Monday, December 31, 2012

Columnist says protect parks; Hentzell designation decision pending
By Dave Felice
As Denverites await a decision from Parks Manager Lauri Dannemiller, a prominent environmental writer says “it’s time Denver residents pay more attention to our irreplaceable, priceless parks.”  And, Advocates for Denver Parks say it’s as important as ever to send a message to the city administration in opposition to a plan to give away nine acres of Hentzell Park Natural area.
Environmental affairs columnist Joanne Ditmer says parks, including natural areas, “should be protected and increased” instead of given away for other purposes.  “No one’s making more land,” writes Ditmer in a Denver Post column.  “But there are always people who want to use park land for something else.”
Read the entire Ditmer column here.
Mayor Michael B. Hancock wants to trade the Hentzell Park Natural Area to Denver Public Schools (DPS) for an office building at 13th and Fox.  By Parks regulations, Dannemiller must make a recommendation on removing the natural area designation before the trade process can move forward.
Dannemiller says she’ll reveal her decision on January 2nd or 3rd.  The decision will be setting precedent because no park land has ever been de-designated.  If she decides to remove the designation, she’ll defy widespread public opinion and an 11-to-6 decision by the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board to retain designation.  If Dannemiller rejects de-designation, she’ll countermand her boss, Michael B. Hancock.
Ditmer’s comments echo those of Denver Post editorial writer Vince Carroll: 
"(S)hould good people with good causes be allowed to encroach on the city's limited inventory of parks and open space?" Carroll wrote recently.
Carroll concluded:  "It's not merely 9 acres in southeast Denver in potential jeopardy.  If the city can unceremoniously swap that land for offices, it can do the same with any open space not protected as officially designated park land."
Read Carroll here
In another column, freelance writer Susan Barnes-Gelt mentions Hentzell Park as a major issue facing incoming Planning Director Rocky Piro and “citizen concern over the opaque dealings between Denver Public Schools and the Hancock administration.”
Read Barnes-Gelt here.
In another article, Denver Post reporter Jeremy P. Meyer promotes the notion that opposition to the Hentzell scheme is limited to “some southeast Denver neighbors.”  
Respected writers such as Ditmer, Carroll, and Barnes-Gelt, however, seem to understand that opposition is much more widespread throughout the city.  The citizen concern is documented by a front-page article in the Glendale Cherry Creek Chronicle and standing-room only attendance at the Parks Advisory Board meeting December 13.
Read the Chronicle article here.
Meyer reports Hancock dismisses the opposition by saying “From what we know about controversies is that you hear from roughly 15 percent of the community” and “We need to ask ‘who are we not hearing from?’ ” 
Hancock’s office has not released any of the communication it has received, pro or con, regarding the Hentzell scheme.  Parks and Recreation has posted six multi-page comment documents on line, most favoring retention of natural area.  There were more people in the audience for the Advisory Board meeting than any time in recent memory.
Three of Hancock’s five appointees to the Parks Board voted to retain natural area designation, putting the future of their appointments in jeopardy.  The property is located in Councilwoman Peggy Lehmann’s district.  Lehmann’s appointee also voted to keep the natural area designation.
Both attendees and Board members complained that the Hancock proposal divisively pitted the interest of parks, open space, and wildlife against schools and domestic violence victim assistance. 
Meyer reports Hancock apparently intends to overlook opposition.  “Hancock wants (the transaction) to happen even though he knows there will be pushback,” writes Meyer.
Read the Meyer report here.
Here is a consolidated list of e-mail addresses for city officials, members of Council, and the Parks Advisory Board:
For more information on Hentzell Park Natural Area, see:

Sunday, December 30, 2012

All Things MJ with Jessica LeRoux - December 30, 2012

Hey Now,

Its time to be through with 2012, and 2013 should be a very educational and mind expanding year! I have big plans in the coming year to remain invested in the political process surrounding the cannabis industry, and to do my very best to keep you informed so that we can ensure that we all remain relevant in a rapidly changing regulatory system.
I have been out most of this past week with that wicked evil bad flu that has been going around, but Im fully recovered and ready to cook up some fun for your patients. Deliveries for next week will be delayed a day all the way around due to the Holiday on Monday/Tuesday but please feel free to let us know what you would like us to deliver and we will do it very happily. And as usual the savings are at the bottom of the news, and will be all year long in 2013! That said you shouldn't skip the homework, there are gonna be a lot of important issues that you will benefit from timely participation in.
Also about 5-6 of the Xmas cards we sent to all of you bounced back, so if you didnt get our card please lemme know so we can ensure you get our remembrance of our gratitude for your support in 2012! Thanks!

just a reminder that the legislative session in CO begins on January 9th, so if you can be at the capitol to kick off the session that is the day, more news on the opener next week! Also a reminder that the A-64 task force has their next general meeting on Monday 1-7-13.

Wednesday, December 26, 2012

Setback for CINQ?

Ed. note: This is a very long piece regarding the latest information on the proposed beltway expansion being challenged by Citizens Involved in the Northwest Quadrant (CINQ).

From CINQ - A lot has recently happened and I have delayed release of this information due to Christmas. In summary, Golden lost the lawsuit but it is preparing an appeal, to be joined by Superior and other organizations. Many close to this case have commented that the Federal judge has made a grossly poor decision. We are aware that the judge was lobbied by at least one very high profile federal official, which is highly unusual. This speaks to the lengths supporters of the beltway will go. We are very glad that Golden will seek an emergency injunction and appeal the case. Maybe we will get a fair shake from a federal appeals court. There's a lot here, and information is provided in sequential order as it was received by us. 
Today's Boulder Camera reports that the federal case regarding the transfer of land at Rocky Flats for the Jefferson Parkway recently decided in favor of U.S. Fish & Wildlife has been appealed by the cities of Superior and Golden and two environmental groups. The article is on line at

Friday, December 21, 2012

Walkabout - December 21, 2012

by Gerald Trumbule
It's a cloudy overcast day today - perfect for a walkabout in my neighborhood near City Park on York.
I've got this thing about giant old trees in the neighborhood. As much as I love trees, I think these old giants should be removed and replaced with trees that are more in keeping with the scale of the architecture they are near. I've had 4 of them cut down on this block on properties I owned (at an average cost of $1000 each) and then replanted with 5 small trees that will only grow about 35 feet tall, which is in keeping with the height of the buildings. I contacted the Denver Forest and Trees Department about this some years ago and they told me they don't cut trees down because they are ugly or out of scale. A few years later, I read that the Curtis Park neighborhood got a grant for exactly that purpose. 

The condo project at 17th and Gaylord got finished. It looks like they redid the balconies. Must have cost a boatload of money...

but they look much better.

Wednesday, December 19, 2012

A personal observation of the Hentzell Park deal

by Bill Langton
Special to Denver Direct

To follow on with the saga of trading the 11 acres of land controlled by Denver Parks and Recreation for a closed school at 13th and Fox to be used as a Shelter for Abused Women and Children, the DPR (Denver Parks and Recreation) Advisory Board voted 11-to-6 against the proposal (December 13). I attended the meeting to see what this was all about. That's the good news. The bad news is that the Parks Board is advisory. DPR is capable of accepting the advice or rejecting it. Time will tell.

I would like to give you my observations on this complex issue foisted on DPR.

As a retired businessman, I found early in my career that these kinds of proposals are never what they seem to be. So, the rule is to follow the money and you will uncover the motive.
First, if the city wanted the school on Fox Street for a shelter, the city could could simply buy it and create the shelter.
Second, if we need a elementary school for southeast Denver, the School District could find a site and develop it. The vote in November gave the District plenty of money.
So why create this subterfuge? If you take the jaundiced view that the city wants this land for commecial development to increase the tax base, it starts to make sense.
The city could not take public land under the DPR rules because it is classified as natural area and prohibited from such acts. But if the administration reclassified it and the school district took over the land then when the school district determined that it was unfit for an elementary school they could sell it for commercial development.
To get the declassification, city officials needed to create a situation where if DPR Advisory Board did not vote to reclassify they they were against Abused Women and Children and were against schools. What a dilemma!
Fortunately, some on the Advisory Board asked some very straight questions. Is this really a fair exchange? The Mayor's representatives said "Oh yes." The school on Fox Ave is valued at 3.7 million and the 11 acres of open space is valued at 3.2 million. How can that be unless it was valued as commercial property? It has no value as open space.
Board members also asked if the DPS was committed to building on this site. They went into great detail on how there would also be community facilities, such as, a ball field for everyone to enjoy. But, then they also recieved a letter from the DPS (Denver Public Schools) saying that the School District would not be able to start building until 2014 and if the demographics or anything else changed, they might not go forward.

So, ergo, the open space is gone, the DPS now can move forward to sell the site for commercial development.
It is hard to imagine building an elementary school next to Havana, one of the busiest state roads in Denver. Children would have to cross Havana to go to school and I assume a 15 mph speed limit would have to be posted during rush hour. This would create a major traffic and safety problems. Children would also use the trail to go to school and run off all of the existing wild life that makes the trail so special. In other words, it is my opinion that school would never be built.
This is my view from listening to the discussions at the Parks Advisory Board meeting and my experience in business. It may or may not be as nafarious as I have made it out but I do think this was a con from the start and the real questions is what developer is behind it and how does the Mayor benefit other than increasing a tax base.
Anyway, one major bullet has been dodged, for the time being, but I think we have to watch this very closely.
Bill L.

Monday, December 17, 2012

Jessica LeRoux reports on the first A64 (Legal Marijuana) Task Force Meeting

Hey Now,
Here is as full a review as I can possibly offer of today's Amendment 64 Task Force meeting, in light of the fact that the panelists seem to have been selected as much for their marble mouthed mumbling qualities as any other obvious qualification. Should be an interesting 8 weeks, I have the dates for pending meetings as well as Pix of important power point pages. I will try to condense this into as quick a read as I can, so I will go over the intro to the meeting and discussion points about the panel, post the pics, and below each picture i will elaborate about the topic in the photo, and give pointers on the panelists proposals and responses. When I want to interject my own thoughts I will *** and change fonts...

The meeting began with Jack Findlaw the Governors office and Barbara Brohl from DOR saying they would be the authority on A64, and going around the table to do introductions. Then Barbara Brohl laid down the basis for the day's session as being "issue Identification". Panel Members were given a binder of worksheets and info contacts etc... the binder contents were reviewed, including the fact that the MMED plans to assist with writing the rules in WA state as well as here. and for the record I am in the process of obtaining a copy of the Map (tab 12) contained in the Binder which shows the state MMJ bans by region.
The group proceeded to set the dates for meetings to occur after the new year, which again are open to you to attend and will also be at the gaming office building at
17301 W Colfax. Meeting dates are as follows.
Monday 1-7-13 12 1-5pm.
Tuesday 1-22-13 1-5pm
Tuesday 2-5-13 1-5pm
Tuesday 2-19-13 1-5pm
(and possibly if nesc 2-28-13)

Then Jack Findlaw started the session with the statement that the MMED is the standard, which alarmed me as I thought the voters wanted recreational to be regulated like alcohol, not over-regulated to death.
"Task force is intended to review legal & policy issues not debate legality of marijuana"
these two power point pages show the role and desired outcome of the task force... they also show some skull, to keep it sexy for ya!

what's cut off here is 'participate in work groups" and "review state law to identify and make recommendations for changes if applicable"

what is cut off here is "work groups will share their recommendations with the Task Force where the recommendations will be discussed and subject to approval"

*** This subject to approval aspect is going to complicate things i predict, based on the need for a "quorum". What that means is that a majority, of greater than 50% of the panel (at least 13 panelists) must agree " to a consensus" on an issue for it to move forward. This is alarming given that the panel only has 2 1/2 people who may represent "us" out of 24 people, thereby potentially disenfranchising patients.
and alarmingly when there is no Consensus the majority vote of the majority of workgroup members in attendance is the way they will move forward if there is a quorum. Also alarmingly we were told if a panelist is going to be absent they may send a proxy to vote on their behalf, but if a proxy is underinformed about previous materials debated or discussed they may cast an uninformed vote we all have to live by.
Also Task Force members must vote on issues, and only may abstain is there is a conflict of interest. WHO DECIDES what is a conflict?

We learned that the meetings will be open to the public, but you need to sign up to speak when you arrive not after the meeting.
The DOR will be taking minutes at meetings which will be posted to their webpage upon their approval at the next meeting (2 week time frame). The work group meetings and all Task force meetings will be posted to the public in compliance with CO open meetings act. ***There is no timeline for how many days in advance these meetings will be posted.

Then we got this powerpoint of the task force workgroups and who is in charge of em...

The grey back grounds make these hard to read, but we have the actual PDF of the real powerpoint attached here too...

Then they went through the groups one by one, in a session where panelists got to give feedback about each work group's agenda. so I will post each pic, share my personal observations and concerns, and give you the panelists comments....

***Ok, so things were going along weirdly enough, but when questions arose about #5 on this guideline, strangely nobody knew where that suggestion came from! State run Cannabis would only adhere to the intent of regulating like alcohol if we lived in Utah folks.

The panelists were asked to identify other issues that fall under this topic, I am presenting an edited version as I couldnt write it all verbatim.
Findlaw: we have choices, to regulate like alcohol, like MMJ, like gaming, MMED is model since it is working... **** really? who told him that?
CS: Alcohol is Model citizens voted for & the framework.
DB what is regulatory framework for WA state?
KB: which implimentation model gains favor will affect local control.
DP: banking issues and federal implications
CU: Define uses
KB: what does DOR envision looking at beyond licensing?
?: Public Consumption
CS: Banking, federal preemption not issue, unless we bring to table, should not be discussed or used at threat. *** Good point.
VM: Will insurance Co's cover MMJ patients, what effect will that have on medicaid funds?
RK: Ideally harmonized Medical & recreational, ***not at expense of patients please.
?: Grey Market sales?
RK: Emergency funding for regulatory, where, when how?
MS: Regulation for home grows...
CT: clarity on outdoor grows

*** here my main concern is that the chair person for this workgroup is Kevin Bommer from Municiple league, as you know I shared a document from his office 2 weeks ago where the CML ws already prioritizing Prohibition over regulation. The CML has also been instrumental in passing many regional bans. I question if the state plans to write a pretty set of rules while at the same time encouraging Kbomb to get the local municipalities to enact bans in every area retail sales might ever be eligible to occur.

main topics were:
BB Different rolls for different agencies state & local.
MS identify opportunities for retail?
DB: Local advertising regs?
CS: who binds local certification?

*** once again they seem to be very keen on finding ways to take money!
We learned a few things on this one, like that the co-chair of this workgroup also happens to be the co-chari of the CCJJ who decides about DUI laws. *** Cozy no? Most of these points centered on DUI no surprise. But there were some other shocking issues of topic...

*** the 1st speaker to chime in on this topic also made the news today for her other opinions... Tamara Ward is a panelist who also is primary signatory of the letter sent by CO business groups to the DOJ requesting that the federal government enforce the Controlled Substances Act. Read the link here, I think this person among about 5 others should be recused for conflict of interest.

TW: Concerns for employers
MS: 280 E tax issues on state level
CS: decouple state & fed taxes for industry
DP?: Student Aid issues, Housing, Contract enforcability???
CS: Where does money go once collected? **** Great Question!
CS: Define Excise tax v other taxes
BB: Where will excise taxes be collected?
CG: Child court issues Dui & juvie court for underage driving intoxicated
MS: (union) DUID in workplace in blood while not using... (nanogram level)
cs: redefine probable cause
kb: redefine muni code rules for misdemeanor

*** expect plenty of new laws to be passed to keep enforcement profitable! See items 2 through 6... and how to keep for profit jails filled long term,
see 7 & 8.

Topics here included:
BB: #6 define safe use, re child services & custody, home grows, and child abuse...
MS: labeling standards
DZ: Illegitimate vs criminal sales definitions... *** note this ass hat's language... this is the "citizen at large" member of the panel who also ironically works in the El Paso Cty DA's office under none other than MMJ hater Dan Maye... nothing to see here...
CU: Diversion to Minors?
DZ: comparrison to Gaming as well as liquor?

*** expect even more new stuff here, as they "think of the children" !

Topics spun out from this one like cheesewhiz from a can shoved up a chihuahua's ass! (sorry, needed to blow off some steam, this typing sucks).

JF: issues of medical vs recreational potency, proposed limit of 10% THC on recreational cannabis.
CT (kiddie drug cop nanny man) blathered on about: advertising to kids, using cartoons, sponsoring youth sports, exposure to smoke, expose to grows, drug culture, impact to drug free schools, duid, substance treatment facilities, mental illness facilities, community colleges? *** this was all one comment in like 20 seconds, the guy sounded all agitated, like he needed to smoke some weed or something.
MS: Responsible vendors- tamperproof package.
CS: re potency please use science vs conjecture.
BB: label & package to deter kids
Smalls: Prohibited chemicals and pesticides
RK: testing standards for potency and health safety
JS: Hashish advertising
RC: Size limits for retail grow operations, plant limit, who regulates?
DZ: community acceptance should be considered
VM: sunset these rules in 4 years in case some dont work out? **** changed my opinion of this woman right here, very sensible.
MS: industry needs a consumer watch dog agency.

Also as I typed this up I got a response from Mark Couch at MMED, he sent me a link to a PDF of all the power point slides so that is attached here, and will let you see the text behind the skulls and grimaces in the pics i took for you. It comes out sideways, but no biggie turn your head!

*** so there you have it... I think what we've learned is that many of these people have 0% of a clue on this topic, and no emotional investment in its success, in fact we seemed to find that in spite of our 3 or 4 years as an industry with a very very few bad apples the prevailing view of panelists was that cannabis users are criminals and addicts who can not be trusted to act responsibly without a nanny state to watch over them. Of course about 35% of these panelists careers depend on that belief system, how is that a conflict of interest? (sarcasm alert) We need to start an email bomb project to let these people know that patients still exist, the medical market is not the same as recreational, and the will of the people was to decrease the drug war and money spent on it, not find new ways to wring blood and money from the same old stoners.

THanks for reading,

Jessica LeRoux
Twirling Hippy Confections
2145 W Evans Denver CO
303 922 3661

Colorado could save millions with its own Bank

Ed: Are you aware of the "State-owned Bank Initiative"? Colorado could save millions by following the lead of North Dakota, which has proven the concept works well. Here is an update from those working to get this on our ballot for the future.

Each of you has expressed interest in the idea of a state-owned bank in Colorado along the lines of the Bank of North Dakota.  This is to update you on progress of that idea in 2012.  As most of you know, planned legislation to establish a state-owned bank in Colorado in 2012 did not materialize.  As a result, Bob Bows, who is on the board of the Public Banking Institute, and I became the co-sponsors of two initiatives in 2012, one to amend the Colorado Constitution to establish a state-owned bank, and the other to amend the Colorado Constitution to authorize political subdivisions to establish their own banks.  We received valuable assistance on our proposed initiative to establish a state-owned bank from Marilyn Barnewall, a Republican with a strong banking background, who has done and is still doing much to publicize the importance of this issue for Colorado and the country.  We believe this is truly a multi-partisan issue, appealing to Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, and Green Party members, among others. 
Our initiatives went through each step of the process --- the Colorado Legislative Council, the Secretary of State, and the Title Board.  As we anticipated, our only opponents were the two main associations of banks in Colorado.  The Title Board ruled in favor of our initiatives on each issue that the banking associations raised.  The banking associations then filed an appeal to the Colorado Supreme Court, raising a number of issues.  We timely filed our responsive briefs on May 29th and May 30th.  The Supreme Court on June 10th issued an order saying they would reverse the action of the Title Board and would file a written opinion explaining their reasons.  Under the statute governing initiatives in Colorado the Supreme Court is supposed to rule on such measures promptly, but to date, over six months later, they have still not issued their written opinion.  On behalf of Bob and me as proponents I filed a Motion to Expedite the Court’s Written Opinion on December 14, 2012, because we need the written opinion in order to know how to proceed in 2013 or 2014, and the opinion is long overdue.  We would have reported back to you sooner, but without the court’s written opinion explaining its action there was not much to report. 
In the meantime, we learned of some reasons that a state-owned bank might possibly work as a “TABOR enterprise”, a way to get around possible problems under TABOR (Taxpayers’ Bill of Rights, a provision of Colorado’s Constitution that restricts the raising of revenue and the level of expenditures).  We realize we need to learn more about the workings of a TABOR enterprise in order to know whether it is practicable and feasible under the law governing the TABOR amendment.  So we’ll be looking into that and perhaps setting up a meeting to discuss various alternatives for proceeding further in 2013 or beyond. 
I am attaching a summary of our 2012 initiative proposal to establish a state-owned bank in Colorado which explains its benefit, and that we had planned to use as a flyer once our ballot measure was approved.  We believe the idea of a state-owned bank in Colorado could promptly turn around the state economy in Colorado, restore full employment, put people back in their homes, refinance student loans at affordable rates, strengthen the state budget, restore bank lending to Colorado businesses desperately needing such funding, and eventually to enable a reduction of the tax burden on Colorado citizens.
Please let us know any thoughts, suggestions, or questions you may have on this important subject.
In a separate email you will be invited to sign a petition initiated by Bob Bows through to urge creation of a state-owned bank in Colorado.  We strongly urge you to sign this petition and to invite others to do so as well. 
Thanks very much for your interest and cooperation. 

Ballot Initiative #95 -- to Amend the Colorado Constitution to Establish a State-Owned Bank
for the State of Colorado - Modeled on the Bank of North Dakota
Since 1919 North Dakota has owned its own bank, the Bank of North Dakota (BND), which holds all fees and taxes collected by the government of North Dakota and invests it through loans made through or in conjunction with private community banks for industry, agriculture and other services needed by the citizens of the state. This has produced many advantages:
* BND has paid the state treasurer >$325 million from bank profits over the past 10 years; $61M in 2010
* ND is the only State with continuous budget surpluses since before the financial crisis of 2008
* North Dakota has the lowest unemployment rate (3.0%) of any State in the U.S.
* North Dakota has one of the lowest home foreclosure rates and credit card default rates in the U.S.
* In FY 2010 BND enjoyed a 19% return on investment
* North Dakota has had no bank failures and has the most community banks per capita
* Banks in Colorado are failing five times more often on average than banks in other states
* In 2011 North Dakota enjoyed almost $500 million in tax cuts and 30% in cuts over 2009-2011
* These benefits are not due primarily to North Dakota’s oil; e.g. Alaska and Montana have as much oil but have high unemployment >7.7%, and have had budget deficits
The proposed Colorado Amendment would add §22 to Article X of the Constitution of the State of Colorado:
Establishment of State-Owned Bank. The measure establishes a bank owned by the state of Colorado. The bank is authorized to lend money at interest or at no interest to promote development, commerce, industry, and agriculture in the state and to promote home ownership, maintenance and construction of needed infrastructure, education, public health and safety, and other purposes for the general welfare of the citizens of the state of Colorado. The bank will have the same powers as other banks chartered by the State and the power and authority to deposit public revenues and funds in the bank, except as expanded or limited by the General Assembly. The bank would not be subject to any revenue or spending limits such as under TABOR, but the measure would not alter TABOR’s restrictions on new tax measures. The bank would be regulated, managed, and advised by public officials, banking professionals, and public representatives, and be subject to annual public audits. It would be backed by the full faith and credit of the state.

Sunday, December 16, 2012

Hancock Digs in After Negative Vote, Calls Hentzell Natural Area “Blighted”

By Dave Felice

Hentzell Natural Area - photo by Ray Ehrenstein
In an e-mail response to Denver resident Marty Amble, Mayor Michael B. Hancock signals he intends to reject a vote of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board to retain designation of the Hentzell Park Natural Area.
Hancock’s e-mail is dated December 15, two days after the Advisory Board’s 11-6 vote against his proposal to de-designate nine acres of parkland and trade it for a Denver Public Schools office building downtown. 
Instead of acknowledging that the Board and concerned citizens citywide might have a valid point of view, Hancock is now stating that nine acres of Hentzell Park Natural Area are “blighted, overrun with weeds, and have lost any significant natural area values.” 
If that is true, it is because the Parks and Recreation Department—which is under Hancock’s control in the Executive Branch—has abandoned any maintenance or restoration of natural areas. 
And as numerous citizens and the City’s retired naturalist Susan Baird testified before the vote, the mayor’s statement is untrue: this natural area has much native vegetation and supports numerous species of native wildlife.  It is not a manicured park of Kentucky blue grass because it was never intended to be so.
Park advocate Joe Halpern declares:  “It is shocking to me that the Mayor has gone from calling the area “underutilized” Thursday night in his statement at the Advisory Board to “blighted.”  If the Mayor considers this natural area worthless, what hope is there that he will not see other natural areas in the city as prime building sites for his real estate deals?”
In fact, one major point made by the Advocates for Denver Parks coalition is that many areas which are commonly thought of as parks are not designated or dedicated, and could also be in jeopardy of abuse or destruction.

Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2012 10:25:31 -0700
Subject: RE: Hentzell Park Natural Area - Comments
Marty –
Thank you for your email regarding the 26-acre Hampden Heights Natural Area. The City and County of Denver and Denver Public Schools are currently negotiating a trade of nine acres of the natural area for a 46,000-square-foot building at 1330 Fox St. near downtown Denver.
The proposal provides an optimal location for a much-needed early education center and elementary school in the Hampden Heights neighborhood while allowing the city to deliver a centrally located, easily accessible domestic violence resource center.
The land swap is a unique opportunity to deliver better services for our children and families, while activating under-utilized land and saving taxpayers money. These nine acres are not presently designated as parkland. Rather, they have become blighted, overrun with weeds and have lost any significant natural area values. (emphasis added)
Like you, I am committed to improving our park system and open space areas.  I have worked tirelessly to preserve and increase park space and natural land for families, children and neighborhoods. As a former City Councilman, I proudly helped the city add more than 300 acres of new open space. As Mayor, I’ve strongly supported our Parks and Recreation Department’s efforts to continue adding new parkland and open space. 
On the whole, Denver will see our park and open space portfolio grow by another nearly 140 acres within the next five years. Specifically, I look forward to working with Councilwoman Peggy Lehmann to designate the remaining 15 acres of the Hampden Heights Open Space as Hentzell Park.  This will increase the size of the dedicated Hentzell Natural Area to 76.7 acres.
Our city has one of the best and most lauded urban park systems in the nation. I assure you that we will continue to grow our parks system wherever we find opportunities, and we will continue to chart a course to enhance the welfare and well-being of all of our residents.
Michael B. Hancock

Saturday, December 15, 2012

All Things MJ with Jessica LeRoux - December 15, 2012

Hey Now!

This is gonna be a very busy week, followed by a potentially very slow week. I am wondering if anybody at all will want an order in the week between Xmas and NYE? Otherwise I will try to bring EVERYBODY a big ol' order this week making all deliveries by the 23rd, so everybody will have any holiday special orders on time... This plan includes  the Customized full size 9" party cheesecakes, if your patients want one, please have orders in no later than Tuesday the 18th. (Co Springs area, you gotta tell us by Monday the 17th... since Tuesday is your delivery day!)  
I will be at the Governors 1st Task Force on 64 Meeting Monday afternoon, and may not be able to make your reminder calls for orders...  please help us out by sending in orders ASAP. I will have a special update Newsletter about that meeting (whihc you are welcome to attend) for you all after that meeting so look for my review on Tuesday Am. 
I will gladly personally make special deliveries for you in the week of Dec 26th through Dec 29th, but since I likely wont have a full staff sitting here at the Kitchen during the Holiday time they could spend with their family, wondering if orders are coming in...  You might want to email orders, allow for some flexibility on products and delivery day, and give plenty of notice if you do need some year end inventory...  if you need to reach me my Cell is 720 369 0107 but it doesnt work really well at my house, so text please... And as you know Im also moving out from my house in the last week of the month so I will be back and forth a bunch...  
And if you stop reading here, know that I am very grateful to you and your MMC for your continued support of Twirling Hippy Confections in 2012. Without your  help, we would not be one of: "the few, the proud, the City of Denver & MMED Vertically Licensed MIPs" Thanks! 

Hope to see you Monday, here are the details if you want to attend... if not, look for my review on Tuesday, and get on the emails please! 
Amendment 64 Task force 1st meeting Monday the 17th, open to public.

 All meetings of the Task Force and any working groups will be open to the public. The Task Force will also endeavor to solicit public comment as part of its consideration of the policy, legal and procedural issues that need to be resolved to implement Amendment 64.
The Task Force will hold its first meeting at noon Dec. 17 in the Department of Revenue Gaming Conference Room, 17301 W. Colfax Ave., Suite 135, in Golden.
please read the entire link to the article on who made the Governor's Task force here. 
look closely at the list of Task Force members and see if you have a relationship with any member please send an email reaching out to that person on a personal level. On a more proactive level we would also like members to write letters to panelists on the Task force and please use your own words but touch on these three points if you can... 
#1. increased enforcement against illegal grows/sales. #2. Licensing prioritization for compliant currently licensed MMJ businesses #3. DUI protection for red card holders... 

Friday, December 14, 2012

Reaction to Obama's new marijuana statements‏

From Tom Angell, Chairman of Marijuana Majority

"The president's statement about not targeting individual marijuana users doesn't mark a shift in policy. The federal government rarely goes after individual users. The real question is whether the Obama administration will try to prevent voter-approved marijuana sales systems from being enacted or if they will force individual users to buy marijuana from the black market, where much of the profits go to cartels and gangs that kill people.

"The president also tries to unjustifiably pass the buck to Congress, claiming that there's not much he can do to change federal policy on marijuana because 'Congress has not yet changed the law.' The fact is, the executive branch was granted the power to unilaterally reschedule marijuana when Congress passed the Controlled Substances Act in 1970. The president should lead on this issue instead of deferring to Congress, a branch of government that he probably knows better than most isn't exactly prone to getting a whole lot done these days.

"One positive thing to take away from this interview is that the president couched his opposition to marijuana legalization by saying he doesn't support it 'at this point.' That could indicate his position on this issue may 'evolve' to catch up with the majority of voters who now support letting states set their own marijuana laws, not unlike how his position on marriage equality 'evolved' as it became clear the what direction the public was moving in."

Excerpts from the interview, which will be released in full tonight, are online at

Thursday, December 13, 2012

Citizen Win! No Hentzell Park De-designation

Just phoned in by Dave Felice

The Denver Parks and Recreation Advisory Board voted 11 to 6 against de-designating a part of the Hentzell Park. This may stop Mayor Hancock from completing his "done deal".

The Rose A. Andom Center website: has been scrubbed of this statement.

We have a home…
A building at 1330 Fox Street has been secured by the City of Denver for The Center.The Center has a long-term lease for use of the building and will be responsible for raising all renovation funds and reimbursing the City for ongoing occupancy costs.

Tuesday, December 11, 2012

Hancock's Landmine

Opinion by Gerald Trumbule

Hentzell Park Natural Area photo by Ray Ehrenstein

Have you been following the parkland-for-a-building swap deal being promulgated by Denver Mayor Michael Hancock? Hancock has advocated for a domestic violence center in Denver. That's a good thing. While in no way impugning his motives, it seems he has forgotten, at least briefly, that Denver's assets are not his to give away or trade. I don't think he anticipated the ferocious love we have for our parks and parkland here in Denver. He's stepped on a landmine of criticism.
And then there is new conflict-of-interest complaint. We'll have to see if this goes deeper than a mere temporary lapse of good judgement. He could pull the plug on the deal, but that may signal deeper concerns.
Experience teaches us that whenever the City/Mayor is involved in land, be it purchase, sale or swap, the citizens need to be extra vigilant.

Ethics Complaint Filed Against Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Member

James T. Allen, Advisory Board member
For background on the alleged conflict of interest go here.

From the Complaint, filed today:

Commencing on or about August 1, 2012, et seq, including, but not limited to the official meeting of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) on November 8, 2012, James T. Allen, an appointee to the PRAB participated in discussions, exchanged e-mail, attended meetings, and otherwise sought to influence a decision by the PRAB to an exchange of property (1) between the City and County of Denver and the Denver Public School District 1. 
By participating in discussions, exchanging e-mail, and attending PRAB meetings, James T. Allen demonstrated a conflict of interest because of his concurrent position as Director of Bond Construction for Denver Public Schools.  Allen’s mere presence in a room where discussions took place constitute an attempt to promote an d influence a favorable judgment on his behalf.
As remedy, all discussions, meetings, and decisions by the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board involving James T. Allen and the Denver Public Schools are to be declared null and void.  Allen is to take a leave of absence from his position with the City and County of Denver until the matter involving his conflict of interest is fully resolved. 
1) The matter under discussion involves a proposal to exchange nine (9) acres of city-owned parkland at Hentzell Park Natural Area for an office building at 1330 Fox Street.  The building is owned by Denver Public Schools.

Monday, December 10, 2012

All Things MJ with Jessica LeRoux - December 10, 2012

Hey Now,
8 degrees in Nederland while I type away, and we have snow! Got a response to the letter I mailed the Governor last week, and i actually got to fill out an application to join the Governors task force on Amendment 64, wish me luck!

COMPLETED City of Denver MIPS license inspection card... All licenses done, all state & local agencies paid in full, just waiting on some papers to prove Twirling Hippy Confections is 100% legally legit, at least with the state of CO!

If you're selling a MIPs which is made in Denver and that MIPs doesnt have one of these inspection cards at least in progress, they might have some licensing issues soon, Denver Excise says that only 3 dozenish MIPs have done the Denver license application so far, & only about 30% of those have completed it...

Quote from the State's A-64 FAQ sheet... "Cultivation, sale, and possession of marijuana for adults age 21 and older is still illegal under federal law. As a result, prosecution of marijuana crimes may shift to the Colorado federal courts within the available resources of the U.S. Attorney's office. That prosecution could include possession or use of marijuana and operating marijuana businesses made legal by Amendment 64." read the rest here:

this story is making the rounds... Statement From U.S. Attorney's Office on Initiative 502
December 5, 2012
The Department of Justice is reviewing the legalization initiatives recently passed in Colorado and Washington State. The Department's responsibility to enforce the Controlled Substances Act remains unchanged. Neither States nor the Executive branch can nullify a statute passed by Congress. In enacting the Controlled Substances Act, Congress determined that marijuana is a Schedule I controlled substance. Regardless of any changes in state law, including the change that will go into effect on December 6th in Washington State, growing, selling or possessing any amount of marijuana remains illegal under federal law. Members of the public are also advised to remember that it remains against federal law to bring any amount of marijuana onto federal property, including all federal buildings, national parks and forests, military installations, and courthouses.
Marijuana: Rumblings about federal crackdown on Colorado over Amendment At this point, there's still no official word from the Justice Department about a response to Amendment 64, the Regulate...
Colorado Municipal league is the entity that has helped dozens of localities ban MMJ, now Kevin Bommer is helping towns across the state pre-ban amendment 64 on the bias that 64 does not give local governments enough time to implement new regulations.
note they repeatedly list prohibition as the 1st option for their members to persue rather than regulation. Not to mention that the Voters have had their voices heard, 53% to 46% mmmkay, CML has always had an anti-agenda about Cannabis.
some of these "businesses" are influenced by this malarky...
Amendment 64: Business organizations ask feds to clamp down on Colorado marijuana measure

at least one lil town isnt under the influence of CML... Boulder council: No ban on recreational pot shops for nowwww.dailycamera.comDespite the concerns of City Attorney Tom Carr, the Boulder City Council held off on any action, saying they needed more information and public input before they could even consider a ban on stores selling recreational marijuana.

BUT some other little towns have some issues still, we support you Brad & Karen! go team go!
Medical marijuana ban in Dacono targeted by repeal petition

just in time for Xmas and new years...
Worth Repeating: Suicide Rates Fall In Medical Marijuana States - Toke of the"We conclude that the legalization of medical marijuana leads to an improvement in the psychological well being of young adult males, an improvement that is reflected in fewer suicides." This story didn't make it past the network news filters, was ignored by the mainstream media, and numerous mental...

also worth mentioning going into the Big Three weeks of holiday driving and parties, be alert for DUI crackdown. Please advise all patients to drive responsibly and DO NOT MEDICATE IN THE CAR esp during the next 4 weeks.
case in point...
whoa what is up with the goatee? that might actually be creepier than the porn/cop mustache which preceded it...
King Says Delta-9-THC Leaves System Hours After Smoking Pot For the fifth time in three years, lawmakers are pushing for a driving under the influence of drugs per say standard in Colorado. Sen. Steve King (R-Dist. 7) said people suspected of driving under the influence of marijuana would specifically be tested for Delta-9-THC. He says this form of THC does ...
see also, now called impaired driving month... remember the highway funding issues with DUI's back in the 80's?
National Impaired Driving Prevention Month | The White Housewww.whitehouse.govDecember is National Impaired Driving Prevention Month - a time to focus our efforts toward recognizing the risks and reducing the prevalence of drugged driving.
third on the topic... this happened in Denver in 2010-2011... the state manager in question is still in charge.
FYI: What Do Forensic Chemists Do, And Why Would They Cheat?www.popsci.comEarlier this fall, a forensic chemist at the Massachusetts-based crime lab William A. Hinton State Laboratory was

In Wake of Scathing Review of Fracking Report, University of Texas Revises Conflict of Interest Polinews.sciencemag.orgThe University of Texas (UT), Austin, is getting a hard lesson in what can go wrong if you fail to spot and disclose a potential conflict of interest. UT has been clobbered with a tough outside review, made public yesterday by Provost Steven Leslie, of blunders in a controversial study on the use of...
Fracking wastewater wells were also linked to earthquakes near raton in CO early this week... Remember MMIG is tied to the fracking lobby, and always has been. When you buy meds from an MMIG member MMC you are subsidising the Industry that is poisoning our precious ground water and spreading cancer across the state. It is your right to know these facts, and it is your right to question if your MMC or MIPS is a Member of a group that pays rent on the offices of the CPA (our state's fracking lobby shares their office suite with MMIG) BOYCOTT MMIG.