tool
	Witwer
	Webb
	Carrera

Not Final YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION:


BILL:	Discussions of Locations and Possible Dates
TIME:	01:22:09 PM
MOVED:	Jones
MOTION:	SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Direct staff to continue drawing region maps on a week-to-week basis. Members of the commission commented about their positions on the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 6-5.
SECONDED:	Carroll
		VOTE
	Atencio	Yes
	Berry	No
	Carroll	Yes
	Jones	Yes
	Loevy	No
	Nicolais	No
	Salazar	Yes
	Tool	No
	Witwer	No
	Webb	Yes
	Carrera	Yes

Final YES: 6 NO: 5 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS

01:23 PM

Jeremiah Barry, Commission Staff Director, presented a list of possible public hearing dates and locations (Attachment F). He commented about his reasons for setting the schedule. Commissioner Jones asked for clarification about the timing for getting from one location to another. The commissioners discussed transportation issues. Commissioner Loevy asked that the Ft. Collins meeting be moved to Thursday, August 11. The commission decided to meet in Greeley on Monday, August 29. Commissioner Carrera asked the commissioners to consider chairing the hearings in the locations where they reside. Discussion ensued about the minimum number of commissioners who will attend each hearing. Commissioners discussed personal conflicts with the dates on the proposed schedule.

01:35 PM -- Public Testimony

Commissioner Salazar suggested that public testimony begin immediately and continue past 2:00 to accommodate individuals who arrive at 2:00 to testify.

01:36 PM -- Dale Hancock, representing the Board of Garfield County Commissioners, read a prepared statement from the board. Mr. Hancock asked that all of Garfield County be included in House District 57. He discussed a possible split. He asked that all of Garfield County be included in Senate District 8. He responded to questions from the commission about the possible need for splitting Garfield County. There is currently a small section of Garfield County in Senate District 7 and Mr. Hancock would like that redrawn to be included in Senate District 8.

01:40 PM -- David Merritt, representing the Garfield Republican Party, discussed the watersheds in Garfield County, especially in House District 61. Mr. Merritt requested that Garfield County be included in House District 57 and Senate District 8. He spoke briefly about communities of interest in Garfield County. He responded to questions from the committee about the possible need for splitting Garfield County. Mr. Merritt spoke about the difficulties inherent in representing House District 61.

01:45 PM -- Bonnie Peterson, representing Club 20, explained the interests of Club 20. Ms. Peterson asked the commission to keep communities of interest throughout western Colorado in mind during the redistricting process. She commented about water, wilderness, and public land. She spoke about energy development economies. She discussed the House districts in Mesa County. She stated her opinion that the current division in Grand Junction works fairly well. She asked the commission to consider roadways when drawing districts, due to the difficulties posed by high mountain passes and inclement weather for legislators who are trying to cover a large western area. She spoke about centers for medical care and retail. Ms. Peterson responded to questions from the commission about the communities of interest in Delta and Montrose. She spoke more about energy development. In response to further questions from the commission, Ms. Peterson stated that it would be preferable to pick up population, where necessary, from mountain communities.

01:57 PM

Commissioner Berry commented about the House districts in Mesa, Ouray, and San Juan counties and discussed transportation routes through the counties. Ms. Peterson spoke about the difficulties that often arise in serving certain areas of Region 3.

01:59 PM -- Phil Pankey, David Arnold, and Alan Olson, representing Grand County, came to the table together. Mr. Olson expressed his opinion about the inclusion of Grand and Boulder counties in the same Senate district. He indicated that the Continental Divide provides a significant geographical barrier in the middle of the district. He spoke about the different communities of interest in Grand and Boulder counties. He focused specifically on the interests of maintaining the water quality of Grand Lake and the Fraser River. He talked about opening Rollins Pass to traffic. He expressed his opinion that Grand County is underrepresented because Boulder County dominates elections. Mr. Arnold spoke about the differences between Grand and Boulder counties. Mr. Pankey commented about the counties included in the current Senate District 16. He expressed concern that the counties that make up 75 percent of the land mass of Senate District 16 only represent 25 percent of the district's population. He discussed the importance of tourism for mountain communities. He indicated that approximately 50 percent of the jobs in Grand County are dependent on tourism and asked that legislators should understand and respond to the needs of a tourism-based economy. Mr. Pankey also commented about the water resources in Grand County.

02:10 PM

Commissioner Carroll asked for clarification about whether the witnesses would like to see Grand County removed from Senate District 16 and put into Senate District 8. Discussion ensued about the interests of Gilpin, Clear Creek, Summit counties and how those compare with the needs of Grand County. Commissioner Loevy spoke about the development of two separate Western Slopes. One encompasses the destination ski areas and the other includes the areas that are more resource- and agriculture-oriented. He asked for the witnesses' opinions about grouping these two areas together in districts. Mr. Pankey commented about the education level of the citizens of Grand County. Commissioner Tool asked for comment about common interests between Grand and Jackson counties and western Larimer County.

02:24 PM

Discussion ensued about the schools in Grand County. Commissioner Tool discussed the packet of letters of public comment received via e-mail (Attachment G) and asked that it be entered into the record.


BILL:	Public Testimony
TIME:	02:27:59 PM
MOVED:	Webb
MOTION:	Direct the commission staff to make all written testimony sent to the commission part of the permanent record. The motion passed without objection.
SECONDED:	Witwer
		VOTE
	Atencio
	Berry
	Carroll
	Jones
	Loevy
	Nicolais
	Salazar
	Tool
	Witwer
	Webb
	Carrera

Final YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: Pass Without Objection

02:28 PM

The commission adjourned.