Dave Chandler

Mayor Dave for Arvada

MayorDave.us

 

 * * *

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - Friday, June 19, 2015 

Chandler for Arvada Mayor

(Arvada) Dave Chandler, well-known and long-time community advocate, is a candidate for mayor of Arvada. 

"I am confident that Arvadans want to keep our city a special place: family-friendly, small town atmosphere, easygoing with neighborly local shops and businesses."

"I am running for mayor to offer that direction for Arvada."

That is in stark contrast, Chandler says, to the path the incumbent mayor and city council are pursuing. 

"We can keep Arvada a quality community or we can let it slip away into just another unremarkable, humdrum suburb. Vote for me to keep Arvada's valuable character, or vote for the other guy and get more traffic, more gridlock, more high density housing, and more neglect of our streets."

Election day is Tuesday, November 3, 2015; all balloting is by mail.

Chandler emphasized how important this city election is.  

"We are at a critical point in Arvada." 

"We need more respect for our own Arvada community character. I am flat out against the efforts by the incumbent mayor through the Arvada Urban Renewal Authority to turn our town into an overcrowded, congested extension of Denver -- I like Denver, but I live here because I like it here, this is our home."

"We can be innovative and bring Arvada fully into the 21st century while still keeping this city committed to its history and traditions. We can make a good start on that by sticking to free enterprise and free markets and ending the recent spate of government tax subsidies and land give-aways to private developers and corporations."

Chandler ran for mayor four years ago and ran for council before in the mid-1990s.

"I'm principled and determined. I'll never give up defending the Arvada taxpayer. I'll never stop working to make Arvada city government as good and as honest as its citizens."

Dave is a founding member of Arvada for All the People, a grassroots citizens group advocating for integrity, transparency and diversity in local government.

Mr. Chandler is fifty-eight years old; he has been married for 28 years and has two adult children. He is a summa cum laude graduate from Metropolitan State University of Denver. Dave and his family have resided in Arvada since 1991. In recent years Dave has been a work-at-home dad, a free lance writer, and an artist painting at LeChaundeler.com. Dave belongs to the Arvada Historical Society; is an enthusiastic member of the Denver Art Museum; and is a monthly contributor to the Colorado Chapter of the Alzheimer's Association.

Contributions can be made at: www.MayorDave.us/contribute.html

More information at: www.MayorDave.us

Facebook: MayorDaveforArvada

Contact: Email: [email protected]
Phone: 303-424-9897
Text: 303-995-6941

 

Urban Renewal's Bad Deal for Arvada

Published in the print edition of YourHub/Denver Post for Arvada, Wheat Ridge, Westminster, Thursday, May 21, 2015

Hilton Hotel Scheme is a Bad Deal for Arvada Taxpayers

by Dave Chandler

There are four big reasons why the Arvada Urban Renewal Authority's (AURA) scheme to build a Hilton Hotel in Olde Town is a bad deal for this city's citizens.

First, there is the sweetheart land deal. Government-owned property that AURA has valued at $3.2 million is to be sold to the hotel developer for only $500,000 – an 85 percent discount! That means this deal is about politics, because this is surely not free enterprise.

Second, AURA gives the developer a tax kick-back (TIF) that shifts to the hotel the 2% lodging tax which should go to streets, parks, and other city services. AURA takes for itself property taxes that should go to schools. This is a subversion of the will of Arvada's citizens – no one likes to pay taxes, but we certainly want the taxes that are paid to go exactly for the things they are supposed to go to, not to subsidize a for-profit corporation.

Third, the hotel is going to charge a private tax. AURA estimates that the Hilton developer is short $5.5 million for the project. In the real world of free enterprise that would mean that the market is not ready for a venture like this. But here in Arvada, the government is distorting the market. To make the deal work, the developer gets a sweet land deal; a tax kick-back; and the hotel is going to levy a “property improvement fee” or “PIF” of 6% on all rooms, or as AURA, itself, puts it “effectively bringing the lodging tax to 8%.”

Finally, this government-Hilton partnership is anti-competitive. If in the near future a marketplace demand for lodging does arise and another hotel company wants to locate in Arvada within three miles of this project and wants some incentives, too (ie., equal treatment), then AURA has to pay up to $200,000 as a penalty – to Hilton! A great deal for Hilton, not so much for the Arvada taxpayer or a hotel competitor.

It might be nice if there were a family-friendly hotel in Arvada, but it ought to locate here because the marketplace demands it, because of free enterprise, and because a business is willing to take the risk – that is the American way. 'Insider' government deals like this are not an example of Arvada values; maybe it is time for a change at City Hall.

Arvada Government's Hotel Bailout Scheme

 UPDATE!
Arvada mayor, Marc Williams offers a retort of the 'Hilton Handout' article in the Arvada Press for Thursday, March 5, 2015: "A positive AURA".

My rejoinder:

In neither of the articles I wrote that have been published about Arvada Urban Renewal did I mention or identify any individual — I have raised issues about serious governmental, economic and political policies. Yet, in both of his rebuttals, Marc Wiiliams personalizes his response by addressing only me — an attempt to marginalize the legitimate concerns and questions that (I suspect) many, many Arvadans have about these AURA deals.

Frankly, his reply relies on mostly lawyerly rhetorical devices: he belittles dissenters; he avoids the primary argument; he misstates my points; he misrepresents facts; he uses ’new’ information; he offers no citations; etc.

Of course, the most glaring argument avoidance is his complete failure to address the main point of contention … as I wrote in the article: “ Selling the property for only $500,000 to a private, for-profit development corporation when “the price paid by AURA of $3,287,000” is most troubling.” Troubling enough that apparently he doesn’t want to even talk about this blatant example of corporate welfare. You know, “Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.”

For brevity, just one other example from his retort that also highlights Williams’s apparent disregard and/or lack of understanding of free market principles. He writes, “The market place is absolutely deciding the location.” Yet this contradicts the public information from AURA itself, of which Williams is a board member. From the AURA board meeting information packet: "Since 2003, AURA has been working to realize the City of Arvada’s priority to bring a hotel to Olde Town. In 2008, AURA created the Village Commons Urban Renewal Area with the sole purpose of developing a hotel on the site.” Really, does Williams have such disdain for us that he thinks that we will not see through his feeble effort to distract us?

Finally, there is this looming issue — conflict of interest. As mayor, Williams appoints the members of the AURA board, indeed, he has appointed himself a member; he has clearly been deeply involved in luring the Hilton hotel developers into this urban renewal project. When (or if) this particular plan comes for Preliminary Development Plan consideration before the city council, he is supposed to act in a “quasi judicial” manner, that is, as an impartial decision-maker. It defies the common sense of any Arvada citizen that he could ethically perform this function. Yet his past practice indicates that this is what he will do: he refused to recuse himself from the council vote on Walmart — even though that was another AURA sales job in which he had been actively involved.

 There is increasingly no doubt that we need real change in Arvada — we ought to have elected representation that is as good and as honorable as its residents.

* * *

UPDATE!
An edited version of this article was published in YourHub/Denver Post for Arvada, Wheat Ridge, Westminster on Thursday, February 26, 2015.

UPDATE!
News article on this subject published in the Saturday, February 21, 2015, edition of the Denver Post.

What is revealing in the article is how the city bureaucrat seems to think that it is the government's duty to bring us a for-profit, corporate hotel. 

America is about entrepreneurship and free enterprise -- so should be Arvada!

* * *

Now it is a Hilton Handout!

Arvada government has a scheme to give-away over $2,700,000 to a private, for-profit hotel developer.

Arvada Urban Renewal wants to sell publicly-owned property valued at $3.2 million at a discount of 85% ... for $500,000! 

The Arvada Urban Renewal Authority (AURA) and city government is again planning the most outrageous kind of corporate socialism that manipulates and distorts the free market.

This time for a Hilton Garden Inn to be erected just across from the scenic west wall of the Lowe's Home Improvement store on Olde Wadsworth. "We always know what is best for you" city officials have decided that this is where a hotel ought to be in Arvada. The market place isn't deciding the location; the hotel industry isn't deciding; free enterprise isn't deciding -- the government is deciding. 

Selling the property for only $500,000 to private, for-profit development corporation when "the price paid by AURA of $3,287,000" is most troubling. There are also tax give-aways as part of this deal.

What is happening in Arvada government to American values of free enterprise, the free market, business competition, risk and entrepreneurship? Why are very prosperous corporations like Hilton and Walmart being offered millions of dollars of subsidies from City Hall?

The United States of America has a history and tradition of supporting and embracing the free market system --

"A market economy based on supply and demand with little or no government control. A completely free market is an idealized form of a market economy where buyers and sellers are allowed to transact freely (i.e. buy/sell/trade) based on a mutual agreement on price without state intervention in the form of taxes, subsidies or regulation." (Investopedia)

The Arvada Urban Renewal Authority itself admits that in effect, this is an unfeasible free market project -- it is over five and half million dollars short (emphasis added)(AHI is Arvada Hotel Investors, the developer):

"AURA staff analyzed the development proforma, including TIF projections and construction estimates and verified that there is a financial shortfall of approximately $5,562,000 in AHI’s development pro forma. To address the gap, AURA will 1.) discount the cost of the property to AHI from the price paid by AURA of $3,287,000 to $500,000 and 2.) rebate to the developer the 2% lodging tax for a period of ten years up to $800,000. The total value of the land discount and tax rebate is $3,587,000. The remaining financial shortfall in the development proforma of $1,975,000 will be AHI’s responsibility and serviced by the planned 6% PIF."

[Note: This means that even with the millions of dollars of government subsidies to the hotel developer, they are still estimated to be nearly $2 million short of what they need to make a go of this project -- the market place itself is announcing loud and clear that this site is not ready for a Hilton hotel.]

In simple terms: the Hilton developer cannot afford to build in Arvada without a $2.7 million property acquisition bailout ... government intrusion in the marketplace.

The government, of course, tries to paint "positive" impacts from this project. The alleged economic supplement to the city of $3,000,000 is surely optimistic. AURA seems to assume that all hotel guests will hike up the hill to Olde Town or take a taxi to Walmart to benefit the "local economy" with their discretionary cash.

It might be nice if there were a hotel in Arvada ... but it should come here because the business conditions and the free market warrant it, not because the government is artificially subsidizing its construction.

The municipal government of Arvada and its Urban Renewal Agency are blatantly subverting, distorting and manipulating free enterprise in its wolfish quest to engineer a new Olde Town. The Olde Town of urban renewal will bear little resemblance to the historic area that has characterized the family-friendly small town feel the most Arvada residents value.

Arvadan's are practical, common sense, fiscally prudent Americans -- this deal does not reflect the values and principles of the vast majority of our wonderful city's residents. 

 * * *

The details of the 'Hilton Handout' deal can be seen in following document:
Arvada Urban Renewal Authority Board Meeting - January_7,_2015 | Packet PDF

* * * 

An edited version of the above article published in the 
Arvada Press, Thursday, February 19, 2015

Urban Renewal: Everything That Can Be Wrong With Local Government

UPDATE!

Arvada’s mayor and Urban Renewal board member, Marc Williams, makes a verbose attempt today in YourHub ‘Letters to the Editor’ to counter my points about the Arvada Urban Re

newal Authority(AURA) and good government in an article that was published on the web and in YourHub last week (below).

His observations fail on all three points.

First, he tries to make a connection between government use of eminent domain and the Arvada Plaza redevelopment. I, on the other hand, did not. However, it serves his rhetorical purpose to make that link. The documentation I provided at the YourHub web site refers specifically to AURA’s and the city council’s pursuit of eminent domain to build “another” Walmart at 52nd and Wadsworth. In fact, so intent was Arvada Urban Renewal that they took the case all the way the Colorado Supreme Court — and, thankfully, lost. (Williams was on the city council even back then.)

Supreme Court Deals Blow To Cities’ Eminent Domain Authority - Channel 7 News; March 1, 2004 

Second, Williams writes about Safeway being driven out of the Arvada Triangle area: "Nothing could be further from the truth." Yet from a CORA freedom of information request in July 2013, there is this citation from an AURA document (the document is reproduced at the link):

Met with Safeway. Upset about the Wal-Mart, said would push them out of business at this location. Unhappy with AURA and IRG - claimed they wanted to move their store to Arvada Plaza
• Howard Gerelick, Vice President, Real Estate Denver & Phoenix Division
• Arvada Personnel - Mark [Deven], Marc [Williams], Hazel [Hartbarger], Katy [Press] (I did not attend this meeting [Maureen Phair])

Sorry Safeway ... “We are pursuing Wal-Mart.” - July 13, 2013 

Third, Williams does not counter my argument about letting free enterprise takes it course, he merely disagrees. Well, we all know that — that is not the point. The point is that government policy does distort and manipulate the free market when it provides bailouts for private land owners or gives subsidies to preferred developers -- that is just common sense. This very policy that Williams enthusiastically supports has given away (or is about to) tens of millions of dollars through AURA in just the past couple of years:

IRG/Walmart $5.8 million; Park Place Olde Town $3.3 million; Solana Olde Town (apartments) $7.2 million; Renascent/Hilton Hotel $8.6 million
Arvada for ALL the People - For the Record

Finally, the number of “executive sessions” (secret meetings) that AURA board and the city council hold can only lead to suspicions about the nature of so many of these generous deals — sunshine on government is the best policy — do the public’s business in the open. Furthermore, this is the 21st century, we all know how the game is played in politics with campaign contributions from those who expect or get deals from elected officials … don’t we?

* * *

An edited for space version of this article was published in YourHub/Denver Post on Thursday, January 22, 2015.

* * *

by Dave Chandler

Cronyism, corruption, corporate welfare, corporate socialism, elitism, insider deals, political payoffs, central planning, social engineering ... the worst of what can happen when politicians, government bureaucrats and business fat cats get together under the auspices of your local  'urban renewal authority'.

In recent years we have seen the Arvada Urban Renewal Authority (AURA) go on a tax give-away binge and engage in heavy-handed regulation for the benefit of favored developers; behavior that has gone far beyond what the 'urban renewal' concept was ever meant to accomplish.

Perhaps most egregious is the strong-arm power of urban renewal authority that distorts and manipulates the functioning of the free market. Local established businesses and historic neighborhoods are thus artificially impacted in ways from which they may never recover. In just the past couple of years in Arvada we have witnessed the city council and AURA applying elitist "we always know what is best for you" decisions in the central region of the city especially.

The whole urban renewal process often descends into what amounts to sanctioned bribery and graft when developers get rebated millions and millions of tax dollars to build projects desired by government -- where otherwise the free market would render its own organic resolution and judgement. Any such system is ripe for abuse: thus, not unexpectedly, we have seen in city council elections, proponents of city government largess tending to receive campaign contributions from their developer 'friends'.

Once upon a time, government urban renewal was meant to reconstruct rundown or 'blighted' urban areas. These days it means

• attempts to use eminent domain to take productive property from one private owner for the benefit of another (Walmart);
• the term 'blight' has been expanded to include even open rural land, like AURA's Northwest Arvada Urban Renewal area for the primary benefit of private residential developers;
• driving out a valuable neighborhood grocery store, Safeway, to advantage another Walmart project, then the government getting into the real estate business by actually buying the vacant property and then giving an exclusive sweetheart deal to yet another private developer;
• and it has come to mean government subsidies of tens of millions of dollars to private developers.

The Arvada Urban Renewal Authority has become a scandal ... but, the concerns of city residents are belittled and ignored.

What are the typical responses of the elected elite, the establishment politicians and their cronies to this tax give-aways and favoritism towards wealthy developers?

• Why, we common folks just don't understand the mechanics of city planning and how government and business have to 'work' together.
• We are naivé to think that this isn't how big, important deals are made ... and besides, what do you know about what is best for the future of Arvada?
• And then there is the slickest line of all: if government doesn't give developers tax money, they wouldn't be able to afford to build and 'improve' the city. Next time you need to repaint or re-roof your house, go to city council and try that reasoning on them -- ask for three of four years of city sales tax rebate so you can afford to 'improve' your neighborhood.

Lately, however, citizens across the metro area are waking up to this abuse of government power that favors special interests over free markets and taxpaying residents.

• In Littleton, a grassroots effort of citizens has succeeded in putting on a city special election ballot a proposal to rein in the overreach of city hall and urban renewal: Gloves are off in urban renewal battle royale - Denver Post.
• In Westminster, an incumbent city council representative has authored a hard-hitting critique of how urban renewal is being utilized in that city: Westminster abusing ‘blight’ designation for TIF-funded urban renewal by Bruce Baker.
• In Arvada average citizens are seeing growing online and grassroots interest in local government reform that puts AURA abuses front-and-center. At issue are pending and proposed tax subsidies worth millions and millions of dollars -- Walmart $5.8 million; Park Place Olde Town $3.3 million; Solana Olde Town (apartments) $7.2 million; Renascent/Hilton Hotel $8.6 million. See: Stop Arvada Walmart/Facebook; Save Arvada Now/Facebook; Arvada for ALL the People/Facebook. 

Residents of Arvada, Westminster, Littleton -- indeed, the entire Denver region -- all want good quality economic prosperity for our communities. Undoubtedly, however, most regular folks also believe that free enterprise, fairness and the 'old fashioned' American way of doing business should not be subverted by government favors and preferences for a chosen few picked to be 'winners' by urban renewal authorities.

•••

To find out more about the Littleton urban renewal ballot issue, go to: http://yourlittletonyourvote.wordpress.com

 

Arvada Government Sure Does Pay!

By Dave Chandler

UPDATE!
The $5000 annual raise for Ms. Phair was approved unanimously by the Arvada city council -- without discussion -- at its meeting of Monday, September 15, 2014.

UPDATE!
We are now in possession of all three employment documents for Ms. Phair. A correction has turned up in the Third Amendment: the retroactive date is to July 2014 ... not 2012. This kind of incompetent error is what happens when a document is not presented to the public at the time it is approved by the AURA Board of Commissioners. (This 'mistake' is also revealing in light of Phair's other official job title as 'Secretary' ... perhaps some remedial office skill classes are in order, that the taxpayer's would have to pay for, of course.)

Still, we see that Phair has gone from a salary of $110,000 in 2011 to expecting $130,000 now.

Wow! $20,000 in raises in just three years. I wonder how many other city employees are so well considered? How about the average Arvada taxpayer?

* * *

Without comment or explanation, the Arvada Urban Renewal Authority (AURA) Board of Commissioners passed a third amendment to the employment contract of executive director, Maureen Phair, at their regular meeting of Tuesday, September 2, 2014.

On Friday, September 5, I asked for and received a copy of this amendment -- it increases Ms. Phair's annual salary to $130,000 retroactive to July 2012!

Just last summer, Phair's salary was set at $125,000, a $500 a month car allowance, plus other benefits. If the city council approves this generous pay raise, Phair will get a nice fat check for at least $10,000 right off the bat.

Life sure is hard for some top government bureaucrats, uh?

Considering that a great deal of Phair's job is to arrange give-aways of tax dollars to development companies and retail corporations, well, your average Arvadan might be forgiven if they just don't quite comprehend the necessity of this kind of personal government largesse.

Hey, when was the last time you got a retroactive pay raise? A pay raise?

But it does seem that government-types do tend to take care of their own if they are at high enough levels (after all, it's not their money and they always know what's best for you).

Just as troubling as the lavishness of the pay hike is the secretive nature of this proceeding -- no public discussion or explanation before the vote by the AURA board for this contract amendment. [See AURA meeting citizen notes.] If a copy of the document hadn't been specifically asked for, we still wouldn't know what this all about. We are led to conclude, therefore, that in previous secret meetings (also called 'executive sessions'), the AURA board and the executive director 'negotiated' this 'personnel matter'. 

Sometimes, as this episode so far demonstrates, public cynicism and distrust of government bureaucrats and politicans is certainly well deserved.

Of course, I still wonder why there isn't a sunset provision for the executive director's car allowance, after all, after the Gold Line is up and running, Denver resident Phair will be able to take the train to work, right?

* * * 

 

Candelas Glows ... And Positive Civic Engagement

That the City of Arvada government ever approved residential development for the land directly adjacent to the south side of the former Rocky Flats nuclear weapons factory demonstrates the degree of their civic irresponsibility and their penchant for empire building.

Now there is a group of dedicated, concerned citizens showing the positive side of civic engagement and  responsibility by trying to inform the public of the potential health hazards of buying a home, raising children and living where plutonium poisoning is a real possibility.

Today, Saturday, July 19, 2014, these good folks congregated at the entrance to the Candelas subdevelopment at Rocky Flats in Arvada to raise awareness of this lingering and serious environmental issue.

For more information see www.CandelasGlows.com, and Facebook page www.facebook.com/CandelasGlows

 

Vote for Weisfield Today for Arvada Fire Board

UPDATE!

Arvada Fire Protection board adds two newcomers, incumbent | YourHub.com - May 7, 2014

Two newcomers and one incumbent have unofficially won spots on the five-member Arvada Fire Protection District Board of Directors.

Votes are still being counted for the 10 candidates, but as of Wednesday morning incumbent Matt Kramer had 686 votes, Jeff Van Es had 516 and Bob Loveridge had 462.

Terms are for four years and in 2012, the last year available, Arvada Fire Protection District handled 8,677 total calls, 254 fire calls and has a 2014 operating fund of $23.6 million.

---

www.RussellforFireBoard.com

Arvada Fire Protection District board of directors balloting is today!

You can vote from 7:00 A.M. to 7:00 P.M.

Arvada Fire Protection District Headquarters
7309 Allison Way
Arvada, CO 80005

Apex Community Recreation Center
6842 Wadsworth Boulevard
Arvada, CO 80003

Apex Center
13150 W. 72nd Avenue
Arvada, CO 80005

Blatant Cronyism Screams Need for New Arvada Fire Board!

I wouldn't have believe it if I hadn't seen it with my own eyes -- in black and white, printed in YourHub/Denver Post for Arvada, Wheat Ridge and Westminster on Thursday, April 17, 2014.

In a Letter-to-the-Editor, four of the five current elected members of the board of directors of the Arvada Fire Protection District endorsing their fellow incumbent member, Matt Kramer, for reelection -- and signing as members of the "Arvada Fire Protection District Board." (You can read the letter below.)

And then this, the last paragraph: "We would encourage all citizens and employees of the district to give Matt your support in this upcoming election."

Four members of an elected board who are responsible for the wages and salaries of the employees of the fire district directly addressing those employees with 'encouragement' to vote for an incumbent.

This is critically important -- a special district like the fire district runs its own elections -- the board employs the people who are organizing the election ... of the very same board members! Connect the dots ... this kind of 'insider' politicking raises trust, fairness and confidence questions about the very conduct and outcome of the fire district election.

A more blatant case of cronyism is hard to envision. Writing as "We the following current members of the Arvada Fire Protection District Board," these men are using their position and title of office to 'encourage' the election of one candidate over others -- one who actually sits on the board with the other four.

Remember, this is also the same board that sought to get term limits repealed for themselves last year ... thankfully, the voters in their wisdom said 'no'.

"Good ol'boy" politics needs to go away in Arvada. This kind of heavy-handed cronyism is not what the professional firefighters and EMTs of the district deserve and it is certainly not what the taxpayers should have to put up with.

It is time for a new Arvada fire board; one committed to the proficiency of its employees, and one dedicated to good government, to openness, to honesty, to impartiality -- and responsible to all the citizens and taxpayers of the district.

---

YourHub.com - Arvada, Wheat Ridge, Westminster - Thursday, April 17, 2014

Board supports incumbent Kramer
We the following current members of the Arvada Fire Protection District Board are grateful that so many candidates have announced their intent to run for the three seats up for election this May.

While we believe each candidate offers something to the betterment of the Fire District, we especially feel the citizens should give strong consideration for casting one of their three votes for current board member Matt Kramer Jr.

We have had the pleasure and honor of serving with Matt for the last four years and can testify to his value to the Arvada Fire District, its citizens and firefighters.

This fire department has moved forward in leaps and bounds in the last four years, much in part to Matt’s input and insights in to the fire service.

When making decisions, Matt always has insights and ideas to help us come to reasonable decisions.

Matt’s knowledge of the current issues and the future issues makes him the most needed and qualified of all the candidates which is why he needs to remain on this board.

Fresh ideas, respect for the past and concern for the future of the direction of the fire district are what makes Matt an anchor on this board.

We would encourage all citizens and employees of the district to give Matt your support in this upcoming election. With his remaing presence we can be certain the good that has beed accomplished in the last several years will continue in to the future.

Mike Kerr, Doug Schneider, Tom McAdam and Ted Terranova, Arvada Fire Protection District Board

State of the City? Challenging Arvada Gov't on Open Meetings

UPDATE!

Arvada city manager Mark Deven responded to our letter this afternoon (Wednesday, April 16, 2014). You can read it below.

What is the answer? Is or should the mayor's 'State of the City' address to the Arvada Chamber of Commerce be an open, public meeting? Typical of a government out-of-touch with its own citizens: it is a public meeting, but it is not a public meeting.

"Please note that the April 18 Chamber event is posted as a public meeting ... we have posted the notice as a public meeting, please note that we believe that the April 18 Chamber of Commerce event featuring the Mayor's State of the City address does not fall under the Colorado Open Meetings Law."[emphasis added]

Not surprisingly, the response contends that a 'State of the City' speech is not a "part of the policy-making process." However, as one of our readers points out:

Most "State of ..." speeches are directly related to policy-making. The typical such speech usually starts with so-called "accomplishments" and then goes on to lay out the upcoming agenda. Is not a statement of legislative -- or quasi-judicial -- objectives a major part of "the policy-making process"?

Curiously, it appears that the city manager has precluded any post-speech audience comments or questions-and-answers:

As the Mayor will be presenting information and the Council is not convened as a policy making body, there will not be an opportunity for public comments.

So, the Chamber has said (below) the public can attend and not pay their $15 per person ticket.

Our objective has been to keep the pressure on the Arvada municipal government to follow the Open Meetings Law -- we are watching!

---

Yesterday, the following e-letter was sent:

Monday, April 14, 2014

Marc Williams, Mayor
City of Arvada
8101 Ralston Road
Arvada, CO 80001

CC:
Mark Deven, Arvada City Manager
Kami Welch, President, Arvada Chamber of Commerce
Ashley Garst, Administration & Events, Arvada Chamber of Commerce
Jeffery Roberts, Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition

Dear Mr. Williams:

We are writing to inform you that it is our considered judgement that the 'Annual State of the City Address' scheduled for Friday, April 18, 2014, falls under the provisions of the Colorado Open Meetings Law and, therefore, must be open to the public as provided for by the Colorado Open Meetings Law.

This gathering is presently publicized on the web site of the government of Arvada: “During the State of the City Address, Mayor Marc Williams will address current and planned projects and the policies of City Council as contained in the City's FOCUS documents.” (http://arvada.org/about-arvada/state-of-the-city-address/)

Since a “meeting” under the Law is defined as “any kind of gathering, convened to discuss public business” this function clearly falls under that provision and must be declared a “public meeting” and open to the public.

Furthermore, the invitation to this event is being described as by “The City of Arvada and the Arvada Chamber of Commerce.” It is, therefore, a government sanctioned gathering and must be considered a public meeting.

It is a reasonable expectation that due to the described purpose of this address by the Mayor of Arvada that other members of the city council and other members of City governmental boards and committees will be in attendance. The law requires, therefore, that at such a meeting where a “quorum or three or more members of a local public body” are present “at which any public business is discussed” that the meeting be “open to the public at all times.”

We already know, for example, that all of the members of the board of directors of the Arvada Urban Renewal Authority have been strongly encouraged to attend this function -- a local public body covered by the Open Meetings Law.

Consequently, we are asking that this gathering be declared an open meeting and “open to the public at all times” and that it henceforth be advertised and publicized as such.

We are asking that it also be made clear to the citizens of Arvada that as an open meeting, the public will be admitted without a monetary charge.

Of course, we expect this event to be properly and legally posted as a public meeting under the provisions of the Colorado Open Meetings Law.

Sincerely,

Dave Chandler
Arvada, CO 80003

Nancy Young
Arvada, CO 80004

Cindi Kreutzer
Arvada, CO 80002

Lyman Parkhurst
Arvada, CO 80003

* * * * *

OPEN MEETINGS LAW

24-6-401. Declaration of policy.
It is declared to be a matter of statewide concern and the policy of this state that the formation of public policy is public business and may not be conducted in secret.

24-6-402. Meetings - open to public - definitions.
(1) For the purposes of this section:
(a) "Local public body" means any board, committee, commission, authority, or other advisory, policy-making, rule-making, or formally constituted body of any political subdivision of the state and any public or private entity to which a political subdivision, or an official thereof, has delegated a governmental decision-making function but does not include persons on the administrative staff of the local public body.
(b) "Meeting" means any kind of gathering, convened to discuss public business, in person, by telephone, electronically, or by other means of communication.
(c) "Political subdivision of the state" includes, but is not limited to, any county, city, city and county, town, home rule city, home rule county, home rule city and county, school district, special district, local improvement district, special improvement district, or service district.

(2)(b) All meetings of a quorum or three or more members of any local public body, whichever is fewer, at which any public business is discussed or at which any formal action may be taken are declared to be public meetings open to the public at all times.

---

We have received a reply from the Arvada Chamber of Commerce which you can read below.

Let's be clear, the Chamber of Commerce as a private organization can make whatever provisions it likes -- Arvada municipal government is bound by the Colorado Open Meetings Law. For Arvada government not to officially declare the Friday, April 18, so-called 'State of the City' event an open and public meeting will be to show blatant disregard for the law, and more importantly, disrespect for this city's citizens and the values of openness and honesty.

We will be waiting to see what City government does.

It has been the efforts of Arvada citizens -- once again -- that have demanded sunshine and openness from our city council.

---

Good morning Mr. Chandler,

I wanted to follow-up with you from the Chamber's perspective on this event. We appreciate your concerns and understand that this is an important topic for the community to have the opportunity to hear. We have evaluated our options for this event and have created a non-monetary opportunity for guests to attend at no charge and listen to the presentation (this will not include breakfast). We are still asking that anyone who plans to attend RSVP to [email protected] to make sure that we have ample seating and room for all of our guests. We will post this option to Facebook and send out an email to our database. We certainly hope that you are able to join us!

This "State of the City" address is part of a monthly series of breakfasts hosted by the Chamber to evaluate challenges/opportunities that are impacting our community (examples include: County-Wide Update, Transportation, Education, Etc.). All of these are open to the public and it is our goal to grow these to make sure that we are providing a forum for looking at community issues that impact businesses and individuals. We appreciate your feedback and are always looking at ways to enhance our current efforts.

As I noted in my email to you last week I would like the opportunity to sit down with you upon returning from maternity leave and learn more about your perspectives and how the Chamber can work to better serve the community as a whole.

Please let me know if you have any further questions!

Kami Welch, President, Arvada Chamber of Commerce

---

Mark Deven

Mr. Chandler

This email is provided in response to your email of April 14 regarding your judgment that the Chamber of Commerce event of April 18 featuring the Mayor's State of the City address falls under the provisions of the Colorado Open Meetings Law and, therefore, must be open to the public as provided for by the Colorado Open Meetings Law and posted as a public meeting.

Please note that the April 18 Chamber event is posted as a public meeting. Each month our City Clerk reviews the Council's schedule of meetings that they plan to attend and posts all meetings or events where we understand that two or more council members may attend. Notices for these kinds of events are posted approximately every two weeks. City sponsored events involving council members are also posted.

While we have posted the notice as a public meeting, please note that we believe that the April 18 Chamber of Commerce event featuring the Mayor's State of the City address does not fall under the Colorado Open Meetings Law. The reason that the event does not fall under the Open Meetings Law is that the event is not part of the policy-making process. A meeting is part of the policy-making process when it is connected to the policy-making responsibilities of the public body that is holding or attending the meeting. There must be a meaningful connection between the meeting held or attended by a public body and the public body's policy-making responsibilities in order for the provisions of the Open Meetings Law to be applicable.

It is the City's position that there is no meaningful connection between the City Council's policy-making responsibilities and the Chamber of Commerce event featuring the Mayor's State of the City address. While individual council members will be attending the event, the Council will not be convened as a policy making body. Council members who attend the event will be there to listen to the Mayor's presentation as members of the community.

It is my understanding that the Chamber of Commerce will be accommodating people who would like to attend the event to hear the Mayor's presentation without participating in the breakfast. We of course support this accommodation.

As the Mayor will be presenting information and the Council is not convened as a policy making body, there will not be an opportunity for public comments. Therefore we anticipate that all members of the community will extend the common courtesy associated with these kinds of events.

Representatives and Candidates on Arvada 'Secret Ballots' Lawsuit

Where do your Arvada elected representatives to the state legislature stand on the city council secret ballots scandal?

The issue has risen to the level of the legislature since Colorado Springs State House Representative Bob Gardner is planning to introduce a special bill to ensure that any Colorado citizen has the 'standing' to go to court to enforce the provisions of the Open Meetings law.

So, over 24-hours ago we sent the following email communication to State Senator Rachel Zenzinger, State Representative Tracy Kraft-Tharp and State Representative Libby Szabo. We also sent the message to those seeking to become our representatives after the coming November 2014 election.

Today, Monday, April 14, we finally received a reply from Libby Szabo.
(See below.)

We will post any further responses when and if they arrive.

---

Monday, April 7, 2014

Dear Elected Representatives and Candidates for the Colorado General Assembly:

As you may know, a lawsuit challenging the use of secret ballots by the Arvada city council to fill a district one council vacancy was dismissed by District Court Judge Margie Enquist on March 31, 2014. Her reason for dismissal was based upon her interpretation of the issue of “standing” even though she also admitted that “the voting procedure may have violated the secret ballot provision” of the Colorado Open Meetings statute.

In response to this controversial court ruling, Colorado state representative Bob Gardner of Colorado Springs, who sponsored the 2012 bill that banned secret ballots for use by city councils and other public bodies, is seeking to introduce legislation in this session of the legislature “making it clear that any citizen has legal standing to challenge violations of the law.” (Sponsor of 2012 ban on secret ballots wants new legislation to clarify citizens’ legal standing - Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition; April 4, 2014.)

As Arvada residents, we would like to know your position on the use of secret ballots by governmental public entities.

We would very much like to know if you are supportive of state representative Gardner’s proposed legislation.

For those already representing Arvada citizens at the state capital — Ms.’s Szabo, Kraft-Tharp and Zenzinger — will you assist in Rep. Gardner’s effort to obtain permission to introduce his bill in this legislative session?

If introduced, will you vote for Rep. Gardner’s bill?

It is our intention to post this communication and answers to it (and note failures to respond) on various Arvada and Colorado internet forums and web sites.

We thank you for your consideration and we look forward to your timely reply.

Dave Chandler
Arvada, CO 80003

Lyman Parkhurst
Arvada, CO 80003

Cindi Kreutzer
Arvada, CO 80002

Hildegard Hix
Arvada, CO 80004

Thomas Wambolt
Arvada, CO 80004

---

Response from Rep. Tracy Kraft-Tharp - Incumbent Representative and Democratic Party Candidate for State House District 29

Dear Dave and others

Thank you for contacting me. I read about this in the paper and on facebook. I really don't have any other information and am very interested in seeing the bill.

I make it a practice to decide how to vote when I see the actual language in a bill versus deciding on the issue as a whole.

Again, thanks for contacting me.

Tracy

---

Response from Niles Aronson - Libertarian Party Candidate for State House District 27

Dear Dave and others,

As a citizen of Colorado, and most importantly Arvada, I find it offensive and appalling that Judge Enquist dismissed the lawsuit when there was a clear violation of the Colorado Open Meeting statute, even after admitting that it "may have violated the secret ballot provision." I personally believe that government should be completely transparent, and I am in favor of legislation that would allow any Colorado resident to bring suit against their government for violating the Open Meeting Laws. The fact that Judge Enquist dismissed the case due to the complainant not being involved is nothing more than proof that government today tries to hold itself above the laws created, and has taken on a bad habit of picking and choosing when and how it will enforce the laws.

I do hope that Rep. Gardner's bill is introduced, and eventually signed into law. If elected I will support and defend the Colorado voter's right to knowing what their government is up to.

Thank you for contacting me and asking for my opinion.

Best regards,

Niles Aronson

---

Response from Laura Woods - Republican Candidate for State Senate District 19

Dave,

Thanks for including me on this email.

Once elected, I will work for liberty on every front - including the freedom to challenge a violation of the law.

Cordially,

Laura Woods

---

Response from Hans Romer - Libertarian Party Candidate for State House District 29

Sir- as a highly distrusting citizen, of government. I feel FULL transparency of government is the only way for a government "of the people and for the people". Maybe only place I can see a place for secrecy or secrets is in military hardware. I do not see any reason for government to hide behind a curtain. Only reason to hide something is because you know what you are doing is wrong. Like criminals liking the dark. My opinion. And how I go about my life.

---

Received from the office of Rachel Zenzinger:

Dear Mr. Chandler,

Thank you for your email. Senator Zenzinger is out of the office today due to illness. I will be sure to highlight your email so that Senator Zenzinger can get back to you upon her return. Do you have a deadline? I could forward this email to the Senator's home email if you need to hear back from her right away. Thank you for your patience and understanding.
Sincerely,

Nicolas Kipling
Legislative Aide

---

Response from Rachel Zenzinger - Incumbent Senator and Democratic Party Candidate State Senate District 19

Dear Mr. Chandler,

Thank you for your interest in my opinion on this subject. I totally support the concept of open government. I recognize there are times that a governing body has to have a discussion in executive session. However, when there is any doubt, the governing process should be made transparent to the public. I left a note with Rep. Gardner this afternoon letting him know that I am interested in possibly serving as the Senate sponsor on this bill.

Thanks,
Senator Rachel Zenzinger

---

The original email was sent today to those who had so far not responded -- we received this reply from Libby Szabo, Incumbent Representative and Republican Party Candidate for State House District 27:

Hello Dave,
I have not seen anything solid on this. I will look into it and get back to you.

Libby

Assistant Minority Leader Libby Szabo
State Representative of House District 27

---

No Response as yet from:

Lang Sias, Republican Party Candidate; State Senate District 19
Robert Ramirez, Republican Party Candidate; State House Representative District 29
Gregg Miller, Libertarian Party Candidate; State Senate District 19

(We were just informed that Wade Norris is the Democratic Party candidate for State House District 27. The original email message has been sent to him and we will include his response when and if it is received.)