Sky-Hi News Candidate Q&A Question 4: Standards for Funding Litigation & Advocacy

Sky-Hi News called me the other day for a raw, unedited interview to give voters an authentic and direct look into my views and my intentions as County Commissioner. I will be posting one question a day for easier reading.

You can read about the format and production of Sky-Hi’s 2026 Election Q&A here.

Question 4:

During the KFFR Candidate Forum, there was a discussion about the county’s decision to commit $5,000 toward an amicus brief in litigation involving energy companies and Boulder County. Beyond that particular case, what standards should commissioners use to determine when county funds should support litigation or advocacy outside Grand County?

That’s a good question, and I appreciate that the conversation’s ongoing about it because just this last week that court case was in the news because it had hit the courts. I think the most basic standard we should use is if and how that case or the results of the case could or would affect Grand County specifically, right? So, comparing that court case, the results of that case, I don’t believe would affect Grand County in a specific way. We wouldn’t be able to draw a straight line, like if ultimately Boulder City and County won their ultimate court case, that won’t affect Grand County in a specific, direct way. There might be outside influences, but our economy changes all the time, and there are a lot of outside influences that we don’t have a say in, and we don’t control or can’t control. 

Whereas you look at other court cases or other situations that could have gone to the courts that we have weighed in on, such as the Uinta Rail Line coming through the county. That had a direct effect on Grand County because the train is coming through Grand County, and we have a rail line that goes straight through the county, goes through Byers Canyon. So I think comparing the two is not accurate because one is more broad and one is very specific to us, so I think that would be my first standard of evaluation. 

And then, you know, especially when it comes to earmarking local taxpayer funds to support or protest a case like that, that’s really something that I feel should have been put to a larger discussion, whether it was a full public hearing or we had a collection of experts of different backgrounds and different ideas come together to really discuss it. Because again, I see this more as the commissioners acting without such a strong mandate, right? They didn’t win with an overwhelming majority of the vote, which to me means they don’t really represent the overwhelming majority of the people of Grand County. And while that doesn’t always come into play when they’re making day-to-day decisions about planning and zoning or how to allocate funds within the county government, I think it does play a role when the county is speaking on the larger stage, and they’re supposed to represent the county’s interests and values.

You can read the full interview here: https://www.skyhinews.com/news/qa-say-hello-to-jeremy-krones-running-for-county-commissioner-district-3/