by Mark Smiley | Jul 22, 2016 | Editorials, Feature Story Middle Left
by Bob Gardner
Coloradans: Would you like all your health care decisions for the next three years to be made by 15 unelected government bureaucrats? That’s what Amendment 69, which has qualified for this fall’s ballot, would mandate.
Before you answer, here’s a few additional facts to help you decide.
These 15 “trustees” — a fancier word for bureaucrats, by the way — would get to say which procedures and which drugs would be covered by insurance and which ones wouldn’t from 2017 until 2020. How would they get that power? Amendment 69 makes it illegal for any other health insurance company to do business in the state of Colorado. And when those companies are all gone, all decisions about any kind of payment to anyone in the health care system fall under the thumb of those unelected trustees.
They’d get to decide how long you should have to wait in the emergency room, how many months your elderly mother should have to wait for hip replacement surgery, and what treatments for your kids will and won’t be paid for.
If you don’t like the sound of that system, you should know there’ll be no opting out. If you’re wealthy, you could pay for health care from your pocket. Otherwise, your family’s care exists solely at the whim of the 15 bureaucrats.
Don’t like it? Move to Nebraska if it’s enacted. Because if we Coloradans go down this road, there’ll be no appeals, no flexibility and no choice in health care in our state.
It gets worse.
In 2020 at the latest, Amendment 69 says we’ll hold statewide elections to replace the 15 appointed bureaucrats with 21 elected bureaucrats.
That’s right — we’ll have giant campaigns across Colorado every other year to pick new health care czars. “A vote for me is a vote for liver transplants!” or “Two nose jobs in every house — vote for me!” An unending buzz of negative TV ads about how the trustee candidate’s evil opponent is trying to take away childbirth reimbursement or how their vote backed up back surgeries.
Sounds ridiculously unappealing, doesn’t it?
Obamacare’s been bad enough — its promised savings cruelly turning into a 13.4 percent average rate increase this year — but Amendment 69 will make things much worse. Its ironclad regime of single-payer health care for every resident of the state, without exception, would almost double Colorado’s state taxes overnight. It imposes an immediate 10 percent across-the-board payroll tax that would cost Coloradans a jaw-dropping $25 billion in additional taxes on top of the $27 billion the state already levies. And the whole system is specifically designed to exist outside of TABOR limits that control state and local government taxation in Colorado.
So who’s behind this nonsense?
Great question. Colorado State Sen. Irene Aguilar has been identified as one of the “leaders” of the campaign, but the funding sources are much more shadowy, with a Boulder psychologist, a Littleton physician, a Denver attorney, and a Fort Collins retiree being identified as collectively donating more than $140,000 to the cause.
Why those four people would have such a burning passion to control our health care isn’t clear to me.
What is clear is that we shouldn’t let them.
The net effect of this disastrous plan would be to drive state taxes through the roof, kill job creation (and likely most economic growth) in Colorado, and institute health care rationing for all Coloradans. All at the hands of a mysterious group of health care ideologues who’ll do their bidding through a shadow “health care Legislature” with literal power over life and death decisions.
Even Gov. John Hickenlooper was caught on tape saying he “can’t imagine there’s any chance (Amendment 69) will pass,” and noting that some large companies considering moving their headquarters to Colorado have put their plans on hold with Amendment 69 even on the ballot. It would make our state singularly economically uncompetitive and hurt the very people it claims it would help.
Just like Obamacare before it, Amendment 69 is an attempt to sell a bill of goods — sweet-sounding words about universal coverage, better benefits, and cost savings from efficiencies driven by an all-seeing, all-knowing government.
And it will turn out just as badly in the end. The difference is that Amendment 69 is a disaster we can all prevent from happening this fall at the ballot box.
Bob Gardner is a Colorado Springs attorney and former Colorado state representative.
This editorial was originally printed in the Colorado Springs Gazette.
by Mark Smiley | Jun 24, 2016 | Editorials
Super Heroes And Comic Book Characters Filled The Convention Center
by Megan Carthel
While over 100,000 attendees found some of their favorite celebrities and characters, a handful of goers found love at the 5th Annual Denver Comic Con. This year the event paired with PrideFest, as both took place over the same weekend. LGBTQ programming took place on Friday and included panels such as LGBT Comics you should be reading and topics like how young adult literature with queer themes can disrupt norms, and how to add diversity to comics, sci-fi and fantasy. The main event was on Sunday, when a group wedding ceremony, open to couples of all backgrounds, took place. Sam Fuqua, executive director of Pop Culture Classroom, the non-profit that puts on Denver Comic Con, said the ceremony was the perfect way to end the three-day celebration of geeky fun.
“I just think it was beautiful. It represents everything we try to promote at Denver Comic Con and in our year-round work — diversity, pop culture, creating a welcoming space for personal expression of many kinds,” Fuqua said. “Whoever we are, whatever we do, wherever we come from, whoever we love, we can just be ourselves and be together with people who like what we like. I think that’s a lovely thing.”
Ten couples promised their vows in front of an audience in the Bellco T
heatre as Wonder Woman’s rope united their hands. The ceremony was ordained by Andy Mangels, author and co-author of over 20 fiction and non-fiction books including Star Trek, Roswell, Iron Man and Star Wars. Mangels is also an activist in the gay community. He said being the minister for 10 couples from all backgrounds was an amazing feeling.
“In today’s world, we have only recently been able to have LGBT marriages, and to have a marriage that reflected all parts of all couples — that reflected their passions in life, and their passions for each other, it didn’t matter if those passions were for same-sex or opposite-sex, love is love,” Mangels said.
The geek-themed ceremony was Star Trek punny and genuinely touching as each couple said their written vows to their partners. The couples were as diverse as their costumes.
Tonya Smith found her “perfect player” over five years ago. With Rachel, the Ruby to her Sapphire, by her side, the two expressed their love for each other. Rachel and Tonya dressed as characters from the cartoon Steven Universe, a show about a boy who uses his magic gem powers with other super heroes. In the show, Ruby and Sapphire are fused together, much like Rachel and Tonya.
The Smiths have been married for five years, but wanted to renew their vows.
“We’ve been wanting to have a real ceremony for a long time, and it’s just been an issue of having the money to do that. When this came up, it seemed
perfect because not only could we have the ceremony, but it could be the way we wanted it to be — chock full of all the nerdiness we could ever hope for,” Tonya said.
Tonya and Rachel, who is transgender, wanted to renew their vows with Rachel as her true self, something Mangels believes to be the cornerstone of any marriage.
“I think that with any marriage, it’s about knowing to not look to change the person you’re with. You didn’t fall in love with them to change them. You fell in love with them because you liked what they were,” Mangels said. “So for any marriage to be a good long-term marriage, is to be supportive of who each of us is.”
Tonya said this time around, the ceremony was much more meaningful. When they were married five years ago, the couple went to the court house without a ceremony — something they say is more like just going to the DMV, not very ro
mantic.
“This felt so much more real,” Tonya said.
“It was pretty good,” Rachel said. “Just to know that it was more formally acknowledged in that respect.”
The couple has struggled in the last few years, from Rachel’s transition, to being homeless and living out of a hotel, and going through a discrimination lawsuit — all with two young boys. Rachel and Tonya were looking to rent an apartment in Golden Hill, but were denied by Deepika Avanti, the landlord.
Avanti allegedly wrote in an email to the couple stating the reason for denial of housing was the “uniqueness” of their relationship.
“Your unique relationship would become the town focus, in small towns everyone talks and gossips, all of us would be the most popular subject of town, in this way I could not be a low profile,” Avanti wrote.
Tom Warnke, media relations director at Lambda Legal, the law firm handling Rachel and Tonya’s case, said no court date has been set yet. In the Motion for Summary Judgment submitted on June 16 to the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado, Lambda Legal cited the series of emails Avanti sent Tonya and Rachel reiterating her concerns about how their “uniqueness” would impact her reputation. In a press release by Lambda Legal, the firm states the emails are “clear evidence” Avanti discriminated against Rachel and Tonya on the basis of sex and familial status, in violation of the federal Fair Housing Act and Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act, and on the basis of sexual orientation and transgender status, in violation of the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act.
Despite of their struggles, the couple has fought their way to get to the loving and stable place they are now, much like their characters Sapphire and Ruby.
“Things were so unsure and so chaotic for so long and so unstable, that now we have stability in our housing and financially, and with each other, with my identity and all that stuff and it’s just like black and white, day and night.”
Rachel describes the past few years as the scene from Pirates of the Carribean when Johnny Depp’s Character Jack Sparrow steps onto land as his ship is slowly sinking to the bottom of the ocean. Tonya, Rachel and their two sons, K
evin and Isaac, are now on land and have a solid foundation with jobs they love, housing, and each other — and a geeky wedding was the icing on the cake.
“This was a good way to acknowledge that, yes we’ve gone through a lot of crap together and come out the other side better for it and because of each other,” Rachel said.
by Mark Smiley | May 27, 2016 | Editorials
Four Mile Historic Park Celebration, Glendale Fireworks Top Patriotic Events
Bang, blare, blast, boom, buzz, clap, cackle, crackle, pop, hiss, ka-boom! No wonder kids love the Fourth of July. This year the sizzle, snap and sparkle to Cherry Creek Valley patriotic celebrations begins early as the City of Glendale and Four Mile Historic Park blasts things off on July 1.
Yes, the City of Glendale’s Fireworks Show — symbol of Independence Day and one of the oldest and largest in the Valley — will light up the sky on Friday, July 1. Constantly the biggest, brightest and most extravagant fireworks, the stunning summer holiday show will begin at dusk (generally 9-9:30 p.m.). Families and friends gather at eateries, bars, patios and porches from LoDo to the Dam to view the dazzling display.
Four Mile Historic Park has always featured an Independence Day Celebration. Last year for the first time the park — a serene 12-acre historic oasis on the edge of Glendale — moved its 4th of July celebration to coincide with the Glendale City fireworks. Again this year families can bring the kids to celebrate the holiday here July 1 with old-time games, historic demonstrations, live music and horse-drawn wagon rides from 5-10 p.m. Food trucks and a beer garden will be on site. Furthermore, they can then stay to watch the Glendale fireworks show. Last entry to the park is 9 p.m. Admission is free, but there is a charge for food, refreshments and some activities. Information: 720-865-0800.
Other Fireworks
The annual Independence Eve Celebration in Civic Center Park at Broadway and Colfax is July 3, 8 p.m. It will feature a free patriotic concert, a light show on the Denver City and County Building plus a fireworks finale. Lawn seating will be available on a first-come, first-served basis, so be sure to bring blankets or low-rise concert-beach chairs. Concessions will be present on-site but families are also allowed to bring their own picnic.
The City of Aurora’s 4th of July Spectacular is July 4th starting at 4 p.m. and includes a car show and hot dog eating contest. Held at the Aurora Municipal Center on E. Alameda Pkwy., there’s also a Backyard BBQ cook-off and concert by country-pop singer Emily West. Fireworks will start at 9:30 p.m.
Professional lacrosse team the Denver Outlaws will battle it out with the Florida Launch at Mile High Stadium on July 4. Following the game there will be fireworks within the bowl — pyrotechnics paired with visuals on a 220-foot-wide, high-definition screen. Another July 4 option is Elitch Gardens where families can spend the day riding the roller coasters and water slides, followed by watching fireworks at night, startin
g at dusk.
Musical Pops, Parades
If you prefer a musical holiday, what better way to celebrate Independence Day than with a free concert in City Park July 3. Enjoy the sounds of Ritmo Jazz Latino, one of Denver’s finest jazz ensembles at the City Park Bandstand, 6 p.m. Then celebrate the stars and stripes of the good ol’ U.S. of A with the Colorado Symphony July 4th at Fiddler’s Green, 7:30 p.m. The family-friendly program will celebrate America with the Armed Forces Salute, Stars and Stripes Forever, the Overture of 1812, God Bless America and a slew of other favorite hits from stage and screen. Fireworks will follow.
If you love a parade you’ll be glad to know that Park Hill 4th of July Parade is back. It will again be marching along 23rd Ave. from Dexter St. to Krameria beginning at 1:30 p.m. on July 4. It promises to be bigger than ever before, with marching bands, acrobats and festive floats, including a Boy Scout color guard, classic cars and the Montbello Drum Line. The parade ends at the Kearney Street Fair on the 2200 block of Kearney with sweet treats from Cake Crumbs Bakery, savory snacks, live music plus kids’ activitie
s.
Finally consider starting July 4 with four miles of fun at the Liberty Run in Wash Park, 8:30 a.m. The 4 Mile Run-Walk is a competitive USATF judged race walk. A kids-only Firecracker Fun Run follows the adult run. Proceeds go to Make-A-Wish Foundation Colorado. Participants are encouraged to dress in their best Red, White and Blue get ups.
by Mark Smiley | Feb 29, 2016 | Editorials
In the Denver Municipal Election last spring, seven new members were elected to the 13 member Denver City Council. New members Wayne New, Paul Kashmann and Rafael Espinoza were able to win with neighborhood activist support over candidates lavishly funded by real estate developers and lobbyists as well as support from Mayor Hancock. However, conversely Stacie Gilmore and Kendra Black won with strong support from these corrupting elements and are viewed as simply bought and paid for hacks who are never expected to cast a vote other than as instructed by the developers and the Mayor. However, the last two new members, Kevin Flynn and Jolon Clark, while they took developer and lobbyist money, they also had some neighborhood support and were not considered lost causes. Unfortunately none of the six returning council members are viewed favorably by reform groups.
The big question for many was whether New, Kashmann and Espinoza would simply sell out once in office. The preliminary indications after seven months is that they have not and in addition, Flynn and Clark are showing some actual independence from the Mayor’s office on some important votes.
The citizens have even managed to win on a vote about a development project in front of the City Council in large part because it took 10 votes to rezone a property and the proponent Emmaus Lutheran Church managed to get only eight votes. New, Kashmann, Espinoza and Clark all voted “No.” Of course Emmaus Lutheran Church is not a deep pocketed developer like Peter Kudla with an army of lobbyists. Moreover by the old system of so called “courtesy voting” the project would have lost 12 to 0 because the project was in West Highland neighborhood represented by Espinoza. But since the pro neighborhood members were elected the concept has been abandoned regarding their neighborhoods which are some of the most valuable to developers in the city.
It was not an easy vote for the conscientious Espinoza since it involved a church that wanted to transform property zoned for single family homes into a medical facility and not the normal massive apartment high-rise, but he stuck to his principles. Espinoza and Clark even voted against the Mayor’s taxpayer rip off $8.6 million affordable housing bonds that cause the city to lose money while enriching the mayor’s rich backers.
It is at least encouraging that the Denver City Council does have some ethical and honorable members who have to date at any rate not disappointed their backers. So there is still hope in the Queen City of the Plains for the neighborhoods and their honest inhabitants.
— Editorial Board
by Mark Smiley | Jan 29, 2016 | Editorials
As the Clinton email brouhaha has demonstrated, the discovery process in civil litigation often uncovers government secrets and documents which otherwise escape public scrutiny from virtually any other method. In Denver, residents have often been mystified and confused how real estate projects actually get approved by Denver City Council even when overwhelmingly opposed by residents.
In theory the process is supposed to work as follows. A project is submitted to the Denver Community and Development Department whose staff gives a thorough review to be sure it complies with all applicable zoning and planning requirements. The staff is headed by a scrupulously honest professional and experienced executive director who gives a sharp eye to any requests for rezoning, variances or waivers. The community then gets its chance at a public hearing. A wholly citizen 11 person Planning Board is supposed to advise the mayor and the City Council on land use matters including planning and zoning. After the citizen Planning Board gives its recommendations concerning the project it proceeds to the City Council. The individual council members are supposed to be impartial judges acting in a “quasi-judicial” capacity. What they know about the development project is supposed to be what is summed up in the publicly available reports of the Planning Board and what they are told the night of the hearing including the comments of the developer and the members of the community.
Nothing of what is outlined above actually happens in Denver. The “cone of silence” between the City Council members and developer of a project and opponents to that project only occurs once a project has actually been submitted to the Denver Community and Development Department. Thus developers first fill the campaign coffers of the applicable council member. The developer then sits down with the applicable council member and gets his/her approval and any changes the council member may want, all before the public even knows there is a project. Once the project is filed is often the first time residents have heard of the project. But their council member then refuses to meet with them saying it would be legally improper for him or her to discuss a submitted projected as they are required by law to be wholly impartial and prohibited by law from meeting with citizens ex parte.
Thus projects are submitted by savvy developers to the Denver Community Planning and Development Department only after the fix is already in. The Executive Director of the Denver Planning Department is Brad Buchanan, an architect turned developer of whom it is often said is wholly void of any ethics or personal propriety. The 11 member citizen Planning Board has been stacked by Mayor Hancock with pro-developer advocates who almost never pay any heed to anything the residents of affected neighborhoods have to say at their public meetings.
The night comes for the City Council to consider a crooked project and the citizens actually get to, in theory, address the City Council themselves. Unbeknownst to many citizens the Denver City C
ouncil over 30 years ago secretly adopted the so-called “courtesy zoning rule” whereby they will all (or almost all for sake of appearances) vote exactly the same as the council member whose district a project is in. This allows the savvy developer to save a great deal of money only having to convince/bribe a single council member while members of the public erroneously think they must have to convince a majority of the City Council.
Of course it takes months for a project to go from submission to the Planning Department to the night of City Council consideration. Economics and other facts change over time. The developer needs to get the council member whose district the project is in to do him additional favors and considerations during this time period concerning his project. But the “cone of silence” rule that keeps the public at bay from the council member legally applies equally to the developer and his lobbyists.
What does the savvy developer and the bought and paid for council member do? The citizens who brought the lawsuit captioned Whitelaw v. The Denver City Council 2015cv032427 in Denver District Court concerning the City Council’s approval of the Mount Gilead project at Crestmoor found out through legal discovery. The answer is, of course, they cheat.
The very high density apartment project was wildly unpopular and required a rezoning in apparent direct contradiction with the city’s master plan called Blueprint Denver. Close coordination between the developer and the key Councilwoman Mary Beth Susman was apparently deemed necessary no matter how illegal. The plaintiffs in discovery demanded all correspondence including e-mails between the council-woman and the developer or its lobbyists post the filing of the project with the Planning Department. The response — not a thing, nada.
The lawyers for the residents, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, however, wondered what was good for former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton might be good enough for Councilwoman Susman, i.e. a private email account on which public business would be conducted free from public open records requests and scrutiny. With some incredible legal sleuthing the lawyers found out that Susman did in fact have a separate Gmail account on which city business was conducted. The Denver City Attorney’s Office already accused and shown to have been engaged in unethical conduct regarding the Denver Jail lawsuits decided not to risk their law licenses and this time produced the voluminous e-mail correspondence post project filing between the councilwoman and the developers’ lobbyists directly concerning the Mount Gilead project.
The lawsuit is in front of Denver District Court Judge Shelly I. Gilman. If she is half the jurist that Federal District Court Judge John Kane is, who oversaw the Denver Jail lawsuits, heads will roll. It is highly unlikely that Ms. Susman is the only city council member who has engaged in such apparent illegal conduct. It will be the job of Judge Gilman to follow the ancient Roman maxim of law “Fiat Justitia Ruat Caelum” — “Let Justice Be Done Though the Heavens Fall.”
— Editorial Board
by Mark Smiley | Dec 17, 2015 | Editorials
The Denver Community Planning and Development Department under Brad Buchanan repeatedly has publicly declared that its overarching goal in planning and zoning for the City and County of Denver is “transparency, partnership and meaningful public involvement.”
Denver neighborhood leader and attorney Greg Kirwin, however, described what actually happens “as anyone with experience trying to shape their neighborhood knows, the land use process is primarily a collaboration between planning staff and consultants for the developers who cherry-pick language from Denver’s Plans and Zoning Code to build whatever kind of new development they want.” He went on to note, “The playing field is tilted in favor of developers throughout the planning process despite the illusion of ‘outreach’ to residents.”
Neighborhood activist Chris O’Connor was even more brutal declaring, “Mayor Hancock and his planners are trying to jam high-density, high-rise buildings into every Denver neighborhood without regard for thriving, existing communities and without adequate infrastructure . . . The entire process must be reformed.”
How does Mayor Hancock, Planning Director Brad Buchanan and the thoroughly compromised Denver Planning Board get away with such a perverted and corrupt system? First, of course, is the fact that the Denver City Council is also controlled by real estate developers and their friends. While three pro neighborhood candidates won this last election they are still only less than one-fourth of the entire 13 member council.
Another problem, of course, is that the paper of record for the city, The Denver Post, has generally buried the story of how real estate projects actually get approved and are helping to destroy the city’s neighborhoods in order to not anger the Hancock administration or its allies. Moreover the local state courts have refused to address concerns when presented with lawsuits by angry citizens. The local courts and judges similarly refused to address the brutality and corruption in the Denver Jail and City Attorney’s Office. Only when a courageous federal district court judge, John Kane, refused to look the other way were any reforms undertaken. Unfortunately, planning and zoning questions normally do not involve federal questions of law.
Finally, the zoning and planning process is highly complex and knowing how to reform the corrupt system is not easy. Fortunately, the Inter-Neighborhood Cooperation (INC) has set forth the principles for an honest system in a seven page “Platform for Denver Planning and Zoning,” which is available at the entity’s website. INC is the umbrella group for Denver’s myriad neighborhood groups called Registered Neighborhood Organizations or RNOs.
Many of the principles are just common sense and it is shocking that many of them are not included in the present broken system. The platform urges the mayor and other city officials to appoint representatives of RNOs to all city boards, commissions, advisory committees, etc. Presently only shills for developers need apply for positions on the Denver Planning Board or the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board. At one time an appointment to one of these boards was a badge of honor while today it is a mark of shame. In many sections of the city if an individual has been appointed to either board by Mayor Hancock, he or she is highly unlikely to be able to successfully run for an elective office in the future.
INC’s Platform has many important provisions but perhaps its greatest guiding principle is that “higher density development, zoning or projects should not be approved unless it can be shown that adverse traffic and parking impacts on the neighborhood will not result or will be mitigated. Traffic and parking impacts can cause serious harm to the quality of life and economic vitality in a neighborhood.” Under the present system parking ratios have been steadily decreased and the city literally declares that it will not ever consider traffic impacts. It is not clear if any other major city in the country refuses to consider traffic impacts when approving major real estate projects.
City planners have publicly stated that they want to make Denver less automobile friendly and force residents to ride bikes and take public transportation. Unfortunately, the public transportation system in Denver generally stinks and while a single millennial might be happy to take a bike around town, a mother with three small children might find such a dictate from a planning official ludicrous, particularly during the winter season.
Any future candidate for City Council should be asked to adopt and approve INC’s Platform for Denver Planning and Zoning. Any candidate who does not is probably not someone one would want on the City Council. More boldly, neighborhood groups might want to ask existing city councilmembers if they will adopt the INC’s Platform. If they refuse, some may begin to wonder whether they want those persons on the City Council at all. The City Charter provides a method by which citizens can undertake to remove from office a person who ceases to represent their interests and that method, recall, is being increasingly used throughout Colorado by angry citizens of all different political stripes. No city councilmember has ever been recalled in the history of Denver, but there is always a first time for everything.
— Editorial Board
