Uncategorized

City Council Wants More Done To Fight Climate Change

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on December 16, 2024Posted in UncategorizedTagged 2024, city-council, climate-change, Colorado, environment, Lakewood, news, sustainability, update-2024

Most of Lakewood City Council is concerned that Lakewood will not reach net zero carbon emissions by 2050. Although Lakewood has been increasing climate change regulations and spending for over a decade, it’s not enough and the city will be increasing both spending and regulation in 2025. Are these goals achievable and which programs are most effective? Lakewood is still developing its model to predict emission reduction. It is almost impossible to attribute which programs result in the best emission reductions because every result is intertwined not only with other programs but with the existing climate, which by definition is changing. Lakewood has more sustainability goals than surrounding cities. Lakewood is named “one of 119 cities across the globe providing leadership in environmental action and transparency by the Carbon Disclosure Project”, showing Lakewood is more aggressive than most of the world. The city is currently working on a new climate vulnerability study, a new sustainability plan, updating zoning codes and building codes for increased required sustainability measures. Votes on the new codes are scheduled for spring. Full-time sustainability staff has increased from 2, in 2014, to 12 in 2025. Dozens more part-time staff are employed throughout all city departments. According to Sustainability and Community Development Director, Travis Parker, about 30% of the new comprehensive plan focuses on sustainability. Despite already doing so much, every Council Member present asked about doing more during the November 18, 2024 Study Session on Sustainability. The key to City Council goals was to secure more funding. Council Member Jeslin Shahrezaei points out that cities like Fort Collins and Denver have a dedicated sustainability budget. She says grants for one project at a time is not a long-term solution. She believes residents want more funding to go to sustainability efforts. According to Shahrezaei, Lakewood played a pivotal role in securing a regional $200M grant because it has the tracking numbers for emissions and workforce. Council will talk about new revenue generating possibilities at the annual retreat workshop. Council Member Paula Nystrom asked for a new program and budget for residential greenhouse gas emission reduction for the upcoming revised budget. Lakewood has not asked residents to support the climate change fight directly with their pocketbooks before. Staffing initiatives often start as “free money” from other sources and continued past the grant’s expiration date without a public discussion. More direct taxing and funding suggestions represent a significant new direction for Lakewood, especially on the scale of new programs at millions of dollars a year. Councilor Glenda Sinks was concerned about being able to track sustainability spending through the budget. This was a good question without a good answer. According to Director Parker, Lakewood is not showing much in the budget yet because it is in the “enviable place of having more money available than we have plans for yet but that won’t be the case for long.” There was no answer as to where the money is shown in the current budget. Councilor Roger Low echoes the need for clear spending and goal tracking in the budget. He would like to see more progress on SolarApp implementation. Council Member Sophia Mayott-Guerrero floated a new idea to expand the greenhouse gas fee and have a larger spending pool to be used for things like sidewalks, bike lanes, lighting, park maintenance, road maintenance, climate impact and water impact. All of these could be viewed as “sustainability” measures. Several Councilors, including Cruz and Shahrezaei, were interested in making sure that money was distributed equitably. They want to make sure that low-income areas were first in line for assistance, as was intended through the federal program that Lakewood receives funding from. Councilor Jacob LaBure would like to be a national leader in sustainability efforts. LaBure points out that much of the federal money may be lessening under a new administration. As a result, he suggests Lakewood do more internally. For instance, Lakewood may require garbage and waste contractors to only use contractors with EV vehicles. Mayor Strom echoes the benefits of buying or contracting EV vehicles companies. Councilor LaBure would like to mandate new buildings, especially city buildings, be LEED certified through the building code. Director Travis Parker says some buildings could already meet LEED standards but do not want to pay the quarter million dollars to get certified. Councilor Rein would like to see more specificity in the sustainability plan in order to get Lakewood on track for less emissions. He is interested in the city getting a LEED certification. City staff say big new projects under city control, like the new maintenance facility, may not be able to get LEED certification but will be sustainable on some level. Rein asked staff if the current budget has enough funding to improve sidewalk connectivity and make the city more walkable in order to cut down on vehicle traffic. Staff answered there was not enough funding.

Lakewood Cries Foul Over New Ordinance While Ignoring Own Laws for Years

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on November 18, 2024Posted in UncategorizedTagged belmar-commons, city-council, community, environment, fee-in-lieu, hb-2024-28, housing, lakewood-open-space, news

By Regina Hopkins At the Lakewood City Council meeting on Monday, November 4, 2024, council members spent three hours deliberating a new ordinance, O-2024-28, and whether to approve it or send it to a special election, which was expected to cost Lakewood between $175,000 and $350,000. Despite expectations that the council would send it to an election, in an unexpected turn of events, the Council enacted the ordinance itself, arguing that doing so would save taxpayer money and expedite an inevitable legal battle related to the Colorado Legislature’s recently enacted HB 24-1313. While Lakewood cries foul over the supposed legality of the newly passed ordinance, its longstanding failure to enforce Lakewood’s own ordinances reveals the hypocrisy of the City’s stance. Ordinance O-2024-28, introduced by the grassroots group “Save Open Space Lakewood,” was sparked by the plan to build a massive zero-lot-line luxury apartment complex next to Belmar Park, the city’s crown jewel. This development became the final straw, igniting widespread outrage and drawing attention to the even larger issue of ignoring open space requirements throughout Lakewood and unchecked overdevelopment. Councilor Paula Nystrom highlighted the issue, saying, “We’re in an untenable situation, but there’s a reason we ended up here. Citizens shouldn’t have to protest, gather signatures, hire lawyers, or jump through hoops just to have their voices heard.” She continued, “The question isn’t whether this petition is perfect; it’s about understanding how we got here and how we can prevent this from ever happening again.” For the past 13 years developers have exploited loopholes in Lakewood’s ordinances without facing any repercussions, as the City repeatedly sides with developers at the expense of green space. The City’s prior ordinance, which required 5.5 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents for new developments, had been ignored every single time. This raises the question: Since 1983, when Lakewood’s first Park and Open Space Dedication ordinance was adopted as part of the first Municipal Code, and included a “fee in lieu” option, how many acres of land have been sacrificed to development rather than preserved through park dedication? Arguably, a significant amount. The City’s consistent approval of the “in lieu of” fee has undermined the intended balance of the original ordinance, leading to a significant loss of green spaces amid ongoing development. We are losing more and more places every day for plants and animals to thrive without human impact. Lakewood’s sudden focus on the legality of the new ordinance is a diversion, as the City tries to portray the citizen-led initiative as unlawful. This focus overlooks the fact that, for years, the City allowed developers to use the fee in lieu option without exception, failing to exercise thoughtful discretion in its widespread application across the city. Had the City exercised better foresight and applied reasonable common sense in enforcing the ordinances already on the books, it wouldn’t be facing this situation today. Instead, by allowing developers to contribute to the City’s coffers while avoiding actual land dedications and now hoping that the newly passed citizen-led initiative gets challenged in court, Lakewood is revealing its true priorities: supporting unchecked development that benefits developers while disregarding the needs of residents, the environment, and escalating larger concerns about global warming. Councilor Nystrom emphasized, “From all the studies done post-COVID, we know that nature is essential for people’s well-being.” She added, “Every apartment building should include green space… These are fundamental human needs, as well as environmental needs.” Nystrom’s perspective highlights an understanding of both human and ecological needs that is sorely lacking among many of her pro-development colleagues on the Council. Councilor Roger Low’s claim that Ordinance O-2024-28 would eliminate affordable housing is simply false. In fact, it would likely benefit those residents in affordable housing the most by ensuring access to green space, which is often overlooked in favor of prioritizing density. The real affordable housing issue lies with Lakewood’s failure to meet the urgent demand it has identified. The City has already overdeveloped much of its available land with luxury and market-rate units, leaving little room for affordable housing. Let’s be clear about where the responsibility lies—with the City itself. Lakewood’s overdevelopment has already created a barrier to meeting the community’s needs, limiting its options, while attempting to deflect attention by blaming O-2024-28. When the petition was initially drafted, it fully complied with existing ordinances and laws. However, the ballot initiative process takes several months, including time for gathering signatures, to move forward with a petition of this kind. As citizens gathered signatures in April and May 2024, their grassroots group gained significant momentum. In response, state lawmakers introduced a last-minute change to pending legislation. A paragraph provision slipped into HB 24-1313, a 62-page bill addressing Housing in Transit-Oriented Communities, in the final days of the Senate legislative session mandated that municipalities offer a “fee in lieu” option to bypass preserving open spaces. It’s no coincidence that the fee in lieu “amendment” passed as the ballot initiative was gaining traction—its success threatened the development industry’s profits by closing a longstanding loophole. This is a pattern of behavior we’ve seen before from the Lakewood City Council, driven by their ties to state representatives and developers, and it’s this pattern that has raised significant public awareness of the City’s disregard for community concerns. The City seems to believe Lakewood residents will happily and willingly sacrifice their green spaces in favor of overcrowded, high-density developments that prioritize profit over quality of life. But Lakewood residents love their open spaces, and for many, it’s why they choose to live here. They don’t want it to become just another extension of Denver’s metropolitan sprawl. The City’s push for new development, prioritizing growth over the well-being of residents, has failed to balance the needs of both current and future residents it claims to serve. The ballot initiative sends a clear message: Lakewood residents have had enough of overdevelopment and will no longer stand for it. This petition is a victory for preserving open space, reflecting the community’s desire to protect

A Different Perspective

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on November 17, 2024Posted in UncategorizedTagged belmar-park, citizen-initiative, city-council, community, housing, news, politics, save-our-belmar

By Lenore Herskovitz On November 4 the Lakewood City Council reluctantly voted to pass the Citizens Initiated Ordinance pertaining to park and open space dedication rather than send it to a special election. How and why did we arrive at this point? Citizen activism has existed almost since Lakewood’s inception in 1969. “The True Story of How Belmar Park Came into Existence” by Stuart MacPhail tells how Lakewood citizens were able to override the wishes of most of the early Lakewood elected leaders and administrative staff regarding the establishment of Belmar Park. A multi-year conflict culminated in a citizen initiated public vote where they were victorious by a 2 to 1 margin. In 2003, the mid-Lakewood residents banded together to prevent university incursion into their neighborhood. Through their perserverance they were able to get City Council to pass an ordinance prohibiting university uses in low density residential zoning. That ordinance was challenged in a lawsuit filed by Colorado Christian University in 2021. Prior to that filing, our own City Attorney told the public that the ordinance was discriminatory and unconstitutional and would not be upheld by the Courts. Yet when forced to defend our law, the City won in both the District and Appellate Courts. In 2017, a grassroots movement promoted the Strategic Growth Initiative (SGI). In addition to inclusion of a 1% growth cap, the SGI established an allocation program and oversight for projects of 40 units or more. This initiative was stalled in the Courts until 2019 when the judge ruled in favor of the petitioners. In July of that same year, the SGI was passed by voters. In August 2023, the Colorado Congress passed HB23-1255 which repealed existing growth caps enacted in Lakewood, Boulder and Golden. These municipalities were given 24 months to develop a plan moving forward. The Lakewood City Council passed legislation one day before the House Bill took effect to sundown the SGI by August 2025. Since the Initiative had a severability clause, the Council could have easily removed the provision pertaining to the growth cap and retained the rest. Such a move would have honored the will of the voters and satisfied the state requirements. Interestingly, the Save Open Space(SOS) petition also includes a severability clause so if one part of it is determined to be illegal by a judge, the other parts could still remain intact. The repetitive statements claiming “We hear you” become meaningless when it doesn’t translate into action. The previous three examples of successful community activism can be categorized as David vs. Goliath battles. City officials and big money opposing residents. Citizens mobilize when they feel their representatives are non-responsive to their concerns. The repetitive statements claiming “We hear you” become meaningless when it doesn’t translate into action. For years there have been rumblings about how to balance open space and housing. Residents are justifiably upset because major decisions regarding developments are made behind closed doors and by the time the public is informed it is too late for their input to affect any change. These issues resurfaced last fall when details were revealed about Kairoi Residential’s plan to build 412 luxury apartment units adjacent to Belmar Park. Citizens began showing up at Council meetings on a regular basis to raise questions about traffic, safety, and environmental impact. The feedback they received was the typical “go away”. Although Councilors were sympathetic, there was nothing they could do. A fee-in-lieu policy allowed developers to buy out of land dedication and that’s exactly what they did. It was discovered that the Director of Community Resources was supposed to re-evaluate the amount of the fee on an annual basis. She had not followed through since 2018 – a major oversight which needed to be rectified. To the public’s knowledge, no one was held accountable for this. The citizens, frustrated by the lack of Council action, decided to organize and try to resolve these problems. The result was the formation of the SOS Green Initiative. Over the next 6 months community members volunteered to collect thousands of signatures on the petition (eventually close to 6500 were verified after submission to the City Clerk). In April 2024 Council held a Study Session to try and make modifications to the park dedication and fee-in-lieu policies. The meeting included recommendations from Norris Design and Duncan & Associates who had been hired by the City in the fall of 2023 to do an assessment of our fee-in-lieu and parkland dedication policies. No ordinance was proposed. There was a comment submitted on Lakewoodspeaks by Marianne Nagel and several others which introduced specific recommendations regarding calculation of fees, etc. that were less extreme than those in the SOS petition yet Council expressed no interest in adopting them. It is unfortunate that our elected officials and staff didn’t meet with the organizers of the Initiative and Marianne Nagel and her group to collaborate on creating an effective ordinance that incorporated the best of each plan. It should be noted that in June, the Director of Community Resources finally increased the amount of the fee-in-lieu (effective July 1 this year). The Council members were aware of the contents of the Initiative for months before the November 4 meeting and could have addressed their concerns before it was submitted. Instead the Council waited and used the special meeting to denigrate the efforts of their constituents. Two of the most vocal opponents were Councilor Rein and Councilor Low. Their hyperbolic vitriol was egregious. Councilor Rein was the only representative who stated definitively that the ordinance was”illegal”. This was surprising because he is an attorney and should be well aware that legality is not determined by City Councilors or even City Attorneys, but by judges in a court of law. Councilor Rein felt the public would lose trust in their elected officials if they sent an “illegal” ordinance to the ballot box in a special election. Actually, misleading constituents increases the distrust that is already prevalent. Councilor Stewart stated that the Initiative could

School Sales Approved

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on November 17, 2024Posted in UncategorizedTagged closed-school, glennon-heights, jeffco, jeffco-boe, jeffco-schools, news, vivian

From the Jefferson County Board of Education Update, November 15, 2024* The Board of Education has voted unanimously to approve the contracts for the purchase of the Vivian, Thomson, and Glennon Heights properties. This decision follows the unanimous recommendation from the Property Disposition Advisory Committee (PDAC), which included ad-hoc community members representing each site and district staff. Below are the details: Glennon Heights Jacob Academy, a local daycare and early childhood education provider, will relocate one of their campuses to this site. They also plan to reuse the building and site as is. Thomson This site is contracted to Evoke Behavioral Health, a provider of services for children and young adults with autism and other behavioral support needs. They will reuse the building and site as is. Vivian The property is under contract with Carlson Associates, a local home developer. The plan is to build 30-33 single-family homes and to collaborate with the City of Lakewood to develop a roughly 3-acre park. What Can Neighbors Expect Next? Thomson and Glennon Heights Since these properties will be reused without changes and fall under existing zoning regulations, no further city governmental approvals are needed. The contracts are expected to close in approximately three months, once the buyers complete their due diligence. Vivian This property will have a longer timeline for completion as it involves development requiring additional community engagement with the City of Lakewood’s planning department. This includes the platting of home sites and the development of the park. The total entitlement process will take up to 540 days beyond the initial 90-day due diligence period. (*Note: Post copied in its entirety because the BOE website has not updated at this time to provide full information)

Lakewood Drop Off for Black Santa Toy Donations

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on November 17, 2024Posted in Uncategorized

Lakewood resident Suzanne Gould is supporting Denver’s Black Santa Project by providing a porch drop-off for unwrapped toys and gifts for infants through teens for the west metro area. This annual event is all-inclusive and serves children of all races. Donations are also accepted on the Black Santa website. Checks can be made payable to The Center For Advancing Black Excellence in Education. Unwrapped toys can be dropped off at 2397 S Eldridge Ct, 80228 through December 16.

Springsteen Brings Open Meetings Lawsuit Against Lakewood

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on November 14, 2024Posted in UncategorizedTagged ccu, coml, executive-session, jeffco-court, Lakewood, news, open-meetings-law, open-meetings-violations, park-negotiations

From Anita Springsteen, Esq. Attorney and former Lakewood City Councilor Anita Springsteen, Esq. filed three lawsuits against the City of Lakewood this week regarding its violation of the Colorado Open Meetings Law (COML) during three Executive Sessions in a row on August 26th, September 9th, and September 19th. The cases are all filed in Jefferson County District Court. The first lawsuit (24CV31555) is on behalf of a citizen, Lenore Herskovitz. The City did not give proper notice or record the August 26th Executive Session, stating only that is was with regard to “legal advice” for an appeal the City won against Colorado Christian University an entire year prior to the meeting. As Ms. Herskovitz was an intervenor in that case (City of Lakewood v. CCU, 22CA1202 and 2021CV30629) – she had a right to know the purpose of the Executive Session and why there would be “legal advice” for a case the City won. The other two lawsuits (24CV31588 and 24CV31574) on behalf of Ms. Springsteen, pro se, are with regard to Executive Sessions held on September 9th and 19th, only referencing “negotiations” to buy undisclosed property. No specific topic was given in violation of COML. However, citizens suspect the meetings involved the purchase of Jeffco school property – a controversial topic of great public interest. Citizens feel that concealing the topic was both in bad faith, and illegal. (Note: These meetings are not archived online. They were executive sessions which are not available for the public. An example agenda is provided below.) Ms. Springsteen spent four years on Council from 2019 to 2023 objecting to what she believed to be constant efforts on the part of Lakewood City Council and staff to conceal information from the public. The City has now become so bold in its lack of transparency that three illegal closed meetings were held without a second thought. Hopefully the Jefferson County Court will remind the City of Lakewood that the citizens are in charge, and that government transparency is critical and required by law. A former elected official should not have to sue her own City to force officials to follow the law.

1515 Whippoorwill Update: Letter to the City from our Attorney, email follow up from the Mayor

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on November 14, 2024Posted in UncategorizedTagged business, city-council, community, conflict-of-interest, housing, lakewood-housing-authority, metro-west-housing, news, whippoorwill

From Applewood Heights Community Organization Despite a 5 1/2 hour Subdivision Public Hearing on 8/21, regarding the development site and both the community and the Planning Commission sharing the same concerns surrounding the safety of the access through W. 15th Place, lack of street connectivity, and making our driveway unsafe to access/unusable in winter, the developer (Metro West Housing Solutions) submitted their 5th rendition to the major site plans to the City without addressing the safety concerns that the community and the Planning Commission had. The City has returned their redlines to the developer without addressing the concerns of the Planning Commission or the Community. On October 14th, we filed a formal request with the City Attorney to have the Major Site Plan review to be turned over by the planning commission as today the City doesn’t have a public hearing for major site plans and it does not go before the Planning Commission. Site plans are simply approved by the Director of Planning. Attached is the letter that was sent by our attorney to Travis Parker via the City Attorney. We are still waiting to hear back from Travis Parker to see if it will be approved to go before the Planning Commission. We will keep pressing on this as we feel that with this being a complex site location, this should be put in front of the Planning Commission. We also attended the City Council meeting which helped us to gain some traction with the Mayor and City Council. After the meeting, the Mayor and a number of City Council members have reached out directly to us. Below is the email written to us from Mayor Strom. While we don’t know what changes they are proposing, it is a step in the right direction. “It has become public knowledge that City of Lakewood staff have provided design services to Metro West [Housing]. This kind of interaction only exacerbates the existing conflict of interest between the City of Lakewood and Metro West, which is the housing organization of the City of Lakewood.” From MST Evaluation Letter above On Thu, Oct 24, 2024 at 12:26 PM Wendi Strom <WenStr@lakewood.org> wrote: Jonna and team, Thank you for staying in touch on this, and for everyone’s time spent in reaching out to your Councilors and coming to speak to City Council recently. Though I’ve not lived in your area of Lakewood, I’m aware of some of the history and safety concerns surrounding this stretch of road and agree with you that the added the number of vehicles (and trips) to this space as a result of this project would likely only make things worse for your neighborhood (and the new residents that would ultimately be moving in). I am working closely with Mayor Pro Tem Shahrezaei and city staff to address these concerns and with the hope of coming up with a solution that will not pose heightening these risks upon your neighborhood community. While I do not have any solutions to report right now, I want to let you all know that we hear you, that I agree that safety is the number one issue, and that work is being done to try to improve this project. Thank you for advocating so tirelessly for your neighborhood, I know this has been a long road. We’ll share more when we have it. Warm regards, Wendi Strom Mayor, Lakewood Colorado

Lakewood Council green-lights citizens’ petition with its disingenuous vote

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on November 13, 2024Posted in UncategorizedTagged belmar, Colorado, community, elections, fee-in-lieu, lakewood-city-council, news, open-space, parks, politics

From Save Open Space – Lakewood At a 9/4 meeting, Lakewood City Council spoke with its usual forked tongue, voting for a citizen led green initiative to expedite delegitimizing it Monday, November 11, 2024—-At the November 4 Lakewood City Council meeting, residents witnessed the culmination of more than a year’s intensive effort by hundreds of volunteers to hold their city accountable to its progressive environmental ordinances. The only item in the hearing was a petition, created by Save Open Space – Lakewood (SOS – L) and signed by more than 6000 voters, which, if approved, would eliminate the option given developers to pay a fee to the city and instead require them to provide the full, current standard of 10.5 acres of parkland for every 1,000 occupants. For over ten years, the predominantly pro-development Lakewood City Council has allowed all developers to pay the city a fee in lieu of donating land for parks and open spaces. This has led to monstrous, soul-less apartment buildings with no green space that remind observers of Russia, not Lakewood. More than half of those who spoke extolled the benefits of open space and their concerns about the impending mammoth luxury apartment building adjacent to Belmar Park. By law, the council either had to vote for the petition at the meeting, or send it to a special election. Following three hours of resident testimony and council deliberation, eight out of 11 councilors declared the initiative to be in conflict with state statutes. By voting to approve it, they said they could expedite a legal challenge. They added that if they were to defer to a special election, it would be expensive and voters would become distrustful of them if litigation would eliminate their vote following the election. Jim Kinney, a Lakewood native, former policy analyst at the Bureau of Reclamation, and former member of the Lakewood Commission for an inclusive Community, believes that “It may not be true that the initiative is illegal due to wording. The issue of whether the state can tell a home rule municipality what to do in the area of land use remains untested in court. It may be that it isn’t the initiative the council just passed that is illegal, but the requirements in state law that are illegal!” Councilor Paula Nystrom noted at the meeting, “We’re in an untenable situation, but there’s a reason we got here. Citizens shouldn’t have to protest, gather signatures, hire lawyers, or jump through hoops just to have their voices heard. This should be a situation where citizens are notified when something is being planned, and then they have an opportunity to speak out and make suggestions.” Nystrom added that “we need to be consulting with environmental planners and environmental engineers…we cannot keep cutting down mature trees and expect our air quality to get better and expect citizens to be mentally healthy.” During the hearing it came to light that, behind its frequently closed doors, the city plans to allow Kairoi Residential, the developer of the huge building at Belmar Park, to also build 850 high density, luxury apartment units at Quail and Colfax while tearing down a grocery store and creating a food desert. Last year, Cathy Kentner, a Lakewood music teacher, former city planning commissioner and longtime community activist, founded SOS – L which created the petition. According to their web site, “Save Open Space – Lakewood is a grass-roots initiative created and promoted by Lakewood residents who seek change in the status quo of rubber stamping development projects without consideration of the future impacts to residents and our natural environment.” Kentner says, “The reason grass-roots initiatives exist is because elected officials have been unresponsive to the reasonable requests of their constituency. It is a last resort that involves countless hours just to have a small chance of being heard. The fact that this council continues to be unresponsive is, therefore, not surprising. “What is surprising is that their ignorance has led them to the assumption that they can act as judge, jury and executioner by claiming that a citizen initiative is ‘illegal’ before ever going through due process. I am confident that, should this ordinance be challenged in court, it will hold up given a proper defense. But the question remains: Will there be a proper defense when the fox is guarding the henhouse? “Opposition to this initiative has come mainly from out-of-state, big money developers who don’t care about the quality of life in Lakewood.” Save Belmar Park, formed in September 2023, is one of many neighborhood groups that have had similar experiences with Lakewood and developers. The objective of the SOS – L initiative is to bring all of these groups together to work toward their common goal of protecting Lakewood’s natural environment. Kentner’s presentation to city council was based on debunking the illegality claim and other F.E.A.R. (False Evidence Appearing Real) -based statements that were presented as facts during the meeting.

Lakewood 2A Passes – No More Refunds Ever

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on November 10, 2024Posted in UncategorizedTagged 2a, Colorado, housing, Lakewood, news, tabor

Lakewood residents voted to give up their TABOR refunds forever. The measure started with Lakewood encouragement, used tax dollars to see what words messaged the best, and raised over $50,000 from people who benefit from city dollars. The money will be used for basic city services like parks and public safety, freeing up money for other city pet projects such as electrification and homeless initiatives. The final vote tally came out 61.7% in favor, 38.2% against. The first campaign committee report showed that a majority of city council members donated to the committee including Councilors Sinks, Low, Shahrezaei, Rein, LaBure, Nystrom and Mayor Strom. Greg Stevinson also donated $10,000. Stevinson just had more land annexed by Lakewood in May, 2023. The second report shows the Lakewood Police Union and Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 21 each made $10,000 donations. An interesting note is the $5,000 donation from the Colorado Gives Foundation. In 2024, Lakewood started a partnership with the foundation, appropriating $500,000 to give them* to develop more affordable housing (see budget book pg 23). *Correction 13 Nov – Lakewood appropriated the money to spend on Colorado Gives affordable housing projects but is not giving the money directly to Colorado gives. This circular relationship shows that the TABOR refunds will not just affect parks and potholes, as sold by Lakewood. Ironically, a day before the election, Councilor Roger Low went on a rant during the City Council meeting, expressing outrage that a resident petition was not honest with the residents who were signing it. He said that if residents were asked to sign a petition that is probably illegal, they wouldn’t have gotten as many signatures, and his hypothetical description is a “much more accurate title”. This sentiment was echoed by the majority of councilor, just like they agreed with the TABOR initiative language that there will be no new taxes. However, the city leadership failed to disclose that no new TAX RATES is not the same as no new TAX REVENUES. Lakewood residents will be paying increasing Lakewood tax revenues with the passage of this measure. The amount in resident pockets will get be lessened.

Glennon Heights Elementary Goes to Private Daycare

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on November 10, 2024Posted in UncategorizedTagged daycare, family, glennon-heights, jeffco-schools, life, news, parenting

Information provided by Lakewood resident Anthony Farr. Thank you! Jefferson County School Property Disposition Advisory Committee recommends selling Glennon Heights Elementary to Jacob Academy, a private daycare facility. Jacob Academy hopes to serve 205 children at this location. Lakewood did not offer to buy this for community parkland like it did for Vivian Elementary. Many Lakewood council members feel Ward 4, where Glennon Heights is located, has more than its fair share of parks already. However, the property will utilize the existing school building and space for the new daycare. The final sale approval will be made November 14. There will be no other public involvement. One developer did not pursue buying the property after discussing the situation with Lakewood. The recommended bid came in under appraised value. Newly constructed homes near Glennon Heights at West Exposition Ave and South Oak St remain mostly empty, with steady price drops since they were made available for rent in February, 2024. Those units were not available for sale. The school board briefly discussed whether this daycare would be a direct competitor for state education dollars, since preschool is now a subsidized, guaranteed business model. More research will be presented at the next school board meeting but due to buliding restrictions, such as safety doors, the public schools do not expect to expand preschool at this time. Glennon Heights sale contract details from school board presentation: