
Complaints were made over not purchasing sign permits for the ROW as well as not following the rules - both Mr. Gillit and Ms. Williams in D3. Mr.
Gillit responded and promised to address it. Ms. Williams did not. We encourage people to email complaints to the City when you see violations.
Visit Other Candidates in this race:


Endorsed Candidate
$10,000


Endorsed Candidate
The Colorado Forward Party has endorsed Rick Gillit, Nancy Henjum and Kimberly Ford and is running candidate advocacy ads. As of 3/31/2025, they have not registered with the Colorado Springs City Clerk.

DARK MONEY
against Gillit.

Protect Colorado Springs/COS Leadership Project
Protect Colorado Springs & COS Leadership Project PAC has spent $17,679 thru 3/23/2025 against Mr. Gillit. Tactics are:
-
3/13 - Text Ad
-
3/16 - Direct Mail & Website
Note: This is an estimate of how the funds were split against 2 candidates (Gillit and Henjum) from these two PACS.
$17,679
Campaign Finance
Note: Note: Next campaign finance filing is 5/1, post-vote, which includes the last 9 days of the election. Any Developer or Dark Money spent in the last 9 days will go un-detected by voters. Check back for updates. In fact, candidates Brandy Williams and Lee Lemkuhl, in this cycle, did not report their Housing & Building Assocation donations when the other 5 candidates have. They were awarded by February 27th. What does developer-related mean? We include real estate, corporate infrastructure partners, and any contract-related entities. The reason is in the 2023 election, we were informed that developers tell their contractors to put signs up for their candidates and "encourage" they support them. In that election, over $1 million in developer + Dark Money donations were made to secure 4 Councilmember seats. The PPAR is a lobbying PAC just like the HBA and are often on the same team. Developers hire realtors to sell their inventory. Additionally, the YIMBY movement that pushes the overbuilding is backed by the National Association of Realtors and asset managers like Blackrock. Lastly, former PPAR board members are part of the CSURA board (that approves taxpayer funded URAs for development. This seems highly relevant.
$1.5 Million Lawsuit
It's disturbing that the Gazette, who we also contacted, has known since they did the backgrounder on Mr. Gillit and has refused to report on this item voters will care about as much as Mayor Mobolade's financial mismanagement of his downtown businesses which are closed now. This is public information and should be vetted thoroughly. We have spoken to Mr. Gillit several times now on this issue. As of Saturday morning, March 22nd, 2025, he has stated that he is in settlement negotiations with the Plaintiff. Mr. Gillit maintains this was a much smaller dispute than the court ordered judgment of $1.5 million noting that the disagreement was over the valuation of the insurance book he purchased [for $900,000] which was later renegotiated to a lower price of $820,000 . It is worth noting that the Dark Money ads emphasize imprisonment which, though the court order did use that term, is extreme as these civil lawsuits are usually settled and dismissed. This is not to excuse non-payment or failure to appear/respond in a lawsuit but merely to call out the incendiary and often misleading nature of Dark Money ads which occur far too frequently, and we oppose. If a settlement is reached and the Plaintiff dismisses the case, we hope the terms of that settlement will be made public for full transparency. Until then, Mr. Gillit confirmed that the below summary is factual:​
1. Complaint and Jury Demand
Case: Scott Robbins Inc. v. Rick Gillit Insurance Agency, LLC and Richard Gillit
Court: Douglas County District Court, Colorado
Filed: October 30, 2023
Summary:
-
Plaintiff Scott Robbins Inc. alleges that Rick Gillit, through Rick Gillit Insurance Agency, LLC, signed a promissory note for $240,000 on October 1, 2018.
-
Monthly payments of $4,724.03 were to begin on November 5, 2018.
-
Payments were made from January 2019 through December 2022, but then stopped entirely.
-
As of the filing date (October 2023), no payments had been made for approximately 10 months.
-
Plaintiff seeks full enforcement of the note, including principal, interest, late fees, attorney’s fees, and costs.
-
A jury trial is requested.
2. Citation to Show Cause
Issued: February 19, 2025
Court Date: April 7, 2025 at 9:30 AM
Hearing Method: Webex (Douglas County Division 6)
Summary:
-
The court has ordered Rick Gillit to appear and explain his failure to comply with court orders, likely related to non-payment of the judgment.
-
The order warns that failing to appear will result in a bench warrant for arrest and potential sanctions or jail time.
3. Order Granting Summary Judgment
Issued: July 15, 2024
Case No.: 2023CV030836
Court: Douglas County District Court
Plaintiff: Scott Robbins Inc.
Defendants: Rick Gillit Insurance Agency, LLC and Richard Gillit
Summary:
-
The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff due to:
-
Proper service and jurisdiction.
-
No response from the defendants.
-
Accepted all allegations in the complaint as true.
-
-
Judgment Amount: $1,519,163.86, against both defendants, Mr. Gillit and his insurance agency..
-
Interest: 45% per annum, beginning June 1, 2024, until paid in full.
Key Takeaways:
-
This is a civil debt collection case.
-
Rick Gillit and his agency defaulted on a $240,000 loan.
-
Rick Gillit stopped making payments over 2 years ago (last payment: December 2022).
-
His continued non-payment led to a $1.5 million judgment, with mounting interest.
-
The court has now initiated enforcement proceedings, and Gillit faces sanctions or arrest if he fails to appear at the next hearing.