"Having opened three schools and serving on the Board of Education in Douglas County, I have always been an advocate of “local control.” I believe that decisions are best made closest to the people who are impacted. This also ensures that decisions are a direct representation of the values and desires of the surrounding community. This was part of the joy when opening a new school as its culture became a unique reflection of the students and families who attended the school.

"It was through this lens of first-hand experiences that I began to consider the Board of County Commissioners’ proposal for changing its statutory governance structure to that of “home rule.”

"Similar to when opening a new school, I wanted to hear what people’s “hopes and dreams” would be accomplished through Home Rule governance. I wanted to know why the current governance approach was not working and what obstacles would be removed through this new structure. Most importantly, I wanted to hear the excitement from “the people” how this would enhance Douglas County community’s values, priorities, and quality of life. Unfortunately, none of these themes have been proclaimed by our commissioners as the primary reasons for seeking this different approach to governance:

"Disdain for the State of Colorado’s legislative decisions, a need to have “standing” in future litigation, and increased control over decisions about public land seem to be the commissioners’ top reasons for seeking “home rule.” Unfortunately, there is minimal to no evidence that Home Rule governance promotes positive outcomes for any of these themes. And where is the evidence that these themes are a direct response to Douglas County citizens “hopes and desires”?

"After watching the commissioners’ interactions with the Board of Education last week, it became clear that the motivation for Home Rule Governance is NOT in response to the hopes and requests of Douglas County citizens. The public forum the following week shows commissioners becoming irritated with citizens who are questioning and requesting more information. This certainly runs counter to the benefits of “local control.” It is unfortunate that the commissioners are more focused on “controlling the narrative” of this initiative, than providing citizens with factual information. The fact that “the face” of those advocating for Home Rule are also the faces of the “county government” completely contradicts the notion that this is about Local Control!

"It is also worth noting that opposition to the Home Rule initiative is coming from both sides of the political spectrum. As an unaffiliated voter, this is further proof that this initiative should not be passed."