Deeper Issues: Many teachers believe the issues bargained in the strike were emblematic of deeper issues, central philosophical beliefs about education.
The Denver teacher strike made national headlines as the latest district to join the Red4Ed movement on February 11. The strike ended three days later when the Denver Classroom Teachers Association (DCTA) and officials representing the Denver public school system (DPS) signed a tentative agreement. Denver wasn’t the longest strike — Los Angeles held out for five days, West Virginia for nine — but it stood out in another way. “You are a little bit unique here in Denver,” said National Education Association President Lily Eskelsen Garcia, alluding to the controversial pay system known as ProComp. Why ProComp, originally liked by teachers, now caused teachers such distress — why the once-popular pay-for-performance system caused Denver teachers to upend the lives of 72,000 students, put their own livelihoods at risk and enter the first strike in 25 years — is a layered story that goes back 15 years.
Disrespected
Denver educators were also protesting the same issues that caused red-shirted educators to stand up in Oklahoma and Arizona: excessive emphasis on standardized testing, smaller class size, and pay they considered a living wage. At demonstrations, many teachers carried this sign: “When we can’t afford to strike, that’s when we have to strike.”
Newly appointed DPS Superintendent Susana Cordova let her feelings be known: the strike could be avoided if “we sat down and engaged in a discussion that found our common values and beliefs.” But the 93% of DCTA educators who voted on January 22 to strike disagreed. They believed that each succeeding proposal the district offered showed they weren’t really hearing teachers’ demands, or feelings.
And the way DPS prepared for the strike — hiring more substitute teachers, arranging to pay subs twice their usual rate, spending $137,000 on lesson plans for those subs — revealed teachers’ main concern, that DPS does not regard classroom teachers as valuable professionals. That concern was amplified when a week before the strike, a leaked document, posted online, showed how top heavy the DPS payroll was with administrative positions and how many administrators received bonuses on top of six-figure salaries.
Joining The Picket Line: Dr. Carrie Olsen, first row, second from left, longtime teacher, was elected to Denver’s Board of Education in 2017. She could not continue teaching, the board said, due to “conflict of interest.” Board members, however, are not required to be neutral, so Olsen joined teachers on the picket lines on the third day of strike.
DPS hoped Colorado’s new governor, Jared Polis, would accede to their request and intervene. But on February 7, Polis announced the two sides should work it out themselves, seeing as how their differences were “minor, small … limited.”
Negotiations for those “minor” differences could be seen online. Residents following the bargaining talks on Saturday, February 9 and Sunday, February 10, heard hours of haggling about what a PDU (Professional Development Unit) would be worth — but the talks always circled back to ProComp.
What Exactly Is ProComp?
ProComp — Professional Compensation — is a system that came into being in November 2005, when voters approved a $25 million mill levy override to provide incentives to teachers who worked in “hard to serve” schools. DCTA and DPS jointly designed the system, which was implemented in January 2006, with a stipulation that both parties could revisit the contract in 2007.
Late in 2007, DPS did want to make changes; reluctantly, teachers came to the bargaining table. But after months of fruitless discussions, then DPS Superintendent Michael Bennet issued an ultimatum: teachers should accept the district proposal — higher bonuses and lower base pay — or DPS would no longer honor the master agreement. The ProComp contract was revised early in 2008.
When the ProComp agreement expired in 2013, DPS asked teachers to put off negotiating a new one; they were about to conduct studies on ProComp’s efficacy. Between 2013 and 2017, DPS made changes to ProComp that teachers did not like: “Hard to serve” schools shifting categories; teacher evaluations based on students’ standardized scores; how paychecks had become impenetrably confusing and distressingly unpredictable. “I never know how much money I’ll have for the month,” said a high school English teacher.
DCTA President Henry Roman kept saying that the short-term bonuses were “shortchanging our students. … Teachers deserve a professional career salary.”
What Lies Underneath
The shape ProComp took reflected the reform educational measures DPS Superintendent Tom Boasberg (2008-2018) installed. But ProComp’s changing parameters mostly stemmed from something that happened 15 years before, when Michael Bennet was DPS Superintendent and Boasberg his Chief Operating Officer.
Both men came from the business world and were considered to be financial wizards. Together, they developed a plan to purportedly save DPS millions. They would borrow $750 million for DPS’s outstanding pension debt. Three hundred million would go to pay back already existing pension debt; $400 million would go to fully fund the DPS retirement fund and $50 million would pay banker and lawyer fees.
And although there were indications something was happening in the world financial markets at that time, Bennet and Boasberg went ahead with their plan, which ultimately included institutions such as Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan, Citibank, Wells Fargo and Bank of America, in April 2008. DPS hoped this plan would allow their retirement fund to join the statewide retirement fund, which would in turn allow DPS employees to easily move in and out of the system, which would reduce DPS’s retirement debt — which would provide more money for classrooms. Win/win, right?
Pensions And ProComp
By 2018, that $750 million loan had doubled. DPS now owed $1.8 billion.
Boasberg and Bennet were able to convince the Colorado legislature that DPS should get the equivalent of “pre-payment” credit to deduct the ProComp’s fees and interest from what would have been their normal pension contributions,” explains Jeannie Kaplan, BOE member at that time and unofficial DPS historian. “Because of these actions DPS employees saw their pension fund drop from fully funded on January 1, 2010, to a little under 80% funded in June 30, 2018.”
How the above connects to 2019 teacher strike: base salaries — which ProComp was originally designed to boost — are pensionable. In 2008, the ProComp “bonus” went from a base building system to bonus-based — and since these bonuses do not contribute to a teacher’s pensionable income, this diminishes the amount a teacher has in retirement, and makes smaller demands on a dwindling pension fund.
By 2019, many educators were fed up with ProComp. As the district offered proposals that didn’t address their demands, many wondered who was making decisions for DPS. “Cordova is not the full boss but she definitely has a say,” said one teacher, while educational activists cited DPS Chief Financial Officer Mark Ferrendino and BOE President Anne Rowe, long affiliated with reform groups such as A+ Colorado — and they were heard to say during a closed-door session, “Do not give in to the teachers — as influential.”
Agreement
In the end, DPS did “give in to the teachers.”
“This [February 14] agreement is a win, pure and simple,” said DCTA President Roman. To get that win, Rob Gould, chief union negotiator, said, “I had to use the last tool in my toolbelt.” The agreement provides a more traditional pay system, significant pay raises, a transparent 20-step salary schedule including a 7 to 11 percent increase in base pay — and still keeps incentives for teachers at high poverty schools. Part of the money for teacher raises, said CFO Ferrandino, will come from cutting administrative costs, including 150 central office positions.
For well over a year, DCTA had been trying to negotiate the above points. “For 15 months, the district chose to ignore us,” said Denver teacher Rachel Sandoval. “Can you hear us now?”
Almost every mayor of Denver who has two or more terms in office has some project or initiative that highlights what the individual wanted to accomplish in public office. For Mayor Robert Speer it was Speer Boulevard and the City Beautiful movement. For Mayor Stapleton it was the Mountain Park System and Civic Center Park. In the case of Mayor Wellington Webb, he was justifiably proud of what he was able to accomplish with Confluence Park and Mayor Federico Peña fought tirelessly for Denver International Airport.
But what about Mayor Michael Hancock? He has been able to destroy and/or monetize parks and open space throughout Denver. He has been able to take the 16th Street Mall, the pride and joy of Mayor McNichols, and turn it into a dangerous place at times that reeks of urine and feces emanating from the alley ways. He has been able to destroy or damage neighborhoods throughout the city with ugly high rises built right to the curb. He has driven out African-American families who have been in the city for generations with his gentrification efforts and making affordable housing in the city a thing of the past. He has turned the once beautiful Speer Boulevard into a concrete canyon. Driving about Denver has become a chore almost any time of the day and parking has become scarcer and scarcer. If he and Councilman Albus Brooks have their way they will have defacto legalized heroin/meth use and sales with so-called Safe Injection Sites.
What could represent and highlight these and many other similar achievements by his honor. We suggest Initiative 300 could do the trick. It would alter the municipal code of Denver to provide a right to rest in any public space in Denver and to live in any motor vehicle on any street without being asked to move. It allows for people to eat, share and serve food in public places. It would make it a crime to harass any person exercising these rights and would override any and all laws of Denver or the State of Colorado that are in contradiction of these provisions.
How perfect can you get to represent the ideals and aspirations of the Hancock Administration. This initative would help to destroy the enjoyment of most people in Denver of those parks and open spaces that Mayor Hancock hasn’t already closed or monetized. It would solve the affordable housing crisis since one could live almost anywhere within a tent and drive down home values so that houses would be “more affordable.” These wonderful legal provisions would also apply not only within the boundaries of the City and County of Denver, but also to the Denver Mountain Park system which would not only apply to Red Rocks concerts and Evergreen Golf Course but apparently to Winter Park.
Initiative 300 applies not only to parks and open space but any public space any land owned or leased by the City and County of Denver or any property upon which there is an easement for public use which would include the sidewalk in front of your house and any street median by your home. Asking too loudly for the person camped out in front of your house not to urinate or defecate on your lawn could be deemed a form of harassment subjecting you to arrest.
The only real obstacle to this initative is the fact that high density developers who control the mayor’s office and who want to destroy the city and its parks and open space for their own profit and fun, are opposed. How dare the homeless advocates make the city an undesirable place to live and work when the high-density developers are doing a bang-up job on their own. The flotsam and jetsam over at Colorado Concern, who runs the day-to-day operations of the city along with the mayor’s Chief of Staff Alan Salazar, will put money in to defeat the proposition. Mayor Hancock himself has been strangely silent on the matter afraid to alienate anyone on either side of the issue with his dubious re-election campaign in full swing. But his silence is in part understandable as he is spending a significant part of his time chasing and harassing women down in Atlanta away from prying eyes.
But we as citizens of Denver all owe it to our beloved mayor who we have elected twice (once without any opposition) and who will, in all likelihood, be re-elected for a third term given the enormous war chest he has built up from high-density developers. It is not easy to destroy a once beautiful and very livable city especially when you have money to burn, but Hancock is helping to achieve the same and Initiative 300 could, in fact, be the crown jewel ode to his time of public service.
This is a once in a lifetime opportunity to attract thousands of drug-addicted street people from across the country to the Mile-High Queen City of the Plains to share our new utopian vision provided by Mayor Hancock. Vote “Yes” on Initiative 300, and help the mayor destroy our once beautiful city.
Audit Reveals Potential To Alter Files, Payment Records; Jeopardizing Justice, More Than 4,000 Cases Closed In Error by Glen Richardson
Claiming it “is a separate branch of government,” Denver County Courts initially refused to grant Denver Auditor Timothy M. O’Brien authority to audit the County Court System. Despite hiring outside counsel to dispute the right to audit, the Denver City Attorney’s office ultimately granted permission. Now completed, the audit of court operations reveals weaknesses in the court’s management of case files, as well as other administrative problems, but the court is refusing to go along with the auditor’s plan to make improvements.
Keeping Courts Honest: Denver Auditor Timothy M. O’Brien goes to court to keep Denver City-County Courts honest and managed properly.
The audit, led by O’Brien, CPA, found more that 4,000 case files closed in error. Equally as disturbing, in the current system personnel can alter case file and payment records without detection. Court management responsibilities lie with Terrie Langham, Denver County Judicial District Administrator, and Theresa Spahn, Presiding Judge of the Denver District Court. Mayor Michael B. Hancock appointed both, Wood in July 2017 and Judge Spahn in January 2017.
Court management is also relying on erroneous performance measures to make decisions. Out of more than 200 metrics Denver County Court reported, the audit found more than 100 do not have an established standard or goal. Thus the court is wasting resources and time compiling data for metrics with no meaning for the organization. “Due to the misaligned and inaccurate performance metrics, Denver County Court management risks not making appropriate oversight decisions or having an accurate picture of its operations,” O’Brien warns.
Cantankerous Court Audit: Audit of the Denver City-County Court System by the Denver Auditor’s Office is shown getting underway on Denver 8 TV. The Court System hired outside counsel to dispute Auditor’s authority but Denver City Attorney ultimately granted permission.
Cantankerous Court
County Court management, nevertheless, disagrees with many of the audit team’s recommendations regarding best practices for internal controls. O’Brien answers in response: “Court management states current policies, procedures and practices are sufficient; however, if that were the case, our audit team would not have found the problems reported in the audit.”
O’Brien initially had to seek a District Court ruling to grant him the authority to audit the County Courts. Previous auditors — who traditionally haven’t been CPAs — have conducted reviews of past court operations. The auditor’s office also made it clear that “it is unusual for the courts to have independent legal counsel rather than relying on the City Attorney’s Office to make a decision.” Nonetheless, City Attorney Kristin Bronson — in accordance with her charter duties — ultimately gave the go-ahead to conduct the audit. The County Courts, O’Brien’s office notes, had been aware of the pending audit since October 2016.
The Denver County Courts receive a $24 million appropriation in the city budget and generate $23 million in revenue. Denver laws require the auditor to conduct financial and performance audits and grant the auditor’s office access to city records, officers, employees and property in performance of those duties.
Case File Concerns
The audit found incomplete documentation in case files and more than 4,000 case files closed in error. Court management may also be using inaccurate information from performance metrics to make decisions. As a result, Denver County Court is at risk of not fulfilling its mission to administer justice in a fair, efficient and effective manner.
Keeping The Law: In accordance with her charter duties, Denver City Attorney Kristin Bronson gave the go-ahead to conduct the audit of City-County Courts.
Case files are at the core of court operations as they are where all records and documents supporting actions related to a case should reside. The audit found Denver County Court case files contained inconsistent and incomplete information, hindering the audit team’s ability to perform audit procedures.
“It’s disturbing to me that the County Court is not keeping the consistent records they need to support case files and track actions taken in court,” Auditor O’Brien says. “We found several case files with missing documentation of key courtroom actions including the suspension of fines and penalties, the cancellation and reinstatement of a protection order, and defendants’ acknowledgments of the terms of probation.”
Courtroom Troubles: Audit finds case files with missing courtroom action records including suspension of fines, cancellation and reinstatement of protection orders and terms of probation.
County Court has agreed to create specific rules to determine what records must be kept in case files. Court management plans to regularly review those case files, as well.
Altering Files, Payment
The audit work also found problems with how the court reviews closed case files.
“During the audit, we identified more than 4,000 improperly closed case files with outstanding fines.”
Seventy-seven percent of these errors happened when cases were either dismissed or transferred. The fees assigned to these cases should have been manually removed but were not, resulting in an approximate $24,000 overstatement of accounts receivable as of the end of 2017.
Corrupt Courts? Citizen concern grows as court management continues to ignore recommendations to improve operations and ensure justice for the people of Denver.
In addition, more than 300 cases were prematurely closed and should have been reopened. In other cases, the court had to issue refund checks for duplicative and overpaid fines.
Escaping Punishment
Court officials said they reviewed and addressed each of these errors; however, they did not share individual case-level information with the audit team for verification until after audit testing work had concluded.
“The court could be perceived as unfair if it closes cases inconsistently,” Auditor O’Brien believes. “Closing a case incorrectly could allow individuals to escape punishment, such as probation, community service, or payment of fines or compensation for victims.”
The audit also found a potential for misuse and errors in payment records. In the current system, personnel can alter case file and payment records without detection because the people who authorize transactions are also the custodians of the cash. The County Court’s cashiering staff is small, making segregation of duties difficult. However, the audit recommends a management review of audit logs and transactions to avoid possible abuse of the system.
Administering Justice
County Court also needs to update ordinances related to its operations. New national best
practices say fines and fees should not fund primary court operations including salaries and benefits. Although fees are currently being used in accordance with the current ordinance through two special revenue funds, the court should adopt the new principles, according to O’Brien. He says the County Court also needs to update outdated language in city ordinances governing the courts.
Further, court management chose not to prioritize certain IT-related controls. While there are many projects for the court’s information technology team, the audit identified significant areas of concern that should receive immediate attention. “We make these recommendations as a way to mitigate risks,” Auditor O’Brien explains. “If they aren’t addressed, these risks could potentially threaten the achievement of the court’s organizational goals.”
To ensure justice for Denver City-County citizens, O’Brien concludes: “The court management should listen to our recommendations to help improve their operations and to ensure they can complete their goals to administer justice for the people of Denver.”
In the printed edition of the February, 2019 Chronicle, we incorrectly identified the Denver County Judicial District Administrator as Kristin Wood. It is Terrie Langham.
Denver City Council Votes Against Proposed 3-story Condominium Project On Holly Street by Mark Smiley
In a stunning turn of events, Hilltop residents, led by Lise Uhrich through an intricate petition process, were able to force the Denver City Council to require a super majority in order to approve a 3-story, 23 condominium project earmarked for Holly Street in between Alameda and Cedar in the Hilltop Neighborhood. On January 7, 2019, the project passed with an 8 to 5 vote, one vote shy of an approval.
One Vote Short: The site of proposed 3-story, 23-unit condominium project is immediately to the south of Park Burger and Novo Coffee on South Holly Street. On January 7, 2019, Denver City Council only carried 8 votes to pass the rezoning application, one vote short.
According to City of Denver, neighboring property owners who oppose the rezoning may file a protest petition with the City Council no later than seven days prior to the City Council public hearing to trigger a super-majority vote requirement (as opposed to a simple majority) at the public hearing. Protest petitions require signatures from owners of 20 percent of the total land area within 200 feet of the subject property.
The required number of signatures were collected by Uhrich and the neighbors and thus required the super majority of the City Council. Mary Beth Susman, who represents District 5 where this proposed project sits, voted in favor of the development.
In a Facebook post she has since removed, Susman stated: “Last night I voted to support a re-zoning proposal in my district that would have given the neighborhood more control on the scale and design of the project. However due to super majority requirements, even though it was supported 8-5, it failed. Now the area that has a use-by-right for denser housing can be built with no input required from neighborhood or council.”
Under Fire: Councilwoman Mary Beth Susman voted in favor of the development on South Holly Street in her district and has received blowback from her constituents.
Susman continues: “Providing a variety of housing opportunities so people of different incomes have access to all our neighborhoods is an important goal for 21st century communities. Inclusivity leads to a diversity of ideas and problem solving and a community knitted together by geography rather than separated by income.
“I also believe in neighborhoods having some say about scale and character. Now we’ve lost both by denying this re-zoning. But I have a renewed commitment to inclusive neighborhoods like we built at Lowry and Stapleton with the participation of all voices.”
Local relator Denice Reich, who has been vocal in her opposition, disagrees with Susman’s assessment: “. . .the development lost 15,630 sq. ft. of space when its zoning change was voted down,” said Reich. “The developer will now only build on 10,209 sq. ft. This allows the other 15,630 sq. ft. to remain single family and allows the area to maintain some of its green space and keeps another unnecessary concrete monstrosity from being built.”
Denver City Council District 5 candidate Amanda Sawyer, who is opposing incumbent Mary Beth Susman in the May election, also sided with the Hilltop neighbors: “Community members expressed their concerns that the development would have towered over the single-family homes and one-story businesses on the block, and that it would have been out of character for the neighborhood,” said Sawyer. “Not to mention the safety and traffic issues at one of the main entrances to the Hilltop and Crestmoor neighborhoods. Because of community involvement, now what will be built on that property is 15-20 smaller condos that will provide housing opportunities for the ‘missing middle’ price point but add less density and — hopefully — fit better with neighborhood character.”
Other critics say this kind of project does not belong in the neighborhood, especially along Holly Street where 20,000 cars pass by each day according to a 2014 study. This study was done before the building that contains Park Burger was built.
So, a plan that was hatched early last year and moved through the process through most of 2018 is now off the board. Jason Lewinston, the developer for the project, will have his resilience put to the test. Currently, it does not appear he has enough support from the neighbors or the City Council to propose another project.
Investigative couple, Denver City Councilman Kevin Flynn and his wife, uncovered evidence that put the brakes on Denver’s plans to install more controversial red-light cameras at city intersections. “We’re such a fun couple,” he quips about their recent “investigative date night.”
Councilman Investigates: Denver City Councilman Kevin Flynn is a former Rocky Mountain News reporter who used his investigative skills to turn up new evidence raising questions about plans to expand the red light camera program.
Last month, the Denver City Council was poised to spend $1.2 million on a plan to expand its red-light camera program. It first launched in 2008 and the city sends tickets to drivers who go through a red light or stop in the crosswalk at those intersections. Currently there are red-light cameras at four Denver intersections: West 8th Avenue and Speer Blvd, Quebec Street and East 36th Avenue, 6th Avenue and Kalamath and East 6th Avenue and Lincoln Street. The new proposal would have moved the 6th and Lincoln camera to Alameda Avenue and Santa Fe and added two new red-light cameras at 13th Avenue and Lincoln and 18th Avenue and Lincoln.
Flynn is an award-winning former reporter with the Rocky Mountain News and was the transportation reporter when Denver first installed the red-light cameras more than a decade ago.
He and his wife armed with a stopwatch app and phone camera discovered that the timing of the yellow lights at two of the intersections in question is so short it’s virtually impossible to get through them before the light switches to red. He says. “The laws of traffic cannot trump the laws of physics. It takes a certain amount of time to stop a moving vehicle, so you always have to take into account the real-world situation.” Flynn found the yellow light at 13th and Lincoln is just three seconds long, the minimum allowed by federal law and the 18th and Lincoln yellow light is 3.5 seconds long. Flynn points out, “That’s just trapping people.”
With the support of Denver Police and City traffic engineers, Flynn wrote a memo to other Councilmembers proposing they postpone the contract adding red-light cameras and try lengthening the timing of the yellow lights.
Traffic Laws Can’t Trump Physics: Councilman Flynn discovers yellow lights at some Denver intersections are so short it’s virtually impossible to get through before the light turns red.
While some argue red-light cameras improve safety, many feel red-light cameras are just cash cows for cities like Denver. The City raked in more than a million dollars in 2017 from the thousands of tickets generated by the red-light cameras. The money goes into the City’s General Fund. In November 2018, Aurora residents overwhelmingly voted to get rid of red-light cameras at 10 intersections in that city. Data from Aurora showed that accidents had actually increased at the red-light camera intersections. A 2011 audit by then Denver City Auditor Dennis Gallagher concluded Denver’s photo radar system did little to show it had any other purpose other than bringing in revenues.
Councilman Flynn says lengthening the yellow light times should address the safety issues without unfairly ticketing drivers. “We don’t need the 75 bucks per driver that badly that you have to induce violations that don’t have to occur, “Flynn says noting the Denver City budget is in fine shape. “The point is, you have to specifically engineer the traffic at each intersection on its own. There can’t be a blanket rule.”
Flynn points out that lengthening yellow light times has worked elsewhere. In Loma Linda, California, Flynn says an intersection with a red-light camera was averaging 249 tickets a month. They added 7-tenths of a second to the red-light camera and now hand out only one ticket every five days. “That’s the kind of safety I want to bring to Denver, “Flynn says.
City Council members voted unanimously to put off adding red-light cameras while City staff tries out longer yellow lights. That process could take up to nine months.
One other problem with the proposed new red-light camera contract, it listed the wrong intersections, so Flynn says they were going to have to postpone it anyway.
Diogenes, a Greek philosopher, was said to have wandered the streets of Athens with a lantern in broad daylight saying he was looking to find an honest man. If he were to come to Denver today and went to Denver City Hall, he would have an equally tough time. It has just become more difficult as Denver City Councilman Rafael Espinoza has decided not to run for a second term as the representative of the 1st District, which includes Denver Highlands.
Four years ago, he became the first person to defeat an incumbent councilperson since the mid-1980s. Moreover, he won in a landslide, garnering 70% of the vote. He came into office hoping to accomplish great things and, in particular, helping to arrest the destruction of Denver neighborhoods by high-density developers. He declared at the time: “I will not be beholden to developers, special interests, the mayor’s office, or even fellow council members.”
He has been true to his word. He even tried to join a lawsuit against the mayor to stop the flood control project at City Park Golf Course. Unfortunately, a majority of his fellow councilpersons were and are, in fact, beholden to the same including developer hacks and Hancock toadies Mary Beth Susman and Kendra Black. Espinoza, during his short tenure, was able to accomplish some important goals including eliminating bump stocks in Denver and imposing new requirements on keeping neighborhoods informed about proposed real estate developments.
But he was unable to stop the onslaught of solely-profit driven, poorly conceived real estate developments. Nor was he able to rein in the absolute control over Denver City Council by the office of Mayor Hancock. Of course, Hancock himself is too busy working out and chasing women in not only Denver but also in Atlanta and Washington, D.C. to control anything.
But that does not mean that his chief of staff, Alan Salazar, in connivance with the Brownstein law firm and the boys and girls at Colorado Concern, doesn’t have time to destroy the city for fun and profit.
There was nothing more shameful in the last four years than the City Council’s craven capitulation to the harassment of Denver Police Officer Leslie Branch-Wise and subsequent payoff for her silence with taxpayer funds. Espinoza tried to hold the mayor accountable as outlined in a letter that went public, but he was one of the few voices on city council willing to take a stand and the heinous conduct of the mayor went unheeded.
Espinoza points to the three-part series in The Denver Post by Bruce Finley titled “The Densification of Denver” which has become one of the cities with the least open space and parks per resident almost anywhere in the country. This for a town that was planned in the early 20th century as a “city within a park.”
But as a councilman he found himself powerless to do anything about it. He believes he can accomplish more as a private citizen outside of government. He has endorsed his top aide Amanda Sandoval to replace him. He indicates the 1st District is really getting two for one. His aide will be working inside of City Hall while he, as a private citizen, can work on key items such as preparing neighborhood design standards that he, as an architect, is particularly well qualified to undertake.
We have not always agreed with Councilman Espinoza. For example, we are incredulous that he voted for Albus Brooks’ Mexican drug cartel backed legislation to essentially legalize and subsidize heroin use in the City and County of Denver under the rubric of “safe injection sites.”
But overall there has been no more principled, hard working and industrious city councilperson. The fact that being a city councilperson in Denver is so worthless and unimportant that it is not even worth being one, is deeply disturbing. What does that say about the majority of the City Council who are there to pick up a six-figure salary and perks and do not care about what they are doing to the city and the citizens of Denver? God help us.
