A proposal to put a larger number of elected leaders at the helm of large counties in Colorado — and to require at least some of those leaders to represent specific areas of their counties — met defeat in the State Legislature.

Supported by state Rep. Bob Marshall, a Highlands Ranch Democrat, the bill sought to expand the number of members on a county’s board of commissioners to five. The bill would have affected several Front Range counties with large enough populations, including Douglas County, where the board has become known for its bitter conflicts and 2-1 votes.

“All I know is we’ve got two people running the whole county,” Marshall said.

In his view, contentious 2-1 splits are “not just a problem for Douglas County — it’s a latent problem for all the large counties,” Marshall said.

Commissioners serve as a county’s elected leaders, somewhat similar to city councils. They make policy decisions that largely affect parts of the county that are “unincorporated” — areas that sit outside of municipalities.

In Douglas County, which includes Highlands Ranch and many other areas, such as Franktown and Roxborough.

Locally, the idea to add two more commissioners in Douglas County came up in discussion in a county meeting in August. Commissioner Abe Laydon has remained opposed.

“The last thing counties need are more politicians,” Laydon said in a February statement about the state legislature’s bill. “Whether you have three or 30 commissioners, there will still be a majority and a minority vote unless it’s unanimous.”

The counties that would have been affected by the bill include Jefferson, Larimer, Douglas, Boulder, Pueblo and Mesa, all of which have three commissioners.

Five commissioners govern Adams County, but Adams would have been affected by the bill’s requirement for commissioners to be elected by district, Marshall noted. All five commissioner seats in Adams are voted on by residents throughout the county — in an “at large” system — rather than voters only casting ballots for the candidates who live in their area.

Ensuring that commissioners are accountable to the people in specific areas of their county was a key part of the proposal, Marshall said.

“Everyone was saying, ‘Marshall is just trying to get a Democratic commissioner’” elected in Douglas County, Marshall said. But his proposal “doesn’t mean a Republican couldn’t represent Highlands Ranch well.”

He noted there are conservative areas of Boulder County that may feel “locked out” of decisions without a Republican commissioner.

“It’s just to help political minorities regardless of who they are,” Marshall said.

Representation is an issue particularly in Douglas County because Highlands Ranch makes up roughly 28% of the county's population, Marshall said.

“When the commissioners are all elected at large, then (Highlands Ranch) really does not have a voice in the county government, which is particularly troublesome” because Highlands Ranch is not a municipality, Marshall said, and relies on the county for many government services.

The Highlands Ranch Metro District provides a limited array of government functions, but many responsibilities fall to the county.

Bill could return

The proposal, state House Bill 23-1180, was “postponed indefinitely” by a 7-3 vote on March 2 in the House’s State, Civic, Military, and Veterans Affairs Committee, stopping the bill from coming to a full vote.

“I think it’s clear that people who had a vested interested in the outcome were more likely to vote against it than people who could (see it) neutrally,” Marshall said.

Among lawmakers on the committee who represented counties that would have been affected, the bill garnered some support but also saw opposition, according to the vote count.

Marshall said in general that GOP lawmakers “have a very strong ideological view of not letting the state tell local jurisdictions what to do, regardless of what the issue is.”

He noted he’ll likely bring the proposal back in the legislature next year.

“I’m not going to give up,” Marshall said. “I’ll have to just see what the lay of the land looks like in December or January, but yeah, all things being equal, I’ll try again.”

Other counties already have five

Some Colorado counties already operate with five commissioners. Under current rules, once a county has more than 70,000 residents, a citizen’s group or the county commissioners can put a question on the ballot asking residents if they wish to add two more.

Of the 12 counties who are eligible through their population size, several have moved to five commissioners, including Adams, El Paso and Arapahoe counties. Weld County and Pitkin County have moved to five commissioners as part of their home-rule charters — essentially the counties’ own constitutions.

Denver and Broomfield have city council structures with about a dozen members each.

The bill would have required that all counties with a population of 70,000 or more have five commissioners, with at least three commissioners elected only by voters who reside in the district from which each commissioner runs for election.

The bill would have allowed counties to choose between three election alternatives:

• Three commissioners from three districts elected by residents in those districts and two commissioners elected at large.

• Four commissioners from four districts elected by residents in those districts and one commissioner elected at large.

• Five commissioners from five districts elected only by residents in those districts.