Independence Day is the number 1 or number 2 holiday for driving fatalities, usually involving drinking or drugs. An estimated 620 people nationwide may die this year. In contrast, from 2005-2020 there were an average of 8.5 deaths per year nationwide from fireworks-related injuries. Most injuries are from common fireworks such as sparklers.
Neighborhood conversations will often reflect worries over fireworks, not drunk driving over the holiday, if not for personal safety then for concerns over fire.
West Metro Fire only had three calls involving “fireworks” codes in 2020. However, there may be other calls in a non-searchable field. A housefire will be called a housefire, not a fireworks fire. Callers may believe a firework started a fire but investigators ultimately find no evidence. This was the case for one fire in Lakewood, started in a shed that spread to the house.
According to the National Fire Protection Association, local fire departments responded to 1,353,500 fires in 2021. The Consumer Product Safety Commission reports fireworks caused approximately 12,000 fires in 2021. That’s about 1% of the reported fires in 2021.
Noisy fireworks are an extreme nuisance to pets and anti-noise advocates but are not statistically not the most dangerous activity in any category.
In 2020, the City of Lakewood received 1666 call for services related to fireworks. Only 68 of those were agent initiated. Only 3 of those 68 resulted in a summons, due to the difficulty in tracking down a noise source after it’s over.
Lakewood Municipal Court numbers from 2019-2020 indicate that 90% of violators plead guilty and paid in full, an unusually high rate that leaves no reason to seek alternative forms of sentencing.
The number of fatalities and injuries over July 4th has caused Colorado State Patrol, Colorado Department of Transportation and others to increase enforcement activities. This year, they are even offering discounts for Uber rides.
Time and money for enforcement are prioritized, generally based on safety factors. Public pressure may shift priorities to a statistically less-hazardous focus, i.e. fireworks, rather than the more deadly risk of drunk driving over the holiday.
The calculated risk posed by fireworks has been acceptable and memorable way for people to enjoy a political and military victory over the past 200 years.
“We must be free not because we claim freedom, but because we practice it.” – – William Faulkner
In the last paragraph of my article on HB 23-1255 I commented that Lakewood was M.I.A. in media coverage. A newly discovered article from CBS reporter Alan Gionet that was first published on April 11, 2023 does include a statement from Mayor Adam Paul. It is interesting to note that the Mayor comments that”…the City Council Legislative Committee voted to oppose this bill….” In actuality, this committee didn’t vote on this bill until April 24, 2023. Apologies for not finding this article sooner. On July 17, 2023 there will be a Lakewood City Council Executive Session to discuss the legal issues arising from the passage of HB 23-1255 that may overturn the voters’ passage of the Strategic Growth Initiative in July, 2019.
On June 7, 2023 Governor Polis signed HB23-1255 into law. This bill, when it takes effect in August, 2023, may repeal Lakewood’s Strategic Growth Initiative (SGI). Boulder, Golden and the rarely mentioned Pitkin County are also affected by this legislation. Moving forward, Colorado cities and counties will be prohibited from imposing population and residential growth limits. A precedent will be set permitting our state government to override the vote of the people. Colorado Municipal League (CML), a non-profit, non- partisan organization that represents the interests of 97% of the cities and towns in the state said it best in their April 7, 2023 newsletter:
“SB23-213 and HB23-1255 reflect a desire to disempower municipal voters from exercising their initiative and referendum rights. The bills would replace local voters’ choices with the policy preferences of the General Assembly.” (See pg 6 of the CML newsletter).
It should be noted that SB23-213 was defeated. However, it is very frustrating to watch the demise of the Strategic Growth Initiative which originated as a grassroots effort and survived lengthy and costly legal battles before even making it to the ballot box where it was victorious. This was never a growth cap ordinance. It was only portrayed as such by the those who wanted to defeat it and even renamed it as the Residential Growth Limitation Ordinance. In actuality, the SGI presented a strategic housing allocation plan to better meet the needs of the community while exempting “blighted” and affordable units from any restrictions.
HB23-1255 was first introduced in the House on March 24, 2023. Lakewood’s Legislative Committee addressed the bill on April 24, 2023 after it had passed the third reading in the House (no link on city website to this meeting but the video was received through an open records request). This committee consists of one councilor from each ward (Jeslin Shahrezaei, Sharon Vincent, Rebekah Stewart, Rich Olver, and Mary Janssen) with Councilor Stewart as chair and Ben Goldstein, the Deputy City Manager as staff liaison/advisor. Although this bill holds great significance for our community, the committee spent less than 10 minutes discussing it before voting unanimously to take a “strong” oppose position (Councilor Shahrezaei was absent). The video of this meeting may be the only available evidence of the city’s stance on this bill. But what exactly does a “strong” oppose vs. just an “oppose” mean? Towards the end of the April 10, 2023 legislative meaning, Mr. Goldstein explained that without a “strong” position the staff would not actively work the bill. They would not write it up and no one would be sent to the state house to testify. (see Apr 10 video clip of the discussion of different positions)
So now the legislative committee gave staff the direction for a strong oppose position.
In contrast, the CML’s position was “oppose unless amended”. Lakewood often takes the same position as CML, relying on CML to lobby for Lakewood at the same time it lobbies for its own position. So what did the individual committee members think would happen next, now that the committee took a strong position and also one that is different from CML? Their responses to this question varied. Councilor Vincent felt: “When it is a strong oppose or support there is someone assigned to speak on behalf of the city on the position that we took.” Vincent is the most experienced Councilor on the committee.
Councilor Olver stated: “This year it seems if we strongly oppose or support then we send someone, otherwise we don’t”. Councilor Janssen wrote: “Since I have been on the legislative committee I was told and understood that if this committee has a strong support or a strong oppose, Lakewood staff (not sure who that is) would go or write a paper to lobby the state legislators. CML could have the same stance but I did not think that they lobby for each municipality. This is my understanding.”
These 3 council members have similar expectations moving forward.
The website titled FastDemocracy.com tracks bills and provides a list of the lobbyists working specific legislation. For HB23-1255 well over 200 organizations, cities and counties are represented with no mention of Lakewood. Councilor Stewart is the Lakewood delegate to the CML Policy Committee. She explains:
“I believe that the reason our city is missing from the lobby list is that we do not retain a registered lobbyist and so no one would be registered as a representative of the city on bills we had taken a position on. We use staff and typically the mayor or the chair of the legislative committee depending on the bill to testify if and when there are opportunities, and we all draft position papers and send them to our state delegations as well as working strategically with CML. I know we did pretty much all those things on bills that we took strong positions on this session, but I will gather further clarification to ensure everything I am telling you is accurate”.
A later communication added “we don’t always have time to write up a white paper because things move so fast.”
In a follow-up email she stated: “The collaboration with CML is key because they have the full-time lobbyists and our membership as a city essentially is how we pay for lobbying vs. retaining our own lobbyist.”
Councilor Shahrezaei reinforces the importance of CML: “Action taken by staff is to communicate with CML, the lobbyists we pay at the City of Lakewood. Staff will collaborate and support as needed with CML staff to communicate with our elected representatives and also support with white paper production.” A follow-up question: Does Lakewood employ CML to be our lobbyist? Response: “Not employ. Contracts as other municipalities do.”
Additional question: Are you saying we contract with CML to be our lobbyist for our specific positions? Clarifying answer from Shahrezaei:
“I am saying we don’t employ CML. As members we expect them to support our positions on issues. I misrepresented that with the use of “contract”. That is part of the membership package. When we moved to strong oppose it is my understanding we would update them and then work with CML staff to understand best strategies to reinforce that position…”
After a lengthy phone conversation with Mr. Goldstein, he sent the following email: “Thank you for our conversation this afternoon. As we discussed, after the City Council Legislative Committee took a strong oppose position on HB23-1255, staff began actively working the bill. The city utilizes targeted strategy to advocate a strong oppose position working closely with the Colorado Municipal League (CML) to identify amendments that Lakewood needs to ensure the bill wasn’t passed. Though the ultimate goal was to have the bill fail in its entirety, staff worked with CML on an amendment that would, at a minimum, have removed Lakewood from the bill. That said, a similar legislative strategy was utilized with SB23-213 with great success. Understand the inner workings of the legislature and the politics behind individual bill can be challenging but once direction is given by the Legislative Committee, staff works diligently on each and every bill by utilizing a specific strategy tailored to that bill.”
A copy of this amendment was requested but the city responded it was not available. In any case, any amendment would have aided CMLs “oppose unless amended” position, not Lakewood’s “strong oppose” position.
When reviewing the statements from all the committee members, it is interesting to note the divide between those councilors who placed the emphasis on staff to take action and those who placed greater reliance on the role of CML.
Pitkin County would also be directly affected by HB23-1255 but unlike Lakewood they were able to successfully testify and have their similar ordinance exempted. An “Aspen” amendment was added to the final bill that “would still allow a governmental entity to regulate growth so long as that regulation enforces affordability requirements. Inclusionary zoning or impact fees are potential real-life examples of this amendment.” (Aspen Times article dated May 8, 2023).
Although we are the fifth largest city in the state and the third largest in the metro area, we did not hire our own lobbyist as did much smaller communities such as Trinidad, Fountain, Firestone and Monument (all CML members like us). Because HB23-1255 directly targeted our voter approved ordinance our voice needed to be stronger and louder. There is no documentation of any testimony by Lakewood staff whether written or verbal. Golden submitted a written statement and several Lakewood residents called into the hearings on the bill. (See House and Senate testimony). In newspaper articles and media coverage Lakewood is again M.I.A. Perhaps our city did more than collaborate with CML on a failed amendment, but the proof is lacking. Any evidence of staff advocacy would have been welcomed. If Lakewood was relying on back-room dealings rather than public statements, their efforts will remain unknown. Shouldn’t we have used every tactic available to fight this bill? Would a more eclectic strategy have succeeded? We’ll never know. The bill passed the Senate on May 4, 2023.
On June 6, the Lakewood Budget and Audit Board decided to recommend that Lakewood keep future TABOR funds instead of refunding any excess to taxpayers. That recommendation will proceed to City Council for approval, along with the recommendation for resident input through focus groups. If approved, the issue will be on the 2024 ballot.
In 2018, over 60% of Lakewood voters approved allowing Lakewood to retain funds that would otherwise be refunded through TABOR. That measure expires in 2025. At that time, the voters were told this was a one-time measure, which would be used to fund “parks, police and potholes.” Those program promises were fulfilled. The 2019 budget used $12.5 million of TABOR funds, $8 million of which went towards parks property purchases (Looking@Lakewood). The 2021 budget used $5.5 million on police body cams, among other things (Looking@Lakewood pg4). However, the city is now used to spending at that level.
Overall expenditures and revenues from the General and TABOR funds were presented at the March 16 Budget Board meeting. As of the June 6 meeting, the day the decision was made by the Budget Board, no critical program was identified as needing additional funds only available through TABOR retention. Instead, overall levels of city spending have grown, and funding for all departments will need reduced proportionately if the city must operate within the General Fund budget. The General Fund is strained because Lakewood’s residential population has grown, requiring increased services, while economic development has not grown, resulting in fewer sales taxes. Lakewood’s mixed-use zoning has exacerbated that problem by replacing commercial buildings with residential.
Work to identify actual budget cuts or increased spending will not be done until after the measure is voted on. That appears to be separate from work to find what the voters may be interested in hearing will be cut or saved, which will affect city decisions and the ballot language. This marks a clear delineation between operational necessity and wish-list type programs. It also brings up the possibility that wish-list promises will be made at the expense of prioritization of available funds. Even within the Budget Board meeting, increased overall spending was not a focus and was not overlaid with decreasing resident satisfaction. Focusing only on the wish-list expresses a false-positive that spending is appropriate and effective (i.e. everyone would agree to a bigger Christmas budget if they didn’t have to evaluate the day-to-day).
From City of Lakewood March 16 Budget and Audit Board presentationFrom 2022 Lakewood Community Survey: Overall Lakewood City Government Performance by Year Shows Decreasing Performance
The Budget Board recommended hiring a specialist to hold focus group sessions to message and explain what they believed the city needs, while also gathering input from voters. The recommendation did not include researching resident desire to retain funds they could use themselves through TABOR refunds. The focus group will look at what programs residents are interested in spending on, and the length of time they would allow the city to retain funds, including indefinitely. Resident input sessions will be done at city expense, to result in recommendations for a ballot measure the voters will approve.
Focus groups and surveys are effective campaign strategies for ballot measures. Straight ballot measures, without campaign strategies, would be to present voters with three different options: refund TABOR money, keep money for another 5 years, keep money indefinitely. No program spending needs to be identified since that was not part of the original decision.
There was limited discussion of ways to operate within budget without retaining TABOR funds. The city has standard procedures in place for such circumstances. The Budget and Audit Board does not typically engage at that level of detail. Instead, the Board decided to ask for continued TABOR fund use.
The next steps will be for City Council to accept or reject the board recommendations. The recommendation came through consensus; no vote was taken but no dissenting opinions were voiced.
Reader Recommended Business:
JD Services: 346-217-8958. “We do fences, patios, ponds and so much more.”
Due to negative impact on locals, including but not limited to affordability, Italy has proposed new restrictions on STRs, just as Malaysia had to recently do, just as Paris, Tokyo & Colorado towns have had to do. Please read below article.
Why didn’t Lakewood City Council heed the info, repeatedly presented to them, of other municipalities’ multi-year experience across the country & the world?
Despite their own votes on their generous ordinance & in another example of cognitive dissonance, the “need to address affordable housing” was once again raised by members of the dais in the 6/12 city council meeting; the same members who recently voted for unlimited STRs in Lakewood.
Italy Proposes Law to Restrict Short-Term Accommodations Italy is pondering a move to curb short-term rentals in its historic centers, giving locals a chance to score dreamy homes instead of tourists, and the proposal has sparked a fiery debate between locals, businesses, hotels, cities, and even the national government. It’s like an Italian soap opera right before our eyes!
Italy’s Tourism Ministry recently unveiled a draft law to limit short-term tourist rentals, including Airbnb listings, across the country. The aim is to tackle the scarcity of affordable housing in major cities and alleviate overcrowding in tourist hotspots.
While Florence has already banned Airbnb in its city center, the proposed bill in Rome has sparked mixed reactions. While hotel businesses advocate for stricter rules, property managers are standing firm in defense of their businesses.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has extended their public comment period on two proposals that would further regulate ethylene oxide to protect people’s health and the environment. The agency is now accepting comments through June 27, 2023.
My comments will concern an aspect of cases of pollution, radiation and other hazards that are not typically looked at – the corruption and malfeasance by the elected official involved in making decisions which, while not obvious at first, have dire consequences upon thousands, and, at times, over generations, millions of people.
I grew up a short distance away from Chernobyl, in Belarus. To this day I come across pieces of knowledge, whereby, government officials made horrendous decisions, be they driven by the desire to save face or to simply hide the truth (and at times, coupled with ego-driven foolishness). Worse still, I see corruption and ulterior motive decision making, mainly driven by greed and ego/narcissism in the U.S. at state and local levels now more than ever.
Which brings us to Terumo BCT in Lakewood, CO. Yes, there should be far stricter regulations on how any given facility utilizing Ethylene Oxide is overseen. However, what is not been looked at are the decisions made by the local and state officials.
Under the convenient guise of “EPA is a federal entity that’s looking at the levels of exposure and we are cooperating”, development adjacent to the potentially harmful effects of such a facility, which may not manifest themselves for decades or even generations, continues. Hence, not only are thousands of current residents are exposed, but untold future thousands might be exposed due to the decisions of the local officials.
There are numerous examples of the local officials making decisions driven by greed, corruption and shortsightedness. Arizona now has to limit the building of home around Phoenix due to well water running low:
While there are larger environmental factors at play, the shortsightedness of the local officials, coupled with short term greed, is one of the key factors now driving the drastic decision related to Arizona’s water supply and Colorado is not far behind in such levels of buffoonery, again, driven by short term greed and corruption.
Lakewood city council and some of the city staff have been pushing for poorly planned development, which is placing thousands of future residents in to rather precarious economic and, now, due to the recent findings by the EPA, environmental position. There are numerous rental units being built in proximity to the Terumo BCT facility, even after the recent findings by the EPA.
(Oak Station Apartments – just a short way down from the zone estimated by the EPA to have exposure to the Ethylene Oxide. And there are hundreds more (perhaps, thousands) of units that are being built all along the Colfax Corridor adjacent to the same area.) Fundamentally, the government has “one job” and it is to ensure that businesses act in an ethical manner. Which, unfortunately, the government has been failing at, be it at a federal or local level. The recent settlement with Dupont, Chemours and Corteva in regards to PFAS is the latest example of this:
For decades, millions of people (never mind the environment) have been absorbing these chemicals. The adverse effects may not be truly known for decades if not generations more. And those companies knew what the chemical might do. The government knew… Why did it take decades to truly act and when the action was taken, it is just a settlement which will never truly cover the real extent of the damage caused?
Just as might turn out to be the case with Ethylene Oxide (and other “surprises” which should be put in the proverbial sunlight in Colorado, but are not in the scope of this particular matter).
Lakewood administration has shown little, if any, regard for (true) economic and environmental considerations in other parts of the city (other than the placating and dismissive statements in the city’s propaganda pieces and vacuous statements as a response to the inquiries by the citizens).
Hence, it might be prudent to start exploring either criminal liability being mandated from the federal level for the local officials, whose decisions are driven by catering to those who donate the most and far stricter, federally-driven, framework must be established where any future development is a subject to review, public input and hearings, governed NOT by state and local officials, but by entities who won’t be easily swayed by the corruption at the local level.
And by the way, if you get hung up on words, then you’re going to let a lot of evil [individuals] slip through. Because evil people learn the correct terms very quickly. I don’t know if you’ve noticed that? They are the first ones to learn it so they can smuggle their evil [stuff] through. By saying everything ‘correctly’ even though they are hiding really bad [stuff] in it.” – Patton Oswalt
Metro districts and high-density, high-priced rentals have spread, like cancer, across Colorado. Municipal and state legislators are enabling this plague, using the “right” words such as “affordable housing”, “equity”, “sustainability”, and “economic development”.
And you are paying for it – hundreds of dollars, per month, on top of the mortgage, in metro district fees which were voted on by the developers, before the residents had any say, or between $1,600 and $2,400 or more for a one-bedroom rental in a corporate-owned apartment building. …
Fire Chief Lombardi reported that he represented the Metropolitan Fire Chiefs Association when attending the Diversity Conference. Lombardi is the immediate past President of the Metro Fire Chiefs. His platform as President was one of education and he instituted the possibility of someone attending this conference. During his attendance, he was able to share techniques for increasing gender diversity from his time at West Metro. Lombardi also represented the United States at this conference by virtue of being the only US attendee. The FEU DEI Conference was open to all and saw attendees from 18 countries. Conference costs For Chief Lombardi were covered by the Metro Fire Chiefs Association, with the possible exception of his time.
Diversity remains a priority for Chief Lombardi. Chief Lombardi was asked by the Board how West Metro’s demographics looked. Lombardi did not have hard answers ready but felt the district underrepresented Hispanics. Lombardi was a leader in redefining the physical ability evaluation model so that females are now tested on their ability to carry the fire hose and perform duties, rather than arbitrary tests such as the number of pushups possible.
Dr. Jennifer Taylor, of Drexel University and the International Association of Fire Chiefs, also attended to present finding of her research. Dr. Taylor has a grant to develop a diversity toolkit. Several members of West Metro, including Chief Lombardi, will continue to work with Dr. Taylor on this project.
Deputy Chief Metz will also be travelling to Copenhagen, this time to participate in an Officer Development Program. Metz said he was particularly excited about this program as a way to see how the European countries were implementing United Nations sustainability goals. One of Deputy Chief Metz’s goals in sustainability is moving to electric fire trucks when feasible.
The FEU invited Metro Fire Chiefs to include a participant in the Development program. During the meeting, Chief Lombardi said that Metz has a unique opportunity …’He’s going to be the US representative to the Officers Development Program.” Metz said that he applied for and was accepted as North America’s representative. After the meeting, Chief Lombardi clarified that no one else applied. The International Association of Fire Chiefs, the overarching organization of which the Metro Chiefs are a subsection, could not locate any announcement of this program accepting applications.
Lombardi believes participation will be good exposure to global financial and marketing practices, therefore West Metro will cover the costs for program participation. Participation in the Officer Development Program will also serve as part of Chief Lombardi’s successor management training.
Lakewood City Council Member Anita Springsteen announced that she had the “amazing honor” to be asked by the NAACP to start a chapter in Jefferson County.
The NAACP is the “home of grassroots activism for civil rights and social justice.” Springsteen will continue to tackle inequality and abuses through her work with the organization. She asks for those interested in serving on the organizing committee or being a member to contact her at [email protected].
The City of Lakewood adopted the 2021 International Building Codes on May 8th. This move will increase the price of new and existing homes and increase the city’s authority to regulate maintenance on private property. Multiple City Council members stated that these changes were necessary for public safety.
Safety
The safety factor was directed toward the adoption of the 2021 International Property Maintenance Code. This new code will allow the building department to issue citations for public safety concerns on private property. Residents can now contact the city if they see broken concrete or inadequate railings on the property of their neighbors or landlords.
Lakewood does not have enforcement capability to police all properties so this will be resident driven, with the city retaining the ability for flexible, i.e. selective, enforcement. There is no timeline for compliance per code. Lakewood city staff vow to work with residents in cases of hardship.
As an example of why this code was necessary, the city cited the case of 940 S Ames St. By the city’s own admission, this property fell into disrepair through a series of unfortunate events leading to the city condemning the property. The city went through legal actions to require the building to be torn down within 90 days of property purchase.
The Ames property was a unique case in which two successive, related owners had personal issues, died and left the property to a third relative who was dealing with loss and extreme property issues. The probability is low that maintenance code violations could have fixed the situation and in fact, the demolition was demanded of the new owners.
The property maintenance code was approved unanimously although one Council Member cited concerns with intrusions onto personal property rights, and another Member cited concerns with the increased cost to lower-income homes.
Sidenote: The Ames property owners were required to have the site demolished due to the building being unsafe, unlike the recent case of the Holiday Plaza Shopping Center wherein Lakewood provided the owners an interest-free loan to accelerate demolition by 6-9 months. Both the Ames and Holiday Plaza situations appear to be a war on abandoned buildings, rather than directing efforts directly towards the homeless themselves.
Increased cost
The city also adopted the 2021 Residential Code and the 2021 International Energy Conservation Code, both of which raised flags for the higher-than-normal new costs they will impose. One 2021 study showed that new building codes have contributed to a 9.9% increase in home costs over the previous 10 years.
That increased cost was demonstrated in the aftermath of the Marshall Fire. Victims had to build their new homes to the new codes. One resident reported hearing estimates as high as $98,000 to meet the new regulations, according to the Denver Post. The town of Superior and Louisville ended up suspending the 2021 codes because of the extreme costs. The residents of Boulder did not have that same relief. Detailed cost estimates obtained by Louisville residents show an estimated $75,000 additional cost for their new home.
Due to the unique circumstances surrounding an emergency, there were many financial incentives available to those homeowners. Some of the residents voluntarily adopted the code after protesting it, according to the Denver Post, due to the availability of relief funds.
Costs in Lakewood will be borne by homebuilders and new residents. According to the National Association of Home Builders, the residential code update, only one code out of several, has a $6.5-$12,000 increased cost. That cost includes increased insulations and sprinkler systems for residences. The same report found that it will take 32-67 years of energy savings under current prices to pay that cost back.
The 2021 International Energy Conservation Code, which has also been adopted by Lakewood, is a little confusing. It appears that new requirements such as having an electric vehicle charging infrastructure, all electric appliances, and carbon offsetting credits were proposed but removed, according to the New Buildings Institute. These removed provisions may be the source of much of the costs in original estimates.
All building code updates were adopted voluntarily by Lakewood. City staff provided options to remove the sprinkler provision but that option was not taken by Council, even though previous city surveys showed residents were not in favor of residential sprinklers. Lakewood is one of the only cities in the state to adopt that provision, which West Metro Fire has been working hard in favor of. All codes were modified before adoption per Lakewood’s local specifications (see ordinances). Except for the maintenance code, all updates were adopted with all in favor except for one dissenting vote by Councilor Janssen.
“It’s important that NAHB members and HBAs emphasize that there is no need for a state to update its energy codes in most cases. Adopting new building codes is expensive… and can be confusing for both builders and building officials.”
The May 8th Lakewood City Council meeting included an item to repeal and reenact Lakewood Municipal Code governing Parks and Recreation. The staff presentation delineates several updates. In the “other” items category, the voiceover includes “clarify the authority” of the Community Resources Director. In fact, the proposed language will transfer all authority from the City Manager to the Director of Community Resources.
The City Charter gives the City Manager responsibility “to the City Council for the proper administration of all affairs of the City.” Under the proposed revision, the City Manager will no longer be responsible for Community Resources, per the Municipal Code. All decisions will be made by the Director of Community Resources.
The Community Resources Director does not report to Lakewood City Council. Council can only talk to the City Manager, setting up a disconnect, now that the City Manager is no longer involved in Community Resources.
The language used in the staff presentation, ie “clarify the authority”, seems to suggest that the City Manager has not been playing an authoritative role for some time.
