Englewood recall petitions OK'd for circulation

Four petitions aiming to recall a majority of the Englewood City Council have been approved by the city clerk to start getting signatures.

On April 17, resident Kurt Suppes announced that a group of Englewood residents filed affidavits with the city clerk seeking to recall Mayor Othoniel Sierra and Councilmembers Joe Anderson, Chelsea Nunnenkamp and Cheryl Wink.

Filing the recall affidavits is the first step in the recall process. The residents had until May 4 to submit recall petitions for each councilmember to the city clerk.

On May 5, Englewood City Clerk Stephanie Carlile confirmed via email that four recall petitions had been submitted for approval. 

“Sandra Kettelhut and Jan Weipert submitted the petitions yesterday for authorization on behalf of each recall committee,” Carlile wrote. 

On May 8, Carlile said via email that the four recall petitions have been authorized for circulation, meaning the residents can circulate the petitions for 60 days to get signatures. 

Each petition may be circulated and signed by registered Englewood voters “who would be entitled to vote for the successor of the incumbent sought to be recalled,” according to the Englewood Home Rule Charter. The number of signatures must equal at least 25% of the voters who voted in the last general election for that office.

The required signatures needed to proceed with the recall process are: 458 signatures for Sierra, 342 signatures for Nunnenkamp, 583 signatures for Anderson and 1,426 signatures for Wink.

Carlile said the deadline to file the petitions is on or before Thursday, July 6. 

“If the petitions are timely filed and deemed sufficient, council will set an election date not less than 60 days nor more than 120 days from the filing of the petitions,” Carlile wrote.

Statements of defense

In each petition, there is a “statement of charges” that explains why the group of residents want to recall the council member. There is also a statement of defense, in which the councilmember can respond to the claims.

One of the claims made by the residents is that each of the four councilmembers support zoning changes contemplated in the CodeNext project including permitting “multiplex housing” in R-1 zone districts, which are areas that have single-family homes. 

CodeNext refers to an ongoing effort to update Englewood’s development code, called the Unified Development Code. The city is still in the drafting phase of the project. 

The Englewood City Council unanimously agreed to indefinitely end the conversation of potentially permitting two-to-four-unit buildings in R-1 zone districts during the April 17 meeting. 

In Wink’s statement of defense, she wrote, “This recall petition is promoted by a small group of people who believe I should not serve as your Council member because the Englewood City Council EXPLORED housing ideas to address our region’s affordable housing crisis. 

“Should City Council be punished for DISCUSSING how to address our most pressing issues? Council heard our constituent concerns about density in neighborhoods and decided not to pursue multifamily units in all residential areas.”

Nunnenkamp, in her statement of defense, also said the recall effort is being pursued by “a minority of residents,” calling the effort “misguided.”

“It will only divide our community and cost taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars,” Nunnenkamp wrote. 

In response to claims that the councilmembers do not address crime and drug issues in the city, several of the councilmembers mentioned ways they believe they have, such as increasing the city’s police force.

Wink claimed the city council has invested $18.4 million to address flooding, tripled its investment in streets and committed $200 million to improve the city’s water system.

In his statement of defense, Anderson said that some people “misunderstand the disagreements that come in public debate” and that just because he does not agree with someone does not mean he has not listened. 

Anderson wrote that “some people just want to shut important conversations down.”

Sierra called the recall effort surprising in his statement of defense, saying it is based on discussions the city council had to bring more affordable and attainable housing to the city. 

“Over the past two years, we’ve created master plans for our water, sewer, and stormwater infrastructure, partnered with Littleton and Sheridan on a Tri-Cities Homelessness Action Plan, and added 6 additional sworn officers to the 2023 budget to help combat crime,” Sierra wrote. 

“This feels like this is an attempt to keep future councils from looking at any major items for fear that it may lead to a recall,” he added.

Referendum effort regarding Sam’s Automotive lot 

Carlile also confirmed that residents have turned in the referendum petition protesting the approval of the multifamily development near West Oxford Avenue and South Navajo Street, where the former Sam’s Automotive business was located. 

In a 6-1 vote, Englewood City Council had approved the development, which would include 361 apartment units in a four-story building as well as 34 rental townhomes in seven three-story buildings.

The referendum petition states, “By signing this petition, you are protesting this ordinance going into effect and — if sufficient signatures are obtained — causing Englewood City Council to reconsider this ordinance, by either repealing it in full or calling a special election to submit it to a vote of the electors of this city.” 

The petition needed to gather 1,466 signatures by May 4. On May 5, Carlile said the city clerk’s office will begin the verification process and has 30 days to issue a statement of sufficiency or insufficiency.