AURORA | Aurora lawmakers will decide tonight whether to ask voters to vote down a statewide proposition to impose minimum and mandated prison sentences for fentanyl users caught with the drug in their possession.
“Targeting those with addiction for, not even having a milligram (of fentanyl) in their possession, and saying that ‘automatically qualifies them for a minimum sentence of eight to 32 years is ridiculous,” Councilmember Gianina Horton told the Sentinel last week in talking about her pitch for the council to publicly rebuke statewide Prop 132.
The city council has been split so far as it has tentatively agreed to make a public statement against the ballot proposal, created by a right-wing advocacy group.
Prop 132 would boost and mandate punishment for anyone in the state convicted of possessing the potentially fatal and highly addictive street drug.
Liberal and progressive city lawmakers point to prevailing research consensus showing that criminalizing drug addicts doesn’t reduce public use and abuse rates and complicates the already Herculean attempt to end abusers’ addiction.
“Decades of research from the ‘60s, and especially starting in the ‘80s, when we saw an increase of incarceration for drug-related offenses and crimes,” show that get-tough court mandates don’t work, Horton said.
Aurora city lawmakers moved the anti-Proposition 132 measure forward from a city council study session two weeks ago after debate and a split vote.
Prop 132 was spearheaded by Advance Colorado, a conservative advocacy group that has the, which continues a streak of elevating ballot initiatives aligned with conservative and what it describes as a “tough-on-crime” approach to legislation.
Republicans who have backed the proposition, such as George Brauchler, district attorney for Douglas County and former DA for Arapahoe County, argue that a get-tough fentanyl sentencing approach will crack down on drug offenders and reduce the considerable Colorado usage of the drug.
While the number of Colorado residents who use fentanyl is unclear, fentanyl-related deaths have been climbing in the state, pushing past 1,800 in 2025, according to state health officials, marking a 13% increase over 2024.
At a press conference last year after the initiative made the ballot, Brauchler said, “… there’s going to be a ballot measure that does something we should have done years ago, and that is to have a low-to-no-tolerance policy when it comes to drug dealers who peddle fentanyl into our communities.”
Under current Colorado law, it’s a felony for someone to possess more than four grams of fentanyl or a compound containing fentanyl. If someone possesses less than four grams, but more than one gram of the same substance, they could be charged with a misdemeanor or a felony based on whether the individual knew they were in possession, and at court discretion.
Possession under a gram is a misdemeanor under current law.
If voters in November approve Prop 132, possessing any quantity of the substance could net convicts a felony and come with a mandatory prison sentence of between 8 years and 32 years. Within the measure, some low-level offenders could be allowed court-ordered treatment in lieu of jail time.
Aurora City Council meets at 6 p.m.
I just did a search on how much fentanyl can kill. “2 milligrams. Fentanyl is 50 times stronger than heroin. Because it is so powerful, a miniscule amount (equal to a few grains of sand) can cause a fatal overdose. Like heroin, fentanyl hijacks the brain’s opioid receptors, creating a rapid physical dependence and excruciating withdrawal symptoms (like severe muscle pain, vomiting, and intense cravings). Fentanyl is arguably the most dangerous and deadliest drug today.” So yes, as fentanyl is “arguably the most dangerous and deadliest drug today” there needs to be strict and severe punishment for anyone peddling and using this poison.
Tip for anyone thinking about running for city council in 2027: Promise to stick to city matters. Period.
This council’s penchant for lecturing on state and federal matters — all while the city is slipping over the financial cliff — is deeply disturbing.
Remember this when they start closing pools, rec centers and fire stations.
Instead of listening to a city council person tell you how to vote, maybe you should talk to a parent of one of thousands of teenagers who have died as a result of trying fentanyl. Some only trying it once. These heartbroken parents will tell you the truth firsthand about how terrible this illegal street drug is. I believe that this proposition will be a strong and effective measure to get fentanyl off our streets and out of the hands of our innocent young people.
If we want to keep trying failed mandatory minimum sentencing to find out that it STILL won’t fix the opioid epidemic that’s one thing
Talk to people who actually work on tackling addiction as a public crisis and they’ll tell you that Prop 132 will make people not seek treatment, pushing them further into addiction. Maybe we shouldn’t be listening to people like Jim and Jeff whose only idea of drug policy is listening to “the parents”.
Istg do a modicum of research on addiction as a public health issue before you send us back to the 1980s
I don’t think you have any actual experience with the drug crowd. I posted about the crowd I hung with and how legal was a deterrent. But I should probably add that my friends almost always had weed to share with whoever wanted to give it a try. Nobody worried about what would happen if cops came. Only one of my friends ignored the potential legal consequences of using acid. But he NEVER had a supply on-hand to share, and NEVER offered to others to “try”. Only a small number of close friends even knew he was into acid. All because the threat of jail and the acid was much more difficult to obtain. This same friend would pull out a joint to share with just about anybody who wanted to give it a go.
Open your eyes. It’s not all about the people who are already hooked. It’s about the next generation. Yes, legal crack down DOES help. It reduces the sharing that happens, makes the drugs harder to obtain, and is a deterrent.
Hey, let’s just let all those drug users die, because we can point at an old study that says cracking down on drugs won’t help. I’m sorry, but BS. No, you are not going to stop drug use. But cracking down DOES make a difference in discouraging people from starting. How do I know? I’m one of those 80’s people who hung with the bad crowd. Most of my friends smoked weed, but steered clear of acid BECAUSE of what would happen if they got caught! Weed was not a big deal from legal perspective. Acid, coke, and crack? Those were different stories.
Oh yea — putting those drug addicts in jail for a few years just might save their lives by getting them clean! Wonder if the liberal think tanks care about that.