Author: Lakewood News from Karen

Guest contribution from Joan from Lakewood…

From: “Joan from Lakewood”
Date: November 9, 2022 at 11:02:52 PM MST
To: <XXX@state.co.us>
Subject: Re: Injustice with land development in Lakewood at 4th and Union

Dear XXX,

Thank you for reaching out to me today. It was kind of timely. You see I have not received any resolution to the FOIA that I file with the GSA. I was supposed to receive an answer on 11/3/22 and I had explained to them that would not be helpful as the title was to be transferred on 10/31/22. But I have since learned that the transfer of the title has been delayed. So I have sent a registered letter to the National Archive Administration Service which is the oversight organization for Federal FOIA requests. I hope to get the information or a resolution. Soon. 

Meanwhile last night at the Green Mountain Water Board, the board passed a ban on allowing employees to dig or work underground on that property. So perhaps the developers will be in touch with the CDPHE to do a deep drive into what is actually on that property. 

Lastly with 123 passing and allowing Tabor Refunds to be used for affordable housing and perhaps that is a source of funding for this project, I am sure the tax payers would not want to have their tax money used in such an unjust manor. 

If you still wish to speak to me, why don’t you call early next week and I will look at my schedule then. 

With Regards, 

“Joan from Lakewood” MT(ASCP)

Ps this might be a mute point as I have heard that there is funding issues with the lenders and developers. You see the Feds have raised the lending rate at least 4 points since this bid was made. And there may not be the collateral to make this a viable loan. 

On Nov 9, 2022, at 10:43 AM, <XXX@state.co.us> wrote:

Hi Joan,

Thanks for sharing your concerns with me and the leadership team here at CDPHE. I tried calling you back but declined to leave a message. I’m happy to talk through this with you. This week may be hard because of the task force that is meeting today and tomorrow, but is there a time next week that works for you?

On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 4:45 PM “Joan from Lakewood” wrote:

Dear XXX

I have been expressing concerns over a piece of 59 acres of Federal Center Land since 2018 as to the possible toxic contamination of the land and the unwise move to develop it. I am aware that the CDPHE supposedly has all the studies that have been done as the CDPHE was involved in the placement and development the RTD rail line next to this property.

There is an Ordinance with the city of Lakewood called the strategic
growth initiative (SGI)
(Previously known as Ordinance 200) that calls for public hearings when a developer want to build over 200 units in Lakewood. A developer can get around the public hearings if the development has over 20% of the units dedicated to affordable housing.

A developer purchased the GSA land to place 1800 units on this possibly toxic land. That means at least 360 units of affordable housing.

Affordable housing has a large percentage of lower income and people of color.

I honestly feel it is inequitable to have children of lower means and color on this land. Land that people of means would not allow their children to live on.

I believe this is the very definition of systemic racism.

I have filed a FOIA with the GSA in Washington DC.

The real dilemma I have is that I believe the title of this land will be transferred on Monday 10/31/22 and the FOIA has been extended to 11/3/22. Although I am told that there is little that can be done to stop this land transfer and development, I still think it is wrong.

“Joan from Lakewood” MT(ASCP)

Crime Forum

At a crime forum held by Lakewood City Councilor Mary Janssen, September, 2022,  residents asked whether or not Lakewood had an adequate police force to handle the high levels of crime.

Lakewood PD reports nearly 400 employees and over 100 volunteers. They are reportedly fully staffed to within a few positions. Recruiting is always ongoing. In fact, Lakewood is currently recruiting a new police chief.  Full staffing but increasing visible crime suggests a disparity.

There are multiple methods to determine optimum staffing levels, including per capita and workload. Per capita appears to be the easiest and most common. Workload staffing is time intensive and costly. According to an International City/County Management Association (ICMA) analysis, staffing by crime level is different than workload analysis. They also find that tying staff numbers to crime “essentially provides incentives for poor performance and disincentives for good performance” and is rarely used anymore.

Examining police staffing per capita with data provided to the FBI

The data show that Lakewood is within average for officer staffing levels. However, anecdotal evidence from the crime forum and nextdoor.com tells of officers being overwhelmed and slow to respond due to high number of calls.  Visible evidence is seen by the increasing number of Lakewood stores that must employ private security.

Crime statistics for Lakewood are published in an annual report. Per the report, Lakewood saw a significant increase in identity theft (143%), wire fraud (68%), and theft of motor vehicle parts (61%). Lakewood saw a decrease in shoplifting (-27%) and theft from building (-19%).

According to AreaVibes.com, Lakewood would rank an F for crime.

Lakewood Chief of Police Daniel McCasky wrote: “Lakewood is changing to meet the needs of its residents… These improvements are only possible if people are and feel safe.”  Do you?

Affordable Housing Townhall

On October 1 there was a Lakewood townhall meeting on affordable housing. Ward 5 Councilors Janssen and Strom hosted the meeting but representatives of all wards were present. Speakers at the meeting were representatives from Metro West Housing Solutions (MWHS).

MWHS is a developer active in Lakewood since 2008, before that they were active in the market by a different name since 1974. They work to develop and manage properties for households with income that is 30-60% of the median household income level (ie <30% of the population).

The question was asked, what about affordable housing for residents that don’t meet the income requirements. The answer was that it’s a question for Lakewood City Council and they are looking into options.

Options for what any government can do to intercede in market pricing has many precedents, but few working solutions. Rent control and price fixing are failed examples of government intervention.

Metro West Housing Solutions provide modern-day examples of problems with trying to be affordable. Example 1: MWHS only rents property. By their own admission, they could not sell properties they develop because even at cost the price would not be affordable. If they do sell the property to one entity, that entity can (and does) sell the property at a higher price because that’s what the market will bear.

Example 2: One of the target demographics for MWHS is seniors on Social Security income, income which is often not enough to afford to move out of their large houses into a more manageable-sized unit. Allowing a senior to move into MWHS property may result in a larger home being sold. For affordable rates? Generally not, since said senior will have to get the most out of the property they can.

Government favoring low-income, or affordable, housing is sometimes done by allowing developers who include affordable housing to build more than others. This is called inclusionary zoning. Once again, there is enough data to show that these policies have not worked in the past.

Bigger picture, the city meeting did not and could not address the problem for those people who do not qualify for affordable housing. Most rents and mortgages will remain the same and those rates are rising. The reason for this is easy: Colorado is a desirable place to live and Lakewood is a prime location for work and recreation alike.

The solution to high prices is generally to increase supply. In this case, build more homes. Since rental units are exempt from the Strategic Growth Initiative, building more apartments is an easy answer. That is good for the individual but is it good for the community?

High residential communities have an increased burden of infrastructure, including traffic and police. Without the increased sales taxes from retail and commercial properties, high-density residential can have a hard time paying for increased infrastructure. For example, when asked about crime, a Sergeant from the Community Action Team said that low-income housing does not have more crime than other units, but that any place that has a large parking lot was a target. However, no solution has been offered on how to provide enough security so that people feel safe.

There were also conflicting stories offered on how new high-density growth will affect surrounding home prices. MHWS representatives claim that studies show home prices in the area go up. A local resident that was present argued she personally knew people whose home prices went down drastically after high-density apartments were built in place of the originally planned strip mall.

The meeting had some ideas for the future, including adding MWHS as a line item to the city budget and holding a future meeting on economic development.

At one time, our schools were so full that many had “temporary” buildings to house all the students. At one time, we the taxpayers voted for money to remodel buildings through 2022, assuming the schools would be used. At one time, school land was permanently lost after being sold to developers. Jefferson County is still living with the effects of these decisions, but Jeffco School Board seems intent on not learning from mistakes.

Jefferson County School Board is voting to close 16 schools throughout Jeffco by consolidation. The school consolidation plan is based solely on student enrollment. They are not considering the economic impact on the school district, the staffing budget and least of all – impact to the family. Was it studied? There is also no mention of the effect on public trust by spending money on remodeling buildings they propose to close. For example, Green Mountain Elementary School was remodeled through the summer of 2022, and if approved by the Board, will be closed less than two years after the remodel.

Can the economic benefits be fully understood without a 10- to 20-year plan, including future demographic changes and defined economic plans for the real estate? Abandoned buildings can cost millions to refit. Acquiring lost assets can cost even more, if even possible at all. Apparently, future plans for the land and buildings will be considered in January, so have not been factored in at this point.

In an age where parents beg for smaller class sizes, Jeffco touts the ability to combine small classes into larger ones. Jeffco School Board itself does not list any benefits to THE STUDENT for school consolidation, besides “services and activities

Data is not presented that families would wish to close schools because of a lack of “services and activities.” In fact, since those who desire that option can already use the School Choice Program, the remaining families demonstrate the need or desire for schools to remain open. Public outcry, both online and in public meetings, demands to keep current schools open. Reasons given include household economics and neighborhood social ties.

Public outcry is impassioned. There is at least one online petition to keep Jeffco schools open. Reasons listed on the petition include student safety, long-term neighborhood viability, property values, and equity. See Jeffco’s site to find that a plan is already in place with unambiguous terms that this WILL happen.

No information has been presented regarding population studies, including data that has already been collected from constituent cities.   When asked at public meetings, the answer was that the board is studying the issue. Interesting to note that schools like Foothills Elementary, which will apparently survive the consolidation, was once under-enrolled to the point of considering closure but is now the school of choice due to demographic change. Studies on how many other schools are in similar condition are unavailable.

Alternatives to full school closure have not been presented. For example, closing half the building, alternative staffing models or engaging charter school models. Statistics discussed at public meetings indicate enrollment declined by 20% due to covid; however, enrollment could increase by 20% if we really understood the deeper reasons of what drove them away. Such statistics also disprove the notion that students remain for extra “services and activities”.

How times have changed.

When Green Mountain Elementary School was opened in 1963, Lakewood wasn’t even an incorporated city but the residents numbered around 90,000 (https://www.lakewoodtogether.org/Lakewood50/news_feed/fifty-years). Population has increased to 156,000. Statistics indicate that enrollment numbers are not the problem. Jeffco schools numbered 39 in 1950 and now total 166. The key appears to be long-term planning for long-term changes and asset management. That is what Jeffco residents are missing to believe the best choices are being made for Jeffco schools.

Lakewood Informer


Resident generated news for Lakewood, Colorado.

Subscribe


© 2022 Lakewood Informer | All Rights Reserved
Designed by Mile High Web Designs