Lakewood has hired Magellan Strategies to conduct a ballot measure survey intended to help pass a ballot measure allowing the city to keep your TABOR refunds. Residents are already receiving the first part of that survey by cell phone message. The intent is to use the survey to find out what question residents respond positively to, and use that language on the ballot. The survey will also allow weighing responses by demographic group and information targeted to specific demographics. The city will spend up to $74,000 figuring out how to convince residents to give up their refund. Opposing groups will not have this advantage.
This survey is a one-sided informational campaign aimed at allowing the city to keep TABOR refunds because the Budget and Audit Board has already identified the need to keep the funds. According to Magellan, a cold ballot measure, one without prior information, does not have a good chance of passing. Through the survey, the city can spread the information that the city needs money.
In other words, the survey is a way to get around the prohibition against government ballot campaigns.
“A ballot measure survey is more than just measuring voter support and opposition for a sales or property tax increase. The ballot measure survey is the single best way a government organization can educate and inform their resident and voters about the reasons why new revenue is needed for core services, capital projects, an other needs.
From years of experience, we believe a ballot measure asking voters to approve a tax increase for any purpose is more likely to pass if a survey is conducted. One primary reason being, informed voters, who trust their local government’s leadership, appreciate the information and can better rationalize the financial contribution they are making.”
Well…. everything. The city does not know and cannot say specifically. Spending levels for all city departments have gone up over the years and that level is now expected to be maintained.
The survey attempts to find out what residents would be willing to spend money on so that the city can justify keeping refunds.
The Budget Board had not identified possible specific cuts prior to the survey. If the ballot measure fails, City Manager Hodgson told the Board the city will default to across the board spending cuts. In other words, reverting to previous levels.
The survey takes about 10 minutes to complete and is composed of general interest and demographic questions. This will help gauge the mood of the residents. The demographic questions will help the surveyors weigh your response. For example, respondents who are homeowners over 65 will have their answers downplayed, while Hispanic renters will have their answers amplified. This artificial weighing allows the consultant to mimic the demographics of Lakewood, rather than the demographics of actual respondents or voters.
There will be a second survey in June to refine the actual ballot language. This first survey is just gauging community interest.
Residents question the use of city funds in an effort to gain resident money, as demonstrated in the Nextdoor post below. According this post, the average income in Lakewood is $45,000, almost $30,000 less than what Lakewood may spend on this survey.
Arrests for shoplifting in Lakewood are down 56% over the last 5 years. Reported shoplifting cases are also down but not by as much due to a sharp increase in reports last year.
Compiled from Lakewood Crime Statistics to National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS)
Council Member Rich Olver recently made the point that the two Walmart stores on Wadsworth have taken out their self-checkout aisles. By speaking to the store managers, he confirmed this change was due to shoplifting. Olver noted that something must have changed for Walmart to go the expense of closing what was supposed to be a long-term investment for self-checkout lanes.
The visible proof at Walmart shows that shoplifting is up.
On March 12, there were reports that three busloads of people were dropped off at the Walmart on Colfax and Wadsworth. These three busloads of people reportedly came in, filled their carts and left without paying.
Walmart has no official comment on the bus incident. Unfortunately, many business are unable to make comment on recent crime trends without enduring public backlash.
However, again, the proof of increasing shoplifting is in the change of checkout lanes. For years, stores in Lakewood have been putting up gates and extra security guards at most grocery stores.
Stores Face Difficulty Prosecuting
Stores have long been resigned to enduring loss through shoplifting. For one thing, the bar for prosecution is extremely high. Regular customers and store employees are deemed unreliable witnesses.
The store must get the accused to agree to wait for police without chasing them or restraining them.
The store must prove intent. Proving intent is almost always the act of concealment. If there is not a consistent witness throughout concealment, or if there is no concealment, the store may have a problem getting a court to pursue.
If the store is fairly confident they have the procedure right, they still have be sure the police will arrive “in reasonable time.”
If any of this goes wrong, the store could be sued for illegal detention or false imprisonment. There is no benefit of the doubt in the “Shopkeeper’s Privilege” to hold accused shoplifters.
(DENVER, CO) Locals and visitors to Denver alike now have a new way to explore the region. The ‘Denver Orbital Trail’ (AKA the ‘DOT’) is a 177-mile, 28-segment, walking, running, and wheeling route linking existing trails and public-access paths to completely encircle the Denver metro area.
The DOT’s designer is Golden resident Michael Tormey, a Civil Engineer currently working on transportation safety projects on public lands. He developed his love of walking the outdoors in the English countryside while in graduate school in London.
He says his goal in developing the DOT route was to create something that would get more people outside exploring more of the region. “A circular walk brings you right back where you started,” Tormey said, “but along the way, I hope you find yourself seeing all this incredible region has to offer, that you find yourself changed along the way.”
He wanted to make sure as much of it as possible is easy for walkers of all ages and abilities, close to amenities and facilities, and public transportation-accessible. It’s a long route, so it’s been divided into manageable parts. The 28 segments vary a lot. They range from 2 to 12 miles in length, all perfect for day hikes.
This was not just drawing a circle on a map! Tormey walked every inch of the DOT to confirm and document the trails, which enabled him to build a detailed website with plentiful information on every segment, including photos. While walking the route, he discovered some side-trail opportunities, which are also included on the website. He calls those, of course, ‘sub-orbitals’!
It took Tormey a few months to walk the entire orbital, but he says the beauty of it is that it’s ‘hop-on, hop-off’. “People can walk as many or as few segments as they like. They can take as long as they want to complete the whole circuit,” Tormey says, “Or maybe they never get all the way around. That’s OK too. That said, there’s something great to see on every single segment, so my hope would be that people aim for a complete orbit!”
“In the first three months after the City of Denver converted a hotel in Denver’s Central Park neighborhood to a shelter for the homeless, calls for police and first responders rose 2,900% compared to the previous three months when it served as a hotel, according to city data obtained by CBS News Colorado.” Read more…
An important note is the Denver article is that Cole Chandler, Denver Mayor Michael Johnston’s senior adviser on homelessness, said that “residents are also being educated on relying less on calling 911 for various issues.”
Lakewood police have already encouraged local food banks to manage trespassing calls on their own. Deprioritizing crimes associated with homelessness is a policy defended by Lakewood officials.
If crime does rise around the navigation center, Lakewood residents may be on their own.
However, the new Lakewood shelter is in an area with historically high crime so it is unlikely a rise in crime will be noticed, especially since it will have been operating as an “emergency” shelter on and off throughout the winter.
The development at 777 S Yarrow St, Lakewood, Colorado, has brought residents concerns over development to the forefront. Despite having ordinances and zoning codes, residents have identified concerns with traffic impacts, wildfire and emergency response, the loss of trees and questionable park fee implementations. Residents continue to act for this cause, at SaveBelmarPark.com, and there has been rumors of possible legal action. However, if Colorado House Bill 1107 gets passed, residents will have an even more difficult time bringing legal action against the city, because they will face legal fees if they lose the case. The bill is meant to decrease suits from residents, who don’t understand that the city has done research to show that the city is right, and therefore, resident concerns are generally unfounded and possibly frivolous. The Lakewood Legislative Committee, has taken a support position on this bill, meaning they support making it harder for residents to bring legal action against the city. This position provides an insight as to why so many resident complaints, like those of hundreds of people against the S Yarrow St development, are often given lip-service or outright ignored.
The issue highlights an important dichotomy in government. Technically, in a representative democracy, the residents should be telling elected officials what they want in terms of legislation. The elected officials then vote on a policy and the city staff will implement it. But what happens when politicians use targeted words to get a policy through that means something other than what people think? What happens when words from last year can be reinterpreted to mean something different this year, so that policy can change without so much as a public discussion?
These are the questions that residents ask when looking at the rules for developing S Yarrow St. How is it possible that a little street with a small building footprint can have no negative impact to traffic if you change it to high-density residential an add an extra couple hundred cars? Aren’t there rules to maintain a neighborhood in similar fashion?
In Colorado Springs, residents have found the answer in taking legal action against the city. Springs residents’ often cite the same problems – and developers are tired of it. According to this article in The Gazette, developers cite the need for more housing while residents cite safety concerns. Reading this article, where they talk about the 7-story complexes going in that are causing traffic concerns for the residents, you may think you are reading about Lakewood.
City Has the Experts
Lakewood will often require a traffic impact study, or environmental study when necessary. This expert testimony is the basis for approving projects. As one quote from the Gazette article stated, “”When [neighborhoods] fight these projects, they are not agreeing with the experts. They are deciding for themselves that it’s not safe.”
“In recent years, numerous political theorists and philosophers have argued that experts ought to be in charge of public policy and should manipulate, or contain, the policy preferences of the ignorant masses.” – Nicholas Tampio, aeon.co
It is rare that cities will change their mind on project approval. Residents concerned with 777 S Yarrow have been told for months that nothing substantial can be done. So legal action brought by residents will typically delay a project, but will not cause any particular change.
To limit these delays, developers and cities need a way to stop residents from pursuing legal action. One way to achieve that is through HB24-1107 which proposes that residents who legally challenge the city will have to pay legal fees if they lose.
Passing HB24-1107 is sure to discourage residents, who already have less financial and legal resources than the city or developers they are facing.
Lakewood Council Member David Rein pointed out that this legislation is very one sided because developers are still free to bring legal action with no increased risk to themselves, which will not be the case for the residents. However, with his “city hat” on, Rein supports the legislation.
Councilor Glenda Sinks said that Lakewood should support this bill because it’s a way to support staff.
No one publicly considered the increase in legal action as a cry for help from the residents, who have presumably asked for the ordinances to be enforced in the way residents commonly understood they would be (for example, open space would be park space, not including dumpster space.)
Unanimous approval from the Legislative Committee: Council Members Sinks , Cruz, Stewart, Rein, LaBure (absent)
Legislative positions are not posted anywhere or shared unless there is a “strong” position. But this signals to the residents that Lakewood considers resident appeals to be generally not worthy of support.
The Community Meeting held on March 12 got mixed reviews, with some residents giving the speakers rave reviews while others left early. Although one resident cited a lack of Lakewood specific information as the reason for dissatisfaction, others were glad for regional information that is now pertinent, given the local ramifications. The main speaker was John Fabbricatore, a subject matter expert, talking about statewide immigration policy. He explained how federal immigration laws would work if they were equally enforced. Kim Monson, of the Kim Monson Show, spoke about holding elected representatives accountable. Local resident and X star Marge Collum spoke about her experience with a video going viral and why people were grateful that she spoke out. Videos of some of the speeches are available below.
Marge Collum started the evening, giving an inspirational speech about how her speech at City Council went viral and how many people appreciated hearing from her. She ends with, “Why do I speak? Because I am more afraid of what will happen if I don’t.” She speaks about becoming a citizen journalist and standing together as Americans. See her whole speech here on Rumble, or see the highlights here on YouTube.
Fabbricatore is a subject matter expert on border issues. He discussed the history of ICE and how our laws would work if they would just be enforced.
He says, “You will hear this argument that everyone who is here was let in and they are legal. That is not true. … They are here illegally and they were let in to see an immigration judge because they made a claim to asylum.”
Fabbricatore also talked about the role of state law in blocking ICE cooperation. His advice is to whittle the state laws back to allow federal law cooperation. Fabbricatore’s full speech is available by clicking here.
“I am not the only one on the stage tonight to say we are for LEGAL immigration!”
-John Fabbricatore
Meeting organizer Ramey Johnson says, ““This community came together once again for a Town Hall regarding our legitimate concerns about illegal immigration in Lakewood and how illegal immigration is affecting this city. Financial and safety issues are real regardless of what you hear. The more I know, the more I understand that elections have consequences. We will continue to meet until our voices are heard”
During public comments at the February 26th Lakewood City Council meeting, Tom Gonzales, a Lakewood resident remarked that he was told by Lakewood Police Department (“LPD”) officers there was nothing they could do about the panhandling (window washers) on street corners – that the police “were handcuffed”. Later, Councilman Rich Olver posed a question based on these remarks to Deputy City Manager Ben Goldstein – is it true that our officers are “handcuffed” or is there something they could do about panhandling on street corners? Mr. Goldstein answered that it depends on the circumstances (what safety issues are at play), that it’s a matter of resources (not having enough staff), and that “it is a complex issue”. Mr. Goldstein suggested that LPD could put together a report for Council that would address the issue.
Under Lakewood Municipal Code 12.18.020, it would seem that window washing would be clearly prohibited:
A. It shall be unlawful for any person to solicit employment, business, contributions, or sales of any kind, or collect monies for the same, from the occupant of any vehicle traveling upon any street or highway when such solicitation or collection:
1. Causes the person performing the activity to enter onto the traveled portion of a street or highway;
2. Involves the person performing the activity to be located upon any median area which separates traffic lanes for vehicular travel in opposite directions;
3. Causes the traffic on the traveled portion of a street or highway to be delayed or impeded;
or 4. The person performing the activity is located such that vehicles cannot move into a legal parking area to safely conduct the transaction
B. It shall be unlawful for any person to solicit or attempt to solicit employment, business, contributions, or sales of any kind from the occupant of any vehicle traveling upon any controlled-access highway including any entrance to or exit from such highway.
Why certain city codes are not being enforced is perplexing.
Seeing window washers at Alameda and Wadsworth at mid-day, walking between the lanes of traffic and between cars while trying to return to the median when the light turns green is clearly not safe for those individuals or for the drivers who have to maneuver their cars to avoid hitting them. Common sense would dictate that it would not be difficult for an officer witnessing this activity to pull over and issue a citation – there should be nothing “complex” about this. This is not the fault of the officers, who are employed to serve the citizens of Lakewood, and put their lives on the line for us every day. They follow the instructions they are given by their managers and whatever guidelines the City has adopted concerning law enforcement. It appears that a decision has been made by someone in a leadership position within the city that certain laws will not be enforced.
Reviewing the numbers
A review of crime figures in Lakewood might help shed a little light on what seems to be happening.
Lakewood publishes a couple of reports containing crime statistics each year, a Chief’s Report and a LPD Annual Report. Looking at these reports for the reporting years of 2019 thru 2022 (the latest year available), the reports typically include the number of criminal offenses for the report year, plus the figures for a couple of previous years for comparison. However, the crimes that are reported each year are not always the same. An example being the 2018 and 2019 LPD Annual reports do not include a number of property crimes (mostly fraud and some theft related crimes) that are included in reports for 2020 and later. There are also some unexplained differences in the annual totals that are reported. For instance, crimes for the year 2019 total 12,127 in the 2021 LPD Annual Report, 12,299 in the 2020 report, 11,877, in the 2019 report. Some of these differences may be due to newer reporting standards.
Most law enforcement agencies across the US report crimes to the FBI using the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS), which succeeds and expands on the earlier Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) system that dates back to the 1920’s. However, not all agencies in the US report to NIBRS, as some have incomplete historical data and others are still working to convert their UCR data to NIBRS. Crime data thru 2023 for Lakewood is in NIBRS, but Lakewood yet to publish their LPD Annual Report for 2023. NIBRS breaks crimes in to two major groups, Group A Offenses and Group B Offenses. Group A Offenses, generally considered more serious offenses, are further broken down and grouped as Crimes Against Persons, Crimes Against Property, and Crimes Against Society. Group B Offenses are generally less serious offenses and include trespassing, disorderly conduct, DUI, liquor violations, and “other offenses”. Group B Offenses report actual arrests, whereas Group A Offenses only reflect the report of a crime whether or not an arrest is made. The NIBRS data lends itself better to analysis as it is more detailed, complete, and consistent compared to the data that is in the LPD Annual Reports and the Chief’s Reports.
The NIBRS figures show normal fluctuations in reported offense totals from year to year. Three-year averaging was used to remove some of the statistical noise and establish a longer term trend. Looking at average number of crimes reported for 2017 thru 2019, compared to 2021 thru 2023, the NIBRS data is showing an overall increase of 13.5% in Group A Offenses. This includes in a 9.4% increase in Crimes Against Persons, a 12.4% increase in Crimes Against Property, and a 23.5% increase in Crimes Against Society. Some of the offenses that are driving this increase include assaults, car (and car parts) theft, and destruction of property.
What Lakewood is not reporting
Within Group A Offenses, reported incidences of Crimes Against Society (mostly including drug and weapon related violations) increased from 2,475 to 3,056 (+23.5%) on average for the 2017-2019 and 2021-2023 reporting periods respectively. Crimes Against Society figures are not included in the LPD Annual Reports.
The LPD Annual Report also excludes the less serious Group B Offenses. NIBRS figures show a decrease in Group B Offenses of 44.6% when comparing 2021-2023 to the 2017-2019 averages. The Group B Offenses contributing to this reduction are disorderly conduct (-53.0%), DUI (-15.5%), liquor law violations (-77.6%), trespassing (-14.7%), and “all other offenses” (-47.7%). The bulk of the drop in reported offenses occurred between 2019 and 2020, when total reported Group B Offenses dropped from 4,673 to 3,220. Since Group B Offenses reflect actual arrests, these figures can be viewed as actual drops in arrests.
Total incidence reports in the Crimes and Group B Offenses that are not reported in the LPD Annual Report vary from year to year, but in general amount to approximately 30% of the total crimes (Group A and Group B combined) in the NIBRS figures.
Incidences of total combined Group A and B Offenses averaged over 2017-2018 and 2022-2023 are virtually the same. This is because the increase in reported Group A Offenses is offset by the reduction in reported Group B Offenses.
One other statistic Lakewood does not include in their LPD Annual Reports are arrest numbers. Using the same 2017-2019 and 2021-2023 averaging periods, we see that arrests for Group A Offenses dropped by 12.1% (recall that these reported offenses increased 13.5 in this same period). Arrests for both Group A and B Offenses for this same period are down 29.3%, in large part due to the drop in Group B Offenses (which require an arrest).
One would generally think that crime trends would move in the same direction – if Group A Offenses increase then so should Group B Offenses. It is possible that LPD is not focusing as much on the less serious Group B Offenses (as seen in the larger drop in Group B Offense arrests). If this is the case, there may be a perception amongst criminals that if lesser crimes are not being enforced they can get away with committing serious crimes. That would possibly account for the increase in reported Group A Offenses. It is also possible that people involved in certain Group B Offenses are more likely to be diverted to various social programs addressing mental health, addiction, or homelessness issues, and those incidences are not being reported as crimes (but this would not necessarily account for the increase in Group A Offenses).
A sense of resignation
In a posting on the City of Lakewood’s website from February 2022, there is a comment attributed to a Lakewood Police sergeant concerning law enforcement in the city:
“Let’s be honest. If they (criminals) have had 30 tickets for shoplifting, trespassing, drinking in public, do we really think that the 31st ticket is going to be that magical step that solves the problem?… We recognize that is probably not the case. That’s why the city and our chief of police recognize the importance of trying new things, not being afraid to step out and say, ‘This isn’t working. The status quo is not working. Let’s try something new’.”
The tone of this remark reflects a sense of resignation on the part of Lakewood and LPD to enforce laws. The problem in this statement is, if someone has 30 outstanding tickets, they obviously are not being held accountable for their offenses. The problem is not that the tickets are not being paid. The problem is that laws are not being enforced. In cases of habitual offenders, they need to be put in jail until they can be brought before a judge.
In July of 2021, Lakewood adopted the LEAD (Law Enforcement Assisted Diversion, or alternatively, Let Everyone Advance with Dignity) to assist people with “unmet mental needs, addiction and homelessness”. Instead of charging individuals identified as candidates for the LEAD program with certain crimes, they are diverted to social programs to address the issues they are struggling with in hopes they will recover and return to society, not to be repeat offenders. LEAD has been adopted by several other Colorado communities, as well as several large cities including Seattle, Portland, and Baltimore. The LEAD Support Bureau, which advises Lakewood in this program, and their affiliate P.D.A. (Purpose. Dignity. Action., formerly Public Defender Association of Seattle), are a group of people with background experience such as include public defenders and social justice activists. It is important to understand that the national LEAD program is run by advocates for criminals and they actively seek to divert people involved in certain crimes into social programs and away from the criminal justice system. It is possible that the drop in reported Crimes Against Society and Group B Offenses is in part due to persons being diverted via the LEAD initiative rather than being charged with a crime.
What others are doing about crime
Some cities struggling with severe social and criminal problems are finally starting to take action by getting tough on crime. In San Francisco, residents recently approved Proposition F which requires drug testing for locally-funded welfare recipients. They also approved Proposition E, which eases restrictions on the police and allows stepped-up enforcement actions to reduce crime. The Governor of New York, Kathy Hochul, has ordered the National Guard to the subway system in New York City to combat an uptick in crime. Washington D.C. recently passed the Secure D.C. Omnibus Amendment Act, which makes certain crimes easier to prosecute and steps up punishment guidelines. Leaders are beginning to see the failure of go-soft-on-crime policies and are finally responding to the cries of their constituents by taking a harder stance on crime.
Expectations and Accountability
Considering other cities have abandoned their years-long soft-on-crime policies, we should not expect to go soft on crime in Lakewood in hopes of success where others have failed. Laws are put in place to protect us and our property. When laws are not enforced we are no longer safe and secure in our communities. These are some expectations that we should adopt to ensure the leaders within the City of Lakewood are accountable for their policies and focused on keeping our community safe:
Lakewood residents have a right to know, and need to know, how laws are being enforced in the city. We clearly have ordinances against street-side panhandling that are not being enforced. The City needs share the news and let us know who is making the decisions which laws are enforced and which ones are not enforced.
The LPD Annual Reports should be complete and consistent year to year. A good standard for reporting would be the NIBRS categorization with annual crime figures from all Group A and B offenses.
The City needs to explain why they believe a group that has roots in defending criminals and social justice should be advising Lakewood on how to handle crime in our community especially in light of other cities having failed undertaking similar soft-on-crime policies.
The City needs to be forthright with us concerning which violations are turned over to social services (diverted via LEAD protocols, referrals to the Navigation Center, etc.), and how the determination is made to divert versus prosecute. Annual figures for offenses that are deferred can be included in the LPD Annual Report.
For offenders who are diverted into social help programs, tough standards and accountability expectations within these programs need to be met. If the individuals fail to meet their requirements, they need to be held accountable for their offenses within the justice system.
We should expect LPD fully complies with ICE detainer requests.
We need to know if the City has the resources (staffing, equipment, etc.) to sufficiently enforce ordinances. If we don’t have the necessary resources, the City needs to actively secure what is needed to protect the citizens of our community.
Guest Post from a Lakewood Resident and former Denver Landlord
This activity by Denver City/County needs be known by all. Whatever your perspective or opinion, you should at least be aware of what city governments are now doing in general, the new vocabulary by which they are now framing it, and with information they demand of you. Specifically by Denver…..
Below is an actual email received by a Denver landlord with an active Single Family Home listing.
Receipt of this letter from the City/Cty of Denver represents them trolling active rental listings (even long-term rental landlords in Denver now must be licensed, in case you did not know), & applicants for long-term rentals.
The subject line of the email from the City and County of Denver is: “An Opportunity to Connect NEWCOMERS* with Housing”*
For as long as I have ever been alive, a property owner or landlord could face legal consequences if they ever leased to an undocumented foreigner– someone without a green card or legal residency status. In Denver itself, specific neighborhoods have been harmed by those who rented as 2-4 people then brought 10,11, 12+ illegals in to live in one 1-2 br home.
Now it seems, Denver City/County are going the opposite direction. Denver is actually encouraging a type of discrimination against locals by asking landlords/property owners to rent instead to ‘newcomers’. (the new nomenclature*). Already in short-supply, especially at the lower end of the rate spectrum, this effectively takes away long-term rentals from local workers and citizens.
Remember, not too long ago Denver decided that anyone renting residentially in Denver must REGISTER. So, all Denver landlords are now required to get licenses, identifying themselves, providing all sorts of detailed info. One realtor told me it took four hours to comply with this bureaucracy.
Now, Denver is using the info gathered from those registrations and ´asking’ landlords of the most affordable housing available (already in short supply) to lease to illegals with no docs—oops, I mean ‘newcomers’. The property owner has NO ability to know the background of such persons as they would per standard practices, have no way of being assured such persons are not criminals, violent, drug runners, terrorists or simply don’t have a bad rental history. The ‘newcomers’ on the other hand know there are no consequences for any damages they cause the landlord.
Of concern aka Shortsighted ‘feelgood’ decisions by Denver City Council:
As the recipient of this letter asked, “Is the next step to make leasing to ‘newcomers’ mandatory” ?
Does Denver NOT see the supreme irony & hypocrisy here? American property owners must register all sorts of personal information, be on the record with government entities and pay for licenses just to let out their residential property (long-term), so that the city can use that info to troll them to request that they lease to people with absolutely NO LEGAL DOCUMENTATION or BACKGROUND CHECKS, no legal residency status, perhaps no income and cannot be background checked once the city/state creates documents for them! Local taxpayers/citizens must be background checked, registered, screened, pay, to lease to foreigners who have no background checks, no screening, no financial qualifications. Would you call that irony or hypocrisy—or maybe just cognitive dissonance?
Who pays if the illegal parties that move in damage the property, move additional unknown people in, perhaps over the safe occupancy limit, conduct illegal activities in the unit, cause a landlord to be cited and/or sued by anyone for what these undocumented, non-background checked newcomers do?
This takes away what little affordable housing remains from legal residents, legal immigrants and USA citizens.
This will LEAD TO FURTHER and PERMANENT LOSS of residential rental inventory managed by independent, local, mom+pop Landlords, resulting in a long-term impact of even higher rent rates upon the very people that are struggling most. Already, independent landlords who remain in Denver despite recent encroachments on their rights, are talking about divesting/selling off their properties, never again to invest under all the risks this Denver initiated behavior brings with it.
Does this relate to Lakewood? One cannot but wonder, observing current Lakewood council comments and recent decisions, is Lakewood next to adopt this Denver behavior? Such would be no surprise, would it? The letter evokes the same tone that Lakewood City Manager Hodgson brought back from her meeting with Denver city/Adam Paul about Lakewood being a welcoming and a good neighbor. Such desire was loudly echoed by most of the current Council.
*File this under FROG IN THE POT syndrome. The no longer allowed vocabulary of “Illegal Aliens” became “Aliens” became “Undocumented Residents/Persons” became “Immigrants” (an insult to those who followed the rules), this year became “Migrants” (an insult to much needed legal migrant workers and farmers growing our food) and is now being presented as ‘newcomers’—most likely so they can deny and accuse if we share their actions publicly.
“When you take from legal, taxpaying, working citizens, themselves stressed financially, to give to those who do not respect the rule of law and live off those working citizens of that community against whom you are discriminating, you create prejudice, discord and ultimately violence from both sides.”
THE LETTER DENVER CITY/COUNTY IS SENDING TO LANDLORDS:
Subject:An opportunity to connect newcomers with housing
March 5, 2024
Dear stakeholders in our local residential rental property industry,
You are receiving this email because you have an active or pending residential rental property license with the City and County of Denver.
The City and County of Denver has long prided itself on being a welcoming city, coming together and supporting one another in times of crises, and supporting each other as much as needed. With almost 40,000 migrants arriving in the Mile High City since 2022, the city’s ongoing efforts include working closely with the community to find solutions that would more efficiently and effectively support our newcomers.
To this end, we are working to assess how many licensed rental property owners and those with pending applications are interested in assisting the city in connecting newcomers with stable housing.
…the issue here isn’t one along party lines. It’s one where an arrogant group of politicians have no compunctions about limiting the public’s ability to see what they’re doing. And they do this in direct defiance of voters saying they want more transparency.
I take this CORA vote the same way. This is legislators thumbing their nose at everyday Coloradans like you and me.
An explanation of HB 24-1296 from the Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition
The introduced version of House Bill 24-1296 had given records custodians the power to consider anyone — except a journalist — as vexatious if that person demonstrated “an intent to annoy or harass a custodian,” limiting their access to public records under CORA for 30 working days and making them go to court to challenge that designation.
Public comment from a Lakewood, Colorado local, Marge Callum, had over 45 million views as of March 5, 2024. The clip has been posted for 48 hours at this time. Great job making local and national news, Marge!
