Cañon City ballot study committee recommends Western Gateway; residents push to prioritize pool or refund option

A citizen ballot study committee on July 6 presented three ranked options for spending the 0.3% sales tax approved by voters in 2024 and now held by Cañon City: Western Gateway riverfront improvements; a water-bill credit; and a modest community pool. The committee reported its scoring and recommended the Western Gateway as the option that could be implemented most quickly.

The report, read by committee member Jessica Hughes, said the group used a 40-point rubric and found the Western Gateway scored 28/40, a water-credit 26/40 and a modest pool 25/40. “Option A already has momentum,” Hughes said, describing existing planning groundwork and lower legal risk. The committee noted Option B (water bill credit) would yield only an estimated $100 per eligible household and called it a short-term, nontransformative choice. Option C, the pool, scored closely but the committee said no formal design, cost estimate or operations plan exists to implement it immediately.

The recommendation drew immediate pushback from residents and several committee members who attended the council meeting. Gwen Ferguson, who said she voted for the tax to build a pool, told the council she expected the revenue to be used for swimming facilities and urged council to preserve the tax for that purpose. “This tax money was passed to use for a pool,” she said. Several other speakers, including ballot committee participants, said the public process felt unfinished and that a clear champion should bring a legally viable pool proposal forward.

Council members said they would treat the ballot committee’s report as three equal options at this stage and proceed with a citizen-driven follow-up. Council member Tony said the committee produced a useful executive summary but emphasized the council must consider the legal constraints imposed by TABOR and the ballot language voters approved. City attorney Sellers advised that changes to the tax’s approved use may require a voter referral and that the precise ballot language and mechanism (ordinance vs. resolution) affect timing.

Council laid out a public schedule: citizen “champions” for each option may assemble materials and make presentations at a special council session (proposed July 21 or a nearby date) to allow public testimony; council will receive direction on Aug. 3 and is expected to adopt final referral language by Aug. 17 if the item is to be placed on the November ballot or county deadlines. The council also left open the possibility of continuing the tax collections while options are explored — a step that Attorney Sellers said would need explicit voter authorization if the original project is no longer moving forward.

The ballot committee report highlighted that by the end of 2026 the tax is projected to have generated about $2.4 million and that continuing through 2028 could raise roughly $4 million, excluding additional grants or donations. Committee members urged continued public engagement and recommended that, if the pool is the community’s choice, proponents work with the recreation district, which has authority to place its own tax measures on future ballots.

What’s next: Council asked citizen groups to form champions for each of the three options and to present concise pitches; staff and attorneys will prepare draft ballot language options. Council scheduled further procedural steps that would allow the city to decide by mid-August whether to formally refer a question to voters.