Ms. Simpkins argues that because my campaign manager had previously received an endorsement from LAUNCH Longmont (a housing affordability advocacy group), that he supports what LAUNCH supports. She also notes that this is even more clear because he has not asked LAUNCH to rescind their endorsement. However, in September, the Boulder County Republican Party endorsed Ms. Simpkins, which she has not asked to have rescinded. Using her own logic, Ms. Simpkins supports all the positions of the Republican Party, which I doubt she does. This claim is hypocrisy at its finest.

Endorsements are not reciprocal. I don’t assume that Ms. Simpkins supports masked immigration sweeps, not vaccinating children, tariffs that are raising prices on all Americans, or denying climate change simply because she has not rejected the Boulder County Republican Party endorsement. 

I’m proud to have many endorsements from residents and local leaders across the political spectrum. It would be absurd to suggest that I reciprocally endorse all of their positions just because they endorsed me.

My opponent has repeatedly made false statements about me, my campaign, and local development. Below are 8 examples. From alleging I am “tied” to LAUNCH, to claiming I dodge clear positions, to misrepresenting land ownership, her assertions fall apart under basic scrutiny. Longmont residents deserve leaders who can be trusted to communicate clearly, accurately, and honestly.

1. Claim: “Matthew Popkin is indeed tied to LAUNCH.” Fact: This is false. I am not a member of LAUNCH, nor have I ever attended a LAUNCH meeting. If she had any proof to the contrary about me, she would have cited that. 

2. Claim: “LAUNCH is run by a Boulder-based interior designer and her husband.” Fact: This is false. They are Longmont residents. 

3. Claim: “LAUNCH doesn't publicly disclose its Board of Directors, which is highly unusual for a non-profit… and it is widely known that LAUNCH has several local developers on its Board, including those with projects awaiting City of Longmont approval.” Fact: This is all false. LAUNCH does not currently have a board of directors.

4. Claim: “Matthew's campaign manager [is] the most important campaign and political advisor in his circle.” Fact: This is false. My most important campaign advisor is my wife, who also serves as my treasurer. Ms. Simpkins should not make assumptions about who and how much I value on my campaign team. 

5. Claim: “So, if you (like me) have been wondering why Matthew seems to always be dodging attempts to get him to firmly commit, without what if's and hypotheticals, to a significantly lower density for Quail Road and no development on the Kanemoto Conservation Easement, my political experience suggests that we all have our answer.” Fact: This is false. My positions on both projects have been clearly stated on my website for months. I ask “what if” questions to more deeply understand residents’ priorities.

6. Claim (on The Sterling Spin podcast): I would support affordable housing on the Kanemoto Estates site and she’s seen emails stating this. Fact: This is false. The full, unedited email chain disproving this claim is available here, which was also provided to the podcast host and editor. (At a resident’s request, I have redacted their personal contact information.)

7. Claim (on her campaign website): I “tentatively oppose [the] annexation” of Kanemoto Estates. Fact: This is false. I oppose the development, not the annexation for reasons articulated on my website and in the email linked in the previous comment. 

8. Claim (on her campaign website): The Kanemoto Estates Conservation Easement is public land. In her own words: “My analysis begins and ends with the fact that this land was acquired as public land” and “[the site] currently belongs to the public and was purchased from the original property owner under the agreement that it would be preserved as public land into perpetuity.” Fact: This is false. Boulder County defines conservation easements as land that “remains privately owned and is not available for public on-site use of any kind.” Given her touted prior experience as a Boulder County attorney, this distinction between public and private land should be clear.

This list is not exhaustive, and Longmont residents should be very careful before taking Ms. Simpkins’ explanations and statements at face value. Screenshots available, if needed.

Not once since I was appointed to City Council in January has Ms. Simpkins shown up to City Council meetings to advocate for you and not once has she emailed me about any issue, concern, or vote. Ward 2 and Longmont deserve someone who shows up and advocates for them, not just writes online position statements when politically expedient. 

Related, another apparent falsehood is that Ms. Simpkins claims to be a “public servant, not a politician.” Her numerous false and misleading claims suggest the opposite. Her routine ‘Monday-morning quarterbacking’ on positions suggests otherwise. And her answer in The Sterling Spin podcast about why she doesn’t speak up at City Council meetings or email me on any issue since January 2025 was because she didn’t want to reveal her strategy if she decided to run for Council. These are not actions of a public servant.

If Ms. Simpkins releases multiple misleading and factually inaccurate statements with the luxury of time on the campaign trail, then why should we trust her to make real-time decisions on complex issues? 

If she prefers to make sweeping judgments about her constituents and local organizations, then why should we trust her to listen when she disagrees?

And, if she leads with marketing first, then how can we trust that we’re being accurately informed about what she and City Council are doing?

For anyone unclear or unaware, below are my public votes and public positions related to development proposals most of interest:

• Bohn Farm Development: I was the only Planning & Zoning Commissioner to vote against the proposal in August 2023. 

• Quail Road Annexation: I opposed the first proposal of just apartments, leading the developer to withdraw the project in February 2025.

• Quail Road Annexation Re-Referral: I have not made any decision on the overall project, and like Ms. Simpkins, I also oppose this project in its current form. I voted to refer the updated concept to restart the review process, when there was a signed agreement with Habitat for Humanity to build 47 units of affordable, for-sale townhomes as part of the project. Many residents said that the lack of an agreement with Habitat for Humanity was a key concern for them the first time. I agreed. Even still, this annexation referral merely gives the applicant the chance to be considered again.

• Kanemoto Estates Development: As I state on my website, I oppose the development proposal, as it does not align with Longmont’s previously-established land use goals and zoning. I know many residents value Boulder County’s conservation easement, but City officials should focus their decisions on what is within the City’s purview.

Saying no to proposals is easy; the real challenge is figuring out when to say yes and working proactively toward a better future. My commitment to urban renewal and infill redevelopment has been a cornerstone of both my campaign and my public service—as chair of the Longmont Urban Renewal Authority, member of the Brownfields Advisory Committee, and the Planning & Zoning Commission. No other candidate or councilmember has ever served in all 4 roles in Longmont. Ms. Simpkins may voice support for these types of efforts, but she has not chosen to be involved in any of them. 

For nearly 3 years, I’ve worked to make it easier to redevelop former industrial areas, attract new mixed-use projects to those areas, and reduce development pressure on our existing neighborhoods. For those who want to verify my longstanding commitment, I’ve linked to my original, unedited applications for the Planning & Zoning Commission in 2022 and City Council in 2025.

Transformational projects aren’t easy—but I bring deep professional expertise in brownfields reuse to help guide projects like the Sugar Mill. I’ve helped cities reactivate former industrial and landfill sites nationwide by securing over $9 million in federal grants that then leverage hundreds of millions more in private investment. I know I don’t have all the answers—but I do know how to help Longmont move forward.

I hired my campaign manager because of his experience with state and local campaigns as well as his willingness to help me advance my policy platform; I did not hire him because of his policy priorities. And he agreed to work for me because of my positions, which I believe best achieve the goals of managing our growth and increasing affordability with more flexible and more for-sale housing in strategic parts of Longmont.

That said, my campaign manager can have opinions beyond my platform, but if he does, these are his and his alone. In fact, I have multiple policy advisors who have views and opinions that do not fully align with my own. This is intentional and helps me pressure test my positions, consider other experiences, and more clearly articulate what I think makes the most sense for Longmont's future.

I know every resident won’t agree with every decision I make—that’s impossible. But I can promise that my decisions are, and will continue to be, informed by a wide range of input, experiences, and data. I have no hidden agenda, and I’ve been clear since applying to the Planning & Zoning Commission in 2022 that I value responsible growth that prioritizes redeveloping older industrial properties and strategic infill development. My votes, actions, volunteer service, professional experience, and policy platform all reflect this. 

In just the past 2 months alone, this includes: 

• Advancing specific urban renewal projects that actually reduce development pressures on existing neighborhoods and reinvest millions into our community;

• Securing unanimous City Council support to safely and responsibly manage the growth of e-bikes and e-motos in our community, advance specific policies to better integrate our airport into the community, and annex two dispensaries in Boulder County enclaves to increase revenue for public safety and other core services;

• Expanding where we can build early childhood education centers to make it easier to meet the daycare and childhood education needs of our community;

• Co-leading engagement with our state representatives to advocate for much-needed state accountability to the sex offender group home in north Longmont; and,

• Closely reviewing the City of Longmont’s $520 million FY26 operating budget ahead of approval.