Guest post by Lenore Herskovitz

A Planning Commission Study Session was scheduled for January 18, 2023 but because of a failure to post in a timely manner, this meeting was canceled. Unfortunately, this is not an isolated occurrence. According to Resolution 2023-3 which designates the places for posting public meetings pursuant to C.R.S. 24-6-402, there is a requirement of “full and timely” notice to meetings. The places for such postings are the lobby/atrium of Lakewood Civic Center and the city’s official website (Lakewood.org). There was no publication of the Planning Commission meeting on the city site until late morning of January 18. The exact manner and means of posting is to be implemented by the City Manager or a designee. Someone clearly dropped the ball.

The agenda for the Study Session included  a discussion of Planning Commission priorities and the topic of attached housing. When Commissioner Kentner spoke with the Clerk of the Planning Commission about rescheduling the meeting, she was told that the clerk had been directed to offer the dates of February 8 or February 22. There was no explanation as to why earlier dates were not provided. The Planning Commission last met on November 30, 2022. More delays and postponements are described in my previous article “A Look Back”.

~Corrections and Updates

~Corrected 1/22/23 from “The Planning Commission last met on November 2, 2022.” to “The Planning Commission last met on November 30, 2022.”

Follow-up from L. Herskovitz:

Previous to the canceled study session on January 18, the Planning Commission last met on November 30, 2022.  (See here:  https://lakewoodspeaks.org/meetings/467)  The blog post incorrectly originally stated that the Commission last met on November 2.

I would like to apologize for the inaccuracy in my article but I was relying on information provided on the official City website (Lakewood.org) which did not show that the Planning Commission met on November 30, 2022. It is difficult to provide the facts to constituents when the official City site fails to do so. Perhaps it is time to consolidate Lakewood.org, Lakewoodspeaks.org and Lakewoodtogether.org into one site to prevent such confusion. I value the truth and strive to avoid misinformation in my articles.

Lakewood’s City Manager Employment Agreement is publicly available. A comparison below shows some of the employment agreement changes throughout the current City Manager’s tenure, along with some considerations that may be taken into account when evaluating a public servant contract.

A quick glance at the chart below shows that the City Manager’s base salary has risen by $93,000 in 13 years, an almost 50% raise or 3.7% per year. Paid time off, health benefits and retirement have also risen. Retirement benefits started with the same benefits as regular employees plus one year of severance, and have risen to all of that plus a defined benefit from the City Manager’s Retirement Pension Plan plus maybe more. (The money purchase pension benefits may be continued through 2014 agreement, unclear.)

*Stated during Dec 19 City Council meeting

**The extra retirement benefit is ambiguous. Read the highlighted section below and see what you think. There seems to be a new benefit in the event of retirement (which the City Manager now qualifies for).

Comments from council during the meeting indicated that the item of most interest was length of tenure of employee and population of city. Analysis of duties included, such as city-wide waste and/or water, was not included.

Other items of interest shown in the chart below include that the City Manager makes at least 4x the base salary of the average Lakewood resident and city employee. At the same time, the community survey shows resident satisfaction with city services is decreasing.

Sources:

Overall satisfaction with city services

Average city employee salary

$56,000 (2022)

$65,000 (2022)

**The extra retirement benefit is ambiguous.

~Corrections:

1/19/23 to remove salary increases were mostly due to salary surveys.

Lakewood City Council Member Jeslin Shahrezaei joined us on January 6, 2023, to discuss a variety of issues. Starting with her views on the Moms Demand Action meetings, meeting disruptions, and how the process should work.

Thank you, Councilor, for continuing through an especially bumbly interview – I won’t quit my day job.

Council Member Jeslin Shahrezaei Interview Part 1: Moms Demand Action, Lakewood City Council meeting disruptions December 2022, and proper processes

Council Member Jeslin Shahrezaei Interview Part 2: Continuation of meeting process, Lakewood City Manager agreement amendments, future goals and DRCOG

Highlights from Lakewood City Council Member Jeslin Shahrezaei (loose transcription):

• Any effort to make sure that we’re sharing actual information is incredibly helpful.
• (Regarding the gun debate) the majority of folks who had strong opinions opposing what Moms Demand Action, we’re suggesting, really weren’t Lakewood residents.
• [the gun issue] conversation is one worth having … Lakewood, being sort of the county seat would have a dramatic impact on what maybe some of our neighbors in the county would consider and there’s an opportunity for us to be a leader one way or another

(Regarding muting) it’s not as black and white as people’s free speech being dismantled through muting …. Ultimately everyone has the right to their opinion, and they should be able to speak, and I don’t know that I necessarily agree that that’s not what we’re seeing

• The mute function is being used to sort of bring us back (on topic), I think that is an important tool
• I felt satisfied with the contract. I felt that the contract didn’t ask for anything that was sort of above and beyond what was okay in my mind. For that, reason I didn’t push forward the idea of a discussion because in my mind I felt satisfied.

We were asked to renew a contract because earlier in the year we had found consensus. The staff member was doing a job that was well enough to continue their service to the community.

• What’s tricky, though, is that there were members of council who voted against the December fifth Special executive session, who also chose not to participate in the annual evaluation. So without their participation… it becomes really easy for them to come back later and say, ‘I call BS on this’.

I trusted the ability of the mayor and the mayor pro attempt to sort of operate that process

What the agenda was requesting of us was to vote yes or no on the extension of the city managers, contract and that’s what we did

• And so were people coming into that meeting ready to poke holes into whatever was presented? I think so.
• To be clear, that [Dec 5 meeting] is not outside of how [executive sessions] usually operates. For example, when we were making decisions about appointing the presiding judge we didn’t receive those hiring packages until that night, so time is given that night to read and ask questions…. you have to come ready to do that work

I did not see a single counselor come prepared to bring an amendment…. We were at the point where you needed to be able… to post an amendment to this….that work hadn’t happened.

• I saw counselors come prepared to disrupt and poke holes in the process, saying, you know I was excluded from this [process].
• How could you evaluate someone without metrics for which to determine success or failure? And I think where there’s an opportunity for us to get further clarity is, which ones do we agree on as community members
• (In regards to giving the City Manager an extra raise over average staff) I would wonder if we’d ask those same questions if this was a man (Editor’s Note: Yes, I would, and did in my own public contract “manager raise” discussion. I did not take the insinuation personally)
• When you look at the salary survey of other city managers in comparable size, cities within the range of what’s appropriate, she’s not making an exuberant amount of money
• What we’re starting to explore now we had a December meeting on, and we’ll continue to look at as we enter into 2023 is what is the role that the Denver Regional Council governments can play on affordable housing.
• I don’t know that we need to bring commercial jobs into Lakewood to keep people from driving out. We have huge employers here already, and a lot of that work is a mix of both working from home and going into the office.

Council Member Charley Able joined us on December 29 to discuss the meetings regarding incentives for the Lakewood City Manager. Those meetings resulted in first, a denial of executive session on December 5th, followed by a public meeting wherein members accuse Lakewood Mayor Paul of muting their microphones.

(a second attempt to reach Mayor Paul has not yet been answered)

I have cut the video into a couple parts for viewability. Both contain information and news for Lakewood, Colorado

Charley Able Interview Part 1: Fighting for transparency and to have his voice heard

Charley Able Interview Part 2: Campaign finance, special interests, homelessness and home ownership.

Highlights from Lakewood City Council Member Charley Able (loose transcription):

The mayor muted me. He didn’t want to hear what I had to say, even though I had to listen to his point of view on the same subject.

• I often feel like [I don’t get to say all I want] On the night in question, Adam decided he was going to put some irritation out there where there shouldn’t have been.
• We claim to be transparent but if we aren’t provided the essential information for a discussion, we shouldn’t be discussing it and that isn’t transparency. So the mayor muted me for trying to set the record straight about his allegation. Then he recognized Councilor Olver and apparently Councilor Olver said something the mayor didn’t want to hear so he muted him too.
• Later, the mayor muted his frequent muting target, Anita Springsteen. When she said “Mayor, when you mute these council people you are muting tens of thousands of voters”. Not her exact words but close summation. He didn’t want to hear that either so he muted her.
• No, I was not disparaging, I was merely pointing out that the mayor was giving us a line of bs. I wasn’t disparaging, and I certainly wasn’t talking about staff. I wasn’t speaking over the mayor. Our policies and procedures manual says that when we have the floor, we aren’t to be interrupted until we yield the floor. And the mayor just ignores that completely, very often.
• (Why didn’t you go back to executive session on the 19^th? Why was it a special meeting) That’s a good question. Because they provided the information that I needed in the first place so I would have had no objection to it.
• To show you how closely we abide by the city charter when I was elected, and sworn in, they swore me in with the wrong oath.
• It is difficult to bring in something that is not on the agenda. … If the majority vote for it, we can schedule it for a study session. We could probably have accomplished that sometime next year.
• We spent less than 3 hours on city manager evaluation and negotiations.
• I have never, in all my evaluations, had [survey results] presented to me beforehand, outside of the executive session, as a condition that needs to be met [per contract]. 

In the run up to [the Dec 5] meeting, the mayor provided council with no information at all. Not the wording of the new incentives, not the wording of the new incentives in the context of the contract she’s working under now

… its not what constitutes a lack of decorum to me but what constitutes a lack of decorum to the mayor. And apparently it’s just someone saying no mayor, you didn’t speak correctly there.

Charley Able

…by not allowing us to communicate the facts to our constituents and that [muting] our speaking time at city council meeting, I believe the mayor is interfering in our first amendment rights.

In Part 2:

• I am chairman of the campaign finance committee. One of our problems is that special interests spent I think $700k on the strategic growth initiative. $40-$50k on council races. I think that is part of what makes it so difficult that people who look towards re-election when making votes. I’m afraid they often look to the side of special interests instead of to the side of the community.
• Crime is much easier to enforce the law if you have jail space. At one time if you stole a car it was grand theft auto. Now it’s a slap on the wrist and don’t do it again. If we catch you a second or third time we’ll put you in jail. But that’s also trying to fund on government budgets.
• folks with the American apartments out of Chicago, donate heavily to people in lakewood. They expect their voice to be heard, and I do believe it’s being heard.
• Basically, the reason I formed this committee to start with is because people shouldn’t have $50k to spend on running for mayor.
• We are handling [homelessness] with some compassion and there’s so many resources out there. We should do our best to emulate [what works]. It’s expensive.

We need to follow through with the promises we’ve been making (on home ownership)

LakewoodInformer reached out to Mayor Paul for comment on muting. It was (still is) the holidays so we gave it a few days but wanted to report that as of now, there is no comment from the mayor of Lakewood, Colorado. We will always take comment from those involved in our stories.

Email sent:

Dear Mayor Paul,

I am reporting on the Dec 19 meeting with the city manager contract and muting of councilors. Would you like to comment?

The reasons you stated in the meeting were a need for decorum, to keep to the agenda items, and a need for discretion with personnel matters. If you’d care to expand on that, please let me know. I am also available for a zoom interview any afternoon this week. 

Possible questions to answer:

1. How do you answer the charge that you did not allow Council Members to speak
2. Why was the meeting not scheduled earlier in the year to allow adequate time for discussion?
3. Why did only you and the Mayor pro tem work on the re-negotiation, without involving the whole council?

Thank you

After the Moms Demand Action came to a Lakewood City Council meeting, a rumor started that they were invited by City Council Member Jeslin Shahrezaei.

I asked Councilor Shahrezaei herself and she denies that she invitated them. A CORA (Colorado Open Records Act) request on correspondence regarding that meeting and the documents support her claim. Indeed, Moms Demand Action are active in several areas outside of Lakewood, showing Lakewood was not specifically targeted.

To be clear, if Council Member Shahrezaei had invited them that would be within her rights and theirs. But spreading false information is hurtful to all sides.

Read into public record: a FOIA request has been bounced around for 3 months, since August, 2022. Latest response requests renegotiation of data release by January 5, 2023.

Reminder: This is the 59 acres recently sold at the corner of 6th and Union. Concerns center around potential environmental hazards

The battle over guns comes to Lakewood.

At the Nov 28, 2022 Lakewood City Council meeting, proponents for and against new gun control measures made their arguments in public comment. This is now an issue for all local governments due to a new law in Colorado, https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb21-256. This law makes it possible for cities to pass their own laws, as long as they are more restrictive than state laws.

Moms Demand Action has suggested the following new ordinances:

1. Creating a 10-day waiting period for the sale of firearms
2. Raising the minimum age to purchase and possess a firearm to 21 years old
3. Requiring firearm dealers to post signage about the dangers of weapons in the home
4. Prohibiting guns in certain public places (open and concealed carry)
5. Prohibiting the possession of unserialized ghost guns

City Council has not added these items to the agenda in any formal action but public comment on the issue lasted around 2 hours just considering the possibility.

There were an estimated 11 comments in favor of new restrictions, and 20 comments against them (some comments were ambiguous)

A VERY brief summary of comments in favor of the proposed regulations:

• These are research-backed solutions
• More regulations slow gun violence
• The 2nd Amendment requires a well-regulated militia and that is currently not the case
• These are sensible solutions
• Our laws are out of date
• Proposal is not overly burdensome, it’s respectful
• The proposal is not an unreasonable ask
• Several stories of personal loss, violence impacting family and friends, and examples from around the nation
• Stories of not feeling safe

A VERY brief summary of comments against the proposed restrictions:

• We have 2nd Amendment rights
• Cannot convert rights to a crime
• Criminals don’t care about laws
• Mature enough to vote, mature enough to own a gun
• Government must uphold constitution
• Culture is the problem
• Moms Demand Action are only expressing pain
• New SCOTUS decision says any infraction on rights is too much
• The real problem is mental health cases are on the rise
• There are local gun businesses which are a benefit to the community and tax base
• Gun control has been tried and doesn’t result in less violence
• We already have enough regulation

The November 7^th City council meeting included a presentation on the 2022 State of the Municipal Court. Presiding Judge Nicole Bozarth presented statistics on cases, hearings and more. She also updated the council on the progress of treatment and outreach programs.

Presiding Judge Bozarth reported that Lakewood is a leader in court innovation.

Regarding case trends, Judge Bozarth reports that penal cases are on the rise, especially juvenile cases. The number of penal cases that are high risk are increasing. High-risk or high-need cases include domestic disturbance cases. 90% of juvenile offenders are in the high-risk category.

The number of calls to police for service is up over last year. Judge Bozarth believes police are following up on more calls of increasing complexity. Traffic cops are being pulled in to cover these other cases, resulting in less traffic offenses such as parking.  

The number of hearings held is still not back to pre-covid levels, being only 60% of the number compared to 2018.

Jails are opening up and are taking more prisoners when a warrant has been issued. However, Judge Bozarth explains that court policy is to vacate almost all warrants. (If there are different types of warrants, it was not explained.)

Failures to appear, citations and warrants are all down from 2021 to 2022. Data before 2021 is not presented.

Judge Bozarth thanks the city for funding the Municipal Opportunity to Secure and Sustain Treatment (MOSST) Program. This program was intended to reduce the cost for “probation clients court ordered to participate in therapeutic interventions.” This program was passed by unanimous vote in March, 2022 at the cost of $199,992.

Lakewood Municipal Community Outreach Court will start December 1, 2022. Judge Bozarth will be handling cases directly from Mountair Church. The goal is to “provide those in need with immediate access to community resources and providers.” For example, someone with a high “Failure to Appear” rate may have an easier time if the court moves to them.

Discussions after the presentation focused on mental health solutions. Several Council Members thanked Judge Bozarth for her compassion and said that was the reason City Council appointed her.

Public comment after the presentation included an account from one resident who was harmed by an offender with several Failures to Appear, for which the Court vacates all warrants. This resident has suffered loss of time, money and personal health.