Castle Pines voters will decide two citizen-initiated changes to the city's Home Rule Charter this November, both dealing with annexation — the process by which a city absorbs adjacent land and gains the power to zone and approve development on it.
The City Council meets Tuesday, Aug. 25 to set the ballot titles for both. On the same agenda, it will consider adopting the city's own Annexation Policy and a separate resolution formally opposing one of the two measures.
How they got on the ballot
Both questions arrived by citizen petition, not by Council referral.
A Statement of Intent to Circulate a Petition was filed with the City Clerk's office on May 11, 2026. Petitions for both ballot questions were submitted on July 31, 2026.
Colorado law requires such a petition to be signed by at least ten percent of the municipality's registered electors. According to staff reports from City Clerk Tobi Duffey, signatures were inspected and verified against the rolls of registered Castle Pines electors, and those not in conformance were removed from the totals. After that review:
- Ballot question 1 — 1,420 valid signatures, deemed sufficient
- Ballot question 2 — 1,406 valid signatures, deemed sufficient
The City Clerk certified both petitions as valid and sufficient on Aug. 3, 2026.
Once a petition is sufficient, the Council's role is not discretionary. State law (C.R.S. § 31-2-210(3)) provides that "if the petition is sufficient, the governing body shall set a ballot title for the proposed amendment at its next meeting." The staff reports say plainly that Council is required to adopt the resolutions "as the requirements per statute have been met by the Petitioners."
Both resolutions also state that by submitting the questions, the Council "is not endorsing any provision proposed by the petition, conceding that any provision proposed by the petition is valid, or waiving any right to challenge the substantive validity" of the proposals.
What each measure actually says
Below is the ballot language as set by Resolutions 26-50 and 26-51, reproduced in full.
Ballot Title No. 1
SHALL THE CITY OF CASTLE PINES HOME RULE CHARTER BE AMENDED TO ADD A NEW SECTION AS FOLLOWS: PROPERTY IN EXCESS OF 20 ACRES OWNED OR CONTROLLED BY A SINGLE OWNER OR OWNERSHIP GROUP OR THAT ARE PART OF A COMMON PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT OR RELATED TRANSACTIONS MAY BE ANNEXED INTO THE CITY ONLY UPON APPROVAL BY THE VOTERS AT AN ELECTION OF THE REGISTERED ELECTORS OF THE CITY OF CASTLE PINES, COLORADO, AND FOR PURPOSES OF THIS PROVISION, ANY SINGLE, SUCCESSIVE, CUMULATIVE, SERIAL OR SIMULTANEOUS ANNEXATIONS OF MULTIPLE PARCELS SHALL BE AGGREGATED AND TREATED AS A SINGLE ANNEXATION AS PROVIDED IN C.R.S. SECTION 31-12-104(1)(a)?
Note the aggregation clause: under this language, "any single, successive, cumulative, serial or simultaneous annexations of multiple parcels" would be counted together as one annexation for the purpose of the 20-acre threshold.
Ballot Title No. 2
SHALL THE CITY OF CASTLE PINES HOME RULE CHARTER BE AMENDED TO ADD A NEW SECTION AS FOLLOWS: ANY PARCEL OVER 20 ACRES OWNED OR CONTROLLED BY A SINGLE OWNER OR OWNERSHIP GROUP ANNEXED WITHIN 180 DAYS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS SECTION SHALL BE REFERRED FOR RATIFICATION AT AN ELECTION OF THE REGISTERED ELECTORS OF THE CITY OF CASTLE PINES, COLORADO, AND IF NO SUCH ANNEXATION OCCURS WITHIN SUCH 180-DAY PERIOD, THIS SECTION MAY BE REPEALED BY COUNCIL ORDINANCE WITHOUT A VOTE OF THE REGISTERED ELECTORS OF THE CITY OF CASTLE PINES, COLORADO?
By its own terms the second measure is time-limited. It applies to a qualifying parcel "annexed within 180 days of the effective date of this section," which it says "shall be referred for ratification" at an election. If no such annexation occurs in that window, the text provides that the section "may be repealed by council ordinance without a vote of the registered electors."
What the proposed opposition resolution argues
Resolution 26-53, also on Tuesday's agenda, would put the Council formally on record against the first measure if adopted. As of publication it had not been voted on. Colorado's Fair Campaign Practices Act permits a council to adopt a resolution expressing its position on a ballot measure.
The resolution lays out the Council's reasoning at length. Its central argument is about the city's neighbors:
The City of Castle Pines is bordered by Lone Tree, Parker, and Castle Rock, which are not subject to the voter-approval requirements proposed by the ballot measure, potentially placing Castle Pines at a competitive disadvantage when property owners determine which jurisdiction to petition for annexation.
Because the measure would not stop development outside city limits, the resolution argues, "the practical effect of the measure may be to determine which municipality governs such development rather than whether the development occurs at all." If land is annexed by a neighboring city instead, it says, Castle Pines "could lose the opportunity to influence development of that property through its zoning, design standards, infrastructure requirements, development agreements, fiscal policies, open-space expectations, and other adopted community standards" — while residents could still absorb the traffic, drainage and service impacts.
The resolution also argues that a voter-approval requirement would apply "regardless of the proposed annexation's fiscal performance, land use, infrastructure commitments, open-space preservation, community benefits, or compatibility with the City's adopted plans," and notes that residents already hold an initiative right under the Charter and state law if they disagree with an annexation Council approves.
The petitions behind both measures were found sufficient by the City Clerk, each carrying more than 1,400 verified signatures.
The annexation policy on the same agenda
Separately, Council will consider Resolution 26-49, adopting a City of Castle Pines Annexation Policy. The opposition resolution leans on that policy directly, describing it as establishing "clear and stringent standards for when annexation should and should not occur" and committing the city to "a cautious approach toward annexation" evaluated case by case.
The policy's development included a resident survey and a public comment period; both the June 15 survey results and a July 28 summary of comments submitted through the city's webpage are attached to the agenda item.
Council had been scheduled to adopt the policy at its Aug. 11 meeting but postponed it to Aug. 25 to allow more time to meet with residents. The city held a listening session on the draft policy on Aug. 19 at the Castle Pines Community Center.
Also on Tuesday's agenda
- Study session, 5:30 p.m. — a discussion of the Colorado Wildfire Resiliency Code
- Ordinance 26-06 — a public hearing on second reading of amendments to Section 27, Site Improvement Plan, of the city's zoning ordinance
- Resolution 26-52 — awarding a construction contract for Phase 1 of the Happy Canyon Roundabout Monument
- Resolution 26-54 — adopting the 2026 Economic Development Strategic Plan
- An update from the Douglas County Sheriff's Office
How to attend
When: Tuesday, Aug. 25 — study session 5:30 p.m., regular meeting 6:30 p.m.
Where: 7404 Yorkshire Drive, Castle Pines
The meeting is hybrid. Registration to attend virtually is available through the city's website. Agendas and packets are posted to the city's Granicus portal.
The election: Tuesday, Nov. 3, 2026, coordinated with Douglas County. The Clerk's staff reports estimate the city's cost of participating at $29,000.
Castle Pines voters will see these two questions alongside the countywide "3 to 5" measure on expanding the Board of County Commissioners, which qualified for the same ballot.
Sources: City of Castle Pines City Council agenda and packet for Aug. 25, 2026, including staff reports from City Clerk Tobi Duffey and the full text of Resolutions 26-49, 26-50, 26-51 and 26-53; City of Castle Pines city council meetings page; The Source, City of Castle Pines newsletter, Aug. 19, 2026.