Let me be clear: I oppose developing Kanemoto Estates. My opponent, Teresa Simpkins, suggests I support the development. This is false. In this article, I share my full position, why annexation is a multi-purpose tool, and why my opponent’s position is based on a key misunderstanding that misinforms the public. Words and details matter, especially for potential city decision-makers.  

Managing how and where Longmont grows should be the next City Council’s top priority. To do that, we need representatives who understand property rights, land use, and redevelopment planning.

As you may know, the Kanemoto Estates site is privately-owned land near the southeast end of Airport Road. In 1982, the Kanemoto family granted a conservation easement to Boulder County. This easement limits how the land can be used. There have been developments proposed and related lawsuits about terminating the conservation easement entirely. Longmont’s comprehensive plan designates Kanemoto Estates for rural purposes. This plan was shaped by a multi-year process with ~16,000 residents informing Longmont’s future land use.

I do not support development here because the area is zoned rural—a decision shaped by extensive community input. We do need more affordable housing options, but we should focus on redeveloping Longmont’s old industrial areas to manage our growth. The vast majority of residents and businesses I talk with support this approach, as it reduces pressures on existing neighborhoods and nature, addresses long-time public safety and health hazards, and focuses our resources on reactivating neglected sites.

Annexation—bringing new land into Longmont’s jurisdiction—can serve multiple public purposes, some entirely unrelated to development. For instance, annexation could allow the city to install utility lines to support nearby neighborhoods. Annexation could allow existing buildings to connect to sewer pipes to eliminate on-site septic systems that leach into the soil. And, annexation could allow the city to acquire a site for long-term preservation. Ruling out annexation for Kanemoto Estates altogether, as my opponent has committed to, is a very limiting position. It doesn’t allow for any adaptation to changing needs and pressures. This is why the zoning, land use, and public input matter most to me.

My opponent has criticized me for taking “months” to consider my position on developing Kanemoto Estates. This is true, but I won’t apologize for taking time to learn about a site’s history, understand the conservation easement, and meet with concerned residents—especially when there are lawsuits involved. These are not decisions that can be rushed, and it is a councilmember’s responsibility to be thorough before taking a position that could impact residents or expose the City to legal risk. 

My opponent also misrepresents my position. First, she states that I “tentatively oppose [the] annexation.” This is false. I oppose the development proposal, not the annexation (for the reasons above). Secondly, she stated in The Sterling Spin podcast recorded September 16th  (airing October 5th) that she’d seen emails I wrote suggesting I supported affordable housing on the site. This is false, and the completed unedited email chain has been provided to the editor. 

Most importantly, my opponent confidently but wrongly claims Kanemoto Estates is public land: “My analysis begins and ends with the fact that this land was acquired as public land.” Boulder County defines conservation easements as land that “remains privately owned and is not available for public on-site use of any kind.” She further says 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.” None of this is true. Ultimately, my opponent’s position is based on a misunderstanding of basic facts.

Here’s why this matters. City Council approves contracts and policies and provides strategic direction on negotiating positions and land acquisitions. Words matter. Details matter. Public and private property ownership absolutely matters.

I’m running for City Council to continue serving Ward 2 because government at its core needs to be effective—now more than ever. I will continue to pay attention to details, listen carefully, make responsible, informed decisions that positively impact our community, and focus on reinvesting in our old industrial sites to bring more housing options and manage Longmont’s growth. These are promises I know I can keep.