Lakewood Informer

Resident generated news about Lakewood, Colorado

Lakewood Informer

Resident generated news about Lakewood, Colorado

budget

Mill Levy Increase Despite Millions Lost on Emory Sale Raises Trust Issues

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on Posted in Budget, Community, JeffcoTagged , , , , , , , , , ,

Jeffco Schools has determined that they need a mill levy increase and are looking for ways to market that decision to residents. However, the way the district closed and sold Emory Elementary demonstrates a decision-making process that doesn’t examine the root cause of problems. From the first, Jeffco schools showed a willingness to craft narratives using a select set of facts for a predetermined output. As shown by the eleven points below, select facts are not the full story. Withholding the full story and losing money makes residents question whether Jeffco Schools can be trusted with more money in a mill levy increase.

Jeffco Point #1: Emory was closed due to declining enrollment amidst a budget deficit.

SUNLIGHT: At the time of closure, Emory ranked #1741 out of 1748 Colorado schools. Declining enrollment coincided with a steep decrease in test scores.  Alternative solutions include raising test scores, which Jeffco proved unable to do since 2015. Good schools are a driver for home sales. Without good schools, new families don’t move in or enroll in other choice schools. Ultimately, poor performance was the reason for closure, not the budget.

Read More

Lakewood Withheld Financial Information While Spending on Controversial Projects

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on Posted in Budget, Entrenched Bureaucracy, TransparencyTagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

On September 8, 2025, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled against Lakewood in an important court case against Metro PCS. As a result, Lakewood now owes around $42 million in tax refunds to Metro PCS and other cell phone carriers.  That was big news, but what happened after the court decision is just as important.

Lakewood withheld the financial ramifications of the Metro PCS court decision during crucial budget planning. Although Lakewood didn’t know the total amount involved, the staff was aware that they would have to refund millions of dollars to the cell phone companies. Yet there was no public presentation of possible impacts during the crucial September and October budgeting months.  Instead, Lakewood spent millions on controversial projects as soon as they could. Millions that could have gone toward the mandated refund. 

Read More

Resident Voices: Keep Lakewood Special

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on Posted in ElectionsTagged , , , ,

Guest post from Joan Poston
Hello Neighbors, on January 26 there will be a meeting of the city council of Lakewood. They are having a vote about the referendum petitions that were successfully presented to the city. Now the city is faced with a choice. They can repeal all of the ordinances about zoning that they passed this past August and September. Or they can hold a special election. I have been hearing rumors that they want the special election and I have been contemplating why? Why would you choose the more expensive route using taxpayer money when you can remedy the situation for free? This seems to be a kitchen table issue. Money is tight right now for both taxpayers and city government. Why would you want a special Election costing at least $300,000? I have a couple of theories. Maybe some of the city council will use this election to raise war chest money. It is always easier to raise money when you show that you’re fighting for an issue. The real question is who are they fighting for? I believe that some members of City Council are fighting for the developers.  And developers have deep pockets.  

Read More

Jeffco Schools Wants a Mill Levy Increase

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on Posted in Budget, Entrenched Bureaucracy, JeffcoTagged , , , , , ,

Recent meetings from the Jeffco School Board Partnership for Fiscal Sustainability discussed raising the mill levy and how to market that decision to residents. This demonstrates yet another government body shaping propaganda to support a future ballot measure. Jeffco Schools, like Lakewood and Jefferson County, hired a consultant to help with a mill levy question. At this point, a community survey has asked about revenue generation. Budget presentations show data about raising the levy. Budget reductions are discussed as a part of the solution.

The point of these meetings was to “prepare and involve the community to support future revenue generation,” as seen in the slide below. This is using district resources to get resident support in what will likely be a ballot question on the mill levy. School communications are also a tool to discuss any upcoming cuts or revenue changes.

Read More

Council Finally Votes on RTD Bridge Spending

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on Posted in Budget, TransparencyTagged , , ,

Lakewood City Council will finally vote to spend money on fixing the bridge lights for RTD on July 14. This controversial measure was delayed twice before because of the high price tag for fixtures that do not belong to Lakewood. Now, City Council is scheduled to vote on a resolution to fund this measure through an Intergovernmental Agreement with RTD. It will be on the consent agenda so it doesn’t get discussed, just agreed to, unless someone pulls it for special consideration. As reported in “Shahrezaei’s Bridge Lights“, there are issues to consider, such as why Lakewood would pay for property not owned by Lakewood. Lakewood has recently de-TABORed because they cannot stay within budget without extra money and is looking at eliminating printed newsletters to save money. These measures are evidence that Lakewood does not have money to waste on RTD issues. The staff memo states, “Public outreach for the funding associated with the current IGA amendment was included in the public budget adoption process last year.” At that time, public sentiment was so against the measure that it was not approved, just like it was NOT approved the year before. But now, with little fanfare and no regular agenda discussion session, it’s back. The budget for the lights has come down since it was initially proposed. Originally budgeted for $800,000, which covers the full cost of the lighting, the new agreement splits the costs evenly with RTD, with each party capped at $500,000. In exchange for funding the lighting, Lakewood will be able to help choose the display color.

Read More

Equal Representation on Budget Board Denied

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on Posted in Budget, Entrenched BureaucracyTagged , , , , ,

City Council Members Jacob Labure and Paula Nystrom asked for equal representation on the Budget and Audit Board, January 27, 2025. They were denied. Only three wards will be represented on the Board. The Budget and Audit Board is vitally important for accountability. Many policies and programs that staff originate are never disclosed to the public. They only show up in funding requests. And as evidenced by the 2024 vote to de-TABOR, city staff is not often turned down. Councilor LaBure was involved in the last rewrite of the Budget Board. LaBure fought hard to get each ward representation on the Board, saying it was common practice to not only have five Councilors on the Board but to allow any Council Member to come and make comments. Now the current Board doesn’t even allow comments. Councilors Shahrezaei and Mayott-Guerrero both said that allowing that many Councilors, as worked for years, would now be unmanageable. Shahrezaei pointed out that at one point, a single councilor made 37 questions to staff and that amount of work was too hard. There is no general rule for how many questions the paid city staff should answer as part of being publicly accountable for a multi-million-dollar budget. In 2024, when Mayor Strom downsized committee sizes, then-Councilor Rich Olver was upset to be removed. Strom explained that she thought she was doing him a favor because he often didn’t have time. Olver was not present at the meeting for the initial appointments to protest. But his argument resonated with Councilor Dave Rein who supported increasing representation. Councilor Low also supported the proposal saying, “Budget is one of the most important things we do. Ward 3 should have representation.” 2025 Council Members on the Budget Board are: Scorecard: Allow Equal Representation Strom: Nay Shahrezaei: Nay Sinks: Nay Mayott-Guerrero: Nay Cruz: Nay Low: Aye Rein: Aye LaBure: Aye Nystrom: Aye

Read More

Mayor Suspends Rules for Parkland Dedication Issue

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on Posted in UncategorizedTagged , , , , , , ,

Mayor Wendi Strom suspended normal City Council procedures to have an emergency discussion on January 13, 2025 regarding issues resulting from the new parkland dedication ordinance. Strom says this was time sensitive so it couldn’t wait until the next meeting and most of Council agreed with her. However, even with the suspension of city policies, Lakewood is still bound by the Colorado Open Meetings laws that require public notice for agenda items. Without that notice, there was no public comment regarding the discussion because no one knew it was happening. One issue Strom initially raised was concern that single-family homeowners are being required to dedicate part of their land to parks. However, other Councilors showed that the real issue was overall development. Strom says the city has not issued any permits since December 7, 2024, when the ordinance was approved. Council Member Nystrom, the only Councilor to sound positive about the new ordinance, pointed out that there may be inaccuracies on how the ordinance is being applied. Nystrom’s point of view was echoed by the author of the ordinance, Cathy Kentner.    Mayor Strom did not say how many people were adversely affected by the new ordinance, but this move is extraordinary.  Even in other time-sensitive circumstances, such as when hundreds of Belmar Park residents were begging for emergency intervention, Strom did not suspend the rules. In fact, with her inauguration, she has moved public comment to the end of the meeting in a move that guarantees most people do not stay for comment. The parkland ordinance itself was time sensitive due to the ballot initiative deadlines. Council chose not to address the issue at all. Strom asked for a vote to direct staff to present some amendments to the ordinance at the January 27 meeting. She also later agreed with Councilor Roger Low’s statement that “it would be incumbent on members of council to proactively draft those amendments and work with the city attorney’s office, presumably to draft those amendments and circulate them [we] will be authoring the amendments and staff merely writing them up.” It is evident that many processes will still be decided over the next month. No data was presented to demonstrate the problem, but Mayor Strom says that will be coming as staff present real life stories of the harm the ordinance is doing to residents and staff. No one mentioned the residents who were positively affected by the ordinance except for Councilor Nystrom. Accusations of Bait N Switch Strom says she does not believe residents knew what they were signing or the unintended consequences of the original petition. This narrative was espoused by several Councilors at previous meetings, including multiple times by Council Member Roger Low. It’s an ironic stance to take coming from the council who approved official ballot language to de-TABOR the city without ever mentioning TABOR. Council Member and Mayor Pro Tem Shaharezaei went so far as to accuse the resident petition gatherers of pulling a bait and switch. She says they touted the initiative as a way to get more parkland but really it was about reducing density. She says these unintended consequences are something that needs a response. Shahrezaei did not acknowledge that the parkland dedication initiative was a result of unintended consequences of City Council not being accountable for adequate oversight of the existing ordinance. That issue has been ongoing for over a decade. But Councilor Low ran through some math to acknowledge that resident density and parkland should have some sort of equilibrium. Parks Versus Development The ordinance is not about development per se. It is about the fact that more people need more parks in order to sustain the equilibrium Councilor Low spoke of. For decades people have moved to Lakewood for the plentiful parks. So much so that Lakewood Council recently pushed a bill to de-TABOR, partly to fund park expansion. Many Councilors returned to the original argument from months ago that there was no way to mandate reasonable parkland dedication and still allow development. Those Councilors just want the development. Urban versus suburban development. Councilor Mayott-Guerrero said that she hears the frustration of residents but there are several projects in her ward that are underway and are affected by this ordinance. She says that she has not heard any objection to developing several large lots in her ward. “Whatever your motivation and your impetus is, I believe that the way that this was written is going to result in a level of cost to the people of Lakewood and to the community that is really irresponsible for us to allow to continue.” Council Member Cruz pointed out that this is impacting affordable housing developers. Affordable housing developers include Metro West Housing (MWH). Cruz did not discuss the MWH attempt to put 44 units on 1.6 acres, without including enough parking or a wide street, let alone neighborhood parkland for these new residents. Councilor Sinks clarified that there was not a ordinance rewrite. Councilor LaBure agreed, stating that this would not be a rewrite, but rather tweaking some words. Willful Misinterpretation Councilor Nystrom says there are inconsistencies and, in her opinion, inaccuracies around the way the new ordinance has been applied. She also pointed out that there are many positive emails from residents, it’s not all negative as the other Councilors state. Nystrom’s comments hint that the ordinance interpretation may be being used as a political football. She is the only Councilor to bring up a contrarian view and sound supportive of the resident-sponsored initiative. Normal City Council procedure requires Councilors to submit a Request for Council Action to start a discussion. In other governments, elected officials can introduce legislation and call for a vote. In Lakewood, instead of Council Members authoring legislation, they must gain agreement from a majority of Members to hold a study session to generate ideas. Alternatively, they can assign staff or a committee to find solutions. No Time to Think It Through City Attorney McKinney-Brown says this move is

Read More

Janssen/Menten Proved Right – Lakewood Illegally Over-taxed

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on Posted in UncategorizedTagged , , , , , , ,

In 2023, then-Council Member Mary Janssen and resident Natalie Menten brought to light that Lakewood’s City Charter had a revenue cap to protect residents from rapid property tax increases. Most of city leadership said Janssen and Menten were totally wrong and besides, leadership said, Lakewood needed the money. However, it turns out Janssen and Menten were not wrong, and Lakewood is now adjusting the 2025 mill levy to comply with the City Charter. There will still be a property tax increase for residents, but only half of the previously proposed increase. Lakewood did not explicitly state the reason for the change because residents can sue if the city of Lakewood was found to be over-collecting taxes. Instead, staff only referenced a “complex legal issue.” Per the new slide presented October 21 (below), the original mill levy would have resulted in $1,561,000 more taxes than 2024 ($872k + $ 689k). The Budget Book advertised this was a 6.2% increase over the 2024 REVISED BUDGET. However, the revised budget is over $1,000,000 more than the original 2024 budget. The mill levy to collect property taxes was set in the original budget. In reality, the original 2024 budget to 2025 budget numbers show a 13.5% increase. Lakewood has been collecting almost double the amount of property taxes allowed by City Charter section 12.12. No one has said that Mary Janssen or Natalie Menten was correct in their original interpretation of the City Charter, as presented to the Lakewood leadership on October 23, 2023. No one even said this change was because of the City Charter provision. Instead, there was only a vague sentence explaining that “a complex legal issue has been identified.” This was a tacit, belated, admission that Mary Janssen and Natalie Menten were right. The city had to lower their mill levy or risk getting sued by the residents for illegally over-collecting property taxes. For three public meetings on the budget, the mill levy recommendation was an increase to 4.711 mills (about $22 per tax bill). On Monday, October 21, 2024, during the fourth and final budget meeting, city staff recommended increasing the mill levy to only 4.496 mills (about $11 per tax bill). Lakewood could only increase the mill levy by about half the amount they wanted because according to the City Charter they can only collect 7% more in revenue than the previous year, not 13.5% as originally proposed. With this change, Lakewood will only collect about half the amount of property taxes in 2025 as originally proposed. Another tacit admission that something was wrong involved the lack of conversation surrounding this issue. Not one Council Member questioned why this lower levy was necessary, even though every Councilor – besides Councilor Olver – has advocated for more spending and higher taxes. The lack of opposition or even discussion was highly unusual and points to legal implications that Council may have been privately briefed on the issue. The entire mill levy reduction discussion and vote took less than one minute (41:49 min mark to 42:42 min mark). Councilor Olver pointed out this was still a property tax increase for Lakewood residents. However, some Councilors disagreed, including Councilors Low and Rein who called the change a tax decrease. Nevertheless, Olver did the math for 2025 from 2024 and stated, “I have to point out that 4.5 is greater than 4.2. That’s my math and I’m sticking to it.“

Read More

Janssen/Menten Proved Right – Lakewood Illegally Over-taxed

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on Posted in UncategorizedTagged , , , , , , ,

In 2023, then-Council Member Mary Janssen and resident Natalie Menten brought to light that Lakewood’s City Charter had a revenue cap to protect residents from rapid property tax increases. Most of city leadership said Janssen and Menten were totally wrong and besides, leadership said, Lakewood needed the money. However, it turns out Janssen and Menten were not wrong, and Lakewood is now adjusting the 2025 mill levy to comply with the City Charter. There will still be a property tax increase for residents, but only half of the previously proposed increase. Lakewood did not explicitly state the reason for the change because residents can sue if the city of Lakewood was found to be over-collecting taxes. Instead, staff only referenced a “complex legal issue.” Per the new slide presented October 21 (below), the original mill levy would have resulted in $1,561,000 more taxes than 2024 ($872k + $ 689k). The Budget Book advertised this was a 6.2% increase over the 2024 REVISED BUDGET. However, the revised budget is over $1,000,000 more than the original 2024 budget. The mill levy to collect property taxes was set in the original budget. In reality, the original 2024 budget to 2025 budget numbers show a 13.5% increase. Lakewood has been collecting almost double the amount of property taxes allowed by City Charter section 12.12. No one has said that Mary Janssen or Natalie Menten was correct in their original interpretation of the City Charter, as presented to the Lakewood leadership on October 23, 2023. No one even said this change was because of the City Charter provision. Instead, there was only a vague sentence explaining that “a complex legal issue has been identified.” This was a tacit, belated, admission that Mary Janssen and Natalie Menten were right. The city had to lower their mill levy or risk getting sued by the residents for illegally over-collecting property taxes. For three public meetings on the budget, the mill levy recommendation was an increase to 4.711 mills (about $22 per tax bill). On Monday, October 21, 2024, during the fourth and final budget meeting, city staff recommended increasing the mill levy to only 4.496 mills (about $11 per tax bill). Lakewood could only increase the mill levy by about half the amount they wanted because according to the City Charter they can only collect 7% more in revenue than the previous year, not 13.5% as originally proposed. With this change, Lakewood will only collect about half the amount of property taxes in 2025 as originally proposed. Another tacit admission that something was wrong involved the lack of conversation surrounding this issue. Not one Council Member questioned why this lower levy was necessary, even though every Councilor – besides Councilor Olver – has advocated for more spending and higher taxes. The lack of opposition or even discussion was highly unusual and points to legal implications that Council may have been privately briefed on the issue. The entire mill levy reduction discussion and vote took less than one minute (41:49 min mark to 42:42 min mark). Councilor Olver pointed out this was still a property tax increase for Lakewood residents. However, some Councilors disagreed, including Councilors Low and Rein who called the change a tax decrease. Nevertheless, Olver did the math for 2025 from 2024 and stated, “I have to point out that 4.5 is greater than 4.2. That’s my math and I’m sticking to it.“

Read More

Lakewood to Increase and Overcollect Property Tax – Again

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on Posted in UncategorizedTagged , , , , , ,

Including explanation from Bob Adams Lakewood will vote on a property tax increase on Monday. This will be done through the normal budget appropriation and mill levy certification. It is not called a tax increase anywhere. However, the 2025 Budget Book,  page 62, explains that a temporary reduction in the mill levy rate will lapse in 2025. As a result, Lakewood residents will pay 6% more property taxes and Lakewood will collect an extra $15.5 million in 2025. In 2023, former Councilor Mary Janssen fought to get Lakewood to comply with the Lakewood City Charter and only collect revenues that are legally allowed. That equated to a property mill levy rate of 3.85%. Lakewood Charter has a revenue cap, not a tax rate cap, to protect its residents from windfall taxes, like abrupt property assessment increases. City Council did not agree to Janssen’s original proposal, but they did lower the mill levy to 4.28 mills. For one year. Now that year is up. On Monday, the Council will vote to approve the full mill levy of 4.711 mills, thereby increasing the rate by 0.431 mills from 2024. Your property taxes will go up again this year. “Natalie Menten, board director with the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR) Foundation, emphasized the importance of TABOR’s protections: ‘According to paragraph 7(c), the maximum annual percentage change in each district’s property tax revenue equals inflation in the prior calendar year plus annual local growth (new construction). That safety cap protects taxpayers and gives very sufficient additional revenue to government agencies. Voters shouldn’t waive any tax revenue cap unless it comes with the 4-year sunset prescribed in TABOR.” In 2023, then-Councilor Janssen found out Lakewood revenue from property tax was increasing 12.87%. The City Charter only allows for a 7% increase in revenue growth (see City Charter 12.12) “Growth from projected 2023 to projected 2024 Property Tax Revenue is 12.87%”- Holly Björklund, Chief Financial Officer, Lakewood, 2023 Lakewood will increase property tax revenues over the amount permitted in charter, as they have in previous years, while advocating to keep your TABOR refunds. Explanation of Overcharging from Bob Adams Every two years (odd numbered years), Colorado requires all real estate to be reappraised.  This was done in 2023 and resulted in a huge increase in property valuations.  This reappraisal applied to property taxes paid in 2024.  The Assessor uses the newly appraised county real estate inventory to prepare a report of the assessed value which is provided to all county tax authorities.  Based on that report, the tax authorities are supposed to calculate the overall mill levy needed to provide services (pay their budget) for the following year.  The approved mill levy is then used to calculate individual tax bills. As published by the Colorado Division of Property Taxation: “Each year county commissioners, city councils, school boards, governing boards of special districts, and other taxing authorities determine the revenue needed and allowed under the law to provide services for the following year.  [In other words, prepare a budget] Each taxing authority calculates a tax rate based on the revenue needed from property tax and the total assessed value of real and personal property located within their boundaries. The tax rate is often expressed as a mill levy.” Source:   (https://spl.cde.state.co.us/artemis/locserials/loc811internet/loc8112022internet.pdf) If the law was followed properly, there would be only a minimal tax increase. However, Jefferson County and nearly all county tax authorities, including Lakewood, failed to adjust the mill levies downward to equal their budgets.  Even Governor Polis sent a letter to all tax districts urging them to reduce mill levies.  Most refused.  Instead, nearly all kept a higher mill levy which resulted in property owners being overcharged and the districts received a huge windfall in increased tax revenue.  Now, of course, the city and county have introduced ballot measures to allow them to keep and spend the overcollected tax revenue this year, next year and every future year. and eliminate all other revenue caps so they can freely raise taxes without a vote of the people now required by TABOR. This is the cause of how tax revenues were overcharged and overcollected. See more from Bob Adams on nextdoor.com

Read More
Scroll to top