I've asked every group that evaluates and/or endorses candidates to make their process public. I then added a simple rating based on how transparent the are. This creates 3½ categories.
Cronkite-esque – These are the groups that are fully transparent in their efforts. Kudos to them for making our electoral process (they are a key part of it) transparent.
- Boulder Chamber of Commerce
- Boulder Community United
- Boulder Hotel and Motel Association
- Colorado Daily *
- Downtown Boulder Inc. *
- The Community Foundation
- Urban Land Institute
- Yellow Scene
* These groups are presently not endorsing. If they do decide to endorse we'll revisit based on how transparent that process is.
Clinton-esque – These groups are willing to provide some information, but also keep some hidden.
- Boulder Area Rental Housing Association – They keep their forum private. This allows candidates to make private promises that most voters would find repugnant.
Cheney-esque – These groups are keeping most/all very secret. Which leads to the question – why?
- Boulder Weekly (very surprising in a newspaper)
- Boulder Community Neighborhood Forum
- Eco-Cycle
- FIDOS (the dog may have eaten their info)
- FOBOS
- Historic Boulder (there are many secrets in our old houses)
- PLAN-Boulder – got the questionnaire from an independent source – and that's it
- University Hill Neighborhood Association
On it's way – These groups have responded and promised details shortly (this is the ½ category)
- Daily Camera
- Boulder Outdoor Coalition
- Sierra Club
