2018 Adams County Voting Guide

Comprehensive Adams County Ballot Guide

The endorsements and ballot positions in this guide are in line with the voting guides provided by progressive and environmental organizations. If you do not have a ton of time to do your own research for every single candidate and issue, this guide can help you get started.

If you only have time to make one single mark on your ballot, mark NO on Amendment 74. The amendment was bankrolled by gas and oil companies as an insurance policy against Proposition 112. Unfortunately it will wreak damage in Colorado far beyond gas and oil drilling. See below for more details.

Federal Offices

• U.S. Representative (CD-4): Karen McCormick (D). Vote for veterinarian and down-to-earth political newcomer Karen to replace super conservative, anti-choice and anti-environment incumbent Ken Buck.

• U.S. Representative (CD-6): Jason Crow. Jason is a combat veteran. He supports common sense gun control to keep Coloradans safe, supports environmental protection and creating clean energy jobs, supports social safety net, and will fight to reduce the cost of prescription drugs.

• U.S. Representative (CD-7): Ed Perlmutter. Ed has been a good friend to Adams County for a very long time. He’s also one of the most approachable, straightforward, and hard-working members of Congress.

State Offices

• Governor: Jared Polis. Jared is running on a platform of 100% renewable energy, full-day kindergarten and pre-school, and universal health care. As a Congressman, he has championed wilderness protection and regulating oil and gas impacts. He’s running against State Treasurer Walker Stapleton, a staunch conservative who was recently endorsed by Trump.

• State Secretary of State: Jena Griswold. An up-and-coming, go-getter lawyer from Louisville who used to work for the Obama administration, Jena is focused on protection of voting rights, campaign finance reform and cyber-security. She’s also the only woman running statewide in CO.  

• State Treasurer: Dave Young. Dave has accumulated great treasurer experience from serving on the Joint Budget Committee during four years as a representative in the state legislature, where he was a reliable progressive vote. He was also a middle school math teacher for many years.

• Attorney General: Phil Weiser. Phil has the legal and management experience needed for AG, having clerked for Ruth Bader Ginsburg, worked for President Obama in the White House and litigated for the Justice Department, before serving as the dean of the CU Law School here in Boulder. His priorities are standing up to the Trump administration on immigrant rights, environmental protection, net neutrality and dark money in elections.

• State Board of Education (CD-4): Tim Krug. Tim is an entrepreneur, teacher, and an active volunteer in public schools. He will work for students, parents, educators, and taxpayers instead of special interest.

• CU Regent - At Large: Lesley Smith. Lesley was a scientist and educator at CU for 30 years, served for 8 years on Boulder Valley School Board, and (fun fact) was the first woman aquanaut in the underwater Aquarius research facility, where she studied coral reefs. 

• Regional Transportation District Director District B: Shontel Lewis. Shontel used to be a Transit Equity Specialist with RTD, and now works in civil rights for Denver Public Schools. She is committed to civil rights and will make sure that everyone has access to the public transit.

• Regional Transportation District Director District L: Shelley Cook. Shelley served in Arvada City Council for three terms. She is an expert in transportation issues and will be an advocate for sustainable and affordable public transportation. She has a proven track record in Arvada in pushing for and winning transit service there and will serve effectively on the RTD board.

• Regional Transportation District Director District K: Paul Solano. Paul is currently serving on the RTD board as an active participant. He is an advocate for low income passes - voted for it - and for RTD workers. He deserves to be re-elected.

State Legislature

Republicans currently hold a one-seat majority in the State Senate. It would be great for the Democrats to win back the State Senate, so that we could pass more progressive legislation at the state level for the environment, women’s rights, education, health care, etc. — so vote Democrat! And we have great Democratic candidates who are worthy of your enthusiastic support: 

• State Senator -- Senate District 24: Faith Winter!  Faith is a conservation champion and an advocate for protecting Colorado's land, water and air. She understands working families and works hard to create affordable housing. She is also a champion for women's rights. As a State House Representative, she brought bills to ensure equal pay for equal work and for paid family leave. She is authentic, caring and understands the issues. She will make a great State Senator!

• State Rep -- House District 30: Dafna Jenet. Dafna is a community builder with the belief that sustainable solutions can only be developed by working with the community. She is a strong supporter of public education for an advocate for veterans.

• State Rep -- House District 31: Yadira Caraveo. Yadira is a daughter of Mexican immigrants. She is a pediatrician and an advocate for children. She supports a higher minimum wage, affordable healthcare, and better public education. She is also a strong supporter of immigrant rights and racial justice.

• State Rep -- House District 32: Adrienne Benavidez. Adrienne is an attorney and is currently serving as the representative for HD 32. She fought for fair wages for workers. She is running unopposed since her opponent dropped out of the race.

• State Rep -- House District 34: Kyle Mullica. Kyle supports living wages for working families,  access to health care, and affordable housing. He served in Northglenn City Council and is currently working as an emergency room nurse.

• State Rep -- House District 35: Shannon Bird. Shannon served in Westminster City Council. She supports increasing economic opportunity for all, providing public schools with fair and equitable funding, affordable housing, protecting our environment and investing in infrastructure.

• State Rep -- House District 56: Dave Rose. Dave worked in public education all his life. He will fight for education funding, subsidized childcare, affordable healthcare, and living wages for working families.

Adams County Offices

• County Commissioner -- District 3: Emma Pinter. Emma serves in Westminster City Council. She is a strong supporter of multimodal transportation and cares about protecting Colorado's environment. She is also an advocate for affordable housing and public education.

• County Commissioner -- District 4: Steve O'Dorisio. Steve is running for re-election as a county commissioner. He has been a strong proponent for clean air and oil and gas regulations during his first term. He is also a strong supporter of multimodal transportation. Steve deserves to be re-elected!

• County Assessor -- Ken Musso. Ken has been appraising real estate in the Denver metro area for the last 18 years, 13 of those years in the Adams County Assessor's office. He is very well qualified for the job!

• County Clerk and Recorder -- Josh Zygielbaum. Josh serves in Thornton City Council. Josh pledges to improve the efficiency of the county offices, make voting more convenient and accessible, and improve the transparency of public records.  

• County Sheriff -- Rick Reigenborn. Rick has worked for 29 years in law enforcement. He will work with the community. He will also work with schools to address the opioid issue through education.

• County Treasurer -- Lisa Culpepper. Lisa has extensive expertise and in-depth understanding of law, taxation, administration, real estate, and public service. She will focus on the community and put citizens first in running an effective and efficient Treasurer's office.

• County Coroner -- Monica Broncucia-Jordan.  Monica has served as the coroner for 8 years. She does a great job and deserves to be re-elected. 

Judicial Retentions

Retain all the judges since they have all met the performance expectations per Colorado Commissions on Judicial Performance.

State Measures

• Amendment V – Lowering the age requirement for serving in the state legislature from 25 to 21 years. Vote Yes. A 21-year old is considered an adult under the law, and younger candidates could help attract and engage younger voters, and represent the specific issues that this demographic faces (e.g., student debt, housing and health care costs, etc.). Voters would still ultimately decide whether they think a particular candidate has enough experience and maturity to represent them.

• Amendment W – Changing the ballot format for judge retention votes: Vote Yes. W is a minor cosmetic change that will make the ballot shorter and more concise (and hence cheaper to produce). Under W, rather than repeating the full wording of the retention question for each judge, it would be written once, followed by the list of judges and a yes/no box for each one.

• Amendment X – Changing the definition of industrial hemp: Vote Yes. Growing industrial hemp (a form of cannabis that doesn’t make you high) is legal in the State of CO and defined as having no more than 0.3 THC in it (the stuff that makes you high). Industrial hemp is not yet legal in the eyes of the federal government, although it’s anticipated that legislation to change this will pass soon. Industry hemp will continue to be protected in the CO Constitution. X would simply remove the definition of hemp from the CO Constitution and define it to be the same as in federal or state statute, thereby providing flexibility and retaining competitiveness for CO hemp growers as the national regulatory landscape evolves for hemp. This measure has a wide bipartisan support in the Colorado legislature - 95 of 100 State Legislators support it. It's also endorsed by Colorado Hemp Industries Association.

• Amendment Y – Changing how we redraw congressional districts: Vote Yes. Every 10 years after the census count, the boundaries are redrawn for congressional and state legislative districts to reflect the new population numbers. In many states, this can be a very partisan process, with the political party in power during the census year redrawing the lines to favor keeping their party in power. A bipartisan group of stakeholders decided to try and end this partisan pendulum in CO by coming up with a fair and impartial system to redraw the lines, and convinced the state legislature, by a 2/3 vote, to refer this measure to the voters for their approval. While it might be tempting to rig the system in your party’s favor, it’s more ethical and sustainable to create a level playing field and let the voters fairly elect the lawmakers who will represent them—and in so doing, CO would become a model of democracy for other states. Y establishes an Independent Congressional Redistricting Commission, consisting of an equal number of members of Democrats, Republicans and Independents, to amend and approve congressional district maps drawn by nonpartisan legislative staff.

• Amendment Z -- Changing how we redraw state legislative districts: Vote Yes. This measure does the same thing as Y, only for the state legislature.

• Amendment A -- Removing language allowing slavery & involuntary servitude to be used as punishment for a crime: Vote Yes. It’s good to get rid of inappropriate and outdated provisions in our state constitution.

• Amendment 73 – School Funding Measure: Lean Yes. This measure would provide much-needed funding for public schools by raising the income tax rate for people who earn over $150,000 to between 5% and 8.25% (from the current flat rate of 4.63%), increasing the corporate income tax rate from 4.63% to 6%, and setting new assessment rates for the property taxes levied by school districts. While CO absolutely needs to increase spending on education (we’re 39th in the nation in per pupil spending), many are concerned that 73 will have unintended consequences and since it’s a constitutional amendment, it will be difficult to amend. In particular, it’s not clear how its changes to property tax assessments for schools will affect revenues for cities, towns and special districts. It also almost doubles the state income rate for those in high income bracket. While there is a good reason to vote for it given the critical need for CO to invest more in education, we understand why some people may balk (read the Denver Post’s editorial for more on this).

• Amendment 74 – Require Compensation: Vote No!!!!. While it might initially sound nice to require government to compensate you for any law or regulation that reduces your property’s market value, this deceptive, dangerous Constitutional measure would trigger a litigation free-for-all, costing billions in taxpayer dollars. The constitution already requires just compensation for “takings” of private property; this measure, bankrolled by the oil & gas industry, would greatly expand this established principle, exposing local governments and the state to costly litigation over almost any land use decision they make -- or don’t make. For example, a city or county couldn’t reject a proposal for a bar, oil & gas well, marijuana shop or adult bookstore next to a school without the risk of having to compensate the property owner. Similarly, a local government couldn’t approve a community center, health clinic or tavern without risk of a lawsuit from aggrieved neighbors. This would have a paralyzing effect on basic decisions local governments routinely make on everything from zoning to public health protections to oil & gas drill permits. A similar but less extreme measure that passed in Oregon resulted in $20 billion worth of claims before voters repealed the measure. That’s why a very broad bipartisan coalition of cities and counties, businesses, environmental groups, labor, teachers, editorial boards and more opposes 74.

• Amendment 75 – Campaign Spending: Vote No. Several Republicans filed this as a way to stop Jared Polis from spending so much of his own money to get elected. While there is some appeal to leveling the playing field so that millionaires can’t outspend poorer opponents, this amendment would lift limits for both candidates, resulting in more money (not less!) being spent on elections and it wouldn’t do anything about the unlimited dark money being spent by outside groups in our major races (regardless of the wealth of the candidate). Further more, this amendment also raises the spending limit when one of the candidates "facilitates or coordinates third party contributions amounting to more than one million dollars". This will open a flood gate for many races including those without multi-millionaires! What we need is a real campaign finance reform to limit campaign spendings, and this amendment will do exactly the opposite.

• Proposition 109 – Transportation Bonding/Fix Our Damn Roads: Vote No. Wouldn’t it be great if you really could get something for nothing? Unfortunately, we can’t, no matter what 109 proponents might say. This measure would authorize $3.5 billion in bonding for highway transportation projects, without identifying revenues to pay them back, which means other programs like education, health care and mental health services, etc. would have to be cut instead. To make it even worse, 109 would provide no monies for transit or local priorities.

• Proposition 110 – Transportation Funding: Vote Yes. In contrast to 109, 110 would generate much-needed funding for transportation, via a sales tax increase of about 6 cents on a $10 purchase. Primary funding for transportation, the gas tax, hasn’t been increased in 27 years, which is why there are so many potholes and traffic jams. 110 funds would be divvied up: 40% to cities and counties for local priorities; 15% for multimodal (i.e., transit, bike and pedestrian) projects; and 45% for state projects, like improvements on I-25 and I-70 that would benefit all of us. Local communities are encouraged to invest in multimodal projects through matching incentives. 110 is supported by a broad coalition of cities, counties, transit advocates, businesses, environmental and labor advocates and more.

• Proposition 111 – Limit Predatory Payday Lending: Vote Yes. This measure would limit interest rates (including fees) on payday loans to 36%; currently, rates can go as high as 214%, which can trap consumers into a cycle of debt.

• Proposition 112 – Setbacks for Oil & Gas: Vote Yes. This measure would require new oil & gas operations to be at least 2,500 feet from homes, schools, parks and open space, and waterways. Oil & gas development is a dangerous industrial activity that poses significant threats to humans and the environment, from toxic air emissions and spills that contaminate water supplies, to explosions that have killed homeowners and workers. Research has shown that people living closer to oil & gas sites are at higher risk for cancer and other public health concerns. The industry is spending $20 million to convince you otherwise, but the bottom line is that we shouldn’t be fracking in neighborhoods.

Local Measures 

• County Issue 4A: Westminster Public Schools— Vote Yes. 

• County Issue 5A: Adams-Arapahoe School District— Vote Yes. 

• County Issue 5C: Adams 12 Five Star School District— Vote Yes. All the above are property tax increases to improve public education. Given that Amendment 73 (state wide income tax increase to pay for education) is facing an uphill battle, these measures will raise the much needed educational funding for Adams County public schools.

• County Issue 6A: AnyLink/RangeView Library District — Vote Yes. County tax increase to fund the operation and improvement of AnyLink/RangeView Library District. Just like investing in education, investing in the library system is investing in the future!

• County Issue 6B: South Adams County Fire Protection District — Vote Yes.

• County Issue 7F: Greater Brighton Fire Protection District — Vote Yes.

• County Issue 7H: Southeast Weld Fire Protection District — Vote Yes.

• County Issue 7I: Southeast Weld Fire Protection District — Vote Yes. All the above would allow fire districts to retain the property tax revenue it would lose as a result of Gallagher Amendment leveling in the future. We need the fire stations to be adequately funded for the growing population so they can respond to the community needs in a timely fashion. It would save lives.

• Urban Drainage and Flood Control District Ballot Issue 7G — Flood Control and Warning Systems Revenue Stabilization. Vote Yes. The UDFC District partners with metro area cities and counties to design and build flood control projects, early warning systems, open space and trails, and conduct debris removal. The District’s property tax rate hasn’t been raised in 50 years, but the 1992 Taxpayer Bill of Rights (aka TABOR) resulted in the ratcheting-down of the flood-control district’s dedicated property tax rate from $1 per $1,000 of assessed value to 56 cents today. Under 7G, the District is asking for permission to restore its full taxing authority, as many other cities and counties have done. The impact on the average home would be about $13 annually. Each city and county receives back the same amount of funding as they contribute, and benefits from well-designed flood control infrastructure.