The nation knew California’s Proposition 50 passed literally two minutes after the polls closed Tuesday, a race with nearly 9 million votes cast. But when it came to a Boulder City Council race with around 33,000 votes cast, we were still uncertain about who won well into Wednesday. I’m sort of kidding, because California still had votes to count on Friday, and I’ll always say let’s count ‘em right, not count ‘em fast. And an extended period of following the returns gave me a chance to watch the positioning change and the “final” but unofficial results shape up before writing. Here’s my recap of the 2025 election and the election cycle, albeit just one voice among many.

Council: Kaplan Wins, Progressive Majority Shrinks

Rob Kaplan won a seat on City Council, but also won my top story of this election cycle by defeating an incumbent.

I honestly think the only “stop the presses” top line-worthy result from the entire 2025 Boulder ballot was that Rob Kaplan knocked incumbent Lauren Folkerts off of Council by winning the fourth and final open seat. It wasn’t surprising that the other three candidates who won seats on Council finished where they did; the ballot measures were all pretty easy to predict; and the only contested School Board race was between two nice candidates where we would have been well-served with either of them. But there were lots of smaller factors leading to the actual outcome, so let’s roll.

Who Pulled the Strings?

I entered the final week of this campaign thinking the Council race would be remembered like it was a game of 3-on-3 basketball. I expected the real meat of the contest to be duked out between what I’ll call “Slate 1” (Nicole Speer, Folkerts, and Matt Benjamin) and “Slate 2” (Jenny Robins, Kaplan, and Mark Wallach.)

The three candidates on each slate are unique and different people, each with their own attributes and characteristics, but politics are often not just about the candidates alone. I did a semi-deep dive into the committees who endorsed and/or financially supported candidates while doing my Election Guide this year. With exceptions and omissions, organizations supporting Slate 1 included Boulder Progressives, Better Boulder, New Era Colorado, and Sierra Club Indian Peaks Group. In the other corner (supporting Slate 2) stood PLAN-Boulder County, Boulder Elevated, Boulder Action, and Open Boulder.

Kids – here’s a textbook example of good political literature from Open Boulder, like it or not. It gets the points across, looks good, and tells voters what to do. Bam.

The wild card to me looked like Open Boulder. During a few recent local election cycles, there was a group of organizations under an umbrella called “The Coalition” that endorsed mostly the same candidates. Until this year, Open Boulder was typically in line with Coalition members, which included Boulder Progressives, Better Boulder, and Sierra Club IPG (Sierra IPG might not have been an official Coalition member but their logo was on the Coalition’s website several years ago).

In 2025, The Coalition didn’t formally file as a committee, and Open Boulder flipped (mostly) away from its former Coalition partners, endorsing Kaplan, Robins, Wallach and Benjamin. The organization also raised the most money among Unofficial Candidate Committees (UCC) by far, taking in more than $15,000, which will pay for a decent amount of mailers and advertising in a local election. I couldn’t help wondering how many people who might’ve ordinarily voted more along the lines of Slate 1 actually changed their votes because Open Boulder mostly endorsed Slate 2.

Better Boulder didn’t really flip, but it endorsed Wallach from Slate 2 along with all of Slate 1 – Speer, Folkerts, and Benjamin – also an all-incumbent ticket. So, my pre-election prediction (I have witnesses) said Wallach and Benjamin would probably finish first or second because they got crossover endorsements – Wallach picking up Better Boulder and Benjamin getting Open Boulder. And I told the same people the race for third through sixth would be interesting.

Standings in Flux After Close of Polls

Matt Benjamin led the 2025 Council election wire-to-wire, earning the most total votes.

The earliest batch of returns Tuesday evening showed Benjamin, Wallach, Kaplan, and Robins in first through fourth – and that’s Open Boulder’s list of endorsements – with incumbents Speer and Folkerts in fifth and sixth. The order was the same after the county’s 12:30 a.m. release, but Speer had closed to within about 400 votes of Robins. That had to be concerning for Robins and her supporters, since it’s been a pretty common pattern in recent elections for standings to change toward the progressive side on the day after Election Day (or later) because University of Colorado voters and other last-day-voting-stragglers hadn’t been counted yet.

At that point, I started wondering about the possible impact of New Era Colorado, the youth voting advocacy organization that spent money supporting Speer, Folkerts, and Rachel Rose (more on New Era below). Huge voter turnout from CU-Boulder hasn’t ever really been the norm in municipal elections since I’ve been following them, but even moderate campus turnout could swing close races.

And true to recent patterns, standings started changing as late returns came in. Speer passed Robins to take fourth place with the Wednesday afternoon election report, and most experienced observers sensed momentum. However, Folkerts was far behind Kaplan and it was beginning to look like one incumbent would be defeated. Just to illustrate how numbers can change as the county reports later returns, Folkerts was about 2,700 votes behind Kaplan on Wednesday morning, but she closed to within about 2,000 Wednesday afternoon, and within about 1,700 on Wednesday evening.

Folkerts eventually made a concession statement that she would not return to office, but Speer passed Kaplan to take third with the Wednesday evening report. Numbers could still change after this last report, but top-four standings probably won’t, as Benjamin finished first, followed by Wallach, Speer, and Kaplan to fill the four open seats.

Mark Wallach was in second place wire-to-wire, and earned his third term on Council.

Robins was still about 600 votes ahead of Folkerts to hold fifth as of Nov. 6. Rose, a relative newcomer to Boulder who had some prior political involvement and picked up a few endorsements, was comfortably in seventh. Montserrat Palacios, who spent exactly $0 on her campaign, was in eighth. Max Lord, a construction professional making his first run, was a few hundred votes in front of computer engineer Aaron Stone, and long-time local political activist Rob Smoke brought up the rear but gave the best concession statement of this cycle.

Hats off to everyone who ran, but here’s a little extra about the winners.

I first interviewed Benjamin in 2017 and he didn’t win, but he got super-involved in local politics and issues, won a Council seat in 2021, and was the top vote-getter in 2025. People need to stick with it after disappointments sometimes! Wallach has already had his turn as the top vote-getter, but he won his third term on Council this year, and people who care about detail in city government ought to get in the habit of reading his Hotline posts.

Speer won her second term and ran her third local campaign, and tried to get me to have hope for the future at the end of my interview with her in September. It sort of worked. She’s served as Mayor Pro Tem and has been involved with regional and state issues as well as the local during her time on Council. Kaplan was a first-time candidate with experience as a professional and volunteer firefighter, Parks and Rec Advisory Board member, real estate professional, and bike shop owner. There will be more on Kaplan in sections to follow.

Political Balance Readjusts

Lauren Folkerts’ defeat in 2025 means the size of Boulder’s progressive majority will change, but it’s not as easy to say what it will mean for Council in practice.

The past two Councils (2021-23 and 2023-25) were sometimes informally referred to as “progressive Councils” in part because Boulder Progressives endorsed a solid number of winning candidates. The progressive wing of Council has probably held a 6-3 majority in recent years, although by no means were all votes taken during those years monolithic.

Kaplan’s victory, or Folkerts’ defeat, probably means the progressive majority has narrowed down to 5-4. The “side” that has been endorsed by Boulder Progressives would include Mayor Aaron Brockett, current members who didn’t have to run this year Taishya Adams and Ryan Schuchard, along with Speer and Benjamin.

The “side” that hasn’t received BP endorsements would be Tara Winer, Tina Marquis, Wallach and Kaplan. Do they need a name? I’d suggest the moderates or the centrists. It’s been disappointing to me to see them labeled as “conservatives” because I know most of them better than that, and they’re all at the bare minimum Democrats who hold mostly liberal or progressive values. I expect this labeling out of influencers who want to tar them with a “conservative” pejorative, but not from professional media. Don’t laugh, but I have often and on the record written that I dislike strict adherence to a political identity anyway. It can get too litmus-testy for my taste, especially when issues are complex and people from “other sides” have legitimate points for or against a position.

Meanwhile, I went on KGNU Radio a few weeks before Election Day, and concluded by saying incumbents have a really strong record of winning re-elections, but there was some dissatisfaction with government out there, and to quote myself – “we’ll see what happens on Nov. 4.”

The old slow-growth political dominance might be gone, but there are still locals who aren’t crazy about construction everywhere.

Fair or not, some of the local dissatisfaction leading up to this election was aimed at the progressives, and it might have contributed to Folkerts’ defeat. I feel it’s necessary to repeat “fair or not,” but some issues that some locals weren’t happy about included crime, homeless encampments taking over areas like along the Creek Path, a perception that there’s been too much development approved, certain recent tax or fee policy proposals, transportation proposals or projects that some believe over-favored cyclists relative to drivers, economic concerns, progressive positions on certain ballot measures, and others.

Council members are individuals, but they’re also fairly naturally associated with political parties, factions, or movements. I wonder if Folkerts would agree with me here, but I thought I had a very good interview with her in September. She’s smart, caring, and very detail-oriented – which you’d better be if you’re an architect. But she might have been seen as the farthest-left politically out of the candidates from the two major slates, fair or not. She was endorsed by Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) – just like Zohran Mamdani who won the Mayor’s race in New York City and is so hot right now – and was one of only two Council members to vote in favor of considering a ceasefire resolution over Gaza.

The organization Engage Boulder, spearheaded by the wealthy former Zayo head Dan Caruso, went after both Folkerts and Speer during the campaign. I have no way of knowing how effective this was, but his message certainly reached Caruso’s followers and social media consumers. Speer has actually been endorsed by DSA in the past (she got a “recommend” from DSA this year but not an endorsement), and was often lumped in with Folkerts in casual local discourse if only for some common connections, including endorsements. Even this year, a large majority of organizations that endorsed Speer also endorsed Folkerts.

Nicole Speer might have received a few hundred less votes than she did in 2021, but she held on for third place this year.

Why Speer got a few thousand more votes than Folkerts is a fair question, but I got some anecdotal sense that there was a desire in the community for rebalancing, and Folkerts getting the only DSA endorsement might have been one factor that made some voters see defeating her as one way to steer Council’s left wing a bit toward the center. However, it’s tough to say a large number of voters follow DSA endorsements one way or the other. Also, Folkerts did not get the support of Stop Antisemitism Colorado (see the next section), which could have had a noticeable impact.

The new 5-4 progressive majority will still have the opportunity to flex some power, but at times this could get tenuous. With a one-seat majority, you can’t lose votes from any members if you hope to pass something that might not appeal to the “other side.” So-called “swing votes” might mean compromise will be more necessary than with a larger majority. Board and commission appointment elections might get a bit more competitive. Also, the majority might disappear completely for a time if a member resigns (this has happened in the past) or for any reason can’t continue on Council (I’ve seen this happen). Finally, I would always recommend that a group holding power should use that power, but there’s a point at which using that power might seem like overreach, especially if the last election didn’t indicate a mandate from the voters. Overreach can easily lead to backlash.

I also believe I had a good interview with Kaplan. Even though he wasn’t endorsed by the Boulder Progressives, I didn’t get a sense that he was really what I call “local-polarized.” Some of the answers he gave to my questions might have fit in fine with the Progressives, while others might have fit in better with the groups that did endorse him. He was and still is relatively new to direct involvement in local politics, so time will tell how he actually governs, but he’s experienced in other areas that should be relevant to governing in Boulder. I believe he’s also lived in Boulder longer than any other candidate this year except Rob Smoke (check me on this), but he’s certainly a long-time local who has connections in the community, which can be really helpful in a smaller-batch election. We’ll see if Kaplan’s election helps satisfy locals who wanted a new balance on Council, but we’ll also get another chance to stand pat or readjust again in 2026.

Dark Money: Here in 2025 But Not Bigly

Here’s an example of what young voters could have learned about young candidate Rachel Rose, thanks to youth voting advocacy organization New Era Colorado. She got nearly 5,000 votes in 2025. 

I’m not using the term “dark money” to convey evil here, but it’s definitely used as a bogeyman if big quantities influence an election. Strictly technically speaking, dark money is a term used to describe campaign funding where organizations don’t have to identify individual donors. In Boulder municipal elections, what we might consider dark money typically comes through Independent Expenditure Committees (IEC).

New Era Colorado Action Fund spent the most among IECs in Boulder this year, at least as of reports on Election Day, dropping about $6,800 to support Folkerts, Speer, and Rose.

For a little history, New Era is often associated with CU-Boulder because it originated there in around 2006, but the organization has since grown significantly, and now functions throughout Colorado. It also endorsed candidates in Aurora and Ft. Collins this year. For one difference between UCCs and IECs, money like New Era’s could have come from anywhere or anyone, unless certain donations are legally prohibited. On the other hand, UCCs have to disclose the name of every contributor, and it’s usually easy to tell if these donors came from Boulder or not.

The organization Stop Antisemitism Colorado spent nearly as much as New Era with their IEC expenditure of about $6,200. This organization supported Wallach, Kaplan, Speer, Robins, and Benjamin – all of Slate 2 plus most of Slate 1 – so it’s a little tough for me to gauge their true influence in this election because so many other organizations and donors supported some combination of these candidates. I never saw any formal advertising or literature from Stop Antisemitism, maybe because I voted early, but perhaps they were more influential than what I might have imagined when one considers that their five candidates ranked exactly one through five as of Nov. 6!

I really don’t mean to be too critical of IECs, but in both cases, New Era and Stop Antisemitism are organizations who don’t only work in Boulder but spent real money in a strictly Boulder election. While candidates and UCCs have to limit donations to $100, IECs don’t – they can draw money from large pools if they have them, and allowable spending is unlimited. Neither of them spent anywhere near what Working Families Party spent on the 2023 Boulder Mayor’s race – about $24,000, which was very impactful since it was about equal to what an individual Council candidate could take in between contributions and city matching funds. Still, $6,000-plus will pay for a lot of literature or advertising, and we the voters can’t know who specifically paid for it.

On the other hand, undoubtedly there can be fair connections between an IEC organization and Boulder affairs. CU students are part of the community but political donations from students in municipal races are less likely, so a New Era IEC can help give youth voters a voice they couldn’t otherwise afford. Negative behavior toward the Jewish population has been a concern locally, whether it’s called antisemitism or anti-Zionism or anything else, and the tragic attack on Boulder Run For Their Lives marchers in June was both a painful memory and part of the discourse during this election cycle.

Boulder Progressives also spent about $1,700 in an IEC, coupled with $2,800 from their UCC, to reach about $4,500 total between two legally separate accounts. I’m not really sure why they had to do an IEC and I wasn’t meant to know anyway, but their spending wasn’t the top money story in this year’s race.

Most Voters Didn’t Vote Gaza Alone

Aaron Stone earned contributions and matching funds, put up yard signs, and stayed vocal on social media, but didn’t prevail in 2025.

While two candidates launched their campaigns very largely because of Gaza and desires for city actions on said issue, Gaza alone wasn’t enough to earn either candidate a seat on Council.

I interviewed both Aaron Stone and Rob Smoke this year, and they both began their opening statements with a lot of information about their stances on Gaza and why they felt it was a relevant issue in a City of Boulder election. After the opening statement, I asked both candidates the same questions about a variety of other city issues that I asked all the other candidates. They both answered all of my questions with honesty and fair effort, but not always with the same command of these issues as they had with Gaza.

Stone told the Daily Camera that he wasn’t a single-issue candidate and I have no reason to doubt that, and the single-issue issue came up during my interview with Smoke, but I think election results showed that voters generally did not see Gaza as a top municipal concern. In fairness, Smoke has been involved in local issues for decades – I used to sit next to him in the Municipal Building lobby during Council meetings 15-20 years ago and he’s been a regular attendee for ages – and Stone has very good professional experience plus took interest in other local issues. They both brought a dimension to the election cycle even if they didn’t win seats on Council.

This part of the campaign did lead me through a bit of a thought journey on international affairs as part of municipal discussions. The two candidates and a group of people who have come to Council meetings recently have, in a nutshell, asked for a ceasefire resolution and city divestment from certain companies doing business with Israel. I asked all 11 candidates what they thought about international issues in city politics, and got a range of answers from “we shouldn’t do it at all” to “occasionally there’s a place for it” to “we have a moral imperative to take action.”

I couched my questions to mostly be about international issues in general as opposed to just about Gaza, since candidates were running for three-year terms and we don’t know yet what other conflicts might take center stage before the term is up. I know people will disagree, but to me the question most voters cared about in this election was not “Is what’s happening in Gaza horrific and immoral?” but “What can a medium-sized city half-way across the world from the conflict with a part-time Council effectively do about it?” I did cover a Council discussion over Iraq as a journalist about two decades ago, so there is history of the city using city time on international affairs, but the war continued long after Boulder weighed in.

Saying Council should “just fix potholes” is overused and trite, but it’s easy to think of a good list of non-international issues Council must focus on – environment, public safety, economics, CU-city relationships, taxes and fees, and yes, transportation – which includes but is not limited to potholes. Anyone can run for Council for any reason, but it’s not easy to win without being able to make a case to lots of voters that they are truly ready to take this job with its multitudes of responsibilities. Possible, yes, just not easy.

Tax and Finance Ballot Measures Go Six-For-Six

It’s no surprise that Boulder County voters passed an Open Space tax measure, but there was some controversy because Issue 1A extends a 0.15% tax forever – although I hope we’ll have views like this forever.

I’ve heard this many times before and I’m not particularly proud of having repeated it, but people often say “Boulder has never met a tax it doesn’t like.” There were six measures on the Boulder ballot this year that had to do with taxes or finance, and six passed. But I’d like to put a little nuance on it.

First, in my view only one of them was actually a “new tax” on the general public. Boulder County Issue 1B passed by about 65% – 35%, and it created a new 0.15% sales and use tax to fund behavioral and mental health services in the county. Undoubtedly some voters didn’t really want a new tax this year, but the county was facing funding losses to behavioral and mental health programs at federal and state levels, and the consequences of untreated mental/behavioral health conditions can be devastating. I endorsed 1B, and despite a reasonable list of local criticisms it passed handily.

Two of the measures extended existing taxes into perpetuity, and they both passed despite critics calling them names like “forever taxes.”

  • Boulder County Issue 1A extended a 0.15% sales tax for Open Space purposes, passing by about 74% – 26%. It wasn’t tough for me to support it for two main reasons: a) this tax only represents a bit more than 20% of this year’s county Open Space budget, so it wouldn’t have extended full Open Space funding forever; and b) County Open Space should hopefully be with us forever – or at least far beyond when this year’s voters will pass away – and a good program needs funding for maintenance and staff. Sure, it could be called a forever tax, but in theory the revenue should be used on “forever needs.”
  • City of Boulder Issue 2A extended a 0.3% sales tax to fund the city’s Community, Culture, Resilience and Safety (CCRS) program into perpetuity by about 72% – 28%. While I might have been interested in putting a sunset date on this one, I half-heartedly supported it because the tax is for funding city facilities and infrastructure. These things inevitably deteriorate over time and with use, which might mean expensive repairs or replacements, and it’s good for a high-quality city to have high-quality facilities and infrastructure – forever (assuming Boulder makes it that long).
  • City of Boulder voters also passed the associated Issue 2B by about 65% – 35%, which will allow increased bonding capacity to do long-term financing for CCRS projects using 2A money to pay the principal and interest, like taking out a mortgage on a new fire station or rec center. 2B isn’t really a “forever tax,” but chances are decent that today’s sales taxpayers will be paying down CCRS debt levels approved under 2B until death does us all part. And chances are also good that we’ll all use or benefit from some of the CCRS-improved facilities and infrastructure as long as we shall remain in Boulder. Forever goes both ways.

At the state level, voters passed both Propositions LL (by about 64% – 36%) and MM (by about 59% – 41%) to help fund an existing School Meals program plus some of the state’s responsibilities for managing its SNAP operations. MM was actually a tax increase and that’s perhaps why it didn’t do as well as LL, but the new tax was only on Coloradans earning more than $300,000 (i.e., not me). These measures never really seemed in danger of failing to me, and I’m pleased more kids will get fed at school.

School Board: Mellow Race For Important Position

Deann Bucher, who has a lifetime of experience in education, will now serve on BVSD’s School Board.

There was only one contested Boulder Valley School District (BVSD) race this year – in District E between Deann Bucher and Jeffrey Anderson. Bucher won by 51.45% – 48.55%, but it seemed to be a very low-profile, low-dollar, and not super-controversial race between two decent and thoughtful candidates. If nothing else, I didn’t see any dirt in this one. Bucher did raise a few thousand dollars from education organizations, and I saw Bucher yard signs around town. Incumbent Nicole Rajpal ran uncontested in District B, and Ana Temu Otting ran uncontested in District F.

This race was definitely not the highlight of the election, but Bucher has deep experience in education and the overall BVSD Board appears to be in good hands for at least the next two years. That’s not a given, and BVSD voters should always take interest in School Board races because it’s not necessarily tough to flip a majority on a 7-person board. There have been a number of School Board horror stories in Colorado over recent years, and BVSD voters should do their best to make sure it doesn’t happen here.

2026: Marathon Ballot?

I’ve always appreciated odd-year elections because they to some extent separate the local from the state or national, so locals can have a high-quality local campaign focusing on local candidates and local issues. However, Boulder City Council and Mayoral elections will now shift to even-numbered years, starting in 2026, which I thought was a horrible mistake when voters passed it in 2022 and I haven’t changed my mind.

Nonetheless, your 2026 Boulder ballot will probably include races for:

  • U.S. Senate
  • U.S. House of Representatives
  • Governor of Colorado
  • Colorado Attorney General
  • Colorado Secretary of State
  • Colorado Treasurer
  • University of Colorado Board of Regents
  • State Board of Education At-Large (statewide)
  • State Representative (some readers might also have a State Senate race)
  • RTD Board
  • Perhaps 10-15 City Council members running for four open seats
  • Mayor of Boulder – there were four candidates last time
  • One Boulder County Commissioner seat
  • Perhaps 10-15 State of Colorado ballot measures (that’s pretty typical in even-year elections)
  • Some number of City of Boulder ballot measures are possible
  • A long list of judge retention questions

We didn’t have to make this change, and I really hope someday Boulder switches back to local odd-year elections. It’s still painfully obvious to me that many voters won’t have or take the time to do a quality job knowing all the issues and candidates on overwhelmingly long ballots like what we’ll see in 2026, so some voters will be almost by definition underinformed on some choices. That doesn’t bode well for residents who might have to live with the impacts of underinformed choices, and that can be a serious problem if we elect mediocre candidates or pass bad ballot measures. But here we go.

Still … Let’s End On The Positive

I’m not claiming to be the New York Times, but I get some readership!

I had a wonderful time once again doing this year’s Election Guide. I always enjoy meeting new candidates and wrestling with the issues. I sincerely hope readers enjoyed my guide or at least found it useful. I’m 100% independent, completely donation-funded and I can’t afford advertising, but was proud to hit more than 11,000 pageviews this year. I had larger reach when I worked for a free newspaper, but still got thousands of unique visits and visitors to my website this year. I offer my deepest thanks to readers and donors!

I called my 2025 guide “Dawn of the New Abnormal” because so many things I’ve taken for granted are changing and not for the better. If anything, this year has intensified my appreciation for free and fair elections, because the threats are no longer theoretical. I hope the courts and the American people can preserve a free and fair system, and I can’t guarantee here that it will be easy. But if we have elections, I will believe until my dying breath that we need good information to make good choices, and that’s part of why I’ve always loved political journalism and opinion writing. See you next year!