by Heather Brecl | Jul 24, 2025 | Main Articles
by Heather Brecl
A growing group of residents in Cherry Creek North (CCN) is voicing strong opposition to a proposed General Improvement District (GID) that would impose a new mill levy on local homeowners. While the initiative is framed as a way to fund neighborhood enhancements, many residents argue it lacks transparency, introduces unnecessary financial risks, and does not reflect their needs or desires.
City’s Perspective vs. Community Reality
According to Councilwoman Amanda Sawyer — who represents Denver’s District 5, which includes Cherry Creek North:
“It is entirely up to the community if they would like to create a GID and, if so, what the cost structure of the GID would be, what the governance structure would look like, and what investments they would like to fund and implement.
A GID was first contemplated in the 2012 Cherry Creek Area Plan, which is a document born out of several years of community conversation. Over the past two years, Cherry Creek residents have expressed a desire for things that the City will not fund — such as security patrols, pedestrian-scale lighting, a neighborhood transit circulator, and beautification features. A GID is the best tool to achieve those goals, but only if residents want it. The Council Office is simply facilitating the conversation.”
However, many CCN homeowners say these statements do not reflect their experience with the process. Instead of inclusive, transparent community dialogue, they describe a rollout that has felt top-down, vague, and rushed.
Flawed Outreach And A Lack Of Transparency
The GID initiative first came to light for many residents through a postcard survey — one that numerous neighbors have described as deeply flawed. While the survey asked about preferences for amenities, it failed to clearly disclose that all improvements would be funded through a new residential property tax.
“There was no upfront question that said, ‘Do you want a permanent tax to pay for these things?’” said homeowner Dana Busch, one of more than 100 CCN residents voicing concerns. “It felt more like a marketing exercise than an effort to genuinely understand the community.”
The survey was also not restricted to verified voters or property owners within the proposed GID boundaries. It could be taken multiple times and shared broadly, with no identity verification. Councilmember Sawyer’s office promoted it via her District 5 platform — even though her district extends far beyond the proposed GID footprint. This has raised questions about the integrity of the data collected and who the survey responses actually represent.
Inclusion Without Consent
Residents were particularly surprised to learn that Cherry Creek North’s residential core — bounded roughly by University Boulevard to Colorado Boulevard, 6th Avenue to 1st Avenue, and between Adams and Steele from 3rd to 6th — was included in the GID proposal without prior input or notification. Many feel blindsided by the initiative and argue that the commercial and residential zones are fundamentally different in both needs and character.
“We were never asked if we wanted to be part of this,” said Busch. “Now we’re being told we may be taxed to support projects that don’t directly benefit our neighborhood.”
Opponents are also concerned that, under current rules, the GID could be approved by voters who don’t live in the residential blocks most affected. There was no verification system in the survey to confirm that respondents had a legal stake in the outcome, further eroding trust in the process.
Unclear Use Of Funds
Residents have repeatedly asked for clarity: What specific projects would be funded? What would the cost be per household? How would spending be allocated across zones? So far, there have been no detailed answers. Instead, responses have suggested that details would be worked out after the GID is formed.
“The answer we’re hearing is basically, ‘Pass it first, then we’ll figure it out,’” said one neighbor. “That’s not how responsible planning works.”
There’s also concern that the GID could be used to issue bonds or take on long-term debt. Given Denver’s current financial challenges, some residents believe this may be a workaround to shift infrastructure costs onto neighborhoods without broader public oversight.
Neighborhood Board Concerns And Leadership Conflict
Why should long-established Cherry Creek North be taxed to support major developments like Cherry Creek West? Residents say: It’s not our responsibility and propose being excluded from the GID.
Efforts to raise concerns at the neighborhood level have also proven difficult. Residents say their requests for public forums have been declined or redirected to websites and Facebook pages. This limited access to real-time dialogue has left many feeling excluded from decisions that could impact their property taxes for decades.
Some residents have also pointed to potential conflicts of interest involving two members of the neighborhood association board — both of whom sit on the GID steering committee. In a recent meeting, one committee member reportedly acknowledged the limitations of the survey, noting it might not yield meaningful insights. Despite this, the process appears to be moving forward without pause.
Mismatch Between Neighborhood Needs And GID Goals
Well-established, well-loved, and well-maintained — Cherry Creek North residents are pushing back against a GID they didn’t ask for and don’t need.
Residents of CCN stress that their low-density, residential neighborhood is not comparable to the high-density, mixed-use commercial zones elsewhere in the GID boundary. Most say they do not require major capital improvements and could handle smaller projects — like sidewalk repairs, lighting upgrades, or landscaping — through existing mechanisms.
Wayne New, former Denver City Councilmember and past president of the Cherry Creek North Homeowners’ Association, shares these concerns:
Imagine voting to raise someone else’s taxes — with no responsibility to pay them. That’s the concern CCN homeowners have with the proposed GID process. Under current rules, renters — who won’t pay the tax — can still vote on it. Homeowners are asking for a more equitable and transparent system.
“Without additional communication with all of our residents, this GID will not understand and represent the improvements needed in our neighborhood. To many the mandatory tax increase funding by residents will be pushed forward without clear communication. In addition, the life of the GID may extend for 10 or more years, creating mandatory additional tax revenue without indicating how the funds would be used. Residents paying for services that were previously funded by our City tax dollars is a major concern.”
Preliminary financial reviews suggest that residential tax contributions would significantly outpace any direct benefits returned to the neighborhood. Many believe their dollars would be used to subsidize larger commercial or infrastructure investments elsewhere in the district.
New development, vague plans, and a tax bill for homeowners. The City’s GID proposal raises more questions than answers — especially about where the money goes and who it really helps.
“We’re not against investing in our neighborhood,” added Busch. “We’re just against doing it through a process that lacks clarity and fairness.”
What Residents Are Asking For
The opposition group is not against improvement — but they are asking for a better process. Their main request is simple: remove the Cherry Creek North residential neighborhood from the proposed GID.
“We want to see thoughtful enhancements in our neighborhood too,” said Busch. “But not through a process where our voices are diluted, our questions are unanswered, and the financial implications are uncertain.”
To stay informed, share concerns, and coordinate local outreach, residents have launched StopTheGIDinCCN.com. The site includes resources, updates, public records, and ways for neighbors to get involved in shaping the future of their community
by Ashe in America | Jul 24, 2025 | Feature Story Bottom Left
ASHE IN AMERICA — OPINION
Attorney General of Colorado Phil Weiser is campaigning to be Governor. His campaign is clear that he sees no lines between his official authority and his political campaigning.
“Just over six months ago, we launched my campaign to serve as Colorado’s next Governor,” the Team Phil X account posted on X in early July. “Since then, you’ve all stepped up in incredible ways. Thank you. This graphic captures some amazing highlights of the last six months.”
Notice the top right square. “Filed 26 lawsuits and 14 amicus briefs to protect Colorado.”
First, that is a lot of legal actions. It’s lawyers and paralegals and experts and billable hours for both the state and federal government. It’s resources that could be used to fight crime, clean up Colorado streets, fix the homeless crisis, or help the women and children that politicians are always claiming to help.
But it’s not because, second, and more importantly, the lawsuits are predominantly (state) tax-payer funded temper tantrums demanding that (federal) taxpayers continue to fund the agenda they rejected in the last presidential election.
Colorado taxpayers have the grand fortune of funding both sides — the claims and the responses — of the 40(!) legal actions Phil has taken against the Federal government. We’re not even six months into the Trump Administration, and we’re funding 40 of Phil’s fever dreams.
And it’s all part of his campaign.
Is the campaign reporting the value it’s deriving at the hands of taxpayers? How many hours do law-abiding Coloradans have to work to fund just one of AG Weiser’s self-serving, campaign-related lawsuits?
Phil Weiser presents himself as a public servant rooted in justice, law, and innovation — fighting the good fight against the bad orange man to save some population of women or children or otherwise marginalized people. But his rise through the legal and political establishment reveals strategic political calculus.
Who is Phil Weiser?
A first-generation American and child of Holocaust survivors, Weiser earned his B.A. with high honors from Swarthmore College in 1990 and his J.D. with high honors (Order of the Coif) from NYU School of Law in 1994 — before embedding himself in the corridors of federal bureaucracy under both the Clinton and Obama administrations. In Colorado, he leveraged his legal reputation to become Dean of CU Law and eventually Attorney General in 2018.
His career reflects a typical trajectory of an establishment Democrat: technocratic, consensus-driven, and scandalous.
Weiser’s tenure has been dogged by ethical concerns and a pattern of insider politics. The most glaring example is his leadership of the Attorney General Alliance (AGA), a group that regularly hosts luxury conferences — like the infamous 2021 Maui summit — underwritten by corporations such as Meta, Pfizer, and Juul. These are the very companies his office is investigating or suing.
His fundraiser at the Maui resort is an obvious conflict of interest, yet Weiser has dismissed the criticism as partisan noise. He did that again with Jena Griswold.
In April 2025, Secretary of State Jena Griswold faced a campaign finance complaint for allegedly failing to file required financial disclosures tied to early campaign activity — specifically the purchase of a domain for a presumed run for governor. Attorney General Phil Weiser’s office, responsible for investigating the complaint, decided not to pursue charges. Totally coincidentally, Griswold is not running for Governor — Weiser is. Griswold is running for Attorney General — Weiser’s current seat. Those role changes shook out in the wake of the complaint dismissal.
Weiser for Governor?
Weiser’s fundraiser at the Maui resort sparked a formal campaign finance complaint, alleging unreported in-kind contributions, and cozy relationships with regulated entities. His decision to dismiss the complaint against Jena Griswold reveals a broader pattern of selective legalism — a strong focus on the rule of law that aligns and often serves his political interests. His current campaign messaging touting official (political) lawsuits as campaign accomplishments reinforces the pattern. Weiser is quite comfortable operating in the gray, seeming to blur the lines of justice with those of his own self-interest.
Time and again, Weiser has shown a willingness to apply legal scrutiny aggressively when it bolsters his progressive credentials — such as in high-profile lawsuits against the Trump administration — while showing restraint when allies are involved.
Regardless of his campaign messaging, Weiser is not a neutral legal steward, but an experienced and shrewd operator — weaponizing his power to serve selective, strategic ends. He is the last person who should be given more power.
Ashe in America is a writer and activist. Find all her work at linktree.com/asheinamerica
by Peter Boyles | Jul 24, 2025 | Blasting with Boyles
Blasting With Boyles
OPINION
Parallels Between Epstein And Denver’s Players And Sugar Scandal
Let’s see by a show of hands how many of you remember an infamous period in Denver history when we all discovered that Denver had four operating bordellos with a very high-class high end bold print names as clientele.
When you compare and contrast the Jeffrey Epstein story with Scotty Ewing and the rich and powerful of Denver, it amazingly lines up.
Post Watergate, when Gerald Ford was president, he held a meeting with Richard Helms the head of the CIA, his vice president Nelson Rockefeller, and Henry Kissinger. As the story goes Gerald Ford had discovered that Nixon was having the CIA open people’s first-class mail, wiretapping reporters, monitoring the anti-war efforts, and wiretapping citizens with no one’s knowledge.
Ford asked the CIA what would happen if that information got out. Helms replied a lot of dead cats are going to get out.
I always thought of that when it came to Scotty Ewing’s client list. If it ever got out a lot of dead cats were going to get out.
Since we were involved in the initial investigation, I called the Hancock number from Ewing’s list and — City Council member about to be Mayor — Michael Hancock’s voice answered. We knew we were on to something. Since then, comparing it to the Epstein story I’ve learned so much more.
Alan Dershowitz asserted at one time that he had seen the client list, but the Department of Justice and Pam Bondi say there is no such animal.
Scotty Ewing claimed his client list was stolen and there was a Denver police report that Ewing was a victim of a burglary. Stolen items did not include cash, jewelry, his iPad, his flat screen tv. Rather the burglars only made off with Scotty’s computer and the records from the former escort service.
Like the Epstein case, the Denver police announced they had also closed the investigation into the theft of Ewing’s records.
And the police cited lack of forensic evidence that there was actually a burglary. Scotty told me that he believed none of what was stolen would ever be returned. But at the same time, I talked to Channel Seven’s Tony Kovaleski who confirmed at the time that they saw the black book phone list of appointments, logs, scheduled bookings, and credit card slips of Players and Sugar.
Also recall Chief Federal Judge Edward Nottingham, naughty Nottingham. Documents in February of 2008 shut down the escort agency and the documents led to Nottingham’s resignation in 2008.
Sound familiar?
Many big Denver names were rumored to be on the stolen list, of course including Mayor-elect Michael Hancock. Now comes again parallel lives.
The present government officials who claim this is all absolutely false also remind me of Hancock’s campaign manager the legendary Evan “blow dryer” Dreyer who claimed the reports were untrue. And, that Michael, and the campaign, endured negative, false, deceptive attack after attack for months and none of us should believe it.
Again, sound familiar?
The protection, and I believe cover up, was done by The Denver Post, KUSA, and other sources.
One of the many internet rumors in the Epstein case was that the so-called client list was his insurance policy, or perhaps even blackmailing prominent world players.
I do know that when Scotty Ewing did my radio show, and management of KHOW tried desperately to stop Ewing’s appearance, including putting a little watchdog in the studio with me the day he came on, stated like Robert De Niro in Goodfellas you may know who I am, but I know who you are, and he aimed that at his johns who were listening to the show that morning.
After all of this, including charges of tax evasion and witness intimidation, Ewing did six months home detention. The woman he sold Players and Sugar to, Brenda Stewart, did six months. And Judge Nottingham will do the rest of his life.
But what does that say about the Epstein saga. Chuck Plunkett with The Denver Post wrote a column that tried to exonerate Hancock because they had spelled his name wrong in the book, and never mentioned our phone call on the air where Michael Hancock’s voice answered the phone number, and one of the working girls picked Hancock’s picture out of the lineup. The story in Denver was spiked.
And isn’t it amazing that after all these years not one of those names has ever appeared, not one customer/client has been revealed. Now will history repeat itself, and you and I never find out who flew to Jeffrey’s island, or visited him in New York or, for that matter, whether or not he killed himself.
—Peter Boyles
by Mark Smiley | Jul 11, 2025 | Travel
By Mark Smiley
Katy Perry returned to Ball Arena on July 10, 2025 after her original performance date was rescheduled. Perry’s Lifetimes Tour began in Mexico City on April 23, 2025. The concert had a futuristic “video game” theme where Perry plays a half‑human/half‑machine hero battling an AI villain who’s stolen butterflies.
Similar to Taylor Swift’s Eras tour, Perry rattled through each era of her music during her two-hour performance. The 25 song setlist included all of her hits such as Roar, Teenage Dream, California Gurls, and Firework (her closing number). It also included the deep track Not Like the Movies which she hasn’t performed live since 2012. Fans experienced the full breadth of her career—from early hits to new tracks.
The stage theatrics included wire‑flying, a lightsaber duel, metallic costumes, and intergalactic visuals. The effects included over 20 screens and large props. With all of the theatrics, Perry also took time to bring five kids on stage to ask them questions and have them perform with her. She also took a phone from a fan and took selfies and videos with it.
The tour will conclude on December 7, 2025. This tour supports her seventh studio album, 143. Visit www.katyperry.com/live for more information.
