Help us improve in just 2 minutes—share your thoughts in our reader survey.
Sedgwick County Board of Commissioners recall, Colorado (2025)
| Sedgwick County Board of Commissioners recall |
|---|
 |
| Officeholders |
Darrin Tobin John Fryar |
| Recall status |
| Signature requirement |
323 (Tobin) 263 (Fryar)[1] |
| See also |
| Recall overview Political recall efforts, 2025 Recalls in Colorado Colorado recall laws County commission recalls Recall reports |
An effort to recall Sedgwick County Commissioners Ron Berges, Darrin Tobin, and John Fryar is underway in Colorado. The effort was launched on July 21, 2025, after organizers filed recall petitions with the Sedgwick County Clerk and Recorder. Recall organizers have 60 days to collect a sufficient number of signatures for each officeholder in order to get the recall on the ballot. The necessary number of signatures is 281 for Berges, 323 for Tobin, and 263 for Fryar.[1]
Recall supporters
Recall organizers cited the following reasons in their general statement of grounds for recall:[1]
| “ |
Voters of Sedgwick County have determined a need to recall the Commissioners in each respective district. The Current Commissioners have demonstrated incompetence in multiple areas of their job as outlined below along with others not listed. 1. They allowed an employee with complete access to all employee’s private information to work from home and bypass all county firewalls allowing a hack to occur that the contracted IT service couldn’t stop and have not made an effort to protect the employees credit since this breech. 2. The finance and payroll department is in complete collapse with the auditors and accountant unable to get accurate reports. Late fees are being added unnecessarily because the commissioners have not managed to review the bills and payroll each month despite desperate requests from department heads/elected officials for the board to acknowledge these issues. 3. Their obvious attempt to discredit and dismantle the highly successful SCOR Community Center. 4. Crippling funding of public safety entities such as Sheriff’s Office, Communications Center, and EMS as well as other departments all while continuing to fund a second Economic Development within the county and shift funds into that office. It’s time for a better change. [2] |
” |
Recall opponents
Berges, Tobin, and Fryar responded to the recall petitions as follows:[3]
Berges' response:
| “ |
1. “Work from home” originated during the COVID-19 pandemic mandated by the state. The two previous county boards (BOCC) and current BOCC have not removed this ability to work remotely, which has been used by many of us in many departments. As anyone with a computer understands, cyber attacks are always a concern for citizens and government agencies alike. The BOCC has engaged the services of a Cyber Security firm to strengthen our safety of computer data, personnel information and the like. 2. The BOCC receives, reviews and authorizes payment of bills every 2 weeks (and as needed) and payroll monthly. Our accountant and auditors are actively working on our finance issues and the BOCC has received a state DOLA grant to hire a financial consultant skilled in governmental finance and payroll issues to help resolve the problems until permanent solutions and personnel can be put in place. 3. There is no attempt nor desire to “discredit and dismantle” the SCOR program. The lease arrangement is under review, along with a review of the original plans for the community center, including SCOR’s use of space and the development of a needed Child Care Center. SCOR provides activities and sports for the full spectrum of age groups and brings business to town with various events. The policies for facility space allocation and use is under review along with personnel policies. 4. Funding of Sheriff’s Office is provided by Budget requests submitted by Sheriff's Office as does funding for all county departments. Necessary services are difficult to provide due to the low tax base we have and the lower wages offered because of that. Two Economic Development offices are not funded by “shifts” of funds from other needed services and future coordination/optimization is being investigated. [2] |
” |
Tobin's response:
| “ |
From the desk of Commissioner Tobin: Rebuttal to Mr. Hunter’s concerns. 1. The ability to work remote was a COVID mandate from the state. There was no effort from the current or prior BOCC to remove this ability after the emergency was lifted. We are reviewing this practice and we have been offered an option for the county employees impacted from the data breach. Keep in mind that companies and government agencies are under constant attack and breached even when operating a closed network. 2. The question of a billing crisis is concerning. The board has only recently been advised that some matters need immediate attention. We have already met with our auditor to make the needed corrections. There is no exact timetable to offer. 3. The matter of SCOR has become a front and center matter to several members of our community. I have stated several times that we all need to talk more and this is a prime example. No one on the BOCC has taken actions against SCOR, nor do we wish to remove them from the Community Center. The terms of the rental agreement do need to be updated, nothing more. 4. The matter of funding our county and maintain proper operations is the primary job of the County Commissioners. We are working with all the department managers to see where changes can be made to improve our financial future. We are not targeting public safety as implied in Mr. Hunter’s notice. As for the issue of two Economic Developments, this is not a simple matter of just cutting one off. Steps must be taken and an evaluation of performance to gauge what the best course of action should be. [2] |
” |
Fryar's response:
| “ |
I was elected by the voters of Sedgwick County to make changes to County Government and to clean up Governmental operations. 1. The current BOCC inherited the existing employee group and policies including COVID adjustments. That includes the employee and the policies that were referenced in #1 of the complaint. Changes are being made to fix multiple problems with both employees and policies. Six months hasn’t been enough time to fix multiple years of problems. 2. As in #1 above, much of this was inherited. The BOCC has recognized these problems along with serious budget problems and is receiving assistance from the State/DOLA to have a financial expert help resolve these and other budget and financial policy problems. This includes $2,000,000 more than revenue in spent in 2024 and budgeted $1,300,000 more than actual revenues for 2025 and effectively 2026 without a viable revenue source. This will totally exhaust the County’s reserves in 2026. 3. There is no plan to discredit or dismantle SCOR. There was is a need to renegotiate the Lease with SCOR not their functions. Management of the Community Center is needed to allow the County to work effectively on getting Child Care and adult education established as was part of the original Community Center proposal. SCOR advised Child Care was not part of their mission. 4. With the budget constraints in #2 above, all departments within the County are subject to budget reevaluation and restrictions. No revenue has been shifted from any department to another. Economic Development is a complicated issue needing definition of each’s responsibilities. They are different for each. The demands of a balanced budget requires that the BOCC evaluate how dollars are spent and to look at alternatives to stay within the actual revenues. [2] |
” |
Path to the ballot
- See also: Laws governing recall in Colorado
No specific grounds are required for recall in Colorado. The number of signatures required for a recall to qualify for the ballot in Colorado depends on the office type.[4][5] After the petition is approved by the relevant election office, petitioners have 60 days to gather signatures.[6]
Recall context
- See also: Ballotpedia's Recall Report
Ballotpedia covers recall efforts across the country for all state and local elected offices. A recall effort is considered official if the petitioning party has filed an official form, such as a notice of intent to recall, with the relevant election agency.
The chart below shows how many officials were included in recall efforts from 2012 to 2024 as well as how many of them defeated recall elections to stay in office and how many were removed from office in recall elections.
See also
- Ballotpedia's Recall Report
- Sedgwick County, Colorado
- Recall campaigns in Colorado
- Political recall efforts, 2025
- County commission recalls
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 Julesburg Advocate, "Petitions to recall three Sedgwick County Commissioners have been filed" July 21, 2025
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ Julesburg Advocate, "Commissioners file Rebuttals to Recall Pettions " July 28, 2025
- ↑ Colorado Revised Statutes, "Section 1-12-105 - Signatures required for school district officers," accessed March 11, 2024
- ↑ Colorado Revised Statutes, "Section 1-12-104 - Signatures required for state and county officers," accessed March 11, 2024
- ↑ Colorado Revised Statutes, "Section 1-12-108 - Petition requirements - approval as to form - determination of sufficiency - protest - offenses," accessed October 13, 2023
