AURORA | Two Republican candidates seeking to represent Colorado Senate District 27 say they would focus on public safety, gun rights and limiting government if elected in November in a challenge against incumbent Democratic Sen. Tom Sullivan.
Daryl Gibbs and Danielle Lammon are competing in the Republican primary for the nomination. While both candidates emphasize support for law enforcement and Second Amendment protections, each campaign has highlighted different priorities in outlining what they would pursue in the legislature.
Gibbs, a military veteran, former law enforcement officer and small business owner, says protecting gun rights would be one of his top priorities. He describes the Second Amendment as a cornerstone of constitutional freedoms and says he would serve as a consistent advocate for law-abiding gun owners while also supporting community safety efforts, according to his campaign website.
Gibbs also says he would back legislation requiring athletes to compete according to their biological sex at birth and would support maintaining women-only spaces, including restrooms and locker rooms, for “biological women.” He argues those policies are necessary to protect fairness, safety and opportunities for women.
On public safety issues, Gibbs points to his experience as a former Denver police officer and says he would support full funding for police, firefighters, emergency medical personnel and Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents. He opposes efforts for what says are efforts to defund law enforcement agencies and says first responders deserve strong support from state government, according to his campaign posts.
Lammon says education and literacy would be among her leading priorities. She says every child should be reading and writing at grade level by third grade and advocates directing more funding into classrooms to support teachers. Lammon also links improved literacy rates to higher graduation rates and lower crime.
Like Gibbs, Lammon says she would defend Second Amendment rights and oppose what she describes as overreaching gun restrictions on law-abiding citizens. She argues that enforcing existing laws is a more effective approach to public safety.
Lammon also emphasizes support for law enforcement and opposes policies she says have weakened public safety. She says government has a responsibility to ensure residents feel safe in their homes and communities.
In addition, Lammon says she would advocate for parental rights, including greater transparency in schools and increased parental involvement in decisions affecting children’s education, health and values.
On fiscal questions, Lammon said in campaign material that she pledges to vote to defend Colorado’s Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights, reduce regulations, cut government spending and lower taxes. She says limiting government and reducing costs are essential to keeping Colorado affordable for families and workers.
Meet Darryl Gibbs
Republican Daryl Gibbs is a former Air Force reservist seeking the GOP nomination to run for the state Senate District 27 seat against incumbent Democrat Tom Sullivan.
Gibbs moved to Colorado in 1995, according to his website, and has since built a career spanning military service, law enforcement and small-business ownership. He served for nearly two decades in the Air Force Reserves as a C-130 crew chief and previously worked for the Denver Police Department, he said. He later became the owner and operator of a trucking business.
Gibbs traces his roots to Illinois and Louisiana and often cites the influence of his family’s perseverance and work ethic. His grandmother, who raised 25 children and worked jobs ranging from house cleaning to cotton picking, lived to age 104.He says she embodied resilience and self-reliance. He also credits his mother, a veteran of the Women’s Army Corps, for raising her family as a single parent while emphasizing hard work, safety and personal responsibility.
Website: darrylgibbsforcolorado.com
Meet Danielle Lammon
Republican Danielle Lammon is a community leader, nonprofit founder, author and retired small-business owner seeking GOP nomination to run against incumbent Democrat Tom Sullivan for the state Senate District 27 seat. A Southeast Aurora resident, Lammon is the founder and CEO of the Aurora Fire Foundation, which supports first responders and public safety initiatives, and founder of the Buddy Publishing Foundation, which promotes literacy programs.
A military wife and military mom, Lammon and her husband raised four children and are grandparents to two adopted grandsons. Her life story includes becoming a teen mother before building a career focused on community service and civic leadership, Lammon said.
For more than a decade, Lammon has led community projects in Aurora, including efforts that helped create the city’s only Sensory Garden at Star K Ranch and Aurora’s first Accessible Playground. She serves as chairperson of the Spina Bifida Association of Colorado and is a past president of the Rotary Club of Aurora.
She said her campaign focuses on public safety, support for small businesses, fiscal responsibility and affordability for Colorado families.
Website: danielleforsd27.com
Q&A with Darryl Gibbs
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: The Legislature reacted — they didn’t reform. Temporary patches and election-year fixes don’t protect Colorado families long-term. Real reform means: Honor TABOR — return excess revenue to taxpayers, period. Permanent assessment caps — not fixes that expire. Stop government from profiting off inflation at the expense of homeowners and seniors. Protect farmers and small business owners who can’t absorb runaway property tax increases. Colorado families shouldn’t need a political crisis to get tax relief. I’ll fight for structural protections that last.
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: Yes, the state has overstepped — and I oppose it. Local communities know their neighborhoods better than Denver politicians do. Zoning and development decisions belong at the city and county level, period. Aurora and other cities are right to push back. The affordable housing crisis is real, but top-down mandates from the Legislature aren’t the answer. Heavy-handed state zoning laws drive up development costs, override community character, and strip voters of their voice over their own neighborhoods. Real solutions come from cutting the red tape that makes building expensive — not handing more power to state bureaucrats. We need to reduce permitting delays, lower regulatory burdens on builders, and incentivize development without dictating to local governments how to do it. The end result does NOT justify the loss of local control. Once you surrender that authority to the state, you rarely get it back.
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: Yes — absolutely. Water is Colorado’s most finite resource, and growth without guaranteed water supply is irresponsible planning. If a developer can’t prove the water exists and is committed, the permit shouldn’t be issued. It’s that simple. We cannot build communities on paper water. Promising future water rights that may never materialize puts homeowners, farmers, and businesses at serious risk — and taxpayers end up holding the bag when the system fails. This isn’t anti-growth. It’s responsible growth. Requiring provable, committed water supplies before permitting protects existing residents, preserves agricultural water rights, and ensures new development is sustainable long-term. As someone who hauls agricultural products across Colorado, I’ve seen firsthand how critical water is to farmers and rural communities. They shouldn’t have to compete with poorly planned developments that were never backed by real water resources. The state should set this as a firm standard — and local governments should have the tools to enforce it without political pressure from developers. Build what you can sustain. Not what you can sell.
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: Local law enforcement should absolutely cooperate with ICE — sanctuary policies cost lives. As a veteran and former police officer, I took an oath to uphold the law. There is no asterisk on that oath. When local governments obstruct federal immigration enforcement, they aren’t protecting communities — they’re protecting criminals at the expense of law-abiding residents. Colorado’s sanctuary policies are dangerous. They allow violent offenders to be released back onto our streets instead of being turned over to federal authorities. That is a direct threat to public safety. What I support: Full cooperation between local law enforcement and ICE Ending sanctuary city and county policies statewide Honoring ICE detainer requests — no releasing criminal aliens back into our communities 287(g) agreements allowing local officers to assist in immigration enforcement Protecting law enforcement officers from political retaliation for cooperating with federal agencies The job of local police is to keep communities safe. Tying their hands with sanctuary policies does the opposite. Immigration law is federal law. Ignoring it isn’t compassion — it’s lawlessness.
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: Governor Polis made the right call — even if his reasoning was purely practical. Tina Peters was convicted, yes. But the sentence was excessive and politically motivated. Colorado’s justice system has repeatedly shown it treats political opponents of the establishment differently than it treats everyone else. A five-year sentence for a first-time, nonviolent offender reeks of making an example out of someone. Clemency exists precisely for situations where justice and the law diverge. That said — I don’t give Polis a pass. This is the same Governor who has signed legislation undermining election integrity, expanded mail-in ballot vulnerabilities, and pushed policies that erode public trust in our elections. If he’s suddenly concerned about fairness in the Peters case, Coloradans should ask why. What I want to see is equal justice. Not clemency as a political tool — but a justice system that applies the law consistently regardless of whether you’re a Democrat, Republican, election skeptic, or establishment favorite. Tina Peters deserved a fair process from the beginning. Whether she got one is a question Coloradans should keep asking.
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 — Colorado has tipped too far toward offenders and away from victims. As a former law enforcement officer, I’ve seen firsthand what happens when the justice system prioritizes rehabilitation rhetoric over accountability. Victims get re-traumatized watching offenders walk free or receive minimal consequences while they live with the aftermath of the crime. Restorative justice has a place — for nonviolent, first-time offenders where genuine rehabilitation is realistic. But Colorado lawmakers have applied soft-on-crime policies broadly, and communities are paying the price with rising crime rates and a justice system that feels rigged against victims. What I support: Victims’ rights must come first — always Truth in sentencing — offenders serve what judges impose Restorative justice limited to appropriate, nonviolent cases with victim consent Ending policies that reduce sentences for violent and repeat offenders Holding the Legislature accountable for crime increases tied to their reforms Rebuilding law enforcement recruitment and retention Rehabilitation is a worthy goal. But it cannot come at the expense of public safety or victim dignity. Colorado doesn’t have a prison overcrowding crisis — it has an accountability crisis.
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: Yes — but the answer is more competition, not more government. Colorado’s healthcare costs are rising because government intervention has reduced competition, increased mandates, and driven up administrative costs. Adding more state control won’t fix a problem government helped create. What I support: Price transparency — require hospitals and insurers to publish real costs so consumers can shop and compare Expand health sharing ministries and association health plans — give individuals and small businesses more affordable alternatives to expensive mandated plans Remove certificate of need laws — these protect hospital monopolies and block competition that would lower costs Interstate insurance competition — allow Coloradans to purchase plans across state lines Protect Medicaid for those who truly need it — prioritize the most vulnerable rather than expanding eligibility indefinitely Cut administrative red tape — regulatory burdens drive up costs for providers and patients alike Support rural healthcare access — as someone who works rural Colorado, I see the gaps firsthand Government-run healthcare isn’t the answer. Empowering patients with choices, transparency, and competition is. Healthcare should follow the patient — not the bureaucrat.
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 between Danielle Lammon and me is credibility and conviction — earned through service, not politics. Danielle is a fellow Republican and I respect that. But when voters choose a State Senate candidate, they deserve someone whose conservative values are backed by a lifetime of living them — not just campaigning on them. I am a 20-year Air Force veteran, a former police officer, and a working small business owner. I have defended this country, enforced its laws, and built something with my own hands in the real economy. That experience doesn’t just inform my politics — it is my politics. On the Second Amendment, I have been consistent and uncompromising — framing gun rights as a civil rights issue with deep constitutional grounding. On fiscal responsibility, election integrity, and public safety, my positions are built on real-world experience, not political positioning. Colorado Republicans need a candidate who can win in November and govern with backbone. That takes more than the right talking points — it takes a record voters can trust and a life story that connects. I’m not a politician who became a conservative. I’m a veteran, a cop, and a working man who has always been one.
Q: If you could unilaterally sunset any Colorado law, which one would it be and why?
A: SB25-003 — Tom Sullivan’s permit-to-purchase law for semiautomatic firearms. This law is unconstitutional, unnecessary, and insulting to every law-abiding Coloradoan who simply wants to exercise a fundamental constitutional right. The Supreme Court was clear in Bruen and Heller — the Second Amendment is not a privilege the government grants. It is a right the government cannot infringe. Requiring law-abiding citizens to obtain government permission before purchasing a legal firearm turns that right into a bureaucratic obstacle course. Criminals don’t apply for permits. This law only burdens honest people. As a veteran who swore an oath to defend the Constitution, and a former law enforcement officer who understands real public safety — I know this law does nothing to reduce crime. It simply creates a registry, delays legal purchases, and lays the groundwork for future confiscation. It takes effect August 1, 2026. The damage to civil liberties begins immediately. If I could eliminate one Colorado law today, it would be this one — because it represents everything wrong with how career politicians like Tom Sullivan approach governance. They punish the innocent, ignore the Constitution, and call it progress. It’s not progress. It’s government overreach dressed up as safety.
Q: What two bills that failed or were vetoed do you think should have become law?
A: SB25-086 — Required social media companies to remove accounts engaged in selling drugs/guns, sex trafficking, or exploitation of minors. Passed with bipartisan support. Polis vetoed it. Senate voted 29-6 to override — House Democrats blocked the override vote. HB26-1255 — Required social media companies to work with law enforcement on credible threats posted online. Inspired by the Evergreen High School shooting where the killer posted warnings on TikTok months before the attack. Polis vetoed it too. Same issue, two sessions in a row. That’s a pattern, not a policy disagreement.
Q&A with Danielle Lammon
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: Property tax relief has helped, but it has not solved the larger affordability problem. While property tax rates have been adjusted, homeowners continue to face rising costs through fees, special districts, and regulations that drive up housing prices. Metro district debt and mill levies often remain in place for decades, creating a hidden tax burden on homeowners. I would support greater transparency, stronger limits on long-term metro district debt, and reducing unnecessary regulations that increase construction costs. Property tax reform should provide real relief while ensuring essential public safety services such as fire protection are not negatively impacted.
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 believe local municipalities should retain home rule authority and have a significant voice in zoning and development decisions. Communities understand their infrastructure, transportation, public safety, and water needs better than the state. While affordable housing is an important goal, a one-size-fits-all approach from Denver is not the answer. The state should work collaboratively with local governments to encourage housing development while respecting local control and the unique needs of each community.
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: Colorado must take a responsible approach to growth and water resources. New development should demonstrate access to a sustainable and reliable water supply before construction is approved. Water is a finite resource, and local governments should ensure infrastructure and supplies can support future growth. At the same time, we must protect existing water rights, honor Colorado’s prior appropriation system, and recognize that agriculture remains one of Colorado’s most important industries and largest water users.
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: Public safety should always come first. Local law enforcement should be able to cooperate with federal agencies, including ICE, when appropriate and lawful. Criminal activity does not stop at jurisdictional boundaries, and law enforcement agencies should work together to protect all residents. I support policies that prioritize the removal of individuals who commit serious crimes while ensuring due process and adherence to the law.
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 have not reviewed all of the facts, court records, or legal issues surrounding the Tina Peters case, and I am not an attorney. Before forming a definitive opinion, I believe it is important to understand the full legal record and the reasoning behind the governor’s decision. Public officials should avoid making judgments based solely on political narratives and instead focus on the facts and the rule of law.
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. The balance has shifted too far away from accountability. Restorative justice may have a role in certain limited situations, but public safety and justice for victims must come first. Too many offenders receive probation or reduced consequences only to reoffend and create additional victims. Colorado needs a criminal justice system that holds offenders accountable, supports victims, and ensures dangerous criminals are not repeatedly released back into our communities.
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: Colorado’s healthcare costs continue to rise for families, employers, and taxpayers. The state should focus on reducing unnecessary regulations that increase costs and limit competition. We should encourage innovation, increase transparency in pricing, and allow insurance providers greater flexibility to offer affordable coverage options. Government should focus on removing barriers that drive up costs rather than creating additional mandates that often increase premiums for consumers.
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 between my opponent and I, is my record of community leadership and proven results right here in Senate District 27. For more than a decade, I have worked alongside residents, nonprofits, businesses, first responders, schools, and local governments to make a positive impact in our community. From founding and running the Aurora Fire Foundation, building and creating community projects, and supporting public safety initiatives to improving literacy and advocating for families, I have a track record of turning ideas into action. Voters in this primary deserve a candidate who not only talks about the issues but has demonstrated leadership, built relationships, and delivered results. As a wife, mother, grandmother, small business owner, author, and nonprofit leader, I understand the challenges facing working families, businesses, and taxpayers. This election is about choosing the Republican candidate who is best positioned to unite voters, communicate a common-sense conservative message, and defeat Senator Tom Sullivan in November. I believe my experience, community involvement, and proven record of service make me the best candidate.
Q: If you could unilaterally sunset any Colorado law, which one would it be and why?
A: If I could sunset one area of Colorado law, it would be the growing number of firearm restrictions that primarily impact law-abiding citizens while doing little to stop criminals. Criminals do not follow gun laws. Instead of restricting the constitutional rights of responsible gun owners, we should focus on enforcing existing laws, prosecuting violent offenders, addressing mental health concerns, and improving public safety. Our constitutional rights should be protected, not continually eroded by ineffective legislation.
Q: What two bills that failed or were vetoed do you think should have become law?
A: Two bills I believe should have become law are the Children Are Not For Sale Act and the Protect Kids From Irreversible Surgeries Act. The Children Are Not For Sale Act would strengthen protections against child exploitation and trafficking. Protecting vulnerable children should never be a partisan issue. Colorado has a responsibility to hold traffickers accountable and ensure children are protected from those who seek to exploit them. The Protect Kids From Irreversible Surgeries Act would establish commonsense safeguards by ensuring that permanent, life-altering medical procedures are delayed until an individual reaches adulthood and can fully understand the long-term consequences of those decisions. Both measures are rooted in a simple principle: protecting children. They promote safety, fairness, and responsible decision-making while recognizing that children deserve special protections. Most Coloradans agree that when it comes to the well-being of our children, we should err on the side of caution and put their long-term interests first.
Q: THE LIGHTER SIDE: Are you a dog person? A cat person? No pets!
A: Definitely a dog person. I recently lost my beloved French Bulldogs, Phinn and Hugo, who were cherished members of our family. Phinn was especially inspiring as he was born with a birth defect in his spine and taught us so much about perseverance and joy. His story inspired me to write my published children’s picture book, Phinn’s Wheelin’ Adventures, which shares his journey and celebrates overcoming challenges.
Q: THE LIGHTER SIDE: What food do you hate most?
A: Lima beans. I’ve tried them more than once, but they still haven’t won me over.
Q: THE LIGHTER SIDE: What book did you last read? Be honest!
A: The Book of Lost Names by Kristin Harmel. It’s a powerful historical novel about courage, sacrifice, and resilience during World War II. I enjoyed both the historical perspective and the personal stories woven throughout the book.
The lighter side with Darryl Gibbs
Q: THE LIGHTER SIDE: Are you a dog person? A cat person? No pets!
Dog 100%
Q: THE LIGHTER SIDE: What food do you hate most?
Sour cream and Ranch
Q: THE LIGHTER SIDE: What book did you last read? Be honest!
How the democrats won the blacks
The lighter side with Danielle Lammon
Q: THE LIGHTER SIDE: Are you a dog person? A cat person? No pets!
A: Definitely a dog person. I recently lost my beloved French Bulldogs, Phinn and Hugo, who were cherished members of our family. Phinn was especially inspiring as he was born with a birth defect in his spine and taught us so much about perseverance and joy. His story inspired me to write my published children’s picture book, Phinn’s Wheelin’ Adventures, which shares his journey and celebrates overcoming challenges.
Q: THE LIGHTER SIDE: What food do you hate most?
A: Lima beans. I’ve tried them more than once, but they still haven’t won me over.
Q: THE LIGHTER SIDE: What book did you last read? Be honest!
A: The Book of Lost Names by Kristin Harmel. It’s a powerful historical novel about courage, sacrifice, and resilience during World War II. I enjoyed both the historical perspective and the personal stories woven throughout the book.