Dumb Friends League
Tumultuous Meeting Ends In Compromise
Glendale Reauthorizes Eminent Domain But With Restrictions
by Mark Smiley
The Glendale City Council reauthorized its urban renewal authority with the power of eminent domain, but with various restrictions by unanimous vote on Tuesday, May 12, 2015. The City Council meeting was jam-packed with television cameras from every local news station lining one wall, reminding some veteran observers of council meetings in the late 1990s when meetings were known as the “Tuesday Night Fights.”
Some city officials were surprised by the vehemence and vitriol of the meeting which, in their minds, was simply reinvesting its urban renewal authority with eminent domain authority which it has previously done in 2004 and again in 2013.
Officials also expressed dismay that articles in the media wrongly indicated that property can be taken without paying the landowner full and fair compensation as determined by a Colorado court. They also noted that the notice applies to the entire 42 acre parcel of land and not a single property.
However, the wealthy and influential Kholghy family from Iran, who owns Authentic Persian and Oriental Rugs, viewed the notice of reauthorization as a precursor to condemnation of their business and the five acres it owns along Colorado Boulevard and East Virginia Avenue.
The Kholghys, as M.A.K. Investment Group, LLC, having retained two high-priced Denver law firms, sued the city’s urban renewal authority in Arapahoe County District Court, asserting abuse of governmental due process. In the complaint the law firms argued that the Kholghys rather than Wulfe & Co., a Houston, Texas developer, should have been chosen to redevelop the entire 42 acre parcel of land, notwithstanding the fact that the Kholghys do not have any experience as developers. Glendale 180, formerly known as the Riverwalk, has been years in the making and will be a dining and entertainment district along Cherry Creek. The Kholghys have also retained the non-profit Virginia-based law firm Institute for Justice who sent attorney Phil Applebaum to the meeting. “They have a right to keep what they’ve worked so hard to own,” said Applebaum.
City representatives pointed out that the Kholghys bought the land in 2006 in order to profit from the redevelopment, and they acquired the land two years after the area was declared blighted and an urban renewal authority had been set up.
For added heft and muscle, the Kholghys engaged the Oath Keepers, a paramilitary militia organization of current and former U.S. military and law enforcement members who assert that they will disobey any orders tha
t they are given if they believe it violates the U.S. Constitution. Former presidential candidate Pat Buchanan said of the Oath Keepers that “depending on where one stands, {they] are either defenders of liberty or dangerous peddlers of paranoia.”
At the meeting an Oath Keeper representative emphatically noted they had been a prominent part of the Bundy Ranch standoff in Nevada and the Ferguson, Missouri, demonstrations. The Oath Keepers demonstrated outside of city hall before the meeting on behalf of the Kholghys forcing attendees to walk through their lines to get to the meeting. One agitated attendee at the meeting wondered out loud, “Is it the Constitution of the United State or that of Islamic Republic of Iran that these guys are trying to intimidate the residents of Glendale into obeying. Who will the Kholghys bring in next to threaten everyone — biker gangs? Glendale residents don’t particularly like to be pushed around and intimidated so the Kholghys can hold up the city. Is this how they think this country works?”
The Kholghys also brought scores of its customers and acquaintances to the meeting from around the metropolitan area that generally excoriated the council and Mayor Mike Dunafon. None of their supporters were from Glendale.
The Oath Keepers originally indicated that they would attempt to recall anyone who voted for the reauthorization. The only actual resident of Glendale to speak, Doug Turner, praised what the city council was trying to accomplish in the small municipality.
Jimmy O ‘Connor, the owner of the property prior to his sale to the Kholghy family in 2006, said at the meeting that the Kholghys bought it from him for $6.5 million. The family indicated to the media it has offers for the property from third parties in the $20 million range. Upon conclusion of the meeting, Mayor Dunafon said they should accept one of the offers if they thought they could get that price. Local experts anticipated that the land was likely worth approximately $12.5 million. An independent appraisal has been ordered by the city.
After several hours of comments Mayor Pro Tem Paula Bovo stated, “The reason we have everybody in the room tonight is because eminent domain is a scary thing. If we can add an extra layer of security without compromising the entire project, I would be willing to do that. … I will do everything in my power to make sure it doesn’t come down to the big threat, the big stick of eminent domain.”
Bovo suggested a compromise whereby the City Council would approve the reauthorization resolution but with restrictions on the urban renewal authority. The city would act in good faith and make a full and fair effort to come to an agreement with any landowner prior to eminent domain.
After consultation with local legal counsel, attorneys for the city and the Kholghys, and Jody Alderman of the law firm Alderman Bernstein drafted an amendment which, among other items, requires the city to enter into mediation with a landowner. The mediator is to be chosen by the landowner but the cost would be borne by the city.
The compromise appeared to be generally acceptable to the main parties involved that night. However, Nasarin Kholghy was a guest on the Fox & Friends television show the following morning and demanded the city abolish the possibility of eminent domain regarding Glendale 180.
After the meeting Mayor Dunafon stated in interviews with local television stations that the city did not want to condemn anyone and did not anticipate the city doing so. “You can’t start the process and even enter into negotiation until the authority is empowered, and by the way, it doesn’t mean the authority ever has to use condemnation and it probably never will,” said Dunafon.
Dunafon generally received high marks from some attendees for facilitating and allowing attendees who wanted to speak an opportunity to do so and for maintaining an equitable demeanor notwithstanding the highly personal nature of some remarks by Kholghy supporters.
One Glendale resident who requested anonymity for fear of retaliation from the Kholghys and their militia supporters concluded, “Ali and Saeed push Nasarin out front and like to pretend to the press that they are victims. By threatening residents with a paramilitary demonstration of force shows who they really are. They know how to work the legal system, the press and everyone else, but in the end they will do anything to anybody to get their way.”
Why The Apple Watch Will Fail
I’m trying really hard to understand the need for a wearable mobile device, or in other words, an Apple Watch. Apple launched their watch a few months ago and I’ve sat on the sidelines. I have hoped to hear of a compelling story about how the Apple Watch created a technology that helped a business. Or, how the watch allowed more free time in a day. Crickets! All I’ve heard are stories about added convenience of not reaching into a pocket to pull out an iPhone. That’s it? So we’ve now placed a value of reaching into our packet at $350. I have a friend that told me he finds it easier with his Apple Watch to reply to texts, pay for
items and not have an intrusive phone in sight during a meeting. Yet, his phone was sitting on the table during our conversation. He used his watch to pay for Starbucks while holding his phone in the other hand. Where is the convenience? Are we that lazy a society that we can’t possibly be bothered to pull out a phone from our pants pocket to reply to a text or decline a call during a meeting? Hey bud, whether you’re looking at your watch or your phone during a meeting to decline a call, you’re still being rude.
Listen, I really want this device and technology to be a success. I’m all for the advancement of technology, but do you know why you’re busy and need a device for “added convenience?” It is because you have TWO devices! That would make you busy! Here’s my issue, this watch needs an iPhone to truly become a device. Otherwise, it is a glorified iPod. Yes, there are a number of actions one can complete without an iPhone nearby, such as, tracking steps, using it during a run, to pay for stuff, get on a plane, emulate the functions of an iPod. How about Digital Touch that allows you to sketch a picture on your watch and send to another wearer’s screen. Seriously, did we become Picasso overnight to be able to sketch on a watch screen? Here’s a stick figure. Can you believe this only cost $350? Yes, it can be a functional device, but are any of these things worth adding a “small iPhone” to your wrist? Can’t you accomplish your fitness needs with a Fitbit or other wearable device?
There are a number of business applications that can make the watch functional, assuming they can accomplish this functionality without a data plan. There are time tracking apps, which will be great for folks that bill by the hour or are in the service business. The flexibility to deliver an Apple Watch to an employee to track time can be advantageous. Another way to look at tracking time can be with Geofency. With little interaction, the watch tracks where you are and for how long, which makes billing easier. For presentations, advancing slides with the watch can be functional. I believe there is a fit for this technology in a business that cannot have a phone in hand, such as those in medical, over the road drivers and skilled laborers. I think there is another fit for monitoring your medical history and delivering this information to your doctors. Unfortunately, I do not believe these experiences are available or are not ready for prime time.
The watch can be stylish. The band looks sharp and feels solid. It can be a conversation starter. The watch face has many options from fancy to silly. Yet, the major miss is the inability to have its own data plan or SIM card. With this technology, the watch would be a serious technology tool, in my opinion. Without it, it’s another device that needs to be charged every night. Oh, here’s a funny one for you. The battery life is 18 hours. I’m not the smartest guy in the room, but I swear that is less than a full day. My Fitbit lasts days. There are too many wearables on the market today are offer similar features as the Apple Watch, and often at a lower cost.
Maybe I’m just getting older. Maybe I’m just saturated with devices. My heart tells me that I really want this technology to work. Is it time though? Unfortunately, the only time that this device should tell you is that it isn’t time to buy one.
Do you have a favorite app you’d like to share? Contact Brian at brian@brianzabro ski.com, on Twitter @BrianZab or LinkedIn at www.linkedin.com/in/brianzab.
Brian, a Corporate Account Executive with NetSuite, has spent nearly 20 years in the telecommunications and software industry. Businesses often have the same concerns: How do I increase my revenue and profit? How do I attract great talent? Am I easy to do business with? Is it simple to access my business information? If you’re a business that would like to learn how Box, GoPro, Groupon and Fitbit have used NetSuite to answer these questions, then please contact Brian.






