Lakewood Informer

Resident generated news about Lakewood, Colorado

Lakewood Informer

Resident generated news about Lakewood, Colorado

Author : Lakewood News from Karen

JAHM Hockey Memorial Day Weekend Tournament

Press Release PARKER, CO – April 5, 2025 – Junction Of American Hockey Matches (JAHM) proudly announces the inaugural Red, White and JAHM Hockey Memorial Day Weekend Tournament, set to take place from May 24th to 26th, 2024 at Parker Fieldhouse in Parker, Colorado. Founded with a vision to promote roller hockey as a widely recognized and respected sport, JAHM strives to provide a platform for talented players to showcase their abilities, foster camaraderie among teams, and nurture a sense of community within the roller hockey world. The Red, White and JAHM Hockey Memorial Day Weekend Tournament is an all-new series designed to bridge the gap between the typical roller hockey competitive season and the competitive ice season, ensuring teams keep their skills sharp and legs fresh while having a blast on the rink. Jacob Harrison, Founder and President of JAHM, expressed his enthusiasm about the upcoming tournament, stating, “We are thrilled to introduce the Red, White and JAHM Hockey Memorial Day Weekend Tournament to the Colorado roller hockey community. This event represents a significant step towards our goal of elevating roller hockey to new heights and fostering its growth both locally and nationally.” Adult and youth teams alike are invited to participate in this exciting event. Adult team registration opens on January 12, 2024, at 12:00 PM MST and closes on May 10, 2024, at 5:00 PM MDT, with only 8 spots remaining. Youth team registration follows the same timeline, with 18 spots available. The registration fee is $625.00 USD for adult teams and $575.00 USD for youth teams. Highlighting the tournament are the all-star games, where the best players from each division will compete against each other for glory. Selected all-star players will receive a custom exclusive hat, adding an extra layer of excitement to the event. Join JAHM Hockey for the inaugural Mountain Regional roller hockey matches hosted by Colorado’s very own. This thrilling tournament promises to captivate both players and spectators alike, offering an unforgettable experience for all involved. “We are dedicated to fostering the growth of roller hockey in Colorado and beyond,” stated Harrison. “With your support, we aim to make this tournament the premier event in the region. Come be a part of this new chapter for Colorado roller hockey and celebrate with us. Bring your A-game and join in the excitement!” For more information and to register your team, visit jahmhockey.com. About Junction Of American Hockey Matches (JAHM) Junction Of American Hockey Matches (JAHM) is committed to promoting roller hockey as a widely recognized and respected sport. Through tournaments, leagues, and community engagement, JAHM aims to elevate the status of roller hockey while fostering camaraderie and sportsmanship among players. Founded in [year], JAHM continues to lead the way in advancing roller hockey across Colorado and beyond. Reader Recommended Business: Carrington Carpet Care

Council Defends Programs That Remove Consequences to Crime

While Saying They Won’t Remove the Consequences to Crime Disclosure: The author, Karen Morgan, is a member of the Lakewood Advisory Commission. All views and research are her own and do not represent Lakewood nor the Commission. Have you wondered why people are allowed to come wash your windshield and solicit money in the middle of the street? Have you heard there is a law against that? Yes, there is a law against that. Lakewood does not enforce it. Have you seen evidence of lax enforcement, like the comments below from nextdoor.com? All of the situations quoted above have complicating factors and reasons for the law not being enforced. Some of the most popular reasons are: For these reasons, there are a number of crimes that Lakewood routinely forgives through various programs. Following this thought process, a person might think: What’s the point of having a law that is not enforced? A recent proposal from the Lakewood Advisory Commission aimed to research unenforced or partially enforced laws to see if it would make sense to remove them. City Council came out strongly against the proposal. Listening to some Council comments, a person may think Lakewood supported enforcing and penalizing all crimes. Mayor Strom: “I can’t imagine telling a voter that we said we’re going to get rid of the consequences to crime. “ But that is NOT WHAT HAPPENED. In fact, nine Councilors, the Mayor and the City Manager defended the current practice of removing the consequences to crime for all the reasons listed above. This was a “have your cake and eat it too” moment for the city. Picking up on the quote above… Mayor Strom continued with praise for the “innovative” new city programs that are “very much on the side of addressing the homelessness challenge.” The programs she referred to do, in fact, remove the consequences to crime, by diverting offenders into receiving resources instead of penalties. Lakewood Programs that Remove Penalties to Crime Outreach Court is a special court that will connect a person to resources, rather than impose penalties. Council spent a majority of their speaking time defending this growing program. For more on Outreach Court, click here for Lakewood FAQ, click here for forgiving of crimes, click here for original news story. For example, Councilor Sinks says this program works to bring people to [Outreach] Court so they can be forgiven and then get an ID while there. Councilor Stewart defended the Court with the idea that moving the court to a less intimidating place helps people “mitigate” their failure to appear. Councilor Low also believes that low-level offenses are “how we get people in front of Outreach Court”. Note: Failure to Appear is cleared (i.e. forgiven) 99.999% of the time City Manager Kathy Hodgson provided a litany of resources that are provided at Lakewood Outreach Court, including everything from blankets to food to housing assistance. The number of people served at the Outreach Court increases every month, which the city counts as a success. The measure of success does not include recidivism rates nor overall crime rates. Providing people help and resources rather than proceeding with criminal charges is what’s known as “diversion”. The pros and cons of diversion is a whole topic unto itself. Some people love it, such as the ACLU who is known to sue governments who do not make diversion known to those who qualify. Others are still looking for evidence of any benefit. Getting an ID is not a consequence to crime. Forgiving (i.e. clearing or mitigating) is not a consequence to crime. The city’s fierce defense of Outreach Court shows the city is very much in favor of removing the consequences to crime, at least for some crimes, for some people. Non-enforcement also happens routinely, with full Council support. For example, Council Member LaBure said “I think we’re not gonna be able to police our way out of a lot of the problems and the challenges that we’re facing, so we gotta find new strategies to help our police department to make sure that, they’re not spending their time on sort of low-level crimes and that are really focusing on the real, important challenges.” Council Member Shahrezaei supported “the creative ways that we’re serving some of our most vulnerable in the community” and said these programs have a “positive impact on us.”  She feared people who might want “want to eliminate programs that don’t impact everyone.” Another “creative way” of serving the community is through the LEAD program. This program diverts crimes associated with homelessness by “providing resources to those committing low-level crimes.” Low-level crimes named by the police include trespassing, drug paraphernalia, and public intoxication. Explanations for non-enforcement include lack of time, lack of resources, and the low-level nature of the crime. The rest of Council supported the track Lakewood is on, that is lessening enforcement, for a variety of reasons. Councilor Mayott-Guerrero said “our police force is doing an incredible job balancing really difficult changing circumstances within our city and our working very hard to recommend and figure out their staffing challenges to figure out how to again address some of these crimes.” Read more here about current police philosophy of treating the individual, not the crime, in Lakewood news. Taking Lakewood at it’s word, non-enforcement and consequence-removal programs are already in place. That it not the question. The question is if it might make sense to research alternative programs that do the same thing. One alternative is law removal. For example: These kinds of policies seem the natural progression of the track Lakewood is on. It is similar to suggestions from the city to “lessen deportation fears”. Are Current Practices Working Councilor Olver was the only one to suggest that current practices are not working. Speaking to the manager of the Walmart on Wadsworth, he has confirmed that the self-checkout lanes in both stores have been closed due to rampant shoplifting. He suggested that research go forward, not to remove laws but to

Citizens Launch a Petition to Take Back Parks and City Stalls it

In the last week, Lakewood citizens launched a petition, started gathering signatures, and had the petition stalled by the city. From Save Open Space Lakewood Today Lakewood citizens start to take back their parks and open spaces from developers Thursday, March 21, 2024—Today Save Open Space Lakewood launches a petition requiring the City of Lakewood to strengthen and adhere to its ordinances to preserve land and open space.   Once the petition reaches a requisite 6,000 Lakewood citizen signatures, it qualifies to become a ballot issue. Initiative Summary as Set by Lakewood City Clerk: Shall the City of Lakewood Municipal Code Chapter 14.16. PARK AND OPEN SPACE DEDICATION be repealed and replaced to eliminate the option for developers to pay a fee in lieu of parkland dedication and to require the City to accept open space and land dedications for current and future developments. For the full initiative text and to learn where Lakewood registered voters can sign the petition, go to SOSLakewood.org or contact Cathy Kentner at (303) 349-2434. Gross ineptitude or sabotage? City of Lakewood’s actions last week and in the past show loyalty to developers over citizens Citizens’ petition to save Lakewood’s parks from developers deemed invalid due to City error, robbing petitioners of time to secure enough signatures for citywide vote  Is this gross ineptitude or sabotage by Lakewood, which has thwarted dozens of citizen-led efforts, many to combat large developments next to parks and open space Read the full story at Save Open Space Lakewood

Terumo BCT Subject to New Emission Rule

Terumo BCT is one of four commercial medical sterilization facilities in Colorado subject to a new regulation meant to decrease emissions and reduce cancer risk associated with ethylene oxide. Terumo BCT Sterilization Services Inc., Lakewood’s 10th largest employer, has been the subject of lawsuits regarding concentrations of this compound that may cause cancer (see Westword article for more information). Residents have been submitting Lakewood news and public comment on the issue and it came to the attention of Lakewood City Councilor Rich Olver. Olver made a request on May 4, 2023 to hold a study session on the topic, inviting the EPA and Terumo to discuss. The motion was approved on May 22, 2023, but no study session ever occurred. Council Member Olver reports that he has renewed his request for a study session. The EPA press release does not provide any outside scientific references for how or why this the new rule is necessary but does predict a 90% reduction in emissions. Promoted Post:

Vacant Property Fee Focuses on the Lesser Problem

Lakewood City Council has set new penalty fees for vacant property owners in Lakewood. Some vacant land has been elevated to the level of a public nuisance because of the homeless encampments on them. However, camps on private property are a relatively new and lesser phenomenon than camps on public property. Public homeless camps have been increasing in Lakewood news for years, as Denver homeless have been expanding into Lakewood. Public encampments are so prevalent that they are increasingly being found on private property. The increased crime and poor economy has led to a downward spiral of vacant properties. So Lakewood has instituted fines on a property owner for having vacant land. Did Lakewood focus on the lesser private problem instead of addressing the larger public problem and is this an adequate alternative to hiring more police officers? Public Homeless Camps 2013-Oct, 2020 In 2020, Lakewood first started posting notices for private property. As shown below, they made a significant number of private property notices over two months, but it was still not as common as public camps. The temptation for Lakewood will now be to pursue these private properties to bring in revenue from fines at the expense of cleaning up the larger public property problem. Many properties in Lakewood have been vacant for years, with no crime problem, but since economic development has stagnated, these owners are left with property the owners would like to have in productive use but that option isn’t available at this time. So now property owners will be fined for a condition that is already not of their choosing, making it harder to sell the property as well. As of January 22, 2024, each vacant property owner must pay the city $700 every six months if the property is vacant and $800 for every emergency service call. The purpose of the fines is to incentivize property owners to find a renter faster or take their own security precautions. It is important to note that these taxpayers already pay for city and emergency services but the city is now charging extra. This may disincentivize new buyers from investing in Lakewood for long-term buy and hold strategies. At the City Council retreat on March 2, Mayor Wendi Strom commented that using city funds to demolish vacant private property was better than pursuing more police hires when Lakewood has still not hired to full staff capacity. In the end, if the city cannot control the larger issue of camps on public property, what are private owners to do differently? Reader Recommended Business: Cafe Ole

Community Meeting March 12

Two flyers are circulating for a community meeting on March 12, 2024. One flyer lists a speaker and suggests the topic of the meeting is immigration. The other flyer suggests the meeting is being called because City Council cancelled the March 11 Council meeting. The Council meeting was cancelled so that Councilors might attend the previously scheduled National League of Cities meeting in Washington DC. It is unclear when city officials were invited to the community meeting or if any can attend. Although discussion topics are not listed, the growing number of migrants is a concern to Lakewood residents – a concern that did not make it to the City Council 2024 priority list. These community meetings may offer residents an opportunity for discussion that is not otherwise available. The community meeting is open to all, at Emory Elementary, March 12 at 6:30 pm.

An update on the CORA request bill HB24-1296

Cross post from the Colorado Accountability Project …the issue here isn’t one along party lines.  It’s one where an arrogant group of politicians have no compunctions about limiting the public’s ability to see what they’re doing.  And they do this in direct defiance of voters saying they want more transparency. I take this CORA vote the same way.  This is legislators thumbing their nose at everyday Coloradans like you and me.  Read more at the Colorado Accountability Project Editor’s Note: Lakewood has taken no position on this or any other legislative item, including: prohibiting residential occupancy limits, higher density construction , more statewide land use control, allowing local law enforcement to cooperate with ICE The Lakewood Legislative Committee meets March 7 at 3 pm. An explanation of HB 24-1296 from the Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition The introduced version of House Bill 24-1296 had given records custodians the power to consider anyone — except a journalist — as vexatious if that person demonstrated “an intent to annoy or harass a custodian,” limiting their access to public records under CORA for 30 working days and making them go to court to challenge that designation. Read more…

Buses of Migrants at Lakewood Hotel

Two, separate, eyewitnesses confirm that an extended bus of migrants was dropped at the Hometowne Studios at 6th and Kipling, in Lakewood, Colorado. The first report came in on Monday, February 26 during a City Council meeting where Lakewood Mayor Wendi Strom would later say she feared a busload of migrants would show up without prior notice. The news was confirmed the next day by a second eyewitness near the motel. An extended bus is the same as two regular buses and has been described as an RTD-style bus that was painted white. Hotel management has not returned calls. Denver responded that they have no involvement in any hotel in Lakewood. Mayor Strom responded promptly on February 28 that she was not aware of such a bus. A high-ranking city official has said that a private group is paying for the hotel.

A $9 Million Grant with Unknown “Strings” Attached

Guest Post by J.T. Johnson – Lakewood Ward 4 If you missed the last two Lakewood City Council meetings, you missed… Well, let’s put it this way, if my Mom had caught me doing what I saw at the meeting, I would have been sent to my room without any dinner.   Let’s start with the February 12 meeting:  Perhaps the most disconcerting and substantive financial part of the meeting came about as a result of questions posed by Councilor Rein to the City Planning Office and the State’s representative providing the grant.  According to the City Planning Office, the taxpayers are on the hook for $2M – $2.5 of operating expenses each year.  (The City’s own financial documentation indicates the operating costs will be much higher, but let’s use the Planning Office numbers for now.)  He went on to say that any decision of the Council to accept the $9M grant would “not be binding on future Councils.”  I believe most legal scholars would disagree with the City Planner and state that future Councils will be bound by grant conditions and the “strings” attached to the grant.  A future Council could elect to breach – but that always comes with a price tag.  Query:  Where was the City Attorney while the City Planning Office was providing legal advice to the Council?  She sat there and didn’t say a word. Following the Planning Office comments, the grant representative from the State said that a contract would be negotiated with the City identifying the City’s obligations.  This contract would only be negotiated AFTER the City accepts the $9M grant.  She pointed out that the contact obligations would be for a 30-year period of time. YIKES!  The City will not know its contractual obligations with the State until AFTER it accepts the money.  What entity takes $9M without knowing what “strings” are attached??  The answer to that probing question is, your City Council.  A simple remedy to this problem would have been to negotiate the terms of the grant contract PRIOR to accepting the money.  Finalization of the contract could have been contingent on the City accepting the grant.   At least the citizens of Lakewood would have known what their City Council had signed them up for if the terms had been negotiated in advance.  But, No!  The councilors were so eager to get their hands on more of your money that they apparently didn’t even want to know what the additional strings would be.  And don’t forget, “he who controls the purse controls the “strings.”   Other than the two councilors from Ward 4 (Olver and Rein), no councilor expressed ANY concern over the uncertainty of the “strings” attached to accepting the $9M.  Now, fast forward to the February 26 Council meeting.  The issue consuming the most time at this meeting dealt with the Head Start program in Lakewood.  Due to possible overlapping resources and the very high per capita cost of the program, Lakewood wants to eliminate the Head Start program from its provided resources. The City favors passing this opportunity to Jefferson County or a private entity.  All of the councilors seemed to agree with eliminating the program from the City’s budget.  However, there was some uncertainty over which entity (if any) might take on the Head Start responsibilities so as not to have a disruption of services.  NOW, here’s the dichotomy – because of the “uncertainty” the Council would not move forward to allow the City to notify the Federal Government (DOE) that the City of Lakewood would no longer be responsible for the Head Start program.  The councilors wanted the City to informally probe other Head Start providers (private entities and Jefferson County) to ascertain their interest.  Here’s the problem:  the councilors were told by the City representatives that the Federal Government cannot seek other providers UNTIL the City removes itself as the Head Start provider.  Only one of the councilors expressed an opinion that acquiring another provider would not be a problem, given the City’s support for the program.  Nevertheless, because of the uncertainty (though likely small), the Council voted to delay notifying the Federal Government.  Apparently, the councilors – even if they are well-intended – have little knowledge about Federal Government contracting.  They may think that the Federal Government can move at light speed and such delay would have no impact on continuing the Head Start program.  In reality, the timeframe between now and the City’s proposed schedule to withdraw from the Head Start program may be insufficient to allow the Federal Government to meet its contracting requirements.  Council’s failure to allow the City to give timely notice to the Federal Government may result in contracting deadlines being missed. Later in the meeting, one of the councilors recounted some of the events from the February 12 meeting.  He specifically stated that the February 12 meeting included a “robust” discussion relating to the finances at the Navigation Center and the $9M grant.  I must have attended a different City Council meeting because I heard no “robust” discussion about funding.  Unfortunately, he misses the bigger issue.  While there were brief comments about the current finances and how a portion of the grant could fund some of the operating expenses, there was no discussion about how the City would fund the long-term operating costs and no discussion about how to fund any of the “strings” the State will attach to the grant… and how could there be any discussion about those “stings” since the City Council has no idea what they will be.  We heard no discussion about contents of the thirty-year contract required by the State, when those contract negotiations would occur and whether the Council would even review/approve the contract. Bottom line – Uncertainty over “strings” attached to $9M and saddling taxpayers with $60M – $100M+ of future obligations is not a problem for this council.  ($60M if you use the Planning Office low number and likely more than $100M if you use the City’s internal numbers.) 

Scroll to top