Douglas County voters have rejected “home rule,” a move county officials had hoped would provide more local control, according to the initial, unofficial tally on Tuesday night.

The “no” votes led by 43 percentage points, 71.16% to 28.84%, with 93,175 votes counted, according to the final unofficial tally.

County officials earlier argued that home rule would provide more local control, particularly in light of state actions that commissioners decried as anathema to good governance.

Critics said it wouldn’t actually alter the county-state relationship in any meaningful way. Critics also accused the commissioners of a “power grab” and said the special election was rushed and failed to be a “citizen-led” effort.

Under the proposal, the 21-member committee would be assigned to write the charter for the county. If the question passed, the charter itself would have needed the public’s vote again in November.

“Home rule is always about building a vision for Douglas County,” Commissioner George Teal, who led the home rule campaign, told reporters after learning of the initial results.

“We did hear several times from the public that we were going too fast. The public needed more information,” Teal said. “I think we see that result. We were moving too fast for the people of Douglas County. And the people of Douglas County are going to need more information until this goes on.”

The campaign officially began late in March, when Douglas County Commissioners Abe Laydon, Kevin Van Winkle and Teal held a special meeting and approved a resolution to spend $500,000 on the June 24 special election.

They said home rule would create avenues to diverge from some Colorado laws and establish a unique charter for Douglas County.

While home rule municipalities are common in the state, only two of the 64 Colorado counties identify as such and are, thereby, separate from the typical “statutory” counties.

Pitkin and Weld county residents established their charters in the 1970s. Denver and Broomfield are also counties but are also home rule municipalities. A few other counties previously attempted to gain home rule status, including Eagle and Ouray counties.

Under Colorado law for counties, residents may establish their own government structure, including the number of commissioners, county employees, duties, and compensation. Commissioners and staff still must operate in the county in accordance with a more structured home rule charter, which limits what a county can do compared to a municipality.

Counties with a home rule charter don’t have unlimited ordinance-making powers like home rule cities.

“Our neighbors knew this wasn’t about political party, it was about what’s right for all residents,” said Dawn Caldwell, a resident opposed to home rule.

“Backroom deals, outside money and false promises are never a winning strategy in Colorado,” she added.

Lora Thomas, a former commissioner who also opposed the home rule proposal, said the county officials pushing the proposal left people out.    

“The way the commissioners did this was by leaving the most important ingredient out — we, the people,” she said.

“The people said, ‘We don’t trust you,’” Thomas added.

Thomas, along with former political rival Rep. Bob Marshall, who represents Highlands Ranch, had filed a lawsuit against the county, claiming it violated open meetings laws while adopting the June 24 election.

On Tuesday, Marshall called the election “probably the biggest victory since I’ve been in politics,” adding it’s a “huge nonpartisan win for Douglas County.”

Acknowledging defeat, Teal said this is only the beginning for home rule proposal in Douglas County.

“I think the genie is out of the bottle in terms of the (home rule) conversation here within the county,” Teal said.