Montrose council votes to notify county to reserve space for charter question after heated public comments

The Montrose City Council on July 21 voted to notify the Montrose County Clerk that the city may add one or more questions to the Nov. 3, 2026 coordinated election ballot related to amendments to the Montrose City Charter, a procedural step the mayor and city attorney said preserves the option while statutory deadlines are met.

Dozens of residents filled the podium and urged the council to slow the timetable, asking for more public outreach and a citizens’ charter review commission before putting changes before voters. “This item was added after the agenda had already been published,” Councilmember David Reid said, arguing the notice signals the council’s intent and bypasses meaningful citizen participation. “Good government values transparency over expediency,” Reid told the council.

Speakers called the calendar rushed: the city attorney outlined statutory deadlines that make July 23 the 100‑day marker and set later milestones including final ballot content required by Sept. 3. Several commenters warned that compressing public hearings into weeks would exclude working parents and others who cannot attend special meetings. “Please slow down, take your time,” one resident said, urging the council to allow the entire community to be informed before deciding.

Mayor (speaker 4) and other councilmembers said the motion merely preserves the option to place questions on the ballot and that the council plans additional meetings and outreach before any final decisions. The city attorney told the council that notification to the county is a step required if the city intends to coordinate a ballot question, and that an intergovernmental agreement (IGA) with the county would be required later if the council chooses to proceed.

Motion and outcome: Councilmember (speaker 32) moved, a second was made, and the council voted to notify the Montrose County Clerk regarding the addition of a question or questions to the Nov. 3, 2026 coordinated election ballot. The motion passed.

Why this matters: Residents said they fear a repeat of last year’s rejected amendment package, which they said had insufficient public input. Supporters of the notice said voters will still decide and that preserving the option is prudent given election timelines, but opponents warned that the process should prioritize broad public engagement and potentially a citizen review commission before placing constitutional‑level changes before voters.

What’s next: City staff said that if the council ultimately approves ballot language the council will need to finalize ordinances and an IGA with the county by late August/early September to meet statutory deadlines. The council did not vote on any amendment language at the meeting.