Eye On Englewood

Link: http://www.eyeonenglewood.com

It don't look good, folks. Frank Gryglewicz,Director of Finance, issued this week a Summary of the Updated General Fund Financial Report to City Council, Englewood, Colorado. While April is generally the month that a huge influx of taxes show up in the City budget, this April 2010 shows "Expenditures exceeded revenues by $393,740."

Nevertheless, the financial report was listed as last on City Council's agenda on Monday, and in the end, they simply ran out of time to address it. While a lot of people have been screaming about the Englewood budget,--and being ignored by their Council Representatives,-- the real issue has become obvious. Fiscal Mismanagement. It's a simple lack of leadership in the making of financial policies for the kind of economy Englewood has faced for years.

While Englewood was gladly and deceptively collecting the sales taxes from the City of Centennial, the problem stayed so well hidden that Englewood seemed rich. But Centennial caught on to the sales tax drain, and throughout 2008, formed their own Home Rule City in order to fight back.

Englewood City Manager, Gary Sears, continues to spend wildly as if the funds will come from somewhere, but where's that, folks? And also Mayor Jim Woodward feels entitled, as he expressed in his Monday evening address: I've put out enough of my own money for travel, and I want the City to pay for my retreat. Of course, he wasn't obligated to go to any such retreat he has used your tax money for. He simply wanted to go. The upcoming Breckenridge retreat will cost constituents $900 per council member for one night's stay.

Twelve items of "less than last year" representing thousands of dollars each, were listed in Mr. Gryglewicz' Report. But there is no recommendation to cut back in any area of spending. The silence is deafening because it is not their money that is being spent, and Council members are bought and paid to keep their mouths shut so long as they get their retreats and their power showers.

In this week's Arapahoe County political meeting, Gene Turnbull, a member of the Englewood School Board raucously teased County politicians for the same kind of silence. He stood up and said, "I'm stealing from you, and you are not paying attention." Several people finally noticed his point. Who on City Council has the balls to stand up and say the same thing? Mr. Rick Gillit, from District 4, alone. He is the only one who continues to make a stink about the unreconciled spending practices of City Council and Gary Sears.

Gillit sent out an e-mail to District 4 saying, "Pay Very Close attention to the graph on top of Page #9) Our city had a nearly $450,000 deficit in income in April alone. If this trend continues we will be in deep trouble if we do nothing to change. With this in mind I was "SHOCKED", to say the least, that the Mayor - Jim Woodward, Council Member Bob McCaslin - (At Large), and Council Member Joe Jefferson (District #1) would ask for the city to pay nearly $1,000 each to attend a retreat in Breckenridge Colorado and attend the Colorado Municipal League annual meeting/retreat. Some of you may remember that there was outrage last year on the news about how residents felt that this was a waste of money during hard times. Looks like we don't learn much about what the residents feel!

He continued, "I guess what is most disturbing to me is that we may possibly have to cut some services, salaries, and possible employees if the financial situation does not get better and we are sending people to a retreat that is not required. This is so extremely bothersome to me! The city just spent almost $10,000 in March to send some council members and the City manager to Washington DC for the National League of Cities retreat. Again, a non required trip that has not brought any benefit to our residents and here we go again. Please someone help me understand how we can bleed our city dry during obvious hard times? When will my fellow Council Members say "NO"??? How bad do things have to get before they are pressured to stop spending??? These trips seem like a small amount but they could be the difference of whether or not we cut a position, or some other service."

Anyone in the City can contact Representative Gillit at: RGillit@EnglewoodGov.org or call(303) 246-4780. But because he only represents District 4, he is limited in his power to represent the entire City. That should be the Mayor's Job, and he simply doesn't care.

Link: http://EnglewoodStory.com

An interesting fact about Englewood's definition of household is that in 2004, Mayor Bradshaw enacted it in violation of the City's official purpose to mirror it's household code with the average of surrounding cities, the size of Englewood.

Instead, Englewood's definition of household became the most narrow of all.

In 2004, the newest legal definition of "Englewood Household" was enacted against Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation of having no less than 4 unrelated people, that being defensible by law. This number also mirrored the median of other similar communities. Finally, that number seemed forward thinking enough to include developers' aims to build larger homes.

With City Attorney Brotzman's help, however, the definition of Household is being used to target people hosting exchange students, out of work sister-in-laws, x-spouses, or visiting friends in summer.

In one case, the City prosecuted a boarding house of artists in Englewood, knowing full well that it was a boarding house, but choosing to prosecute it for the definition of household anyway. The City's definition turned out to be too vague to use in the prosecution and it was dismissed secretly (against criminal rules of procedure) that dismissals must be procured only in Open court.

In another instance, an out-of-work family was forced to leave his Englewood sister's home or she would face prosecution for violating Englewood's definition of household.

In Englewood, there is no freedom to have an elder hostel or youth hostel for travelers.

But, Englewood doesn't come right out and actually define the terms of their narrow codes. They cannot do so legally, because of anti-discrimination laws.

Recently, when not-in-my-back-yard philosophers complained about 2 students living in a four bedroom home with the owners, the City reinvented the code for Englewood Boarding houses. Still, they did not define what Englewood's code meant by "related" or "unrelated". After eight months of debate and drafts, the new code was reenacted with the same mistake it had originally. It was too vague to prosecute.

Nevertheless, such residences, as of October 6, 2008, have been legislated by color of law out of all Englewood residential areas and into multi-family zones with apartment buildings or industrial areas.

Since Boarding houses are not permitted to exist in an apartment setting, the purpose of relegating them to the apartment zone is a little obvious. The message is: "Don't Want No New People... Go Away."

What is your personal definition of family? Has it ever changed with marriage, divorce or simply because of the situation someone you love finds themselves? Are you an inclusive person, or do you believe "every man is an island" and should traverse every phase of life without aid of any kind?

Are you one to practice entertainment or hospitality? Many cultures value hospitality above all. One of the most valuable times in my life came when I spent a year abroad, living with a family. In Englewood, by Englewood Municipal Code, this arrangement of hosting a student is illegal and criminal if you also happen to have a stepmother, sister in law or uncle in the home.

Is a Realtor's liability compromised if she sells an Englewood bungalow to an unmarried couple with children?

Perhaps you own a three-bedroom rental in Englewood with more than two unrelated people living in it?

No wonder Englewood's Flood Middle School closed in 2006. A City's duty is to be creative in attracting families, and one of those ways is to be hospitable to nannys, cooks, gardeners and... grandmas. Englewood is too closed minded to appeal to the upper class.

Mother-in-law cottages in Englewood neighborhoods used to be popular and useful. Now, they are illegal. The code works to isolate people rather than promote neighborliness.

Why doesn't the City encourage housing for students attending schools nearby? Instead, it prosecutes any more than two renters per home, regardless of the size of the house.

Students are on the cusp of finding a mate and settling down. It's likely they will stay were they have found friends rather than enemies.

Some people believe that the public officials are all that needs changing, and that the selective prosecutions of such laws will solve themselves.

But, If the law is unjust, is it unqualified to be law? Especially since variances cannot be approved for specified Uses according to zoning rules and the Appeals Committee.

If the neighbors are concerned with loud noises, with weeds, with neighborhood values, or with traffic, why not fight those battles with specific codes addressing those issues rather than by this government defining your family?

In 2004, when the definition of household had it's public hearing, one man testified about weed violations, and another about a neighborhood business with too many trucks.

A third testimony was that code enforcement and the police who were on the same block, turned a blind eye continuously. Employing the definition of household to these issues made no sense.

Does a renter, necessarily just because he is a renter, fail to plant flowers or a garden or mow the lawn? We all know of home owners who allow their properties to fail. The issue isn't really one of relationships at all.

And, since when was it government's business to determine relationships within a home?

If the City wishes to legislate morality, then they should, but don't throw the baby out with the bath water. Hospitality is a cornerstone of our society. Never more than this time, in global bank foreclosures, housing crises, and business crises, will your family's generosity be remembered, honored.

Except... Not in my backyard.