We have a fascinating problem in our city that I’ve seen firsthand as a candidate for city council – twice, having run for city council in the 2021 and 2023 municipal elections.
Beginning with funding a campaign, if you want to win a city council at-large seat in our city, it costs about $70,000 per 500,000 registered voters. That puts 3 to 4 ‘vote for me’ cards in voter mailboxes, targeted to the party of choice and unaffiliated voters. It also puts out election signs and maybe a billboard or two. Perhaps, there will be enough left for coffee and donuts for walking teams to knock on doors. Personally, I was not going into debt in my campaigns and with the donations of friends and personal funding, had about a $5,000 budget. I was nowhere close to the $70 K I needed to touch voters four times.
As a result, like many candidates, I interviewed with the Developers for their support. That support did not come my way, but that was an excellent time with them. I thought they were a smart, excellent group of business, banking, and real estate people. I was disappointed but have no negative feelings because their decisions for who to support for City Council was a business investment decision.
My guess is that the Developers did not choose me because I pointed out problems I saw as a member of school district D-20’s District Accountability Committee, (DAC). Their development consultant for D-20 briefed the DAC last year that student population in D-20 was stagnant the past 10 years. In discussion with him after his briefing, he said the reasons are homes on the north end of town are too expensive for young families, that problem exacerbated with rising utilities costs. The reason D-20 remains stagnant, as opposed to seeing declining student population, is that many families in our city ‘Choice’ their students in other districts into D-20 schools. D-20 has a distinguished history of being accredited with distinction in Colorado for the past 14 years and is many parents’ destination for their kids' education.
In my interviews with Developers and Real Estate people, I challenged them that in our harsh, very expensive housing market, they had to figure out how to build and sell homes young families could afford. Apartments with monthly rent costs that match monthly mortgage costs do not solve the problem. As a result, our soaring business and job market since 2015, detailed accurately by John Suthers in his last 'State of the City' speech, will soon cease to attract businesses and people to work and live in our city. None of us had the answers but as reported recently in the Gazette, we are seeing our economy numbers, as indicated by dropping tax revenue, begin to slide. Next city fiscal year, that will force cost cutting in our city services. The lack of homes young families can afford means our city population is aging into empty nester homes and retirees as High School Seniors graduate. It is probable that in the near future, stagnant student populations will begin to decline. I'm an old Grandpa and do not want to see this happen in our beautiful city.
As a 20-year retired Army Vet, I also turned to the military side of things. If military families can find affordable homes, it is usually outside city limits. As for military dependents in D20, a large proportion attend schools on the west side of D-20 where much of D-20’s $300 million deferred maintenance bill resides… In D-20’s oldest schools. I hope D-20’s sharp new superintendent and school board have a vision to fix that.
The bottom line is that Homes young families can afford are not being built in D-20 and our other school districts. With the stagnant student populations, they will not be building new schools anytime soon, and this scenario is repeated across school districts in our city. Add in rising utilities costs and we are providing potential new families with a fair number of reasons to not come here for new jobs and homes.
In the 2023 municipal election, the winning candidates were all developer supported. I was disappointed that not one of the winning Developer supported candidates came from known conservative or Republican party roots. The El Paso County GOP piously focused on their pup tent ‘non-affiliated election’ approach by not endorsing or supporting any candidates. The Democrats had a very different and much more successful approach. As a result, not one military veteran conservative from Republican roots was elected to council and there were excellent candidates on the ballot. Essentially, the developers got their slate of candidates on City Council.
With GOP registered voters shrinking in our city and county, the Unaffiliated voters had the loudest voices in the election. I believe that one more election like this one will put Democrats in just about every elected office in our city and county. I want to be wrong in that analysis, but one of many solutions is that the El Paso County GOP MUST build a big tent attractive to unaffiliated voters. Not pup tents.
It is what it is, but voters picked the candidates who received that magic $70 K of support, able to put a plethora of mailers in mailboxes, signs on every major street corner, and the developers got what they wanted on city council. For them, they did not have evil intent, but rather, candidate support was a business investment decision. For us, our frustration grows as our city increases utility bills, the housing market is hugely expensive, and all those ‘in-fill’ projects cram more apartment complexes into our city.
Holly Lawrence in her Gazette Op/Ed on 9 August hit the nail on the head. Our city essentially elected a City Council and Mayor who “Hear but do not listen.”
Jay Inman
Enjoying another fabulous summer in Colorado Springs and pleased to be mowing my really green grass from all the rain as opposed to watering my lawn with expensive city water.