In the Democratic primary in House District 42, which includes the Del Mar Park area, voters will decide between Rep. Mandy Lindsay and challenger Sarah Woodson.
Lindsay was first appointed to represent House District 42 in 2022 through a vacancy committee. Lindsay has a background as a community organizer and legislative aide, as well as working in healthcare.
Woodson, who grew up in the district, is a community activist and founder of The Color of Cannabis, an organization focused on education, advocacy and policy initiatives related to social equity and small-business access. Woodson also owns a mobile cannabis lounge in Denver, the Cannabis Experience.
At a Democratic candidate forum in May, Lindsay and Woodson made the case to voters why they should be the district’s next representative and spoke about their policy priorities.
Last month, a House Ethics Committee found that Lindsay likely violated ethical guidelines by mismanaging Democratic House caucus funds. The committee hasn’t determined if Lindsay, the caucus co-chair, is guilty and didn’t find any criminal behavior. As part of the process, Lindsay told Colorado Newsline that she intends to request a formal hearing to defend herself, which would include evidence and witnesses.
The ethics complaint alleges that Lindsay improperly reimbursed herself from the caucus bank account and used that money for personal expenses. While the Colorado Democratic Party conducted an audit last year and found that the caucus’ bank account was properly reconciled, it also suggested new bookkeeping policies.
Lindsay pushed back on claims that she had poor financial practices and didn’t keep receipts or track spending. She said receipts were documented and added that past caucus chairs and other co-chairs have operated similarly and haven’t presented financials on a monthly basis.
“Everything is actually documented,” Lindsay said. “The opportunity that’s come out of this is the opportunity to create those guidelines for our own caucus so that we are protecting our funds, but also protecting the people in this role so we’re not in jeopardy legally or ethically.”
Woodson said that as a business owner, she finds Lindsay’s bookkeeping practices to be suspect.
“I believe that she did misuse funds and I believe that she was grossly negligent,” Woodson said. “Recordkeeping is, to me, the basics if you’re going to be legislating for people.”
In addition to calling out Lindsay’s money habits, Woodson said she is running for the position because she feels Lindsay has ignored the needs of her constituents.
“The reason why I’m running for this seat is because our house district has been neglected — the current representative does not show up in the community,” Woodson said, adding that she has the experience needed to do a good job as the district representative.
In response, Lindsay said she has spent her time in the Capitol passing more than 60 bills benefitting her district, including many focused on housing policy, like renter’s protections. She said she wants to return to the statehouse to continue addressing affordability.
“I want to be re-elected to continue the work that I’ve built a foundation doing for the last few years,” she said.
On housing policy, Lindsay said she supports more policies helping renters transition into homeownership. She added that housing affordability is a priority for her because of her personal experience as a renter.
“Part of my concern on that front is how people are qualifying for mortgages, especially when they’re paying more in rent than you would likely be able to qualify for a mortgage, so you get stuck in this cycle,” she said.
Woodson said one of the main housing policy changes she would support is a reform of the state’s construction defects law, which has limited the construction of condos in the metro area. She said that while the intentions of the law may have been good, the effect has been detrimental to housing options.
“I’ve already been told by legislators that this is a difficult one to tackle, but I don’t want to be there to do fun things, I want to be there to do tough things that will directly impact HD42 and the whole state of Colorado,” Woodson said.
Both Lindsay and Woodson said the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights has been detrimental to the state’s ability to pay for services like healthcare and education and both said they would support a repeal.
“It is the root cause of so many of our financial struggles and we could do so much more for the people of Colorado if we did not have TABOR,” Lindsay said. “It makes really great ideas die because we cannot fund them.”
Woodson said one of her top priorities would be to expand police officer training on mental health and increase mental health evaluations for police officers. She added that she wants to help bring a state mental health facility to the district.
“We have to have police officers that are mentally healthy and mentally sound,” Woodson said.
Woodson also emphasized her goal to reduce poverty by supporting businesses and schools, promoting healthy police and expanding pathways to homeownership.
Lindsay highlighted her work and plans to continue lowering the cost of living, whether by reducing the costs of prescribed medications or supporting seniors’ homestead property tax exemption.
“Aurora traditionally is one of the most affordable places to move to, so that’s what I want to continue fighting for here for many people like myself,” she said.
Whoever is elected as the Democratic candidate will not face a Republican challenger in November, but Lindsay and Woodson were split on whether they would endorse their opponent in the general election.
Woodson said she wouldn’t endorse Lindsay if she wins the primary, calling her unqualified.
“She’s been here for four years and she has not done anything specifically to really impact the overall impact of HD42,” she said.
Lindsay said she would support Woodson in the general election because she wants the district to be successful and benefit from state policies.
“Whoever is elected for any seat that represents the area I live, I will be supporting them and encouraging them and getting votes out for them because, obviously, we don’t want Republicans in these seats,” Lindsay said.
Meet Mandy Lindsay
Mandy Lindsay was born in Denver and later moved to Aurora in 2013. Lindsay is the House District 42 incumbent, which she has held since being appointed to the seat in 2022 through a vacancy committee. Lindsay, a mom of four, previously worked as a legislative aide and for a vaccine clinic, as well as owned an organizing business.
Lindsay started in politics as a precinct organizer in 2008 and has served in multiple positions for the HD42 Democrats.
In her time in office, Lindsay has passed more than 60 bills covering things like housing, healthcare, education and transportation. She has advocated for working families, education, affordable housing and criminal justice reform.
Whoever is elected as the Democratic candidate for District 42 will not face a Republican challenger in November.
Website link: https://www.mandyforcolorado.com
Meet Sarah Woodson
Sarah Woodson, who has lived most of her life in Aurora, is the founder and executive director of The Color of Cannabis, an organization focused on education, advocacy and policy initiatives related to social equity and small-business access. Woodson, a mom of three, also owns a mobile cannabis lounge in Denver, the Cannabis Experience, and previously owned a pro-se legal document preparation business.
Woodson serves as vice chair of the Aurora Business Advisory Board and on Colorado’s Task Force for Drunk and Impaired Driving.
The priorities Woodson lists on her website include juvenile justice, education, mental health, housing, economic development and affordability.
Whoever is elected as the Democratic candidate for District 42 will not face a Republican challenger in November.
Website link: https://www.woodsonforcolorado.com/
Q&A with Mandy Lindsay
Q: After astonishing property value increases over the past four years, voters and the Legislature have moved to change property tax laws in an effort to reduce property taxes for residents. Did everyone get it right? What would you want to see changed?
A: If I’ve learned anything since joining the legislature, it’s that if there was a simple answer to any of the issues we face, it would’ve been handled already. Every lever that we pull (i.e. reducing property taxes) has an effect on another part of the system (i.e. school funding in the counties), which the state has to come back and address. I am proud of the work we did in the legislature to try and balance the needs of all stakeholders, and land on the best solution possible considering our TABOR situation. I want to see TABOR go the way of the dinosaurs.
Q: State lawmakers have in the past two sessions passed a handful of measures addressing the problem of affordable housing. City officials, including those in Aurora, have balked, saying some of the measures usurp local control, especially over zoning and development issues. Do you agree that’s the case? If so, is the end result so important that it outweighs the loss for local communities?
A: I am a state legislator and admittedly approach issues from that perspective, but I do also genuinely consider the lack of affordable housing to be a matter of statewide concern. No city is an island or exists in a vacuum, and what one city does (or doesn’t do) absolutely impacts its neighbors. The housing crisis is such a multi-faceted problem that we need to attack from every direction possible. A cohesive, unified strategy is necessary to make sure that all Coloradans have a safe and warm place to sleep at night.
Q: With available water sources all essentially determined, and water storage projects limited, should the state require that new home and business development be limited to provable, existing water supplies committed to the county or town permitting new construction?
A: 100%! I serve on the Agriculture, Water, and Natural Resources Committee and have toured the state with organizations like Aurora Water, Northern Water, the Capital Development Committee, and joined many farm visits. Along the way I’ve seen several already-existing reservoirs, and also stood on valley floors that will soon be flooded to create new ones. We face an uncertain future as a headwater state, have to preserve water resources for Coloradans, as well as honor the complex. long-established waters laws that exist between us and our neighboring states. The entire American West has to grapple with rising temperatures and decreased water supply. I have passed legislation that allow for xeriscaping in HOAs, which reduces the nearly 45% of municipal water that we spend on outdoor landscaping. The governor just officially declared that we are in a drought, and we have to do everything possible to mitigate the harm that could cause.
Q: There have been a number of efforts to limit local law enforcement’s cooperation with federal immigration agencies and restrict immigration enforcement. What regulations would you support for immigration enforcement operations, or should local police work more closely with ICE?
A: I would hope that next year we can get a bill passed that prohibits law enforcement from wearing masks, bolsters existing law that restricts local law enforcement from working with ICE on immigration issues, continuing efforts to make sure state agencies aren’t providing information to ICE that endangers our immigrant communities, and laws that allow for recourse when civil rights have been violated. After this last session and the failure of these bills to make it across the finish line, it is clear we have so much more work to do to protect Coloradoans, and people right here in our very own neighborhoods.
Q: While the Legislature, out of session, has little recourse right now, state lawmakers from both parties are loudly condemning or supporting Gov. Jared Polis’ decision to grant former Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters clemency. What do you think about Polis’ decision?
A: I could not be more disappointed in Polis and the decision he made granting Tina Peters clemency. It is a slap in the face to the prosecutors on the western slope who successfully presented a case outlining her illegal actions that endangered our election process. Polis provided clemency to an elderly white woman who served very little time, when thousands of others who are incarcerated are not given the same consideration. She has also shown no remorse and in fact is using her new-found freedom to once again rail against our elections here in Colorado and spread lies. The Democrats in the state legislature have made very clear our thoughts on this, and the fact that Polis waited until session was adjourned shows his cowardice in facing the legislative branch. Did I mention that I can’t wait for a new governor???
Q: Has the state struck a good balance between addressing justice for crime victims and promoting “restorative justice” in an effort to rehabilitate rather than house crime perpetrators and reduce the cost of state prisons?
A: No. We have a million miles to go on this front. We need major reform in this area. Not only on moral grounds, but financial ones as well. I serve on the Capital Development Committee which tours all the state prisons and evaluates their requests for improvement projects. We spent *$40 million* to renovate a kitchen in a state prison kitchen. Now, if we’re gonna incarnate them we damn well better make sure they’re fed properly and safely, but it was painful to see so much money go into the prison system. Victims deserve justice, and we also need to reevaluate what that actually means, from a moral *and* financial perspective.
Q: Between Medicaid cuts and a limited insurance exchange program, many Coloradans are experiencing rising healthcare costs. Is there anything the state can do to lower the cost of healthcare both for people with and without commercial health insurance?
A: For this and many other reasons, we need to get rid of TABOR. Until that day, we need to get creative in how we ease the cost burden for Coloradans. I worked at a mass vaccine clinic in 2021 and saw first hand how important pharmacies and pharmacists are to the healthcare ecosystem. Since joining the legislature I have passed several bills in this space, including two this past session. One bill made it possible for kids 5+ to get tested *and treated* at pharmacies for common illnesses like strep, flu, COVID, and RSV. This increases access to care for parents, saves time and money, and provides an additional item to the menu of healthcare options. I passed another bill that allows for prescriptions purchased online to count towards your health plan’s deductible. This for sure saves folks money on their life-saving medications. For the long term I support universal healthcare and often get bummed out over the fact that we still have not made meaningful progress on an issue I debated on Saturdays back in high school in 1993.
Q: What is the biggest difference between you and your opponent, and why is it important to voters in this primary election?
A: The biggest difference is my decade-plus living here in the district, and my five years already served in the legislature. We moved to Aurora in 2013 and have been in the same house ever since. Our oldest was just starting 6th grade, and our youngest, 1st grade. My kids grew up here in northwest Aurora (I’ve taken First Day of School pics every year in the front yard, which have measured the growth of my kidlets, *and* our bushes along the sidewalk, over the last 13 years. I have served this community since I got here, was elected the Chair of the HD42 Dems, and have knocked a gazillion doors in the district to get other Democrats elected, for the good of the people living here. At the Capitol I have learned the ropes, been elected to leadership within my caucus, and have personally sponsored and passed over 70 bills, and co-sponsored hundreds more. I came to the legislature to work on housing issues and have run bills every session to fight for renter’s rights, increase our housing stock, make healthcare more affordable, and protect the most vulnerable among us. The hubs and I are a working class couple, who have raised our kids near 6th and Havana, and have the had the joy and privilege of living in one of the most vibrant and diverse house districts in the state. My entire family is better off for living here and experiencing the whole world in our very own neighborhood.
Q: If you could unilaterally sunset any Colorado law, which one would it be and why?
A: It’s a bit of a cheat because it’s not a law, but I must be a broken record and say TABOR. We are the only state in the union that has this strange setup which handcuffs the legislature. If it’s so cool, why haven’t other states jumped on the bandwagon, including the red ones??? It is in our state constitution and requires a ton of work to repeal, but it has been in place for nearly 40 years and despite a thriving economy, our state cannot adequately fund education, healthcare, and a whole host of other important state programs. I had to run a bill just this last session to creatively fund the DMV so it could stay open — so people could, ummm, get driver’s licenses! Because the DMV is not funded through our state general fund, which is BANANAS. So yeah, TABOR has to go. It was voted in by a whole other generation, and people now deserve the right to re-evaluate this construct — that impacts every single person in Colorado. We need a stellar education and messaging strategy so that people understand the nuances of an admittedly difficult issue (even for legislators). Fingers crossed!
Q: What two bills that failed or were vetoed do you think should have become law?
A: A bill of mine that didn’t make it past committee this session was regarding eviction court reform — which included consistent law across the state for renters, so it wouldn’t matter what county you live in our what judge hears your case, the same rules would apply to everyone, every day. It also prohibited minors from being included in formal eviction proceedings. Imagine turning 18, starting out on your own, and already having an eviction on your record. We can do better than this. I was beyond disappointed when this bill failed in committee, and look forward to bringing it back next year.. As for a veto, hands down, Polis should have signed the Worker Protection Act. We are one of the few states with this additional step that makes it harder for workers to organize. I look forward to a new governor who will sign this bill into law and support our working families.
Q&A with Sarah Woodson
Q: After astonishing property value increases over the past four years, voters and the Legislature have moved to change property tax laws in an effort to reduce property taxes for residents. Did everyone get it right?
A: I think the Legislature and voters were right to recognize that rapidly increasing property values were creating real financial pressure for homeowners. However, it’s clear that many residents are still frustrated and uncertain about what their property tax bill will look like from year to year. What I would like to see is a more predictable and transparent system. Families should be able to plan for their expenses, and that becomes difficult when property tax bills can change significantly in a short period of time. I believe we should explore a formula that provides greater stability and allows homeowners to better anticipate future property tax obligations, whether through incremental adjustments or a multi-year framework that provides more certainty. This is especially important in House District 42, where many residents are retirees, seniors living on fixed incomes, individuals receiving Social Security, and people with disabilities. For these households, predictability matters just as much as affordability. They need to know what to expect so they can budget and remain in their homes. I’ve heard similar concerns from residents and local officials, including county assessors.
Q: State lawmakers have in the past two sessions passed a handful of measures addressing the problem of affordable housing. City officials, including those in Aurora, have balked, saying some of the measures usurp local control, especially over zoning and development issues. Do you agree that’s the case?
A: This is a nuanced issue because I understand both sides of the debate. My background in cannabis policy taught me the importance of local control. Every community has unique needs, infrastructure challenges, and priorities, and local elected officials are often in the best position to understand what works for their residents. In general, I believe communities should have a meaningful voice in decisions that affect their neighborhoods. At the same time, Colorado is facing a housing affordability crisis, and we cannot ignore the need to create more housing opportunities. Rather than broadly overriding local control, I would prefer to focus on addressing the factors that drive up housing costs. That includes streamlining permitting processes, reducing unnecessary delays, examining development fees, and continuing to reform construction defect laws that have contributed to the decline in condominium construction across Colorado. Condos have historically been one of the most affordable paths to homeownership, and we should work to make that option available again. For me, the answer is balance. The state has a role in addressing housing affordability, but local governments should remain important partners in that process. Collaboration will produce better outcomes than one-size-fits-all mandates.
Q: There have been a number of efforts to limit local law enforcement’s cooperation with federal immigration agencies and restrict immigration enforcement. What regulations would you support for immigration enforcement operations, or should local police work more closely with ICE?
A: As the child of an immigrant, this issue is deeply personal to me. I believe we can have secure borders, enforce our laws, and still treat people with dignity and respect. It’s important to remember that ICE has existed under both Republican and Democratic administrations for more than 20 years. ICE operated under President Obama and Biden, and during that time we also saw programs like DACA created to protect young people who were brought to this country as children. My concern is how this administration has chosen to use ICE. I do not believe local law enforcement should be enforcing federal immigration law or assisting ICE with routine immigration arrests. I support stronger communication between federal agencies and state and local leaders regarding major enforcement operations so communities can prepare and respond appropriately. I do not support expanding ICE detention facilities. I do not support having local police, police federal agents. That creates conflict between agencies and that is exactly the kind of chaos that makes government less effective. Donald Trump thrives in that chaos. While Americans are distracted by conflict and division, policies continue to move forward that make the wealthy and well-connected even wealthier and more connected.
Q: Has the state struck a good balance between addressing justice for crime victims and promoting “restorative justice” in an effort to rehabilitate rather than house crime perpetrators and reduce the cost of state prisons?
A: I believe both accountability and rehabilitation are important, and the challenge is finding the right balance between the two. For some offenses, particularly nonviolent crimes, restorative justice programs can be effective at reducing recidivism, helping offenders take responsibility for their actions, and allowing victims to have a voice in the process. When done correctly, these programs can help people successfully reenter society and reduce the long-term costs associated with incarceration. However, I do not believe restorative justice should come at the expense of crime victims. Victims deserve to be heard, protected, and treated with dignity throughout the criminal justice process. Public safety must remain the top priority, especially in cases involving violent crime, repeat offenders, or individuals who pose an ongoing threat to the community. I do not think there is a one-size-fits-all answer. Some cases call for rehabilitation and alternatives to incarceration, while others require significant consequences and incarceration to protect the public. Ultimately, I support a balanced approach that prioritizes victims, protects public safety, and creates opportunities for rehabilitation when appropriate. The goal should be reducing future crime, supporting victims, and helping people who can be successfully rehabilitated become productive members of society.
Q: Between Medicaid cuts and a limited insurance exchange program, many Coloradans are experiencing rising healthcare costs. Is there anything the state can do to lower the cost of healthcare both for people with and without commercial health insurance?
A: Healthcare affordability is one of the biggest challenges. While many of the factors driving healthcare costs are outside the control of state government, there are steps we can take to help reduce costs over time. One area I believe deserves greater investment is preventative care and mental health services. When people can access treatment early, we can often prevent more serious and expensive health issues down the road. Early intervention is not only better for patients, but it is often far less costly than emergency room visits, hospitalization, incarceration, or crisis response services. I support expanding telehealth services in rural and underserved communities. This can increase access to care, reduce travel costs and time away from work, and help connect patients with specialists and mental health providers. That said, I believe we should be honest about the limits of state government. Healthcare costs are driven by many factors, including federal policy, insurance markets, and pharmaceutical pricing. While Colorado cannot solve every aspect of healthcare affordability on its own, we can make smart investments that improve access to care, reduce long-term costs, and help people receive treatment before a small problem becomes a major crisis.
Q: What is the biggest difference between you and your opponent, and why is it important to voters in this primary election?
A: The difference between my opponent and me is experience, community roots, and a proven track record of delivering results. I was raised in Aurora and have been working in policy and advocacy since 2019. Before running for office, I spent years working with legislators, local governments, state agencies, and community organizations to advance policy solutions and secure resources for the communities I serve. My opponent was appointed to the seat in 2020, and I believe her record reflects a much narrower focus that has not fully addressed the diverse needs of House District 42. I currently serve as Vice Chair of the Aurora Business Advisory Board and as a member of CDOT’s Drunk and Impaired Driving Task Force. Through my work, I have helped secure more than $4 million to support entrepreneurs and small businesses and have worked on initiatives that improve public safety and economic opportunity. I bring policy experience, community involvement, and a proven record of delivering results. Most importantly, I have spent years showing up, listening, and working to improve the lives of the people in Colorado.
The lighter side of Mandy Lindsay
Q: THE LIGHTER SIDE: Are you a dog person? A cat person? No pets!
A: Total cat person. If it weren’t for my husband, I’d become a crazy cat lady and have, like, a million. So, I’m grateful for him, obviously. They don’t require as much attention as dogs, and as a mom of four, I appreciate that! They are so soft and the perfect size to cuddle, have gorgeous orb-like eyes and cutie pie toe-beans, and I’m convinced of the magical, healing properties of kitty-purrs. They scratch up my furniture and get hair all over the place, but I wouldn’t trade them for the world.
Q: THE LIGHTER SIDE: What food do you hate most?
A: Cilantro! I always joke about the “Cilantro Incident” where my husband whipped up homemade guacamole and put {GASP!} cilantro in it, which made me question everything I thought I knew. “Have you ever met me???” “Do you know me AT ALL?” “Do you actually love me????” 🙂 Man, I just can’t stand the stuff. So disgusting.
Q: THE LIGHTER SIDE: What book did you last read? Be honest!
A: One of my favorite things in life is my monthly book club where we have an elaborate themed dinner to celebrate and discuss our latest selection. Oddly enough, considering a question from above, in May we read a book called “We’ll Prescribe You A Cat” by a Japanese author named Syou Ishida. It’s about a mental health clinic that PRESCRIBES CATS as treatment. So Mandy-coded! It’s a love letter to our feline friends, and my fellow book clubbers and I had a blast (as always) with our Japanese/cat evening, complete with sushi in cat-face and cat-paw shapes!
The lighter side of Sarah Woodson
Q: THE LIGHTER SIDE: Are you a dog person? A cat person? No pets!
A: Dog
Q: THE LIGHTER SIDE: What food do you hate most?
A: cottage cheese
Q: THE LIGHTER SIDE: What book did you last read? Be honest!
A: The Lincoln Conspiracy- The Secret Plot to Kill America’s 16th President- and Why It Failed