Lakewood City Council Member Mary Janssen announced she will be proposing a mill levy decrease in an upcoming meeting.
As seen in the video, her proposal is based on getting tax relief for Lakewood residents. Lakewood’s current mill levy is 7.411 and she is considering proposals to reduce the rate to between 2.5 and 3.6. According to Janssen, Lakewood has added a variety of different taxes in the recent past, such as internet taxes, delivery taxes and taxes on some food products, as well as currently retaining all TABOR refunds.
City Council can lower the mill levy without a vote of the people so it is within Council’s power to provide this relief. Council Member Olver signaled his support for such a measure.
“If we sit back and do nothing, we’re letting a double-digit tax hike sucker punch Lakewood citizens when they’re already winded.”
When you run out of money for your expensive spending habits, you might self-evaluate. Responsible people, find ways to cut costs or perhaps hire a financial advisor. Lakewood and Jefferson County have both opted for a different path – spend money on a consultant to research potentially successful ballot arguments to let the government keep taxpayer TABOR refunds.
The government cannot legally spend money campaigning on ballot initiatives. However, by starting before they put the measure on the ballot, Lakewood and Jeffco have months to figure out how to shape the narrative – and use your tax dollars to do it. As long as they don’t know it will be on the ballot, use of funds in what could be a “pre-campaign” or “fact-finding” effort is legal. Once the measure is on the ballot, use of funds must be stopped immediately.
“no public funds, including County staff time working with the Consultant under the contract, will be expended as of the moment in which the Board of County Commissioners makes a decision to move forward with any ballot initiative. no public funds may be spent advocating for a ballot issue once a decision has been made. Therefore, all terms of this contract must be completed before the Board of County Commissioners decides whether or not to move forward with any ballot recommendations made by the Consultant.” – excerpt from Jeffco draft contract
Lakewood’s Budget and Audit Committee has already agreed the City needs to keep future TABOR refunds. They recommend hiring a specialist to find out what voters would be willing to sacrifice their refunds for. The Budget Board did not recommend a specialist to find ways to cut spending or to find out if voters would be interested in keeping their refunds if they made cuts.
Jefferson County is following the same play book. They propose a “fact-finding” mission, during which they will inform residents of all the challenges they see and the only solution they can determine at this point. Jeffco calls this implementation of “an educational outreach plan”.
The outreach plan, as currently discussed, does not educate residents on any merits of TABOR restrictions, refunds, or ways to operate within current budget levels.
No ballot language is needed to make internal spending prioritization. Ballot language is only necessary for retaining TABOR funds. However, one of the county deliverables is for different versions of ballot language and survey results to show what the public would be interested in voting for.
In any other situation, that would be termed a campaign strategy analysis.
An alternative strategy is to ask residents to vote… Do you approve the government retaining your TABOR refund?
Neither government can answer what the money is NEEDED for specifically. The consultant is being hired to find out what you WANT to spend on money on. Winning the vote means framing the argument. Research shows how much the right words matter, making hiring these government consultants critical if they want a ballot measure to pass. For instance, Jefferson County found out that jails are critical so that’s what they used as a ballot issue last time. Lakewood found that residents wanted to spend money on parks. No research was done on controversial programs that would be easier to cut or spending prioritization.
Both Lakewood and Jefferson County will be voting to approve these expenditures at a future meeting, date not yet set.
As residents and business owners cry for help in controlling the effects of drug use and crime surrounding our homeless populations, Jefferson County is supporting safe drug use in our most affected communities. Serving all of Jefferson County, Points West operates out of Lakewood to provide harm reduction materials and service referrals to those who want them. Lakewood business owners are now coming to City Council, pointing out that the need for a safe society for business operations conflict with providing materials for continued drug use.
Motto from Points West
Points West has an outreach program that was started in 2020. Their website reads, “Initially intended as COVID-19 mitigation… within a few months the program evolved into a Points West project centered on harm reduction.” Points West now conducts street outreach efforts throughout Jeffco on Tuesdays and Fridays by actively driving around to search for people who appear to be living outside. They specifically serve the Lakewood area every other week. Their schedule is posted at https://www.instagram.com/pointswestssp/
Harm reduction drug use materials have helped many individuals avoid diseases that can be communicated through shared needle use. These supplies are intended to help the entire drug use population and are not linked to any recovery effort or incentive program.
Some residents and business owners experience the negative effects of growing drug use among a swelling homeless population. According to one Council Member, residents are finding drug paraphernalia near their houses and sidewalks where it is was not found before.
At one City Council meeting in August, two business were heard regarding regional homeless, drug and crime increases that have negatively affected their business. In both these cases, the city has been unable or unwilling to effectively help. These businesses have asked the city for help multiple times, requesting actions such as increased patrols and posted signs for deterrents. For them, supporting drug use does not make sense.
One owner expressed his frustration with finding Points West onsite supporting the population he believes is causing him to lose tenants. “I believe the ability to be safe is important, but to come to the area that we’ve identified multiple times as a problem — I don’t believe that’s ok.” Another business owner said she may lose her license due in part to regional problems along Colfax Ave.
Points West provides outreach to all areas including urban corridors and suburban neighborhoods. They visit homeless encampments they’ve seen or areas they’ve been to before, such as Colfax or the area surrounding the RTD station on Wadsworth that was discussed in City Council. For this reason, author Michael Shellenberger points out that what America calls a “homeless encampment”, Europe calls an “open drug scene”.
Jefferson County Public Health estimates that Points West serves an estimated 150-250 people per month, including those served for sexual health tools and referrals to other services.
Why are safe drug use programs increasing while residents continue to experience negative effects of a population with high drug use rates in their neighborhoods? To quote an old saying: “Follow themoney!“ According to Points West, their street outreach program was initiated through COVID-19. Unfortunately, there has been no increase in comparable grant funding for police and court action needed to prevent and prosecute low-level criminal drug use.
Points West currently has a temporary office at Recovery Works on Colfax. Lakewood has applied for a Department of Local Affairs 0grant that will be used to fund the expansion of Recovery Works .
Reader Recommended Business:
JD Services: 346-217-8958. “We do fences, patios, ponds and so much more.”
Joplin officials say they have big plans for $13.8 million of pandemic relief funds the tornado-ravaged southwestern Missouri city received under a two-year-old federal law. Yet the latest federal records show none of the money has been spent — or even budgeted.
In fact, about 6,300 cities and counties — nearly 1 in 4 nationwide — reported no expenditures as of this spring, according to an Associated Press analysis of data released by the U.S. Treasury Department. About 5,100 of those listed no projects — either planned or underway.
LAKEWOOD, Colo. (KDVR) — A Lakewood City Council member has been on a monthslong mission to get information about a police shooting back in March that left a 17-year-old dead.
So I have been following the LAC sustainability committee since late June when there was a request of the City Council to allow them to research the mandating of electrification of homes during remodeling. I did an interview with Lakewood Informer about this subject and shared my knowledge of the federal laws passed in the seventies – Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act (Purpa) with the LAC executive board and my love of gas stoves.
I believe that this caused the Sustainability Committee pause as at a previous meeting they talked about modifying the proposal.
However there is 180 million federal dollars available and this committee is determined to “get a piece of the pie”. And I believe the City Council’s Emergency meeting on August 7 helped to energize this committee to continue to try to mandate this electrification. Home Rule and leaders with an agenda can over come all laws.
8/16 meeting
So as my husband and watched this meeting we could not understand how this proposal would be made policy by the city council. The chair of the committee admitted that there was no way they could collect the necessary energy usage data (due to privacy issues)to use as benchmarks but then stated that there were approximately 5000 structures in Lakewood of which 4800 were under 5000ft. These 4800 structures (presumable household structures) are responsible for 41% of the greenhouse gas emissions in Lakewood. I asked my husband wouldn’t it be a better use of the money to go after the 59% from the bigger structures and he said that piece was probably car emissions. I looked up today greenhouses gas emissions from households and there were several articles quoting 20% to 73% so I do not believe this is settled science yet.
So it was decided that collecting data would be difficult, the discussion turned to what small issues could be addressed. There was an interesting discussion on the permitting process in Lakewood and the number of people that pulled permits. It was brought up that some people do not pull permits because of lack of knowledge (I learned that you should pull a permit for replacing a water heat although there is ambiguity in whether you need to pull a permit when replacing “like with like”) and additional cost to the update.
Rebates and actually paying for the electrification was discussed. Generating of forms and the means to inform the people about program was another topic. Nate W brought up that DEI should be included in the process. My thought on this was another government program picking “winners and losers” and if the committee really believed in inclusion this would be a more overall program for all of the city.
So in conclusion it seems that the committee will have some plan because those federal dollars under the Inflation Reduction Act need to be spent. And it is important to have a plan when those dollars are made available.
Thank you Committee for all your hard work and especially looking into how hazardous those Gas Stoves are. I think you will find some recent articles stating they are not so bad.
PS the last topic was the introduction of the Xcel and Committee Choice Energy Bill that will be introduced in the 2024 legislature. I am looking forward to this bill.
In Lakewood, growth and development are important topics, and our City Council is working together to address them head-on.
Communities are multi-faceted and encompass many essential elements, such as ensuring safety, affordability for all residents and spaces that embody the Colorado lifestyle. Lakewood is incredibly fortunate to possess all the necessary components for a vibrant, thriving community. We boast parks, businesses, excellent schools and convenient proximity to the majestic Colorado mountains and the bustling City of Denver. As residents of Lakewood, we greatly appreciate these valuable assets.
In 2017, Stephanie Deveaux noticed her city and neighborhood were changing. Lying on Denver’s western outskirts, Lakewood was known for its spacious single-family homes, good public schools, pristine parks and Rocky Mountain views. But many of the things that made Lakewood so livable seemed under threat.
“All these multiunit dwellings [were] starting to be developed,” she said, referring to the boxy, ultramodern and monotone buildings now scattered across Lakewood. “And then lands that I thought had been earmarked for open space, those started to get filled up.”
Cathy Kentner, a teacher and Lakewood planning commission member, also noticed those same tall buildings “adjacent to small single-family homes and cutting off all their sunlight”; deteriorating streets; busier hospitals; and green space being replaced by “a sea of concrete”. She mentioned the murals dotting several buildings along West Colfax Avenue as an example. “I really appreciate the art that they put on the outside, how it’s all green and plants,” she said. “[But] how nice would it be to actually have some real greenery.”
The City of Lakewood cites an increase in crime around or near Jumbo’s Sports Bar and Grill (6111 W Colfax Ave), leading to increased emergency service calls. The City cites this increase as a reason to suspend the bars liquor license. Others point to the regular crime rate along Colfax as the source for crime. Jumbo’s owner, Tanesha Howard, argues they are the victims of crimes that Lakewood will not investigate.
Some neighbors have complaints over alleged license irregularities. A State investigation of license irregularities concluded the liquor license allegations were “unfounded”.
Ms. Howard explains that opening the bar actually cleaned up the area and gave good purpose to the property. Robert Vigil, a local resident and supporter, says he looked forward to having a safe place in the community to come to. Jumbo’s routinely feeds the homeless.
According to CBS Colorado, Lakewood’s document calls Jumbo’s “a target for gun violence”, not a perpetrator, enabler or cause of gun violence.
This marks a disturbing trend in Lakewood to penalize property owners for their property not being safe. Recently Lakewood passed a new ordinance for vacant properties, requiring owners to register, pay fees, and potentially be penalized, because their vacant property attracts crime.
Jumbo’s may also be penalized for property location. Fox31 KDVR shows Lakewood City Council Member Springsteen saying, “I’ve read through the allegations from the City and I did not see specific circumstances when people from this establishment were causing gun violence that you don’t see anywhere else on West Colfax.” Springsteen has been advocating for Jumbo’s since she heard about their problems.
In fact, the business purports being the victim of many crimes and potential acts of sabotage. Mr. Howard explains that the bar was flooded due to what appeared to be a hose on left out on the roof.
Down the street from Jumbo’s there are only a handful of houses for neighbors to complain from. However, these neighbors have been active and have provided the City with video footage and verbal complaints to show people in the parking lot after 2 AM, arguing that means the business is open after legal hours.
There are also new, high-density apartment buildings that brought plenty of new neighbors to the block, but not to complain. Local resident and neighbor Alex Johnson says, “It seems like there are bigger issues out there than beating on a mom and pop shop.” He says he’s tried to go to Jumbo’s but it was shut down. He would like a bar and grill within walking distance.
The few houses across and down the street from Jumbo’s. In between high-density apartment buildings, one still in construction directly across from the bar
Recently the restaurant was served with a Notice of Violation in a TikTok video that went viral. The Rocky Mountain NAACP is now involved. Portia Prescott, President of RMNAACP, has issued a Call to Action to Lakewood’s Mayor Paul to encourage small business like Jumbo’s. She argues that Colfax is a known problem area for crime, saying, “If you want to talk crime, I can literally walk, what, 20 feet and see crime.”
Tyrone Glover, a Chair with the RMNAACP Legal Redress Team says, “Small businesses are the lifeblood of our community.” He calls for Lakewood Police to assist with investigations, rather than requiring burdensome records requests.
State investigations found no subsequent problem with serving liquor without a license or serving those underage, although the allegations still haunt Jumbo’s. Ms. Howard says, “[the police] never asked where they got the liquor.” An obvious oversight with a liquor store next door and a public intoxication being common in the area.
Jumbo’s lost their license just before the NBA finals. They stayed open to serve food, and Ms. Howard feels like that was the basis for allegations that they continued to sell alcohol. She emphatically states Jumbo’s never sold alcohol after that time.
Another local resident and neighbor says he’s never known Jumbo’s to be especially loud or troublesome. Against the backdrop of the normal crime on Colfax, there seemed to be a lot questions as to why Lakewood is linking Jumbo’s to crime “in the area” and whether Jumbo’s was the unacknowledged victim of said crime. There is also the outstanding question of whether the neighbor complaints represent the entire neighborhood.
Jumbo’s will have a public hearing August 29 for all interested parties to have a chance to explain why Jumbo’s should or should not get their license reinstated.
No one is talking about what would happen if Jumbo’s had to close permanently and the corner would return back to the non-productive state it was in. Jumbo’s Mr. Howard says they are committed to safety and are willing to hire safety officers themselves. Private business having to hire their own security is another upward trend in Lakewood.
“Just let us run our business and make a living without harassing us … I just want the city to work with me instead of against me”
In a contentious meeting rife with head-shaking, eye-rolling and looks of disgust, Lakewood City Council voted to overturn the will of the voters and sunset the Strategic Growth Initiative (SGI) aka Lakewood’s Growth Cap. The sunset will occur in 24 months, ostensibly to bring the city in line with Colorado’s new law to preempt “Local Regulations Limiting the Number of Building Permits“, Colorado HB23-1255. This decision will allow Lakewood 24 months to discuss next steps and work towards compliance, without waiving any Constitutional rights. The discussion allowed residents to see if and how each City Council Member would fight for Lakewood’s local rights as well as voters rights.
Debate seemed divided between those citing affordable concerns and/or wanted time to find a solution and the people who wanted to uphold local control and/or the will of the people.
Of those who discussed the need for affordable housing as a reason to overturn SGI:
None of these Councilors addressed the charge that this council has been able to add low-income affordable housing under existing statute
Of those who addressed the voter-passed initiative as a “will of the people” question, one Counselor said that was a different time, two said they understand but there are others who didn’t vote for it; one Councilor said they would honor it but needs time.
Some of these Councilors thought they could do Strategic Growth better.
If there was any mention of local control it was in reference to regional problems that would necessitate giving up local control. (Note: This begs the question of what Lakewood City Council can do regarding affordable housing at all.)
A majority or all of these Councilors lamented the lack of an executive session at least once. None of these Councilors mentioned seeking legal counsel prior to this meeting, in the time since the last executive session did not proceed.
Councilors who voted against the sunset and/or in support of keeping SGI intact argued:
Half stated their belief that the existing SGI ordinance could have helped affordable housing, if used properly.
All mentioned wanting to uphold the citizen-led initiative.
All mentioned local control. (Note: there is no real debate here, “preemption” is in the state law title)
Most voiced transparency concerns. Did not require additional legal advice.
What did your Councilor say about it?
Mayor Paul: Said options are limited without an executive session.
Able: Fought against the notion that we needed to overturn SGI for affordability reasons. Before SGI we weren’t getting “the housing types that were called for in our housing studies, we didn’t have any move towards affordability and as far as I can see we still haven’t made a move towards affordability. The committee that was going to deal with affordability had its knees chopped off… The housing committee has not had the discussion yet.”
Shahrezaei: When [the original referendum was] passed it was a different time. Now, she has a hard time supporting the proposed ordinance because “We give ourselves two more years of living through this bad policy. … We need to support our community by working with [affordable housing needs.]” (Note: made motion to call the question of keeping SGI intact after only 4 minutes of debate saying it was on the agenda, although the City Attorney made repeated references to all these options and others being available to Council.)
Vincent: says neither she nor her ward were a fan of SGI, but she has to uphold the votes of the city as a whole. She supported the new ordinance as way to get time to discuss.
Mayott-Guerrero: Wants to figure out ways to do smart local growth that the city has more control over. Wants increased affordable housing. Votes for new ordinance to have time for discussion but still complies with law. Advocates for increased affordable and mid-range housing and sustainability measures and believes SGI is inadequate for that purpose.
Springsteen: “All of you who vote to override our local law are voting for those corporate interests and many of you were very much supported by them.” She believes in SGI as a way to stop gentrification. (Note: Made motion to get SGI language into the recitals of new ordinance)
“The rights of the local community’s self-government serve as the foundation for the American system of law and is a central tenant of our Declaration of Independence and state and federal constitutions. The people’s right to government have been routinely ignored by our elected representatives and over-ridden by the courts in favor of corporate rights.”
-Thomas Lindsayvia Council Member Anita Springsteen
Stewart: Would have like the new ordinance with a 12-month sunset, rather than a 24-month timeframe. She acknowledges the need for income-based housing but also greenspace and accountability. (Councilor Stewart claimed to have led the Legislative Committee against HB23-1255. Meeting videos will show that Janssen and Olver were strongest against 1255 and that Lakewood entered the fight too late, with no visible action).
Franks: Made repeated remarks lamenting the lack of an executive session.
Olver: Voted to keep local law in place and will look into why Lakewood didn’t make more of an effort to fight against 1255. (Note: Made motion to change language of proposed language to retain SGI titles. Voted to keep SGI intact and for new ordinance also)
Strom: “We have complex community needs” on both sides of SGI and we need to figure out a path forward … Two years gives opportunity to work it out … this is a significant shift. We have people begging for more affordable units [to be developed]. (Made motion for new ordinance)
Janssen: Said 1255 was a gross overreach by the state of Colorado and Governor Polis. The problem extends beyond SGI. The excuses that politicians at the capitol use reflects that they don’t care about local control or voter’s voice. “As City Councilors, our residents need us to stand up” (Note: Made a motion to keep local law in place)
“As City Councilors, our residents need us to stand up”
