Measure 2G would force At Large Council candidates to win not one, but two elections in order to take office -- doubling the influence of big money on the outcome. It would create citywide runoff elections in At Large Council races just like in the Mayor's race.

In 2023, over $15 million was spent on the Mayor's race, with almost half of that spending coming from corporate-backed dark money committees*. 2G is designed to make it so that the At Large Council elections see more of this kind of big money influence on the results.

*source: https://denver.maplight.com/public/candidate-details/658/26

Measure 2G would do something that makes no sense. Instead of having all the At Large Council candidates run together in the same race, it would split the two At Large seats into Seat A and Seat B as separate races with different candidate pools, but still in the same election year. 

Confused how At Large candidates would pick whether they are running for Seat A or Seat B, or why on earth this change is needed or helpful in any way? We are, too, because Measure 2G simply is not aligned with any kind of best practice for running elections.

Measure 2G was also rushed through City Council with little to no consultation with voting rights experts or community groups, and is a controversial measure that passed a divided Council by a single vote.

This measure would force more citywide runoff elections, increasing the costs to administer municipal elections significantly and unnecessarily.

Our city already has a massive budget shortfall and is laying off senior city employees. And there are budget cuts proposed for the Denver Clerk's office, too. If the worst of these cuts go through, the city would have to close some dropboxes and voter service centers in 2026.

Given all this, why on earth would we *increase* the cost of running elections right now, especially for a change that is both unnecessary and misguided?