A tiny town neighboring Denver and Wheat Ridge has descended into an all-out political brawl.
Members of the Mountain View Town Council are pushing to expel the mayor and a council member from elected office. The chief of police, the town clerk and the former mayor have spoken out against the town administration, too.
It approached a boiling point Monday night, when hearings about ousting Mayor Emilie Mitcham and Councilmember Brittany Loecher were scheduled. The hearings were ultimately tabled, with council members instead deciding to take their concerns before a legal magistrate.
Councilmember Janet Randolph had called for the removal hearings, writing that complaints and public records alleged a pattern of conduct by Mitcham involving “misuse or mishandling of confidential information, interference with administrative and departmental authority, retaliation or intimidation toward staff, conflicts or perceived conflicts related to mayoral compensation, and conduct inconsistent with transparency, fairness, confidentiality, and public trust.”
Mitcham said she could disprove the allegations.
“If we had had this hearing, I would have brought forth indisputable evidence that the accusations in those public comments at the last meeting were blatantly false,” Mitcham said during the Monday meeting. “And so I'd like to thank Councilmember Randolph for allowing the magistrate process to proceed. That due process will help the truth come out. And that's the only way we can move forward.”
The complaints span a variety of topics, including allegations about spending and overstepping boundaries, as well as the mayor's conduct in text conversations and behind closed doors.
One resident at Monday’s meeting called the proceedings a “kangaroo court.”
In a written response to the call for a removal hearing, Mitcham called the hearing “illegitimate political harassment dressed up as procedure.”
Mitcham is the subject of at least 11 formal complaints filed with the town – including complaints from the town’s police chief, half of the town's council members and the town's administrator, according to public documents.
Mountain View has a population of about 600 people spread across 12 blocks, with six at-large town council members and a mayor. Mayor Mitcham was elected in 2021 and describes herself as “a middle child, a lifelong artist and writer, and a trained paralegal mediator.” The town has a budget just above $5 million.
Formal complaints from public officials
Former Mayor Jeff Kiddie, who initially endorsed Mitcham, filed a complaint against her on March 22, according to public records.
Based “on her performance in office, I have significant concerns regarding financial decisions, leadership and adherence to proper governmental procedures,” Kiddie wrote in his complaint.
He alleged excessive and speculative spending without transparency, failure to act in the best financial interest of the town, and hostile and unprofessional conduct, among other things, in his complaint.
Kiddie is now the chair of the town’s Board of Adjustments and Appeals. He did not respond to an interview request. His complaint alleged the town had been irresponsible in making property acquisitions and issuing requests for proposals that haven’t yielded results.
The town's chief of police also filed a complaint against the mayor on March 9, saying she broke town code when discussing an ongoing pay freeze for officers that was expected to last through 2026.
“Mayor Mitcham relayed to these officers that the pay freeze would not last through 2026 and that the town was working on a fix to this issue,” Chief Michael Nesbitt wrote in his statement. “These conversations can create doubt with some of our officers in reference to the decisions made by our command staff. Moreover, when these conversations occur without the command staff knowledge, it can disrupt and corrode the structure of our department and can make staff question the department’s leadership.”
Nesbitt said that every option had been explored, but a pay freeze was the only option to help the department's budget.
In a written statement, Mitcham called the chief's claim “absurd.”
“My conversations with officers expressed appreciation, acknowledged a difficult situation, supported leadership’s difficult recommendation and expressed hope that improving revenue might allow relief from the freeze,” the mayor wrote. “I did not direct officers to disregard command staff, oppose leadership decisions, challenge departmental authority, interfere with operations, or negotiate compensation.”
Mayor Pro Tem Leal Algiene, who has filed her own complaints against the mayor, said on Monday that Mountain View is facing hard times.
“Leadership during difficult times is not easy, and I appreciate the commitment to following the processes that are intended to promote transparency, impartiality, and accountability,” Algiene said. “And most importantly, we have important town business that we must continue moving forward. Our residents, our businesses and staff deserve that.”
Neither Mitcham, Loecher nor Algiene responded to interview requests.
On April 14, Algiene filed three complaints, according to public records. Mitcham pushed back on the complaints.
“I welcome accountability, that is part of this role. I am the individual who initially asked for an improved process to hold elected officials accountable. But accountability must be grounded in facts, in shared reality and in actual governing standards,” she said Monday. “Not speculation, not perception alone and not repeated attempts to re-litigate policy disagreements.”
Mayoral compensation and the town administration position
On Jan. 12, the council appointed Charity Campfield as the town administrator, a decision that quickly spiraled into lawsuits and complaints from all sides.
The position had been vacant; hiring an administrator would affect the mayor’s salary, according to public records. It’s not clear how much the mayor’s salary has changed, and the mayor’s salary is not explicitly listed in the town's budget.
“...Mayor Emilie Mitcham characterized the financial impact of this change as ‘life changing’ and expressed concerns regarding continuing in the role under the revised compensation structure,” Campfield wrote in a formal complaint filed April 30. “The Mayor’s conduct toward the position and toward me changed in a material and escalating manner.”
According to Campfield’s complaint, Mitcham questioned the necessity of the town administrator role, interfered with administrative functions and participated in discussions about Campfield's removal from the position.
“These actions occurred after the ordinance language was altered in a manner that created a direct financial incentive associated with the absence of the Town Administrator role,” the complaint reads.
In a 2021 op-ed, Mitcham wrote that she wanted to change the town charter to forbid the mayor from also being the town manager.
Campfield said the town was unable to comment and she didn’t comment herself.
Mayoral compensation has been a hot topic for months in the town of Mountain View. Ahead of the November 2025 election, when Mitcham was reelected, the council discussed changing the mayor's pay. Mitcham took part in the discussions, which Councilmember Ryan Debner said could be a conflict of interest.
On Aug. 5, Mitcham started collecting candidate petition signatures for her reelection campaign, and on Aug. 18, council members held a workshop about mayoral compensation and considered the first reading of the ordinance, according to Debner's formal complaint.
In the same month. Mitcham wrote an op-ed in a town-funded page of the Neighborhood Gazette titled, “What should the Mountain View Mayor be paid? Town voters’ voices matter!” In the op-ed, she argued that the mayor should be paid more.
“We don’t expect teachers, nurses, or nonprofit leaders to work for free—even though many are called to the work. We value their time, skill, and expertise, and compensate them accordingly. The same should apply to municipal leadership,” she wrote.
The town council later adopted a policy saying the town's newspaper content should be informational and not editorial, according to Debner's complaint.
Mitcham again denied any wrongdoing. In a written response, she said that the salary issue was not a credible cause for her removal. And in an email cited in Debner’s complaint, she said she had not decided whether to run for another term while the salary deliberations were happening.
“The (mayoral salary) motion was stated publicly, the vote was taken publicly, and the staff report concludes that the ordinance language matched the motion to amend. This was not secret drafting. It was not self-dealing. It was not hidden from Council. It was proper, public, legislative work, discussed with Council, shaped by Council, addressed by the Town Attorney, and adopted by Council in an open meeting,” she wrote. “Council’s lack of understanding about the Rules of Procedure and how to pull an item from the Consent Agenda, does not free them of their responsibility to examine everything they pass on the Consent Agenda.”
Another issue in Campfield's complaint arose when she took time off.
Campfield took personal leave in April while her daughter was hospitalized, but says she remained responsive to time-sensitive issues and communicated that non-urgent administrative matters could be handled when she returned, according to her complaint.
During Campfield's absence, Mitcham changed the compensation of another town employee, which was not within her purview, according to Campfield's complaint.
“The complaints themselves—and the Council’s handling of them—are part of a broader pattern of political hostility, selective enforcement, public disparagement, and ongoing efforts to isolate and discredit me politically,” Mitcham wrote in her response.
Campfield’s complaint also alleged that Councilmember Loecher shared private and personal information about Campfield’s late daughter with Loecher’s attorneys — information that was not publicly available.
“This raises a serious question about how this sensitive, non-public information became available to a party engaged in legal action against the Town,” Campfield's complaint stated.
Loecher denied those allegations. In a written response, she said all she had done was share pertinent information as she and her lawyers tried to deal with town business.
“I believed Ms. Campfield was experiencing a devastating personal tragedy and I was attempting to make her job easier during that difficult time. At no time did I discuss any information protected by legal confidentiality of any kind, nor did I have any conversation with the mayor surrounding this issue,” she wrote.
“This is another example of wildly inaccurate speculation unsupported by any facts whatsoever,” Loecher continued. “Desire to remove me by a politically motivated runaway council, who stomp their feet and exclaim loudly how everything that I do is wrong, does not make it a fact.”
Councilmember Randolph called for a hearing to remove Loecher. She stated that the issue “is whether Councilmember Loecher used, received, relied upon, or benefited from confidential, privileged, or sensitive Town information without authorization of Council,” and whether her lawsuit against the council was meant to interfere with Mountain View’s operations as a town.
Loecher sues the council
Councilmember Loecher, the member facing removal, recently sued the town council for an alleged open meeting violation at the Jan. 12 meeting where it hired Campfield as town administrator.
Loecher alleged the meeting was meant to discuss creating the position of town administrator, not selecting someone for the position. Loecher’s attorneys also argued that a group of council members was discussing town matters privately in violation of open meeting laws.
A letter from Steven Zansberg, an attorney hired by Loecher, called for the rescinding of the appointment of Campfield, and threatened to take the matter to the Jefferson County District Court.
The town attorney responded, saying the position was created 17 years ago by the council — and that the discussion was only about the possible appointment of an administrator.
Loecher then filed the lawsuit in Jefferson County District Court. The council rejected two settlement offers from Loecher's attorneys.
“My lawsuit exists because I believe the Town repeatedly violated Colorado Open Meetings Law requirements. I raised those concerns internally, publicly, and through legal counsel before filing suit. Litigation became necessary only after those concerns were disregarded,” Loecher wrote.
Loecher wrote that she sued because the town ignored her concerns.
“You don’t need a PhD to see that attempting to remove a sitting elected official while that litigation is pending is evidence that Council is attempting to punish, intimidate, or silence a litigant challenging governmental conduct,” she wrote.
Mayor vs. mayor pro tem’s wife
Mitcham has alleged violations of the Fair Campaign Practices Act by Melinda Plemel, Councilmember Algiene's wife.
In a campaign finance complaint, Mitcham wrote she received a postcard linking to a website that opposed her reelection.
The website domain was hosted by Squarespace Inc. and on Nov.26, the company received a subpoena relating to a separate website.
Initially, Plemel attempted to quash any subpoena for Squarespace that pertained to Mountain View, but the Jefferson County District Court denied the request, according to Mitcham's complaint.
On April 3, records were released to show that Plemel was the owner of the website. Mitcham reviewed the records on April 7, according to her filing.
“These records also show that Ms. Plemel registered multiple related domains incorporating my name, including MayorMitcham.com, EmilieMitchamMayor.com, and EmilieMitcham.com, demonstrating a broader pattern of election-related activity conducted without disclosure,” Mitcham wrote in her complaint.
Mitcham claimed that would constitute unreported electioneering communications. Plemel said that she feels confident that she’ll be found innocent of any violations in an email to Denverite. The hearing is May 29.
A separate campaign finance complaint involving different parties was dismissed by the town. But the filer, Brent Metz, described the 2025 Mountain View election as contentious and similar to national politics.
“What used to be approached as a friendly contest between whomever would be willing to step up to help the local community as mayor or councilmember is now going the way of Washington politics,” wrote Metz, a former councilman.
Separately, Metz faces trial for shooting a 17-year-old boy in the face at his property in Conifer, for which he pleaded not guilty to felony charges. Voters recalled him after the shooting.
Small town, strong mayor – for now
Mountain View is one of four municipalities in Colorado with a strong mayor-council government structure. A strong mayor government allows the mayor to act as chief executive, with major authority over administrative and budget needs, and the council acting as the legislative body.
However, amid the drama, that structure may change.
Most other small towns have a “weak” mayor system, or council-manager model, where the mayor shares power with the council, and the council hires a manager to run day-to-day operations.
Mountain View’s council plans to ask voters this November to change the town’s structure, according to the mayor. If that happens, Mitcham could lose some of her power, even if she keeps her seat and wins reelection.
The town adopted the strong mayor-council government in 1972 as a home-rule municipality, though the town was technically founded in 1904.
It's unclear how long it may take for the magistrate process involving the mayor and Councilmember Loecher to play out.
Editor's note: This article was updated to correct a description of The Neighborhood Gazette. The town pays for a full-page ad, but does not fund the paper itself.
