Dave Chandler

The Best Arvada Votes 2013

UPDATE!

Arvada City Council Election Results
Tuesday, November 5, 2013

At Large
Ascenzo Di Giacomo -- 43.22% -- 11,730
Don Allard --56/78% -- 15,410

District 1
Rachael Zenzinger -- 100% -- 5,336

District 3
Ted Terranova -- 39.45% -- 2,484
John Marriott -- 46.80% -- 2,947
Justin Vicory -- 13.75% -- 866

---

It is indicative of the degradation of Arvada municipal politics that so few candidates for city council this election are forthrightly in favor of reform and cleaning house at city hall.

This past year has demonstrated just how entrenched is the corruption of cronyism at the higher levels of Arvada government. The Walmart issue created new grassroots citizens groups that have shown the light on the insider deals and favoritism exercised by the city council, the city 'community development' department (planning department), the Arvada Economic Development Association (AEDA), and especially the Arvada Urban Renewal Authority (AURA).

Indeed, the Walmart scandal grows with news this week that AURA is using the city government as its banker to buy the closed Safeway property.

Likewise the cronyism, favoritism and heavy hand AURA is flexing to manipulate -- to its own ends -- business and real estate markets in Olde Town, despite the voice of local residents and citizens.

Free markets in Arvada? Free enterprise in real estate in Arvada?

Forget about it.

AURA looks like a reconstruction of the centralized government economic planning bureaucracy of the old Soviet Union ... with a board of directors and a sponsoring city council comprised of pals, cronies and campaign contributors.

It is a sad reality in Arvada, Colorado, that our local elections have become essentially charades for the 'insiders' party to ratify its chosen candidates. The campaign contributions flow in copious quantities to those sufficiently acclimated to the ways of the Arvada political machine. Rarely has a genuinely independent, free thinking individual been elected to the city council -- it is a rigged system no matter how much the 'leaders' of our city may proclaim otherwise.

Nevertheless, here are my choices for city council in 2013:

At Large. On the very face of it this is easy. Twenty years is too long for anyone to be in elected office. Period.

Don Allard is a nice man, but holy moly it is time for him to go.

And ... Ascenzo Di Giacomo presents Arvada voters with the best opportunity for some change on the council. Ascenzo was/is active with the effort to stop the Walmart/IRG insiders deal and he would certainly bring a new, refreshing perspective into the council chambers.

District 3. John Marriott is well informed, competent and appears at least in his role as a candidate to be open to new ideas and to listening to a broad range of Arvada's residents on important issues. My concern is that once on council, John maybe susceptible to the perfidious influences of the crony culture so prevalent there.

Still, Mr. Marriott is a chance for better representation ... the alternatives in District 3 are untenable. Why Justin Vicory is running is still a mystery to me and I have already written about Ted Terranova, whose election would be a big, big step backwards for Arvada government (No Time for Ted).

District 1. I won't cast a vote in my council district. Rachael Zenzinger is running unopposed, but I choose to not ratify her re-election with my ballot.

Unfortunately, Zenzinger demonstrates precisely how the Arvada political machine works -- her first Report of Contributions and Expenditures is a list of many of the cronies and special interest campaign donors that turn our 'representatives' into tools of favored developers, corporate players, city sycophants, and the 'governing class'.

Ms. Zenzinger's clear identification with the Democratic Party is also disturbing to me. City council elections are meant to be non-partisan, perhaps that is still an old fashioned ideal for me ... so be it. I think it is a disservice to voters when candidates for non-partisan offices, be it city council or school board, use political party identification as a means to try and find electoral advantage. Go ahead, call me naive; argue that "this is just how it is done these days" -- I don't like it and I'm not going to personally acquiesce by casting a ballot even for an unopposed candidate.

Arvada voters, of course, should do their own research and investigation of these candidates -- call them on the telephone -- they will talk to you. Ask hard questions. For instance, ask them if they would be in favor of abolishing Arvada Urban Renewal ... see what they say and figure out from there who they would really work for on the city council.

Go ahead, do it.

Election 2013: No More Money for Failed Education 'Reform'

No on Amendment 66.

Send a message.

Tell the legislature, the governor and the bureaucratic corporate educrats that Colorado will be the first state in the nation to reject a failed so-called 'reform' agenda and is going to adopt a genuine reform policy that empowers students, teachers and parents.

There is only one effective way to communicate to the politicians and the education elites that we are fed-up with the failures of the so-called 'accountability' policy ... and that is to cut-off the money.

Charter schools, high-stakes standardized testing, grading teachers, etc., in other words, the corporatization of public education has failed (as I have posted here on this web site so many times). Until there is a redirection of education priorities to teachers, students and parents -- not administrators, data collectors, testing companies, computer companies, consultants, charter management companies, accreditation companies, more consultants, etc. -- then further funding for the status quo does our children a disservice.

Here is exactly what is wrong with Amendment 66 according to an article in the Denver Post on Sunday, October 13, 2013 (Colorado Amendment 66: Is it right for schools?):

The new law would include money to advance existing but unfunded reforms. Professional development money would augment the educator evaluation system passed in 2010 and put into effect this school year. Other dollars would address early-literacy development mandated by last year's passage of the READ Act and implementation of the Common Core State Standards. ...

Van Schoales, CEO of A+ Denver and the outgoing president of Colorado League of Charter Schools, said that while the measure remains far from perfect, it does offer major reforms.

Under the new law, the Charter School Institute would get funding equal to the average of what school districts are spending on mill levies. Charters could leave school districts that are not sharing their mill levy dollars and sign on with CSI. The law designates $18 million for charter capital construction.

"What ended up in Amendment 66 will be the best school finance law for charter schools in the country," Schoales said. ...

I will give the legislature credit, however, for finally making a progressive income tax part of a revenue hike proposal ... it's about time.