Dave Chandler

"20 years later and there's no tollway out there."

Three main points.

One - This tollway idea is for the express purpose of spurring more suburban sprawl to the west of Arvada proper, the Candelas development.

Two - The establishment elites in Arvada and Jefferson County government are far more interested in pleasing business and residential developers (more tax revenue and campaign contributions) than they are in the real safety issues associated with plutonium in the area from the former Rocky Flats nuclear weapons manufacturing factory.

Three - It is simple common sense: a tollway will drive toll-avoiding traffic onto already crowded arterials Wadsworth and Sheridan. Far from alleviating traffic flowing through Arvada, the tollway will exacerbate the problem (if it is a problem).

Remember, this tollway segment will not complete the metro Denver beltway -- it does not connect up with either the Northwest Parkway or C-470.

Jefferson Parkway pushes slowly forward a year after courtroom drama | Boulder Daily Camera/John Aguilar Staff Writer - December 26, 2013

... Dave Chandler, an Arvada resident who has fought against the Jefferson Parkway and its predecessor projects for decades, said he's not worried about work on the parkway starting anytime soon. He said it's still not clear to him how the highway builders are going to pay for the road and, more importantly, he doesn't see a need for it.

"Here we are 20 years later and there's no tollway out there," Chandler said. "Because ultimately there just isn't any demand."

More on Tollway: Power Grab Update

The power grab is dead ... at least for now.

The proposed legislation drafted by the 'we know best' Jefferson County Commissioners to create a 'Beltway Completion Authority' won't be introduced in this session of the Colorado legislature after all.

So, the first good news is thus reported in the press release below from the City of Golden.

The second good news is the statement issued by the Jefferson County League of Women Voters opposing the boondoggle tollway; see their press release at the bottom of this page.

The bad news is revealed in some diligent reporting done by Jim Smith -- the good ol'boy club of the Jefferson County Commissioners is and has been spending millions of dollars promoting this unnecessary beltway/tollway scheme. Some of this manipulation of taxpayer's dollars seems to be of a questionable nature.

Read Jim Smith's article in the middle of this web page.

Citizens of Jefferson County should be demanding that the three Jefferson County Commissioners and the oligarchs of the Arvada city government stand before us and answer some serious questions.

Why did they draft and support a piece of proposed legislation that would give 'super' governmental power to a 'Beltway Completion Authority'?

Do they really believe in the concept of "dominant eminent domain"?

Are they really so power hungry that they would usurp the legitimate rights of towns, cities and landowners ... to favor a fee-per-trip roadway that would facilitate more suburban sprawl?

Were they so determined to get their way as government officials that they would impose this tollway without demonstrating hard evidence that it improves traffic flow?

Would they show us all their campaign contributions from interests that benefit from the construction of this tollway?

Do they have such contempt for the regular process of government and the courts that they would prevent the rights of neighborhoods, communities and citizens to sue in order to preserve health, safety and property rights?

These and many more pointed question need to be answered directly by the Jeffco commissioners, the officers of the so-called Jefferson Parkway Authority, and the 20th century throw-backs on the Arvada city council.

But, you know they will be the last to meet with regular citizens and answer questions -- they know they already know what is best for us.

This 'Beltway Completion Authority' draft legislation and the way the Jeffco commissioners have been spending our money to promote this special interest road construction is a scandal.

The politicians shouldn't be allowed to run away and hide. Questions need to be asked ... and answered.

---

Proposed toll road bill won’t be introduced after all

Golden, Colo. ­— April 23, 2012 — We have positive news to report.

Last week, we told Golden residents about a proposed bill that would have deeply eroded local control and could have allowed Jefferson Parkway proponents to push a toll road through Golden without considering the needs of our community.

Today, we’re pleased to report that we’ve been told that the bill will not be introduced this legislative session.

This very positive news is a testament to the focus and energy of citizens who have made their voices heard on these issues. We were also aided by the leaders of some neighboring cities who were concerned that the proposal overreached and undermined regional cooperation.

While we don’t know yet exactly why the threat of the bill was withdrawn, we are grateful that cool heads prevailed.

Golden has been and remains committed to productive dialogue with neighboring municipalities and counties about how to address the transportation challenges our region faces. But we made it clear that we could not productively discuss these issues with the threat of detrimental legislation hanging over our heads.

We appreciate your continued interest in these issues and we’ll continue to update you on important developments as they occur.

---

From Citizens Involved in the Northwest Quadrant (CINQ) ---

CINQ Comments: This is another fine article by Jim Smith, Golden resident, realtor and CINQ board member. Jim has done some investigation, and he tells us that Jeffco Commissioners have put $6.325M in cash into advancing the Jefferson toll road. The cash has come from the general and Open Space funds. This amount of money does not account for staff time which is likely considerable. While county services are being cut back, including libraries, commissioners are using funds that are clearly not appropriate to advance a private endevour. We call on groups such as Plan Jeffco and others to look into this mis-use of funds, and consider legal action. This news is just another example of the inappropriate and eggregious behavior by Jeffco Commissioners. Take a moment to contact county commissioners. Both Faye Griffin and John Odom are up fror re-election this fall.
Contact: [email protected], 303-271-8525

===

By Jim Smith

Last week I described the effort by Jefferson County’s Board of Commissioners to introduce legislation which would create an authority with “super eminent domain” powers to complete the beltway from northeast of Highway 36 though Jeffco and Golden to connect with C-470.

This Monday, that effort was killed by the commissioners themselves, following quite a backlash from the public and from legislators who considered the proposal a massive overreach and an unwarranted gutting of long established local powers.

Commissioner Don Rosier told me at press-time (Tuesday) that the Governor and CDOT requested that they drop the proposal and return to the negotiating table.

Prior to this short-lived effort, the Commissioners had essentially given up forcing a beltway though Golden and had created a public highway authority to solicit private investors for a toll-road north of Golden connecting Highway 93 and Highway 120 but leaving gaps south through Golden and between Highway 120 and the beltway’s current end east of the Boulder Turnpike. (Nevertheless, the Commissioners and the highway authority continue to promote their toll road as “completing the beltway,” and the press has generally picked up on that inaccurate and lame phraseology.)

The proposed legislation was perceived by toll road critics (including myself) as a desperate last ditch effort to get the beltway completed, since negotiation with Golden to drop its opposition to the toll road had backfired and even led to Golden filing suit against the use of contaminated Rocky Flats land for part of the right-of-way. An equally questionable strategy (already in place) for establishing the “privately funded” toll road has been the use of Jeffco Open Space funds (from sales tax revenue) to facilitate purchase of the 300-foot right-of-way though Rocky Flats. Here’s how it was explained to me by Assistant County Administrator Kate Newman:

The County gave $1.225 million in general funds to the toll road authority, which put those funds into escrow to buy the 300-foot right-of-way. Meanwhile, the County put $5.1 million of Open Space funds into escrow as its contribution to the purchase of another parcel (Section 16) to be deeded over to US Fish & Wildlife, but that fully-funded transaction only closes when and if the authority closes on the right-of-way purchase.

I wouldn’t be surprised if this comingling of purposes were to trigger another lawsuit over the misuse of Open Space funds.

---

Jefferson Parkway meets opposition from Jeffco League of Women Voters

The proposed Jefferson Parkway does not meet smart 21st century sustainable transportation goals, according to the League of Women Voters of Jefferson County. “We oppose the proposed private toll road on many levels," said LWV Jeffco President Ann Roux. “It fails our tests for adequate public input and transparency, government accountability, and economic sustainability.”

The League’s opposition to the proposed parkway stems from its in-depth study of the toll road, and is based on its consensus-driven standards for evaluating any highway proposal.

The parkway’s route through the Rocky Flats National Wildlife Refuge needs updated analysis, the League believes. Since the original Environmental Impact Statement was completed, new proposals for commercial and residential development on the east, south, and west refuge boundaries have surfaced.

Costs to taxpayers should be clarified. Estimated costs for area governmental entities and the Colorado Department of Transportation range from $300 million to $500 million to construct interchanges at the north and south ends of the toll road in order to actually complete the metro area beltway.

The League further believes that questions about the long term consequences of the parkway should be answered. Does it mesh with land use goals for the area? Have all alternatives, including public transit, been considered? Have all environmental impacts, such as those to wildlife and scenic vistas, been assessed? Will the public interest be served if a non-compete clause were included in a private investor’s contract prohibiting improvements along arterials abutting the parkway?

“Until this is information is provided, we will continue to oppose the Jefferson Parkway private toll road,” said Roux.

***

The League of Women Voters, a nonpartisan political organization, encourages informed and active participation in government, works to increase understanding of major public policy issues, and influences public policy through education and advocacy. Visit the League’s website, www.lwvjeffco.org, email us at [email protected] or call us at 303-238-0032 to learn more about the Jeffco League’s activities.

Jeffco Tollway Means Double Taxation

The 'Beltway Completion Authority' draft legislation proposes bonding power to raise money to build the so-called Jefferson Parkway, also known as the 'tollway to nowhere'.

And it is no secret that the establishment elites that sit on the board of the 'Jefferson Parkway Public Highway Authority' are anxious to make a finance-construction-franchise deal with Isolux Corsán of Spain.

You are going to pay, pay, pay if all these political deals and government horse-trading schemes somehow become reality.

Now ... the rest of the country seems to be finally figuring out that most of these 'public-private partnership' deals (P3s) have a funny way of soaking the taxpayer while delivering a guaranteed profit to developers and tollway operators (it's called corporate welfare) and more power and campaign contributions to elected officials.

In an era four dollar a gallon gasoline and corporate bailouts, well, when there aren't enough 'customers' paying the toll to pay-off the bondholders and the foreign franchisee-holder, you can easily foresee the coming assault on your wallet.

The following article explains via Texas how this tollway 'public-private partnership' formula works ... or rather doesn't work.

Read and learn.

Why Public-Private Toll Roads Won’t Work | Terri Hall/San Antonio Transportation Policy Examiner

It's hard to disagree with much of what a recent Wall Street Journal (WSJ) editorial advocates, like making the highway fund solvent, returning gas tax money sent to Washington back to the states, and loosening the federal strings attached to road money. However, where they're missing the boat is this notion that private money will be the silver bullet to fix road revenue shortfalls and provide what’s often called ‘gap funding.’

There's a hefty price that comes with seeking private money to build public roads using public private partnerships (P3s), as well as loss of sovereignty and control over the surrounding free routes (through non-competes clauses that prohibit or penalize expansion of free roads). Not only are toll rates on these privatized roads punitively higher than public toll roads (75 cents a mile versus 12-15 cents per mile on a public toll road), heaps of taxpayer money subsidize these government-sanctioned monopolies (so having to pay a toll, too, is DOUBLE TAXATION).

Also, these sweetheart P3s deals are structured to GUARANTEE private profits at the public's expense. On the North Tarrant Express project (I-820) in DFW, taxpayers brought three-quarters of the money to the table, the Spanish firm, Cintra, only one-quarter, yet Cintra gets the exclusive right to set and collect tolls (at a rate of 75 cents per mile in peak hours) for the next half century in return for their paltry investment.

The WSJ’s subhead says ‘Americans don’t want to live in LaHood’s car-free utopia,’ knocking Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood’s livability agenda, which is actually a more sanitized name for the United Nations’ Agenda 21 anti-car policies that seek to herd people into high density housing in the inner cities and force motorists out of their cars and into mass transit.

Yet, the very policies the WSJ advocates, P3 toll roads, have the same net effect. It makes driving unaffordable and forces the majority of the traveling public out of their cars or stuck in unbearable congestion on unimproved free routes -- so those who cannot afford to pay 75 cents a mile to get to work will be treated as second class citizens without mobility, even though they continue to pay gas taxes for roads.

The average worker has no control over when he reports to work. Many cannot afford to live close to their jobs, others plain don’t want to. Yet the WSJ and many libertarian and so-called conservative think tanks advocate congestion pricing that gouges commuters during peak hours in an attempt by government, or its private surrogates, to ‘manage’ traffic flow and purposely discourage peak hour travel.

‘Managed lanes’ utilize congestion pricing which is a variable toll rate that changes depending on time of day and level of traffic on the toll lanes. The more cars, the higher the price, creating road scarcity through pricing. Economists love it since their textbook free market theories get put into practice by governments.

However, government-sanctioned monopolies cannot be considered a free market solution to congestion. When there’s only one way to get where you need to go and the state puts that road in the hands of a private corporation who controls the toll rates and dictates how much you’ll have to pay to get to work at your appointed time, that’s not free choice nor free market -- it’s tyranny.

Changing the tide
Georgia Governor Nathan Deal had his own awakening to the threat to state sovereignty by handing control of public roads to private, even foreign, corporations and he pulled the plug on Georgia’s P3 program, calling them “ill-conceived sell-outs” of state sovereignty. Recently, a Cato Institute scholar, Timothy Lee, also reconsidered his support for P3s reasoning that it threatens our freedom to travel. So the tide is turning as the political and financial realities of these failed policies come to light.

So while we need to get a fiscally responsible federal highway bill passed and while we need to give the states back the money they send to Washington and stop diverting road funds to non-road purposes, advocating P3s as part of the solution to make-up structural road funding shortfalls is fiscally irresponsible and a taxpayer rip-off, putting the cost of transportation so far out of reach for the average person that these toll roads will go bankrupt from lack of use, necessitating more taxpayer bailouts and malfeasance.

Tollway Totalitarianism

The greed and political depravity of those scheming to construct the boondoggle tollway in the northwest quadrant of the metro area has reached a new level of audacity.

The special interests haven't been getting their way through the normal, established, democratic process ... so now they are attempting to use government and corporate power to change the rules.

It appears that the good ol' boy club on the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners have drafted legislation to create a whole new government institution to ram through the tollway plan. Of course, the commissioners have the support of the government oligarchy in Arvada and pave-over-the-world corporate developers. Rumor has it that they have persuaded a couple of their political toadies in the state legislature to introduce this as a last-minute bill.

Local control over tollways, highways, roads through your city -- forget about it.
Government needs your property for the project -- they'll have the power to take it.
You want your neighborhood open space protected -- too bad for you.
Foreign control of 'public-private' infrastructure -- whatever it takes.

That's the kind of totalitarian power that would be granted to the 'Beltway Completion Authority' in the draft legislation. 

This kind of 'bipartisan' heavy-handed maneuver is precisely why so many Americans -- liberals, conservatives, independents -- have a deepening contempt for politicians and government. 

The Arvada-sponsored tollway plan, that the creation of the 'Beltway Completion Authority' is supposed to facilitate, has been demonstrated  time and time again as unnecessary to relieve traffic congestion. It is not a completion of the metro beltway because it does not connect to either the Northwest Parkway nor C-470; and furthermore, it is obvious that the real purpose of this tollway is to gin-up activity for more Arvada residential development on the southern border of the former Rocky Flats nuclear trigger factory.

The positive take on this latest plot to legislatively fashion a super government agency to jam this tollway into our wallets is that Arvada, Jeffco, Broomfield governments and the developers must be desperate if they feel they need to attempt this kind of over-the-top power grab.

If this bill makes it to the floor of either or both the state House and state Senate it will be quite revealing of the characters of those who vote for or against it. Republicans who vote 'yes' will show their praise for local control and talk of 'limited' government is just that: talk. Democrats who say 'aye' will illustrate that their commitment to 'green economy' and participatory government is hollow in the face of entrenched, elite power and corporate pressure.

My final warning: Beware Colorado citizens and taxpayers -- the legislature is still in session!

Find here the communication from Golden elected officials and a copy of the draft legislation.

Breaking News on Beltway: Proposed Bill  FROM THE MAYOR OF GOLDEN, COLORADO: BELTWAY BILL From: Marjorie Sloan, Thursday, April 12, 2012 9:25 PM ...These were my comments on the beltway bill, I understand Channel 8 was out tonight. Also, public comment is the first item at Jeffco Commissioners' meetings, held Tuesday at 8:00 a.m. MAYOR'S COMMENTS   Just within the last day or two, we found out about a proposed state bill that beltway backers and their allies are threatening to submit for last minute legislation in the General Assembly. As the draft bill is written right now, it would establish a "Beltway Completion Authority"-- a whole new level of government with unprecedented powers. The authority would be composed of 18 members from the entire metro area -- with Golden having one vote -- and any majority decision would be conclusive. In other words, the authority would have the power to override Golden's principled positions concerning transportation through our town. If the bill passes, the authority would have the power to build a beltway through Golden wherever the majority of the members wanted it. If the bill passes, it would also take away what's called a locality's "1041"powers. That means that the authority could design and construct a road way without including any of the elements Golden residents need to make it compatible with our community's shared vision. There's more. If the bill passes, it would give the authority super eminent domain powers that would trump our own -- meaning that any property along the route could be condemned to make way for the beltway. Our parks, open space areas, schools, residential and commercial property -- all would be at risk City Councilors, city staff, and I have spend the past 48 hours reaching out to neighboring communities, CDOT, the Governor's office and legislators. We've had some success in getting support, particularly since the bill would eviscerate the local powers of other communities as well as our own. Though the bill is specifically targeted at Golden, it would affect all communities in the metro area and set precedent for power grabs statewide. This is not just Golden's concern. Tonight we want to make sure our residents understand what's going on and that we are working hard and working together to push back. Know that we're relying on you to play a part, too. Tell your neighbors -- and friends in other communities -- that they should make their outrage known. Contact county commissioners, state representatives, state senators, mayors, city councilors, editors, writers, bloggers, and any person of influence you can think of. Our message is simple -- the proposed authority is the ultimate bad idea. We just got a draft copy of the bill today. Keep in mind this is not the final bill and could change before it is presented and it could even be retracted. But the draft gives a good idea of what they're trying to do. We have copies of the draft here if you'd like to look it through. Let any of us know if you have questions. But the bottom line is that this is the one issue we all agree on. And if the bill passes we won't have the luxury of working out our own differences. Together we have the awesome power of community - let's put it to use.   *** FROM COUNCILOR MARCIE MILLER: PLEASE READ!  From: [email protected], Thursday, April 12, 2012 9:27 PM Everyone - Please see the attached bill [below] being put forward by Sen. Boyd and Rep. Vaad. This is HUGE! Please wade through the legalese and recognize how important it is that we stop this! It is an egregious overstepping of authority by elected officials on behalf of the Jefferson Parkway Authority!  Send this far and wide to all your friends! This is about Golden on the surface, but if someone wanted to use eminent domain to build a hotel at a ski area they could. If they wanted to over-ride local controls on "frakking," they could. EVERY municipality should be concerned, and so should all Colorado residents! Send this to everyone you know all over Colorado and ask them to call their state representatives and preserve private property rights statewide. Sen. Boyd and Rep. Vaad have permission to drop a bill (probably mid-week next week) to make it easier for an authority to complete the beltway in cooperation with private entities.  I have just learned that the central element of the bill would be to allow an authority to operate for an entire geographic area (like Jeffco and Broomfield Counties) if there is a majority vote of all of the electors in that area supporting the authority, even if one or more municipal jurisdictions within it object.  So, if a majority of Jeffco voters vote for an authority, Golden would no longer be able to veto operations in its City limits.  It may or may not also have provisions regarding 1041 regulations and restrictions on tolling existing free lanes.  Regardless, this would be a serious threat to Golden's legal protections.   SUMMARY OF MAIN PROVISIONS OF THE "BEEP ACT"  The "BEEP" Act would create a "Beltway Completion Authority" as a brand new government entity with extraordinary powers to override all local control of toll road construction within their boundaries and exercise unrestrained "dominant eminent domain" over all other local government property.  This new Authority would be created automatically by the Act with no approval by voters or the communities involved or affected.  Proposed C.R.S. 43-4-1004.  The Authority would have the power to build and toll new lanes of highway anywhere throughout the Denver Metropolitan Area (Adams, Boulder, Douglas, and Jefferson Counties, along with the Cities and Counties of Denver and Broomfield).  See Proposed C.R.S. 43-4-1005, -1007.  It would create a new layer of bureaucracy on top of the existing E-470, Northwest Parkway and Jefferson Parkway Authorities. Elimination of Local Control over New Toll Roads.  The Authority can force new toll lanes into any jurisdiction without its approval.  The Authority would be run by a Board of Directors that would include one voting representative from 15 metro counties or cities (including Golden and the City of Denver), one special district (Highlands Ranch Metro), CDOT and the High Performance Transportation Enterprise.  Proposed C.R.S. 43-4-1006(1)(e).  As few as six votes would allow the Authority to condemn property, build and toll new lanes and eliminate local regulations throughout Metropolitan Denver, even if the affected jurisdiction votes against such actions or is not even represented on the Board.  Proposed C.R.S. 43-4-1006(1)(e).  This radically shifts from the current Public Highway Authority Law, which requires the consent of any jurisdiction in which a segment of the Beltway would be built.  C.R.S. 43-4-504, -506(1)(f).  This power could be used against any jurisdiction in the Denver Metropolitan Area. "Dominant Eminent Domain."  The Act would grant the Authority the power of eminent domain and an extraordinary "dominant eminent domain" power.  Proposed CRS 43-4-1003(10); 43-4-1007(11).  "Dominant eminent domain" would allow the Authority to condemn any public property from any local government with no defense that the condemned property is needed for existing public purposes.  Proposed CRS 43-4-1003(10).  Property that would be wholly at the whim of the Authority's super-eminent-domain power includes schools, parks, water infrastructure, local roads, civic buildings, jails, and open space. Elimination of H.B. 1041 Regulations.  The Act would eliminate the right of any jurisdiction in the Denver Metropolitan Area to apply Areas and Activities of Statewide Interest Regulations ("H.B. 1041") to any extension, upgrade or enhancement of the Beltway.  Proposed C.R.S. 43-4-1008.  The Legislature passed H.B. 1041 almost 40 years ago to ensure local control of the effects of large projects that can disrupt communities, including power, energy, water, solid waste, rail, airport and other similar projects.  The proposed rollback of the H.B. 1041 protections creates a precedent that puts all other H.B. 1041 protections at risk.  Even state agencies are subject to and comply with H.B. 1041 regulations; the Act would place the Authority on a higher status than state agencies. No Limit to Completing the Beltway.  The Act is written loosely and broadly to allow the Authority to engage in condemnation and toll development anywhere in the Denver Metropolitan Area - and even outside of the Metropolitan area - without local approval so long as it can say that such efforts would "enhance," "expand," or "upgrade" a Beltway around Denver.  C.R.S. 43-4-1003(2)-(3), (9); -1005, -1007(8).  The wide powers of the Authority are not limited to the area between the Northwest Parkway and C-470.  Id.  These expansions, enhancements or upgrades of the Beltway over the objections of local communities could occur anywhere in the Denver area (or outside), including feeders into the C-470 loop, resurrection of the Super Slab, or other loop extensions. No Environmental Review.  The Act contains no provisions requiring any environmental review by the Authority and nothing to replace the reviews under H.B. 1041 that it would displace.  By comparison, CDOT and the HPTE conduct environmental analyses for all of their major actions. No Oversight.  The Act allows the Authority to transfer "dominion," property, and toll road facilities to "any person," including domestic or foreign corporations.  Proposed C.R.S. 43-4-1010(1)(e).  Any such "person" would have complete control of toll rates and operation of transportation facilities.  The Act gives the Authority power to set tolls "without any supervision or regulation of such fees, tolls, rates, and charges by any board, agency, bureau, commission or official."  Proposed C.R.S. 43-4-1007(4). Unconstitutional Restriction on Cooperation among Local Jurisdictions.  The Act would make it illegal for any two cities and/or counties in the Denver area to enter into intergovernmental agreements "or combinations to frustrate the purposes of the Authority."  Proposed C.R.S. 43-4-1011(2).  This dramatic overreach would apply even to jurisdictions that cannot vote on the Board or that may be outvoted.  As written, it would also apply if two jurisdictions agreed to work cooperatively for the amendment of the legislation in the future.  It reflects the overall purpose and effect of the Act to isolate and marginalize local jurisdictions. Marcie Miller City Councilor, District 2 Golden, Colorado 720-326-8636 *** Text of the Proposed Bill Second Regular Session Sixty-eighth General Assembly STATE OF COLORADO INTRODUCED   HOUSE BILL 12-_____ HOUSE SPONSORSHIP TBD, SENATE SPONSORSHIP TBD,   House Committees                                                     Senate Committees tbd                                                                               tbd   A BILL FOR AN ACT Concerning completion and improvement of a Denver metropolitan area beltway to foster economic development, incentivize job creation and employment opportunities, to facilitate transportation and to attract business location and investment in and throughout the state of Colorado. ______________________________________________________________________________ Bill Summary   Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Colorado:   SECTION 1. In Colorado Revised Statutes, add a new part 10 to article 4 of title 43 as follows: PART 10  Beltway Economic Enhancement Project Act 43-4-1001. Short title. THIS PART 10 SHALL BE KNOWN AND MAY BE CITED AS THE "BELTWAY ECONOMIC ENHANCEMENT PROJECT ACT OF 2012."   43-4-1002. Legislative declaration. (1) THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY HEREBY FINDS, DETERMINES AND DECLARES THAT: (a)  THE STATE REMAINS IN A PERIOD OF ECONOMIC CHALLENGE, EXACERBATED BY INADEQUATE AND INCOMPLETE TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES, INCLUDING THE LACK OF A COMPLETED BELTWAY CIRCUMSCRIBING THE DENVER METROPOLITAN REGION. (b)  THE COMPLETION OF BELTWAY TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS CIRCUMSCRIBING THE DENVER METROPOLITAN REGION IS CRITICAL TO THE STATE OF COLORADO, BECAUSE ALL OF THE STATE'S INTERSTATE HIGHWAYS, MOST OF ITS MAJOR FEDERAL AND STATE HIGHWAYS AND MOST OF ITS TRANSIT CORRIDORS RADIATE FROM THAT REGION TO EVERY BORDER OF THE STATE. (c)  NO DENVER METROPOLITAN REGION BELTWAY, CONNECTING MOST OF THE STATE'S HIGHWAY RADIALS AND PROVIDING ACCESS TO MOST OF ITS TRANSIT CORRIDORS, IS COMPLETE AND LACK OF COMPLETION CREATES CONGESTION, WHICH IS A BARRIER TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, CREATION OF JOBS FOR COLORADO'S CITIZENS AND ATTRACTION OF BUSINESS INVESTMENT AND EXPANSION IN THE STATE. (d)  COMPLETED BELTWAY SEGMENTS FULLY CIRCUMSCRIBING THE DENVER METROPOLITAN REGION WILL (I) ENHANCE COMMERCE AND CREATE JOBS, (II) PROMOTE MOBILITY, (III) MITIGATE AIR POLLUTION IMPACTS OF TRAFFIC CONGESTION, (IV) ENHANCE AIRPORT, SKI-AREA AND MOUNTAIN TOURISM ACCESS, (V) PROVIDE OPPORTUNITY FOR EXPANDED TRANSIT, AND CONNECTION TO THE METROPOLITAN AREA RAIL SYSTEM, AND (VI) PROMOTE THE HEALTH AND WELFARE OF THE AREA'S CITIZENS BY PROVIDING THE OPPORTUNITY FOR ADDITIONAL BICYCLE, PEDESTRIAN AND RECREATIONAL TRAIL FACILITIES ALONG THE BELTWAY CORRIDOR AND CONNECTING WITH TRAILS PROVIDED BY LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES. (e)   THE CREATION OF A BELTWAY COMPLETION AUTHORITY, EMPOWERED TO COOPERATE AND CONTRACT WITH EXISTING AND FUTURE PUBLIC HIGHWAY AUTHORITIES, THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, THE HIGH PERFORMANCE TRANSPORTATION ENTERPRISE, REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITIES AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, INCLUDING CITIES, COUNTIES AND CITIES AND COUNTIES, PROMOTES THE PROSPERITY, CULTURE AND WELL-BEING OF COLORADO'S CITIZENS AND BUSINESSES, WHICH, IN TURN, PROMOTE THE ATTRACTIVENESS OF THE STATE TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND THE CREATION OF JOBS. (f)   THE COMPLETION OF DENVER METROPOLITAN REGION BELTWAY TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS IS A MATTER OF SUBSTANTIAL STATE INTEREST AND A MATTER OF STATEWIDE CONCERN. (g)  The division of the Denver Metropolitan Region into a variety of incorporated and unincorporated areas has made completion of the long-planned beltway exceptionally challenging, contrary to the intent of the general assembly expressed in the Public Highway Authority Law, Section 43-4-502(1)(a)-(c), C.R.S. (h)  THE COMPLETION OF MAJOR TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE, SUCH AS THE DENVER METROPOLITAN REGION BELTWAY, IS A MATTER WHICH WOULD TRADITIONALLY BE GOVERNED BY THE STATE AND ITS COMPLETION IS IMPERATIVE TO EFFECTUATE ADEQUATE PROTECTION OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, TRANSPORTION AND MOBILITY THROUGHOUT THE STATE. (i)    THE DENVER METROPOLITAN REGION BELTWAY IS THE TYPE OF FACILITY THAT NO SINGLE MUNICIPAL OR COUNTY ENTITY could ACCOMPLISH ALONE AND REQUIRES COOPERATION AMONG VARIOUS GOVERNMENTAL UNITS. (j)    THE DENVER METROPOLITAN REGION BELTWAY IS A PROJECT WHICH IMPACTS AND BENEFITS MULTIPLE COMMUNITIES AND PERSONS THROUGHOUT THE dENVER mETROPOLITAN rEGION AND THE STATE. (k)  ADEQUATE MOBILITY THROUGHOUT THE STATE, and THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND JOBS SUCH MOBILITY ENHANCES, REQUIRES UNIFORMITY OF REGULATION. (2)The general assembly further finds, determines and declares that it is the intention of the general assembly that the beltway completion authority be an enterprise under section 20 of article X of the state constitution.   43-4-1003. Definitions.  As used in this section unless the context otherwise requires: (1)  "Authority"means the beltway completion authority created pursuant to this part 10. (2)  "Beltway"means a LIMITED-ACCESS expressway OR EXPRESSWAYS located in a metropolitan region with a population in excess of one million persons, which generally circumscribes that metropolitan region, and which will be primarily utilized for major traffic movement at higher speeds and which comprises or will comprise public highways of public highway authorities, state highways and/or REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMs of regional transportation authorities. (3)  "Beltway completion segment" means a public highway or highways, a state highway or highways or a REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM or systems which the authority undertakes to enhance, plan, design, construct, finance, upgrade, expand or operate, or assist therein, and which completes, enhances or assists in completing or enhancing, in full or in part, a beltway. (4)  "Board" means the board of directors of the Authority. (5)  "Bond" means any bond, note, interim certificate, contract or other evidence of indebtedness of an authority authorized by this section. (6)  "Concession" means a long term lease arrangement with one or more public or private persons for the construction or operation of a beltway completion segment. (7)  "Construct" or"Construction" means the planning, designing, permitting, engineering, financing, acquisition, installation, construction, reconstruction, enhancement, expansion or upgrading of the beltway. (8)  "County" means any county organized under the laws of the state, including any city and county. (9)  "Denver metropolitan Region" means the counties of Adams, Arapahoe, BOULDER, Douglas AND Jefferson, AND THE MUNICIPALITIES WITHIN THOSE COUNTIES and the cities and counties of Broomfield and Denver. (10)         "DOMINANT EMINENT DOMAIN" MEANS THAT THE RIGHT OF THE AUTHORITY TO CONDEMN PUBLIC PROPERTY, REAL AND PERSONAL, SHALL BE SUPERIOR IN PUBLIC NECESSITY TO THAT OF ANY CITY, TOWN, CITY AND COUNTY, COUNTY OR OTHER PUBLIC CORPORATION, BUT SUCH RIGHT SHALL BE SUPERIOR ONLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPLETING INCOMPLETE SECTIONS AND ACQUIRING BY WHATEVER legal MEANS necessary RELATED REAL OR PERSONAL PROPERTY. (11)         "Grant" means a cash payment of public funds made directly to the authority by a governmental unit within the state, which cash payment is not required to be repaid. "Grant" does not include the following: (a)  Public funds paid or advanced to the authority by a governmental unit in exchange for an agreement by the authority to provide transportation facilities, services or systems to, on behalf of or for the benefit of that governmental unit or the public; (b)  Refunds made in the current or next fiscal year; (c)  Gifts; (d)  Any payments directly or indirectly from federal funds or earnings on federal funds; (e)  Collections for another government; (f)  Pension contributions by employees and pension fund earnings; (g)  Reserve transfers or expenditures; (h)  Damage awards; (i)  Property sales; or (j)  A LOAN THAT IS EXPECTED TO BE REPAID. (12)         "Incomplete Section" means any part of a state highway, public highway or regional transportation system designated as or to become part of a beltway and which is not a four-lane limited access highway or A FOUR-LANE LIMITED ACCESS HIGHWAY DESIGNATED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AS INCOMPLETE, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION C-470. (13)         "Municipality" has the same meaning as that provided in section 31-1-101, C.R.S. (14)         "Person" means any natural person, corporation, partnership, association, or joint venture, the United States of America, or any state or local governmental entity. (15)         "Public Highway" has the same meaning as that provided in section 43-4-503(12), C.R.S. (16)         "Revenues" means any tolls, fees, rates, charges, assessments, grants, contributions, or other income and revenues received by the Authority. (17)         "REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM" HAS THE SAME MEANING AS THAT PROVIDED IN SECTION 43-4-603(16), C.R.S. AS RELATED TO HIGHWAYS. (18)         "State Highway"means, for purposes of this part 10, a state highway AS defined in Section 43-1-204, C.R.S. or a highway which is part of the state highway system provided in Section 43-2-101, et seq., C.R.S. and which, with enhancement, expansion or parallel construction of new lanes, is intended by the authority and the DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION to serve as part of a beltway.   43-4-1004. Creation of beltway completion authority.  There is hereby created an authority which shall be a body corporate and political subdivision of the state of Colorado which shall be known and designated as the "Beltway Completion Authority." THE BELTWAY COMPLETION AUTHORITY SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE COLORADO open meetings LAW, SECTION 24-6-401 ET SEQ., c.r.s., AND SHALL BE CONSIDERED A LOCAL PUBLIC BODY PURSUANT TO SUCH LAW, AND THE COLORADO OPEN RECORDS ACT, SECTION 24-72-101 ET SEQ., C.R.S.   43-4-1005. Authority boundaries.  (1) The authority's boundaries shall consist of the Denver metropolitan region.   43-4-1006. Board of directors.  (1)(a) The authority's board of directors shall comprise one voting director from each of the following persons, which director shall be an elected official, or in case of the DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION appointed by the transportation commission and in the case of or the High Performance Transportation Enterprise, appointed by its board of directors: (I)     Adams County; (II)    Arapahoe County; (III)  Boulder county (IV)   Douglas County; (V)    Jefferson County; (VI)   City of Arvada; (VII)  City of Centennial; (VIII)  City and County of Broomfield; (IX)   City and County of Denver; (X)    City of Lafayette (XI)    City of Golden; (XII)   City of Lakewood; (XIII)   City of Lone Tree; (XIV)   City of Littleton; (XV)    Town of Morrison (XVI)   Highlands Ranch Metropolitan District; (XVII)  Colorado Department of Transportation; and (XVIII)  High Performance Transportation Enterprise. (b)  The authority's board of directors shall include one non-voting director from the STATE air quality control commission. (c)  The authority's board of directors may be expanded by a two-thirds vote of the board. (d)  All powers, privileges and duties vested in or imposed upon the authority shall be exercised and performed by and through the board. The board, by resolution, may delegate any of the powers of the board to any of the officers or agents of the board; except that, to ensure public participation in policy decisions, the board shall not delegate the following: (I)  Adoption of board policies and procedures; (II)  Approval of final roadway alignments; (III)     Ratification of acquisition of land by negotiated sale; (IV)     Instituting an eminent domain action, which action may be taken in a public hearing or in an executive session pursuant to section 24-6-402(4), C.R.S; (V)      Initiating or continuing legal action; and (VI)     Establishment of fee policies. (e)  For actions by the board, each voting member of the board shall possess one vote and a majority of the voting members of board shall constitute a quorum, and a majority of the quorum shall be necessary for action by the board of directors. (f)  Any member of the board shall disqualify himself from voting on any issue with respect to which he has a conflict of interest, unless such member has disclosed such conflict of interest in compliance with Section 18-8-308, C.R.S. (g)  The board, in addition to all other powers conferred by this section, has the following powers: (I)  To adopt bylaws; (II)  To fix the time and place of meetings, whether within or without the boundaries of the authority, and the method of providing notice of the meetings; (III)     To fix the method of calling emergency meetings; (IV)     To make and pass orders and resolutions necessary for the government and management of the affairs of the authority and the execution of the powers vested in the authority; (V)      To adopt and use a seal; (VI)     To maintain offices at such place or places as it may designate; (VII)    To appoint, hire and retain employees, agents, engineers, attorneys, accountants, financial advisors, investment bankers and other consultants; (VIII)  To prescribe methods for auditing and allowing or rejecting claims and demands and methods for the letting of contracts for the construction of improvements, works, or structures, for the acquisition of equipment, or for the performance of furnishing of such labor, materials, or supplies as my be required for carrying out the purposes of this section; and (IX)     To appoint advisory committees and define the duties thereof.    43-4-1007. Powers of the authority.  In addition to any other powers granted to the authority pursuant to this section, the authority has the following powers: (1)  To have perpetual existence; (2)  To sue and be sued; (3)  To enter into contracts and agreements affecting the affairs of the authority; (4)  To establish, collect, and, from time to time, increase or decrease fees, tolls, rates, and charges for the privilege of traveling on a beltway completion segment financed, constructed, operated, or maintained by the authority, without any supervision or regulation of such fees, tolls, rates, and charges by any board, agency, bureau, commission, or official; (5)  To receive revenues of all types, including grants THAT DO not exceed ten percent of all revenues, and to pledge all or any portion of the revenues to the payment of bonds of the authority OR TO SECURE THE AUTHORITY'S OBLIGATIONS TO MAKE PAYMENTS UNDER A CONCESSION AGREEMENT OR A CONTRACT WITH ANOTHER PERSON; (6)  TO ISSUE BONDS IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 43-4-1009; (7)  To ENTER INTO A concession AGREEMENT, TO AGREE TO MAKE AND TO MAKE AVAILABILITY AND OTHER PAYMENTS TO A CONSESSIONAIRE; (8)  To construct, finance, operate, or maintain a beltway and beltway completion segments within or without the boundaries of the authority, provided that the authority shall exercise this power IN connection with any part of a beltway constructed, operated or owned BY a public highway authority, regional transportation authority, the DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION or the high performance transportation enterprise ONLY WITH THE AGREEMENT OF SUCH OWNER; (9)  To enter into contracts with public highway authorities formed pursuant to Section 43-4-501 et seq, C.R.S., regional transportation authorities formed pursuant to Section 43-4-601 et seq, C.R.S., the DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION or the high performance transportation enterprise to facilitate the completion and enhancement of a beltway or beltway completion segments; (10)         To purchase, trade, exchange, acquire, buy, sell, lease, lease with an option to purchase, dispose of, and encumber real or personal property and any interest therein, including easements and rights of way, without restriction or limitation by other statutory or charter provisions; (11)         To have and to exercise the power of eminent domain and dominant eminent domain IN THE MANNER PROVIDED BY ARTICLE 1 OF TITLE 38, C.R.S., to take any property, public or private, necessary to the exercise of the powers granted in this section and for the purpose of completing an incomplete section, within the boundaries of the authority; (12)         To accept real or personal property for the use of the authority and to accept gifts and conveyances upon such terms and conditions as the board may approve; (13)         To determine the location of the alignment of the beltway completion public highway; (14)         To have and exercise all rights and powers necessary and incidental to or implied from the specific powers granted by this part 10; (15)         To establish beltway completion activity enterprises; (16)         To enter into intergovernmental agreements for the purpose of advancing the completion or enhancement of a beltway; provided, however, that nothing in this part 10 shall be construed to limit or eliminate the powers of the DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, the high performance transportation enterprise, public highway authorities or regional transportation authorities pursuant to law or their establishing agreements; and (17)         To cooperate with towns, cities, counties, cities and counties, special districts, the DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, the high performance transportation enterprise, public highway authorities, regional transportation authorities and other municipal and quasi-public entities for toll collection and enforcement.   43-4-1008. Limited exclusion from Areas and Activities of State Interest Act. No form or manner of beltway construction related to an incomplete section of the beltway nor any offsite area or activity affected by construction of an incomplete section shall be REGULATED BY LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AS a Matter, area or activity of state interest pursuant to the Areas and Activities of State Interest Act, Section 24-65.1-101 et seq., C.R.S. Neither the authority, nor the incomplete section nor any offsite area or activity affected by construction of an incomplete section shall be subject to any of the limitations, conditions or restrictions of the Areas and Activities of State Interest Act, Section 24-65.101, et seq., C.R.S., or any ordinances, resolutions or regulations adopted pursuant thereto or pursuant to Article XX of the constitution.   43-4-1009. Bonds.  (1) The authority may, from time to time, issue bonds for any of its corporate purposes. The bonds shall be issued pursuant to resolution of the board and shall be payable solely out of all or a specified portion of the revenues as designated by the board. (2)  Bonds may be executed and delivered by the authority at such times, may be in such form and denominations and include such terms and maturities, may be subject to optional or mandatory redemption prior to maturity with or without a premium, may be in fully registered form or bearer form registrable as to principal or interest or both, may bear such conversion privileges, may be payable in such installments and at such times not exceeding forty years from the date thereof, may be payable at such place or places whether within or without the state, may bear interest at such rate or rates per annum, which may be fixed or vary according to index, procedure, or formula or as determined by the authority or its agents, without regard to any interest rate limitation appearing in any other law of the state, may be subject to purchase at the option of the holder or the authority, may be evidenced in such manner, may be executed by such officers of the authority, including the use of one or more facsimile signatures so long as at least one manual signature appears on the bonds, which may be either of an officer of the authority or of an agent authenticating the same, may be in the form of coupon bonds which have attached interest coupons bearing a manual or facsimile signature of an officer of the authority, and may contain such provisions not inconsistent with this part 10, all as provided in the resolution of the authority under which the bonds are authorized to be issued or as provided in a trust indenture between the authority and any commercial bank or trust company having full trust powers. (3)  The bonds may be sold at public or private sale at such price or prices, in such manner, and at such times as determined by the board, and the board may pay all fees, expenses, and commissions which it deems necessary or advantageous in connection with the sale of the bonds. The power to fix the date of sale of the bonds, to receive bids or proposals, to award and sell bonds, to fix interest rates, and to take all other action necessary to sell and deliver the bonds may be delegated to an officer or agent of the authority. Any outstanding bonds may be refunded by the authority pursuant to article 56 of title 11, C.R.S. All bonds and any interest coupons applicable thereto are declared to be negotiable instruments. (4) The resolution or trust indenture authorizing the issuance of the bonds may pledge all or a portion of the revenues of the authority, may contain such provisions for protecting and enforcing the rights and remedies of holders of any of the bonds as the authority deems appropriate, may set forth the rights and remedies of the holders of any of the bonds, and may contain provisions which the authority deems appropriate for the security of the holders of the bonds, including but not limited to provisions for letters of credit, insurance, standby credit agreements, or other forms of credit insuring timely payment of the bonds, including the redemption price or the purchase price. (5) Any pledge of revenues or property made by the authority or by any person or governmental unit with which the authority contracts shall be valid and binding from the time the pledge is made. The revenues or property so pledged shall immediately be subject to the lien of such pledge without any physical delivery or further act, and the lien of such pledge shall be valid and binding against all parties having claims of any kind in tort, contract, or otherwise against the pledging party, irrespective of whether such claiming party has notice of such lien. The instrument by which the pledge is created need not be recorded or filed. (6)  Neither the members of the board, employees of the authority, nor any person executing the bonds shall be liable personally on the bonds or subject to any personal liability or accountability by reason of the issuance thereof. (7)  The authority may purchase its bonds out of any available funds and may hold, pledge, cancel, or resell such bonds subject to and in accordance with agreements with the holders thereof.   43-4-1010. Cooperative powers.  (1) The authority has the power to cooperate with any person: (a)  To accept contributions, loans, advances OR OTHER PAYMENTS from AND TO MAKE CONTRIBUTIONS, LOANS, ADVANCES OR OTHER PAYMENTS TO any person with respect to the financing, construction, operation, or maintenance of a beltway completion segment and in connection with any loan or advance to enter into contracts establishing the repayment terms; (b)  To enter into contracts with respect to and to cooperate in the financing, construction, operation, or maintenance of a specified beltway completion segment, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO CONTRACTS IN WHICH THE AUTHORITY AGREES TO MAKE PAYMENTS TO ANOTHER PERSON, AND TO SECURE ITS OBLIGATION TO MAKE SUCH PAYMENTS BY A PLEDGE OF AUTHORITY REVENUES; (c)  To enter into joint operating contracts concerning a beltway completion segment; (d)  To cooperate in acquiring easements or rights-of-way for a beltway completion segment; (e)  To transfer dominion over or convey ownership of all or any portion of a beltway completion segment financed, operated, maintained, or constructed by the authority to the federal government, the state, other governmental units, or any person; and (f)  To designate a beltway completion segment as part of the federal highway system, or the state highway system, if any person with jurisdiction over such highway system consents to such designation.   43-4-1011. Powers of municipalities, counties and cities and counties within authority boundaries.  (1) Municipalities, counties and cities and counties within the authority's boundaries, for the purpose of aiding and cooperating in the financing, construction, operation, or maintenance of a beltway completion segment, have the power: (a)  To sell, lease, loan, donate, grant, convey, assign, transfer, and otherwise dispose to the authority any real or personal property or interests therein; (b)  To enter into agreements with any person for the joint financing, construction, operation, or maintenance of a beltway or beltway completion segments. Upon compliance with applicable constitutional or charter limitations, such person may agree to make payments without limitation as to amount except as set forth in the agreement, from revenues from one or more fiscal years, to the authority or any person to defray the costs of the financing, construction, operation, or maintenance of a beltway or beltway completion segments; (c)  To transfer or assign to the authority any contracts which may have been awarded by the member for construction, operation, or maintenance of a beltway completion segment; and (d)  To assist in the financing, construction, operation, or maintenance of a beltway or beltway completion segments, any municipality, county or city and county which is within the boundaries of the authority may, by contract, pledge to the authority revenues it receives. The authority shall apply revenues which it receives pursuant to such pledge to the financing, construction, operation, or maintenance of a beltway or beltway completion segments. (2)  Notwithstanding the cooperative powers created in this section, municipalities, counties and cities and counties within the authority's boundaries, shall not have the power to enter into intergovernmental agreements or combinations to frustrate the purposes of the Authority or completion of the beltway.   43-4-1012. Agreement of the state not to limit or alter rights of obligees.  The state hereby pledges and agrees with the holders of any bonds issued under this part 10 and with those parties who enter into contracts with the authority that the state will not limit, alter, restrict, or impair the rights vested in the authority or the rights or obligations of any person with which it contracts to fulfill the terms of any agreements made pursuant to this part 10. The state further agrees that it will not in any way impair the rights or remedies of the holders of any bonds of the authority until such bonds have been paid or until adequate provision for payment has been made. The authority may include this provision and undertaking for the state in such bonds.   43-4-1013. Investments.  The authority may invest or deposit any funds in the manner provided by part 6 of article 75 of title 24, C.R.S. In addition, the authority may direct a corporate trustee which holds funds of the authority to invest or deposit such funds in investments or deposits other than those specified by said part 6 if the board determines, by resolution, that such investment or deposit meets the standard established in section 15-1-304, C.R.S., the income is at least comparable to income available on investments or deposits specified by said part 6, and such investment will assist the authority in the financing, construction, maintenance, or operation of a beltway completion segment.   43-4-1014. Bonds eligible for investment.  All banks, trust companies, savings and loan associations, insurance companies, executors, administrators, guardians, trustees, and other fiduciaries may legally invest any moneys within their control in any bonds issued under this part 10. Public entities, as defined in section 24-75-601 (1), C.R.S., may invest public funds in such bonds only if said bonds satisfy the investment requirements established in part 6 of article 75 of title 24, C.R.S.   43-4-1015. Exemption from taxation - securities laws.  The income or other revenues of the authority, all properties at any time owned by the authority, any bonds issued by the authority, and the transfer of and the income from any bonds issued by the authority shall be exempt from all taxation and assessments in the state. In the resolution or indenture authorizing the bonds, the authority may waive the exemption from federal income taxation for interest on the bonds. Bonds issued by the authority shall be exempt from the provisions of article 51 of title 11, C.R.S.   43-4-1016. No action maintainable.  An action or proceeding, at law or in equity, to review any acts or proceedings, or to question the validity or enjoin the performance of any act or proceedings or the issuance of any bonds, or for any other relief against or from any acts or proceedings done under this part 10, whether based upon irregularities or jurisdictional defects, shall not be maintained, unless commenced within thirty days, or such shorter time as may be provided by court rule, after the performance of the act or proceedings or the effective date thereof, and shall be thereafter perpetually barred.   43-4-1017. Judicial examination of powers, acts, proceedings, or contracts of an authority.  In its discretion, the board of an authority may file a petition at any time in the district court in and for any county in which the authority is located wholly or in part praying for a judicial examination and determination of any power conferred to the authority, any revenue-raising power exercised or to be exercised by the authority, or any act, proceeding, or contract of the authority, whether or not such contract has been executed. Such judicial examination and determination shall be conducted in substantially the manner set forth in section 32-4-540, C.R.S.; except that the notice required shall be published once a week for three consecutive weeks and the hearing shall be held not less than thirty days nor more than forty days after the filing of the petition.   SECTION 2. In Colorado Revised Statutes, revise 24-65.1-102(4) as follows:   24-65.1-102.General definitions. As used in this article unless the context otherwise requires: (1)  "Development" means any construction or activity which changes the basic character or the use of the land on which the construction or activities occurs. (2)  "Local government" means a municipality or county. (3)  "Local permit authority" means the governing body of a local government with which an application for development in an area of state interest or for conduct of an activity of state interest must be filed, or the designee thereof. (4)  "Matter of state interest"means an area of state interest or an activity of state interest or both, but in no event will a matter of state interest include the completion of a beltway, or completion of incomplete sections of a beltway within the Denver metropolitan region, or any of the impacts attendant to such completion, in accordance with the Beltway Economic Enhancement Project Act, Section 43-4-1001 et seq., C.R.S. (5)  "Municipality"means a home rule or statutory city, town, or city and county or a territorial charter city. (6)  "Person"means any individual, limited liability company, partnership, corporation, association, company, or other public or corporate body, including the federal government, and includes any political subdivision, agency, instrumentality or corporation of the state.   24-65.1-201. Areas of state interest as determined by local governments. (1) Subject to the procedures set forth in part 4 of this article, a local government may designate certain areas of state interest from among the following: (a)  Mineral resource areas; (b)  Natural hazard areas; (c)  Areas containing, or having a significant impact upon, historical, natural, or archaeological resources of statewide importance; and (d)  Areas around key facilities in which development may have a material effect upon the key facility or the surrounding community. (2)  In no event will activities in furtherance of completion of a beltway or completion of incomplete sections of a beltway within the Denver metropolitan region or any of the impacts related thereto be designated to be areas of state interest by a local government.   24-65.1-203. Activities of state interest as determined by local governments. (1) Subject to the procedures set forth in part 4 of this article, and subject to subsection 2, a local government may designate certain activities of state interest from among the following: (a)  Site selection and construction of major new domestic water and sewage treatment systems and major extension of existing domestic water and sewage treatment systems; (b)  site selection and development of solid waste disposal sites except those sites specified in section 25-11-203(1), c.r.s., sites designated pursuant to part 3 of article 11 of title 25, c.r.s., and hazardous waste disposal sites, as defined in section 25-15-2003, c.r.s.; (c)  site selection of airports; (d)  site selection of rapid or mass transit terminals, stations, and fixed guideways; (e)  site selection of arterial highways and interchanges and collector highways, subject to subsection 2; (f)   site selection and construction of major facilities of a public utility; (g)  site selection and development of new communities; (h)  efficient utilization of municipal and industrial water projects; (i)    conduct of nuclear detonations; and (j)    the use of geothermal resources for the commercial production of electricity. (2)  In no event will activities in furtherance of completion of the beltway or incomplete segments of a beltway within the Denver metropolitan region or any of the impacts related thereto be designated to be activities of state interest a local government.   24-65.1-401. Designation of matters of state interest. (1) After public hearing, a local government may designate matters of state interest within its jurisdiction, taking into consideration: (a)  The intensity of current and foreseeable development pressures. (b)  Repealed. (2)  A designation shall: (a)  Specify the boundaries of the proposed area; and (b)  state reasons why the particular area or activity is of state interest, the dangers that would result from uncontrolled development of any such area or uncontrolled conduct of such activity, and the advantages of development of such area or conduct of such activity in a coordinated manner. (3)  In no event shall a local government designate as a matter of state interest within its jurisdiction the completion of the beltway or incomplete segments of a beltway within the Denver metropolitan region or any of the impacts related thereto.

 

Tollway is a Bygone Concept

This article was published in the print edition of YourHub.com for Wheat Ridge, Arvada and Westminster on Thursday, March 29, 2012.

The dreams of a bygone era still flicker in the myopic eyes of the Arvada city council, the Jefferson County Commissioners and a few assorted developers and corporate special interests ... they long for the receding 20th century view of suburban sprawl and a dark brown cloud cuddled-up against the Rocky Mountain foothills.

Those members of the governing class and elite one percenters still cling to the notion that building a tollway from nowhere-to-nowhere will spur the development of the Candelas housing project west of Arvada proper and on the southern edge of the old Rocky Flats nuclear weapons trigger manufacturing facility.

With gasoline pushing to four dollars-plus a gallon and likely never to fall again to much below $3.00 (unless the whole economy collapses), with high underemployment and unemployment persisting, with government at all levels corrupted by insiders and campaign 'bribery', and with government tax revenues stagnant -- the necessity of a so-called 'public-private partnership' to construct a tollway in the northwest region of the metro area is more and more distant.

Of course, greed knows no constraint to the governing elite when the prospect of taxpayer's money and guarantees are the collateral for private gain as is true in the case of the tollway scheme aka the 'Jefferson Parkway'.

An article in the 'Perspective' section of the Sunday Denver Post for March 18, 2012, inspires me to revisit the tollway issue and remind folks just how antiquated has become this idea. Building a new 'fee per trip' highway that doesn't connect to the Broomfield tollway or to C-470 is not only old fashioned in light of our new economic realities, it doesn't even make sense when we are becoming more oriented towards alternative, more efficient and environmentally practical modes of transportation.

While the essay linked to here by Neal Peirce discusses highways in the context of urban settings, the thoughts are applicable to any grandiose plans for new concrete and asphalt projects.

Unfortunately our elected officials in Jefferson County and Arvada have their feet firmly planted in the past (and in received and future campaign contributions from developers). We need a new vision and change -- whether we get it or not depends upon what you are willing to do to push our communities bravely into the rest of the 21st century.

More City Freeway Teardowns | Neal Peirce/Washington Post Writers Group/Denver Post

Will the 20th century's urban freeway legacy — interstate roads cutting huge swaths through American cities — be reversed in the 21st? ...

The Philadelphia case was the center of a February forum, organized by Diana Lind, founder-leader of the Next American City organization, featuring presentations by highway removal experts from New York, Providence and Denver [planning director Peter Park]. "What's to say the highway system of the future must be as it was planned 50 years ago?" Lind asked. "The highway doesn't pay taxes. It doesn't create economic opportunity." ...

What's easily forgotten is how the deep gashes in America's city fabric occurred. The highway planners of 1950s and '60s seemed unfazed by pushing massive highways straight through cities, devastating minority neighborhoods as well as cutting off waterfronts.

Yet, as some of the intrusive roadways have collapsed, they've actually triggered amazingly rapid recovery and new prosperity. The collapse of a chunk of New York City's elevated West Side Highway in 1973 didn't, for example, cause the traffic Armageddon anticipated. As Streetsblog founder Aaron Naparstek noted at the Philadelphia Forum, substitution of a ground-level, more modest urban boulevard "has made some of Lower Manhattan into some of the world's most valuable real estate." ...

What's clear is that if citizens want less freeway-dominated cities, they'll have to wage multiyear campaigns, with constant organizing, pressure on city and state agencies, plus their own city halls, to think afresh. What may give them hope are the rich advantages — in livability, quality of life and fast-rising tax yields for hard-pressed city treasuries — that the forerunner freeway demolition sites have demonstrated.

No Getting Around It ... Tollway is a Bad Idea

No demonstrated traffic relief ... imposition of a 'toll tax' ... more suburban sprawl ... foreign operation of a 'pubic' highway ... no north or south connection ... toll avoidance leading to more traffic congestion in Arvada ... non-compete clauses causing deterioration of existing streets ... and now confirmation that radioactive contamination is still present along the tollway route!

As I have posted here on this web site now for years, the so-called 'Jefferson Parkway' toll road is a bad idea ... for all and more of the reasons noted above.

Yet the governing class, the elite one percenters, the developers, the special interests, the bond dealers, consultants and contractors just keep using the power of government to try and finagle a way for this boondoggle to be built.

Perhaps the courts will ultimately side with the regular folks and put the final kibosh on this bad idea. Perhaps.

Study: Rocky Flats area still as contaminated with plutonium as 40 years ago | Boulder Daily Camera

Boulder's Rocky Mountain Peace and Justice Center hires contractor to test soil for plutonium

Plutonium & the Jefferson Parkway: Report on recent soil sampling at Rocky Flats | Boulder Blue Line/LeRoy Moore

Environmental groups sue feds over proposed Jefferson Parkway land swap | Boulder Daily Camera

Plaintiffs claim U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service didn't fully analyze highway impacts

Government Arrogance From Arvada, Jeffco, Broomfield

This article was published in the print edition of YourHub.com for Arvada, Wheat Ridge, Westminster on Thursday, June 2, 2011.

Only from the twisted perspective of the "pave the world" crowd would you get the argument that a higher bid to purchase land for open space rather than put a road on it "is not a legitimate offer."

But that is exactly the contention of Bill Ray, the Arvada city government's Deputy City Manager and formerly the Director of Public Works, who is also the interim director the Jefferson Parkway Public Highway Authority (can you think of a better example of a "self-serving bureaucrat"?).

As reported in the Denver Post on Saturday, May 21, the city of Golden as part of its ongoing effort to preserve the quality of life for its residents (and fortuitously also for all the citizens of northwest Jefferson County), is offering $200,000 more or $3 million for the purchase of land at the east side of the Rocky Flats National Wildlife Refuge, along Indiana Street; the Jeffco highway authority has proffered $2,800,000.

A better return for the taxpayer almost always seems like a legitimate offer to most taxpayers. But government empire builders and their "public-private" developer allies have a more arrogant point of view: a deal is only 'legitimate' if it ends up providing more tax revenue for the politicians to spend and government guaranteed profit for the developers.

Since the Northwest Quadrant Feasibility Study demonstrated that a piece of beltway (let alone a toll road) in north Jeffco does not do anything to alleviate traffic congestion for Arvada, Westminster and Wheat Ridge; and since we know that Broomfield is in this because of the fiscal debacle of their Northwest Parkway toll road; and since the Jefferson Parkway Authority is angling to turn the construction and tolling profits (if any) over to a foreign-controlled entity, a Spanish corporation -- well, we should all thank Golden for doing whatever it can to put roadblocks in front of this boondoggle.

There is, of course, the public service that Golden would be providing for the health and welfare of the entire northwest area of Jefferson County if they are able to make this open space purchase: the remnant plutonium presently laying undisturbed in the soil of the eastern boundary of the former Rocky Flats nuclear bomb factory will remain undisturbed. The prospect of tiny particles of the most deadly substance on the face of the Earth being thrown into the breeze as part of the dust of highway construction and blowing into the lungs of children living downwind, ought to be enough of a threat by itself to stop this grandiose tollway scheme.

Here's a 'godspeed' to Golden ... good folks in the entire Denver metro area should be grateful for your commitment to bold civic responsibility.

---

Golden Offers $3 Million to Buy Land Sought for Jefferson Parkway Toll Road | Denver Post

'Autopistas de Jeffco'?

This article was published in the print edition of YourHub.com for Arvada, Wheat Ridge and Westminster on May 5, 2011.

---

At today's foreign currency exchange rates it is going to be expensive paying the toll in Euros rather than dollars to get on the 'Autopistas de Jeffco' (also known as the 'Jefferson Parkway') ... if it ever gets built.

For the political empire-builders occupying the seats of power in Jefferson County, Arvada and Broomfield, their preference is for global business to construct the ill-conceived 'Jefferson Parkway/Tollway'. On April 19, the Denver Post reported that "Jefferson Parkway Public Highway Authority officials said ... they are talking to a Madrid-based construction firm Isolux Corsán about financing, building and operating the 10-mile toll road in Jefferson County."

Despite the fact that this segment of highway was demonstrated to be unnecessary by the Northwest Quadrant Feasibility Study, these elected politicians are so greedy and cravenly power-hungry that they are eager to outsource this entire project of public infrastructure to a foreign corporation. If they sign a deal with Spain's Isolux Corsán corporation, we can rename the Parkway 'Autopistas de Jeffco'.

Why do the politicians want Isolux Corsán to takeover the entire toll road project?

Because the eyes of local potentates are filled with visions of skyscrapers, strip malls and housing tracts silhouetted in front of the mountain backdrop west of Arvada -- and all the tax revenue that future development might bring them.

The politicians are also afraid of going directly to the people of Jefferson County with their grand plan. One has to wonder, if the tollway is such a critical project, why don't the politicians do the American thing and go to the voters and taxpayers with a ballot question and tax request, instead of negotiating with a foreign corporation? Well, we know the answer: the people might say 'no' and the government 'leaders' and private developers would not get what they want.

Let's be plain, Jefferson Parkway Authority bargaining with a foreign corporation is an end-run around the voters and reeks of arrogance towards the county's citizens.

And understand if Isolux Corsán gets to build 'Autopistas de Jeffco' costs will be borne by the driving public -- a toll road like this is a permanent tax hike, yet the toll revenues head not to your local government, but into the bank account of a European corporation.

Our republic in 2011 faces great fiscal challenges in part because of slick politicians and insider lobbyists who have contrived these kinds of public-private, quasi-government ventures. In light of this, diminishing our U.S. and Colorado sovereignty with a foreign city-county-corporate deal ought to be a road too far.

Especially for us there are warning flags; if and/or when the 'Autopistas de Jeffco' finds it is having trouble meeting its debt obligations or paying its bills, as did Broomfield's Northwest Parkway toll road several years ago, who will bail-out Isolux Corsán? Jefferson County taxpayers should be very nervous!

In these days of rising gasoline prices and constrained family finances, a tollway is an outmoded transportation concept from the last century. It would be progress, however, if we returned to the American values of government working for all of the citizens instead of making a deal with a corporation from Spain to build a project that benefits only a very few.

We need basic improvements to roads and highways in Jefferson County, we need local government representatives to work on our behalf to that reasonable end -- we don't need the 'Autopistas de Jeffco'.

---

Board of Directors: Jefferson Parkway Public Highway Authority

Isolux Corsán

Tollway Trickery | Dave Chandler-February 13, 2011

Will the Proposed Jefferson Parkway Toll Road Take Colorado Commuters for a Ride? | Jared Jacang Maher/Westword-January 15 2009

Northwest Parkway Noncompete Clause Forces Drivers to Pay Tolls to Foreign Corporations, will Create Century of Congestion | City of Golden-September 4, 2007

GoTheBetterWay.org

---

Foreign Ownership Diminishing U.S. Sovereignty | Sam Williford/EconomyInCrisis.org-March 4, 2011

America for Sale: An Exclusive Excerpt from Matt Taibbi’s New Book on the Economic Meltdown | Rolling Stone

Foreign Ownership of U.S. Companies Rising | Alec Feinberg/TradeReform.org-March 18, 2011

Plutonium Parkway

"Rocky Flats: A Local Hazard Forever"

PUBLIC MEETING
STANDLEY LAKE AND ARVADA

Tuesday, May 10, 2011
7:00-8:30 PM
Standley Lake Library
8485 Kipling Street
Arvada, CO 80005
MAP

Plutonium at Rocky Flats - LeRoy Moore, Ph.D.

A presentation entitled "Rocky Flats: A Local Hazard Forever" will focus on the long-term danger of plutonium contamination at the site of the defunct Rocky Flats nuclear weapons plant. Dr. Moore will explain why the government's plan to allow construction of a road on the refuge, and allow pubic recreation in the future should never happen. One purpose of the project is to raise awareness about dangers associated with exposure to the tiny particles of radioactive plutonium knowingly left in the soil at Rocky Flats after the cleanup of the site.

The project to implement Nuclear Guardianship at Rocky Flats is a joint endeavor of the Rocky Mountain Peace and Justice Center and Naropa University's Environmental Studies program. It combines the arts, science and remembrance to cope with the seemingly intractable human-caused quandary of radioactive contamination. Nuclear Guardianship is a powerful manifestation of a shift away from the culture of risk, secrecy and denial we have inherited to a culture of ecological responsibility and greater democracy. The project seeks to initiate a commitment for the millennia to safeguard Rocky Flats, a pledge to our children's children's . . . children. For more details on the project, including a schedule of events and bios of presenters, see www.rockyflatsnuclearguardianship.org

Golden: 'No' to Tollway Pay-Off

Commons sense, future perspective and fiscal responsibility triumphed last night at the Golden city council meeting where the Jefferson Parkway Authority's 'pay-off deal' was considered.

This 'deal' was the topic of my Sunday, February 13, 2011 post titled "Tollway Trickery" ... and was published by the Denver Post in YourHub.com in Jefferson County.

What follows here is a summary of the Golden city council's decision from Citizens Involved in the Northwest Quadrant (CINQ).

Next let's hope that the Jefferson County Commissioners and the 1990s-style Arvada City Council finally decide to get engaged with 21st century realities and drop this old-fashioned, discredited 'pubic-private' tollway scheme.

Like 'CINQ - Beltway Update' on Facebook

Connecting to Facebook

Connecting to Facebook

Greetings, The City of Golden held a critical meeting last night regarding the proposed Jefferson toll road deal. Golden was being offered a deal by the county that included some road planning, and the "promise" of money to fund one or two projects. This proposed deal was viewed by most people as hallow and inappropriate, and many people came forward to voice their concerns.  In the end, city council decided to abandon the current deal, and pursue a much stronger, two pronged strategy. First, the city will move forward with a lawsuit that keeps the pressure on toll road proponents, and acts as a best, last resort if the city decides to sue. Second, the city will move forward with negotiations, but pursue a much more ambitious agreement that includes: money upfront for road improvements through Golden; requires Arvada to improve its own roads (specifically Indiana/McIntyre); bars any non-compete agreement on public roads; requires more money for noise mitigation for north Golden neighborhoods; and requires testing on Rocky Flats for Plutonium. There are several other requirements, and when the city releases its official terms, CINQ will forward them to you. City Council Must Hold Fast... Last night's developments are very good news for Golden as both council and residents are galvanized with a clear direction. The key issue is that the council must not retreat from these better terms. The voice of Golden residents is clear - if we pursue a deal, it must meet the full and complete needs of Golden, and toll road proponents must "pay the toll" to get Golden's cooperation. Again, city council must hold fast to these better terms. It should be acknowledged that Golden's council and staff have worked very hard on this issue, and many thanks should be given to council for their wisdom to understand that Golden has the leverage and power in any negotiation. CINQ encourages their continued courage, tenacity and wisdom. However, CINQ points out that having a "friendly" relationship with Arvada, Broomfield and Jefferson County is not the goal - protecting Golden is. If that means not having good relations with neighboring communities, then so be it. It is apparent that politicians from neighboring communities don't care about Golden, and are rather more interested in pandering to developer interests. Sorry to say, but they have a long track record of questionable dealings on this issue, and they are not to be trusted. It is important to note that Rep. Ed Perlmutter was at the meeting last night, and we appreciate his interest. Moreover, the Town of Superior Trustee, Debra Williams spoke last night, and stated that her community also opposes the toll road, and is pursuing possible legal action. Debra's willingness to come forward is much appreciated, and illustrates that Golden is not alone in it's opposition. CINQ encourages Golden citizens to talk with council members, and encourages them not to bend on Golden's terms. If a deal is done, the bar must be high. If toll road proponents cannot meet the full and complete needs of Golden, then legal action is required. If a lawsuit moves forward, the benefits should not be discounted. Slowing the progress of the toll road by legal action can result in diminished interest from investors among other unforeseen benefits. Obviously, other parties are also pursuing legal action, and this brings strength to this tact. Collectively, if Golden remains strong and fully committed to its future, this toll road may die the death it deserves. Rob Medina CINQ - Citizens Involved in the Northwest Quadrant www.GoTheBetterWay.org [email protected] 720.261.2058