Lakewood Representatives Using Position To Advance Democrat Agenda Without Benefit To Lakewood

“This won’t impact Lakewood,” say City Councilors at the February 26, 2026, Legislative Committee meeting. Nevertheless, the committee supported a total of four state legislative bills citing regional benefit or planting a flag for Democrat leadership. Without a solid benefit to Lakewood, it is unclear whether lobbying at the state level is representing city interests or personal beliefs. 

Democrat Leadership

Bill sponsors were often listed as if the Democrat leadership was reason enough to support the bill.

Councilor Roger Low says HB26-1001 has become a “flagship, important bill to the Governor.” HB26-1001 is the HOME Act, where the state takes over local zoning to allow more development. The HOME Act was the number one priority for the Democrat party in 2026.  The committee voted to support the bill.

Council Member Low says Representative Rebekah Stewart put a lot of effort in HB26-1114, regarding minimum lot size. Low agreed to advocate for the bill in his personal capacity. The committee voted to support the bill.

HB26-1007, concerning how a customer uses distributed energy sources, has no impact to Lakewood but was sponsored by Representative Rebekah Stewart. Unanimous Strong Support.

Councilor Dave Rein notes that HB26-1065, concerning housing investment zones, was supported along party lines. The committee strongly supported the bill, hoping Lakewood would get grants.

Toward the end of the meeting, Councilor Isabel Cruz says, “without knowing who brought it forward it’s hard to tell what the point is,” regarding SB26-40.  The committee did not support this bill, in part because there was no clear support from “progressive municipalities.”

Limited Local Impact

HB26-1001, the HOME Act, has limited impact on Lakewood because Lakewood has already implemented much of the bill. However, Councilor Low remarked that Lakewood should lends its voice as a city that has already implemented the changes through the new zoning code.

HB26-1114, regarding minimum lot size, has no effect in Lakewood. Lakewood has already eliminated single family property and since the bill is only for single family, no property in Lakewood would qualify.

Councilor Low made this explanation but said Lakewood should support the bill because it’s incentive for other cities to move in this direction. Council Member Isabel Cruz agreed.

Both Councilor Rein and Sinks pointed out that HB26-1114 would not impact Lakewood. There was even discussion about how they could convince others if there was no benefit to Lakewood. Deputy City Manager Ben Goldstein said staff could handle it. Rein, Sinks and Low voted to support HB26-1114.

HB26-1202, regarding strategies to prevent homelessness, would have limited impact on Lakewood. Most things in the bill are already being done in different ways. Support for this bill can be summed up by the statement from Councilor Glenda Sinks, “Anything to help the homeless.”  The bill had unanimous support from the committee.

At a previous session, the committee took a position on one bill, HB26-1036, taxing vacant property. Lakewood already taxes vacant property and has the ability to modify those terms if needed so there was no benefit to Lakewood. Councilor Isabel Cruz admits the won’t affect Lakewood during discussion. HB26-1036 has already died in state committee.

So Lakewood supported four bills despite having limited or no impact on Lakewood.

Repeatedly, these bills were supported because of regional benefit to other cities or because the bill had Democrat leadership. Regional benefit in the context of state legislation means Lakewood representatives are using their position to advocate personal beliefs at the state level.

When the committee supported legislation that did not directly benefit Lakewood, the bill aligned with affordable housing goals. Other Democrat bills were not considered for support.

Support Despite Doubt and Contradictions

Deputy City Manager Ben Goldstein advised Councilors that HB26-1001, the HOME Act, may contradict Lakewood’s rules because the HOME Act limits new buildings by height rather than size. Despite this future problem for Lakewood, the Committee put the state over the city.

Councilor Dave Rein said he believes the HOME Act would take faith to believe it will work as intended. He voted to support it anyway.

HB26-1065 earned a strong support, even though no one knew whether Lakewood would qualify for funding.

Councilor Low said that the bills that did not benefit Lakewood could be supported BECAUSE there was no benefit to Lakewood, therefore they did not impinge on local control. This position would put Lakewood in the role of third party advocate, similar to claiming Lakewood had no conflicts of interest in this bill.

Subverting Local Control

Zoning has historically been a matter of local control. That means cities like Lakewood write their own rules. Now that the state is interested in overruling local control, some cities are fighting for their rights. Lakewood is not fighting for its rights. Lakewood is actively giving home rule rights away.

Low says, “CML [Colorado Municipal League] keeps beating the local control drum…. I think it’s an opportunity to say maybe we believe in a different approach here in Lakewood.” He says it’s frustrating that people keep raising local control concerns.

Low seems to be advocating for state control.

Councilor Isabel Cruz says she’s not a local control type of person.  She says she’d like to encourage others to do what Lakewood has.

Lakewood is a home rule city and residents have not been asked to give up that status.

Glimmers of Representation

There were two moments when committee members referenced listening to their constituents. That was not enough to change outcomes but it is worthy of note.

Council Member Glenda Sinks said HB26-1001 is a little problematic for Lakewood to support because of the different height restrictions than Lakewood currently allows.

She also said that the amount of resident pushback Council has received indicates the Committee should wait until after the April 7 special election on zoning to decide whether to support the HOME Act or not.

Sinks was the lone “no” vote against supporting the HOME Act.

Councilor Isabel Cruz made it clear that although she’s “struggling” to have conversations with her constituents, she would respect their pushback enough to abstain from voting to support HB26-1114. She did not vote opposed.

Their individual votes did not change Lakewood’s support for the bills but show that enough voices on specific issues may make a difference.