Tags: business
61, A Six Pack of Muscle
October 5th, 2010Link: http://www.englewoodcitizens.org
Amendment 61 would place severe restriction on governmental agencies borrowing money and would basically eliminate the ability to purchase large items through a lease-purchase agreement. It would encourage business owners to do Colorado business, and government agents to keep Colorado trust, do their duty, and very little else.
TABOR placed severe restrictions on governments to engage in any contract for goods that causes future governors to be yolked to the debt. But in Englewood, governors have disregarded TABOR, and I'm sure like other municipalities, are finding ways to bundle services with goods, or simply failing to notify the people of the right to vote on important contracts. You can read City Council's contract this Summer with the reprehensible BP (gulf oil spill company)also known as Ameresco for the Solar goods, maintenance, and higher energy costs for Englewood over the next 20 years.
Violations for ignoring the law have been shrugged off. So what? Judges tend to say. If a home rule entity wishes to indenture future generations, who are we to interfere?
So, frustrations of those denied recourse in the courts and being depleted of resources by trusted servants have now won the right to petition you because they had legs enough to walk and presence enough collect the signatures, which is a feat in itself, to put ballot 61 into play.
Where is the teeth to Proposition 61? It requires the same kind of oversight accountability for governors that is required of CEOs and CFOs. It requires that tax rates raised for the specific item say, the production of government services or buildings or roads, must then be reduced after the projects are paid for. Presently, the system is that once the funds are raised, the expiration date of the tax is simply ignored, and Coloradoans keep paying, but the money gets filtered off to new projects.
61 tells government that people do not want to be sold "a temporary war time tax" yet be forced to pay into it indefinitely. This proposition requires a "truth and lending" element to the practice of raising taxes by requiring that the tax ceases when the museum or transportation system is built.
If governors have a pet project, they can no longer fund it under the table, but must deliberate it thoroughly and present it for a vote through a blue book type disclosure of all the angles.
Another thing this idea does is stop allowing Englewood to say it is raising bonds necessary for schools buildings while depleting the school fund for filtering money to private developments of say,...um... let me think... oh,... City Center...yes, case in point. Now, I loathe City Center's empty storefronts, but I loathe empty-eyed kids more.
Knowing how to budget your own money is a trick, but at least the spending stops with one household. Compare that to the State of Colorado which now owes 17 billion in debt it didn't ask you for permission to obtain. And for what, you ask? Have your parks,roadways, business district or utilities improved? Colorado is presently doing business like a banker or entrepreneur, taking much needed commerce and control out of the private sector.
Amendment 61 changes the present terms of State funding to public universities which have been secretly filtered to certain universities without voter approval. No longer will the State of Colorado be the lender for select home buyers, businesses, ranchers and farmers. And, the biggest impact will be on the all powerful water districts which continue to "improve" without voter approval under the table, and then ask for higher fees.
Amendment 61 is a six pack of muscle back to the people. Vote Yes.
Professional Advantages
September 29th, 2010Link: http://www.englewoodcitizen.com
It used to be that a "profession" such as doctoring, lawyering, running a football, priestly duties and public servants were paid very little. This was true, even though the skilled individuals acting in these fields were considered "experts". They received honor as part of their pay because they were viewed as public servants. To compensate for this feeble pay, they were supported by the good will of the people, commercial interests, patrons, tips, and insurance.
I attended the Colorado Symphony recently and was reminded that Beethovan and Tchaikovsky had patrons to support them. Tchaikovsky had his 13-year association with the wealthy widow Nadezhda von Meck. And,he was honored by the Tsar, awarded a lifetime pension and lauded in the concert halls of the world. Beethovan's first patron was his own piano teacher, Count Waldstein.
In the western world, the pursuit of "entitlement" is sometimes a full time career. Being a lifetime professional has re-defined the meaning of entitlement. It now means someone is intellectually trained beyond the common amateur, and one who is generally comfortable financially. Albeit, because of the personal and confidential nature of many professional services, and often the necessity to place a great deal of trust in them, most professionals are held to ethical and moral standards called rules, regulations or oaths.
City Managers belong to an ethics association. Attorneys are held to an Attorney Code of Ethics, Judges to a Judicial Code, Plumbers to a Plumbers Code, and an Olympian, to an Olympic Code of Ethics. Nevertheless, when "experts" holding your life in their hands fail to do their jobs, and are sued, they are the first to demure that they were merely "practicing" law, or "practicing" medicine or "practicing" management of your civil welfare.
But, home rule managers are not in the same class as regular business managers. Can you guess why? City managers do not create the money they earn. They spend people's taxes. The Citizens very literally are their patrons. Members of City staff also do not make money for their employers, ie: "We, the people" but instead spend it, lots of it. They enjoy your money much like royalty.
Quite unlike a business owner who creates substantial income as a product of their ingenuity and work ethic, the news article in Your Hub shows how a City Manager gets to name his budget without showing a work product, gets a budget approved, and then plays all year long on it. Several residents showed up to the Englewood Budget Hearing to protest this very real situation. Ida Mae Nicholls particularly protested having to pay for an Assistant City Manager as well as a regular City Manager, putting Englewoods' budget a hundred thousand dollars above neighboring cities.
Mama always told me to watch out for those shysters who want an up-front deposit before doing the job. She reasoned, "What holds them to any standard if they have already been paid? What is the incentive?"
Meanwhile business owners who are already sweating away to maintain a viable service or product for their customers, are forced to keep receipts, collect taxes, figure percentages and pay the special government districts for the right to provide jobs and make money. Taxes, fees, fines and regulations assessed against business owners grow in larger and larger sums. This money is not being carried into the public river. Instead, city managers are getting paid more and more, while still enjoying greater benefits. Cushy job, that!
What is this topsy-turvy honor system? Business owners are the ones who creatively provide for the public desires. They are the ones who should be honored, not taxed for their services or treated like slaves to the so called professionals.
Business owners in Englewood should start attending the City Council's meetings and speaking their minds on the value of their work, compared to the value of the City managers. Business owners should demand their vote on anything that concerns their ability to function in the City or to earn money.
And all the citizens should consider the real comparisons of real managers and those who only call themselves managers by professional advantage.
Matt Crabtree? Mayor Jim Woodward?
October 25th, 2009Link: http://www.EyeOnEnglewood.com
A Halloween yard decoration witch crackles at my knees. “It only takes a few little beggars to spoil the stew!"… I am meeting up with Matt Crabtree on his early morning campaign rounds in Englewood.
“So Matt, with only seven percent of the vote in at Nancy Doty’s office, I thought I’d track you through the leaves and see what good you might offer for the people of Englewood.”
Matthew Crabtree’s open face begins to shine in the chilly open morning sun.
“I hope I can bring some.” He nods and smiles.
“What have people been saying to you on the campaign trail?”
“Well, it’s definitely been interesting,” he admits. “I put my contact number on my door hangers during the very first weekend, I got some hate calls where people would say to me, ‘I know you’re a right-wing conspiracy nut and I hope you lose!’ Then, they would hang up anonymously without even given me a chance to respond. That was unnerving.”
“Are you a right-wing… whatever nut?” I ask.
“No.” He says emphatically. “Actually, if you look at the political parties, I align with my opponent, Woodward, but political parties should not be the issue in a municipal election. Non-partisanship input should be heard on the issues.”
“Okay, let’s start with the only issue Englewood put on the ballot this election. Term issues. Isn’t City Council hoping for a third term? If you get in, wouldn’t that issue also work to your advantage?”
“I was sitting in the audience the night the City voted to add that to the ballot. I almost laughed when I saw the Council vote yes on it. Personally, I believe that adding another four years to their terms is just a third-world prank of dictators.”
“Wow. Third world? Why?”
“Well, it doesn’t help any political geography when there is no change over. Our country’s presidents don’t even get any more than two terms in office. It only reflects our Council’s small-minded attempt to maintain control. So no, even for my benefit. I just don’t believe a third term is a good idea.”
“You’ve done well for being the underdog, Matt. I certainly see a lot of your signs all over, Matt, and I saw your bio in the Englewood Citizen. It looked authentic and focused. Good for you. Anything you wish to add to that?”
“Well, I think all three of us, Rick Gillit, Doug Cohn, and myself are running on similar issues. And we need to get all three of us into Council to make the change over.
“Accessible government, will re-instill trust. A cut in budget spending in the right areas will bring about true value for taxes. I want to bring in more businesses to Englewood and work with people to achieve a better community.”
“Right now the Council has sat on their hands too long. They put requests from residents and businesses into a holding pattern.
“None of them have received any training from the City on the code, or how their roles interact with Colorado law. They have no idea how to research their own code or come up with creative and timely direction, so everyone suffers.
“It’s one thing not to require legal knowledge when you get elected. It’s just not acceptable to continue in that ignorance year after year. They have a job to do. It’s not just a social board. We can’t afford to have them remain ignorant year after year.”
“Hey, must be trick-or-treat in Englewood!” I laugh.
Matt clears his throat. “I’ve watched people actually cry in front of Council, begging for relief, and Council sits there enjoying the power they hold over them. That’s their response. The Mayor did not even know his own job description two months ago when a resident was asking for relief. The City Attorney had to cut into the Mayor’s response, and correct him… ouch!”
I agree. A Mayor should know his City code and his own job description. But, my feet are beginning to hurt and Matt still has ground to cover, so I ask, “Anything else?”
“Well, I think it’s backwards for Englewood to cut out the people’s parades, theater events, social items like fireworks, festivals and concerts as a means to cutting the budget.
“Those kinds of events create community. Great signage creates an interesting community. Community creates tax revenues. I want to be pro-active, not a small-minded micro-manager of someone else’s business.
I say, “Oh, did you hear that Mayor Woodward has some flyer out there telling people to call him before they vote for Matthew Crabtree?”
“Ha-ha, Yes I did. Someone I know in District One took him up on that offer, and called. ‘You know what Jim said?… He said the Appellate Court had overstepped its authority in Englewood and that is why Englewood lost the signage war on Broadway!”
“You gotta be kidding.”
“No. I’m not. City Council, in my way of thinking, should be servants of the law. Not the other way around. The present Council thinks they can do anything they want just because they are “Home Rule".
“I actually believe the Constitution is still alive, that Colorado statutes regulate Home Rule and that Englewood’s City Charter holds the limits for our code. If our codes come up against those laws, then they are wrong, and I hope to lighten up the load legally on our businesses and residents when I’m on council.
“Well, I hear you are making friends on the campaign trail. Keep going to those neighborhood parties and just enjoy the process buddy. I gotta go to work.”
Matt shakes my hand firmly. “Me too.” And shouts at my back, “Have a happy Halloween, Bill!”
Linda Olson? Doug Cohn?
October 8th, 2009Link: http://www.EyeOnEnglewood.com
What's the difference in a candidate for City Council who attends a crucial City budget meeting, grading a stack of papers throughout, and a child who doodles during Mass?
It's the difference it takes in mental acuity to concentrate on the subject matter at hand. A postman understands this. A pilot understands it. Anyone who works with his hands knows it is possible to process other data, but it is not possible to divide one's analytical attention and process two sets of data at once. Candidate for City Council, Linda Olson, hopes she can downplay the difference by her presence at City Council on Monday night.
How does Olson analyze and grade papers while absorbing critical budget allocations taking place?
Is this how she intends to do business for the people of Englewood if elected?
Doug Cohn and I met up outside the Cohn law offices.
I ask Doug Cohn what his plans are for Council compared to the Ms. Olson's stated intent. He answers,"I want a full service city because that is what we are already paying for."
"The city council makes all its budget decisions without seeing the whole budget," says Cohn. "How can intelligent decisions be made about spending forty million dollars if we do not have all the information? Matt Crabtree just requested a copy of the budget on disc, and the Clerk's answer was that the City doesn't have it computerized. None of us feel that's acceptable."
"Why do you feel the need to access the budget directly rather than delegating to City staff?" I ask.
"I see City Council members as the overseers, the policy makers in the City. We have to know what the line items are before we can study and delegate management of the budget to Gary Sears. There are debits, credits and transfers... I have questions about where millions of dollars have gone, grant funds, brownsfield chemical clean up money, and other strange happenings with taxes."
I say that I saw in the Englewood Citizen, Linda Olson's bio which reads like a professional marketing piece, while borrowing phrases from you, (Cohn), such as "transparency of government."
My observation is that Linda, in less than a month before elections, still fails to find time to concentrate on issues facing Englewood. She may be a nice person, but will she really listen when you have an issue? Will she read her council packet before voting? Or, will she bring papers to grade behind her council chair?
I say to Doug, "Olson states that she stands for your voice and your access to city management, yet her own interest in government shows exactly how much she values the access. Where has she been these last few years on Monday evenings?"
"Hummm... good question..."
..."While your concerns over Englewood foreclosures,forced paving of your driveways, grandfathering issues, property rights, dog rights and sewer fees were being debated in Council, when did she ever show up to listen, weigh in with a perspective?"
"Well, Linda is a very nice person, but she's busy with other things."
"While you seem to be running on some lofty Constitutional issues," I say. "What would you say is the most important Constitutional issue to you?"
"I believe that power follows property rights. Those rights are even more important than free speech. If you gut a guy's financial power to assets, or free choice in how to use that property, what is the purpose of owning property?"
"I've heard there's been an ongoing debate about off-leash dog parks over the years. Do you mind saying anything on that?"
Doug says, "Rick Gillit and I agree on that one. Let's find more spaces around town that can be used as off leash places. Not Jason Park. Dogs will never be given a higher priority than children when we are elected. There is a financial liability there for Englewood, and we have enough irons in the courtroom fires already. Humans must be protected. Government's role is to protect the most vulnerable. Not, special interests."
I agree. Olson lacks interest. How can she be a leader? Maybe she wants some Christmas cash. Even a pretty face can clearly betray a casual, "whatever" attitude because actions still speak louder than words.
Judicial McFoolery
September 4th, 2009Link: http://www.EnglewoodStory.com
With sentencing still scheduled for October 9, 2009, for City Councilman McCaslin to have circulated the petition for Judge Atencio's inclusion on the November ballot to the Bartnick's neighbors on Pearl, who were witnesses in the case, seems like a clumsy attempt for payback, and perhaps unethical. If the Englewood judge is elected again, his salary is set over $121,000.00 annually.
On Thursday, August 13, 2009, witnesses for Englewood prosecution foiled the City’s plan to validate the prosecution of boarding house owners. Tricia Langon, Senior Planner, testified that the boarding house amendment “was not returned to Planning and Zoning Commission for their approval, because only major modifications or amendments to the code are returned to the Commission for review.”
Langon also testified that despite the Council’s October 6, 2008 enactment of Ordinance 55, (Boarding Houses) such residences are not businesses, but regular residences. They are not home occupations, and they do not require a license.
The jury was then released early, with the judge and prosecution both recommending the legs of the boarding house ordinance be dismissed in favor of the Bartnicks, and remanded to City Council for review.
Defense immediately went to the throat of the validity of the Ordinance because the Englewood City Charter, Section 58, declares that ALL modifications or amendments to ordinances must revert to Planning and Zoning for study and recommendation, even if the City Council chooses to disregard the recommendation. This is to prevent hasty enactments which often fail the test of justice.
The role of the volunteer citizens’ Planning and Zoning Commission to obtain legal council on proposed zoning codes as to fair housing, equal access and other zoning issues, while civil engineering counsel can ascertain measurable densities and standards. Hasty decisions also circumvent justice simply because they feel like a hard pressure sales job. Only time can allow that kind of intimidation to subside in favor of common sense.
The City circumvented its own Charter many times in the making of new Boarding House provisions, but this was the instance for Defense Council’s request for a directed verdict Thursday afternoon.
Judge Atencio taken aback, hemmed and hawed, and then declined his power and duty to declare summary judgment finding accurately that “what Defense is asking cuts to the heart of the ordinance”. Judge then determined “to allow the jury to decide the facts.”
The electric moment of truth was over. What was left of the material facts is unclear, as Tricia Langon had also admitted to the Bartnicks having pulled proper permits for zoning, but that under the new ordinance, parking areas require paint striping. Striping is an interesting dilemma if, unlike the Bartnicks whose back parking area is paved, the homeowner’s parking is unpaved. Keeping paint on dirt parking might prove to be an expensive year around feat for Englewood residences.
August 14, 2009, the jury, unaware of the previous days’ electricity, was sent to deliberate. They found the Bartnicks guilty of a shell of an Ordinance.
The implications of the Englewood verdict relate not only to setting City precedence for ungrandfathering pre-existing properties into newer codes, but also as to human rights and property ownership, the right to freely associate in the privacy of your own home with whomever you wish. If a neighbor accuses you of being unrelated, so be it.
What City Councilman, Bob McCaslin, was unable to accomplish for his friends, Ron and Robin Noffsinger, through Council legislation,

he turned up in the middle of Pearl Street to celebrate Saturday morning after the verdict was won through judicial McFoolery.

McCaslin's zeal short-sighted his actions linking the Englewood City Council to the very neighbors who had listed their names as witnesses against the so-called business. These neighbors each signed the good-old boy petition for re-election of small town political Judge. This is the same Judge who had refused to recuse himself earlier in the case.
Matthew Crabtree, challenger for the At-Large Council position, stumbled upon the judge's petitions for re-election, thus the confirmation of the City Councilman's conspiracy with the neighbors and the judge, when the clerk gave them to him on September 2, 2009.
The Judge is running unopposed this November. McCaslin is not up for re-election until next year.4 New Medical Marijuana Venders
August 8th, 2009During a study of medical marijuana venders last Monday evening's City Council, information that four existing city approved storefronts on Broadway surfaced. Other proposed venders slated for Englewood storefronts became the hot topic, enough to get a consensus action to establish an Emergency Moratorium.
Douglas Cohn's comment last year to Council regarding real emergencies and false emergencies has come full circle. He spoke during the false emergency moratorium on boarding houses and said, "When I first learned of a City emergency ordinance, I thought that perhaps you were taking notice of the foreclosure crises or that you had found a new way to handle drug houses in Englewood. That wasn't the case, and I have an issue with you folks abusing the City's definition of Emergency and Emergency Ordinances."
Personally? Four alternative drug venders on Broadway certainly seems suspicious, while only a short while ago, other herbal dispensaries were hard fought to win the privilege to exist in the competitive established models of medical fields in Englewood.
I spoke with one man outside of a clinic known as Patients Choice of Colorado. "Mike" was injured riding rodeo. He said the only thing holding his back together is the nuts and bolts. He said he was "dead" in his bed when he revived and that he has seizures from his brain being ripped from his right eye backwards.
Mike said he can tell when people are faking the need for marijuana, and that they could ruin it for all others who use it instead of heavier pills otherwise prescribed. So, Mike is a proponent of City licensure by application.
He believes that an application should sort out whether a dispensary is qualified to prescribe because they would know the answers to certain questions of which strains of the drug help which ailments, and what the various side effects are.
He pulled out his State license to use the drug for medicinal purposes and pointed out that high schoolers and other pleasure seekers could not lawfully obtain marijuana without the license. With a license, all is well. Without the license is quite another story.
Doctors could lose their license, their living, their home and wind up in federal prison, because it is the federal law that takes over when a violation occurs. Buyers would experience the same repercussions. However, Mike's concern is for the building owners who leased their premises to the errant tenants. In that case, the entire building would be caught up and confiscated by the FBI or FTB.
Matthew Crabtree, candidate for Council, and owner of the grassroots website for accessible government, ECOG, also voiced his concern to a group of concerned citizens when he said he had known someone who was a landlord where the tenants were manufacturing fake money out of the garage and paying rent with it. Not only did the landlord lose his rent, but also his rental property was confiscated.
Reality speaks. Either licensed marijuana dispensaries should own their own storefronts should they overstep their licensed privileges, or the City should draft a law to pre-empt the feds confiscation of the storefront belonging to an innocent party.
My hope, because this issue has already been approved by the State of Colorado, is that Council holds a hearing on the merits of the real Emergency as well as the City's own censurer process and what exactly they hope to protect.
Protecting business economy, private property and City taxes are all well within the reach of city government. Perhaps the new contenders for Council in November 2009 elections, will add protections to property within the boundaries of Englewood's Home Rule so that the wrong person doesn't lose his shirt, or his shop, to the feds.
Cinderella Bribed to Leave the City
July 2nd, 2009Link: http://www.englewoodcitizens.org/
Over the years, Community Development has received a budget of $2,000,000.00 per year. The exact “USES of FUNDS” according to the 2009 budget for the Community Development Department is $1,639,615, that would be $32,792,300 for a twenty year period IF that was the budgeted amount for every year which it probably is not, factoring in inflation, etc..
If this figure has been consistent, they will received at least $40,000,000.00 over the course of the next 20 years. With that money they have developed a fine two story brick strip mall called Trolley Square, which was not thought through sufficiently, -- therefore could not be leased, -- and which within five years time, was demolished.
Community Development also oversaw the demolishing of much of Historic Broadway, the old City Civic Center and Cinderella City.
They received grant money to clean up the brownfill on the backside of Elati and made a deal with RTD for the development of a walk on station. But, Community Development tried to cut out the existing residents' mountain views by inviting loft high rises into the area.
Robinson brick now uses the contaminated land for storing bundles of brick. When asked about the development of this property this year, City Councilman, Jefferson stated that Community Development deemed it too expensive to develop. It might be a bike park, or a retail mall or a hotel for light rail accommodations, but for some reason, the City has become disenchanted with their previous agreements.
They paid professionals for studies on the redevelopment of the RTD Light Rail cleaning and maintenance facility, brought in the station for light rail to Englewood at Hampden, and designed the new transit oriented City Center. This City Center was the recent subject of a video published on the Englewood Citizens For Open Government website. The results of the video show how several deadly marketing choices were made so as to prevent the open offices at the base of the light rail station to receive no access, and thus remain unleased office space.
The study also resulted in the claim that most retailers will not inhabit a retail mall area so small, and that a broader nucleus of retail stores would likely need to be offered to bring in willing businesses who viewed the traffic in the area as viable for money making.
Despite these critiques, Community Development is currently trying on new shoes East of Broadway, at the Swedish Medical PUD site, where they hope to offer a Whole Foods Store in the old Bali’s Gym structure. This idea would likely be a hit for health conscious citizens, and accessible to much of the outside public driving through Englewood on Highway 285.
Nevertheless, Community Development has the Kent Place at University and Hampden to worry about. When they initially cut the deal with the buyers to develop the highly visible property, the City accepted a deal where they would not take the tax monies from the property owners for up to 30 years.
Because Kent Place has changed hands a couple more times, concerned citizens would like to know whether they must continue to face the 30 year deprivation of tax revenues at the hands of the new investor/developers, or if that aspect of the deal was not an asset passed through from developer to developer.
In any case, Kent Place lies dormant, while the relocated Denver Seminary which vacated the premises has flourished in their new Aspen Grove property for three years onwards. Give it another four years, and the property’s renewed soil nutrients should sustain a farm pretty well.
Meanwhile, there is the McClellan Reservoir Foundation whose board of directors are the Community Development and Finance gurus of the City of Englewood. The City recently spent approximately $45,000.00 for a weekend in Las Vegas, marketing this property to the World. Maybe Las Vegas looks like modern Dubai? For that price, it might as well have been a trip half way around the world.
Why would Englewood market this piece of property at such an expense, when it is situated inside of another town, the town which would profit from the taxes of the Reservoir’s development? Why would Englewood agree to pay for the moving around of the dirt on this property, when the City doesn’t stand to gain tax revenues back? If Englewood were a large corporation, it certainly would have enough losses to qualify for great tax shelters each year.
We turn now to Historic Downtown. Why do Broadway’s sidewalks have weeds growing through the cracks? Why are they dirty and unkempt? Why do so many storefronts remain vacant?
The empty lot next to Bonnie Brae Hobbies could be transformed into a delightful, accessible Farmer’s Market in Summer or an Ice Skating Rink in Winter. Why not? It seems the City of Englewood would rather not claim the historical parts, but treats them as the unwanted step-child. Historic Englewood could prove to be a real Cinderella itself, if Community Development chose to throw a little dress on her shoulders.
Could it be that no amount of marketing Englewood’s prime retail space can spin itself as a good deal while Community Development hassles new business owners on Broadway about signage, paint choices, bed bugs, murals, signage, outdoor seating, taxes, and signage? What safety issues are Community Development trying to curb by micro-managing the small business dealers?
Meanwhile important issues such as the parking crises, empty storefronts, brick walls facing the public’s access to City Center, and lack of passageways, bridges, sidewalks to these areas are simply ignored.
For $40,000,000.00 budgeted over the next 20 years, I’d demand a little more attention to detail for my money. That kind of budget could at least clean up the issues that remain before embarking on more speculative deals.
Englewood Historic Broadway on Open Market
June 5th, 2009Link: http://www.I2I.org
On Tuesday evening, June 9, 2009, 6
m at the Englewood Civic Center, the City hosts an open market for determining the image of two important districts, the Historic Broadway Business District and the as yet undeveloped Swedish Medical Business PUD located between old Hampden and I-285.
Having attended the first open market, I am interested in this "Final" market approach, especially since a public hearing is approaching July 6, 2009.
In the first go round, everyone who attended was given sticky dots to affix to their preferences--as represented by the Planning and Zoning Department--of lighting, artwork, street designs and sizes, mall signage, and cross-walk design.
It made for a fun evening out.
While engrossing myself as an outsider in attempts to understand and make choices, to make my mark as it were, I began to hear murmurs from the other guests.
Business owners were saying, "I like this one, but who is going to pay for it?" A person with a disability stated emphatically, "Don't choose those posts at the crosswalk or we can't get our wheelchairs through them."
A politician argued against the cobblestone look of the cross-walks because the cobblestone laid in Denver's Larimer Square is requires regular maintenance because of bulging, trippage and breakage.
One business owner discussed with a citizen the fact that they each quite liked the idea of overhead lighting on Broadway.
One wanted to see Englewood by satellite. The other wanted an atmosphere to invite nightlife into her otherwise small town. Those overhead white lights would accomplish both economically.
Someone like the arch idea and said, "Couldn't Englewood use this idea to incorporate that bridge from the South of I-285 to the Civic Center?" "No, no." She was corrected, "That arch idea is not presented for the Civic Center, but only for Historic Broadway Businesses."
Upon another person entering the discussion, a critique was made that Broadway's present buildings are only two stories tall at most, and every other one is ranch style height. "Who are they trying to fool with these depictions?" He hissed. "This ain't Broadway."
This point led into whether Englewood intended to rebuild Broadway's lower structures similar to Littleton's redevelopment, and if so, what would happen to the existing businesses?
A chill entered the circle of conversation, then hovered over the voters. They realized that too little information had been handed over, and the depictions of choices were not depictions of the existing Englewood centers.
Further, Englewood does not have the money to improve Broadway presently. It's simply not in the budget.
Questions started arising such as why the City is presenting marketing idioms from two completely separate situations: One being a pre-existing historic Broadway, and the other concerning a largely scraped block of empty land with a few blocks of populated housing and flourishing small businesses.
Someone pointed out that he lives in a small home in the Swedish redevelopment area. "Would my place eventually be taken through eminent domain?"
"Maybe you're land values would increase if it gets zoned commercial," poised another.
There was an awkward shuffling of feet. The hoopla began to wain in the face of larger implications to private property takings.
Questions of business owners' businesses, their rights, taxes and choices being run over by the City 's prostitution of their property to the masses suddenly became a concern.
Why hadn't the City approached the Chamber of Commerce with these matters first or dialogue in a less-expensive way about real proposals and real needs?
Why must the City narrow the already narrow street of Old Hampden while creating a mall that will produce more traffic?
The owner of a mechanic's shop explained how the overlaid redevelopment proposals work against grandfathered business owners. He told his own story about being pushed out of business and forced to sell because he could not obtain a new proprietor/lease until after the six month window of City-allotted time had lapsed.
"There is only so much an owner can do with a building designed for car mechanics." Expressed one sympathetic guest.
Yet, the City ungrandfathered this land owner and forced him out because they had their own plans for that prime corner lot on Logan and I-285. A big beautiful bank now sits there.
The City's position is that outdated, unkempt properties need to be updated or replaced.
Somewhere in the mix are the answers for better stewardship of the existing images and markets of Englewood, and a means to upgrade properties without taking over viable existing rights.
If the City wants to exercise control, it needs to fund its existing rehabilitation budget before implementing frivolous marketing parties and coy marketing plans for eminent domain.
Collecting the funds first and utilizing them for the public benefit is one thing. Diverting tax moneys already vested and raised to other City employee benefits and frivolous exercises is another.
Public Hearing is set for July 6, 2009 to gather public input.
O Grandfather, Where Art Thou?
April 29th, 2009Link: http://englewoodstory.com
I will go so far as to say this: Everything in a City is grandfathered unless the City is able to prove some license to regulate it.
O, Where O Where doth such a license cometh from?
In Colorado municipalities, they come from Colorado Revised Statutes Title 31, Municipal Governments, michies Colorado free legal which limits powers and are given further boundaries through none other than the Supreme Law of the Land, our great United States Constitution.
These laws clearly state that someone's power, presumed authority or "will" cannot legally over-power or control what rights the law has handed to me already. The mass lynchings are illegal because they are not founded in deference, self-respect or law.
It doesn't matter how much sweaty fervor is passionately invoked or what kind of bribe or slander occurs, if it ain't founded in law, it ain't no good.
Last week in the Englewood Council meeting when Bob McCaslin accidentally, or perhaps conveniently left out of the pre-written invocation, "Help us not to control..." I had to chuckle. Well, it just escaped. I didn't mean to be irreverent. But "arbitrary control" is exactly what this Council loves to do to this fair city by their own elected whims.
But just because they are elected and it is hard to get them unseated, doesn't mean that they have legal rights to presume license over all aspects of residential home lives.
Last week at Council, John Moore played the roll of Mayor and controlled the discussion on Hard Pavements himself. He kept wanting to know what would be "grandfathered" as if Council can simply ignore the City Ordinances and Savings Clauses and has utter authority over the private homes as well as licensed businesses. Near the end of the discussion Moore says, "So what are we choosing to grandfather then? Only gravel?"
Stand Up, people! Where is the Council's license to tell you where or how you can park on your own property?
Once an idea gets passed legislatively, then the full burden of proof rests on one defendant's shoulders, inconveniently cited and hauled to the Judge, to prove that the legislation is unfounded. Since it is the legal duty of the municipal judge to presume the law is reasonable, this individual must have a very strong mind with plenty of time available to find out where the missing links are and present them to the Judge or jury accordingly. If he doesn't have these resources, the illegal law can be established judicially, and then it is almost impossible to over-rule.
So the old maxim stands that all it takes for evil to win is for good men to do nothing.
If you choose not to trust your gut, or defend your right to serve, your right of easement, your immunities, your right to real estate, then you forfeit not only the right, but also the law that governs the right. And if you forfeit the law, you betray your fellow man who depends on that same law.
I was trying to stay one step ahead of myself but now I walk on my hands and don’t look back...
"Though the law itself be fair on its face and impartial in appearance, yet, if it is applied and administered by public authority with an evil eye and an unequal [118 U.S. 374] hand, so as practically to make unjust and illegal discriminations between persons in similar circumstances, material to their rights, the denial of equal justice is still within the prohibition of the Constitution. This principle of interpretation has been sanctioned by this court in Henderson v. Mayor of New York, 92 U.S. 259; Chy Lung v. Freeman, 92 U.S. 275; Ex parte Virginia, 100 U.S. 339; Neal v. Delaware, 103 U.S. 370, and Soon Hing v. Crowley, 113 U.S. 703. Soon Hing v. Crowley, 113 U.S. 703." See, Yick Wo v. Yick Wo v. Hopkins
Submitted April 14, 1886, Decided May 10, 1886,118 U.S. 356.
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
FOR THE DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
How do we know what rights we have fundamentally? Consider the Privileges or Immunities clause of the US Constitution. One author has then suggested normal people go to the laws of the District of Columbia to see what's fair there. Another suggests that whatever is fair in all the states is fair in your state.
"It is accordingly enacted by § 1977 of the Revised Statutes, that all persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall have the same right in every State and Territory to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, give evidence, and to the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of persons and property as is enjoyed by white citizens and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, penalties, taxes, licenses, and exactions of every kind, and to no other." (See Above, Yick Wo)
I was really scared that Yick Wo, the laundry proprietor, would only protect those narrow civil rights laws specifically written, but when I went to read that case it was as clear as the blue Colorado skies that everyone in America has the right to make and enforce contracts, to sue, to be parties, to give evidence and to enjoy the full benefit and duties of all laws and policies and access to government and court, and to remain secure in their persons and property.
Neighbors must work hard to subdue your greed, subdue your bias, and subdue being lazy entitled ingrates. Seriously!
Whatever gets sold out for some selfish or shady benefit today, will come back to bite not only you and your white Englewood neighbors and your white grandchildren, but me and my household too because the rest of us have rights only equal to yours, and then your rights are only equal to mine. You need to stand up like responsible, dutiful adults now. I don't want to take the water slide down with you.
W
