Littleton council opposes charter amendment 3A after hours of public comment

The Littleton City Council voted 5–1 on Oct. 7 to adopt a resolution opposing Charter Amendment 3A, a citizen‑filed ballot measure that would place restrictions on residential land use in the city charter and require voter elections for city‑initiated rezonings and certain text amendments.

The measure, placed on the Nov. 4 ballot after petitioners submitted a sufficient number of signatures, drew sustained public comment both for and against the amendment and raised legal questions from the city attorney about how it could interact with state law. Mayor Kyle Schlechter and five council members approved the resolution opposing 3A; Council member Pat Driscoll cast the lone no vote.

Supporters and opponents made lengthy appearances during the public‑comment period. “The only thing I ask is that as you discuss it publicly, you use factual information to back your position instead of any hyperbole or unknown maybes,” said Corey Palmero, identifying himself as a District 4 resident and an advocate for the amendment. Britney Decker, another speaker, said of the proposal: “Ballot 3A does feel like it's an assault on our freedoms.” Other speakers said the ballot measure would protect neighborhood character or, conversely, would freeze rights homeowners recently gained through council action.

City staff outlined the legal and procedural concerns the amendment raises. The city attorney said petitioners had filed the item and the clerk verified sufficient signatures, and that the petition’s language would, if enacted, “place within the city charter certain restrictions on single family land use.” The attorney cautioned that because the charter amendment would lock some land‑use rules to an “arbitrary date of 01/01/2025,” it “risks the city's ability to comply with state law requirements, putting the city at risk of costly litigation and government funding opportunities.” The attorney also noted the city filed a related court petition to seek clarification in advance of the election and said interveners were permitted under state statute.

Council members who supported the resolution cited ambiguity in the amendment and the likelihood of legal challenges if the charter and state law conflict. “An ambiguous legislative language leads to lawsuits,” Council member Joel Zink said during debate. Council member Reichert said it was important for elected leaders to take a stand where disinformation and hyperbole were circulating in the public debate.

Council member Driscoll, who voted no, said he favored letting voters decide without the council taking an official position and urged the body to defer to the public vote.

The council amended the resolution once on a minor wording change before the final vote and then approved the resolution opposing 3A, 5–1. The resolution itself urges Littleton voters to vote No on Charter Amendment 3A but does not remove the measure from the ballot; the amendment will still appear for voters on Nov. 4.

The petition, the council said, raises multiple legal questions the city may need to resolve in court if the amendment passes; city staff advised that the charter language’s interaction with recent state laws about accessory dwelling units and other land‑use matters creates potential conflicts.

The measure and the council’s resolution do not change voters’ access to the ballot. The council’s resolution is a formal statement of position; the electorate will decide the amendment’s fate on Nov. 4.