word games Archives - Lakewood Informer

Lakewood and Jeffco Called a Sanctuary

Written by Lakewood News from Karen on June 13, 2025. Leave a Comment

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) published a list of sanctuary cities on Thursday, May 29. Lakewood and Jefferson County were on the list. By Sunday, DHS had taken the list down because of objections by the named jurisdictions. Cities like Lakewood never voted on the issue, just quickly enacted deprioritization policies behind the scenes and then told residents that the increased migrant population is not their problem. Now, DHS is calling out places like Lakewood and Jeffco that hide behind an unofficial policy of not cooperating, while other places do their best to balance a state law that acts against federal law.

Lakewood has been through these word games with its residents already. No – Lakewood never formally voted to be a sanctuary city – but only because the state approved sanctuary status so Lakewood politicians didn’t have to take the political risk. At the time, it was apparent that Council would have approved sanctuary status if needed.

At that time, around 2018, sanctuary meant being welcoming, resisting ICE cooperation and providing cover for migrant activity. Today, it seems to mean paying for housing and benefits…

Because the bar has already been raised! People EXPECT welcoming and resistance to federal immigration.

However, DHS is working from the original definition of any jurisdiction not cooperating with ICE. According to the original statement, DHS defined these sanctuary cities as:

“deliberately obstructing the enforcement of federal immigration laws and endangering American citizens.” – DHS

NOTE: This author seems to remember former Mayor Adam Paul talking about migrants taking refuge in a Lakewood church basement and the need for more placements. Does that sound right to anyone else?

Lakewood has still been playing these word games, using “migrant” or “newcomer” instead of “illegal alien”. They would not guarantee that new homeless shelters would not be used for migrants. Instead, some Councilors insisted that all would be welcome.

According to an article in The Guardian, the president of the National Sheriffs’ Association, Sheriff Kieran Donahue, “said the list was created without input from sheriffs and ‘violated the core principles of trust, cooperation, and partnership with fellow law enforcement’”.

Lakewood still “deprioritizes” crime instead of admitting they will not enforce certain crimes or cooperate with certain agencies. Both Lakewood and Jeffco claim that immigration enforcement is not their jurisdiction so no cooperation is necessary. Neither government has any problem cooperating with other federal agencies, such as the FBI. Therefore, according to Lakewood and Jeffco principles, the National Sheriffs’ Association’s objection is without merit because local jurisdictions shouldn’t be cooperating anyway.

Note that the DHS list is more granular than others that just highlight the entire state as a sanctuary. DHS did not respond to requests for more information on how the list was compiled, but there were clearly some cities and counties singled out around the state.

Lakewood’s Police Chief has described Venezuelan gang activity in Lakewood in a rare Ward 4 appearance.

Lakewood thinks residents are so ignorant that they can’t see the deteriorating conditions brought on by “de-prioritizing” crimes. They seem to think that if they don’t use the word “sanctuary,” they can act defy federal law and be fine. And so far, they are right. During the last discussion about Lakewood’s sanctuary city status, Lakewood Informer news noted that the word games continued with a change from “sanctuary” to “being a good neighbor”.

The Bend: A Government Financing Trade Deal

Written by Lakewood News from Karen on May 10, 2025.

Lakewood may be forcing a property owner to blight their own land in a backroom trade deal wherein staff pledged a positive vote from City Council for a metro district. The deal would give The Bend development city financing in exchange for metro district status.

In January 2025, a representative for The Bend developer made the following public comment:

“The city is actually only allowing a Metro District to be put in place if the URA (Urban Renewal Area) passes so that it is a vehicle for this infrastructure and tax increment financing. They actually would not pass our Metro District standalone. They’ve made that very clear.” – Allie Meister, Lincoln Properties, at Green Mountain Water Board Meeting, min 40:13.

This deal illuminates why Lakewood is rushing through a URA and metro district public hearing on the same night. Staff presentations have repeatedly touted the advantages of doing both the URA and the metro district at the same time. They claim these are complementary structures.

But they are not complementary. Rather, these are essentially overlapping structures that could finance the same set of infrastructures. Apparently, financing public infrastructure is a profit center.

Overlapping financing is duplicative. Even worse, for The Bend, neither metro district nor URA is appropriate. The Bend is not a “serious and growing menace” to the public health, safety, morals, and welfare, which is the statutory reason for Urban Renewal. The Bend does not provide public services, which is necessary for a metro district. The metro district will only be used for financing. Therefore, the most appropriate government assistance, if any, would be a Business Improvement District (BID). BIDs are the more accountable, less powerful, way to achieve development financing but no one is advocating for its use.

Instead, developers prefer to form metro districts. This initially involves the developer loaning money to the new metro district. Then the metro district issues a bond, with interest, to pay back the loan. Since the developer and the metro district are the same people (different legal entity), the developer has now gained itself government immunity, as well as millions of dollars of interest payments. In many cases, the interest payments never end – they only continue to grow. This outcome isn’t possible with a BID.

(See Denver Post series “Metro Districts: Debt & Democracy” by David Migoya for more in-depth information on metro district abuses)

Therefore, developers generally want that metro district as a profit center, rather than as a way to finance development, since they front the funds in either case.

A URA is also meant to fund public infrastructure. Much of the public infrastructure was repeated under both the URA and metro district justification. Only one method is needed to finance infrastructure, and, as noted, the developer will provide the base funds in any event. As Karen Gordey reported in the Lakewood Informer, there was no required financial gap analysis completed to show that city funding was required. Therefore, with a metro district there is no need for a URA. This conclusion is also shared by a report from the Independence Institute. A URA has not required a metro district in the past.

However, Lakewood can trade URA financing for affordable housing. Lakewood is not allowed to pay for housing directly. Lakewood is not even supposed to demand any percentage of affordable housing. There is no zoning or ordinance that requires it. The irony is that Lakewood City Council itself sunset the Strategic Growth Initiative ordinance. Under that ordinance, this development would have fallen under the allocation review system wherein Lakewood could have asked for affordable housing to permit this many units in a TRANSPARENT process. Instead, the city is now working behind the scenes to make this same thing happen.

So, through the URA, Lakewood will gain affordable housing, aka government housing or government-subsidized housing. Those units can be used to qualify for state grants for even more development in Lakewood.

“Without the Urban Renewal plan, in our case, we wouldn’t be able to deliver kind of what they want to see or their vision for this piece of land which includes housing retail and affordable housing they you know both the state and the city and the county do have a desire to have a portion of the site have affordable housing in it.“ Allie Meister, Lincoln Properties, Jan 28 2025, min 35:57

Lakewood residents will pay for The Bend development by giving the developer financing. The new taxes from that development are diverted out of the general fund, which pays for Lakewood resident services like police, and instead will pay for The Bend development responsibilities like streets and pipes.

The decision for an Urban Renewal Area is very separate from the decision to approve a metro district. The developer did not originally desire to be in an Urban Renewal Area and Lakewood may not approve a metro district as a standalone decision. But, operating together, the developer and city can trade financial incentives that residents throughout Lakewood will pay for. The developer offers blight and gets metro district status and financing. The city offers URA financing to indirectly offset affordable housing units and gets a basis for more state grant funding.

“Municipalities are using a tool (URA) meant only for serious threats to the public as a tool for gaining a competitive advantage in economic development. Which, essentially, is a way to financially reward development partners and a method to force the public into a future desired by government planners.” -From The Empty Promise and Untold Cost of Urban Renewal in Colorado

Just like Lakewood’s deal to buy Emory Elementary, residents should know the full plan to leverage this deal for more high-density development using state grant funds from the affordable housing units. Without that knowledge, which has not been disclosed, neither the URA nor the metro district decision makes any sense.

There will be a City Council vote on the metro district and URA on Monday, May 12 that is open to public comment.

The representative from Lincoln Properties, Allie Meister, did not reply to requests for comment.

This article is written as the personal beliefs of Karen Morgan under the Lakewood Informer banner.

Headline from Denver Gazette with author photo

Lakewood’s shady Jeffco Schools business deal

Written by Lakewood News from Karen on May 4, 2025.

By Jimmy Sengenberger, in the Denver Gazette

The backroom deal I warned about last year is now playing out in broad daylight.

In February 2024, I asked whether Lakewood was eyeing a bargain on the closed Emory Elementary — a deal that could dodge public input and leave Jeffco taxpayers holding the bag.

Fifteen months later, the answer is a resounding yes.

On Monday, Lakewood’s City Council authorized a $4 million below-market purchase of the school — a site that got $2.6 million in taxpayer-funded upgrades before Jeffco closed it in 2023. It’s now on track to become the new home of the nonprofit Action Center — courtesy of a taxpayer-funded workaround.

The Action Center’s mission may be noble, serving vulnerable families and individuals. But the process? Not so much. It reeks of an almost theatrical disregard for transparency and taxpayer interests — with a straight face.

In January 2024, Jeffco Schools quietly introduced a new “Municipal Interest” process giving municipalities like Lakewood first dibs on shuttered schools — without competitive bidding or public input. COO Jeff Gatlin confirmed Lakewood’s “interest in the Emory property,” revealing they were already “working through the municipal interest route.”

Translation? A backdoor sale — letting Jeffco Schools unload taxpayer-funded property at a loss. A consultant even advised this process empowered the district to skip community feedback entirely.

Read the rest of the article….

New zoning rules propose to take Lakewood back to “bedroom” community concept

Written by Lakewood News from Karen on March 20, 2025.

Repost from Dave Weichman

On top of everything else going on these days, the Lakewood establishment is planning to change the city’s comprehensive plan and zoning codes to allow for more population density and cheaper housing. As usual there is way too much devil in the details to wrap one’s head around.

However, there is one area that gives me a deja vu. Back when I was on City Council (in 2012) there was a major change in zoning. One of the innovations was the concept of “mixed-use” zones.

We on Council bought into the idea there could be buildings with multiple uses. The example we were sold on was a vision where the first floor of the building could have commercial uses like restaurants or shops. The second floor could be offices for businesses. The third and fourth floors could be apartments or condos for residential use.

Therefore there could be three different types of uses within the same building. This would reduce the need for traveling to different zones for a range of uses – i.e. one could work, shop, play and live all within a single building. So city zoning was changed to create “mixed-use” zones that would allow for several different types of uses within the same structure.

However, when it came time to actually build this type of zoning ALL these buildings were 100% housing. Commercial uses and offices remained located in other parts of the metro area. The City argued mixed-use did not mean there actually had to be more than one use going on in a building but rather there was a range of possible uses to choose from. According to this line of reasoning, the builder could choose to either build all housing, or all commercial or all offices.

When voters complained about this bait and switch tactic, there was an effort to require that mixed-use buildings actually have more than one use going on. There was a major City Council effort led by Ward 4’s David Skilling to change the zoning rules for properties in Mixed-Use Employment (MU-E) districts.

Mr. Skilling was able to pass an ordinance that changed MU-E zones to prohibit more than 50% of the building being used for housing. However, since developers never had any intention of building mixed use projects but rather were just interested in finding a way to build housing in zones previously limited to commercial or office use, not a single project was eventually build using this model.

After these zoning rules went into effect, developers with properties zoned as MU-Employment came back to the city and requested permission to re-zone these properties into a category that would allow them to build 100% housing.

Fast forward to 2025. The current proposed “reform” of the City’s zoning codes seeks to just get rid of the 50% limit on housing in MU-E zones. That way developers could continue to just focus on building more housing. As for commercial and office uses, the proposed zoning would go back to the old scheme of making Lakewood the “bedroom” community for metro Denver.

So this new zoning is essentially a GOING BACK to the glory days of multi-family residential housing and riding the train into Denver for work or shopping.

Lakewood Informer Joins Mandy Connell Show

Written by Lakewood News from Karen on March 15, 2025.

Mandy Connell, Host of The Mandy Connell Show on KOA and iHeart Media, challenged her listeners to rat out shenanigans at the local level. Thanks to you, wonderful readers who are also her wonderful listeners, Mandy invited Karen Morgan on for a discussion of crime and housing. We also talked about Lakewood’s new propensity of going over the heads of Lakewood residents to change state law rather than listening to residents.

Thank you Mandy for being so much fun, very well researched and getting the word out to everyone!

Just a heads up that Mandy may have another Lakewood guest next week so keep listening.

Listen to the whole segment from The Mandy Connell Podcast on KOA iHeartRadio.

Fire in Lakewood Raises Policy Concerns

Written by Lakewood News from Karen on February 8, 2025.

As reported by CBS News, a fire in an abandoned gas station on February 3 endangered 20-30 homeless people who were using the building as a shelter. The situation underscores the need to re-examine several ongoing strategies, such as:

West Metro Fire unofficial policy of not enforcing fire safety standards in homeless encampments. West Metro officials have said these fires are a matter of life and death so encampment fires are typically allowed or deprioritized for enforcement activity.
Lakewood police official policy of deprioritizing drug paraphernalia and trespassing
Lakewood code enforcement for occupancy standards
Lakewood’s penalty fee on vacant property

Which of these policies were effective in de-escalating the ongoing safety situation?

From CBS News, by Karen Morfitt

Fire in vacant Colorado gas station doubling as shelter for unhoused highlights concerns of neighbors

At around 10 p.m. on Monday night a fire tore through a vacant Colorado building that was once used as a gas station. The building at the corner of Alameda Avenue and Harlan Street in Lakewood was being used as a shelter.

A resident of the apartment building next door captured video of flames shooting out of the building’s windows.

“Thank God the response was quick,” Victor Garibay said.

Garibay didn’t take the video, but he lives in the same apartment building. He and his neighbors raised concerns about people coming and going from the building several times.

“A lot of people have gone to the police have gone to the fire department and told them about the issues here — people coming in and out. The drug use, of course. The police have come, the fire department has come but they never seem to really be able to do anything about it,” he said.

Read article from CBS…

RAdiant Painting and Lighting
https://paintwithradiant.com/

Lakewood Playing Games with Blight Statutes to Increase Development

Written by Lakewood News from Karen on February 6, 2025. 1 Comment

Lakewood is using every tool at its disposal, and then some, to aid development at 4^th and Union, known as The Bend. The latest proposal is to blight the property in order to include it in an Urban Renewal Project so that the Lakewood Reinvestment Authority can fund the development. The Lakewood Planning Commission voted unanimously to approve the first step of this process on January 22, 2025. However, despite a presentation on blight, there was no consideration of blight status for this vote and other developments in the area, like St. Anthony’s, did not receive financial assistance. Since the blight finding relies on environmental contamination, Lakewood should get involved in cleaning up a toxic landfill to make this legal, which is also not being proposed. This vote concentrated on whether the new development conforms with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan was written by Lakewood to include this high-density development, which has been in the works since 2013. There was no examination of whether the residential units being built were needed per the provisions of urban renewal, such as mitigating slums.

Examples of Games

Eliminate slum and blight – will not, develops around it
Comprehensive Plan baked in – a new plan is up for approval any time now
Shortage of safe housing – meant to eliminate slums but city is using for affordable housing
Playing favorites – Same conditions as St. Anthony’s that didn’t get funding
But For – Development would happen without city assistance

None of these factors were discussed or by the Planning Commission but one approval leads to another in this process.

No elimination of slum or blight

Slide 16 of Lakewood presentation March 4, 2024 https://lakewoodspeaks.org/items/3419. Lakewood is not planning on eliminating slum or blight, just developing.

Per Colorado State Statute 31-25-102 (1), the purpose of a blight designation and urban renewal is to eliminate blight or slums. In a typical blight situation, there has been deterioration of structures that now need repaired. That’s not the case here.

Raw land is not suitable for a blight designation. Adding infrastructure is just development. The problem, as Lakewood seems to see it, is that they want to enable the developer’s goal of 2000 units of high-density residential in an area that wasn’t designed for that many units. A smaller development may work. Lakewood wants to change the standards from when 6^th Avenue and Union were constructed to today’s goals of high-density and walkability.

That’s not blight. That’s development. And per Lakewood’s own presentation, it is illegal to use blight designations for the sake of development for its own sake.

The only problem with the land is that there is a toxic landfill on the north end. Neither Lakewood nor the developer is currently proposing mitigating that risk so there is no elimination of blight conditions in this proposal. Merely finding blight, if it even exists, is not enough to comply with statute.

Lakewood points at projects like a landfill in Castle Rock that underwent a similar blight process. During that process, the landfill was cleaned. Cleanup is not proposed for The Bend site which is not a city landfill but a toxic munitions dump. So the underlying blight condition, if any, will remain in place.

Location of new development showing there are no known contaminants at the development site — Box labeled “D” is The Bend development. From pg 2 of EPA report

Comprehensive Plan Baked in

A new Comprehensive Plan will be approved in February. There was no pause on The Bend blight vote to see if it would meet any revisions that arise during the vote. Both the current and upcoming plan are written in such a way that city staff can interpret Comprehensive Plan goals to mean just about anything. And this area has been targeted by developers (not necessarily residents) for high-density residential for more than 10 years.

In fact, the Comprehensive Plan details what Lakewood would want to see built on that land so this whole argument is circular. It is just the city writing what it wants in multiple places and then using those multiple places as justification.

Shortage of SAFE housing

According toC.R.S. 31-25-107 (5), if residential housing is to be developed, there must be a demonstrated lack of decent, safe and sanitary housing. Remember that this statute is designed to eliminate slums.

“(5) In case the urban renewal area consists of an area of open land which, under the urban renewal plan, is to be developed for residential uses, the governing body shall comply with the applicable provisions of this section and shall also determine that a shortage of housing of sound standards and design which is decent, safe, and sanitary exists in the municipality; that the need for housing accommodations has been or will be increased as a result of the clearance of slums in other areas (including other portions of the urban renewal area); that the conditions of blight in the urban renewal area and the shortage of decent, safe, and sanitary housing cause or contribute to an increase in and spread of disease and crime and constitute a menace to the public health, safety, morals, or welfare; and that the acquisition of the area for residential uses is an integral part of and essential to the program of the municipality.”

Lakewood will not be eliminating slums and there was no consideration of safe and sanitary housing. Instead, Lakewood points to a “shortage” of housing that is in dispute (see “the Totally 100% Fake Housing Shortage”). Lakewood also points to the need for “affordable housing”, which is not considered in statute.

Playing Favorites

St. Anthony’s did not get financial assistance through the Lakewood Reinvestment Authority and it has the same sort of environmental conditions that the land being developed further north has – that is it is technically clean for development. Again, the new development will not be developing or mitigating the toxic landfill that forms the base of the environmental concerns there.

But For

The need for Lakewood to provide this tax incentive is the “But for” argument. “But for” the urban renewal designation, development may not happen. This is patently false since the developers have been planning on funding the project for years without the blight designation.