Tag: budget

Lakewood Spends Taxpayer Money on Keeping Taxpayer Money

Written by Lakewood News from Karen on .

In June 2023, the Lakewood Budget and Audit Board voted to recommend keeping future TABOR funds. To do that, they recommended finding a specialist to help find out what would make residents agree to this proposal. That decision seems to be proceeding, although requests for status have not yet been answered.

As this CBS News article points out, governments cannot spend money on political campaigns. Although keeping TABOR refunds will be a ballot issue, it is not now. Therefore, there is a loophole to be taken advantage of in order to craft a political message before announcing the ballot measure.

Jefferson County is doing the same so-called pre-campaigning for tax refunds. However, in the case of the county, they were very careful not to say that a decision had been made to keep the funds. Jeffco said they were just researching, which will include ways to craft ballot language.

Lakewood has already made the decision to keep the TABOR funds by a vote of the Budget and Audit Board. So a ballot issue is pending but is not yet announced. The Board discussed using the specialist to find out what residents would be willing to pay for so that they could use that language. Former Mayor Paul pointed out how successful that strategy was the last time.

Jefferson County was in the news for hiring a personal connection of Rep. Brittany Pettersen to research this TABOR issue.

Lakewood did not have to suffer this scrutiny because they reached out for three quotes that did not go over the limit which would require a public Request For Proposals. The decision did not come to Council as a separate policy decision that would require public discussion. The expense would have been included in the 2024 budget and approved at that time.

There is no word on the current status of this project. No Council Member responded to questions for status or where in the 2024 budget the funds were included.

Update 3 February 2024: Council Member Olver responded that the current Budget Board Council Members would be more likely to have answers. Currently that would be Councilors Rebekah Stewart, Jeslin Shahrezaei, Isabel Cruz.

Lakewood Informer banner

Reader Recommended Business: Go With the Flow Plumbing

Go With the Flow Plumbing logo

Lakewood Paying for RTD Lights

Written by Lakewood News from Karen on .

Fixing the bridge lights for RTD on the 6th Avenue overpass is an $800,000 budget item for Lakewood… to fix RTD property. The large line item caught the attention of Council Member Olver at the time. How did this get to be in the budget with no prior public discussion?

Why isn’t RTD paying for their own repairs?

A series of open-records requests reveal not a single communication in 2023 between RTD and any city official discussing the details of how the project came to be. Not who would pay or for what, not what they think the problem is, or why RTD cannot pay for it…. Nothing.

As seen in the highlighted screenshot below, open-records requests revealed an email between the RTD point of contact and Council Member Shahrezaei. Shahrezaei responded that she would speak over the phone. Phone conversations increase communication but cannot be provided through open records requests.

Email from RTD representative asking Counselor Shahrezaei how to proceed. Shahrezaei responds she will call.

As the Council representative to DRCOG, Councilor Shahrezaei is in frequent contact with regional boards like RTD.

The city shared that this project was submitted to the budget by the Public Works Department during the 2024 budget process. No communications came up between staff and RTD on this topic but the city says they have been in discussion about the project for years.

No Council Discussion but Presumed Permission

According to the city, this budget item aligns with City Council Goal 3, “Beautiful and Sustainable City.” Normally, setting goals is admirable but this statement reveals the public policy disparity with the City Council setting goals.

  1. Council sets goals that could apply to many applications
  2. Council is not allowed to direct staff so technically no Council Member can say “please do this project to fulfill this goal”
  3. Council can claim credit for staff achieving specific goals even when there has been no apparent public decision. (For example, the Navigation Center was not a specific goal)
  4. Throughout the year, staff can justify many new projects without public discussion thereby leading to conspiracy theories about Point #2. (Can you find RTD lights under the stated goals?)

Public and City Choose Different Bridges

These bridge lights will be beautiful – if they can stay lit. Unsubstantiated sources suggest that the lights cannot remain functional through the train vibrations that displace electrical wiring.

In the bigger picture, there was public outcry in 2023 for a different bridge. Public wanted to keep the use of a pedestrian bridge in Ravines Open Space park. 290 residents signed a petition to keep a bridge that will now be lost. For the price of the lights that are RTD property, the city could have kept the city beautiful a different way. Now those park users will have an unusable pipe-hanger while RTD gets bridge lights that will, certainly, be enjoyed by all.

Picture of existing bridge compared to possible trestle design replacement with no walkable surface

Footnote: then-Counselor Janssen did not receive any answers to her questions before Council voted to approve this budget.

Residents Will Pay For Development

Written by Lakewood News from Karen on .

One recommendation from Lakewood’s Strategic Housing Plan (SHP) is to incentivize development with city funds. A variety of costs and methods are discussed. Specific spending decisions have not been made but City Manager Hodgson says staff is ready with a proposal to work with  the Community First Foundation  in a donor-advised fund. Funds could be ready as early as first quarter 2024. Hodgson suggested a starting amount of $500,000.

In most cases, direct funding would not be economical so available funds could be used to leverage other funds. For example, city funds could match against other government grants for development.

There are significant other costs proposed:

  • Increased staff costs
  • Increased administrative costs
  • Rebating city property taxes
  • Waiving permit costs
  • Paying for property damage
  • Increasing city funds for direct housing vouchers
  • Utilizing resident TABOR refunds
  • Non-direct costs such as impacts of loosened parking requirements

The other favored source of proposed funding would be from an increase to the Accommodation Tax (currently 3%). This hidden tax increase would have far-reaching effects:

  • Proposed changes would almost double the tax
  • Increased taxing makes it less economical for hotels, so would therefore decreases hotel viability. Hotels drive other tourism-based businesses.
  • Increased hotel fees make Short-Term Rentals (STRs) more attractive since they are immune to the tax.
  • Increased STRs contributes to needing more housing which will need more financial housing incentives while driving down the business that is providing the funding.

The reason for the accommodation tax in the first place was to fuel economic development but that purpose has been modified for public safety by Lakewood City Council.

The city has previously made funds available through the Community Block Grant Fund to pay for infrastructure costs for development. One benefit of having a new fund with the Community First Foundation would be that funds would be immediately available on the developers’ schedule, rather than waiting until grant approval time.

The indirect costs of increased residential services and decreased business opportunities cannot be directly calculated so are not considered.

  • 1
  • 2

Lakewood Informer

Resident generated news for Lakewood, Colorado.

Contact Info

Subscribe

© 2022 Lakewood Informer | All Rights Reserved
Designed by Mile High Web Designs