On March 16, 2024, at 1 p.m. at Kathmandu restaurant, five candidates on the ballot for the Town of Nederland’s April 2 election sat and engaged in the first of two Roundtable Discussions hosted by The Mountain-Ear. The candidates were asked six questions, none of which had been asked during the Candidates Forum held on March 4 because of time constraints.

Candidates for the Board of Trustees (BOT) Kristopher Larsen, Nichole Sterling, and Aaron Tye, and Mayoral candidates Billy Giblin and Tom Mahowald answered questions about representative democracy, becoming a home rule municipality, protecting the Town’s water rights and watershed, and wildfire preparedness and mitigation.

If necessary to secure the Town’s “paper” water rights, would you support exercising the Town’s right of eminent domain to purchase private property for water storage?

“As a last resort,” Sterling answered. “There’s so much more creativity and brainstorming that needs to happen first and if that gets exhausted and we’re at a point where we have to secure additional water for the future of this town, then absolutely it’s not off the table. That’s the burden that we bear and that is the duty that we would have to explore.”

“It’s the option you never want to use but if your back is against the wall it’s what you have to use,” Larsen explained, describing how eminent domain should only be evoked for “immediate necessary public improvements.”

Tye agreed and specified how there would need to be “highly structured guidelines” to follow in the case of considering eminent domain.

Barker Reservoir was indicated as an example of eminent domain that was used for the “greater good” in terms of meeting community needs. Mahowald stated that the Nederland Middle Senior High School was another example of eminent domain, used by the Boulder Valley School District.

The discussion ventured into a topic brought up during a recent workshop with SE Group addressing the Comprehensive Plan concerning the Town using eminent domain to claim the property near the Barker Reservoir housing the Amerigas propane tanks. Most candidates agreed that claiming that property did not meet community needs and therefore was not a good use of eminent domain.

“That’s a ‘nice to have,’ but here is where I think we have to draw a line between what’s really important and necessary versus what’s a ‘nice to have,’ ” Sterling said.

How seriously do you take the town’s Rights of Nature resolution to recognize the rights of the natural world, specifically the Middle Boulder Creek and its watershed? Do you intend to make this a part of your decision-making process?

Sterling reiterated that the Rights of Nature does not provide jurisdictional rights over waterways, and noted that the public is often misguided in their understanding of what the Rights of Nature entail.

“It’s really easy to come up with your own version of Rights of Nature,” Tye spoke on the vagueness of the ordinance’s name. “You can just read it however you want to.”

“It’s a tool to give us insight into what’s going on around us with anything that’s affecting our water quality,” Larsen said, as the discussion among the candidates touched upon how the Rights of Nature, and the appointed Guardians who observe and report on those factors that affect Nederland’s environment, are already a part of the checks and balances of Nederland’s governmental process.

“It’s a slippery slope, because any state legislature can override it and that’s been done in Florida and Ohio, where the vast majority of the public wanted something and the conservative state legislature overrode it,” Giblin added.

“They’ve tried this in 39 countries and in the United States no court has yet to uphold them; these laws are primarily local ordinances and they’re all awaiting litigation,” Mahowald noted.

Sterling mentioned that the Guardians recently were asked to report on the potential ecological impacts of a recent development proposal, which she brought up as an example of how the Rights of Nature and the appointed Guardians are already a part of the BOT’s process.

Do you believe in “representative democracy” through which the BOT is elected to make decisions for their constituents, or do you believe that community issues should be voted on by the electorate as a ballot question.

Giblin was the first to answer and brought up the differences between a statutory town, Nederland’s current status, and a home rule municipality, where the community writes and institutes its own governing charter.

“The referendum is there for the folks to have a vote,” Giblin said of the democratic process, “and if we were ever to move to home rule there would probably be a lot more of that.”

Mahowald noted Denver as the best example of a successful home rule municipality, and specified that 94% of the Colorado electorate live under home rule, and that Erie was the latest municipality to become home rule.

“I can tell you in Summit County it has made a huge difference,” Mahowald added, explaining his experience of the positive impacts of becoming a home rule town. “When I lived there they got a new high school, a new rec center, and the entire river walk was paid for with taxes that would not have been allowed without home rule.”

The conversation went into the nature of volunteer government, to which Larsen noted that it is systemically classist and designed for the wealthy to assume power.

“It would be great if we could pay a full-time Mayor $100,000+ a year, and pay the council members $100,000+, but that’s never happening on our budget,” Larsen said.

“Under home rule maybe,” Mahowald laughed.

Considering how enrollment in local schools is seriously dwindling, how can you help make effective change in town government and in the community as a whole to create more support for Nederland schools and connections between the schools, the Town, and the greater Nederland community?

“Housing is probably the number one thing we can do, and then childcare,” Giblin began. “My daughter has had three teachers this year and when trying to fill the seat for the long haul part of the problem is people want to be able to live here and they have no options.”

Candidates spoke about creating more internships and mentorships, with a focus on outdoor education and environmental conservation. Giblin noted that he had spoken with school principals who had suggested that area kids would be interested in internships with Wild Bear Nature Center, the US Forest Service, the Nederland Parks Department, and Eldora.

Sterling brought up other municipalities that are focusing on student workforce education and on advanced technology.

“One of the things that we’re following very closely is, what are some of these new skills that are going to be paramount in this new age of AI,” Sterling said about work she does professionally, “and what I’m seeing is that oftentimes our school systems don’t focus on critical thinking and problem solving enough. I do think that there is something to be said about getting kids immersed in these new problem solving dilemmas.”

Larsen responded by stating that, in terms of what the Town government can do in a jurisdictional sense, right up there are building relationships with the educators and listening to their needs, and providing safer streets and sidewalks for kids to be able to walk to school. Larsen added that students could hold a greater role in Town government by attending meetings as liaisons, but statutory rules do not allow it, and proceeded to note that as a home rule municipality Nederland could change the voting age to 16 years old.

Tye spoke about instituting less broad mentorships, instead of giving students generalized options.

“My dream is to turn Wolf Tongue mine into a place where kids can go and learn these skills,” Tye said, referring to trade skills and jobs. “If COVID taught us anything, how many people in the tech industry lost their jobs and that was what they were qualified for? Instead, why not have a backup plan: know how to drywall, know how to do some mild plumbing, know how to do some tile work, it never hurts to learn those skills.”

“And as there’s a huge increase in manufactured housing, that would be a great place to combine those technical skills and trade skills,” Giblin added.

We live in wildfire country, but the Town has not made funding for wildfire mitigation on greenspace and other property owned by the Town a priority. This puts everyone at risk. If elected, would you advocate for and support establishment of a line item allocation in the budget to fund annual inspection of Town-owned land and the removal of dead/dying trees, downed trees and other wildfire accelerators?

Mahowald noted that there was not that much Town-owned land to have to mitigate, and Giblin stated that his answer would depend on the combined costs of inspection and mitigation. Candidates veered into discussing the removal of noxious weeds on Town-owned parcels, considering that the Town requires property owners to remove weeds on their own parcels.

Tye brought up the idea, previously mentioned during the Meet the Candidates Forum, of increasing volunteer efforts from the community for noxious weed removal and wildfire mitigation by offering free firewood as incentive.

How confident are you that the town could be safely evacuated now in the event of a wind-driven wildfire like the Marshall Fire? How would you improve the situation?

All candidates were in agreement that the Town would not be safely evacuated.

“It’s a matter of time,” Mahowald said. “I’ve run simulations and it took over 90 minutes to get Big Springs out simply because human nature is to do nothing.” Mahowald suggested installing sirens to mitigate hesitation from the public in the event of a wildfire or other emergency.

Mahowald added that he would like to see the Nederland Fire Department conduct public demonstrations of the Town’s hydrant and water capabilities, and suggested that a Saturday morning test evacuation should be conducted. He noted that the Town should also have a winter weather emergency plan and a plan for how to rebuild the Town after a critical emergency event.

Sterling pointed out that the BOT has already created a line item allocation in the budget for Troy Hendricks, Nederland’s Emergency Manager, to draft an Emergency Plan and to create an educational curriculum for the public for wildfire and emergency preparedness.

On March 18, 2024, at 6 p.m. at Tres Gringos, Trustee candidates Riley McCallister, Luke Miller, Jesse Seavers, and John Stevens were present, as well as Giblin, Larsen, and Mahowald, for the last Candidate’s Roundtable Discussion. Candidates were asked six remaining questions curated from the public; the questions pertained to housing development and community engagement.

Are you in favor of or opposed to allowing tiny home villages to be built in Nederland neighborhoods currently zoned as mountain residential? Why?

“It depends,” Stevens began. “You just can’t have somebody building 15 little tiny sheds in their backyard without any kind of sanitation. I would be opposed to it.”

“I would be for it,” Larsen stated. “It’s a creative solution for the housing crisis we have but I think we need to design them in such a way that makes sense for a mountain environment, because a lot of tiny homes are not that efficient, particularly in our climate and our weather.”

Giblin stated that he was in support of tiny home villages, though he admitted that they were sometimes expensive to build, especially given the Public Improvement Fees (PIF) fees attributed to them, and said that for tiny homes to be efficient they need to be built as villages with shared plumbing.

“I’d like to make sure that the definition of tiny home is very black and white, that it is a permanent structure and not a mobile RV,” McCallister said, before detailing where in Nederland he would consider a good location for a tiny home village. “To me, when I hear ‘tiny home’ I think of van campers and small communes. What I would think of immediately is where the trailer park is now and the open vacant lot where the old mill was. If it is on a universal septic and it is up to code and on the grid, then I could be for it.”

Mahowald called tiny homes “one of the least efficient ways you can possibly build in terms of allocating your resources,” before suggesting that duplexes and triplexes made more sense for Nederland.

“You can’t solve our housing problem with tiny homes but I think there is definitely a category of people who would enjoy that lifestyle,” Miller said. “But the efficiency of duplexes, triplexes, and apartments can’t be discounted; that has to be more a part of our solution.”

Would you prioritize the annexation of a dense development over the infrastructure needs within town limits?

Larsen noted that annexation and infrastructure are both broad subjects and interpreted infrastructure to refer to Nederland’s streets, parks, and utilities. He stated that any annexation would need to fit the needs of the community and come with incentives, but that current infrastructure needs should always be a priority.

“Infrastructure has to be the first thing, and with that can come infill and development and building density inside the town,” Giblin said. “As for an annexation, it depends on the application that comes before us, and when it does, whether the town needs it at that point; but that’s not quite how it’s going to present itself in real life. It’s going to be working on infrastructure and then looking at applications as they come in.”

McCallister stated that he believed both annexation and infrastructure needs to be important, but that infrastructure takes priority for him due to concerns of public safety.

Mahowald spoke of the results of the Housing Needs Assessment and of Proposition 123 and noted that the Town was in need of 122 new homes with only 35 buildable lots available. He explained how infrastructure upgrades are needed to support infill development that is already being planned, and how annexation may be a necessity in Nederland’s future.

“Town infrastructure of course is a priority, but our infill options are limited,” Miller agreed, “both because of the actual number of buildable properties but also the people who own buildable properties may not be interested in building high density housing. We may find ourselves in an opportunity where annexation is the best way forward, but we obviously can’t jeopardize the Town’s infrastructure.”

Stevens agreed, and spoke of how drainage and sewage issues in the Big Springs neighborhood should take priority over annexation.

How do you propose to increase and improve community involvement, and how welcome are the views of community members on the borders of Nederland but not living inside?

Giblin said that he was somewhat defensive of judgements on how Nederland governs that come from outside of Town limits, but that he welcomes, appreciates, and encourages engagement of any kind from both those within and outside of Nederland’s boundaries.

“I believe everyone’s input is just as valid than if you live here in the community; there’s not an invisible border that I see where the town ends and the outskirts begin,” McCallister said. “I think we need to think forward and be progressive for everyone else around us; the more opinions we get the better we get as a community.”

Mahowald mentioned having personally witnessed an unwillingness from others to volunteer for public service, though he spoke of being inspired by the Youth Advisory Board and hoped for more collaboration between the youth and the Town. Mahowald also explained how he would like to pursue discussions about becoming a home rule municipality, which would require a lot of citizen involvement in order for a town charter to be drafted.

Miller suggested moving the meetings to begin at least an hour earlier and implementing more communication between Town officials and the general public through various avenues. He reiterated that the only reason to draw distinction between those who live within Town limits and those who live outside them was because people in Town limits pay property taxes.

“The people in town pay the taxes. I’m open to suggestions from people outside of town, but I won’t take orders from them,” Stevens stated.

“We have a certain fiscal responsibility to those who live in town because roughly a third of our budget is from our property taxes,” Larsen explained, “and that is paid for by the town residents and they’re the only ones that can vote for us, so we have certain responsibility to them when it comes to making our decisions, particularly when we’re doing our annual budget. Counter to that is another third of our budget is from sales tax, and that is something that everyone in the area contributes to.”

Seavers arrived late for the Roundtable Discussion as a result of assisting community members dealing with the aftermath of the extreme winter weather. Seavers wished to address this question in particular.

“With Town events we have a huge opportunity to improve and there’s also an opportunity to mend the gap between Town staff and the BOT, and I believe we can do that with Town-sponsored events.

“I would like to see block parties so that neighbors can meet each other and learn to talk to one another, so when there are things like four-foot snow storms, neighbors are there to help one another,” Seavers continued.

“Another opportunity is volunteer parties within neighborhoods, where Town staff can work alongside neighbors who have potholes, for example. Town staff can just roll through a neighborhood and drop some spot piles on streets and neighbors can come out and fill potholes.

“Some of our largest budget categories are for public works and the police and we have zero citizen advisory related to those huge spending categories and I think that’s a problem,” Seavers added. He spoke of another way the public can get engaged: “We don’t have any sort of focus groups that are citizen-selected specialists that could add a layer of expertise on these matters. How many excavators and miners do we have in this community who would be great citizen advisors on what are the best practices for streets and for building trails?”

Do you support or oppose a reduction in the cost of building permits and water permits for construction of a new home in Nederland for those who qualify for affordable housing?

McCallister said that such a reduction would require a “black and white” process so that no one could take advantage of the offer, and he stated that he did not think the reduction should be made standard.

“It’s absurd how expensive it is to build,” Mahowald said, noting he paid about $60,000 in permit fees before being able to break ground on a home development. “If our priorities are to build affordable housing, and we’re making a commitment that we’re going to subsidize it in some way, then it has to be a line item that you can see and it’s something that goes into a budget and you’re willing to pay for.”

Miller agreed that there was a critical need for affordable housing in Nederland and that creative options should be considered.

Stevens reiterated that there are grants and other financial opportunities to help those in need acquire affordable housing, though he added that the Town government could assist in such a way and that duplexes, triplexes, and apartment buildings would be able to utilize such permit fee reductions most effectively.

Larsen specified that if the PIF fees were being waived then the home on the property in question would have to be classified as affordable indefinitely, so that developers could not turn a profit on the property in just a few years.

“If it’s a multi-family or multiplex of any kind where there is shared infrastructure, when there’s ways to reduce the cost in the actual amount of water that can go into each unit, then it becomes more reasonable to play with those PIF fees,” Giblin added. “Building permits aren’t exactly off-the-charts but it’s usually the PIF fees that’s the brunt of your charge, so if the rate study allows us to, that’s where we can have a little wiggle room.”

Hypothetically, if you had to choose one over the other, would you prioritize dedicating tax dollars to provide matching funds for the latest grant opportunity for new projects and facilities, or dedicating tax dollars for immediate and long-term maintenance and upgrades to existing parks, facilities, and infrastructure? Please explain your response in detail.

“I think it’s backwards,” Mahowald said. “Essentially, what we did as a Board a year ago was sit down and finish over the summer priorities that we care about irregardless of how they’re paid for. Chasing a grant for the sake of chasing a grant leads you down a trail of stupidity.” Mahowald did specify, however, that a broadband grant in partnership with Gilpin County was sought after despite broadband not being listed on the 2023 – 2024 Strategic Plan.

“There’s no point in going after a project just because there’s a grant for it,” Miller answered. “Using Town funds to match grants is a more efficient way of getting money for projects. There needs to be a balance of the two; we need grants but we have to focus on our priorities.”

Stevens agreed that the town’s needs should be prioritized, stating his belief that many needs had been neglected for several years, which was an inefficient way to operate a town.

Larsen brought up the Big Springs egress project as an example of a project that was beyond the Town’s budget and would require grants, but emphasized that a bicycle pump track, tourism initiatives, and a brand identity were projects that the Town should not have entered into grant requirements for.

Giblin stated that more structure was being created regarding how the Town considers applying for grants in the future, putting more accountability on Town staff and the BOT.

“Safety, sustainability, and then growth,” McCallister listed his personal priorities for the town, “as long as we are making sure we’re safe and that everything is updated it doesn’t stop us from looking at future ventures.

“We should be open for the 10 year plan, not the three-month or three-year plan, but to look towards the future so that when we do upgrade we upgrade for the right reasons, not as a knee-jerk reaction where we go in and fix something and two years down the line we have to redo it.”

The next Nederland municipal election is scheduled for April 2, 2024. Electors should have received ballots on March 11; the last day to request an absentee ballot is March 29.

To read the Candidates Profiles and the coverage of the Meet the Candidates Forum, please visit: https://www.themtnear.com/category/governement/.