ArvadaforAllthePeople

Citizen Watchdogs Prove Their Value!

Citizen power!

As Thomas Jefferson is purported to have written: "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." And, may we add ... good government, too.

As described here previously in 'Olde Town Scandal - Conflict of Interest & Open Meetings Violation', there has been a real controversy over recent actions at the Arvada city government's Design Review Committee that makes advisory recommendations to the Planning Department about developments in the Olde Town area.

Consequent to the raising of these issues by Arvada for ALL the People and members Cindi Kreutzer and Nancy Young, a meeting with the Arvada city manager and city attorney was arranged to address the matters.

Clearly these concerns were not the results of "conspiracy" thinking or "nefarious" inventions as had been charged, since the highest levels at City Hall decided to address these problems.

Positive and productive accomplishments were the results of this meeting:

• investigation into recent Design Review Committee behavior will continue;
• there will now be a staff city attorney present at Design Review Committee meetings;
• there will be more training of staff and committee members on the Open Meetings Law;
• obtaining new recording equipment for the committee is anticipated.

The big achievement is that Arvada for ALL the People, and good citizens Cindi Kreutzer and Nancy Young, are truly ... citizen watchdogs who have been vigilant and have affected positive change for more open and honest local government.

Arvada for ALL the People recorded this session; you can listen to it here.

Schools are Being Shortchanged by Arvada Urban Renewal

Less money for schools ... so that a private, for-profit developer can get a big tax rebate.

Thanks for nothing Arvada Urban Renewal Authority.

In today's Denver Post -- more on how Arvada Urban Renewal diverts tax dollars that should go to schools, libraries, APEX, etc., for the benefit of a commercial project.

'Solana Olde Town Station' is to be a 350 unit, 18 building apartment complex that will be built on land situated north of 56th Avenue between Wadsworth Bypass and Lamar Street; the developer will get a government tax kick-back so that they can make money on their private property.

In the Olde Town Arvada urban renewal zone, free markets in local real estate, entrepreneurship, and free enterprise are given only lip service; corporate welfare is the true coin of the realm.

'Tax increment financing' or a TIF is the government mechanism where the Arvada Urban Renewal Authority (AURA) rebates back to the private developer the property taxes above the initial 'frozen' base. Since the land is essentially worthless now because of soil contamination, all of the rising land value that will come from the clean-up and development will go right back to the developer and to AURA to the tune of at least $7.2 million; it won't go to the school district or the recreation district, or the fire district, or your local library.

This kind of so-called "public-private" scheme is going on all over Arvada ... from the Walmart subsidy to the Hilton Hotel handout to the monstrosity being constructed at Wadsworth Bypass and Ralston Road.

To demonstrate the topsy-turvy world of government fat cats, the Denver-resident director of Arvada Urban Renewal actually says in the Denver Post report that "The developer is paying their way, they're paying property taxes and then getting reimbursed for cleaning up a contaminated site." Say what?

Paying their own way would be for the developer to pay for the clean-up as a cost of doing business and then pay their property taxes like everybody else to support our schools.

This TIF racket is quite simply unfair to every other business and every homeowner in Arvada who pay their taxes without rebates. Solana Olde Town Station will undoubtedly become home to many children, but the developer will end up paying very little on the increased value of the property to help fund the public schools those children will attend.

Remember, this is the same kind of plan that AURA wants for the Hilton Hotel.

It is time for change in Arvada.
It is time for a city government that is as honest, as fair, and as good as the resident of Arvada.

* * * 

Arvada urban renewal helps clean contaminated site near new rail stop
Denver Post - Wednesday, March 25, 2015

Taxpayer Subsidy for Solana Olde Town Station

This deal is a government subsidy for the land seller and for the buyer -- with the Arvada taxpayer on the hook for the payoff. And, of course, we get all of the new traffic congestion at 56th Avenue and Wadsworth Bypass, too.

Arvada urban renewal helps clean contaminated site near new rail stop | Denver Post/YourHub.com, March 24, 2015

"Under an agreement reached with Arvada’s Urban Renewal Authority, developer MKS Residential will be rebated 100 percent of property taxes collected through 2034 or until the $7.2 million is reached. ...

“If the property is essentially worthless because of the contamination, the sale price ought to be about a dollar,” said Arvada for All People member Dave Chandler. “You are engendering moral hazard by this kind of government subsidy; it tells property owners they can pollute with impunity, and in the end, the taxpayers will pay to cleanup their mess.”

Put 'Community Respect' into Arvada Community Development Department

Just who pays attention to city Planning Commission meetings?

It sounds boring.

But some true blue Arvada citizens are concerned enough about the future of our city to be taking the time to pay attention and report to you about just what is going on in municipal government. We are fortunate that a new grassroots citizens watchdog group, Arvada for ALL the People, is going to meetings, taking notes and analyzing the goings-on at City Hall

The United States of America is a republic, a representative democracy -- good citizenship means that we care about what our government is doing allegedly on our behalf. Not every resident has to get so involved, but those who do ought to be respected and given every due courtesy when they voice concerns.

As posted here previously -- Olde Town Scandal - Conflict of Interest & Open Meetings Violation; March 13, 2015 -- there are serious issues in Arvada right now regarding conduct in the Olde Town Design Review Committee overseen by the Community Planning Department. 

An amendment to the Land Development Code about nonconforming properties in Olde Town at the Tuesday, March 17, 2015, Arvada Planning Commission meeting -- an amendment that could affect a proposed development at the center of the current controversy -- was the occasion for two volunteer citizen watchdogs to address the integrity and openness of the process. 

In return speakers Nancy Young, Cindi Kreutzer and grassroots citizen watchdog groups like Arvada for ALL the People and Save Arvada Now were maligned and belittled by the city attorney for the Planning Commission, Mr. Randall Sampson.

To quote from Arvada for ALL the People citizen notes from the meeting:

Attorney Randall Sampson of the City Attorney's office then said that, with respect to nonconforming structures the law as it stands imposes limitations. Sampson made it clear that he did not like the "insinuation that staff is somehow nefarious -- that is not how Arvada's staff operates, and certain folks who see conspiracies everywhere" should stick to the facts and in that way, "we could move Arvada forward in a productive way."

He continued, "Our office will have discussions with the members of the Design Review Committee, who are volunteers, not paid." He said those volunteers, in his view, try to operate in the best interests of the City, but may need reminders as to technical matters. He said that, where some people find nefarious behavior and conspiracies, others might suggest that we are blessed with skills, failings and frailties, and that sometimes it's hard to know what should or shouldn't be done.

He said, "where concerns are raised, we will investigate, if there is a conflict we will address it, if there are technical issues we will educate folks as to the things to avoid. Will it take time? It might. I think that people try to operate in the best interests of the City, and we will work with them to ensure that that's the case."

And furthermore:

Following the meeting, Sampson observed rather forcefully to Cindi Kreutzer that "some people just want to get in front of the cameras" (he says the Planning Commission meetings are televised, news to me) and spout all kinds of conspiracy theories, rather than try to move forward in a productive way. His opinion of the Design Review Committee is that the members are just not fully versed in the proper procedures, but that doesn't make them bad, just needful of some proper education in those matters.
Arvada Planning Commission - Citizen Notes; For the Record - March 17, 2015

Mr. Sampson should be called to task by the City Manager and the City Attorney. His remarks were intemperate and condescending. No one is alleging a 'conspiracy' -- Sampson is attempting by his rhetoric to marginalize good folks who -- not paid -- would be citizen watchdogs on important and consequential decisions being made by government regarding the future of Arvada's Olde Town.

Sampson's attitude seems to be indicative of higher level administrative staff -- especially in the Community Development Department -- who have been in their positions for perhaps too long and forgotten for whom they ultimately serve -- ALL the people (their job is not to grease the governmental skids for developers, it is to protect the businesses and residents of Arvada). The previous director of the department is finally, finally gone; perhaps now is an appropriate time for the introduction of a new attitude, for new respect towards citizens, and a new fairness and even-handedness upper echelons of this department.

Arvadan's deserve a city government that is as good and honest and respectful as ALL of its people. It is time that the emphasis on 'Community' be reaffirmed for the Community Development Department. 

 

Listen: Podcast of Planning Commission Meeting - March 17, 2015
Pertinent portion starts at around 13 minutes.

* * *

Let's Talk, Arvada on Facebook

Olde Town Scandal - Conflict of Interest & Open Meetings Violation

Read correspondence with Arvada city officials below.

* * *

Perception of Entitlement

By Cindi Kreutzer

Between what has already started and what is in the planning process, new construction and redevelopment is about to change the face of Arvada forever. Some see it as a sign of progress and some of us see it as a loss of our way of life.

In an effort to better understand why and how the decisions are made to allow and encourage these projects, I've spent the past two years getting to know Arvada city government. It's no secret that I have been an outspoken opponent of most of these projects –- especially those that are being subsidized with millions of our tax dollars.

Ironically, the issue that has caused me the most concern recently came from a small project still in the planning stages that would stand on its own without any financial support from the public.

Because this project is planned for Olde Town, it is subject to special Olde Town Design Review Guidelines. So, as I have done many times with other local boards and committees, I attended and observed a meeting of the Design Review Advisory Committee. Based on the Colorado "Sunshine" Law, this committee is subject to all of the same rules and regulations. Their meetings must all be held in forums open to the public and there are well defined rules about how they must be conducted.

The Design Review Committee meeting that I attended was far less formal than any of the others I've observed, but it seemed to be progressing within the typical format. That is until they reached the end of the first and only item on the agenda. They discussed and voted on their recommendations to city staff, but to my surprise, before the meeting was adjourned, one member brought up a subject that was not on the agenda. At that point the meeting was hastily adjourned, the required audio recording was stopped, however, the discussion continued.

One of the most basic rules of the Colorado Open Meetings Law is that no possible future projects will be discussed without a public posting in advance. This includes the very limited occasions when an Executive Session (a meeting that excludes the public) is allegedly warranted. The conversation that I witnessed was not publicly posted nor did it qualify as a topic for an Executive Session. In addition, the content was an obvious and glaring conflict of interest for the committee member who brought it up.

Then, as if I hadn't been sufficiently surprised, the entire committee proceeded to discuss, what sounded to me like an effort to stop an upcoming project -- simply because it would not be desirable to a nearby business owner who happens to be the spouse of one of the committee members. The apparent feeling of entitlement to talk about this was just wrong.

During this entire conversation I sat in the back of the room in stunned silence. I had long suspected that discussions like this were taking place, but I never anticipated witnessing one myself.

In the end I was left with having to decide what to do about what I had just heard. I was absolutely certain the Open Meetings Law had been violated.

I have reported the conversation to the City Manager and to City Council. As of today, I have not heard what the outcome will be. I do know that if this particular project is not approved, all citizens of Arvada should be outraged.

* * *

* * *

Download PDF of the above correspondence

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

Secret Meetings Run Amuck!

The minutes are now available from the January 27, 2015, Arvada Urban Renewal Authority(AURA) 'executive session' where an additional $200,000 subsidy to the IRG/Walmart project was approved. This brings the total of Arvada government corporate welfare up to at least $6,000,000.

Arvada for ALL the People reported on this secret session at the time: Citizens Not Allowed. What is so necessarily secret about giving away money to a developer? Indeed, if anything should be public and open it ought to be government activities like this. 

But government in Arvada has a strong liking of secret meetings -- virtually every regular city council meeting begins with a secret 'executive session'. 

The AURA 'executive session' special meeting minutes also contain a reference that looks to reveal a potentially prohibited discussion. Note the highlighted paragraph on page two of the document below. How does "instruct[ing] the executive director to proceed with the Ralston Creek North redevelopment" meet the criteria that the Open Meetings Law requires for 'executive sessions'?

It is time for reform -- it is time for sunshine inside Arvada government's board rooms.

---

 

Conflict of Interest? Open Meetings Violation? Cronyism?

Now there's this: An interested party on an official city committee who may have a conflict of interest and yet another possible violation by a city committee of the Colorado Open Meetings law.

More serious allegations that show how much we need change and reform at Arvada City Hall. 

Here is the background from a Public Comment statement made by Nancy Young, speaking on behalf of Save Arvada Now, at the city council meeting of February 2, 2015:

Nancy Young spoke about a proposed project for Olde Town which would be a true mixed use project, retail and commercial on the ground floor with for sale condominiums on the second floor. The project includes parking and complies fully with Olde Town Design Guidelines with no waivers. It looks like a project Save Arvada Now could support, with a few tweaks. The only drawback is that two existing homes, both dating back to about 1909, would need to be demolished. However, in one case, the house is crumbling and damaged beyond reasonable hope of repair, and the other is livable but has challenges. Young said that Save Arvada Now is "looking forward to this developer receiving a friendly, cooperative reception from the City of Arvada." [Citizen Notes-For the Record-Arvada for ALL the People]

The Design Review Committee, including 3 current members, approved over 30 waivers for the Park Place Olde Town (PPOT) project -- a totally inappropriate 5-story, rental apartment building opposed by the citizens.

The Design Review Committee now opposes a development that fully complies with the Design Guidelines and is supported by the citizens -- all because one member's wife is concerned about "jackhammers" during construction and calls this modest, 2-story building a "monolith".

The following remarks were delivered by Nancy Young, representing Save Arvada Now, before the Arvada City Council during Public Comment at the meeting of Monday, March 2, 2015.

* * *

Good evening Mr. Mayor, Members of Council, and Citizens of Arvada

On February 2nd, Save Arvada Now announced support for a new project on Grandview in Olde Town. Four days later, we were contacted by a couple who claimed to have an alternate plan and who requested that we retract our previous statement.

Save Arvada Now is unable to support this couple’s alternative plan for the following reasons:

1. It involves only one of the two little houses that would be demolished

2. That house would be “fixed up” and a retail addition put on the front, thereby eliminating the historical context of the house

3. The couple had no written plans, drawings, or specifications. Therefore, their plan is hearsay and has no basis for our support.

During the course of the discussions, it was mentioned that the husband is a member of the Design Review Committee. The developer of the new project had reported to us that the Design Review Committee gave his project an hostile reception at their August 21, 2014, meeting. So we checked the minutes - the husband did not recuse himself from the discussion, despite his personal, economic interest in preventing approval of the new project in favor of his own plan.

Of even greater concern, during the discussions, several city officials and staff members were mentioned by name as having reviewed the couple’s alternate, undocumented proposal - one even gave them preliminary approval. While this information is hearsay, it raises many questions for citizens. We are investigating this matter.

Save Arvada Now is deeply, deeply troubled by this situation. Citizens expect that every development project would receive an honest, fair, and unbiased review. That did not happen here. We are watching the progress of the new project very carefully.

On a positive note, this might be a golden opportunity for the City of Arvada to prove that its approval process is fair, honest and unbiased. We urge you to invite members of Save Arvada Now, and its partner, Arvada For ALL the People, to participate in every meeting involving the developer’s new project, with the developer’s permission, of course.

* * *

The following email letter from Cindi Kreutzer of Arvada for ALL the People was sent to Arvada city manager, Mark Deven, on Tuesday evening, March 2, 2015.

Dear Mark,

As you may already be aware, I attended and observed the February 19, 2015 Design Review Advisory Committee meeting held in the AURA Conference Room. Following is what I witnessed at that meeting.

After completing the discussion and vote on the issue before them, one member, Roger Derinka, asked the other members if they had received a letter. At that point it was suggested that the meeting be adjourned. The meeting was adjourned, but the conversation continued. The committee went on to have an approximate 10 minute conversation about a redevelopment project in Olde Town. The same project that Nancy Young talked about tonight at the city council meeting.

Part of this conversation was about a letter written to the committee by Mr. Derinka's wife and her concerns about the project being planned next to her business in Olde Town. Among other things, they discussed that Mr. Derinka's mother currently lives in one of the houses on the property and that Mrs. Derinka's business would be inconvenienced by the "jackhammering" and the "monolith" resulting from it. The remainder of the discussion was about details of the plan submitted by a developer to revitalize the property.

After that conversation was completed, they went on to discuss another subject that they might be considering in the future, and Ms. Drake advising them that she had intended to just handle that one herself. I did not catch the description of that item so there is no more I can tell you about that.

I am sharing this information with you for two reasons. One, because it's important for you to know that this completely inappropriate conversation took place. Two, because this is a formal CORA request for a copy of the letter that was being discussed. I do not know if it was a written or electronic communication but it should not be difficult to locate. If I need to submit this request in a different format, I would be happy to do so, but I trust the information I have provided will be sufficient.

Regards,

Cindi Kreutzer

* * * 

And ... here is the letter.
Conflict of interest looks to be confirmed.

 

Urban Renewal in a Nutshell: Tax Increment Financing

 

Download Urban Renewal in a Nutshell-Draft Revisions

* * *

The People Speak!

Dialogue with the public, an exchange of opinions and ideas, and a different view of Urban Renewal were heard Saturday, February 28, 2015, by 75-to-80 good citizens in the first Community Meeting sponsored by Arvada for ALL the People.

We can make a difference. We can preserve what is best and special about Arvada. We can make substantive and positive changes in our city that promote more democracy, openness, and free enterprise.

Thank you to all who attended, and those who could not, who made this a very successful and inspiring first gathering for Arvada for ALL the People.

 

 Arvada for ALL the People Community Meeting - Arvada Public Library; Saturday, Feb. 28, 2015.

 

 Keynote speaker: Bruce Baker, City Council Member, City of Westminster, Colorado.

  

Mr. Baker presented an articulate and reasoned argument on the conflicts
between Urban Renewal, the free market and community values.

 

Arvada's mayor, Marc Williams, gave a brief, unofficial 'rebuttal'; with moderator, Cindi Kreutzer.

 

A diversity of voices and comments from around the city were heard.

 

A vigorous and heartfelt discussion and dialogue was engaged in with the attending public.