Clusters of school board candidates backed by teachers unions made a strong showing across Colorado on Tuesday night, but final results indicate that conservatives won over voters in some districts.

About two-thirds of the 80 candidates endorsed by the Colorado Education Association won their contests, a Colorado Sun analysis found.

In Woodland Park, a fight for control of the board tipped the scales overnight, with two conservative incumbents eking out a lead after their union-backed challengers garnered the majority of votes in early counting. They each held their seats by less than 100 votes.

Meanwhile, union-supported candidates held their ground in Aurora, Adams 12 and Cherry Creek.

“Voters across Colorado showed that extremism will not take over our local school boards, and that we will ensure that our school boards are led by people who believe in public education, who believe in an honest and accurate curriculum, who believe in fully funding our schools and who believe in supporting students and educators in our communities,” Colorado Education Association President Amie Baca-Oehlert told a crowd at Stoney’s Bar in Denver where Colorado Democrats gathered to watch election results.

But conservatives kept control of school boards in other districts like Colorado Springs School District 11, where a slate of conservative candidates looked to be on pace to win all four seats up for election.

Tyler Sandberg, who described himself as a center-right political consultant and principal at Timor Strategies, characterized the election results as “a mixed bag” without one clearly articulated uniform message from voters in school districts outside Denver.

The only resounding narrative, he said, is that voters are demanding “political turmoil” be kept out of elections and classrooms.

“In terms of policy prescriptions, I don’t think voters endorsed any one way or another one worldview,” Sandberg said. “But they did say, ‘we don’t want chaos and we don’t want politics.’”

Tuesday night’s outcomes put to rest an off-year election that further divided some parents, educators and communities over what kids should learn and who is responsible for teaching them. This year’s lineup of school board races took a sharp departure from elections of years past, when most voters paid little attention to campaigns or outcomes. Many elections took on a contentious, partisan tone, even as school board races have been historically nonpartisan. The divisions pitted teachers unions and their supporters against conservatives as they drew ideological lines in many school districts with competing endorsements and voter guides. Hot-button issues included student pronouns, sex education and teaching about race.

Campaign spending also ratcheted up in some districts as outside political organizations supported candidates with campaign contributions and advertising. Super PACs spent about $3.3 million trying to influence Colorado school board contests, with 95% of that spent in just 10 districts.

The Colorado Sun covered several of the more controversial contests, and will continue posting results in district contests as they are decided. 

Colorado Springs 11

Conservatives retained control of Colorado Springs School District 11, where 10 candidates vied for four seats, divided into two slates of candidates that generally fell along partisan lines.

Final results showed first-time candidates Thomas Carey and Jill Haffley winning alongside incumbents Parth Melpakam and Jason Jorgenson.

The Colorado Springs district of about 23,000 students has garnered statewide attention the past two years after a series of controversial board decisions pushed forward by its conservative majority, including dissolving the district’s department of equity and inclusion.

Campaign spending became outsized in the district, with super PACs spending $627,000 to try to influence local voters, with 64% going to support conservative candidates.

Aurora

Incumbent Aurora School Board Member Vicki Reinhard and newcomers Tiffany Tasker and Danielle Tomwing, all backed by the teachers union, led challengers in the state’s fifth-largest district with about 39,000 students. 

About 82% of the $276,000 in super PAC money in the contests supported the three winning candidates.

Adams 12

The union-backed slate of Lori Goldstein, Rebecca Elmore and Alexis Marsh-Holschen led their challengers in Adams 12, the sixth largest school district in Colorado with about 36,000 students.

Super PACs spent $155,000 on the three contests, about evenly divided between conservative and liberal candidates.

Cherry Creek

Democrats endorsed by CEA had commanding leads for school board seats in Cherry Creek School District, Colorado’s fourth largest school district with about 53,000 students, according to final results.

Three board seats were up for election, with two of them contested between liberal and conservative candidates.

Anne Egan led Steve McKenna with about 64% of the vote while Angela Garland won over Scott Graves with about 62% of the vote, final results showed.

McKenna and Graves, both registered Republicans, ran together in a slate, though they said their campaigns were not partisan.

Kasey Ellis, president of the Cherry Creek Education Association, said she was “thrilled” that Egan and Garland won seats along with Ruthie Knowles, who ran uncontested.

“My philosophy is, we need to have people on the board who are pro-public education, who understand what’s happening, who have volunteered in the schools and understand what’s happening,” Ellis said. “I will knock my socks off for people who understand and see the value of public education and what we do for kids and what the educators do for kids.”

She described the three elected board members as “reasonable” with “common sense” that will steer the school district in a direction that will prioritize the needs of students and educators and keep the board’s focus on the classroom instead of political agendas.

They “also understand that educators are not doing anything but teaching students,” Ellis said. “It’s not anything nefarious in any way, shape or form.”  

Super PACs spent $138,000 supporting the two liberal candidates and opposing the conservatives in Cherry Creek.

Jefferson County

Union-backed candidates also led in Jefferson County, the second largest school district in Colorado with about 77,000 students.

Michelle Applegate had 58% of the vote in the District 3 contest, while Erin Kenworthy had 42% of the vote in the three-way District 4 contest.

Super PACs spent $173,000, with two-thirds of that supporting the union-backed candidates and opposing the conservatives.

Academy School District 20

Conservative school board candidates Amy Shandy and Derrick Wilburn held their ground late Tuesday in Academy School District 20 over challengers Heather Cloninger and Will Temby, both of whom were endorsed by CEA. 

The Colorado Springs school district is the 10th largest in Colorado with about 27,000 students.

Colorado Springs Opportunity Fund spent $110,000 supporting Shandy and Wilburn.

Woodland Park

Two conservative incumbents and a union-supported candidate won school board seats in Woodland Park, according to final election results.

Conservative school board incumbent Mick Bates captured 50.23% of the vote over challenger Seth Bryant, final results show. Meanwhile, conservative school board incumbent Cassie Kimbrell secured 50.3% of votes, moving ahead of candidate Mike Knott. Both races were within a 50-vote margin.

Conservative incumbent Dave Illingworth, however, continued to trail behind Keegan Barkley, who had 51.31% of the vote in results.

Still, election outcomes could change with an automatic recount triggered by any race where the vote is separated by 0.5% or less. The seat that Bates and Bryant are vying for is close to that margin.

Additionally, Teller County has 46 cure letters for ballots that need a signature verification or a form of identification, said Teller County clerk and recorder Stephanie Kees. Those ballots are due back to the Teller County Clerk and Recorder office Nov. 15 to be counted Nov. 17, according to Kees.

No one has asked for a recount yet, she said, adding that school board races for the district have never before required a recount. They didn’t even require an election until two years ago “because they never had any candidates to run against each other,” Kees said.

 Kees said voter turnout was high for an off-year election in Teller County, with 58% of voters casting a ballot. Her office hit a snag with ballots after a vendor error affected 14,812 ballots. The vendor, however, sent out replacement ballots by Oct. 20, the statutory deadline for ballots to be mailed. Kees is confident the error did not interfere with the election or with counting ballots.

“I don’t think it slowed us down too much,” she said.

Woodland Park School District, which educates about 2,100 students, has drawn plenty of controversy after conservatives took over the five-person board two years ago and instituted sweeping changes. Among them, the board issued a gag order on teachers, scaled back mental health resources for students and adopted the conservative American Birthright Standards, a controversial set of social studies standards that downplay the importance of teaching history through diverse perspectives. Their politically charged decisions prompted more than 80 teachers and staff members to band together last month and pen a letter to the community sharing their concerns about a districtwide “culture of fear and silence.” 

Nearly $104,000 in outside money flowed into the three contests there.

CORRECTION: This story was updated at 10:34 p.m Nov. 7, 2023, to correct information about candidates in Adams 12.

Aurora Mayor Mike Coffman, a Republican, appeared headed toward securing a second term on Tuesday as he held a commanding lead over his challenger, City Councilman Juan Marcano, a Democrat, in Colorado’s third-largest city.

Conservative candidates also were poised to win four of five Aurora City Council contests, which would mean conservatives keep a majority on the council.

Voters in municipalities across Colorado decided races Tuesday. Here’s a closer look at some of the top contests.

Conservative candidates leading in Aurora

Coffman, a former congressman, had 55% of the vote in the three-way mayoral contest as of 9 p.m. Marcano had 37% of the vote while the third candidate, Jeff Sanford, had collected 7%.

The incumbent mayor accounted for 23% of the $826,000 spent on the 2023 election by the city’s municipal candidates through Oct. 31, according to campaign finance reports filed with the city Friday. Marcano had spent more than $94,000 through Oct. 31 and had $18,000 left in his campaign’s bank account.

Municipal contests are nonpartisan in Colorado, but all of the candidates running in Aurora — with one exception — are registered as Democrats or Republicans.

Conservative candidates were leading their liberal challengers as of 9:30 p.m. in four of the five City Council contests being decided Tuesday: 

• Incumbent Francoise Bergman, a Republican, in Ward VI led Democrat Brian Matise
• At-large Incumbent Angela Lawson, who is registered as unaffiliated, led Democrat Chris Rhodes in Ward V
• Republican Stephanie Hancock led Democrat Jonathan Gray in Ward IV
• Incumbent Curtis Gardner, a Republican, and Alison Coombs, a Democrat who was term-limited in her Ward V seat, each had about 22,000 votes as they vied for two at-large council seats. Republican Jono Scott had about 18,000 votes while Thomas Mayes, a Democrat, had about 17,000 votes.

Political spending groups had dropped more than $1 million on Aurora’s municipal races through Oct. 31, with nearly 90% of that going to support the conservative candidates for mayor and City Council.

Strom leads in Lakewood mayoral contest

In Lakewood, City Councilwoman Wendi Strom was leading in the mayoral contest with 47% of the vote compared to 29% for conservative Don Burkhart, and 24% for Cathy Kentner, a city planning commissioner and unaffiliated voter. 

A host of prominent Democrats endorsed Strom, while Jefferson County Republicans endorsed Burkhart. Development was at the heart of the debate in Lakewood’s mayoral race.

Kulmann leads in quest for second term as Thornton mayor

In Thornton, Mayor Jan Kulmann, a Republican who lost the GOP nomination for the 8th Congressional District a year ago, was outpacing her challenger, City Councilwoman Julia Marvin. 

At 9:15 p.m. Kulmann was leading with 54% of the vote to Marvin’s 46%. 

Kulmann outraised Marvin, a Democrat. 

Committees affiliated with Conservation Colorado and the Colorado Immigrant Rights Coalition supported Marvin, while Building Thornton Together and Housing for Colorado supported Kulmann. 

Colorado voters on Tuesday overwhelmingly passed Proposition II, allowing the state to keep tens of millions of dollars collected through increased tobacco and nicotine taxes that it would have otherwise had to refund. That money will be used to bolster the state’s new expanded preschool program. 

Proponents of Proposition II claimed victory within an hour after the polls closed, and the Associated Press called the race as well. By 9:19 p.m., the measure was leading 66% to 34%.

“This year, we saw historic demand from Colorado families for free universal preschool. Coloradans value early childhood education and I am thrilled people voted in favor of providing more funding for our free universal preschool program that is saving families money, and this voter-approved measure will help fund more preschool for kids,” Gov. Jared Polis said in a written staetment Tuesday night. “Thank you to all voters who made their voices heard, and thank you for continuing Colorado’s clear history of supporting early education.”

The Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights, a constitutional amendment voters approved in 1992, requires that money collected in excess of a tax’s projected revenue be refunded unless voters let the government keep the money. 

Voters approved the increased state tobacco and nicotine taxes in 2020 through the passage of Proposition EE, which directed revenue collected under the change to fund what the state calls universal preschool in Colorado. 

When Democrats drafted EE in the legislature, nonpartisan legislative staff predicted the increased taxes would generate $186.5 million in new revenue a year. But the revenue has been much higher than that — at around $208 million — which is why Proposition II was placed on the November 2023 ballot. 

The passage of Proposition II means the state can keep about $24 million in tobacco and nicotine taxes collected in the 2022-23 fiscal year, which ended June 30, in excess of the projections for Proposition EE. It also lets the state keep any future revenue collected in excess of the EE revenue projections. 

It’s likely that Proposition EE revenues will increase in the future. The taxes on a pack of cigarettes under Proposition EE are currently $1.94 and are set to go up to $2.64 on July 1, 2027. The tax on other tobacco and nicotine products is 50% and set to rise to 62% starting in July 2027.

If the measure had failed, the tax revenue collected above the Proposition EE projections would have been returned to nicotine and tobacco wholesalers and distributors. Additionally, the nicotine and tobacco tax rates would have been cut to prevent future excess revenue. 

Proposition II was placed on the ballot this year by the Democratic majority in the legislature through the passage of House Bill 1290. All 31 Republicans in the General Assembly, as well as three Democrats, voted against the legislation. 

Colorado’s expanded preschool program began offering at least 10 hours a week of instruction this academic year to kids in the year before they start kindergarten, as well as classes for 3- and 4-year-olds with disabilities. Families don’t have to pay any out-of-pocket costs. 

The program has seen high enrollment, though the expansion got off a rocky start, with some school districts suing the state over funding issues. The initiative has faced scrutiny from state lawmakers, too, over how Gov. Jared Polis’ administration has rolled out the expanded preschool access. 

Preschool for All Coloradans, the issue committee that supported Proposition II, reported raising $349,000. The top donors to the group were Healthier Colorado at $90,000, Save the Children Action Network at $86,000 and Gary Advocacy at $50,000. Healthier Colorado and Save the Children Action Network are nonprofits, while Gary Advocacy is a philanthropic limited liability company affiliated with nonprofit Gary Community Ventures.

There was no organized opposition to the measure.

Colorado voters on Tuesday soundly rejected Proposition HH, a complicated tax and spending measure that would have provided hundreds of dollars in property tax relief each year for the typical homeowner, while reducing state taxpayers’ refunds and expanding state spending on schools.

As of 8 a.m. Wednesday, the measure was being rejected by 60% of voters. Voters in just six counties — including Denver and Boulder — supported its passage. The Associated Press called the race before 8 p.m.

The overwhelming rejection of the ballot measure was a major defeat for Jared Polis, the state’s popular Democratic governor, who spent much of the past year pushing unsuccessfully for policies that he said would reduce housing costs across the state. His office authored Proposition HH, which was referred to the ballot at the eleventh hour by Democrats in the legislature. But the complex proposal never won over the enthusiastic support of liberals, while Republicans remained staunchly opposed to the measure and conservative groups spent millions to seek its defeat.

Conservatives celebrated Tuesday night at an Aurora sports bar, calling the measure a victory for Colorado’s government-limiting Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights.

“The message tonight is really simple: Government has enough money, live within your budget,” former Gov. Bill Owens, a Republican, told the crowd. “The only reason this was on the ballot was to do away with the TABOR refund. That was the only reason.”

Proposition HH’s failure means Coloradans’ property tax bills could go up as much as 40% on average next year without intervention by the General Assembly or local officials. There’s little time to make changes before local governments prepare their budgets and tax bills go out, so the legislature and Polis will have to decide soon whether to take action.

They could call a special lawmaking term before the end of the year or attempt to cut property tax rates when the legislature reconvenes in January. Republicans on Tuesday renewed calls for Polis to convene a special legislative session and have already put forth a number of broad property tax relief proposals in anticipation of the measure’s failure.

“The governor needs to call a special session — do it tonight, do it tomorrow, fix this property tax system immediately,” said Michael Fields, the leader of Advance Colorado Action, a conservative group that campaigned against the measure. “TABOR’s not going anywhere, and neither are we.”

Polis, who was at the Western Governors Association meeting Tuesday night in Jackson, Wyoming, issued a statement through a spokesperson.

“The governor thanks everyone who voted in this year’s election,” said Conor Cahill, Polis’ press secretary. “While he is disappointed voters didn’t pass a long-term property tax cut, he is currently considering next steps.”

Also looming large is a measure authored by conservatives on the 2024 statewide ballot that would cap annual property tax increases statewide at 4%, limiting the amount of money collected by schools and other local taxing authorities that rely on property tax revenue.

Some voters told The Colorado Sun they liked Proposition HH’s school funding provisions or its property tax cuts. Others said it didn’t provide enough cost savings to them personally, or that they didn’t want to cut taxes at all. And on Election Day, supporters and opponents alike expressed uncertainty — and confusion — about how the proposal would actually work.

Patrick Garvey, a Democrat, said he was conflicted, but voted against Proposition HH — “begrudgingly.”

“I feel like the issues within that proposition need to be isolated and voted on separately because it’s confusing for the average person,” said Garvey, who dropped off his ballot outside the Denver Botanic Gardens early Tuesday afternoon.

The measure was unusually complex even for Colorado, a state with a long tradition of asking voters to weigh in on complicated tax policy questions.

Proposition HH would have provided relief from rising property taxes on the one hand, by reducing the statewide residential assessment rate to 6.7% from 6.765% and expanding existing tax exemptions for homeowners.

On the other, it would have increased the state revenue cap under the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights by 1 percentage point a year for at least the next 10 years. That would have reduced, or in some years even eliminated, taxpayer refunds owed under TABOR in years of strong economic growth.

In a statement, Senate President Steve Fenberg, D-Boulder, said Proposition HH was “about providing long-term tax relief for Colorado seniors and families” without harming schools and other local services. He blamed a “far right” misinformation campaign for the proposal’s defeat by voters.

“It’s unclear tonight what the pathway forward is,” said Fenberg, who chaired the campaign in favor of the measure, “but it’s clear the answer is not Initiative 50 (the conservative tax cut measure), which would amend the constitution to permanently reduce funding for schools, fire districts and libraries.”

The change to the TABOR cap could have allowed the state government to spend as much as $2.2 billion in additional tax revenue annually by 2032. The vast majority of that money would have gone to K-12 schools.

The boost to education funding was what won the vote of Susan Katz, a Boulder Democrat.

“We are totally open to paying more taxes, and we’re anxious for more money to go to education,” Katz said. “We like what the governor did with early childhood education (universal Pre-K) and we want to support him.”

But that message was largely missing from the campaign and from Polis himself, who tried to pitch voters on tax relief first and foremost.

That pitch was lost on some renters like Garvey, who didn’t expect to benefit from it. Chris Okere, a homeowner who cast his ballot in Boulder, said he voted for it, but with misgivings.

“It’s all about property taxes,” said Okere, a politically unaffiliated voter. “I didn’t think that it’s a great deal, but if we don’t do it, then our property taxes will go up 30 to 40%.”

Some of Proposition HH’s provisions were temporary, like a one-year change to the TABOR refund formula that would have given more to Coloradans who make under $99,000 a year, while reducing refund checks for higher earners.

The measure also would have provided some financial assistance to local governments to compensate for reduced property tax revenue, but the state aid was designed to be limited and fade over time. As a result, the measure was opposed by the Colorado Municipal League, Colorado Counties, Inc., and the Special District Association of Colorado, which represents local governments across the state.

Meanwhile, the true impact of other provisions would have depended greatly on future unknowns, like the economy and the decisions of future elected officials. 

Roughly $5.5 million was raised and spent by issue committees trying to persuade voters to approve or reject Proposition HH through mailers, text messages and TV ads. The money mostly came from political nonprofits that don’t disclose their donors — what The Colorado Sun refers to as dark-money groups — and it was roughly evenly split between the lone committee supporting the measure and the five committees opposing it. 

Property Tax Relief Now, the committee that supported the initiative, received donations up until Election Day, including $46,000 on Monday from five nonprofits and individuals. It raised a total of about $2.9 million.

The committee’s largest donors included two national liberal nonprofits that don’t disclose their donors: the Sixteen Thirty Fund, which gave Property Tax Relief Now $600,000, and Education Reform Now Advocacy, which gave the committee $660,000. Boldly Forward, which donated nearly $400,000, is a nonprofit associated with Polis that also doesn’t disclose its donors. The National Education Association, the country’s largest teachers union, gave $200,000.

Five issue committees opposed the measure, including No on HH, which alone raised north of $2 million to combat the initiative. No on HH received $1.2 million alone from Advance Colorado Action, a conservative political nonprofit that doesn’t disclose its donors. It also received $600,000 from Defend Colorado, another conservative political nonprofit that doesn’t disclose its donors.

Americans for Prosperity, a national conservative political nonprofit that doesn’t reveal its donors, spent $405,000 to defeat the question.

Other opponents included the Colorado Association of Realtors and the state branch of the National Federation of Independent Businesses.

Proposition HH was supported by AARP Colorado, the Colorado Association of School Boards, Colorado Professional Firefighters and Colorado Concern, a nonprofit made up of CEOs in the state.

Staff writers Sandra Fish, Erica Breunlin, Parker Yamasaki and Clare Zhang contributed to this report.

It’s Election Day in Colorado, where voters will decide whether to approve two statewide ballot initiatives and also make important choices in their local school board and municipal races.

If you haven’t voted yet, there’s still plenty of time to cast your ballot.

In fact, Colorado is a same-day voter registration state, so you can even register to vote and cast a ballot until polls close at 7 p.m. tonight. As long as you turn in your ballot or are in line to vote in person by 7 p.m., your vote will be counted. 

It’s too late, however, to mail your ballot back to your county clerk. You must turn your ballot in at a drop box if you want it to be counted. 

To find a nearby drop box or polling location, visit this site. You can also check your voter registration status here. 

Results will start being posted soon after polls close at 7 p.m., but The Sun won’t launch stories on a race until it has been called or if we won’t know the results before the end of the night. 

Early results are just that, and we don’t want to mislead you about the direction of a race by reporting initial returns that don’t necessarily indicate the outcome of a contest. 

We’re expecting a lot of last-minute ballots this year, which means the counting process may be slow. Most counties typically report results through about midnight on Election Day and then return to finish counting on Wednesday. 

The Sun will be focusing its Election Day coverage on the outcome of the two statewide tax measures, Propositions HH and II, as well as the top municipal and school board races across the state. 

Check coloradosun.com this evening for results and analysis. You can also follow our politics team on social media for updates through the day:

• Political reporter Jesse Paul
• Policy reporter Brian Eason
• Political correspondent Sandra Fish
• Education reporter Erica Breunlin

If you have Election Day questions or concerns, send them to questions@coloradosun.com.

Happy voting!

Millions of Colorado voters Thursday evening received a robocall urging them to cast their November 2023 ballot from Colorado’s top election official, who faced criticism last year for spending money on a similar messaging campaign aimed at boosting turnout and combating election conspiracies.

The Colorado Secretary of State’s Office says registered voters received a call from Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold if their ballots hadn’t been returned and processed by 1 p.m. Thursday.

That’s more than 3 million people.

Coloradans who already cast their 2023 ballots may have received the 30-second robocall from Griswold, a Democrat, if their ballot hadn’t yet been opened by their county clerk. For instance, a Colorado Sun reporter who cast their ballot Wednesday still received the robocall.

“This is Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold,” the recorded message started. 

It ended with: “Colorado’s elections are safe and secure. Thank you for making your voice heard in the 2023 coordinated election.”

You can listen to a recording of the call here. The campaign cost $50,000, according to Griswold’s office, which declined to comment further on the call.

Matt Crane, executive director of the Colorado County Clerks Association, said that not all county clerks, who manage elections, were notified about the calls in advance.

“We are hearing from voters about it,” Crane said. “It appears that people who cast their ballots some time ago are receiving this message. We’ve had clerks who returned their ballots or clerks’ family members who have returned their ballots a week or so if not more ago, and they’ve gotten the calls.”

Crane added: “There are quite a few clerks who are upset and disappointed by it.”

The call comes at a time when clerks are busy dealing with Tuesday’s election. 

“The last thing that we want to see happen is voter confusion created around that messaging,” he said. “We know that, ultimately, this is going to fall mostly on the clerks who have to take the phone calls from angry citizens.”

But Wendy Holmes, a spokeswoman for Douglas County, said the county clerk’s office there was notified of the call before it was made and that the county’s election officials didn’t get questions from voters about it.

Ballots must be received by county clerks by 7 p.m. Tuesday to be counted. It’s too late to mail a ballot back in, but voters can drop off their ballots at a drop box or vote in person. 

► To find a nearby drop box or polling location, visit this site.

Voters can track the status of their ballots by signing up for BallotTrax. They have the option of being sent an automated text or email when their ballot is received and when it is officially counted by their county clerk.

Through 11:30 p.m. Thursday, roughly 650,000 of the nearly 4 million active, registered voters in Colorado had returned their ballots.

Griswold came under fire last year when her office spent more than $1 million to run a TV ad featuring her and former Colorado Secretary of State Wayne Williams, a Republican, in the months leading up to the 2022 election. The ad was aimed at combating voting conspiracies, but critics said it amounted to free air time for Griswold, who was running for reelection, and for Williams, who was running to be Colorado Springs’ mayor. 

Griswold won her reelection bid. Williams’ bid fell short. 

The ad prompted Senate President Steve Fenberg, D-Boulder, to add a provision into an election bill this year prohibiting the Colorado Secretary of State’s Office from using state or federal funds to pay for advertising that prominently features declared candidates for federal, state or local office.

Griswold is not currently running for any position.

The Colorado Secretary of State’s Office awarded a $1 million contract to Marketing for Change for advertising ahead of the 2024 election aimed at encouraging people to vote and assuring voters that the state’s elections are secure. The company has offices in Virginia, Orlando and Denver. 

Colorado’s Proposition HH packs a lot into a one-sentence ballot question.

It gives out tax relief by cutting local property taxes. It also takes tax relief away by reducing state taxpayer refunds.

It could be a financial boon to schools, but the tax cuts would come at the expense of other local government services.

And figuring out exactly what it would mean for your wallet and your community depends on a dozen different variables.

In the past few weeks, we’ve written extensively about the ins and outs of Proposition HH, the 10-year ballot measure championed by Democratic Gov. Jared Polis. The measure would cut property tax rates, boost school funding, replenish some local government losses and attempt to pay for it all by reducing state taxpayer refunds.

If you want to understand all the nuances, we’ve got you covered. We’ve written detailed explainers on how Proposition HH would work, what it would mean for public services and how the campaigns are misrepresenting its effects on property taxes and the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights. We also did a reader Q&A.

But if you lack the state legislature’s apparent enthusiasm for complicated tax policy, that’s OK, too. We’ll try to break it down in simpler terms.

Here are the key things you should know about Proposition HH before you vote in the Nov. 7 election.

Proposition HH: What you need to know about the Colorado property tax relief plan

Fact check: Would Proposition HH really eliminate Coloradans’ taxpayer refunds?

No, Proposition HH doesn’t raise property taxes. But it’s unlikely to cut them as much as supporters say.

Prop. HH would cut property taxes.

Property values are going up an average of 40% in Colorado next year, which means a big jump in almost everyone’s property taxes.

Proposition HH won’t wipe that out completely, but it would lessen the increases that people see on their tax bills over the next 10 years.

What does that translate to in tax relief? That depends on how much you pay in taxes in the first place.

The state voter’s guide provides a rough starting point. If your home is worth $500,000, and you pay around 70 mills in local taxes, Legislative Council Staff estimates you could save $186 to $276 on the property taxes you would have owed next year, and $314 to $396 in 2025.

For an estimate tailored more closely to your household, try this calculator created by legislative staff.

Homeowners 65 and older stand to benefit even more. The measure would make an existing tax break for senior homeowners portable starting in 2025, meaning you don’t lose it if you move to a new home.

Of course, it’s even more complicated than that. To learn more about how Proposition HH affects property taxes, including how it could help renters, read our detailed explanation and our fact check of property tax claims.

Prop. HH would reduce TABOR refunds over time.

If Proposition HH passes, everyone would get a TABOR refund check of $832 in 2024.

For most Coloradans, that’s a larger refund than they would have received otherwise. It’s paid for by taking refund money away from those making more than $99,000 a year.

After one year, TABOR refunds would revert back to the usual system, in which higher earners get larger checks and lower earners get smaller ones.

But over time, everyone’s TABOR refunds would be reduced under Proposition HH. That’s because the measure raises the TABOR cap by an extra 1 percentage point each year, allowing the state to spend more of the money it collects rather than refund it to taxpayers.

For more, read our fact check on how it would affect TABOR refunds.

Prop. HH could increase funding for schools.

Could is the key word. It depends on economic conditions, but as long as the economy grows, Proposition HH sets up school districts to be the biggest winners of all.

WATCH

The Colorado Sun’s politics team explains Proposition HH

For starters, the state would be required to fully replace the $800 million that schools would otherwise lose due to the measure’s property tax cuts over the first few years.

And thanks to the increase in the TABOR cap, Proposition HH could do far more than just cover the cost of the tax cuts. Over the first three years, the measure is projected to generate over $400 million in new money for schools, according to the state voter guide. Eventually, it could generate over $1 billion in additional school funding in a given year.

There are some caveats, which you can read about here. But in general, the better the economy does, the more that schools would stand to gain.

Prop. HH would cut funding for local governments.

Cities, counties and special districts would all lose money if Proposition HH passes.

The measure does provide for some partial repayments to local governments to make up for the property tax cuts. But unlike for school districts, the repayments are designed to go away within the first few years.

In year one, the total hit to local government budgets would be $240 million statewide. By 2025, that’s expected to grow to $500 million.

For more on how it would affect local government funding, read our full story.

The group pushing for the passage of Proposition HH, the 10-year property tax relief plan on the November ballot, has launched a $1 million-plus advertising and messaging blitz as Election Day nears. 

Property Tax Relief Now, also known as Yes on HH, has spent nearly $700,000 since Oct. 13 on TV and streaming site advertising, according to campaign finance reports filed Monday and the committee. 

The committee has also spent roughly $250,000 on mailers and about $200,000 on digital advertising since mid-October. 

The last-minute spending was made possible by big donations from liberal political nonprofits, which The Colorado Sun refers to as dark-money groups because they don’t reveal their donors. Those nonprofits include the Sixteen Thirty Fund, a national group, which gave Property Tax Relief Now $350,000 on Oct. 20; Education Reform Now Advocacy, another national group, which donated $100,000 on Oct. 13; and Boldly Forward, which is associated with Gov. Jared Polis and gave $75,000 to the committee on Oct. 12. 

Education Reform Advocacy Now has given Property Tax Relief Now a total of $650,000, while the Sixteen Thirty Fund has donated a total of $600,000.

Property Tax Relief Now raised $760,000 from Oct. 12 to Oct. 25, the last fundraising period for which issue committees must file reports before Election Day. It spent nearly $1.3 million during that time. 

“We are continuing to educate voters on what’s at stake in these final weeks of the election,” said Senate President Steve Fenberg, a Boulder Democrat and one of the architects of Proposition HH. “Our message is clear: If HH fails, property taxes will go up.”

Major contribution reports — required within 24 hours when an issue committee receives a donation of more than $1,000 in the month leading up to Election Day — show Property Tax Relief Now continues to raise money. Boldly Forward gave Property Tax Relief Now $240,000 on Oct. 26, after the most recent campaign finance reporting period, and $10,000 on Oct. 27.

Boldly Forward has given Property Tax Relief Now a total of nearly $392,000.

Proposition HH, which was placed on the Nov. 7 ballot by Democrats in the legislature with the help of Polis, is highly complex. It would limit the increase in Coloradans’ property taxes each year by hundreds of millions of dollars, if not more than $1 billion. But over time, Coloradans could get billions less in tax refunds as the state government redirects those dollars to schools and other local agencies.

The recent fundraising and spending by proponents of Proposition HH has caught them up to the opponents of the ballot measure, who raised their cash earlier on and began attacking the initiative in mailers and on the airwaves over the summer.

The issue committees opposing Proposition HH had spent a total of $2.4 million through Oct. 25, compared with the $1.7 million total spent by Property Tax Relief Now. But the groups opposing the measure only had $125,000 left in their campaign accounts as of Oct. 25, compared with the $670,000 left in Property Tax Relief Now’s account.

Here’s a closer look at the fundraising and spending by the groups opposing Proposition HH through Oct. 25:

• No on HH has raised nearly $2 million, with almost $1.2 million coming from Advance Colorado Action, a conservative political nonprofit that The Sun refers to as a dark-money group. No on HH has also received $600,000 from Defend Colorado and $150,000 from Ready Colorado, two more dark-money groups.
• Americans for Prosperity, a national conservative political nonprofit, has spent $375,000 on canvassing, radio ads and mailers opposing Proposition HH through its state issue committee, Americans for Prosperity Colorado. Both Americans for Prosperity and Americans for Prosperity Colorado are what The Sun refers to as dark-money groups.
• The Colorado Association of Realtors spent nearly $167,000 on digital advertising and a website opposing Proposition HH through Coloradans for a Better Colorado, a recently formed state issue committee.
• The TABOR Coalition has spent nearly $16,000 on radio ads and signs opposing Proposition HH. It has been funded by a couple of nonprofits and several individuals.
• The Independence Institute, a conservative think tank, accounted for almost all of the $14,000 raised by Taxpayers for a Better Deal. The money from the nonprofit, another dark-money group, accounts in-kind contributions including staff time and office space. 

In addition to money raised and spent by the issue committees opposing Proposition HH, Advance Colorado Action directly spent more than $556,000 on TV advertising and a newspaper ad opposing the ballot measure. The group didn’t route the spending through an issue committee, but reported its spending to the Colorado Secretary of State’s Office under a 2022 law that doesn’t require nonprofits to create an issue committee if 20% of their spending over three years isn’t on a single ballot measure.

The partisan proxy battle for political control of the mayor’s office and city council in Colorado’s third-largest city is nearing $2 million, with much of that money being spent by conservative groups that don’t disclose their donors. 

Municipal elections in Aurora are technically nonpartisan, but conservatives currently control city government, which is unusual in the Democratic-dominated Denver metro area. 

That could change Nov. 7, when the Aurora mayor’s office and five city council seats are up for grabs. Groups aligned with Republicans are spending gobs of money to defend the conservative power in Aurora while organizations aligned with Democrats are hoping to reverse the political tide in the city.

Independent spending committees, or super PACs, which can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money as long as it doesn’t go directly to candidate campaigns, had spent $921,000 on Aurora’s municipal election through Oct. 21.

That nears the $979,000 total spent just by conservative super PACs in the city’s 2021 election. It’s more than the $723,000 in spending by similar groups in the Colorado Springs’ municipal election in April but far less than the $6.8 million spent by political groups in Denver’s elections earlier this year. 

Two conservative groups account for 80% of the super PAC spending so far this year, and the bulk of those dollars are going to city council contests.

“Aurora being the third-biggest city in the state, it has a big interest for conservatives,” Michael Fields said. “The current city council and mayor have been doing a good job — and we have to continue the momentum.”

Fields is the treasurer for Aurorans for a Safe and Prosperous Future, a conservative committee that has spent nearly $365,000 on Aurora council races this year and $97,000 on the mayoral contest. 

That makes sense given that Aurora’s “weak mayor” form of government — the mayor’s role is mostly ceremonial outside of casting tie-breaking city council votes — means city council and the city’s manager almost effectively hold the levers of power. 

Aurorans for a Safe and Prosperous Future received $480,000 from Defend Colorado, a conservative political nonprofit. The Colorado Sun refers to Defend Colorado as a dark-money group because it doesn’t disclose its donors. Additionally, Fields is the leader of Advance Colorado Action, another dark-money political nonprofit.

Two years ago, a different group also named Aurorans for a Safe and Prosperous Future and run by Fields spent $603,000 to help three of five conservative candidates win city council seats. 

This year, the super PAC is sending mailers and other communications:

• Supporting incumbent Mayor Mike Coffman, who is registered as a Republican and is former congressman, while opposing Councilman Juan Marcano, who is registered as a Democrat, in the mayoral contest;
• Supporting city council candidates Francoise Bergan, Curtis Gardner, Stephanie Hancock, Angela Lawson and Jono Scott, all of whom are registered Republicans except Lawson, who is unaffiliated; and opposing council candidates Alison Coombs, Jon Gray, Brian Matise and Chris Rhodes, all of whom are registered Democrats. 

Building Aurora Together, another super PAC backing conservative candidates in Aurora, has spent $306,000 to support the same slate of city council candidates as Aurorans for a Safe and Prosperous Future. 

Ready Colorado, a conservative dark-money nonprofit focused on education issues, donated $200,000 to Building Aurora Together, while Our Community Our Future donated $100,000. The latter group is a dark-money political nonprofit that incorporated in March. Former Aurora Mayor Ed Tauer is the organization’s original registered agent.

One Main Street Aurora, another super PAC, has spent nearly $70,000 to support Gardner, who is running for reelection to his at-large city council seat. It has been funded by an $80,000 donation from One Main Street Colorado, a related dark-money political nonprofit.

Two super PACs are supporting the liberal slate of candidates in Aurora, but are spending far less than their conservative counterparts. 

Conservation Colorado Victory Fund has spent more than $13,000 to support Marcano in the mayoral race. It has also spent nearly $47,000 supporting Thomas Mayes, who is registered as a Democrat, and Coombs for the two at-large seats that are up for grabs on Nov. 7, and Gray, Matise and Rhodes for other council seats. 

The $113,000 the group has raised came from the national dark-money nonprofit League of Conservation Voters, as well as Conservation Voters Colorado, its affiliated super PAC, and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal employees. Conservation Colorado Victory Fund has also received donations from a handful of individual donors.

Aly Ferrufino-Coqueugnoit, political director for Conservation Colorado, said local elections are important to the group, but she’s not worried about being outspent.

“So many of our issues, from oil and gas to transportation to affordable housing, are really being tackled at the local level, which is why we invest in municipal candidates in municipal races,” she said. “We know that our residents want action on climate — need affordable housing, need clean air and water in their city. And we’re working to support the candidates that we believe are going to best fight for on those issues.”

Earthworks Action Fund, a super PAC, has spent nearly $23,000 supporting Coombs, Mayes and Matise in the race for control of city council. The $30,000 the group has raised came from a national dark-money nonprofit of the same name. 

Conservative candidates are leading their liberal counterparts in fundraising on the individual campaign level, too

Conservative candidates in Aurora are also outraising their liberal counterparts on the individual campaign level.

Coffman had raised $244,000 through Oct. 21, the most among Aurora candidate’s this year, and spent $148,000. Marcano had raised $101,000 through Oct. 21, while spending $62,000.

A third mayoral candidate, Jeffrey Sanford, hasn’t reported raising or spending any money.

Fundraising in the Aurora City Council contests:

• In the battle for two at-large seats, Gardner had raised $124,000 and spent about $81,000 through Oct. 21. He is trailed by Scott, who had raised $102,000 and spent $83,000. Coombs had raised $62,000 and spent $58,000, while Mayes had raised $50,000, including a $10,000 loan, and spent $37,000. 
• Hancock, who is running to represent the open Ward IV seat, had raised $47,000 and spent $38,000 through Oct. 21, while Gray, her opponent, had raised about $8,500 and spent nearly $5,800.
• Lawson had raised $33,000 and spent about $14,000 through Oct. 21 in her campaign to represent the open Ward V seat, while her opponent, Rhodes, had raised $10,000 and spent less than $7,000. Lawson is currently an at-large member of the council, but she’s term-limited in her seat. 
• Incumbent Bergan had raised nearly $85,000 and spent about $58,000 through Oct. 21 in her bid to continue representing Ward VI. Her opponent, Matise, had raised nearly $94,000, with $66,000 of that his own money. He’s spent nearly $83,000.

This story was originally published by Chalkbeat. Sign up for their newsletters at ckbe.at/newsletters

With a little more than a week until Election Day, spending in the Denver school board race has surpassed $1.36 million, fueled largely by one group that has spent big, including on an attack ad that the targeted candidate decried as a racist dog whistle.

That group — Better Leaders, Stronger Schools — is an independent expenditure committee funded largely by Denver Families Action, which is the political arm of an organization called Denver Families for Public Schools. The organization was founded in 2021 with the backing of local charter school networks and its board is populated by charter leaders.

In Denver Public Schools politics, pro-charter organizations like Denver Families Action are on one side and the Denver Classroom Teachers Association union is on the other. So far, the charter group is outspending the teachers union by about 4 to 1.

Pro-charter organizations are fighting to gain back a seat at the decision-making table. After years of a pro-charter majority on the Denver school board, the balance of power flipped in 2019. Today, all seven current members of the Denver school board were backed by the teachers union. With just three of the seven seats up for grabs Nov. 7, the election won’t change the majority. But it could change the board’s discussions.

Though Denver school board races have been million-dollar elections for several cycles, this year’s spending is notable. Pro-charter Better Leaders, Stronger Schools spent $250,000 on television ads featuring Denver Mayor Mike Johnston endorsing three candidates who were also endorsed by Denver Families Action: John Youngquist, Marlene De La Rosa, and Kimberlee Sia. It’s the first TV ad in memory for Denver school board candidates. 

The pro-charter committee has also sent several negative mailers, including one featuring a sad white child on one side and candidate Kwame Spearman, who is Black, on the other. 

In an interview, Spearman called the juxtaposition “dog whistling.”

Clarence Burton, CEO of Denver Families Action, did not respond to a request for comment.

Read more at chalkbeat.org.