Douglas County Voters Question Home Rule Special Election Amid…

Douglas County voters are nearing a special election on home rule, sparking intense debate. Residents will vote on creating a home rule charter and electing a charter commission. Critics worry about developer influence and the haste of the election, which could cost taxpayers $500,000. Proponents see it as a chance for greater local control over laws. Tensions rise as the vote approaches, with divided opinions in the community.

In Douglas County, the debate surrounding the upcoming home rule special election is intensifying as residents prepare to cast their votes in less than two weeks. On June 24, voters will weigh in on whether to establish a home rule charter for the county and select members for a charter commission. If approved, this charter will be further voted upon in November.

County officials argue that adopting a home rule charter could increase local autonomy, allowing Douglas County to customize tax regulations, gun laws, and immigration policies. Many residents have already received their ballots, but the urgency of the election – costing about $500,000 – has raised eyebrows in the community. Some residents like Barrett Roth have expressed frustration over the perceived haste in which the election is being conducted.

Roth mentioned, “I’ve never seen such backlash across party lines in the county. If you rush, we don’t have time to ask questions of the people that matter and can influence our votes.” Initially uncertain about home rule, Roth has since investigated campaign financing and discovered that the “Yes on Local Control” campaign received a whopping $110,000 in funding.

Significant contributions include $10,000 from Westside Property Investment Company, the developer for Dawson Trails, and $50,000 from Ventana Capital, which is also currently engaged in a lawsuit with the city of Castle Pines over a denied McDonald’s project. Roth raised questions about the involvement of developers, asking why their interests align with a home rule initiative. He suggests a potential land grab could be a factor behind their support.

When CBS Colorado reached out to Westside and Ventana regarding their backing of the campaign, Westside declined to comment, and Ventana did not respond. George Teal, a County Commissioner, acknowledged he does not know all the contributors supporting home rule but mentioned how home rule could enhance local tax control for businesses.

Teal argues that pursuing home rule would establish a stronger legal foothold for the county to manage local governance. He aims to address public safety concerns and provide flexibility to alter tax rates as required. Moreover, he indicates that home rule could facilitate better interactions with state agencies.

The pro-home rule campaign has other notable financial backers, like “The Cundy Harbor Irrevocable Trust,” contributing $50,000, and smaller donations from Teal’s wife and Laura Tonner, the spouse of a developer behind a controversial water project in the area. Conversely, the opposition group, “Stop the Power Grab,” claims to have gathered $30,000 in donations from various local citizens, including some Democratic politicians.

Roth feels wary about the narratives surrounding home rule, suggesting they may be misleading. Dr. Robert Preuhs, a professor at Metropolitan State University of Denver, pointed out that while home rule allows counties to create more policies, it does not guarantee the ease of bypassing state laws, often leading to legal challenges over jurisdictional matters.

Roth believes these potential court battles could lead to wasted taxpayer funds, stating the election itself could have been incorporated into a food-filled November ballot without incurring significant costs. He adds that the county should have waited to hold the election for free, rather than incurring $500,000 in taxpayer expenses this summer.

The county’s attempts to provide information about the home rule measure also faced criticism from Roth. He expressed disappointment in receiving a non-partisan booklet supporting home rule, stating it felt like campaign material funded by taxpayers. In response, county officials have indicated that they have balanced viewpoints on their home rule webpage.

Teal has been vocal in supporting the home rule initiative, believing it to be the right path. He encourages residents to vote positively on the charter. As the election draws closer, divisions in the community appear increasingly pronounced, with Roth suggesting, “It’s something no one asked for, and I do think it’s going to fail pretty substantially.”

In a final push before the election, the county will host a town hall virtually on June 17 at 6 p.m. On Saturday, an additional protest, dubbed “No Kings,” will take place in Castle Rock to oppose the home rule movement.

As the special election approaches, the discourse regarding Douglas County’s potential home rule is charged with tension. Residents are concerned over the implications of rapid decisions, particularly in light of substantial developer contributions. Critics argue that the promises associated with home rule may lead to legal disputes and unnecessary financial costs for taxpayers. Meanwhile, supporters believe it represents an opportunity for enhanced local governance. The outcome remains uncertain as the community prepares to vote.

Original Source: www.cbsnews.com