Louisville's New Corporate Citizen Is...?

The speculation over who has purchased the StorageTek/Sun property in Louisville surrounds big high-tech names like Google and Apple. While the price of $60 million for the 440-acre campas seems to be accepted, I'm interested in how the Louisville Comprehensive Plan update process with address the potential of the property. Louisville has made it clear they don't want more residential development, and any commercial redevelopment will hear the screams of growth needing to "pay its own way" (as if residential even comes close to the same premise).

The current Comp Plan identifies the area as potential retail and commercial space, (known as the Southeast Plateau) and the sheer size of the development plus its great location is definitely of concern to Boulder's aging downtown space. To the extent FasTracks can become a factor (bus rapid transit is the option) this area has great potential for the city, if they choose to accept it.

I'm hearing Apple is a good guess. I'm curious if Crocs has an interest in such a location, even though their manufacturing is scattered around the globe. Or, it is some deep-pocketed Class A space developer with a long horizon. Much like Broomfield and Longmont used to pick off Boulder's discards, a Southeast Plateau development can tag onto Broomfield's focused recruitment efforts.

Just Wait Til FasTracks Comes Through...

While visiting the City of Louisville's website I see a homepage link for contacts for those concerned with airplane noise. For this to be on the homepage must indicate some level of priority status, and it made me think how unsupportive of diesel powered commuter trains residents around Old Town Louisville will be once that comes online.

FasTrack's commuter rail segment will be the impetus to all sorts of Old Town redevelopment, but the overall impact in activity, density and noise is not going to please everyone.

Louisville Ballot Issue 2A

Louisville residents have one issue on their ballot. 2A would clarify that the Louisville City Council is the authority regarding urban renewal district decisions instead of the Council-appointed Louisville Revitalization Commission. It would also require a fiscal analysis before any tax-increment financing plan could be approved, plus other ethics and oversight protocols.

This one has people confused, dismissive and some really fired up. The site PreserveLouisville.org is the source for all things pro-2A.

This one is tough because the arguments are apples to oranges - maybe. If you listen to pro-2A folks, the LRC and their authority is way beyond what a non-elected Board should have regarding millions of dollars and redevelopment decisions that will change the look of old town. Anti-2A folks have a message that 2A is redundant; Council oversight and approval of the LRC's decisions is already the case.

The rationale for 2A is based on distrust of the LRC's motives, members and accountability. After asking around, I see two ways to make your vote - you can wade into the morass of detail and conflicting assertions and get convinced by whoever screams the loudest and gets to you last. Or, you can choose which premise of government you ultimately want to drive your votes: healthy skepticism and distrust? Vote yes on 2A. Efficient government process with knowledgeable people making decisions with Council oversight? Vote no on 2A.

One caveat - if you voted for current Councilors who are opposed to 2A, have they done anything else to violate your trust in their judgement? If not, maybe they know more details as to why 2A isn't a good idea. Again - either trust or distrust will be your motivating factor.

2A In Louisville Becoming Petty, Ugly, Stupid

The folks behind the petition-spawned 2A ballot issue in Louisville are challenging the opinions of 2A opponents through apparently calling some anti-2A businesses and just politely - or threateningly - saying they won't shop their because of their views.

Bill O'Reilly would be proud.

So the pro-2A crowd says the Louisville Revitalization Commission is far too autonomous in its authority and 2A, if approved, would return the LRC's decision making capacities back to the Louisville City Council. Anti-2A'ers say the Council's structured oversight of the Council-appointed LRC is significant and appropriate, that the LRC is not a potential rouge, extra-legal entity and to just leave them alone. Trust the Council and the LRC is the message.

Ty Gee, a member of PreserveLouisville, says in the Louisville Times: “At the end of the day, I kind of wish I hadn’t talked to any of these people,” Gee said. “I realized in doing what I did, I raised the temperature unnecessarily. I’m regretful of that.”

I think what's missed in all this deabte over authority is the way in which the boundaries of the LRC's authority grew to include the King Soopers on South Boulder Road and other non-downtown/Hwy 42 area properties. That's where to ask more questions, regardless of who has authority over the District.

Conflict Of Interest Or No Big Deal?

IN Louisville, a member of the city's Revitalization Commission has been outed, as it were, as having purchased an investment rental property with in the area under the LRC's influence in the months following his appointment to the LRC over three years ago. The concern voiced by Ty Gee, a principal behind PreserveLouisville.org, is that LRC member Michael Reis has a conflict of interest sitting on a board making development decisions for an area in which Reis owns property. Reis says he'll recuse himself from any vote pertinent to his property.

Letter of the law - Reis is not in violation, it appears. But does it pass the smell test? No. But, once you know how the games are played, it's not tough to choose to play to your advantage. Is it even possible for an LRC member make a decision that wouldn't improve the general area and hence improve the general value of nearby property? The LRC's mission is inherently positive for any property within the boundary. If Louisville officials didn't make it clear at the outset you couldn't own any property within the redevelopment area's boundaries as a qualification for service, then this scenario was absolutely predictable. Who else has the motivation to join such a board if not an affected property owner?

I wouldn't waste time trying to get Reis removed, just watch for direct violations of a conflict of interest.

Louisville's Big X Factor

I hope Louisville's Council candidates now are asked to brainstorm on what they'd like to see - or be willing to approve - for the 400+ acre former StorageTek campus that recently sold for an undisclosed sum to an undisclosed buyer. (Camera and Hometown News versions of the topic.)

At this point there's no plan on the table, although the assumptions that Class A office space is the likely target of developers seems right on. Such a development would impact Boulder more than East BoCo, at least in terms of luring away substantial amounts of current businesses.

I am curious to hear the ideas from candidates, as that is really the last large parcel that could redevelop in Louisville; yet it isn't contiguous to old town or other neighborhoods in a way that grabs residents' attention; the discussion lends itself to more philosophical growth decisions. While Issue 2A is the front burner topic this election, StorageTek's redevelopment deserves to be discussed as well. For politicians, the topic is in that free-form area where you can pontificate about what would be nice, what you would like to see, etc. to appeal to your target demographic. Great campaign fodder without any threat of tangible consequences.

East BoCo Candidate Forums

Here are details to various candidate forums I've found for East Bock:

Louisville:
The League of Women Voters sponsored a forum on Saturday, September 29, it will be televised live on Cable Channel 8, and rebroadcast throughout the weeks leading up to the election.

Lafayette:
The Lafayette Youth Advisory Committee held a forum on Saturday Sept. 29 at Canon Mine Coffee; hopefully they'll be some coverage Wednesday in the Lafayette News.

Council Candidates have been invited to participate in a forum sponsored by the Community Foundation Serving Boulder County and the Human Service Alliance on Friday October 5, 11:30 AM - 1:30 PM at the Lafayette Public Library, 775 West Baseline Road, Lafayette, CO 80026.

On Thursday, October 18 the League of Women Voters will sponsor a Candidates Night at City Hall in the Council Chambers at 6:30 pm. Candidates will have an opportunity to answer questions and share their opinions. This event is open to the public and will also be televised on Government Access Cable Channel 8 and will repeat throughout the weeks leading up to the election.

Longmont:
(From the TimesCall)The Longmont Area Democrats organization is devoting its monthly meeting to a candidates and issues forum from 7 to 9 p.m. Wednesday October 3 at the City Public Works Building, 375 Airport Road.

At 6:30 p.m. Oct. 11, voters can meet St. Vrain Valley school board and Longmont City Council and mayoral candidates at the 2007 Longmont Candidates Forum in the Albert E. James Auditorium at Longmont High School, 1040 Sunset St.

The mayoral and council candidates also have been invited to discuss their views on the Longmont area’s nonprofit organizations, and how local government can support such groups, during a Thursday luncheon sponsored by the Community Foundation Serving Boulder County. That 11:30 a.m.-to-1:30 p.m. Thursday forum will be at the Longmont Museum & Cultural Center’s museum classroom, 400 Quail Road.

What do you think of forums?What is the best format? My dealings with the 22-person/seven seat race in Boulder leads me to believe we need much higher signature thresholds to get on the ballot.

Louisville Council Considers Resolution Defending Itself

Louisville's citizen petition-borne ballot issue 2A seeks to switch authority for revitalization efforts (specifically financial decisions) currently given to the Louisville Revitalization Commission back to City Council. The opponents argue that's how things are already set up, proponents see an appointed body having control of millions of dollars. So besides the public getting two versions of the truth, the City Council last week debated passing a resolution in opposition to 2A, an interesting effort - can a Council make a formal resolution against an issue to which it is a party? I guess so. But isn't it redundant? If they agreed with the ballot supporters point, they would have done what they asked. By the ballot issue's own existence, Council has shown its opposition, so what's the point of taking time making it official? There was going to be clarifying language in the resolution regarding Council's ultimate authority; they'll take it up again next week.

Of course this plays into the conspiratorial assertions of the ballot supporters. I can't see the distinction being made by the ballot proponents. It appears to me the City Council has final approval power over any of the LRC's decisions. Check out the voluminous detail on why that interpretation is wrong at www.preservelouisville.org.

(The Louisville City website is down this morning, I couldn't create any links to topics)

Lafayette A Model For Others Part 2

After Wayne Laugesen's chiding of Boulder and kudos to Lafayette as an example of municipal decision making (the Silver Mine Subs scenario), I see that Lafayette's single stream, city-wide recycling program has caught the attention of Louisville's new City Manager Malcolm Fleming. At the Louisville City Council study session earlier this month, Councilor Dave Clabots mentioned Louisville could see how Lafayette’s program worked and possibly use it as a guideline.

So, at the risk of pushing unsolicited advices, what else is worth copying in Lafayette? And don't go negative and say "I'll tell you what isn't worth copying, blah blah blah.." We cover that stuff nearly every day.

By the same token, what should Lafayette copy from others? What are the municipal best practices out there? I like Louisville's highlighted reminder to turn off cell phones, the public meeting detail equivalent to keeping the potholes filled around town. Little things can go a long way.

Turn Off Your Phone

My email alerts from Louisville City Hall have recently included this line at the top of meeting agenda notices:

"Please turn off all cell phones and other electronic devices prior to entering City Council Chambers."

Anymore is this just an annoyance, or should people be kicked out of meetings for letting their phone go off? Some people get pretty ticked when a phone goes off. I don't think the phone ringing should be cause for absolute banishment. I say the chair of the meeting makes a judgement call on the ring itself - banishment by subjective analysis. When someone has a version of Achy Breaky Heart blast into a meeting because they actually chose that for a ringtone, they should be asked to leave.

Not a serious political topic, but its been a long day. And I don't see this request online with the agendas, just in the emails. Maybe we email alert folks are a rude ringing bunch.

And They're Off - The EastBoCo Races Officially Begin

Here are the candidates for various East BoCo races:

Lafayette has four open seats on the seven-member council, all at-large. The three top vote-getters will serve a four-year term, and the fourth will serve a two-year term.

• Kerry Bensman (incumbent)
  Robert Brown
  Brian Herzfeld
  Stacia Lupberger
  Melinda Medrick-Nye
  Laura Oster
  G. Scott Penfield
  Frank Phillips, (incumbent)
  Jay Ruggeri, (incumbent)
  Alex Schatz

Louisville has four open seats on the seven-member council - one for each Ward in the city, plus the Mayor's spot.
Mayor's seat
Chuck Sisk, (incumbent mayor)
Randy Luallin
Ward I seat
David Clabots, (incumbent)
Annie Hughes
Ward II seat
Sheri Marsella (incumbent)
Ward III seat
Matthew Jones
Hank Dalton

Longmont has four open seats on the seven-member council - including the Mayor's spot.
Mayor's seat
Karen Benker (incumbent)
Doug Brown (incumbent)
Roger Lange (incumbent)
Ward I seat
James De Vore
Brian Hansen
Aaron Rawlins.
Ward III seat
Bonnie Finley
Sean Patrick McCoy
At-large seat
Sarah Levison
Gabe Santos
Paul Tiger

Louisville Still Alluring

Louisville ranks No. 3 on the latest list of America's best places to live by CNNMoney.com. Louisville boasts "the feel of a small frontier town" as well as a modern economic base, they say.

That should come as great news to the community's Revitalization Commission.

What do the other communities "have the feel" of? I'd love your thoughts.

Louisville Revitalization Commission To Be Challenged

The Louisville Revitalization Commission is going to be facing a public vote of confidence this November.

John Leary, a former Louisville Council member and Don Atwood, a member of the Louisville Cultural Council have championed a petition drive and submitted 900 signatures to the City Clerk this past week. They are fed up with the failure of the City Council to make the LRC more accountable to voters.

Usually redevelopment Boards such as this are presumed trustworthy based on the judgment of Councils who appoint the members. Many Louisville residents appear unwilling to leave the nearly $80 million in predicted funding the LRC would handle in the hands of this appointed body. Read the details at www.preservelouisville.org.

Is this type of demand paranoia? Is it about anti-development or strict oversight?

Malcolm Fleming New Louisville City Manager

Malcolm is the new man in Louisville; here's the press release.

Much like the PreserveLouisville.org website that is all over the alleged/presumed improprieties of Louisville's Revitalization Commission, Mr. Fleming has been included in the detailed rantings of a watchdog website back in Washington accusing various public officials of secretly working to re-zone land for a racetrack in 2005. (I say rants with all due respect as a fellow blogger.)

So, he also brings the experience of having vigilant activists digging up all sorts of details regarding economic development possibilities. That will be handy, as PreserveLouisville.org is challenging the authority of the Louisville Revitalization Commission with a ballot issue this November.

New Louisville City Manager Imminent

The official announcement and offer will happen Tuesday; the selected candidate was contacted over the weekend. Predictions?

Senior Pork On The Chopping Block

Louisville City Council told staff last week to return with a plan to eliminate a property tax discount for seniors that I had remarked in April seemed gratuitous. In tight times, the city is making a pragmatic analysis and the Louisville Times article points out the nearly $300,000 a year the city spends on senior programs.

The gist to me is that the amount given back is so small as to be token in nature. In aggregate it costs Louisville about $30,000 a year (max $133 per applicant). And with a new state program offering much more for senior property tax rebates, eliminating this makes sense.

We're Broke - And We Play Nice!

Louisville City Council will consider adopting the Code of Ethics of the Metro Denver Economic Development Corporation Tuesday; MDEDC President Tom Clark will make a presentation on why this is a good idea.

I like the concept; in practice I've heard the commitments not to "sell against" a neighbor and share information is spotty and not always championed by members. Mr. Clark's efforts are worthwhile though and have been more successful than similar efforts around the country. They're more realistic in creating an atmosphere of opportunity for the Front Range than say, oh, revenue sharing plans.

We're Broke - Let's Share!

At the County's urging, the notion of revenue sharing between communities is going to be discussed by the respective City Councils in Louisville and Boulder Tuesday. A proposal to study details to the project needs $49,000; Louisville is being asked to chip in $7,000.

Getting started on this concept is not going to be easy; it goes against the grain of municipal funding mechanisms based on sales tax that have been in place for decades. I perceive the best options for success would be to develop previously un-annexed land between two communities and allow for commercial development; put as many of the costs/responsibilities onto the County. That is likely not within the County's Comp Plan given the buffer philosophy in place (not to mention each community's open space acquisition priority list).

The other option means development of a parcel within a given community's boundary. So someone gets the responsibility of fire protection, traffic and other components of a business in their town while sending some of the income to a neighbor or a regional revenue pool. Hmmm.

I'm curious to see the details to how $49k will be spent and the presumed details that will be discovered. BTW - Lafayette, Erie, Superior and Longmont will be asked to chip in too.

Rational Thought Prevails - Another Champion of Context in the World of Wopburgers

I read another editorial column about the Wopburger's survival on the Blue Parrot's menu that "gets it", as far as I'm concerned. It's all about the context of the word, which more deeply means the intention behind its use. David Harsanyi of the Denver Post says:

"A wise person recently asked me: As a Jew, would you be offended if the work "kike" was part of a name for food? Kike-fish instead gefilte fish, for instance? Depends on the context, of course. If Moshe Greenstein served it to me at my favorite Jewish deli - with horseradish - probably not. If a guy with a swastika tattoo plated it up for me, probably.

And Blue Parrot is owned and operated by Italians. If they're not offended, why should I be offended for them?"

He continues with some background on the decison to keep it:

And for a while there, it looked as if the Wopburger would be yanked off the menu after 80-some-odd years as the kerfuffle erupted around the name. But then, an avalanche of support arrived - and a call from the family's patriarch, Joseph Colacci, made things right.

"Dad called me and said, 'Let it be. I want the Wop back on the menu,"' Riggins says. "It's not just him. People have been outraged by this. And it is terribly silly. ... This is our heritage and something we've lived with all our lives. I'm elated it stays."

Read the rest of hie article here.

The Name Shall Remain At The Blue Parrot

Thanks anonymous - it appears the national media attention has caused the Blue Parrot to reconsider: From the Scripps-Howard News Service:

"We've had so many people coming in and calling us, telling us, 'I can't
believe you're changing the name. Please don't change the name,'" said Joan
Riggins, who owns the restaurant with her father, Joseph Colacci, and brother
Richard Colacci.

The Rocky Mountain News has some other related links to the story. Plus Mike Littwin editorialized about it.

Now it's a battle of wills. Any chance Mr. Gambino will sue? The spotlight is on, and people looking for a fight never refuse that opportunity. Larry King, O'Reilly and Hollywood can't be too far off.

To Kerry's point, the Rocky's food critic gave the wopburger a C+ for taste.