Jefferson County's elected officials are facing scrutiny over their decision to hire a political consulting firm and spend $300,000 in public dollars to explore whether voters would support eliminating taxpayer refunds, when their constituents already rejected that question twice.
The political consulting firm's work was the basis for Commissioners Tracy Kraft-Tharp, Andy Kerr, and Lesley Dahlkemper unanimously voting to ask the public in November to allow the county to retain and spend all the revenue it collects, instead of giving some of it back to residents as mandated by the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights.
In addition to questioning the use of taxpayer money to explore financing a political campaign, some criticized the county's decision to hire The Bighorn Company, a consulting firm based in Lakewood, saying that work should have been done in-house. Others questioned the relationship between the county commissioners and the consulting firm's founder, Ian Silverii.
Silverii maintained that there is no conflict of interest, and he also defended his company's work.
“People want to see a real fix to these problems, not a band aid,” Silverii told The Denver Gazette.
A $300,000 contract
Jefferson County hired The Bighorn Company back in November to revisit the question of "de-Brucing."
Under Colorado’s TABOR, voters may allow their respective governments to "de-Bruce" — that is, permit a county, municipality, or school district to eliminate TABOR's revenue limit and use all the taxes it has collected for spending priorities.
The county's voters already rejected in 2019 and again in 2022, but the county's commissioners this month insisted that, after "engaging" with the public through "both qualitative and quantitative research," voters need to decide the question anew.
The contract directed the consulting firm to conduct a ballot policy analysis and work with county staffers to review "Jefferson County’s recent past ballot efforts to address funding challenges." Although the contract didn't spell it out, that provision likely referred to the failed 2019 and 2022 ballot measures.
Also under the contract, the firm offered to engage in "coalition building" and "stakeholder input on potential ballot solutions" and "gauge interest in and enthusiasm for supporting potential ballot solutions to funding challenges." Silverii said his firm ended up not doing these specific provisions.
Notably, the firm would conduct public opinion research, including polling on "potential ballot solutions."
Polling was conducted through a company called Aspect Strategic, according to Cassie Pearce, a spokesperson for Jefferson County and its commissioners.
Interestingly, the poll didn't actually test the specific language that the county sent to the ballot a few weeks ago. That ballot language was what The Bighorn Company had recommended to the county.
Silverii said the pollster ended up using similar language as the measure referred to the ballot by the county board, but it’s not clear exactly how that similar language was used in the poll.
One of the questions the poll asked was this: “Would you be more or less likely to support a measure if it supported the following county programs/services?”
The poll then listed those programs, including "fixing potholes," "road and bridge repair" and "youth mental and behavioral health programs."
The framing of that question appeared geared toward swaying voters to support the "measure" — without actually describing that it would allow the county to retain and spend all revenues it collects, and thereby eliminate people's TABOR refunds.
It also offered a hint of the tactic that the county and supporters of de-Brucing would use in their campaign messaging to voters.
The poll presented three options to respondents — revenue retention, a sales tax for transportation and a sales tax for both transportation and public safety. The latter two were presumably sales tax increases.
Revenue retention received majority support (56%-39%), while the transportation sales tax was under water (45%-53%). The third option barely cleared the majority at 51%-48%.
In its presentation to the county, Bighorn said de-Brucing strikes the "best balance between community’s desire to avoid cuts to popular county services and community’s cost sensitivity in our current economic environment."
The consulting firm acknowledged that approval at the ballot box is "not guaranteed" but that the option "provides the best available odds of resolving the county’s financial challenges without general fund cuts starting in 2025."
Will voters change their mind in 2024?
Supporters and critics of eliminating TABOR refunds don't discount the possibility that the voters of Jefferson County will support the proposal this time around.
“There’s a possibility voters will support this ballot measure. Every election is different, but I do think that Jefferson County voters are still concerned about inflation and the economy, and nothing has changed on that,” said Dick Wadhams, political consultant and former Colorado Republican state chairman.
In a column for The Gazette newspapers, which include Colorado Politics, Wadhams accused the county commissioners of tapping into public dollars to finance a political campaign.
"Make no mistake about it, the commissioners are paying a partisan political consulting firm," he wrote, "to essentially conduct a partisan political campaign out of the Jefferson County Courthouse to pass a Democratic proposal to raise taxes and kill TABOR restrictions."
Silverii countered that voters often change their mind.
“Voters often change their minds from year to year, depending on a wide variety of factors. For example, in 2016, JeffCo voters rejected a mill and bond proposal to provide additional funding for the school district but approved the exact same questions when asked again in 2018,” he said.
The 56% support — based on the Aspect Strategic poll — for the question framed at its most favorable light suggests a tough road ahead for de-Brucing in Jefferson County.
Voters, in fact, rejected the idea twice within the last five years, though it got close to wining last time it was on the ballot.
In 2019, the commissioners voted to place a similar ballot measure, approved in part by Dahlkemper. Nearly 55% of voters shot down the proposal. At the time, 30% of registered active voters were Democrats, 27% were Republicans and 41% were unaffiliated, according to registration records at the time.
Another revenue retention proposal appeared on the ballot in 2022 after Kraft-Tharp, Kerr, and Dahlkemper unanimously approved it. The result was close — 50.53% of voters said "no."
In November that year, 29% of active voters were registered as Democrats, and 23% were registered as Republicans. Nearly half — 47% — were unaffiliated.
This time around, the county has fewer partisan voters (27% Democrat and 21% Republican), and even more independent voters (49%).
Conflict of interest?
Much of the criticism directed at the county focused on hiring The Bighorn Company and questions about conflict of interest.
Jefferson County paid The Bighorn Company and Aspect Strategic $302,947.50 to provide advice and expertise on how to handle the county's funding challenges, according to Pearce of Jefferson County.
The money came from the county’s general fund, which includes property taxes, licenses, user fees, and interest earnings, said Pearce.
Of the amount, $180,000 went to the Bighorn Company, while $116,000 was subcontracted to Aspect Strategic, which conducted the polling, Pearce confirmed.
At a recent county board meeting, residents criticized the commissioners' decision to seek outside help to find solutions to its "funding challenges," particularly since that entailed using hundreds of thousands of dollars in taxpayer dollars.
“The research does not need to be done by an outside organization," Wadhams said in an interview with The Denver Gazette. “The commissioners have staff that can help them craft a proposal like this.”
Several residents — including Natalie Menten, a board member for the TABOR Foundation — questioned the commissioners’ relationship with Silverii.
A veteran Democratic political consultant, Silverii served as executive director of Progress Now and as chief of staff to the Colorado House Democrats from 2014 to 2016. He founded The Bighorn Company, along with Mansur Gidfar.
The scoring sheets and contracts received via Colorado’s Open Records Act showed that The Bighorn Company didn't get the highest score. It also didn't offer the cheaper proposal.
On Aug. 21, 2023, Jefferson County put out a bid on Bidnet, requesting “consultation for potential ballot solutions to funding challenges.”
Two companies submitted bids: Cornerstone Government Affairs and The Bighorn Company.
A spreadsheet The Denver Gazette obtained via a records request showed that when scored, Cornerstone rated higher than The Bighorn Company, and the expected total for Cornerstone’s services was almost $77,000 to $115,000 cheaper than Bighorn’s services with the inclusion of polling costs.
When Jefferson County picked The Bighorn Company, it was the second time Silverii had worked on a contract with the county.
In September 2021, Jefferson County Public Health hired a public affairs firm called PowerMap for at least $80,000 to “mitigate political flareups” and improve communication between citizens and the public health sector in the county during the COVID-19 pandemic, according to PowerMap’s proposal.
After the contract was signed, PowerMap handed over the project to Silverii as a subcontractor.
Menten, the pro-TABOR activist, claimed that Silverii’s previous work for the county, his progressive leanings, and his wife’s closeness with county commissioners raise conflicts.
Silverii is the husband of U.S. Rep. Brittany Petterson, a first-term member of Congress. Pettersen served in the legislature for nearly a decade with former state senator Cheri Jahn, who is now the vice chair of the Jefferson County Board of Health and was appointed by the county commissioners.
Silverii denied any conflict of interest between him and Jefferson County.
“Having already worked for a client or a department related to a client is not a conflict of interest," he said. "Many professionals get work from people that they have previously worked for in the past because they did a good job.”
He also rejected any claims that Jefferson County would choose his firm because of Pettersen.
Wadhams said he sees nothing wrong with hiring Silverii.
“Ian Silverii is a very smart, capable person who’s been involved in Democratic politics for many years. There’s nothing wrong with this, but to pay Silverii out of taxpayer dollars to create a political strategy to pass a tax increase is wrong,” Wadhams said.
Commissioners denied hiring Silverii's firm to develop a political campaign.
“The Bighorn Company was not contracted to develop a political campaign. The Bighorn Company was contracted to conduct research and make recommendations to the county on potential options to address funding challenges,” Pearce said.
One of the options was to make cuts to the county's budget, but that stakeholders and community members prefer ballot solutions, such as a sales tax increase or revenue retention, according to Silverii and the commissioners.
"Revenue retention is an extremely common ballot solution, particularly at the county level," Silverii said. "50 of Colorado’s 64 counties have already obtained voter approval for much broader revenue retention measures than the one Jeffco commissioners ultimately chose to refer to voters.”
Local Colorado State
Most Popular
Comments / 0