by Mark Smiley | Feb 2, 2015 | Editorials
That Is Always The Question For A Newspaper
The international dispute on whether to publish one or more of the Charlie Hebdo cartoons that lampoon Islam is a question that faces publications from the “newspaper of record” The New York Times down to local papers such as the Glendale Cherry Creek Chronicle. We at the Chronicle are fiercely proud of being a local paper covering local news in the Cherry Creek Valley. We, as a matter of general editorial policy, do not cover state, national or international events except where the event directly affects the Cherry Creek Valley.
But the Charlie Hebdo cartoons and their censorship does directly affect us in the Cherry Creek Valley. Charlie Hebdo is a French publication out of Paris, that until the controversy and butchering of 12 people in the offices of that publication by two French jihadists, had a circulation that was significantly smaller than the Chronicle. As an editorial board we are saddened by the decision of The New York Times and certain other national publications not to publish the cartoons. The reason given by the Times executive editor Dean Baquet was, “Out of respect to our readers we have avoided those we felt were offensive.”
The rationale rings hollow. The Times relishes printing materials offensive to some of its Jewish and Christian readers including artwork from a Holocaust-denying Iranian cartoonist Maziar Bijani, and Andres Serrano whose most famous work of “art” is titled “Piss Christ.” When a University of Southern California journalism professor challenged Baquet calling his decision “absolute cowardice,” Baquet went on Facebook to call the professor an “A**hole.” It is said that if you’re taking flak, you’re over the target.
The New York Times is not just any paper. Most of the members of this editorial board grew up venerating that publication. The failure to publish the cartoons reveals far deeper problems at that institution. It was reported that one of the killers in Paris stated to a woman, “I’m not going to kill you because you’re a woman, we don’t kill women, but you must convert to Islam, read the Quran and cover yourself” before shouting “Allah Akbar.” The Times bizarrely changed the quote to “Don’t be afraid, calm down, I won’t kill you. You are a woman. But think about what you are doing. It’s not right.”
Why would the publication falsely change a quote except that the editor understands that the Times fears offending the sensibilities of some of its Muslim readers that it will falsify quotes. What a fall from grace by what was once America’s most respected and courageous newspaper.
We print here five Charlie Hebdo cartoon covers including the edition printed after the massacre, at right, which has sold over a million copies. What is surprising is how relatively bland the cartoons are. France does not have a particularly strong tradition of free speech, notwithstanding the parade of the notables in Paris and the holding up of pens and pencils. In 1990 under the Gayssot Act, it became illegal to question crimes against humanity under the London Charter of 1945 which would cover the Holocaust but potentially much more.
French laws also make any communication deemed hate or discriminatory speech criminal which are so broadly defined that it conceivably covers virtually any type of statement that a governmental official may deem offensive. Under this very broad law septuagenarian actress Bridget Bardot was convicted of hate speech in 2008 and fined $11,920 for alluding to Muslims as leading “us around by the nose, which destroys our country.”
Following the Charlie Hebdo massacre French comedian Dieudonné was arrested for simply saying on a Facebook entry, “Tonight, as far as I’m concerned, I feel like Charlie Coulibaly” mixing the last name of the killer who held hostages at a Jewish deli and the first name of the magazine. In France, as is the case of The New York Times, what is highly offensive is very much subjective.
We do not think it is of any great act of courage for us to print the Charlie Hebdo cartoons although, as noted above, the French magazine had a circulation significantly less than this publication at the time of the massacre. When we printed a story on “How Powerful Is Islam in the Valley — Could Rioting and Bombing in Europe Come Here Some Day (Local Islamic Center Asserts It Is The Victim of Discrimination)” on the front page of the December 2005 issue of the Chronicle, we certainly received our share of irate calls that suggested acts of violence against the paper. But that goes with the territory.
The Editorial Board has to consider whether to print or not to print what may be considered controversial stories virtually every edition. We view as part of our job to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. We have printed stories that have offended, among others, the mayor of Denver, the Denver D.A ., the executive director of the Denver Department of Planning and Development, well connected real estate developers in the Cherry Creek Valley, powerful union officials, and certain powers that be in Glendale.
As a result we have lost our fair share of advertising along with access to various public officials. But what is the point of publishing a newspaper if it is not to print the truth, at least as we see it? We understand we do not have a monopoly on the truth as readers are happy to point out in the letters and emails to the paper. Occasionally a reader will write that this paper is certainly “not” The New York Times. Sadly that statement is no longer the insult that it once was intended to be.
— Editorial Board
by Mark Smiley | Dec 22, 2014 | Editorials
— A Modest Proposal
There has probably never been a time as difficult as the present to be a Denver municipal peace officer whether in the police or sheriff’s departments. Everyone is more than happy to tell you exactly why you suck and there does not appear to be anyone who seeks to back you up from the President of the United States, the U.S. attorney general, the mayor of Denver and even the police chief of Denver. Across the country protesters are screaming “What do we want — Dead Cops. When do we want it — Now.”
In Denver they almost got what they wanted during the Ferguson protests outside East High School. A driver, who was cheering the students on, ran into four police officers on bicycles, dragging Officer John Adsit under his car, almost killing him. A police union official indicated that the protesters cheered and chanted “hit him again.” So deep is the suspicion of Mayor Michael Hancock and Police Chief Robert White that when they declared the incident to be an accident caused by the driver’s medical condition, many people simply assumed that they were lying. Believe it or not there was a time when most of the Denver public assumed the opposite — that most police officers told the truth most of the time. Now police officers in Denver will be required to wear body cameras because the public does not believe much of what they are told by the Denver Police Department.
The police have traditionally counted on support from older citizens. The Greatest Generation had a high level of respect for law enforcement. But that generation is quickly disappearing and is replaced by Baby Boomers, some of whom grew up calling police officers “pigs.” President Obama has demonstrated that he does not support police whether in Cambridge, New York City or Ferguson. Attorney General Holder clearly views many police departments as “racist” even if in places like New York City where the police force demographics mirror the racial composition of the city.
In Denver the sorry spectacle at the Denver City Jail has not helped with embarrassing videos coming out seemingly daily. Denver citizens do not regularly distinguish between Denver police officers and Denver deputy sheriffs and perhaps there is no reason why they should. Denver law enforcement is Denver law enforcement. The six millio
n dollar verdict handed out in the Marvin Booker wrongful death case in United States District Court in October certainly indicates that the city is in a great deal of trouble if a case of excessive force by a Denver law enforcement officer reaches a Denver jury.
Mayor Hancock is definitely not a fan of the rank and file of the Denver Police Department. He has worked hard to be sure that the firing of Denver cops, which are almost all rank and file and never the brass, is made easier and more expeditious. When he went to look for a new police chief it was clear he was not going to promote from within the Denver Police Department. Chief Robert White has taken a number of meritorious actions in shoring up the department including making sure that more officers are walking a beat and not sitting behind a desk.
But White has no history with the Denver police force and he owes his job and allegiance to Michael Hancock, even to the point of lying straight into television cameras in declaring that the sole purpose of photo radar cameras was public safety while refusing the demands of the City Auditor and others to conduct any studies to back up his claims. While Hancock may not be a fan of rank and file police officers he does strongly support photo radar cameras and apparently is adamant that no studies occur lest they threaten a growing revenue bonanza.
So where do law enforcement officers in Denver go to get support? It is not the police union which was long ago discredited by its actions in supporting police officers no matter how heinous the purported misconduct.
No it is going to have to be from average everyday citizens whom the officers are sworn to serve and protect. Earning that support, which has been by and large lost, will not be easy. The bigwigs in Denver have cast the average police officer into the wind. The only port in this storm for everyday Denver cops is the common man and woman. An alliance of everyday people and the rank and file police could be in its own way revolutionary. No longer would there be one set of rules for the elite and another for the rest of us. No more John TV while the mayor has been and maybe still is an important patron of prostitutes. No more special license plates for politicians which evade the ever present Denver photo radar cameras while citizens literally pay millions in fines every year. A citizens’ police force and not the politicians’ police force. It’s worth giving it a try. Ultimately it will take changes to the Denver City Charter to get the police out from the politicians’ grasp, but it can be done and should be done.
— Editorial Board
by Mark Smiley | Nov 21, 2014 | Editorials
Brian Vogt
In letters and e-mails to the Glendale Cherry Creek Chronicle, readers have asked us if we remember as many people working for the City and County of Denver that are totally devoid of ethics and competency as there are under Mayor Hancock. We admit that individuals like Lauri Dannemiller, the Manager of Parks and Recreation; Scott Martinez, City Attorney; and Brad Buchanan, Executive Director of Community Planning and Development, are sadly lacking in the skills and morals that any decent administration would seek along with many of the Mayor’s disgraceful appointments at the Sheriff’s Department. But that does not mean there are not tremendous people who work for the City and County of Denver.
One of the greatest of the public servants in Denver is Brian Vogt, the CEO of Denver Botanic Gardens. Appointed in 2007 to his post during the Hickenlooper administration he hit the ground running at the Botanic Gardens and hasn’t let up. In addition to being a highly adept businessman and administrator his warm outgoing personality has won the Botanic Gardens myriads of friends in the areas around the facility which has not always had the best of neighborhood relations. Given the enormous growth involving construction at the Botanic Gardens during his tenure the good neighborhood relations is no small feat.
Vogt came to his position as the ninth CEO of the Botanic Gardens with extraordinary curriculum vitae. He went to the University of Colorado at Boulder and spent a year in England studying Greek Stoic Epicurean philosophy. He served for 14 years as the president of the South Metro Chamber of Commerce, growing that organization into a regional powerhouse. He occupied three cabinet positions in Governor Bill Owens’ administration including the director of the Colorado Office of Economic Development where he supervised the Colorado Tourism Office and the Colorado Council on the Arts. After leaving the employ of government when Bill Ritter came to the governor’s office he had his own consulting company, ProCounsel Co. LLC. where he was able to understand the challenges of running a small business up close and personal.
He needed all of his skills developed over a lifetime when he began his hegemony over the organization. Attendance was down with a perennial lack of funds for projects and poor morale among the employees. He first addressed staff concerns by providing opportunities for employees to use their own initiative for projects which paid enormous dividends for the Gardens. He then hit the street looking for additional funding, a task that is an ongoing critical part of this job. He discovered he was good, very good, at raising funds for the Botanic Gardens.
As a result of the fundraising efforts, there began an $80 Million Master Plan Development Plan which included a badly needed three story parking garage, a visitor’s center, a greenhouse and a Children’s Garden that has been a spectacular hit. The building and renewing has never stopped and this last year a Japanese Garden and a Bonsai Pavilion and Tea Garden opened up.
Making the Gardens a fresh new and abundant experience is all part of the challenge. Having overseen the Colorado Council on the Arts he recognized how the visual arts could greater further the Botanic Gardens mission of bringing plants and people together. He brought in the sculptures of Henry Moore to the Gardens in 2010 to rave reviews. In 2014 came the incredible art of Dale Chihuly to the Gardens which to Vogt’s delight the exhibit was controversial to some greatly increasing attendance. The exhibit was such a success that Chihuly himself came last month to the Gardens and generous donors paid for one of the sculptures to be permanently installed.
The difference between Brian Vogt and Brad Buchanan, Scott Martinez and Laura Danamiller is that the former is trying to make something great for the people of the City and County of Denver and Colorado as a whole while the latter are individuals hoping to line their own pockets or at least are so desperate for a government sinecure they will do anything to retain their jobs.
We all would like to think that the majority of the employees of the city are closer to an admirable Brian Vogt than a widely reviled Brad Buchanan. Yes the appointees of Mayor Michael Hancock are by and large a disappointment to all honorable citizens of the city but they are only a fraction of the whole. Hancock and his real estate developer overlords hold sway today but even they will pass on and hopefully there will be enough Brian Vogt types who will remain for a great city to build anew from all the damage that the greed and avarice of the Michael Hancock era has brought.
— Editorial Board
by Mark Smiley | Oct 24, 2014 | Editorials
An old proverb declares that “It’s a foolish bird that fouls its own nest.” Brad Buchanan, the beefy, bloated, ethically challenged, new executive director of Denver’s Department of Community Planning and Development is no one’s fool. Prior to taking on the top job in planning Denver’s future growth he moved out of the city, over an hour away to a 1,500 acre ranch on the Eastern Plains beside Kiowa Creek so he would not have to personally suffer from what he and the city government are doing to Denver’s neighborhoods one at a time.
Larry Ambrose, president of the Inter-Neighborhood Cooperation which is the umbrella group for all of Denver’s neighborhood associations, summed the situation up well when he told The Denver Post, “It’s very easy for Brad to come into the city and shove this density down our throats and then drive back home to his ranch.”
Considered by some an uninspiring and somewhat hackneyed architect he eventually became highly politically connected. He was the chairman of the Downtown Denver Partnership but hit real pay dirt when he was appointed to the Denver Planning Commission by then Mayor Hickenlooper. He eventually was made chairman of that entity. The 11 member board advises the mayor and Denver City Council on land use matters including making recommendations on rezoning requests.
There was no direct remuneration for the positions he held but he made the appointments highly profitable for himself. He became the man developers hired when they had a questionable project that had to get past the Planning Board. He was hired for the highly controversial Red Peak development at the Denver Highlands that many in the neighborhood considered the buildings to
o high and the density excessive for the historic area. The citizens unsuccessfully sued to stop the project.
He was also hired for the redevelopment at the St. Anthony’s Hospital site on West Colfax where his design included downtown density and heights in a single-fam
ily residential area. Ethical questions were raised by his actions including a formal complaint filed by former Denver City Council President Cathy Donahue who objected to his making presentations to the Planning Commission shortly after leaving as chairman, but to no avail. In Denver, ethics appears to offer little or no constraints to politically connected individuals like Brad Buchanan.
Mayor Michael Hancock declared that Buchanan was his “dream pick” which is very bad news for Denver’s neighborhoods. Buchanan has preached the need for ever more density in the form of high rise apartments and condos in every neighborhood across Denver. At the same time he opposes open space requirements that exist in the present code and intends to bring forward controversial amendments which will drastically limit open space requirements in large developments despite vociferous objections by neighborhood groups.
Upon being appointed executive director in March, Buchanan threw a bone to the neighborhood associations saying they will be notified of a rezoning application after it has been submitted a second time as opposed to after it has been formally vetted and approved. But neighborhood groups understand that the concession was one without any real meaning as they will have no possibility of any real input unless they are notified when the Planning Department first receives a request to rezone.
Neighborhood groups moreover realize the deck is stacked against them no matter when they are notified. As it stands the Denver Planning Department is little more than a minor speed bump today for well connected developers. The Planning Board is packed with pro-developer advocates appointed by Mayor Hancock who learned his lesson when a majority of the Denver Parks Board stood up to him over the Hentzell Park giveaway. He made sure anyone who opposed him was replaced by individuals who will do what they are told.
At one time being appointed to a volunteer board in Denver government was a mark of true honor and distinction. Under Hancock it has become something of a badge of shame as appointees are viewed for the most part as pliable hacks that will do the Mayor’s bidding without question or independent judgment.
Buchanan has expressed his admiration for cities that have incorporated “incredible density” such as Singapore. He has also repeatedly toted “walkability” by which he means citizens in new developments with minimal required parking will be forced to walk in the shadows of towering apartment and office buildings. The walking will be in an urban setting devoid of trees or grass or anything else that once served as open space. Under Buchanan paved streets are in some cases argued to be what serves as open space in the new Denver.
He has personally helped in the design of some of the worst projects and ugliest developments in Denver from the Highlands to Sloan’s Lake. His appointment means no neighborhood is safe from a high density makeover as the denizens of Cherry Creek, Observatory Park and the Country Club areas have discovered, to their chagrin.
Buchanan wants to place the majority of the residents of Denver into dense vertical structures with families living in 1,000 square feet or less of living space while he and his wife and two children enjoy the luxury of 1,500 acres of land in Strasburg, at his Flying B Bar Ranch. As the pig Napoleon declared in George Orwell’s Animal Farm: “All animals are equal; but some are more equal than others.”
Brad Buchanan most definitely sees himself as being one of the “more equal” animals. His appointment was a disgrace — what he is doing to the formerly livable neighborhoods should be a crime. Instead, it is deemed “progress” in Michael Hancock’s Denver.
— Editorial Board
by Mark Smiley | Sep 29, 2014 | Editorials
Bob Coté the founder of the alcohol and drug rehabilitation center Step 13 was truly one of a kind as was the charity he founded. A former boxer from the mean streets of Detroit he knew what it was to be an alcoholic and homeless in Denver. He had been a white collar salesman who was able to hide his addiction for a while before spiraling down into alcohol dependence and hopelessness. He was at heart a “street fighting” man who took no gruff from anyone no matter how important or mean they were.
Having saved himself from addiction and despair he walked the alleys and byways of pre-yuppieized downtown Denver carrying a baseball bat searching for souls to save from the hell he personally knew all too well.
Even the name of the charity he founded “Step 13” was as idiosyncratic as its founder. It is almost universally initially assumed that it refers to a proposed next step after the 12 step program of Alcohol Anonymous, but instead it is homage to the original 13 colonies of America and Jesus and his 12 disciples. He quickly found out that modern American governmental agencies (federal, state and local) wanted absolutely nothing to do with any charity whose name was picked to honor patriotism and Christianity. They would do whatever they could to destroy a man who was quickly succeeding in making a real difference in lives of homeless drug and alcohol addicted men in Denver.
He said he knew what these men needed, as he had needed it so badly in his time of despair — “A hand up, not a hand out.” He wanted for those he helped what all men wanted (including himself) — dignity and self respect. He believed that only came from work and self reliance. He could never figure out why people like John Hickenlooper for all his purported concern about these men never got it. In his mind all that the Hickenloopers of the world offered these men was dependence and suffering or as he called “suicide by the installment plan.”
He viewed most of the members of the Denver City Council as “jackals” and “hyenas” who poured money into programs like the “Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness” (now known as “The Road Home”) which in his mind were simply bureaucratic sinecures for those who have never actually helped another human being in their entire lives. He viewed the Coalition for the Homeless as little more than the “Coalition to Exploit the Homeless” where the top personnel pay themselves handsome six figure salaries on the backs of the homeless.
That his charity Step 13 succeeded without ever taking any money from the government was amazing to him. He saw himself as a type of rough-hewed Forest Gump. More by accident than design he found businessmen like Bill Daniels and Cortlandt Dietler who were will willing to support and fund his vision while he worked tirelessly to make Step 13 a self-sufficient enterprise.
When he died last September replacing him seemed impossible. But the individuals who are on the Board of Directors had seen with their own eyes how Step 13 had literally saved men from their own destruction and that for such an organization to die while the harmful and invidious government funded programs lived on to exploit and destroy the lives of the humans they purported to help was too much to bear.
After months of fruitless efforts they found a man who seemed to be just the type of person they were looking for — Peter Droege. He was not in any sense a younger Bob Coté — that mold had been broken and thrown away when Coté came into the world.
Moreover, Peter Droege is most definitely not a “street fighting” man but rather the son of two artists who went to Central City to escape the real world and open up a gi
ft shop to display and sell artistic items. He attended the University of Wyoming and then headed out to California to be a journalist in Los Angeles. He returned to Colorado to work on various local publications. He joined the Daniels Fund, the billion dollar legacy of cable pioneer and Step 13 supporter Bill Daniels, where he rose to Vice President of Communications before coming over to Step 13 as its executive director.
Droege has had his own battles with “demon rum” and knows what addiction can do to you. He met Coté in 2001 and helped co-chair the 25th Anniversary of Step 13 held at Infinity Park just prior to Coté’s death.
Bob Coté made it abundantly clear to you whether he liked you or not. His magnetic personality attracted many people, but he also repelled more than his share of individuals sometimes unnecessarily. He just couldn’t help himself when he found himself in the presence of someone he believed to be a self important phony whether or not the person could have been of great aid to his enterprise.
Peter Droege on the other hand is a uniter. Quickly after meeting him, he makes you feel that you have known him your entire life and the two of you are the closest of friends. His infectious, positive enthusiasm makes you feel that just about anything can be accomplished.
He has already made important alliances including one with Goodwill Denver. He has adopted as his own the mantra “Get a job, get a better job, get a career.” He believes to his core, like Coté before him, that finding jobs and careers for the men who Step 13 assists is the key to making them whole again. Goodwill Denver’s Career Connection Centers are one-stop shops for career developments that work perfectly with Step 13’s mission.
He has also been successful in getting more and more people to contribute cars, boats, motorcycles etc. to Step 13 for them to repair, fix and resell while making sure the donor gets the highest allowable tax deduction for his or her donation.
The unique Step 13 organization appears in good hands with Droege, although when you refuse all governmental funds you are constantly going to be challenged in obtaining necessary funding.
If you want to give to a charity to make yourself feel good there are lots of organizations out there with which you can accomplish your goal. If you want give to an organization that really does make a life-changing difference in the lives of others, Step 13 has proved to be just such a charity, first under Bob Coté and now under Peter Droege.
— Editorial Board
by Mark Smiley | Aug 29, 2014 | Editorials
The Denver City Council was once a political body that the news media in Denver, including newspapers and television stations, regularly covered. John Hickenlooper’s rise to the office of mayor changed all of that. His approval ratings stayed well into the 70s for his entire two terms in office and that cowered many City Council members. Hickenlooper privately would mock how supine and powerless certain individual council members were. He would note that all he had to hang on to was five council members as it took nine votes out of 13 to overturn any veto the mayor might come up with.
However, the City Council as a relevant political entity may be returning as a result of the Denver Sheriff Department scandal. While Hickenlooper keeps his contempt of the individual members of the City Council private, a less adept Mayor Hancock has made it publicly obvious. He appointed a Sheriff Department Executive Steering Committee to hire an outside firm to review the Sheriff Department and recruit candidates for the sheriff’s position. He chose six people, all of whom were appointees he controlled, such as City Attorney Scott Martinez and Chief of Staff Janice Sinden.
The City Council has been under a lot of public pressure for simply rubber stamping multi-million dollar settlements with jail inmates and not being more involved in demanding reforms. The City Council reasonably requested a representative on the steering committee. Hancock, incredibly, stiff armed them declaring he would update them at the weekly meeting he and his staff have with the City Council.
When the first such meeting occurred Mayor Hancock didn’t even bother to attend saying he needed to spend more time with his family. He was, in fact, inside the City and County Building when the meeting occurred.
The City Council had finally had enough. The usually meek and compliant Jeanne Robb erupted at David Edinger, who is overseeing the steering committee, and Stephanie O’Malley, Denver’s public safety director: “What are you thinking. I am astonished. You’ve set up council to be included to question every move. The public is upset, and I’m very upset.”
The mayor’s representatives had come to the meeting unprepared with no reports or materials for the council to review emphasizing how little they thought of the City Council. Councilman Charlie Brown was incredulous stating, “Let’s be more professional about how we are treated here.”
Mayor Hancock was informed by his staff that it was actually possible to offend Denver City Council members. Hancock relented and added two members of the City Council, Jeanne Robb and Paul Lopez, to the committee. Hancock, of course, did not want council members to think that they were all that important so he also added four regular citizens to his committee. The 13 person committee is now as large as the Denver City Council itself.
Denver has the so-called “strong mayor” form of government. Notwithstanding the same, City Council has a great deal of power under the City Charter if it elects to exercise it. The City Council is the only branch of government that can adopt or revoke legislation. It also controls all budgetary matters. The mayor’s staff wrote on the City’s website describing how the City Council actually performs its critical role in the budgetary process as follows: “to date, council modifications of the budget have been relatively minor.” It is an unintentional, but damning, critique on how the City Council members as a whole have undertaken their statutory obligations to the public in recent years.
It is about time City Council members start acting like real elected officials with constituents and not simply potted plants. There is more to being a Denver City Council member than simply approving by large margins every ill conceived real estate project that comes along. The Sheriff Department Executive Steering Committee debacle shows that City Council members can make a difference if they choose to do so.
— Editorial Board
