p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 18.6px 0.0px; text-align: center; font: 32.0px 'Times New Roman'; -webkit-text-stroke: #000000} p.p2 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 18.6px 0.0px; text-align: center; font: 18.0px 'Times New Roman'; -webkit-text-stroke: #000000} p.p3 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 18.6px 0.0px; font: 16.0px 'Times New Roman'; -webkit-text-stroke: #000000} span.s1 {font-kerning: none}
We have not always seen eye-to-eye. We have disagreed, sometimes strongly, about decisions facing the City, the processes by which some of those decisions were made, and what we believe is best for Montrose.
Those disagreements are real and remain. We will not pretend otherwise.
But there is something more important than the disagreements between us: our shared responsibility to the people of Montrose.
We both believe in this community. We want Montrose to remain a place where people can raise their families, build their businesses, retire with security, and feel that they belong. We want a city that is safe, well managed, financially responsible, welcoming, and prepared for the future. Those shared hopes are larger than either of us and more enduring than any single controversy.
That is why we met. We did not meet to erase our differences or to ask either person to surrender his convictions. We met because disagreement among elected officials must never become more important than the community they were elected to serve.
Montrose has experienced a difficult and divisive period. Public confidence has been tested. Relationships have been strained. Citizens who care deeply about this city have found themselves on different sides of important questions. Too often, disagreement has been interpreted as disloyalty, and questions have been treated as attacks.
We want to begin changing that.
Reconciliation does not mean silence. Finding common ground does not require anyone, elected official or citizen, to abandon what he or she believes. It requires us to listen to one another, to respect the sincerity of those who see an issue differently, and to remember that after a vote is taken, we remain neighbors.
The four proposed charter amendments will be decided by the voters in November. We continue to have differences concerning those proposals and the process that brought them to the ballot. This joint statement does not resolve those differences, constitute an endorsement or opposition of the amendments, or ask anyone to change a vote. Each of us remains free to express his views, and we shall, and every citizen must be equally free to study the questions, speak openly, and vote according to conscience.
What we can agree upon is that a city charter benefits from thoughtful review from time to time. The charter belongs to the people of Montrose, and its provisions shape their government long after any individual council member has left office.
Accordingly, following the November election and consideration of the proposed amendments, we will jointly ask the City Council to establish a citizens’ charter review commission. The commission should broadly represent the community, examine the charter as a whole, invite meaningful public participation, and recommend whether additional changes would serve the long-term interests of Montrose. Whatever recommendations it may make, if any, and whether the Council and voters ultimately accept or reject them, the process itself can provide a constructive opportunity for citizens with different perspectives to work together on the future of their city government.
Recent questions concerning the 2026 General Municipal Election also tested our ability to work together. Those questions mattered to the community and deserved careful examination. An internal review of the information has been undertaken so that the public would not bear that cost. We confirm the certified election results, which stand.
An initial review has also identified weaknesses in the election process that should be corrected. We agree that the City should implement measures providing clearer election-administration responsibilities, refined and city-specific agreements, a formal and impartial process for selecting and appointing election judges, and an official place where every candidate is invited to await results on election night.
Confidence in an election’s outcome and improvement of the process are not competing objectives. Both matter. Asking a difficult question is not an attack, and correcting a genuine weakness is not an admission of bad faith. When citizens raise a legitimate concern, their government should examine it honestly, protect public resources, preserve what is sound, and correct what can be improved.
The commitments announced here will not eliminate every disagreement, nor are they intended to do so. They are intended to demonstrate that common ground must be more than words. Trust is rebuilt when public officials listen, include the community, acknowledge differences honestly, and follow expressions of goodwill with meaningful action.
We remain committed to finishing the work already underway, planning carefully for growth, stewarding public dollars, maintaining dependable infrastructure, supporting public safety, and protecting the character that makes Montrose worth calling home. We will listen to residents, including those who did not vote for us, and treat fellow council members, city staff, and the public with the respect these offices require.
The measure of our work will not be which person wins an argument at a meeting. It will be whether Montrose is safer, stronger, more livable, more welcoming, and more accountable because we served.
We cannot change what has already occurred, but we can decide what happens next.
We choose to move forward, not by forgetting our differences, but by handling them better; not by asking anyone to be silent, but by listening more carefully; and not by expecting agreement on every issue, but by remembering what brought each of us to public service in the first place.
Montrose is more than the government we administer or the issues we debate. It is our neighbors, our families, our shared history, and our shared home. It belongs equally to those who agree with us and those who do not.
That is the common ground on which we stand, and the Montrose we will work together to serve.