Cortez voters are being asked to decide four ballot questions in addition to choosing candidates for five open seats in the April 7 municipal election.
City manager Drew Sanders explained the questions at a forum Thursday before a handful of people.
The first question cleans up numerous issues in the city charter ranging from typos to clarifying the duties of the city manager and city attorney. The language in the full measure is more than 50 pages long, so the ballot question is only a summary. The complete language of all the measures can be seen on the city’s website.
Sanders said the measure is complicated and he understands that it may seem confusing.
“I have had a hard time keeping a few things straight,” he said. “It needs to be done, but we don’t need to make it any more complicated than it has to be.”
All the questions involve modifications to the city charter, which Sanders likened to a constitution, saying it’s difficult to change.
Council first has to pass an ordinance establishing the ballot questions, which involves a public hearing before the council. Then those questions go to the voters, he said.
Attorney Patrick Coleman said the council also had two work sessions at which it developed the ballot questions, so there were several opportunities for the public to weigh in before the questions appeared on the ballot.
Sanders said the current charter contains a great deal of outdated language, leading to the first ballot question.
It clarifies the tax levy and annual budget processes, Sanders said, and clarifies the duties and responsibilities of the city manager and attorney.
“There is very little information about the city attorney in there now,” Sanders said.
The measure, if passed, also would remove the requirement for the city manager to live in the city. Sanders said managers should indeed live in the city, but this would allow the council the flexibility to let a new manager temporarily live elsewhere until he or she finds a home in Cortez. He said the council would have the ability to specify in the manager’s contract that the person had to ultimately reside in Cortez.
It also would change the charter to remove language saying the city attorney has to be licensed in the state of Colorado even to apply for the job. Coleman said anyone hired to be the city’s attorney would have to then be licensed in Colorado, but the current language eliminates people from even applying for the job if they aren’t licensed here.
The first question would also eliminate some outdated provisions and language.
Question No. 2 would allow the city council to change its members’ compensation by ordinance rather than a citywide vote.
Sanders said this is a different measure than how the U.S. Congress changes its pay When Congress changes its compensation, it can immediately begin getting the higher salaries.
“This does not take effect until the next council is seated,” Sanders said.
There would still have to be a public hearing on any ordinance allowing a salary change, he said, and if a council passed a salary increase that really outraged people, there’s always the option of a recall election.
The measure also says that if council members are allowed to appear remotely at meetings, they would be paid for those meetings as if they had attended in person.
Question No. 3 would change the charter to say council members can participate in meetings remotely.
Coleman said an ordinance passed by the council in 2025 does allow remote participation. The ordinance limits that to two councilpersons at any single meeting so that the entire council isn’t appearing on Zoom. The total number of meetings any individual can attend remotely is set at six per year, he said.
People who face charges in municipal court are allowed to appear remotely, he noted. “It’s pretty common in a lot of jurisdictions, but some people have strong feelings one way or another about it.”
The idea is to provide an option for councilpersons who have to be out of town for some reason such as caring for an ailing parent.
If city voters reject this ballot question, Coleman said, the council may choose to reconsider the ordinance they passed allowing remote appearances.
The final question would let people who have served eight consecutive years on the council run again after a two-year hiatus instead of waiting four years, as is now required.
Councilpersons are limited to serving two consecutive four-year terms. If someone is elected to a two-year term – which happens for the winning candidate who gets the fewest votes among the winners – that person can be elected to a four-year term after serving the two-year term. But, Sanders said, he or she could only serve an additional two years if elected a third consecutive time.
Sanders urged anyone who has questions about the ballot measures or the election to call him, attorney Coleman, PIO Kelly Codner, or clerk Danielle Wells at City Hall.
