Weld County commissioners opened a July 30 public hearing on proposed commissioner-district maps and heard hours of public comment before agreeing to continue the hearing and hold an additional virtual public-comment session. County Attorney Matt Conrad said the board would accept virtual testimony at the Monday evening session and continue consideration until the board meets next Wednesday.

The hearing drew repeated appeals to preserve communities of interest and to follow the state law and the Colorado Supreme Court’s ruling that struck down the county’s original map. Community leaders and residents urged the board not to re-create the conditions that led the high court to reject the earlier plan.

Why it matters: The county must redraw commissioner districts after the prior plan was found noncompliant with state and federal rules. The choice of lines can affect which groups can elect candidates of choice and whether the county avoids legal challenges under the Voting Rights Act and the state redistricting law.

Residents who spoke urged commissioners to give priority to the three maps produced and recommended by the county’s bipartisan advisory committee. “These maps are a front to our face that you do not respect us enough to give us the title of a community of interest,” said Stacy Sunigo, president of the Latino Coalition of Weld County, a frequent critic of the original map. Sunigo said she and other plaintiffs challenged the county’s earlier map and praised the advisory-committee maps as following the law and keeping Latino communities intact.

County Attorney Matt Conrad opened the hearing and noted the board had set additional opportunities for public comment. “We’ll take virtual testimony at that time as well,” Conrad said, referring to a Monday evening session the board scheduled and to continuing the item to the following Wednesday for a decision.

Commissioner James said the panel has not chosen a final map and described the commissioners’ role as weighing the committee work, public comment and statutory requirements before adopting a plan. “We haven’t chosen a map yet,” Commissioner James said. He and other commissioners asked commenters to identify the statutory grounds on which they believed particular drafts failed.

Several speakers referenced the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision that threw out the earlier plan and repeatedly urged commissioners to avoid any map that would dilute the voting power of the county’s largest minority community. Other residents urged the board to preserve smaller, local communities — including parts of Greeley, Platteville, Gilcrest and LaSalle — together so school districts and local priorities remain aligned.

Some public commenters supported a county staff proposal called the Lone Tree map, saying it kept district populations closer to the mathematical equality required by statute and did a better job of preserving Latino communities than earlier drafts. Supporters cited provisions in state law that ask commissions to minimize splitting cities and towns and, where feasible, preserve communities of interest and maximize competitive districts.

No final vote was taken. The board directed staff to accept additional public comment at a scheduled virtual hearing and to bring the matter back for the board’s decision the following Wednesday. Commissioners said they would consider the advisory-committee maps, the new maps submitted by commissioners and public testimony before voting.

What’s next: The board scheduled another virtual public-comment session and continued the matter to its next regular Wednesday meeting, at which commissioners said they will consider a final map and the statutory findings they must make.

Sources: Public hearing transcript of the Weld County Board of County Commissioners, July 30, 2020; public comments and staff remarks at that hearing.