Residents submit petition to add charter language to preserve Littleton single‑family neighborhoods

Supporters of a citizens' initiative urged Littleton City Council on July 15 to place a charter amendment on the November ballot that would make it harder for the city to change single‑family residential land uses without voter approval.

The petitioners, organized as Rooted in Littleton, asked the council and city staff to confirm that the petition form met legal requirements and to hear a presentation or answer questions at the council's July 22 study session. Tammy Whitney, president of Rooted in Littleton, told the council she and volunteers collected 2,202 signatures—more than the 1,827 required—to qualify the amendment for the ballot.

The petition would add a new Section 65.5 to the Littleton City Charter. Backers say the language would (1) preserve the rules for four residential zoning districts (Small Lot Residential, Medium Lot Residential, Large Lot Residential and Acreage Residential) as they were on Jan. 1, 2025; (2) require first‑class U.S. mail notice to affected property owners before “comprehensive rezoning and official zoning map amendments including text changes”; and (3) make clear that an individual property owner may still seek rezoning for their own parcel.

Proponents argued the measure responds to a recent Unified Land Use Code (ULUC) proposal the group opposed in January 2025. Skip Maxwell, a Second District resident, said Rooted in Littleton offered to meet with city staff “so that there would be no misunderstanding of the intent of the amendment,” but that the offer had been declined. Jen Carlton, a Third District resident, told the council the amendment would "require notification, prevent significant changes in our communities, and give this power to us, the voters." Mark Harris, another petitioner, said the amendment "puts this important decision about the character of our neighborhoods in the hands of the people."

Petitioners emphasized the third sentence of the proposed charter language, which would require mailed notice to affected property owners for large ULUC text changes. Jane Brennan (identified in the petition discussion as a Fourth District resident) said mailed notice is a modest cost for the city and necessary so property owners do not learn of significant zoning changes only after the fact.

Several speakers also asked the council to use a new Colorado law—repeated in public comments as HB25‑109 (and related citations mentioned as HB25‑1093 by one speaker)—that permits cities to request judicial review of initiatives to determine their legality before they go on the ballot. Daniel Fleshner, a Cedar Street property owner, urged the city attorney to seek judicial review under that state law so voters would consider only lawful, well‑drafted measures.

City staff and the city manager said staff and the city attorney have met with Rooted in Littleton representatives, and the petitioners should expect a response from the city manager before the study session next Tuesday. No formal action or council vote on the petition was taken during the July 15 meeting.

The petitioners said they will submit the completed petition forms to the city clerk for verification; city staff indicated the clerk would examine the submitted forms per the usual process for ballot initiatives. The council did not vote on or modify petition language at the meeting.

A study session on the petition was scheduled by council for July 22; petitioners requested a chance to present and answer questions at that meeting.

Ending: The petitioners urged council to adopt the procedural steps that would let voters decide the proposed charter language in November and to use the new state judicial review process if the city chooses to pursue it. City staff indicated they will respond to Rooted in Littleton before the study session.