Denver deserves none but the best. Such was the message of Mayor Michael Hancock when he announced a national search to find a new manager for the department of parks and recreation. The effort resulted in the appointment of a veteran lobbyist/political hack, Allegra “Happy” Haynes, to the post—she was originally part of the search committee. Amazingly, those loving Denver parks were surprised by the result.
Talent searches are among the endless charades of the government and academia. The efforts are often nothing but ways to tab a previously selected person. In many instances, they are a means of rewarding consultants who spend lavishly on the effort. Particularly when they involve highly charged and controversial positions, the reviews are a way by which one institution dumps an unwanted administrator off on another community. The national searches additionally assume that outstanding talent is extremely rare. Mile High insecurity endlessly believes that locals are not good enough to fill leading positions. On the contrary, boosters eagerly drool over carpetbaggers to reshape the city’s skyline and direct its educational and cultural endeavors.
The sham talent search was an insult to the populace. Voters elect the mayor to run the city. Members of his cabinet are not faceless bureaucratic administrators, but political choices who reflect the values of cityhall and reward various constituencies. Hancock, following in the steps of ex-Mayor John Hickenlooper, has clearly shown a thorough contempt for parks as quiet open spaces. On the contrary, he demands they become commercial ventures. Where possible, he has been ready to trade or sell them off.
Haynes fits in well with the mayor’s agenda. Since the 1980s, she has been an available woman. Besides serving on city council and the school board, she has been part of CRL Associates, a lobbying firm which puts Brownstein Hyatt to shame in terms of directing city council and assuring the adoption of very bad policies. Never in her career has she stood up as a bold dissenter, challenging the mayor or 17th Street. At the most, she well fills the bill for those who love tokenism: they endlessly herald her as a black woman who has done well within the system.
Haynes has always been quick to play the race card, claiming any opposition to her unquestioning devotion to the status quo is primarily a reflection of people uncomfortable with a black woman having a position of power. The prime difference between Haynes becoming manager of parks compared to an outsider is that she will eagerly plunge into the job, doing Hancock’s bidding with a vengeance. In contrast, it would take a outsider months to get fully in synch with the mayor’s anti-park agenda.
Hancock’s naming Haynes to lead parks and recreation also shows the thorough waste of talent searches. Given the revolving door between cityhall, 17th Street, consultants, lobbyists, and nonprofits, powerbrokers could simply rent out such functionaries as Haynes to the mayor. But this would be too blunt: it would reveal the dictatorship of big money over the citizenry. Hence the need for the sham search finding that Haynes is the best of all possible executives to lead the department of parks and recreation. Her tenure might well spawn nostalgia remembering the first term of Hancock as a golden age of the city’s parks.
For years, Denver never named public facilities after members of city council. Beginning with the dubbing of the land near 15th Street and Cleveland Place “MacIntoshPlaza” in the early 1980s, this started to become a trend. It recalled the establishment stalwart who had served on council from 1959 to 1980, never challenging the worst of the status quo. Then, in 1990, council had honored the city’s first black member of the body, Elvin Caldwell, with a small plaza at 26th Avenue and Emerson Street adjacent to the FivePointsCommunity Center. The Blair-Caldwell Library, opened nearby in 2003, further honored him. By this time, the city had memorialized former councilmen Hiawatha Davis and Bill Scheitler with existing recreation centers.
The man who defeated Davis in the race to replace Caldwell on council in 1980, King Trimble, was honored in 2004 with the “EconomicProsperityCenter” at 2980 Curtis Street. Failing to bring prosperity to the neighborhood, it soon became the home of a charter school. Elbra Wedgeworth, who was Mayor Wellington Webb’s handpicked candidate to succeed Davis in the seat in 1999, was always a dependable supporter of the administration and the estab-lishment. The city honored her in 2014 by designating a major wing of the FivePointsCommunity Center for her.
Shortly after his death in 2005, Denver Public Schools recalled black Park Hill city councilman Bill Roberts (1971–90) with a charter school near Montview Boulevard and Akron Street. For some years, Roberts clashed with Caldwell. Eventually, he was a right-hand man of Federico Peña, especially in pushing through DenverInternationalAirport. By that time, his early crusades against a racist establishment had long disappeared, especially when he was on the receiving end of numerous government efforts to reward black entrepreneurs who heralded working within the system.
Besides being the political patron of Davis, Caldwell was also something of the godfather of Wellington Webb. As mayor, the latter showed himself an egomaniac. Despite a statute prohibiting naming public buildings for an incumbent, he got his rubber-stamp city council to designate a new city office building for him. For the most part, it was sealed to the public, complete with extremely unfriendly private guards whose primary function was to keep everyday citizens out of the public space. The naming was indicative of a thoroughly insecure politician afraid that he would not have a legacy without having his name attached to a building.
Webb had a point. Lacking buildings recalling them, it is doubtful if many would remember Scheitler or Davis, both of whom served on council under Webb. In office, neither stood out as crusaders working to change bad policies and reorient the direction of the city. Indeed, it is hard to recall any memorable acts associated with their careers on council. To his credit, Davis had been a draft resister who preferred prison to joining the military during the Vietnam War era. In the early 1970s, he had loudly opposed Caldwell when he projected himself as a most militant black nationalist. None of this was part of dedicating what had been the SkylandRecreationCenter in his memory.
Now a push is underway to christen a long-delayed, well-over budget, and far less than promised Capitol Hill recreation center for Carla Madison.
She won the seat of Caldwell–Trimble–Davis– Wedgeworth in 2007. The white victor was something of a darkhorse against the black establishment candidate, Sharon Bailey—the latter ran a hideously bad campaign. Despite suffering from cancer, Madison had an excellent record of attending council sessions until her untimely death just before the 2011 balloting. In office, she never took on the administration. At no time did Madison stand out as a bold opponent of the status quo, offering alternative programs that eventually emerged as triumphant. No more than Davis or Scheitler did she leave behind a legacy as a model for those seeking relief from the 17th Street domination of the city.
Part of Madison’s district included North Capitol Hill. The only modern member of council from that neighborhood who came close to showing the possibility of a different approach from business as usual was Cathy Donohue. She ran as a rebel in 1975. On council, she joined with other insurgents in challenging the Bill McNichols administration, eventually besting the mayor on some crucial issues. Nor did Donohue go along with the corporate orientation of the FedericoPeñaadministration. Eventually, she made her peace with Webb in 1994, taking a city job to assure she had a good pension. In retirement, she has again voiced her views, challenging city policies that have virtually given parks away to politically well-connected business interests.
If politicos urgently believe they have to name the Capitol Hillcenterfor one of their own, an even better choice than Madison would be Donohue’s immediate predecessor in district #10, Bob Koch. He was the personification of the bozos who have long led many to mock council as a dead end for drunks. An affluent oil man who was a vestige of conservative, elite Capitol Hill, he committed suicide just before the end of his term to avoid having to report to jail for a hit-and runaccident and lying about it. Or there was C. Paul Harrington, a backer of the Chamber of Commerce who represented central Capitol Hill on council from 1933 to 1959. He lost his re-election bid during the latter year when the United States attorney’s office announced agrand jury had indicted him for income tax evasion the day before the runoff balloting.
Madison, who was most responsible in attending endless committee meetings and dealing with the nuts-and-bolts concerns of most of her constituents, was far and away above the tradition of Harrington and Koch. Still, she did nothing to deserve the honor of being memorialized by a city building. On the contrary, she was essentially an echo ofthenMayor John Hickenlooper with his commitment to the corporate control of the government. Additionally, she was with the mayor in backing the broken-window theory of policing, an effort essentially making poverty a crime.
The councilwoman was also a personification of the mayor’s claim that a “creative class” should be the heart of the city. This was the snobbish rhetoric appealing to people who consider themselves highly enlightened. Generally, they have all the wit of those who participate in coffeehouse poetry readings in believing they are on the cutting edge of fine literature. Even at that, Madison was a skilled artist. Typical of her personality was that her wedding was a joint venture in Denver and Las Vegas, the latter city being the epitome of empty illusion of faux sophisticates. Even so, Madison was, far and away, the most colorful member of council, a body otherwise dominated by professional politicians, some of whom had never had a real job outside of the government.
Madison’s one big initiative on council was working to privatize the parks. In particular, collaborating with Chuck Morris of the Anschutz Entertainment Group, she called for fencing off CityPark to the public so a private corporation could profit by endlessly blasting noise through the green as part of the Mile High Music Festival. The Zoo vetoed the event, realizing the ear-splitting racket would endanger its animals. This protection of public peace and tranquility was beyond the councilwoman. Far from discussing her views with constituents, she refused to speak to some of the critics of the event, especially when they brought out she had made a video backing the event before the Anschutz Entertainment Group had publicly announced the venture.
The drive to name the recreation center for Madison (led by her husband, who, with Madison, had no understanding of the concept of conflict-of-interest) says nothing about the highly dubious real estate deal by which the city acquired the property for it at Colfax Avenue and Josephine Street from a crony of Mayor Hickenlooper. Nor does it explain Mayor Michael Hancock’s sudden 180-degree reversal on building it. He found the money for it when he urgently needed the vote of Capitol Hill councilwomanJeannieRobb for his highly dubious park policies and purge of the parks and recreation advisory board. As it is, TaxpayerSuckerRecreationCenter is the most descriptive title for the facility.
The matter of what attorney John Case contends is the city's illegal taking of 11.5 acres of Hampden Heights North (Hentzell) Park is now in the hands of the Corardo Court of Appeals. Case has been fighting the legal battle pro bono for nearly three years.
Here are two reports from courtroom observers, plus the actual courtroom video. The video doesn't actually start until 24 minutes into the "broadcast." Use the slider to advance the time. A reporter for the daily publication attended the oral argument hearing Tuesday (9/1), but nothing had been printed by Thursday afternoon.
Report #1
A citizens' group on Tuesday brought a long-term solution before the Colorado Court of Appeals for a controversial land swap of Hampden Heights North Park land to Denver Public Schools. The group has argued the deal originated by the city of Denver without a vote of the people, in violation of the city charter.
"The elephant in the room is that the school district built the school with this case pending," said John Case, pro bono attorney for the nonprofit Friends of Denver Parks. "This case may set a precedent for the city to do this over and over again."
The school opened for the first time last week. Part of the group's argument is that it was being built in the Cherry Creek floodplain.
Case asked the three-judge panel to reverse the decision and remand the case to the lower court. If the court agrees, once the useful life of the school ends, in 20 or 30 years, the land would revert back to open space. Denver Public Schools would in effect lease the property until that point.
City of Denver attorney David Broadwell said the group never proved that the land was operated as a park before 1955, the year designated in a 1996 law. It was operated as a park in the 1960s and later. He made a distinction between designated parks and non designated parks.
Case said the intent to use the land as park to connect parkland in Denver to the west dated back to 1936.
The court will announce its decision later.
Following the hearing, group spokesperson Renee Lewis feared that city park land would be in jeopardy should the group lose the case. Sixty percent of the park land in the city has been considered non-designated by the city of Denver.
Report #2
John Case did a great job. He was articulate and forceful. He had the first say, and started with Section 2.4.5 of the city charter. If it was used as a park prior to 12-31-55, a park was a "common law" park even if it was never "designated" as a park. Then there's the question of the meaning of "designate", with an ordinary meaning of "denote" or "show". The word is apparently not defined in the charter. Of course, this is important because park land can't be sold without a vote of the people.
Then there's a fascinating issue of "designate" versus "dedicate". A street or alley can be "dedicated" by council resolution and doesn't require an ordinance. Hentzell Park was not dedicated by ordinance, but was included in parks maps, and an expert witness testified that it was used as a park.
David Broadwell for the city argued that it's only a park if it's so identified in the deed, in the plat, or by ordinance and that mere use as a park is not enough. Judge Rothenberg asked him about the parks commission's annual reports in which the city repeatedly listed it as a park. He responded that there was no evidence of pre-1955 use as a park.
Then Broadwell dived into the 2010 zoning ordinances, the 1983 OSA zoning for the park , the ripple effect if no OSA land could be sold, and finally his big point: THE SCHOOL HAS ALREADY BEEN BUILT AND IN FACT IS IN SESSION!
Case had the last word. He responded that in the McIntyre case, park land had been illegally sold. There, the parties worked out a settlement involving a long-term lease. Case also refuted the lack of pre-1955 park use, citing a December '55 deed connecting the "park" to a highway.
That was a lot of talking in a half hour.
This message is presented for public information. No endorsement is intended or implied. Some may find the second attachment on noise quite informative. Contact Denver Water directly for additional information.
As part of Denver Water’s commitment to working closely with the communities we serve, I’m writing you to let you know about some work that will take place in your area in September that may impact your neighborhood.
We are currently conducting a study of underground aquifers to determine whether they may be suitable for use in storing water for future use. This study requires us to drill exploratory wells at several sites across the metro area. One of these sites – located at 40 th and Colorado – is near your neighborhood (see map in attached flyer).
We have conducted an acoustical study and predict that when our noise mitigation strategies in place, the nighttime noise traveling off-site will be below the 50 decibel residential limit set by Denver’s Noise Ordinance. To give context, I’m also attaching a document that compares decibel levels to commonly known noise generation sources.
I do not think our work will cause any inconvenience to your neighborhood, but wanted to reach out and introduce myself in case you are interested in more information, would like to discuss our noise mitigation strategies in more depth, etc.
The proposed construction of 180 apartment units at 17th and York has begun with the demolition of the existing buildings. This assemblage has been in the making for the last 20 years and may serve to ease the current apartment shortage
First artist's rendering of new rec center that I've seen. Let's not name it after anyone. CENRAL DENVER REC CENTER SOUNDS GOOD. Go here for more info.
What if Denver’s premier main street, Colfax Avenue, was a pedestrian paradise?
WalkDenver couldn’t think of a better place to launch our Fundraising Gala than Colfax Avenue. WalkDenver’s People on Colfax Initiative celebrates the “longest wickedest street in America” and its revitalization by partnering with Colfax friends and neighbors to ensure pedestrians are a top priority.
Come join us at our “I Walk Colfax” event for an evening of food, drinks, contests and fun.
Help us raise funds to make Colfax a premier pedestrian corridor and Denver a more walkable city by buying your tickets today at www.walkdenver.org! Your ticket includes:
* 2 drink tickets * Tasty appetizers * I Walk Colfax video contest awards (visit www.walkdenver.org for more information) * Prizes * Opportunity to learn more about how to make Denver a more walkable city and connect with like-minded individuals * Raising funds for a good cause * And more…
Please share an evening with us and Dr. Paul Connett , a scientist and an expert on incineration and ZeroWaste. We are lucky to have Dr. Connett in Denver for this night only.
He will share information about the health and safety concerns with incineration and the virtues of the ZeroWaste philosophy.
Dr. Connett's presentation is especially timely in view of the fact that the Denver Zoo is building and installing a waste to energy incinerator in the Denver Zoo in City Park. If you live anywhere in Denver, you won't want to miss this talk.
Please enjoy the video below. Space is limited so please sign up (free) on the link below or call me to reserve a place. 720.440.3562.
The presentation the INC Delegation enjoyed at its monthly meeting on June 9 at the Brookdale Assisted Living Center, was edifying and gratifying. Edifying because, Architect, Jeff Sheppard, whose April 4, 2015 opinion editorial appeared in the Denver Post “Denver is a great city, so why the bad buildings?” explained his theory that Denver’s new, much touted Zoning Code, lacks “heart and soul.” Gratifying because, finally we had the 2014 Colorado Architect of the Year confirm what most of us have been feeling and thinking for the past few years: That Denver’s Zoning Code is not giving us better architecture or neighborhoods.
When then Mayor, Hickenlooper, announced that the Office of Community Planning and Development would be completely rewriting and rezoning the entire City of Denver under the leadership of his Planning Director, Peter Park, and Planning Board Chair, Brad Buchanan, we were told it was intended to streamline and simplify the existing 70 year old Zoning Code. What we got was quite a bit more complex, complicated and longer. Hundreds of meetings between the “Zoning Code Task Force” and citizens resulted in claims of unprecedented citizen involvement and inclusiveness in the planning process.
When the “New” Zoning Code was brought to City Council in 2010, the City Council en masse, gave the massive document their unequivocal, enthusiastic support and their votes. It was as if, close to being divinely inspired, this document was intended to work miracles for the next 70 years.
Now it is clear, that we, the citizens, not being planners or architects, were at an extreme disadvantage in understanding the what effects this new Code would have or what “products” it would produce. We were told it was contextual and form based. For most of us contextual meant,, don’t worry, what will be built will fit in to our existing neighborhoods. Form based was not as well explained, but somehow it was supposed to provide a template that would make designing buildings much simpler. Sounded good to us, right?
What we first began to notice in 2012 when new developments began to spring up in what used to be 1 and 2 story, single family zone districts, were homes being built by many developers to get maximum square footage with no concern for quality, design, context or character of the neighborhoods. The effect was that new development seemed out of place when you looked down the street. In addition, some zone districts seem to be more problematic than others. For example, in some areas, what was R-2 zoning which allowed duplexes and triplexes, has been replaced by a new zone district of G-MU-3. The replaced zoning allows up to 6 units, on a 6000 sq. foot area with a building height of up to 35 feet and an allowance of an additional 12 feet for a stairway and/or utility shed on top. Six units on what previously allowed only single family or triplexes and duplexes is leading to skinny, tall, building blocks with no redeeming features. Every day, traditional one story homes, zoned in what was previously R2 but now is G-MU-3, are scraped to make way for vertical “living units” which are proliferating and changing the entire context of what are supposed to be stable neighborhoods.
The new code has also promoted many thousands stick and frame construction apartments. The words design and quality never come into the equation when the multi-units are approved or being built. These “people-coops” seem to be intended to house a majority of future residents of Denver. G-d knows where these multitudes will be able to go when they go crazy and want to move out of the slightly larger-than-storage unit sized apartments.
According to Jeff Sheppard, the cheap, shoddy construction is also a result from Denver’s 2010 Zoning Code. He maintains that it does not have to be this way and that changes can be made to the Code which would promote quality design and construction replacing the build and flip, quick profit incentives which exist now. It is clear to most reasonable Denver residents who merely get out and look around at what is happening in many neighborhoods, that something is afoul in our fair City.
It is time to stop the denial, admit that Denver’s Zoning Code is not sacrosanct and demand that our elected and appointed City officials and professional employees stop and listen to the citizen outrage. The Zoning Code needs to be changed based on neighborhood concerns and on information and advice available to them from experts both here in Denver and around the country. Tragically, it may be too late for some neighborhoods, but doing nothing should not be an option.
Submit for publication: I consider any emails I receive to be publishable unless otherwise indicated e.g. (FYI ONLY, DO NOT PUBLISH, NOT FOR PUBLICATION. ETC.) Editor@DenverDirect.tv
Now it is clear, that we, the citizens, not being planners or architects, were at an extreme disadvantage in understanding the what effects this new Code would have or what “products” it would produce. We were told it was contextual and form based. For most of us contextual meant,, don’t worry, what will be built will fit in to our existing neighborhoods. Form based was not as well explained, but somehow it was supposed to provide a template that would make designing buildings much simpler. Sounded good to us, right?
Posts
