Tags: commercial
Jimany Christmas, Batman! It's the Joker Again!
December 11th, 2009Link: http://www.EyeOnEnglewood.com
As we move into the solar energy age,the City of Englewood is faced with many choices, some of which are being watched closely by the City of Lakewood. Unfortunately, the Englewood City Council has narrowed all this down to just one choice: Should they or shouldn't they accept an offer from a company named AMERESCO for a 25 year commitment to solar panels.
A company named AMERESCO has offered to do an energy audit of the municipal buildings if the City will commit to a 25 year contract for solar panels.
The City rents the main building known as 1000 Englewood Parkway. The Service Center is surrounded by tall trees that would require being chopped down in order to use the panels and the Recreation Center already has windows surrounding the South facing direction for optimum heat absorption between the prime sunshine hours between 10:00 a.m. and 2:00 pm, four hours per day.
How do the citizens of Englewood know that they will receive the latest, best equipment from AMERESCO? Is it last year's technology? Will it be outdated next year, and taxes be locked in to supporting the equipment for another 25 years?
I remember when health clubs would "hard sell" a 10 year membership to young men and women. Unsuspecting people rarely realized how their lives and movements would change, or how health technology and the companies would change or evaporate into thin air in a mere ten years. Then, think about solar and wind energy being on the move today!
The City is committed by Charter to offer competitive bidding. Belmar Green is a vested developer of green energy and Englewood would do well to pay attention to the choices they are making. One contractor, (anonymous) who often works with the City of Englewood is surprised to learn that there are no public offerings on the table so that he could make a bid himself on helping the City into the green age. An obvious competitor might be Namaste Solar.
Why not turn the tables and offer Englewood to AMERESCO or another company as a green study in exchange for free technology? Certainly, the early technology would warrant this kind of offer from a city the size of Englewood.
What will it cost Englewood in the end to repair the roof damage or to maintain the holes in the roof or to take down the obsolete equipment?
Solar energy is not simply used for heating and lighting, but in the case of Englewood, also for air conditioning.
Energy employees at the City of Denver were asked by a source named, "Mitch" how they keep the Capitol cool in the summer without air conditioning. They stated that ventilation is a key often overlooked by consumers. They also suggested the City buildings turn off the hot water during the summer months since bathing is not an issue in commercial buildings.
On the other side of the coin, how would solar panels impact the heating bills? AMERESCO proposes a 10,000 watt or 1% decrease in the monthly bills. This is nowhere near what wind energy could provide or geothermal energy.
Certainly, an updated generator grid would be an option for Englewood since it is the flow of the distributive power being generated that actually effects costs. Until the flow of energy is changed to disburse the energy from its source to its destination, it doesn't matter if every business in America has solar. It is the shortest route that brings the costs of energy down.
Concerned Citizens in Englewood (ECOG) assert that the City can save more money by changing the light bulbs in the building to energy efficient ones, and upgrading insulation or even triple paning the windows before trying out solar panels on a 25 year locked in commitment to AMERESCO.
Jimany Christmas, Batman! It's the Joker offering the Mayor a City deal of the century! Then again, its the Mayor who had his own home recently fitted with energy panels. And, after all, it's not his own money he's committing for 25 years.
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
