Eye On Englewood

Link: http://www.eyeonenglewood.com

It takes green to make green. That is the theme of the latest Englewood's heated discussion and vote; Five to two, in favor of a flimsy lie. District 4 Gillit and District 1, Jefferson opposed. Englewood, however, was rushed. Englewood citizens are now indebted to pay Ameresco, a green solar company, for the next 20 years on a lease of solar equipment and a $1.00 purchase at the end of it (outdated and worthless by that time).

Does Englewood get the benefit of the energy credits from Xcel? No. Ameresco as the provider and installer does.

It was "sold" to the City by the promise of 1.3 million in qualified Energy Performance Bonds (QECB-) from the Government Energy Office (GEO) to benefit the City's lease-purchase through savings of $400,000 over the life of the term. Ameresco provides their own annual measurements and verifications of energy savings. Sound anything like BP's arrangement with Halliburton and the U.S. Government to audit themselves?

Local chemist, Robert Cassidy believes so. He suggested, "Put a meter on the inverter. Numbers do not lie. No Ameresco measurement work is required for the sale of the equipment."

The deal is that Ameresco owns the panels until they are completely depreciated, but have been paid for many times over by the "lease" of them through Englewood taxpayers. Ameresco is only responsible for the panels by warranty, not for the bridge device. The average life of the bridge device is five to ten years, but Englewood will purchase that part in the deal, and can simply reinvest in a new one when it begins to fail.

Ameresco designs, builds, operates, maintains the system and will sell the output to the City of Englewood under the Power Purchase Agreement (PPA).

Call it what you will, it sure seems like this is the kind of shady deal, green or no green, that TABOR intended to protect the citizens from under Colorado Constitution, Art 10, section 20(4)(b).

On Monday night, June 21, 2010, Mayor Woodward, broke form outside his normal glibness, and became stealthily defensive when he claimed that nobody in Englewood cares enough about the budget to show up when there is the annual budget hearing. He then chastises the the individual who brought her concerns to council and calls her ignorant or an outright liar, twice. She is so offended she leaves the Council Chambers. Gee Whiz, Mayor Woodward! No wonder people don't care to express an opinion. District Representative Gillit said as much.

In the audience, a member of the Concerned Citizens group retorted, "You should publish it in the Englewood Citizen so that every household would automatically know about it and not have to pay for a notice."

Concerning the Breckenridge vacation that City Council is going on, City Attorney Brotzman bragged that he was going early to play golf. This was the first anyone had heard that several staff members were also asked and trips underwritten to attend the League of Cities vacation, not within the City's 2010 budget.

With the City Attorney being treated like the City's playboy, no wonder he missed reading the City Charter regarding the green expenditures and multi-year lease.

Link: http://www.eyeonenglewood.com

During June 7,2010 City Council meeting, the Denver Christian School requested a business variance to open a second hand store on Broadway. The history underlying this request is that the latest version of the Englewood code prohibited various kinds of businesses, including thrift. But in this economy, beggars can't exactly be choosers.

Senior Planner, Langon, suggested changes in the code to enable the School to open their store front. The only question there is whether the code should lighten up across the board, or whether the school will receive preferential treatment.

The School also requested a change to the square footage. Again, Council debated the advantages against the disadvantages, and several district representatives admitted that they had no vision for what was to happen along South Broadway, and did not talk with the business owners, but only amongst themselves. Olsen stated she was concerned that there was no real downtown plan, and also concerned about allowing a subcategory for nonprofits. McCaslin recognizing the limits of government in a unprecedented moment, suggested that it was more appropriate to allow the businesses themselves to determine such things, and that it was better for Council to let out the rope.(See Council Bill 11, See Item 11.b.1 discussion.)

Mayor Woodward, however, suggested that Council purchase a new set of aerial photographs for $5,000, at "a real bargain" and that further he personally used the photos for code enforcement issues against business and residential properties comparing the last photographs were taken. (Item 11-a.1. Council Bill 13).

"With a $39,953 loss anticipated this year,and a 2.5 million dollar deficit in the City, I am very disturbed about our cavalier Council," reported Rick Gillit after the most recent financial presentation at Monday's City Council meeting.

The votes are down the line, six to one, six to one, six to one, but District 4 Representative, Rick Gillit is sticking to his Mantra: "Stop Approving New Spending."

Mayor Jim Woodward's response seemed insipidly lacking in perspective when he said, "Well you know, back in 2007, we were really concerned, but we had a super situation and we came out on top." In 2007, Englewood was still rechanneling sales taxes from Cherry Hills and Greenwood Village. Englewood can no longer do that, so it must either amend it's spending or enact a higher tax on the people in order to make ends meet.

"I am very disturbed at this ongoing trend. It terrifies me that this Council just doesn't care." Said Gillit. Thankfully, Commissioners on the Board of Adjustments and Appeals stood up and took notice themselves in this week's Board meeting directives to the Englewood City Attorney, Nancy Reid.

In the BOAA meeting, two private land owners approached the Board because the present Englewood Code was inappropriate for their properties. Research performed by Commissioner, Douglas Cohn,was presented, showed that,

1. Englewood had originally drafted its zoning codes after Denver's zoning codes in the 1903 (Mayor Jacob Jones, and afterwards, with Mayor Daniel Sutton). These codes established the typical lot sizes as 25 feet and 37.5 feet wide.

2. Mayor Woodward had changed the entire zoning code (E.M.C)in 2004 off of a generated template from the Municipal League of Cities. This code replaced the old lot measurements with a minimum of 40 feet wide.

a. the template was geared towards new emerging cities, not
existing, and did not apply to Englewood's historic issues.

b. the new Englewood Municipal Code did not grandfather the
residents' pre-existing properties or conforming uses.
Therefore, all lot sizes under 40 feet wide are automatically
non-conforming in use.

c. The enacting of the new Code in it's entirety rather than
in smaller topical sections that had time to be reviewed and
researched in detail, violated Constitutional restrictions for
enactments.

d. Owners and developers are encountering logistical conflicts
in these last few years, throwing the City into numerous
lawsuits due to lack of foresight.

e. Owners cannot sell existing residences as a "conforming use"
and are forced to sell them as "non-conforming" uses at a loss
of value because they are under 40 ft wide.

Chairman John Smith III,'s ire was raised, as a multiple property owner and landlord in Englewood. He spearheaded the ensuing discussion and both of the residents approaching the Board for variances this week obtained their objectives. Chairman Smith and the Board of Adjustments and Appeals instructed City Attorney Reid to direct Englewood Mayor Woodward to revisit and amend the zoning code accordingly. The code is the Mayor's own yard work.