The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20112409.tiff RESOLUTION RE: APPROVE CHANGE IN BOUNDARY LINES OF THE COMMISSIONER DISTRICTS IN WELD COUNTY, COLORADO WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, pursuant to Colorado statute and the Weld County Home Rule Charter, is vested with the authority of administering the affairs of Weld County, Colorado, and WHEREAS, Section 30-10-306 (4), C.R.S., states the following: ". . . after each federal census of the United States, each [County Commissioner] district shall be established, revised, or altered to assure that such districts shall be as nearly equal in population as possible based on such census in the following odd-numbered year and shall be completed by September 30 of such year," and WHEREAS, by Resolution #2009-1525, dated July 1, 2009, the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, revised the boundary lines of the County Commissioner Districts as shown on the map attached to that Resolution, and WHEREAS, in order that Weld County complies with the law in every respect, it is desirable, necessary, and in the best interests of the County that the Board of County Commissioners now consider, determine, and re-establish boundary lines of the County Commissioner districts within the County, and WHEREAS, upon notice published in the Fort Lupton Press on July 20, 2011, the Board of County Commissioners held a public hearing on August 3, 2011, to obtain public input regarding changing the District boundaries, and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners is now of the opinion that the County Commissioner Districts do not conform to the proper division of the County with respect to population, and WHEREAS, upon notice published in the Fort Lupton Press on August 31, 2011,the Board of County Commissioners held a public hearing on September 7, 2011, to determine and re-establish boundary lines of the County Commissioner Districts within the County, with the boundary lines and division of precincts as shown on the attached Exhibit "A." NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, that the boundary lines of the County Commissioner Districts within the County, with the division of precincts into the respective County Commissioner Districts as shown on the attached Exhibit "A," be, and hereby is, approved. W& 2011-2409 C1- 41 - 11 CR0026 CHANGE IN BOUNDARY LINES OF THE COMMISSIONER DISTRICTS IN WELD COUNTY, COLORADO PAGE 2 The above and foregoing Resolution was, on motion duly made and seconded, adopted by the following vote on the 12th day of September, A.D., 2011. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WELL) COUNTY, COLORADO ATTEST: iuo��• �l� � N } I 7 k k ,( z1; . �� r ,F. �,; irkmeyer, Ch it Weld County Clerk to the Board Seerff,' ay, Pro-Tem C BY: �/� �'e? ti Depu y CI to the Board ��7 ' `�` W'y rF. G cia APP A ORM: avid E. Long my ttorney O1- 7 ks 01/17ri C24 F glas,Rademach r Date of signature: WZ-c/// 2011-2409 CR0026 2011 Redistricting Plan ( 139 & 336 to D2 315 to D 1 Total population : 252 , 825 125 128 t 106 107 135 13I. 6 132 211 124 241 108 109 111 110 134 112 212 214 215 ;��♦*♦�iye ��..- _ 243 ♦♦♦�♦ �♦�� 333 217 114 139 ; k, ,> 219 .,'�e 315 222 .! , 317 329 137 ?1\ 235 223 221 . . 7''' i 320 • 220 318 319 i tflis 226 ....„,." 238 321 3� ♦;i ►♦�►♦i! �i♦♦♦i�♦♦ ♦,�♦i ;♦;♦♦�` 330 !�i�'�♦i±�►i ,♦ ♦��i�i'�i♦*�►♦r�♦♦'' 325 ♦ ♦♦ i ♦♦ 231 . 324 323 236 326 331 :Plan 2 Dimkt Populations , Commissioner Districts Precinct C 2trd 3 1 3e 500 District 3 District 1 L_ II District 2 rraw , 8.4,519 District 1 District 3 ;%%% 315 to D1 DISCLAIMER .{.. 2 TM rinOi we wee ae,awAgM,van at env:y Wm carry Ire( S a&Mwar P" NI O�sllki 2 I H4 H08 District avr^e.ald r+.*Nor onalet•et —P.sc. xdila Mi is anyaftatuna, a • 40•I MMaO it*Nor r erallieedit ha,YtiNM1W MIY6lM OI11 ♦♦♦ 139 to D2TOt;0,~. c. .� .,TMi.PRODUCT BE MAO la ►�� 0EBRiNPJf0t4CH.NIXD COUNT WIZ AOlYN,14vRIC OR W.+NNhlCC5 2924 336 to D2 ' r 0 2000 40000 60.000 50.000 ---- 100.000 720000 2011 -2409 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Docket#2011-51.A On August 3, 2011, the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, held a public hearing to receive input from the public regarding changing the boundary lines of Commissioner Districts in Weld County, Colorado, as proposed by the Weld County Clerk and Recorder, to make the populations between the three Commissioner Districts nearly equal. The Resolution which would adopt the proposed boundary change will be considered for approval on Monday, September 12, 2011, and public comment will be considered. Copies of the map showing the proposed boundary change and resulting Commissioner Districts may be examined in the office of the Clerk to the Board, 1150 O Street, Greeley, Colorado 80631.Written comments are welcome and must be received prior to September 12, 2011, in the office of the Clerk to the Board, P.O. Box 758, Greeley, Colorado 80632. To ensure inclusion of E-Mail correspondence into the record, please send a copy to egesick@co.weld.co.us. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WELD COUNTY, COLORADO DATED: August 26, 2011 PUBLISHED: August 31, 2011, in the Fort Lupton Press Jeffrey T. Hare 6136 W. 16th St Greeley, CO 80634 August 31, 2011 Weld County Board of Commissioners c/o Bruce Barker 1150 O Street Greeley, CO 80632 Dear Board of County Commissioners, First, let me apologize for not being able to deliver this letter to you in person. Unfortunately, I am out of town on business. The census and re-districting process provides the County Commissioners an opportunity to reflect on the population changes in the County and think about the next ten years of growth as well. While the statutes related re-districting calls for the districts to be "nearly equal in population",the changes made must also anticipate the growth in the county in the next 10 years such that the district boundaries don't become too skewed based on the likely growth patterns over the next 10 years. Part of the challenge in this process is to anticipate this growth such as the impact of the approval of the Dry Creek RUA close to Brighton and continued growth along the I-25 corridor. With a significant exposure to I-25 communities and access to Denver, D2 and D3 seem poised to continue to gain population versus D1 over the next 10 years. I'd argue that part of the goal of the re-districting is not just to smooth populations as of this point, but to structure the districts in such a way as growth is even over the next 10 years. Another reasonable constraint is that you also want to consider adjacent precincts when moving from one district to another. With the population growth over the last 10 years being skewed towards D3,the challenge is to be move some higher growth districts from D3 to D2 and D1,yet do so with adjoining districts. This is best accomplished by moving districts from D3 to D2 and D2 to D1 since it is likely that a disproportionate percentage of the population growth may again come from the south part of the County as was the case in the last 10 years. The current proposal considers changes in three districts as follows: 315 from D3 to 01, 139 from D1 to D2, and 336 from D3 to D2. I don't believe the current proposal goes far enough to anticipate the skewed growth that is likely to become disproportionately from the I-25 corridor, south County, and impact of the new Dry Creek community near Brighton. My proposal is to move precincts 335 and 337 from D3 to D2 since they are adjacent to D2 and along the I-25 corridor. This change would also potentially allow the County in 2020 to move other adjacent precincts along the I-25 corridor from D3 to D2 if my population growth predictions are accurate. The second change would be made to move some current population from D2 to Dl. To do so, I've suggested leaving the current proposed change of 139 from D1 to D2, but added a move of 243 from D2 to 01 since 243 is a decent sized district. This somewhat 'oversizes' Dl relative to D2 and especially to D3, but I believe this disparity is logical and justified given what is likely to be more growth in D3 in particular, but also in D2. Here is a table that summarizes the impact of my proposed changes: Orieinal 139 243 335 337 New D1 83,272 (1,139) 2,938 85,071 D2 82,133 1,139 (2,938) 1,516 2,803 84,653 D3 87,420 (1,516) (2,803) 83,101 252,825 252,825 With respect to the statues related to re-districting that calls for the districts to be "nearly equal in population", this brings the disparity before the re-districting from 5,287(87,420-82,133)to 1,970 (85,071-83,101). While I realize this is more than the disparity in the current proposal 1,306(84,806- 83,500), I believe this better positions the County to keep equal-sized districts and still meets the intent of the statute. While I would have liked some more time to evaluate other options, I realize the deadline for public comments is today,August 31, and wanted to make sure I provided some feedback by the deadline. If you'd like to discuss these proposed changes with me or would like me to work with the staff in the Elections office to further explore these changes or provide additional information regarding these changes, I'd be happy to do so. Feel free to contact me at 970-324-1450. Regards, Hello