Lakewood Informer

Resident generated news about Lakewood, Colorado

Lakewood Informer

Resident generated news about Lakewood, Colorado

Uncategorized

Lakewood Paying for RTD Lights

Fixing the bridge lights for RTD on the 6th Avenue overpass is an $800,000 budget item for Lakewood… to fix RTD property. The large line item caught the attention of Council Member Olver at the time. How did this get to be in the budget with no prior public discussion? Why isn’t RTD paying for their own repairs? A series of open-records requests reveal not a single communication in 2023 between RTD and any city official discussing the details of how the project came to be. Not who would pay or for what, not what they think the problem is, or why RTD cannot pay for it…. Nothing. As seen in the highlighted screenshot below, open-records requests revealed an email between the RTD point of contact and Council Member Shahrezaei. Shahrezaei responded that she would speak over the phone. Phone conversations increase communication but cannot be provided through open records requests. As the Council representative to DRCOG, Councilor Shahrezaei is in frequent contact with regional boards like RTD. The city shared that this project was submitted to the budget by the Public Works Department during the 2024 budget process. No communications came up between staff and RTD on this topic but the city says they have been in discussion about the project for years. No Council Discussion but Presumed Permission According to the city, this budget item aligns with City Council Goal 3, “Beautiful and Sustainable City.” Normally, setting goals is admirable but this statement reveals the public policy disparity with the City Council setting goals. Public and City Choose Different Bridges These bridge lights will be beautiful – if they can stay lit. Unsubstantiated sources suggest that the lights cannot remain functional through the train vibrations that displace electrical wiring. In the bigger picture, there was public outcry in 2023 for a different bridge. Public wanted to keep the use of a pedestrian bridge in Ravines Open Space park. 290 residents signed a petition to keep a bridge that will now be lost. For the price of the lights that are RTD property, the city could have kept the city beautiful a different way. Now those park users will have an unusable pipe-hanger while RTD gets bridge lights that will, certainly, be enjoyed by all. Footnote: then-Counselor Janssen did not receive any answers to her questions before Council voted to approve this budget.

Bandimere Update

Cross-post from KYGO.com, By Shawn Patrick on January 18, 2024 Here’s What’s Planned for the Former Site of Colorado’s Bandimere Speedway Bandimere Speedway in Morrison has seen it’s last drag race, and will eventually have a new home, but the site will still likely have strong ties to the automotive world.  Officials from California-based Copart, a car auction firm, said they are in the process of buying Bandimere Speedway and hope to turn the majority of the property into storage for cars awaiting auction. Read more at KYGO.com

Correction: Services, Not Shelter, to Move to Jeffco School

Correction to https://lakewoodinformer.com/2023/12/29/lakewood-to-propose-a-homeless-shelter-in-public-school-building/ An unnamed, closed Jefferson County school may act as a new location for the Jeffco Action Center rather than as a shelter. The Action Center offers hardship services and is valuable resource for many unhoused. The move would also increase housing for the homeless. Plans are not final, but discussions have been started. More details have not been brought before Council yet. Per City Manager Hodgson, December 18 City Council meeting, “We recently worked with RecoveryWorks… and opened the first phase of the Navigation Center. Now we are talking about a partnership with the Action Center to move them [Action Center – not Navigation Center] to one of the schools that’s been closed…. then Lakewood would have a presence in the existing two buildings of the Action Center to complete the navigation concept and allow to for more housing for our homeless population….”

Lakewood to Welcome Migrants and Increase Shelter Options

Despite cities across America seeking to reduce the flow of migrants, Lakewood is moving ahead to officially welcome more. On January 8, 2024, Lakewood City Council voted unanimously to move as quickly as possible to figure out how to help with Denver migrants (Note: Councilor Olver absent). A separate motion was passed for a study session on increasing service of the extreme weather shelter for the homeless, acknowledging that this will serve the migrant community as well. Unless the recommended actions impact the municipal code, further actions could be taken as soon as February 12. For example, mention was made of Lakewood being a “good neighbor”. Denver is seeking to make “good neighbor” agreements with surrounding cities to agree to take their migrant population. Lakewood’s former Mayor, Adam Paul, plays a key role in these agreements with Denver. These are unusually speedy decisions for Lakewood City Council. Generally, Council Requests for Legislative Action generate discussion and get deferred to another committee. It’s rare to have to direct action scheduled at all, let alone so quickly. Residents supporting Save Belmar Park have been asking City Council to take action for months with no results. One City Council Legislative Request was denied by the Council majority because no action was possible until new objectives were set at the annual retreat. In this case, the Council has not set ANY objectives for the year and it already has major policy decisions scheduled to be made in the February 12 meeting. The quick passage shows Council can act, direct staff, and schedule study sessions, when it wants to. As a result of these motions, the February 12 meeting will include a study session at 5:30 pm on increasing shelter options. During the Executive Report in regular meeting on the same night, Lakewood City Manager Hodgson will relate what immediate actions can be taken to help migrants, and what actions may need further study. Council Members expressed their belief that the majority of Lakewood residents would support both of these measures. Councilor Mayott-Guerrero said she believes “…progress is possible now in a way that it wasn’t even three years ago.” Lakewood city staff report they can find no proclamation that Lakewood is a sanctuary city. However, Jefferson County is a sanctuary, so an official offer to help or house people, would increase the migrant population, as seen in other cities like Denver.

Lakewood Dismissing Low-Level Offenses

Putting someone in jail for a low-level municipal offense is an unsatisfactory answer for people who believe jail is ineffective or harsh. Since jail is often the mandated penalty, Lakewood may take the “compassionate” route and dismiss the case if the alleged offender visits Community Outreach Court. The de facto penalty is then talking to housing and job providers, which isn’t a penalty but a helping hand. The result is dismissing all warrants for Failure To Appear in court, and often dismissing the original charge as well. Charges that are often dismissed: Lakewood is working to reach out to the homeless community to bring them to Outreach Court. Lakewood homeless navigators and community members spread the word that if you come to court your warrants will be forgiven and your original case may be dismissed. Is the law effective if Lakewood forgives all the cases? Having a law that everyone knows will be dismissed is not an effective deterrent. In one case, an offender admitted to ongoing trespassing but because she talked to resource providers, thereby fulfilling the terms of the original trespass case, everything was dismissed. Jail may be viewed as unreasonably harsh for unhoused individuals because they could lose their meager possessions with one overnight stay. There are arguments that jail is ineffective for anyone and low-level offenses are not worthy of jail. Another argument is that if you are trespassing (for example) because you are homeless, are you really committing a crime or being punished because you are homeless? Being homeless is not a crime but dismissing these “crimes of homelessness” has consequences such as: There is opportunity for discussion here. Whether penalized with jail or having the case dismissed, the court is not responsible for an individuals housing. However, that is a role the court is taking on by acting as resource coordinator. The Court continues to work for grants for homeless and housing. Community Outreach Court is presided over by Municipal Judge Nicole Bozarth, who was the only candidate for Municipal Judge on the 2023 ballot. She was previously appointed to the position in June 2022. Reader Recommended Business: a SAFE HOME Gas Fireplace Service

Denver Metro rent inflation worse than any major city!

Cross-Post By SaveBelmarPark.com (updated to correct “by Save Belmar Park Community Action”) Metro Denver apartment rent inflation has outstripped income gains by a higher margin than in any other major city in the U.S. since 2009, according to a study from Clever Real Estate subsidiary Real Estate Witch.   From 2009-2021 rents in the Denver area have increased 82%! In an amazing coincidence, numerous national landlords active in the Denver area apartment market have been named in an alleged nation-wide rent gouging scheme in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act. These landlords are accused of sharing pricing data and using a common software package called RealPage to set rent levels and eliminate price competition on rent. All defendants deny wrongdoing and are vigorously defending against these unproven allegations. One of these landlords, Kairoi Management aka Kairoi Residential, is also the developer of the habitat-destroying Belmar Park West apartment complex. Despite the widely available public information regarding Denver area rent inflation and alleged illegal wide spread rent collusion, Lakewood’s Strategic Housing Plan pegs annual rent inflation at only 3%! It almost seems as if Lakewood is hiding something.  But what? Is Lakewood aware that some people may be unhoused due to (alleged) illegal rent gouging? What does Lakewood plan to do if defendants do not prevail and have to pay significant damages?  If Kairoi can’t pay the damages and also fund 777 S Yarrow construction, will they abandon the 777 S Yarrow project and leave an unfinished construction project?  What then? Maybe Lakewood should require audited financial statements from all developers in the city including private companies such as Kairoi?  And require financial reserves sufficient to survive any major lawsuits. Kairoi sells limited partnership investments in the form of unregistered securities.  Once a building is completed, they sell it a few years down the road and close out the partnerships.  Like the Edison building that sold in 2019. Suppose they have to pay damages to former tenants of the Edison building.  Will the former limited partners be willing to pay those damages?  Not likely.  Can they then assess those damages to partners in another building.  Not likely.  Yes, this is speculation.  But it will not end well. How did these companies get into this mess?  My guess, this is only that, is that at least some of these entities ignored legal advice.  There is a long list of defendants.  Do you seriously think none of them asked their staff attorney(s) for advice regarding their use of the RealPage software? Don’t assume their business insurance will cover it.  Some defendants are already complaining their insurance will not pay their legal fees. Here is a partial list of the parties included in the combined rent gouging lawsuits: ALLIED ORION GROUP, LLC, Defendant Apartment Income REIT Corp, Defendant Apartment Management Consultants, LLC, Defendant Avenue5 Residential, LLC, Defendant B/T Washington LLC, Defendant BH Management Services, LLC, Defendant Bell Partners Inc., Defendant Bozzuto Management Company, Defendant Brookfield Properties Multifamily LLC, Defendant CH Real Estate Services LLC, Defendant CONAM Management Corporation, Defendant CONTI Texas Organization, Inc., d/b/a CONTI Capital, Defendant CWS Apartment Homes LLC, Defendant Camden Property Trust, Defendant Conti Capital, Defendant Cortland Management, LLC, Defendant Crow Holdings, LP, Defendant Dayrise Residential, LLC, Defendant ECI Group, Inc., Defendant ECI Management, LLC, Defendant Equity Residential, Defendant Essex Property Trust, Inc., Defendant FPI Management, Inc., Defendant Greystar Management Services, L.P., Defendant Greystar Management Services, LLC, Defendant Highmark Residential, LLC, Defendant Independence Realty Trust, Inc., Defendant Kairoi Management, LLC, Defendant Knightvest Residential, Defendant Lantower Luxury Living LLC, Defendant Lincoln Property Company, Defendant Lyon Management Group, Inc., Defendant MidAmerica Apartment Communities, Inc., Defendant Mission Rock Residential, LLC, Defendant Morgan Properties Management Company, LLC, Defendant Pinnacle Property Management Services, LLC, Defendant Prometheus Real Estate Group, Inc., Defendant RPM Living, LLC, Defendant RealPage, Inc., Defendant Related Management Company L.P., Defendant Rose Associates Inc, Defendant Sares Regis Group Commercial, Inc., Defendant Security Properties Inc., Defendant Security Properties Residential, LLC, Defendant Sherman Associates, Inc., Defendant Simpson Property Group, LLC, Defendant TF Cornerstone Inc, Defendant THOMA BRAVO, L.P., Defendant The Related Companies L.P., Defendant Thoma Bravo Fund XIII, L.P., Defendant Thoma Bravo Fund XIV, L.P., Defendant Thrive Communities Management, LLC, Defendant Trammell Crow Residential Company, Defendant UDR, Inc., Defendant WINNCOMPANIES LLC, Defendant Windsor Property Management Company, Defendant WinnResidential Manager Corp., Defendant ZRS Management, LLC, Defendant United States of America, Interested Party Joshua Kabisch, Plaintiff The list may contain errors, be incomplete or may not reflect recent changes. Please attend Lakewood City Council Meetings and convey your concerns. https://www.lakewood.org/Government/Upcoming-City-Meetings And please remember to ask that Lakewood acquire the parking area at 777 S Yarrow St via Eminent Domain to establish that buffer space with the park. Visit SaveBelmarPark.com

Fees for Park Land Static Since 2018

The development near Belmar Park, on 777 S Yarrow, has brought into focus the “fee in lieu” provision of Lakewood, Colorado’s Municipal Code L.M.C. 14.16.010. These fees have not been reviewed, or changed, since 2018, resulting in potential under-compensation to the city. Historically developers have had to provide park land for their residents to use. The fee was instead of park land. Existing Lakewood parks would provide park services for the new development. In light of the confusion regarding the fee in lieu of land dedication/policy the following was sent out to Council and staff on Dec. 31, 2023:  Begin forwarded message: From: Lenore Herskovitz <lenoreherskovitz@gmail.com>Date: December 31, 2023 at 2:56:12 PM MSTTo: Wendi Strom <WenStr@lakewood.org>, CityCouncilMembers@lakewood.org, Kathy Hodgson <KatHod@lakewood.org>, Travis Parker <TraPar@lakewood.org>, abrown@lakewood.org, kitnew@lakewood.orgSubject: Fwd: land dedication fee in lieu “I don’t know if you’ve seen this before but this is the fee that was set by Director of Community Resources in 2018. The fee is determined by the Director. The ordinance was supposed to have been reviewed by Council no later than Dec. 31, 2023. Also, the fee is due at the time of site plan approval or can be delayed by the Director (Kit Newland) until building permit issuance. The amount to be paid shall be the fee in effect at the time of payment (although it is interesting to note that the fee mentioned in the document expired on Dec. 31, 2019). As far as I know, the fee has not yet been paid. There has been misinformation sent out by the planning department stating “the city staff cannot change this valuation without an act of Council”. However, 14.16.07B of the 2018 document says that the Director shall set the fee equal to fair market value…The only job of Council right now is to review this ordinance. Why was this not placed on the agenda months ago? Staff should have been well aware that this needed to be addressed before the end of the year and it should have been posted. Former Councilor Springsteen mentioned this in October and no action was taken. Why are we updating fees so rarely? Prior to 2018, the only ordinance addressing this was passed in 1983. Obviously, property values fluctuate greatly and fair market values should reflect that. How much potential revenue have we lost over the years due to this antiquated system of determining fees? Council should review this ordinance at the next scheduled meeting and alter the terms as needed.” See ordinance and policy letter below:

Migrants and Housing

Lakewood, Colorado may decide to lessen deportation fears for migrants as part of its affordable housing strategy. The single sentence from the study suggests “proactively addressing fears in the community about public charge and deportation.” Presentation explained that this means lessening deportation fears, so that people in a difficult housing situation did not feel compelled to leave any stability they may have found. However, immigration status is polarizing the nation, and in the context of the other housing assistance options, this discussion may require extra time or this single sentence may be interpreted as new policy. No questions or comments regarding this particular item were brought forth by Lakewood City Council so no details are available.

Lakewood to Propose a Homeless Services in Public School Building

Correction, Jan 18, 2024: The unnamed, closed Jefferson County school was not proposed as a homeless shelter but as a new location for the Jeffco Action Center which offers hardship services. Increased housing for the homeless would then be available and Lakewood would have a presence in two Action Center buildings. Plans are not final, but discussions have been started. More details have not been brought before Council yet.  Correction: Services, Not Shelter, to Move to Jeffco School Lakewood’s Strategic Housing Plan (SHP) researched the possibilities of redeveloping vacant or underutilized land for affordable housing. For example, there are many vacant commercial sites that could be used for new affordable units. The SHP currently does not have details, rather the plan is ready for further research and public discussion. However, Lakewood City Manager Hodgson says that by listening carefully to City Councilors, city staff could anticipate that this item was of particular interest so staff has started work. Towards that goal, Lakewood staff already has a proposal to work collaboratively to house homeless in a closed Jeffco school in Lakewood. That project includes working with the Jeffco Action Center to provide shelter in these already controversial neighborhood sites. Financial incentives may be available from the city. This proposal will be coming to Council for approval soon, with no other details provided by Hodgson, as announced in the December 18 study session. Public comment shows people want further discussion regarding sheltering the unhoused in a school, but city staff believe they have enough tacit approval from City Council that they have proceeded with their plans.  Under the option for repurposing existing buildings for affordable housing, the city will not require a separate discussion for this topic, outside of plan adoption, although public comment would be available if there is a separate proposal. Although the people who live in those highly residential areas may not want a homeless shelter next door, the city has an answer to that: Public comment is over-represented by affluent long-term homeowners (link added 2/11/24). The argument that owners of single-family residences are generally rich, white people who are over-represented in their city council meetings is laid out  in the Harvard Law Review paper to show affordable housing is a right.  Sidenote: City Manager Kathy Hodgson and Mayor Wendi Strom have studied government at Harvard University. The city survey correlated how long residents have lived in Lakewood with survey responses in order to pit residents against each other, in what seems to be a continuing conversation of older residents versus younger residents. For example, it has been suggested during the demographic study that residents “ageing in place” contribute to taking up valuable housing stock that would otherwise be “affordable.” Destabilizing neighborhoods by changing their use or density may prove a base assumption of the plan. The SHP depends on residents that have enough money moving out of their existing homes and moving into the newly created market-rate apartments. The move would allow for the existing housing stock that was vacated to be used for those less fortunate. Housing migration is a critical component to a successful market-rate overstock policy implementation.  (Hattip Ditson) Correction: Study date changed from Dec 19th to 18th

Scroll to top