Six Candidates, Five Seats, One Contested Race

Monument voters will elect five town officials on November 3 and decide whether to raise the town’s tax on construction. Six candidates filed for the five seats, and only the mayor’s race drew more candidates than there are places to fill: two sitting councilmembers are competing for the seat Mitch LaKind is leaving after six years in town government.

The ballot in the Town of Monument carries a mayor, two at-large councilmembers, one councilmember from Residential District 1 and one from District 2. Laura Kronick and Kenneth Kimple, who sit for District 1 and District 2 respectively, are both running for mayor. Dan DeBoo is the only candidate for the District 1 seat. Marco P. Fiorito, who holds the District 2 seat on the ballot under a term that expires this year, is the only candidate to succeed himself — the one incumbent on the ballot for the seat he already occupies. Alex Valderrama and Scott Gilson are the only candidates for the two at-large seats, which puts both on course to join the council.

LaKind announced on August 26 that he would not seek a second term. Asked by the Independent what his successor should confront first, he named water. “The biggest challenge facing Monument over the next five to ten years is water,” he wrote. “This is an existential issue for the town and must be treated as such.” Growth management, he said, was “a close second,” and the next mayor would need to understand “both the tools available and their limitations.”

On what voters should look for, LaKind said they should find “someone genuinely invested in this community, not just in the title,” and someone who treats the office as nonpartisan. “Roads, water, development — none of that should be about party politics.” He added that the job asks more than attendance: voters should find “someone who shows up beyond the two meetings a month, who can collaborate with staff and council.”

Five of the seven seats are on the ballot

Monument is governed by a mayor and six councilmembers. Two councilmembers and the mayor are elected at-large; two are elected from each of the two residential districts. Every seat carries a vote, and every seat runs four years unless a shorter term is needed to keep the terms staggered.

Five of those seven are being filled this November, and the reasons differ seat by seat. Three terms won in 2022 are simply expiring. A fourth seat is held by an appointee. The fifth belongs to a councilmember elected in 2024 to a term that was always going to end at this election.

Two of those appointments came the same night. Redmond Ramos resigned in December 2022, and LaKind’s move from the board to the mayor’s chair left a second seat empty. On February 6, 2023 the council chose Fiorito and Kronick from the applicants, and both were sworn in on February 21, as reported at the time by Our Community News. Both then stood in November 2024: Kronick for a full four-year District 1 term, Fiorito for a District 2 term the town’s own results page records as running only until the next regular election. That election is this one.

The seventh seat changed hands after a death. Jim Romanello, elected at-large in November 2024 to a second term, died on April 12, 2025. Chad Smith, then chair of the Planning Commission and the only applicant, was appointed on June 16 and sworn in the same evening.

The at-large seats carry unequal terms

The two at-large seats do not run for the same length of time. Under the town’s home rule charter, the at-large candidate receiving the most votes is elected to four years and the runner-up to two. The town’s explanation is that assigning one shorter term preserves the charter’s staggered structure so the two seats do not expire together. The arithmetic behind it is visible in the roster: Abbott’s at-large term, won in 2022, expires this year, while the at-large term Romanello won in 2024 and Smith is holding by appointment would otherwise run to 2028. With two named candidates for two at-large seats, both are on course to be elected, and the vote totals will decide which of them takes the four-year term and which the two-year.

The shorter term is not a lesser commitment on paper. Section 2.3(6) of the charter provides that where less than a four-year term remains at the time of election, the shorter term counts as a full four-year term for the purpose of the two-term limit. The candidate finishing second in the at-large count would serve two years, but those two years would use up one of the two consecutive terms the charter allows in that office.

A district seat falls vacant either way

Both mayoral candidates already sit on the council, and both hold seats with two years left to run. Kronick represents District 1; Kimple represents District 2.

Section 2.6(4) of the charter permits a sitting officeholder to run for another town office, but requires the winner to resign the seat currently held. Whichever candidate wins the mayoralty will therefore vacate a district seat that no voter is being asked to fill this November.

Section 2.7(2) gives the council 90 days to fill such a vacancy, by appointment or by calling a special election. The distinction matters: an appointee holds the seat only until the next regular town election, in November 2028, while the winner of a special election serves out the full remaining term. The council has taken the appointment route in each of its recent vacancies — Ramos’s and LaKind’s in 2023, Romanello’s in 2025. The losing candidate keeps their district seat and serves the remainder of the term.

Who is leaving

Three members elected on November 8, 2022 reach the end of their terms in January: LaKind, King and Abbott. Smith, appointed in June 2025, holds his seat only until this election. King, Abbott and Smith each chose not to seek election in November.

None was barred from running. The charter permits two consecutive four-year terms, and the town’s roster records each of the four as serving a first term in the office they now hold; LaKind’s earlier service, as a trustee elected in 2020, was in a different office. So four seats are changing occupants because LaKind, King, Abbott and Smith did not file, not because any of them was term-limited. Voters choose the new mayor, and formally elect the candidates standing unopposed in the other four races.

What the candidates have published

Three of the six have campaign websites setting out a platform. Both mayoral candidates have one.

Kimple’s site, under the line “Steady Leadership for Monument’s Future,” lists five priorities: town financial strength, expanding and supporting the police force, infrastructure repair prioritized by data-driven assessment, securing a renewable water supply, and small business support. It dates his arrival in the Tri-Lakes to 2016 and gives his civic record as service on his subdivision HOA, as a FireWise community coordinator, on the Planning Commission and the Board of Adjustments, and now on the council. It gives his background as thirty years in the U.S. Navy, where he trained as an air traffic controller and retired in 2016 as a master chief petty officer, and as airfield manager at Fort Carson since 2020, with volunteer work as a sponsor family for Air Force Academy cadets and as a D38 substitute teacher from 2016 to 2025.

Kronick’s site, under the line “a Mayor for all,” sets out three priorities: water and infrastructure, fiscal responsibility, and smart growth. It puts renewable and reusable water for the roughly 1,700 residents on town water first, calling it “a primary objective” and adding that “yes, it will be expensive.” It ties the growth section to the Monument 2040 comprehensive plan, on whose steering committee she sits, and gives her civic record as three years on the Monument Sanitation Board, three years on the council, and nearly six years before that in the audience at council meetings. It gives her background as more than twenty years at Hewlett-Packard as a senior solution architect, volunteer work with Silver Key Senior Services and the Pikes Peak Area Council of Governments’ Area Agency on Aging, and degrees from Columbia College and the University of Southern California.

Valderrama’s site, the only one among the council candidates, lists four priorities: preserving Monument’s character, putting residents first, supporting local business, and managing growth responsibly. On character it says growth “should reflect the values of our community, fit the scale and character of the town, and protect the feel that residents treasure.” It also carries a frequently-asked-questions section, with questions on Monument’s growth, small business, Buc-ee’s and his qualifications.

All three accounts are the candidates’ own, and the Independent has not independently verified the biographies. No campaign website was found for DeBoo, Fiorito or Gilson. That is a statement about what a search turned up, not a finding that none exists: a campaign run through a social account, or on a domain the Independent did not try, would not have appeared.

The first campaign finance reports were due at Town Hall by 5 p.m. on September 4, covering the period from the start of each candidacy through August 30. Two more fall before the election, on October 5 and October 19. They are filed with the town clerk; the town’s campaign finance page carries the calendar and the blank forms but no filed reports.

The use tax question, in full

The ballot also carries a tax measure referred by the council under Ordinance No. 19-2026. It asks voters to raise the town’s use tax on construction and building materials and construction equipment from 2.0 percent to 3.5 percent, matching the existing 3.5 percent sales tax on retail purchases. The town has published the certified ballot title, which is reproduced here in full.

Three things in that text are worth reading twice. The first is what the tax reaches. Monument levies its use tax in two places: on construction materials at the time a building or right-of-way permit is issued, and on motor vehicles at registration. The ballot title names only the first. On the town’s own taxation FAQ both stand at 2.0 percent today, and the measure would leave the vehicle rate where it is.

The second is the list of what the money may buy. The town’s own polling, which the Independent reported in June, found that the single most persuasive argument for the tax — moving 68 percent of respondents toward yes — was that the money could be used only for roads. The certified title confines the revenue to capital projects, and the two categories it names are streets, roads, bridges and sidewalks, and stormwater improvements. It introduces them with the word “including,” which does not shut out other capital projects, and stormwater formed no part of the roads-only framing that tested best.

The third is the number. The title estimates the increase at $2,272,500 in its first year and asks voters to authorize the town to collect, retain and spend that revenue, and any earnings on it, as a voter-approved revenue change under TABOR. A ballot issue number — Monument’s past measures have run 2A, 2B and so on — is assigned through the coordinated election and will appear on the sample ballot.

What else Monument voters will see

The use tax is the only measure the Town of Monument referred. It will not be the only measure on a Monument ballot: the November 3 election is a county-coordinated one, and the same envelope carries statewide measures and any questions referred by the districts a given address sits in.

Some of that is already public. The Secretary of State certified the statewide ballot on September 4 and listed fourteen measures. The same announcement names Front Range Passenger Rail District Ballot Issue 7A, on funding for the line the state calls the Colorado Connector; the district takes in part or all of thirteen counties, El Paso among them, so the question may reach some Monument addresses.

What is not yet public is the county’s own paperwork. As of September 8 the El Paso County Clerk and Recorder lists its sample ballot, its TABOR notice and the state Blue Book as “available soon,” and its 2026 records page carries nothing for this election. The sample ballot is the document that will show which of these contests reach a particular address — the county cautions that most voters will find only a handful of them on their own ballot — and the TABOR notice is the one that will carry the required financial detail behind each local tax and debt question. The Independent will publish the local measures in full when the county posts them.

Where the filings live

Readers looking for candidate filings should go to Town Hall rather than the county. The county clerk administers the coordinated election but states plainly that it does not handle ballot access for municipal contests. Its election information page directs voters to TRACER, the Secretary of State’s campaign finance database, for candidates’ websites, contact details and finances. TRACER does not hold Monument’s municipal races: its office categories for El Paso County cover county offices, judges and special districts, with no category for mayor or town council. That guidance is written for the state and county contests sharing the November ballot.

Nomination petitions, candidate affidavits and campaign finance reports are filed with the town clerk, who is the designated election official. Candidates qualify by petition, requiring at least ten signatures from registered electors — from within the district, for district candidates, who must also live in the district they seek to represent. Charter section 2.6 sets the remaining requirements: United States citizenship, registration as a town elector, an age of at least 22, residence in the town for no fewer than 24 consecutive months before the election, no felony conviction, no employment with the town, and no other elective office at any level of government.

Sources & further reading

The Independent’s own coverage: LaKind Will Not Seek Re-Election as Mayor of Monument, which carries his announcement and the full text of his statement · Monument Town Survey: What the Words Are Worth, on the town’s own polling behind the use tax and which arguments moved voters · Palmer Lake’s November Ballot Is Set, the neighboring town’s certified ballot, which restores staggered terms by the same device Monument uses for its at-large seats.

Town record: Town of Monument, Elections (the candidate list, the offices on the ballot and the official ballot title) · Town Council roster (seats, election and appointment dates, terms) · Election Results (the 2020, 2022 and 2024 outcomes, including Fiorito’s shortened term) · Candidate & Election Resource Guide 2026 (petition, eligibility and write-in rules) · Campaign Finance (the reporting calendar) · Taxation FAQ (the two components of the town’s use tax).

Charter: Monument Home Rule Charter, Article II (qualifications, terms, term limits and vacancies) and Article IV (elections).

State and county: Colorado Secretary of State, 2026 ballot certification (the fourteen statewide measures and Front Range Passenger Rail District Ballot Issue 7A) · El Paso County 2026 election information (mailing, registration and in-person voting dates; the pending sample ballot and TABOR notice) · Candidates and Jurisdictions (the statement that the county does not administer municipal ballot access).

Other reporting: Our Community News, Monument Town Council, Feb. 6 and 21 (the appointments of Fiorito and Kronick) and Monument Town Council, June 2 and 16 by Chris Jeub (Smith’s appointment and the date of Romanello’s death).

Candidates: Kenneth Kimple · Laura Kronick · Alex Valderrama.

Methodology

The candidate list, the five offices and the official ballot title were taken from the Town of Monument’s Elections page, read in full in a browser on September 4 and read again in full on September 8, 2026. The candidate field was unchanged between the two readings. Automated retrieval of that page does not return what a browser sees: on both dates an automated fetch returned a cached 2022 copy describing a Board of Trustees election and listing that year’s candidates. Every figure here comes from the browser readings. The ballot title is reproduced verbatim; the only change is the removal of the double spaces the page’s line wrapping inserts, and the all-capital setting is the town’s.

Seat assignments, election dates, terms and Chad Smith’s appointment come from the council roster and Election Results pages, both read in full on September 8. Those pages record elections and current terms; they do not list appointments, so the February 2023 and June 2025 appointment dates, the reason for each vacancy and the date of Jim Romanello’s death come from Our Community News, whose accounts of both meetings were read in full. The statement that the two-year at-large term corresponds to the remainder of the term Romanello won in 2024 is the Independent’s reading of those two pages together; the town’s own explanation, given on its Elections page, is that a shorter term preserves the charter’s staggered structure, and it does not say which seat is which.

The charter provisions on unequal at-large terms, the resignation requirement and the filling of vacancies were read directly in Articles I through IV; later articles were not read and no claim here rests on them. The Candidate & Election Resource Guide was read in full, all eight pages; its table of offices does not survive text extraction, so the offices on the ballot were taken from the Elections page rather than from that table.

LaKind’s quotations are from written answers he sent the Independent on August 27, 2026 in reply to three questions put to him the previous day. They are quoted verbatim.

All three campaign websites were read on September 8, 2026, and every description of a candidate’s platform or biography is that site’s own account. Both of Kimple’s pages, platform and biography, and Kronick’s single page were read in full; the two mayoral candidates are given equal space and are listed alphabetically, as they are throughout this article. On Valderrama’s, the answers in the question-and-answer section sit behind panels that did not open to the Independent’s reading, so the questions are listed here and the answers are not characterized. Kronick’s site was supplied to the Independent; the other two were found in the September 4 search. The absence of a website for DeBoo, Fiorito and Gilson reflects that search — the web plus roughly thirty candidate domain patterns, with every domain that resolved opened and read — repeated on September 8. One domain matching a candidate’s surname belongs to a different person seeking a different office and is not linked here. That method would not find a campaign run on a social account or on a domain not tried, so no candidate is described as lacking a web presence.

The account of the rest of the ballot rests on the Secretary of State’s September 4 certification announcement and on the county’s election information and 2026 records pages, all read on September 8. Whether Ballot Issue 7A reaches a particular Monument address cannot be determined from the state’s list; the county’s sample ballot will settle it. Nothing here should be read as a finding that no other district referred a measure.

The Independent has not contacted any candidate for this article, and none is described as having declined or failed to respond.