DENVER -- As thousands of Coloradans head to the polls or cast mail-in ballots next month, thousands more won't, because their town boards or city councils have cancelled their municipal elections.

"Many of the races are uncontested," said Lisa White, of the Colorado Municipal League. "It's not uncommon for elections to be cancelled in an uncontested race."

When asked why so few people were willing to run, White said, “With this challenging economy we feel that people may be struggling. They’re focused primarily on what’s going on in their lives.”

At least 16 Colorado cities and towns have cancelled or are considering canceling their elections. They include:

Brookside

Coal Creek

Eckley

Firestone

Frisco

Glendale

Hartman

Lakeside

Mancos

Mt. Crested Butte

Ovid

Peetz

Ramah

Romeo

Swink

Timnath

Firestone Town Manager Wes LaVanchy said the lack of competition on the local level speaks volumes considering the rancorous debate that’s taking place on the national and state level over health care and the budget.

He attributes that to solid local leadership.

“Ninety percent of the citizens in Firestone responding to a survey said they were satisfied with their quality of life,” LaVanchy said.

He added that there is only one person running for each of the open seats in Firestone.

“They’re the kind of people that residents want in office,” LaVanchy said. “There’s not this angst, this grind, this ‘oh no it’s way to the left,’ or ‘oh no, it’s way to the right.’ They’re people that people believe in.”

The Town Manager said Firestone will save $8,000 to $10,000 by not having to print and mail out ballots or set up a polling place.

It’s the same in Glendale, where the people running for uncontested seats will automatically get the jobs because the election has been cancelled.

“We expect to save $5,000 to $10,000 said Victor Ross, spokesman for the city.

When asked what Glendale will spend that money on instead, Ross replied, “It’s not that we have anything that we want to spend it on, it’s just that it’s $5,000 to $10,000 that we won’t be spending of taxpayers’ money. And I think, from a fiscally responsible standpoint, that’s a good administrative decision.”

But not everyone likes the idea of canceling an election just to save money.

“It kind of sucks,” said Firestone resident Michael Butts. “I wanted to vote against them just to keep things new.”

Butts said he knows that finances are tight so he can understand why the election was cancelled, but he said it feels wrong to not be able to vote for someone, or in this case to leave a ballot unmarked.

Dacono resident Joyce Bobbett said her town has been through the same thing.

“I don’t like it,” Bobbett said. “You want to be able to vote for the lesser of two evils.”

When told that there aren’t always two people to choose from, she said, “I think people want to say 'yes' or 'no.'”