Broomfield council asks staff to draft six charter ballot proposals, including vacancies, dual-office ban and code-of-ethics requirement

Nancy Rogers, the city and county attorney, briefed the City and County of Broomfield council on outstanding recommendations from the charter review committee and the process to place charter amendments on the ballot.

Rogers reminded council that charter changes take effect only if voters approve them, that government funds may not be used to advocate for ballot questions, and that the city must meet a deadline (staff cited August 12) to place questions on the 2025 ballot. She also reviewed procedural constraints such as the “single subject” rule that guides how proposals can be bundled.

Council discussed priorities and directed staff to draft six items (some bundled under single-section changes) for formal consideration as ballot questions. The topics council asked staff to prepare were: - A broad language “cleanup” question consolidating non-substantive editorial and consistency updates across the charter. - Section 4.6: a prohibition on an elected official simultaneously holding two elected offices (a dual-office ban) and related clarifications. - Section 4.7 (vacancies): changes including treating 50% absences as a vacancy, limiting appointment fills to the next coordinated election rather than for the full remaining term, and making the mayoral succession plan place the mayor pro tem in the mayor’s role until the next election. - Section 4.11: a charter requirement that council adopt a code of ethics; council asked staff to include a time frame for adoption (council members discussed a suggestion of roughly six months after voter approval to adopt or update a code of ethics). - Section 6.8 (emergency ordinances): a proposal to allow certain emergency ordinances to take effect immediately (staff said this had been a medium-priority staff recommendation because of potential needs, for example, in a public-safety emergency). - A charter change to require a two-thirds council threshold for specified intergovernmental agreements (IGAs) where the charter currently imposes a higher threshold than for other contracts; council proposed making IGA approval thresholds consistent with other practice.

Council members expressed a mix of views about pacing and bundling. Several members favored bundling multiple noncontroversial “cleanups” into a single question to avoid ballot fatigue; others emphasized making a few substantive changes each year so voters can consider them more clearly. Members also asked staff to consult stakeholders such as the Broomfield Housing Authority on items that might affect affordable-housing operations and to allow time for public education if council moves forward.

Rogers said staff would draft ordinance language and return to council for readings; she reiterated that council’s action tonight is to give direction to prepare questions and not to adopt charter changes. Council indicated consensus on the set of items staff should bring back; staff will prepare ballot-question language and ordinance drafts subject to council readings if council confirms placement on the ballot.

Next steps: staff will draft proposed ballot questions and related ordinance language, circulate drafts to council in advance of the formal ordinance readings, and observe the August 12 deadline for inclusion on the 2025 ballot if council pursues placement. No final charter text or voter question was adopted at the study session.