
Denver, Larimer County among Colorado jurisdictions with wildly lengthy ballots
Depending on where you live, Colorado’s 2024 election ballot may seem like you just sat down to start a new novel

Depending on where you live, Colorado’s 2024 election ballot may seem like you just sat down to start a new novel

“I feel like five people up here kind of knew what was going to go on, similar to when things were rescinded.” — Andrea Sampson, Loveland City Councilwoman.

“No other remedy than specific performance of the MFA will adequately compensate McWhinney,” the complaint reads.

“What I’d really stress is just like the governor was able to sneak this bill through, watch and see how they sneak the fix to this.” — House Minority Leader Mike Lynch

Get involved in the special district elections whether by running for office or even by just voting an absentee ballot.

The bill vastly expands union presence in the government sector and would create massive influence for those unions, undermining employers’ ability to negotiate and budget as they see fit.

The Fiscal Note for the bill does not project the cost of the rail system and only vaguely notes that there will be some “additional costs and workload” for both state agencies and local governments.

Colorado’s complex water appropriation doctrine make it imperative that water rights owners protect their place in the “first in time, first in right” queue. If you don’t use it, you lose it.

According to Tim Leonard, there is no record of the district board holding a public hearing or approving a resolution authorizing the purchase at the time.

A panel of “experts” censored questions written by the audience on 3×5 cards or questions facilitated by the host, thereby editing the narrative on Special Districts.

The Colorado Supreme Court is supposed to act as a stout defender of civil liberties. But apparently all bets are off when it comes to private property. In that sphere

Local officials for years have been approving an unmanageable, crazy-quilt of these districts — quasi-governments that operate with little accountability over huge sums of money they collect and spend annually — often without fully understanding the long-term consequences for the local tax structure, economic vitality and delivery of services.
By Jon Caldara
If you’re a fan of limited government, personal liberty, or educational choice, Tuesday night’s election results were a downer, just another one in a long line of depressing elections that has made Colorado more California than California.
However, if you prefer a controlling elite deciding your fate, debt, class envy and teacher unions, it was just another victory in a decade’s long win streak.
I’m curious how multi-billionaire nannyist Michael Bloomberg felt about his out-of-state investment. He put $5 million toward convincing Denver voters adults must stop buying Swisher Sweets cigars (which contains flavored tobacco, the new fentanyl).
As adults drive by marijuana shops selling flavored edibles, liquor stores selling peach-infused vodka, and legal psychedelic mushroom operations, it’s adults buying smoking cessation products like Zyn in Denver that Michael Bloomberg knows is the scourge of our nation.
It didn’t matter it is already illegal for anyone under 21 years old to buy any tobacco or nicotine products, flavored or not. Bloomberg’s millions convinced voters this was a ban on children buying the stuff. He won handedly as he spent nearly $52 per “yes” vote to make it happen.
Fifty-two bucks a person was enough to convince Denverites who scream “my body, my choice!” when it comes to abortion that government needs to stay out of your uterus but shove itself down your adult lungs. He can’t run New York anymore, so he regulates Denver.
His $5 million was the most spent on any ballot issue or candidate in Colorado this year. For perspective, the class-baiting tax increase on rich people to buy free lunches for just slightly less rich people’s kids raised only $800,000. And that was a statewide question not a tiny one like Denver’s cigar ban.
Passing Propositions LL and MM, the double-down on free lunches in Colorado, was certainly no shock. But it gives us some things to speculate.
It did not surprise me MM passed. What did surprise me was it passed by a larger majority than the original tax proposal, Prop FF, just a couple years ago.
By contrast voters seem to have learned their lesson on the wolf reintroduction fiasco. If put on the ballot today, “wolves” would certainly lose. I think witnessing the debacle of flinging apex predators throughout Colorado is what drove Denver voters to recently reject the slaughterhouse ban and a ban on selling furs. They realized that maybe in some areas, government doesn’t know what it’s doing.
In the same way, the farce that is the free lunch program should’ve caused more of us to reconsider the blatant socialism of stealing from those who have more than you.
It took no time for the current free lunch program to run into the red. I mean, go figure, you offer people free stuff, and they line up to take it. The program also failed to source food locally as promised in the original Prop FF. In other words, the state really FFed the whole socialistic experiment.
Yet even after witnessing this failure, a larger percentage of people voted for MM than the original FF. More of us want to penalize successful people to empower government elite to decide what their own kids should eat.
Could this be a leading indicator the socialist value structure of “take from thy neighbor” has taken root here? Props FF and this year’s LL and MM might be the gateway drug for the cocaine of “democratic socialism.” The first one is always free. “Yo, here’s a sandwich for your kid, you know, on the house.” Before you know it, we’re replacing our successful flat income tax rate with a punitive, progressive income tax.
New York’s socialist mayor-elect spelled it out in his victory speech. “We will prove that there is no problem too large for government to solve, and no concern too small for it to care about.”
Translation: Here in Colorado we will destroy our economy to save the Earth from climate change (while China builds a dirty coal plant every day), punish the productive, risk-taking class and chase them out of the state (see New York in California) as we micromanage every aspect of your life (like outlawing Swisher Sweet cigars, and feeding your children the meals of our choosing).
Is this the Colorado we’ll buy when some out-of-state billionaire sells it to us?

The Public Utilities Commission has a new proposed rule that would have them focusing less on energy and more on social justice. What changes would that bring? PowerGab Hosts Jake Fogleman and Amy Cooke discuss this and more.
Show Notes:
Because the grid could use a backup plan.
Yes, we’re giving away a Predator Generator.
No, this is not a drill.
Yes, it’s because reliability apparently isn’t fashionable anymore.
Starting with the first show of 2026, drop a funny, clever, or pithy comment in the show’s comment section.
That’s it. No forms. No fine print to initial. No ESG questionnaire.
At the end of the session, we’ll select our top 3–5 favorite comments.
Then you vote on the winner.
Democracy still works here. Mostly.
Winner announced on the last show in May 2026.
One comment.
One generator.
Because when the grid wobbles, satire won’t keep your lights on — but a Predator Generator will.

Grab your wallets and hold on tight.
As the Colorado Legislature gets back in session, Director of Policy for Independence Institute, Jake Fogleman forecasts the session and predicts what they’re gonna do to us.