Author : Lakewood News from Karen

A Poisoned Pill Passed: The Strategic Housing Plan

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on February 19, 2024Posted in UncategorizedTagged city-council, Colorado, Homeless, housing, Lakewood, news, zoning

City Council Member Rich Olver was the only nay vote for the Strategic Housing Plan, which passed on February 12, 2024. He claimed it was a poisoned pill because it contained provisions that did not have public support, such as using abandoned school buildings for homeless services. Neighborhood associations came to voice their concern that stakeholders were not included. The associations were more concerned about the development strategies than the unhoused strategies. The associations’ comments show that although the plan was billed as affordable housing, there were two distinct pieces: more high-density development and plans for the homeless. Councilor Sophia Mayott-Guerrero said the Housing Plan will work “hand-in-hand” with the Navigation Center. These items are all interconnected to give Lakewood the same framework that cities like Denver use to deal with the unhoused. The message from February 12 was that a majority of Council want the plan passed; however, there was no clear consensus as to what the plan means. Councilor Sinks said it would be good to have a roadmap to follow. Others spoke of discussions still to come. Councilor Low promoted strategies for eviction protection, Additional Dwelling Unit expansion and directly funding housing. Mayor Pro Tem Shahrezaei said, “The action at this point is to adopt this framework. Nobody is agreeing tonight to all these strategies. We are agreeing that there is a need for affordable housing.” Agreeing to a need for affordable housing does not require even one page. The Strategic Housing Plan is 156 pages of strategies. Which strategies Council did not agree to was not discussed. Instead of approving all strategies in one motion, each strategy could be adopted by separate motion after further discussion. In fact, many strategies will need to be adopted by modifying ordinance to implement. Olver said this plan is not making more affordable housing, it is not stopping corporate land speculation, or increasing home ownership possibilities. He asked for more time to study, but no other Councilor agreed. Other Council Members had agreed to pass the plan at a previous study session. Shahrezaei pointed out that the Strategic Housing Plan was funded by the Colorado Department of Local Affairs (DOLA), the same department that funded the navigation center, and that Lakewood could not even change the name of the product DOLA had paid for. How much of Lakewood’s policy does DOLA fund? Is accepting all this “free money” from DOLA leading Lakewood to take the steps the state wants, rather than the steps the local residents are asking for? Olver went on to explain that housing migrants in the schools would not happen because that requires a public process to rezone an abandoned school into a residential area. Just like operating a shelter requires a special use permit that requires a public process, unless there is a very good reason. In the case of the navigation center, the city planned for it to be used as an emergency shelter but didn’t get a permit because it was an “emergency”. Now the city has accepted a grant requiring the land to be used as a shelter so there is an argument that there the city cannot NOT approve a shelter permit, regardless of how many people show up during public process. Experiences like these may have been in the minds of the people laughing at the words “public process” during the meeting. Scorecard: Approve Lakewood Strategic Housing Plan Strom: Aye Shahrezaei: Aye Sinks: Aye Mayott-Guerrero: Aye Cruz: Aye Stewart: Aye Low: Aye Olver: Nay Rein: Aye LaBure: Aye Nystrom: Aye Read previous articles about the Strategic Housing Plan: Lakewood Strategic Housing Plan Update Residents Will Pay for Development Migrants and Housing Not Affordable: More Market-Rate Housing Coming to Lakewood Correction: Services, not shelter, to Move to Jeffco School

Resident Concerns Cause City to Change Tactics on Migrant Support

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on February 18, 2024Posted in Uncategorized

Hundreds of Lakewood residents raised concerns over supporting migrants and stopped City Council from taking immediate actions at the Council meeting on February 12. The Council did not even have a discussion on migrant support after the City Manager provided her report on meeting with Denver. Previous Council meetings clearly suggested further discussion and action was anticipated so the abrupt absence substantiates the city’s “misinformation” campaign but does not explain why Council changed directions. Comments later in that meeting show that Lakewood will open city and city-connected non-profit homeless services to migrants. As a new way to support migrants, Lakewood Mayor Wendi Strom has signed Lakewood’s support to fast-tracking work authorizations. Media coverage of the February 12 meeting is listed below. The City Manager’s report of her discussion with Denver is available online. However, Council had previously promised a discussion at the February 12 meeting to decide what further actions they will take. Councilors Roger Low and Isabel Cruz stated that they hoped the City Manager’s report was only the first step. “Quickly” was the buzzword the City Manager repeated. Not just listening quickly, but acting quickly. The lack of discussion following the executive report was notable not only because of this previous promise, but because it was apparently coordinated. Mayor Strom did not open the floor to comments and no Council Member tried to open a discussion at this time. Also notable was that six Council Members were wearing butterflies as a sign of solidarity with migrants. This visible support in combination with an apparent coordinated lack of discussion led two members of the public to wonder aloud whether there was any point to making public comment. Are Council Members listening with an open mind if they come in solidarity with a position? Migrant support was also discussed when the city approved funds to open a county-wide homeless shelter and support center, otherwise known as a navigation center. Denver’s failed homeless policies and influx of migrants have pushed Denver’s homeless into Lakewood. So by approving a new center, Lakewood is supporting Denver’s failed policies and two displaced populations. And as one public commenter said, Lakewood itself is adopting the same failed “housing first” strategy that Denver has tried. The navigation center was approved by a vote of 10-1. Scorecard: Approve Lakewood Navigation Center Strom: Aye Shahrezaei: Aye (wears butterfly) Sinks: Aye (wears butterfly) Mayott-Guerrero: Aye (wears butterfly) Cruz: Aye (wears butterfly) Stewart: Aye (wears butterfly) Low: Aye (wears butterfly) Olver: Nay Rein: Aye LaBure: Aye Nystrom: Aye Non-Profit Coordination Lakewood will continue to work with non-profits to “navigate”, or coordinate, migrant support. Council Member Sophia Mayott-Guerrero stated that “of course both the Housing Plan and the Navigation Center and any other social resource may in fact support people who have immigrated here.” Mayott-Guerrero has said that she herself volunteers with the Venezuelan migrant population. Many Lakewood residents seemed to be saying there is no “of course” about it. They want to stop enabling a population that may not have come here legally and they want Lakewood to have a discussion, not just assume there is only one way to do it. For example, Lakewood’s unofficial policy of migrant support is in stark contrast to cities like Colorado Springs which has declared itself NOT a sanctuary city. According to the Colorado Sun, Colorado Springs has seen approximately 24 migrant families compared to Denver’s 40,000 migrants. Lakewood residents driving popular intersections such as Colfax or Alameda and Sheridan will see migrants looking for work, suggesting Lakewood’s migrant numbers are already more than Colorado Springs, despite Colorado Springs being the larger city. What is bringing more homeless and migrants to Lakewood than to Colorado Springs? According to the Colorado Sun piece, the Springs and El Paso County are encouraging non-profits to NOT provide services to migrants because it is not compassionate to signal there are services available when that may not be financially feasible. The majority of Lakewood residents speaking against migrant support echoed this worry about financial resources, especially during a time when personal finances are stretched thin. Supporters of migrant support felt there was enough to go around, especially when federal funds kicked in to provide free money. The Navigation Center will not require an ID or any legal verification for service. Lakewood Encourages Fast-Tracking Work Authorizations Lakewood is not taking a backseat to providing migrant support. According to the Kim Monson Show, Lakewood Mayor Wendi Strom signed a letter of support from the Metro Mayors Caucus in support of three things: fast-tracked work permits, legal services and federal funding for migrants. This letter is not yet available. Media Coverage of the Meeting Lakewood, Colorado, residents urge city council not to help neighboring Denver with migrant crisis, by Lawrence Richard, Fox News Lakewood residents pack meeting about migrant rumors, FOX31 Denver Lakewood tries to dispel migrant rumors, 9News Lakewood residents are right to be skeptical about migrant agreement with Denver, Colorado Peak Politics Lakewood residents protest as Denver spends millions on new immigrants and tensions grow over what to do, by Rachel Estabrook, CPR News Denver suburb residents outraged over migrant crisis, America’s Newsroom, FOX News

Recovery Works Secures Former Motel in Lakewood

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on February 11, 2024Posted in UncategorizedTagged Colorado, Homeless, Lakewood, news, unhoused

According to the article below, Recovery Works has completed the purchase of a motel in Lakewood. The motel will be an additional Jefferson County shelter and service center for the unhoused. Recovery Works is the same organization that will be running the new Navigation Center in Lakewood. Lakewood Council will vote on appropriating funds for the project on February 12, 2024. Cross post from Mile High CRE IMPACT Commercial Real Estate has announced the recent sale of a former motel that will now serve as the future home for a nonprofit organization, Recovery Works. This was not only a significant milestone for the community but a testament that commercial properties can transform into something that will make a positive impact on the community as well. The newly purchased 10,000-square-foot building is strategically located at 14825 W Colfax in Lakewood and will serve as a bridge center and resource for the unhoused in Jefferson County by referral. It will help people get back on their feet and find permanent housing for those in need. Recovery Works locations provide additional services, including meals, laundry capabilities and job programs for employment placement. Read more….

Solidarity Demonstration at City Council

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on February 10, 2024Posted in Uncategorized

Pictured below is a call to support migrant and homeless assistance. Homeless is homeless. Lakewood will vote on spending $9.3 million for homeless services on Monday, Feb 12, 2024. Agenda item 13 already has public comments. Possible migrant actions will be discussed during the executive report, which has been moved up to agenda item 8 and is not accepting public comment.

Lakewood Park Land Dedication Issues

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on February 10, 2024Posted in UncategorizedTagged Colorado, community, Lakewood, news, parks, urban-planning, zoning

Recent park land dedication discussions show that the policy is used for more than just adding parks for new residents. The policy could be used to extract fees from developers for other park services. The policy could also be used as a tool for preferential development. Or the policy can determine whether the city increases the number of parks or level of services. The review for this policy is overdue, but thanks to a motion from Council Member David Rein, it may be discussed soon. The new development at 777 S Yarrow St did not require any land dedicated for parks for the new residents. The land dedication would have been of particular public interest since it is near Belmar Park. Instead of land, the city accepted a fee that will be used for undisclosed park services. The fee was set in 2018 so it may seem low in todays market. This so-called “fee-in-lieu” of park land dedication is the policy under discussion. See more at savebelmarpark.com, including how this property does not pay taxes on full acreage Paying a fee in lieu of dedicating land was made possible in a time of slow growth for Lakewood, when Lakewood officials decided there was enough park land. That is no longer the case but developers are accustomed to being able to pay a fee in order to maximize their land development. This pushes new residents into existing parks, putting strain on those resources. Ironically, fees collected today are supposedly going to buy parkland. During periods of slow-growth, cities try to incentivize growth by setting fees that are more palatable to developers who want to maximize the small, in-fill projects that occur after the initial urban sprawl. The next phase, the one that Lakewood is currently in, is where the city returns to high-growth, except this time the growth is high-density. Dense growth still requires the same amount of park land, including parks close to home. This is especially true of dog parks for apartment residents. Does the city repeal fee-in-lieu of land that was meant for slow-growth times of incentivizing development? Not usually, as shown in this article of park policy over time. Discussions have not evolved to making land dedication easier for high-density developments. The fear is that returning to land dedication would slow development. However, land dedication may be the only way to serve neighborhoods. As Council Member Mayott-Guerrero points out, the city has had problems purchasing land in high-density areas. Neighborhood Parks versus Other Parks The problem is partially of public perception. Providing open-space for a new development has historically included a neighborhood park within the development. That way of thinking also aligns with the modern-day vision of a 15-minute city, with everything in walking distance. Clearly neighborhood parks are still highly desired but that is no longer being considered for high-density growth, as the public would define park space. High-density growth packs more people into less space, meaning there is less space for parks as well. “Open space” does mean green space or park space. In fact, “open space” requirements can be fulfilled by garbage dumpster areas, or in a pinch, access to the roof. And when was the last time parking was expanded for regional parks like Hayden Park on Green Mountain? Taking Park land dedication is intended to provide park services to the new residents of the development. Courts have upheld passing these costs through developers to new residents. This is different than if a city would demand land or fees to pay for unrelated costs or services, which would constitute a “taking”. A taking is “is when the government seizes private property for public use.” For example, when former Mayor Paul stated that he wanted to use the fee in lieu of land for equity, to look at parks in other neighborhoods, there is no longer a direct link to services for the new residents and could constitute a taking. (see more about the Westword article at savebelmarpark.com) “Realizing that there’s a lot of other parts of our city that don’t have a lot of parkland, especially in some of our lower-income areas, it was really an equity thing for me,” Paul says. Excerpt from the Westword However, it gets tricky. It is only taking if the city admits they are using the fee for other residents or the developer can prove intent. It is not taking if the city says the policy is to use fees to increase parks in some other space for new residents to drive to. Lakewood’s official policy is that dedications “shall be reasonably related to the needs of the residents of the proposed development.” Development Tool Council Member Jacob LeBure pointed out that past park dedication policies involved leveraging the policy to control or incentivize development. For example, if Lakewood enforced the policy of neighborhood parks, the Yarrow Street project would have required 3 acres of land dedicated to parks. Enforcing land dedication might cause this development to stop. Councilor Mayott-Guerrero says these fees are “barriers and leverages for how to better encourage affordable housing.” For that reason, she encourages the park discussion to be part of the Strategic Housing Plan. Is the Government Providing Parks or Controlling Housing? The question is, is this policy about providing parks for new residents or affordable housing. History shows that when government officials try to leverage their power for outside purposes, they may be outclassed. As pointed out by parks expert Dr. John L Crompton, “Developers frequently are represented by specialist lawyers and consultants whose expertise typically far exceeds that of local city planners, so taxpayers are disadvantaged.” As LeBure says, evaluating different developments is a cumbersome process and you don’t always get the outcome you want. If City Council’s priority is to enable housing development, they would necessarily have to sacrifice some neighborhood open space and endure the fall out of the new residents asking for more parks. Council Member Rein explains his motion is actually simpler than all

A Brief Lakewood Legislative Report

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on February 8, 2024Posted in UncategorizedTagged city-council, elections, featured, news, politics

Guest Post by Joan Poston So this morning 2/8/24, I went to the Lakewood City Council Building to attend the Lakewood City Council legislative meeting. I made an error as to the time so I showed up at 8:30 and the meeting had started at 8:00 am. I am not my best at early hours. The legislative committee is made up of one member of each ward and they look at bills from the 2024 legislature that is considering issues/consequences that would impact the city of Lakewood. 2024 Committee MembersCouncil member Glenda Sinks – Ward 1Council member Isabel Cruz – Ward 2Council member Rebekah Stewart – Ward 3Council member David Rein – Ward 4 Council member Jacob LaBure – Ward 5 Rebekah Stewart (Ward 3) is the chair of the legislative committee. When I walked in there was a discussion about a bill about occupancy. I believe it was HB24-1007. But could not confirm that was the bill they were discussing. They decided not to put it on the list because the target city was Ft. Collins and college towns and did not apply to Lakewood so they would just watch it and add it to the list later. There was a little discussion lead by Councilman LaBure as to the need to define the role of the legislative committee. And then Councilwoman Stewart asked if there was any other business and Adjourned the meeting. I arrived at 8:30 and the meeting was adjourned at 8:36. I went to speak to the Deputy City Manager about how they had not stated when the next meeting would be and he said “in two weeks if it was not canceled.” So stay tuned. Meanwhile ColoradoTaxpayer.org is a great resource for what is happening at the Legislature

Westword Pushed the DO-OVER Button! Here’s What Happened…

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on February 7, 2024Posted in Uncategorized

Cross post from SaveBelmarPark.com Westword pushed the DO-OVER button regarding their reporting of former Lakewood Mayor Adam Paul’s involvement in the non-purchase of 777 S Yarrow St. by the City of Lakewood. Attorney and former City Councilor Anita Springsteen has provided updated comments on the revised Westword article. See the Updated Article

The Sanctuary Misinformation Campaign and Response

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on February 7, 2024Posted in UncategorizedTagged Colorado, featured, illegal-immigrants, Lakewood, migrants, news, subdivision

When Lakewood voted to take the first step in helping with Denver’s migrant crisis, residents interpreted that as Lakewood becoming a sanctuary city. Lakewood immediately cried misinformation. At the emergency citizens’ townhall of February 6, 2024, several speakers addressed concerns over Lakewood’s sanctuary status, saying that Lakewood is not using the word “sanctuary” and is not discussing that issue. However, by a show of hands at the meeting, attendees thought the current role of Lakewood Police and Lakewood’s offer to support migrants would match both the proposed support and the definition of a sanctuary city. Both set of words applied to the same actions. Yet Lakewood still spent tax dollars and energy on a campaign to cry “misinformation.” Resident comments show that the meeting was useful to talk to each other, as much as it was useful for gathering information. Lakewood has a taxpayer funded PR department that can respond instantly to crises. In this case, the crisis was the residents’ concern over the possible “sanctuary” status of our city. Within a couple days, Lakewood had a new website that included a public statement which was also widely circulated (see below). (above) Lakewood also had a flyer circulating on social media sites that most residents would not even know existed so would have a hard time advertising on. At the same time, residents had difficulty on Nextdoor.com, which kept stripping posts of the meeting and discussion on the matter. Despite the problems, residents came by the hundreds to learn about Lakewood’s plans to support migrants. Speaker Karen Morgan (disclosure: this author is Karen Morgan) said, “We all operate with different ears. I might say one thing and you hear another. For example, it’s absolutely true that Council is not discussing anything using the word “sanctuary”. They use words like good neighbor, welcoming, inclusive, supporting, sheltering…” The audience laughed as they recognized that all these words meant the same thing. One resident commented after the meeting, “thank you for making that point, I was going to say the same thing.” An interesting note is that in the city’s flyer above, “sanctuary city” and “being a good neighbor” are in quotes, as though even Lakewood recognizes these are just words with fluid meaning. At the same time, they imply one is right and the other is wrong. Other resident comments: One resident said they understood Lakewood was just taking the first step, but this was opening the door and the time to stop it was now. Yet another resident said he will be at the February 12 Council meeting to show support. He said that the Citizens’ Meeting was a great way to reconnect with some old friends. Another asked for the address to City Hall. He has never participated before but he will be there. Several people commented that the problem was the lack of accountability of the City Manager, Kathy Hodgson who has the ability to work behind the scenes. At least a dozen residents told this author personally that the meeting was needed, they wished the city had done something like this. Other residents were interested in information and the Citizens’ Meeting was an opportunity to find answers. Was there misinformation? In today’s world, one persons misinformation is another persons’ fact. No matter what, an important discussion is taking place and residents are participating in their government. Council Member Isabel Cruz stated in the January 8 meeting that “This is important to step up to our responsibility as good neighbors…This [approved motion] is only the first step.” And now, more Lakewood residents are engaged in discussions about what, if any, steps will follow. One meeting organizer said, “This was about the citizens. They all pulled together, it wasn’t about the organizers. This was about everyone.” It seems hundreds of attendees agreed with that.

Emergency Citizens’ Town Hall

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on February 3, 2024Posted in Uncategorized

UPDATE: Venue changed to 1626 Cole Blvd., Bldg 7, 4th Floor, Lakewood, CO 80401, 6:30-8:30 pm Guest post from The Concerned Citizens in Lakewood Date: Fri, Feb 2, 2024 at 3:57 PMSubject: Citizen Town HallTo: <CityCouncilMembers@lakewood.org>Cc: <wstrom@lakewood.org>, <jshahrezaei@lakewood.org>, <gsinks@lakewood.org>, <sguerrero@lakewood.org>, <icruz@lakewood.org>, <rstewart@lakewood.org>, <rlow@lakewood.org>, <rolver@lakewood.org>, <drein@lakewood.org>, <jlabure@lakewood.org> Mayor Strom, Chief Smith, and Lakewood City Councilors, We understand that the City of Lakewood is in discussion with the City of Denver and considering a vote to make Lakewood a Sanctuary City to allow migrants to be bused into our beautiful city. We also understand that the intent is for them to occupy the now vacant Jeffco Schools buildings at the expense of Lakewood taxpayers. Lakewood has hundreds of citizens that are very concerned with this. We invite you to come and listen to concerns, share what you know about these plans, and how you see this playing out in our city. In addition to the serious concern of Denver making their problems ours, there are significant concerns about the ramifications and impacts this will create in our neighborhoods and greater community – crime and safety, infrastructure, local business, and much more. We realize it is short notice, but please let us know if you can attend on Tuesday evening, so we can both acknowledge you and plan for you on the agenda. Informational flyer is attached with details on the event. Sincerely, The Concerned Citizens in Lakewood concernedcitizensinlakewood@gmail.com

Save Belmar Park: The Inside Story

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on February 2, 2024Posted in Uncategorized

Check out the new great content at SaveBelmarPark.com Mayor Adam Paul Quashed Purchase of 777 S Yarrow St The Looming Lakewood Parking Crisis -Over 800 Parking Spaces Short A fabulous local site with more stories available!