Lakewood Informer

Resident generated news about Lakewood, Colorado

Lakewood Informer

Resident generated news about Lakewood, Colorado

Author : Lakewood News from Karen

Selena Quintanilla ‘Still Dreaming of You’ Art Show Returns After a Decade

From Chicano Humanities & Arts Council Celebrate Selena with Art, Music, Look-Alike Contest, and Custom Car Magic El Rey Artwork, in collaboration with the Chicano Humanities Arts Council (CHAC Gallery) and Creature Arcade Tattoo and Illustration is proud to announce the much-anticipated return of the Selena Quintanilla Art Show: “Still Dreaming of You”. This year’s event, held at CHAC Gallery at 40 West (7060 W. 16th Ave. Lakewood, CO 80214) on March 7th, April 4th, and April 5th, commemorates the 30th anniversary of Selena’s untimely passing and honors the Queen of Tejano Music with three unforgettable days of vibrant art, music, culture, and celebration. The event will feature stunning artwork by Denver’s finest artists, Selena-inspired tattoo flash, a look-alike contest, a karaoke competition, a Show & Shine car show, Aztec dancers, and a variety of mouthwatering food trucks. The festivities begin on Friday, March 7th, from 5:00 PM to 9:00 PM, with an exciting Opening Ceremony Art Show, including a captivating performance by the Aztec dance group Huitzilipotchli, storytelling, face painting, and fun crafts for kids. On April 4th and 5th, the celebration continues with the eagerly anticipated look-alike contest, tattoo flash event, and a high-energy Selena karaoke contest, with incredible prizes for the winners. The Viejitos Car Club will lead a procession of custom cars, culminating in a Show & Shine car show at the CHAC and Creature Arcade parking lot, where the state’s finest custom cars will be on display. Rob and Tammy Yancey founded this event ten years ago as a heartfelt tribute to Selena, aiming to bring together the Denver community to celebrate her lasting legacy. “Selena is an icon who represents resilience and embodies the beauty of our culture through her music and spirit,” says Rob & Tammy. “Though she may be gone in person, she will never be gone in spirit. Her legacy lives on in our hearts, and we’ll continue to honor her light.” This year marks the one of the largest events hosted at CHAC’s 40 West location, with the goal of uniting Colorado’s artistic communities while celebrating Selena’s enduring influence on music, culture, and art. So, get ready to show off your best Selena attire and perfect those karaoke moves and voices! Click the links to let us know you’ll be joining the celebration on March 7th and/or April 4 & 5. 

Belmar Park Traffic Study ignores traffic from over HALF of the planned housing units!

From SaveBelmarPark.com Here is more of the cloudy history from the strange Book of Belmar.  This has come to light due to the attention to detail provided by Kairoi’s excellent attorneys at the Brownstein law firm in their court filing with Jefferson County District Court. Please notice the map above.  The green area represents Belmar Park.  The two red blocks represent the two parcels of land that comprise the Irongate Office Complex.  The red square on the left is 777 S Yarrow Street.  The red rectangle on the right is 777 S Wadsworth Boulevard. The developer plans to build at least 411 apartments at 777 S Yarrow within the red square on the left. An additional 650-800 apartments are planned within the rectangle on the right at 777 S Wadsworth.   How will they construct so many units at 777 S Wadsworth?   By building TWO 12-STORY TOWERS. Two key points to consider. 1)  Kairoi always planned to develop BOTH Irongate parcels.  Namely, 777 S Yarrow Street and 777 S Wadsworth Blvd shown above. This point is established by numerous statements in the legal brief filed on behalf of the developer including that Kairoi submitted a formal letter of intent to purchase both properties way back on October 9, 2020. The two parcels are conveniently located directly across the street from each other and are both part of the Irongate office complex as shown on the map above. Yet incredibly, the developer has succeeded in excluding the S Wadsworth location from consideration by the public or Lakewood’s Planning Department or Lakewood’s Planning Commission or Lakewood’s City Council or the Colorado Department of Transportation!  Wow!   On December 2, 2020, both the seller and Kairoi signed a letter of intent for Kairoi to purchase the TWO properties. Lakewood was also in the loop even back then. On December 14, 2020, the City of Lakewood provided a formal zoning verification to Kairoi for the two properties. In addition to the 777 S Yarrow location, as per page 6 of the court filing, Kairoi has always planned to construct multiple 12-story towers on the S Wadsworth site with 650-800 total housing units at that location.  There has been no change to that plan. And since they are only proposing 411 units at the S Yarrow address, the majority of the units Kairoi plans to build at Irongate are not yet included in their major site plan or TRAFFIC STUDY since 650-800 units so far have been excluded.   Those 650-800 excluded units are over half of the project and Kairoi has succeeded in keeping that fact quiet.  Nobody is talking about that elephant in the room. So let’s move on to the second key point. 2)  Kairoi has NEVER included the 777 S Wadsworth site in traffic planning.   Read more…

Lakewood City Council to decide fate of policy affecting Belmar Park, other developments

From Save Open Space Lakewood The saga over the future of the Belmar Park project could be nearing its final chapter depending on the outcome of the Lakewood City Council meeting Monday, February 24, at 7pm in Council Chambers. Council will vote on whether or not to repeal and replace the citizens’ initiated Save Open Space Lakewood (SOS Lakewood) Green Initiative with City Hall’s anti-environmental, no-transparency, developer-friendly ordinance. Lakewood, like many communities, adopted an ordinance requiring developers of large residential projects to dedicate a portion of land to the City for parks and open space. Lakewood’s first version was in 1983. Then in 2018 the ordinance was updated to encourage more such donations. A separate provision also was adopted, requiring the code to be reviewed “by December 31, 2023.”  That date came and went without the required review, despite the outcry from the community that no such dedications had occurred since 2013. Between 2013 and 2023, City Council heard from multiple neighborhoods that opposed Lakewood’s relentless drive to become a concrete city. They expressed concerns over problem developments with little or no green space, all of which had paid a fee in lieu of property dedication. Community members were appalled when they learned that Lakewood had secretly ushered through approval of a behemoth luxury apartment building adjacent to Belmar Park. For months, they approached Council asking for the development to be modified and for months their pleas were ignored. As a result, the SOS Lakewood Green Initiative was launched in March, 2024. At the center of that initiative was the requirement that new developments could no longer donate a fee in lieu of parkland dedication. As the petition gained momentum, in the final days of the Colorado State Legislature session, an 11th-hour amendment to HB 24-1313 was added to mandate a fee option, creating an obvious legal challenge to the petition. The initiative garnered over 8,000 signatures, enough to qualify for a city-wide election. The issue was expected to go to ballot but the counting process was rushed. A Special Meeting was hastily called for Monday, November 4, the night before the presidential election, ensuring the initiative attracted little attention.  At that meeting, instead of setting a ballot date, Council passed the ordinance with a disingenuous vote. After passing the citizen initiative that night, Mayor Wendi Strom told the press…”the outcome will ultimately end up being decided in court.” Why would the Mayor be so confident that the matter would end up in court? Apparently Council knew that if they voted, the proposal likely would be approved and then challenged in court. However, mailing a ballot to every voter would increase visibility and likely increase support for the petition. The City fears public opinion is so strong for parks and open space that even their own pro-development machine could not stop it. But Council could, and did, prevent a city-wide vote. On December 20 developer Kairoi Residential filed a lawsuit questioning the initiative’s effect on their proposed development adjacent to Belmar Park. Kairoi’s case stands on “wobbly legs,” according to Colorado Municipal League (CML) Executive Director Kevin Bommer, who added, “Local control is local control, whether it comes from the governing body or whether it comes from the residents through the initiative process.” CML represents 271 Colorado communities.  To date the City has not taken any steps to support the ordinance. Kairoi’s motion for preliminary injunction went unopposed, leaving the judge with only one side to consider. Instead of using the court to decide the law, the City seems to be using it to do their political bidding.  Instead of accepting responsibility for the chaos they had created, City Hall launched a campaign of misinformation to scapegoat the initiative for problems that they labeled “unintended consequences.” The petition was falsely labeled “anti-growth,” yet it was the City’s withholding of building permits that caused numerous people to suffer needlessly. The irony is that the majority of city councilors say they support sustainability and parks but their actions allow corporate greed to rule. Or perhaps it is making good on unspoken promises to campaign donors.  More than half of the money spent to elect Mayor Pro-Tem Jeslin Shahrezaei came from the National Association of Realtors and Metro Housing Coalition, organizations known for supporting Republicans and corporate Democrats. In addition to being heavily funded by these same groups with admitted racist histories, the Mayor was supported by One Main Street Colorado, recently described in The Denver Post as a “dark money” group. A Denver Post editorial (2/16/25) proclaimed “Lakewood’s Messy Fight Can Be Solved.” But instead of finding a simple solution, as suggested by the Post, and instead of keeping their word to make amendments without changing the overall intent of the initiative, City Hall pulled a bait and switch, revealing a developer-friendly ordinance that incentivizes a fee in lieu in every case. According to Cathy Kentner of SOS Lakewood, the ordinance under consideration for Monday night, “Places the decision whether or not to accept a fee in lieu behind closed doors without any oversight. It’s even worse than the previous version because one administrator, working only with the developer, can not only decide the fee in lieu but would be allowed to lower or eliminate the fee if the developer convinced them it was worthwhile. This is all with no public outreach and no oversight.”  She added, “City Council CAN and arguably SHOULD solve their manufactured crisis. But the current proposal does nothing to solve the underlying problem. For more than a dozen years, no land dedications have occurred. Irresponsible, unsustainable, unaffordable housing is being built without any oversight. Oversight is not a “barrier” to housing. It is a “guardrail” to big money corporations buying out of our land use requirements.”

No Workforce Housing for Lakewood

Another Lakewood misinformation campaign bites the dust. For years Lakewood has been pushing high-density growth in the name of “affordable housing”. They market this narrative to schoolteachers and civil servants. See Lakewood’s recent resolution using these exact words. However, a development presentation to the Lakewood Planning Commission introduced a new term that exposes the lie: Workforce housing Workforce Housing The consultant Lakewood hired to evaluate blight and Lakewood’s Comprehensive Plan pointed out that there was NO PLAN for increasing workforce housing in Lakewood. The emphasis on “affordable housing”, despite what Lakewood says, is different from workforce housing. No matter how poorly teachers and civil servants get paid, they get paid more than anyone living on the streets. Affordable housing in Lakewood will mean a government-run program, similar to what used to be called Section 8. That is not the same as an answer to inflated housing prices for low- to median-income levels. Think about government-run affordable housing like a scholarship system for school. A person may need the financial assistance, and may not be able to go to college without it, but there are others who need it more and not enough to go around. For decades, the people most in need are those with extremely low income. Not low. Not middle-low. Not teachers and civil servants. Extremely low income. Ann Ricker, of Ricker Cunningham, is Lakewood’s blight consultant. She pointed out there was a gap in the Comprehensive Plan. She said the plan talked about affordable housing, and it talked about single-family housing, but she said there was the missing middle. She suggested removing “single-family” and just using the term “housing”. Using the general term “housing” would allow more high-density, market rate apartments to be built in an effort to flood the market and lower prices. Lakewood is already proceeding with this plan. There is no guarantee the low-priced condos or townhomes will be built anywhere. The term “workforce housing” is a more accurate description of how the public perceives the promises from Lakewood. This was an important acknowledgment that “workforce housing” is different than “affordable housing”. The public should be aware of the word games going on, similar to “illegal alien” versus “migrant”. Watch Ann Ricker discuss the Comprehensive Plan here: From Frank Lehnerz, Free State Colorado “If the government tries to wage war against the laws of the market by price control, it undermines the working of the market mechanism and leads to conditions which, from the point of view of the government itself, are less desirable than the previous state of affairs it intended to alter.” — Ludwig Von Mises, Human Action (1949) History has repeatedly shown that price controls—whether on food, housing, or other essentials—create virtually no consumer benefits and only price distortions. By capping what producers or retailers can charge, these controls reduce supply, reduce product or service quality, discourage investment for new, improved, or cheaper products and services, and create market signal distortions.

Lakewood Demands Fee for Impossible Sustainability Goals

Lakewood requires such high sustainability standards that they are almost impossible for large developments to meet. The standards are meant to eliminate greenhouse gas emissions.  For those developments, Lakewood accepts a fee in lieu of sustainability amenities. Lakewood is currently arguing that parkland dedication is illegal or amoral because it asks too much from developers. But Lakewood makes the same sort of demands to further its sustainability agenda. In both cases, the desire is to have development offset the environmental cost of development. The question is at what point is there so much development that the city says money is an acceptable substitute for direct environmental offsets. Note that these city mandates will continue despite any possible changes to federal funding for climate change initiatives. Achievable Goals or Ideology Lowering emissions is expensive so most people have not done it or have only done it by using rebates and subsidies. Achieving net zero emissions is even more expensive and is sometimes not achievable. For example, the city of Lakewood admits its new maintenance facility will not meet LEED standards let alone be net zero. Lakewood has set its own standards and requires that new buildings meet those standards by earning sustainability points. “net zero standards require reducing emissions to more than 90% and then only offsetting [with purchased carbon credits] the remaining 10% or less to fall in line with 1.5 °C targets.” –Wikipedia For large developments, the city admits it is almost impossible to achieve enough points. Therefore, developers are forced to pay a fee so that Lakewood can fund other sustainability projects. This is similar to other carbon credit purchasing schemes but in this case, it is authorized, administered, and required by Lakewood.  There is currently no discussion that Lakewood will require credits or fees from existing residents. Lakewood City Council was scheduled to discuss new ways to generate revenue, as well as how to spend the revenue generated from existing fees, at the February planning retreat. The planning retreat has historically been an in-person only meeting where staff takes direction from Council on items that do not require an official vote. No recording is available online for review. “For some [developments] that the [sustainability] targets are just too high to meet, they pitch in so that the city can spend that money to further achieve our goals.” Travis Parker, Director of Sustainability and Community Development during staff sustainability update (min 1:17:52). Increasing UNAFFORDABLE Housing Since 2019 Lakewood has demanded buildings meet climate sustainability goals. This was estimated to add 2-3% to building costs but actual costs have not been collected or analyzed. Building costs are passed on to the consumer, which makes Lakewood even more expensive to live and work in than in the surrounding areas. The additional sustainability measures will add 1-10% to building costs for things like EV charging stations. Would you like all new apartments to have a few charging stations at an increased overall cost for everyone or would you like some buildings to not have those amenities at a lower cost? Lakewood’s demands have resulted in a reduction in emissions to meet a target of 20% less than 2007 levels. With the new demands of 2022, some large construction projects cannot meet Lakewood’s demands, resulting in the project paying a fee to Lakewood that will be used for other climate goals. Lakewood city staff acknowledged that it was almost impossible for large projects to meet demands, making the fee-in-lieu necessary. Money Making Machine Lakewood has already generated $221,000 from various sustainability fees. They anticipate generating over $250,000 per year on these fees. Lakewood made over $600,000 on the statewide plastic bag mandate. One could say Lakewood is getting into the business of selling emission offsets. For more information on what Lakewood’s sustainability measures have achieved so far, watch the full video update at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYbpkr1Gm24&t=150s Consequences The extra expense of building in Lakewood limits the possibility of new businesses coming into Lakewood. Even sustainability businesses, whose goals align with Lakewood’s, find it difficult to make a profit when required to meet high sustainability standards.  Councilor Rein specifically remarked that he would like Lakewood to attract new businesses that would develop sustainability technologies.  At the same time, businesses nationwide are rethinking their sustainability goals amidst high demands such as Lakewood’s. The enhanced development fee was first approved in 2019. Now the city is asking for more and some projects are not even possible to achieve what Lakewood wants. All projects must meet a base emission efficiency level. After meeting that base level, projects are eligible to pay a fee because even Lakewood staff admit it is not possible to achieve what they are asking for. “Fee-in-lieu is for those super large projects that have really large point totals that may not even be able to find enough points in the [standards] list to meet their point total, they still have to achieve at least 50 [base level efficiency] and they can achieve the rest as well or they can pay a fee in lieu for some of those higher points.” – Travis Parker, sustainability update (min 1:34), emphasis added What do the fees go towards? They could go towards every basic city service besides police. Per Councilor Sophia Mayott-Guerrero, these fees could be used for sidewalks, bike lanes, lighting, park maintenance, road maintenance, climate impact and water impact. Councilors asked about tree preservation and housing. Public art was part of the original goal. Tree canopy health. Food access. Household wages. Even subscriptions to city communications and trips to the rec center count towards “sustainability goals”. Other people have to fight to earn business advantages like that. The dates below are from the staff presentation, detailing future meetings where Lakewood will be implementing more robust sustainability measures for Lakewood.

Equal Representation on Budget Board Denied

City Council Members Jacob Labure and Paula Nystrom asked for equal representation on the Budget and Audit Board, January 27, 2025. They were denied. Only three wards will be represented on the Board. The Budget and Audit Board is vitally important for accountability. Many policies and programs that staff originate are never disclosed to the public. They only show up in funding requests. And as evidenced by the 2024 vote to de-TABOR, city staff is not often turned down. Councilor LaBure was involved in the last rewrite of the Budget Board. LaBure fought hard to get each ward representation on the Board, saying it was common practice to not only have five Councilors on the Board but to allow any Council Member to come and make comments. Now the current Board doesn’t even allow comments. Councilors Shahrezaei and Mayott-Guerrero both said that allowing that many Councilors, as worked for years, would now be unmanageable. Shahrezaei pointed out that at one point, a single councilor made 37 questions to staff and that amount of work was too hard. There is no general rule for how many questions the paid city staff should answer as part of being publicly accountable for a multi-million-dollar budget. In 2024, when Mayor Strom downsized committee sizes, then-Councilor Rich Olver was upset to be removed. Strom explained that she thought she was doing him a favor because he often didn’t have time. Olver was not present at the meeting for the initial appointments to protest. But his argument resonated with Councilor Dave Rein who supported increasing representation. Councilor Low also supported the proposal saying, “Budget is one of the most important things we do. Ward 3 should have representation.” 2025 Council Members on the Budget Board are: Scorecard: Allow Equal Representation Strom: Nay Shahrezaei: Nay Sinks: Nay Mayott-Guerrero: Nay Cruz: Nay Low: Aye Rein: Aye LaBure: Aye Nystrom: Aye

Fire in Lakewood Raises Policy Concerns

As reported by CBS News, a fire in an abandoned gas station on February 3 endangered 20-30 homeless people who were using the building as a shelter. The situation underscores the need to re-examine several ongoing strategies, such as: Which of these policies were effective in de-escalating the ongoing safety situation? From CBS News, by Karen Morfitt Fire in vacant Colorado gas station doubling as shelter for unhoused highlights concerns of neighbors At around 10 p.m. on Monday night a fire tore through a vacant Colorado building that was once used as a gas station. The building at the corner of Alameda Avenue and Harlan Street in Lakewood was being used as a shelter. A resident of the apartment building next door captured video of flames shooting out of the building’s windows. “Thank God the response was quick,” Victor Garibay said. Garibay didn’t take the video, but he lives in the same apartment building. He and his neighbors raised concerns about people coming and going from the building several times. “A lot of people have gone to the police have gone to the fire department and told them about the issues here — people coming in and out. The drug use, of course. The police have come, the fire department has come but they never seem to really be able to do anything about it,” he said. Read article from CBS…

Lakewood Special Election Candidates

A special election to fill vacancies left by Rebekah Stewart (Ward 3) and Rich Olver (Ward 4) will be held March 25. This election has generated more candidates than recent elections, giving residents the benefit of choice. Below is the list of candidates and their respective websites. It will be updated as new information becomes available. Ward 3 Ken Cruz: https://www.cruzforlakewood.com Patrick Flaherty: https://votepatflaherty.com/ Pete Roybal: https://www.peteroybal2025.com/ Ward 4 Bill Furman: https://www.billfurman4lakewood.com Desiree Gonzales: Facebook Page: Councilwoman At-large Desirée González Nicholas Munden: https://www.progress4all.com/ Diane Rhodes: https://rhodes4lakewood.com Thank you to everyone stepping up to serve! Even campaigning is hard work! This is not an endorsement of any candidate. Paid for by the Lakewood Informer although this communication did not cost anything but someone will ask. Not authorized by any candidate or committee.

Lakewood residents push to intervene in Belmar Park lawsuit

From the Jeffco Transcript, by Suzie Glassman, February 5, 2025 The fight over a controversial proposed apartment complex near Belmar Park is escalating as frustrated residents have reached out to the city council, and parkland advocate Cathy Kentner has moved to formally intervene in a lawsuit filed by developers against the city last December.  Members of Save Belmar Park, a citizen-led group advocating for the preservation of open space, argue the City of Lakewood has failed to defend a citizen-led ordinance the council adopted after the group submitted the required number of signatures, leaving residents in opposition to the move no choice but to step in. The lawsuit began when Kairoi Residential, developers of a planned 412-unit luxury apartment building at Belmar Park, sued the city, claiming the 2024 ordinance, which prevents developers from paying fees instead of dedicating land for parks, violates state law.  On Jan. 14, a Jefferson County judge granted Kairoi a preliminary injunction, allowing the apartment project to proceed while the case progresses. Lakewood didn’t oppose Kairoi’s request for the injunction, leading some residents to believe this inaction signaled to the court that the ordinance had little legal standing.  Read more including the backlash over Lakewood’s legal strategy

Scroll to top