The Colorado Municipal League, a nonprofit advocacy and information resource for municipalities, has announced its support and opposition to three propositions that will appear on election ballots in November.
The CML represents municipalities across the state of Colorado in 14 districts (divided on the same borders as the state’s 14 planning districts). The league hosted a meeting in September for District 9, which includes the towns and cities of Durango, Bayfield, Cortez, Dolores, Ignacio and Pagosa Springs.
Durango City Councilor Melissa Youssef said she attended the meeting in Pagosa Springs where three ballot items, Proposition 122, 123 and 126, were discussed by league representatives.
CML opposes Proposition 122 and Proposition 126 and supports Proposition 123, Youssef said.
Proposition 122, which would decriminalize and regulate state-classified Schedule 1 drugs such as psilocybin (the psychedelic compound found in some species of mushrooms) and DMT, is opposed by the league because it doesn’t give individual municipalities the option to opt out of decriminalization or natural medicine service programs that would be created by the state if the ballot item is passed by voters, she said.
“Municipalities have no ability to opt out as they did in Amendment 64 for marijuana,” Youssef said. “They are all about local control. So they oppose that.”
The league also opposes Proposition 126, which would allow liquor stores to offer third-party delivery services for alcoholic beverages and allow bars and restaurants to continue takeout and deliveries of alcoholic beverages indefinitely. As it stands, takeout and delivery of alcohol from bars and restaurants, which was temporarily instated during the COVID-19 pandemic, is set to expire on July 1, 2025.
Youssef said the CML opposes Proposition 126 because it fails to include local permitting and approval processes for third-party delivery companies.
“(It) restricts local governments from holding companies accountable for violations of Colorado beer and liquor laws in assuring that alcohol is not being sold to minors,” she said. “They think the state will be overrun and unable to control it on a level that they would want to see, and they wanted to see more local control, which is not in this proposition.”
Although CML opposes certain ballot measures, it favors Proposition 123, which would direct 0.1% of state income tax revenue toward affordable housing development grants, an affordable housing equity program and an affordable homeownership program, among other actions, to address the housing crisis afflicting cities across the state, Durango included.
Councilor Kim Baxter said one concern she has heard about Proposition 123 is that some municipalities might not participate in programs created by the state should the ballot measure pass. But Durango is well positioned to receive state funds and put them to work on affordable housing projects, she said.
“(CML) recognized that local participation is going to be necessary to ensure that this works,” Youssef said. “They’re also recognizing that it’s not going to solve our housing crisis and they wish it was a greater funding amount, but it’s a step in the right direction.”
In an Oct. 7 newsletter, CML said Proposition 123 would benefit municipalities trying to supply more affordable housing units to their communities. Because the proposition doesn’t mandate municipalities to participate, except if they choose to accept funding provided by the proposed program, the CML executive board supports the ballot measure.
cburney@durangoherald.com
