Broomfield Ballot Question 1A is intended to clean up and modernize the Charter without making major substantive changes to how Broomfield’s government operates. The changes are primarily administrative and do not create new powers or policies.

The ballot measure would: Modernize language throughout the Charter; Remove outdated or obsolete provisions; and Clarify references to Broomfield’s current status as both a city and a county.

Neutral position.

Broomfield Ballot Question 1B would change Section 4.6 to add a  provision that an elected official cannot concurrently hold any other publicly elected office.

While it's not clear that such a situation has happened in the past, adding this change to the charter makes it explicit that an elected official cannot hold multiple offices at one time.

Vote Yes on 1B.

Broomfield Ballot Question 1C measure combines three different scenarios related to vacancies, one of which we support, one which we do not support, and one which we are neutral.

Expand the time frame for Council to elect a person to fill a councilmember vacancy would be 60 days, not 30 days. Neutral. as 30 days should be sufficient time to find a person to fill a vacancy.

Make it that a person appointed to fill a vacancy in a councilmember seat will only serve until the next general or coordinated election (Currently, the person completes the entirety of the original term) Support.

Requires that a vacancy in the office of the mayor shall be filled by the current mayor pro tem, who shall serve until the next general or coordinated election (Currently, mayoral vacancy is filled in a special election unless vacancy occurs 4 months or less before the next election) Oppose.  The mayor position is the highest elected office in the City and County of Broomfield. Having the Mayor Pro Tem who was elected in only one ward in Broomfield fill the Mayor's term disenfranchises a large number of Broomfield voters. As such the position should be filled by a vote of the people from a set of candidates.

Vote No on 1C.

Broomfield Ballot Question 1D would mandate the Council adopt a code of ethics.

Unfortunately, we are in a day and age that our elected officials seem to need a code of ethics. That said, our concern is that the code of ethics should be adopted by the council as a body; requiring it to be enshrined in municipal code would require that the council update that code to make changes over time.

Neutral position.

Broomfield Ballot Question 1E wound make the effective date of an emergency ordinance immediately upon passage, rather than the current eight days after passage.

Changing emergency ordinances to go into effect immediately removes time for the public to prepare for or raise concerns to the Broomfield Council about such ordinances. This could be ripe for abuse by the Broomfield Council to make changes to ordinance in circumstances that they alone deem an "emergency" (and anything could be an “emergency”).

Vote No on 1E.

Broomfield Ballot Question 1F would change the required number of Council votes to approve Intergovernmental Agreements from two-thirds to a simple majority.

This ordinance will lower the bar for intergovernment agreements, which can have far reaching affects on Broomfield as well as the other municipalities or governments participating in the IGA.  Broomfield should have a higher threshold, not lower threshold, to approve these impactful agreements. (from ⅔ vote to majority vote and executed IGA’s “could” or “may” be published on the City website).

Vote No on 1F.

Proposition LL is asking voters to let the State of Colorado keep $12.4 in tax revenue above and beyond the TABOR limit to pay for the 2022 Healthy School Meals for All program. The measure gives the state too much unchecked fiscal authority by allowing it to keep and spend more money than voters originally approved under the 2022 Healthy School Meals for All program.

Colorado’s universal school lunch program is unsustainable, no opt-out, no extra benefits for low-income students, and faces future budget shortfalls. SNAP changes are reducing costs by tightening eligibility (removing undocumented immigrants, adding work requirements, limiting unhealthy purchases), not from “dire” funding cuts. SNAP isn’t being slashed because of a crisis—the changes just make it fairer and healthier, making sure help goes to families who truly need it.

Vote No on Proposition LL.

Proposition MM is a tax increase, without sufficient guarantees of efficiency or targeted spending. The School Meals program is being expanded beyond the originally intended scope, including students whose families may not need free meals.

The Healthy School Meals for All program has grown more quickly and cost more than initially projected; expanding the program will introduce more inefficient and may lead to waste.

Instead of raising taxes to bring in more revenue, the program should focus on targeting existing resources to students who need them most and controlling growth of the program, rather than “blanket funding”.

Vote No on Proposition MM.

Ballot Issue 5B asks Adams 12 Five Star School District voters to override the school dstrict mill level to increase taxes collected by up to $39.42 million in 2025 and beyond.

Supporters of Adams 12 Ballot Measure 5B argue it will provide essential local funding to raise teacher and staff pay, enhance student safety and mental health supports, and expand academic and career programs—helping the district stay competitive with neighboring school systems and improve student outcomes.

Opponents of Adams 12 Ballot Measure 5B argue it unfairly increases property taxes when the district should better manage existing funds, reduce spending, and push the state to address education funding shortfalls instead of repeatedly asking local taxpayers to pay more.

Neutral position.