From savebelmarpark.com
The 777 S Yarrow public hearing is very close on:
May 7th at 7:00 PM at 480 S Alison Parkway, Lakewood, CO
You may now enter public comments online at: https://lakewoodspeaks.org/meetings/869. You may have to click on item 3.
Unfortunately, a likely defect in the Planning Commission’s online file upload process has been identified and was reported via a follow-up public comment. However, that public comment was rejected by Lakewood for violating comment policy.
It appears the comment was rejected out of an assumption that the Planning Commission software could not possibly be broken.
The city clerk was also very helpful in providing examples of other comments with attachments that were publicly posted as proof that the upload process is not broken.
Notably, NONE of the examples provided by the clerk included the .doc file extension.
Therefore, because Lakewood was obviously not going to investigate a reported defect that could potentially have been suppressing public comment file attachments for a long time, perhaps years, I investigated.
It turns out that the Planning Commission does NOT accept all of the file extensions specified on the file upload dialogue (which is shown in the image at the top of page).
Once I converted the .doc file to a .pdf file, then the upload process was successful!
If you upload a file with a supported .doc file extension, for example, it appears to work properly. However, if your comment is approved for publication, the attachment is never displayed.
This is a material error because members of the public may reasonably assume their upload was successful since no error message is ever produced at any point in time during this process.
Nor does the moderation process capture file upload errors and notify users.
Nor are members of the public ever advised that the software may be unreliable and may silently dispose of file uploads.
Upon reviewing public comments just this morning, one person who supports approving the Kairoi project referenced his attached letter. But no attached letter was displayed. So his attachment may also have been lost by the software.
Therefore, members of the public or any parties with a matter to be heard by a quasi-judicial panel could upload files for the official hearing record and discover after the hearing record is closed that their file uploads were rejected. Then it is too late to re-submit their files.
This problem is also complicated by a significant conflict of interest due to the fact that Mr. Parker, Lakewood’s executive in charge of making development recommendations to the Planning Commission and/or City Council, is also and incredibly an advisor on the executive team of the same software company that is at the crux of possibly suppressing public comment by silently rejecting documents intended for quasi-judicial hearings.
We suggest the city is indifferent both to the public perception and the risks of this conflict of interest.
We also suggest that as a result of enabling this conflict of interest, the city is also indifferent to the requirement for software quality control.
Please consider that a quasi-judicial hearing is a legal proceeding. What if the clerk of a court periodically discarded or lost documents delivered by litigants without telling anyone? What do you think would happen to that court clerk if this malfeasance came to light after years of discarding court documents?
We are not suggesting any Lakewood employees are disposing of these files. The comparison is being made to the apparently inconsistent software vs what if an employee hypothetically did the same thing? We doubt that an employee would get off so easily. But in Lakewood, the software does get off easily.
And consequences can be significant if a court is not diligent regarding management of important technology used in processing court documents or evidence.
Consider the Colorado Bureau of Investigation and the fiasco over their DNA tests. It was recently revealed that hundreds of DNA tests were allegedly ‘manipulated’ over a 30-year time period and as a result material facts were omitted from official records even though no DNA matches were falsified. The CBI Director stated: ““Our actions in rectifying this unprecedented breach of trust will be thorough and transparent.”
Will Lakewood be as forthcoming regarding ignored software defects that potentially corrupted public hearing records?
Has this defect been suppressing relevant files for years? It is possible. Especially considering Lakewood does not seem responsive to any report that the software does not work properly. Anyone who has previously reported a problem may have received a similar response that it was user error because other people can upload files – but of a different file type.
Therefore, we strongly urge that Mr. Parker be required to recuse from any matter that may eventually involve the Planning Commission or City Council where the PeopleSpeak software is used to accept public comments for any quasi-judicial hearings or city council meetings.
In the meantime, any past decisions made by the Planning Commission or City Council where online public comments were accepted from the public should be reviewed and new hearings potentially announced once the software is fixed.
Stay tuned and thanks for listening,
Steve