Help Hold City Hall Accountable:

Words matter. Lawyers cost. Pass the hat for public trust.

When citizens vote to tax themselves and authorize 61 MILLION DOLLARS in public debt, they have a right to rely on the ballot language placed before them.

As many of you know, on September 3, 2026 I filed a lawsuit to stop the City of Durango from demolishing the Arts & Sciences building next to the former Durango High School. I filed this lawsuit because the City is not doing what the ballot language authorized.

I am asking for help with the legal costs of my lawsuit against the City of Durango because this case is about more than one building. It is about whether the words on a ballot actually mean something.

Why I Need Your Help

Taking on a legal case against the City is expensive. I expect my legal costs could reach $50,000. I am asking the community to help me shoulder that burden because this effort will be more powerful if it is supported by many citizens, rather than financed by one person. Whether you can contribute $5, $50, $500, $1,000 or more, every donation helps. Funds raised will be used for attorney fees for this case. If funds remain after the case is concluded, I will donate them to San Juan Citizens Alliance.

Other important ways you can support include: writing a letter to the editor, contacting the City Council, and sharing this fundraiser with friends and neighbors.

Why I Went to Court

In April 2025, Durango voters approved Ballot Issue 2A, authorizing $61 million dollars in public debt for the “restoration and equipping of the historic Durango High School building and adjacent facilities for use as a new City Hall and new police facility”. The 33,000-square-foot Arts & Sciences building is that adjacent facility. Before the election, the project presented to the public called for renovating that building for the Police Department. Now the City plans to demolish it. Restoration and demolition are not the same thing.

Demolishing a building that voters authorized the City to “restore and equip” is a material departure from the voter-approved purpose of the bond funds and is not permitted under Colorado law.

Where the Case Stands

On September 10, 2026, the court held a hearing during which it ensured that the City would not demolish the Arts & Sciences building while this lawsuit is in process. Also during this hearing, the City argued that the court case was “frivolous” and that I should be responsible for paying their attorney’s fees. The judge rejected this assertion and the City is now paying (with tax payer dollars) for an attorney based in New Orleans to represent them in this case. Finally, the judge reminded the City's attorney that my character and motives are not relevant to the legal question before the court. I hope the City takes the judge's words to heart and stops the personal attacks on me so we can focus on the issue: whether the City can use voter-approved bond funds to demolish a building the ballot said would be restored and equipped. The judge set a date for our trial, October 15, 2026.

I left the courtroom feeling inspired, supported, and optimistic.

Why This Matters

When citizens vote to tax themselves and authorize millions of dollars in public debt, they have a right to rely on the language placed before them. Voters have a responsibility to pay attention, ask questions and participate. Government has an equally important responsibility to clearly state what voters are being asked to approve—and then abide by that authorization after the votes are counted. If “restoration and equipping” can later mean demolition and replacement, what protection does ballot language actually provide? That question reaches far beyond this particular building.

Others Are Speaking Up

Many other people in the community are speaking up about how far this project has moved from what was originally presented. Tracy Reynolds, the lead architect involved with the original project planning, wrote a bold and thoughtful letter questioning the direction the City is taking this project. Christina Rinderle, former mayor of Durango and leader of the City’s focus group on the original project design, wrote a powerful letter to council and staff questioning whether this project even resembles the original plan presented to voters, and the ways in which the City has dismissed public concern, alienating the very people who care about Durango.

Speaking publicly can be difficult, particularly for local professionals and business owners whose livelihoods depend, in part, on an ongoing relationship with the City government. This risk of retaliation from the City makes broad community participation especially important. When only a few citizens challenge City Hall, it is easy to focus attention on those individuals rather than on the substance of their concerns. When dozens or hundreds of citizens speak up, it becomes much harder to dismiss the issue—or single out the people raising it.

I am deeply grateful to everyone who has already spoken up, written letters, contributed, or simply encouraged me to keep going. This is our community, our history, and our vote.

I believe the words voters approved are worth defending.

Thank you for helping me to do it!

— Charles Shaw