Welcome!

This forum is a sounding board for a range of issues facing eastern Boulder County. I will prompt discussions with my posts and elected officials can tap into the concerns of citizens here, and explain their rationale on decisions. Follow along with the latest discussion by checking the list of recent comments on the right. You can comment with your name, a nickname or anonymously if you wish. You can become a contributor as well. Thank you for your comments!
Latest Post:

Friday, September 28, 2007

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 Candidates Need Better Questions

Lafayette's City Administrator Gary Klaphake's job performance has somehow become a highlighted election issue, as opposed to the goals, successes and vision of the current and future Council itself. In the Lafayette News this week, two candidates are spotlighted, Alex Schatz (whom we know well) and Bob Brown (anybody have context on Bob?) . As I read through the articles I see the typical "What qualifies you for Council" question, an open ended (and hyperbole-inducing response by Brown) question on key issues, then a specific reference to Councilor and candidate Kerry Bensman's suggestion Klaphake should be replaced, and what do the candidates think of that.

Seriously?

What a lousy tone and topic to inject into a candidate debate. I know Kerry's felt strongly about this, and that's fine. He should pursue that as he sees fit. But for the paper to champion the cause of one candidate as an across the board campaign issue is way off base. This isn't a policy or vision question, as Councilors should address, it's a potential personnel choice, with an undercurrent of scape-goating and mis-applied responsibility. It's not even and off-base topic people know much about, like should Silver Mine Subs stay open late, or do we need another cop on Hwy 287, or where the heck's the Cheese Importers? Just asking the question asserts a premise most people aren't qualified to evaluate. I want to know what Councilors intend to achieve, not who they intend to hire and fire. It should be a solid assumption of the citizens the Council will direct staff and move people in and out as necessary to achieve their goals. The Lafayette News needs better questions.

New Board Member Imminent In Erie

When Erie Trustee Dave Callahan announced this week he was moving to Denver he also resigned from the Board; the Board now gets to appoint his replacement and will likely do so October 23. This technique is far more efficient than Boulder's recent 14-candidates-for-one-three-month-long-Council-seat special election in July, however in the past Erie's appointment process exploded in accusations of impropriety (Although Callahan's appointment to a Board vacancy wasn't).

From the history files, an excerpt of my Yellow Scene column from February 2002:

The “good ol boys” image was highlighted in February, when Trustee Jennifer Engelbrecht resigned unexpectedly at a regular Board meeting. Trustees Haglin and Steve Skapyak were not present. When the remaining three Trustees (Martinez, Bob Stremel and Lynn Morgan) and Mayor Van Lone decided to appoint a replacement from the crowd in attendance, some cried foul. Nancy Jo Wurl, a temporary Trustee from 1998 – 2000 was asked to step in until the April election.

Typically, although not always, vacancies are announced and candidates are interviewed before being appointed. “I’m just not sure the Ruling Party in Erie understands this whole democracy thing”, said Reed Schrichte, whose wife may run for a seat on the Board. Although there was no legal requirement to fill the vacancy, Van Lone explained that for certain decisions to be made at least four Trustees are required. “We’ve been having attendance problems, and Mrs. Wurl had the experience to step in and contribute. It’s our job to keep the government of Erie functioning.” He adds: “I don’t see how she could turn the world upside down in three meetings.” Because of the controversy, two days later Wurl notified the Board she was declining their temporary appointment.

These “shenanigans” as Schrichte called them, give citizens the sense that the Board is trying to avoid accountability. In a letter to the Erie Review, Bruce Cohen lamented the “blatant attempt by an axis of developers to pack the Board with a sympathetic vote”. To these comments, Van Lone replied: “What does that mean? I don’t know what great conspiracies some people think we have going on here”.


The town is accepting applications for the position, the application deadline is 5 p.m. on October 9. Who shall step forward? My guess is several single issue, pet-peeve-motivated folks. Wouldn't it be coo instead to see someone generally civic-duty minded, wanting to assist the things that are working for Erie? Is that too much to ask?

Thursday, September 27, 2007

Longmont Ballot Issues

Here are some anonymous opinions sent to my site about three ballot issues in the upcoming Longmont election.

AGAINST Longmont Issue 2C: Open Space Sales Tax Extension
Extending this tax until 2034 would be the height of fiscal irresponsibility in view of the tight city budget. Longmonters are already heavily burdened with three open space sales taxes from Boulder County. The last thing the city needs is to go into $31 million more debt with repayment costs of $59.5 million to buy bonds for additional open space. There are far greater spending priorities. This tax was narrowly passed by voters in 2000 with a term of 20 years. The issue should be brought back to the taxpayers when it expires in 2020, not now.

AGAINST Boulder County Issue 1A: Open Space Sales Tax Extension
After 89,000 acres purchased, three sales taxes and nearly $200 million debt, it's time to put the brakes on Boulder County's runaway open space program. The commissioners have devoted far too many resources toward open space, resulting in money being siphoned away from vital county services such as infrastructure, public safety and social services. Excessive open space in Boulder County has proved to have many unintended consequences, most notably unaffordable housing in Boulder. The average sale price of a 3-bedroom home in Boulder is more than $525,000. Boulder also has a weak business climate due to high sales taxes and stifling environmental restrictions. The new Twenty Ninth Street retail center performed poorly in its first year. Broomfield formed its own county several years ago to allow dynamic projects like FlatIrons Crossing and the Broomfield Event Center to flourish. Defeat of Issue 1A would allow this portion of open space sales taxes to expire at the end of 2009 and help to reduce the stranglehold that open space madness has on the county economy.

AGAINST Boulder County Issue 1B: Transportation Sales Tax Extension
Issue 1B is an unneeded extension of a redundant transportation tax. A hefty 1.0% Regional Transportation District (RTD) sales tax is already assessed in Boulder County for transit needs. Road projects are also funded from state and federal sources. In the 2007 Boulder County budget, the commissioners granted a disproportionate $46.2 million for Open Space Funds compared to only $15.2 million for the Road Fund. County voters soundly defeated a similar "transit and trails" sales tax a year ago. The same should be done for this unnecessary sales tax extension.

Imminent Ranting...

Okay, faithful EastBoCO readers, its been an especially crazy week. I'll return tomorrow with several items, from many towns. Hang in there and re-read the posts and comments you missed before - Only a couple weeks til the mail ballots go out...

Tuesday, September 25, 2007

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.

Sunday, September 23, 2007

Trouble In WalMart Land

WalMart's gentleman's agreement in Longmont to build a Sam's Club along with a new SuperCenter is reported in the Times Call to be off the table, making city planners a bit anxious and threatening hardball.

The Sam's Club part of the deal struck in March is said to have been the sweetener that made the deal fly. Now WalMart corporate refuses to commit to the Sam's Club component, leaving Longmont in the position of refusing to fund public improvements as punishment. Too bad the city's agreement with them wasn't all or nothing. Meaning, too bad they don't have veto power over the SuperCenter given the apparent flipping off WalMart corporate is sending in lieu of the Sam's Club.

Friday, September 21, 2007

County Tax Overview: Commissioner Will Toor's Comments

Boulder County Commissioner Will Toor submitted the following comments to add to our discussion of County ballot issues 1A and 1B for open space and transit improvements, respectively. Comments?

I have read with interest the exchanges on this blog on county ballot issues 1A and 1B. I would like to provide my perspective on why both issues benefit all of Boulder County, and urge your support for these issues.

On issue 1A:County Question 1A enables Boulder County to continue preserving, improving and maintaining important open lands around the county. It continues an existing l tenth of a cent sales tax, or 10 cents on a $100 purchase. It does not increase taxes above the current rate, it simply carries forward an existing small amount.

The preservation of open lands is vital to sustaining our quality of life in Boulder County. As urban sprawl from Denver encroaches on our way of life, there is much to do in terms of managing growth and protecting wildlife habitat and agriculture. Critical wildlife corridors and significant parcels of land will be available for open space purchase in the immediate future. If 1A passes, we will be able to safeguard these lands for future generations. If not, we'll see more development throughout rural Boulder County.

We live in a region with significant growth pressures. State planners estimate that Colorado's Front Range - from Colorado Springs to Fort Collins - will grow by more than 3 million people in the next 25 years. This rapid growth intensifies the need for preserving our remaining open spaces. Further, Boulder County's economic health is directly linked to how well we protect our environment.

Without the continuation of this tax, Boulder County won't be able to purchase additional open space for many years and will face real limitations on funds needed to build new trails and facilities. Current open space taxes only generate enough revenue to pay for the land that has already been acquired. If 1A passes, Boulder County will be able to buy and preserve key parcels now before they're bought up by developers and while prices are still affordable.

The remaining land that should be preserved includes wildlife habitat in the mountains and plains; urban buffers between communities; working farms and ranches; and trail linkages. These parcels are often adjacent to or surrounded by other open space land. If we fail to conserve these lands, the impact on current open space will be significant.

Question 1A also provides funds for maintaining and improving the land we have. It will help pay for weed management, wetland and riparian area enhancements, trail and facility construction and maintenance, forest management, wildlife habitat improvements, agricultural management and more.

The choice is clear. We can pass 1A and continue to protect our quality of life and our rural lands or we can defeat 1A and risk development and sprawl. We can protect wild places for wildlife or we can allow wild places to sprout new houses and attract widespread development.

Boulder County is known statewide and nationally for our land preservation efforts, for our trails, our preservation of historic structures and our efforts to manage growth. 1A maintains a very small tax that allows us to continue these efforts.

In response to questions that have been raised on this blog: Boulder county currently has only $12 million left for land acquisition. This may sound like a lot, but at current rates of land acquisition this will last less less than one year. 1A will generate $4.2 million annually. Of this, $3.2 million will be bonded, providing $40 million in bonds for land purchase; and $1 million per year will be available for land management and trail construction. Dr Bombays' statements that county open space funds are primarily invested in the Boulder area are incorrect; he may be confusing County open space with City of Boulder open space. Major County open space purchases over the last few years have included large parcels near Lafayette, Superior, Lyons, Longmont, and one major purchase in the foothills west of Boulder (near the Betasso open space).

Boulder County Ballot Issue 1B - .10% Transportation Sales and Use Tax Extension will allow Boulder County to continue to provide better roads, safer pedestrian crossings, an expanded network of regional trails, and continued high quality transit service for Boulder County - all key components of a balanced and well-maintained transportation system that provides residents and visitors safe and convenient travel choices throughout Boulder County.

Voting Yes on ballot issue 1B will not increase the current sales tax rate. 1B continues an existing one-tenth of a cent sales tax to be used for fifteen years towards the construction development, maintenance and operation of our vital transportation system.

In 2001, the citizens of Boulder County voted to fund improvements to the County's transportation system. Most of these improvements have been implemented, including 42 miles of shoulder and intersection improvements to County roads, implementation of popular transit routes, and major roadway construction of the Valmont Road and Airport Road bridges.

As growth in the County continues, there is a continued need to invest in transportation improvements. If we are to sustain the high quality of life that makes Boulder County such a desirable place to live, work and play, we must continue to support our first class transportation system.

For only a penny on every $10 purchase, 1B will help provide for these important projects and services:

* Roadway Reconstruction, Road Safety and Maintenance Projects (over 40% of funds), including ten critical roadway and intersection improvements throughout the County and funding for ongoing maintenance of our roadway system. This funding will also help construct key underpasses and sidewalks in areas that present barriers to walking or biking safely and conveniently to key community destinations.

* Road/Bike Shoulder Projects (25% of funds), including thirteen different roads that require wider shoulders to improve safety for both drivers and bicyclists.

* Transit Projects that support Senior Transportation programs, Eco Pass programs for neighborhoods and businesses, and continued support for important transit routes throughout the county (approximately 16% of funds). Passage of 1B will mean continued support for transit service between Lafayette, Erie, Louisville, Superior, Longmont, Lyons and Boulder, as well as improved connections between communities in the southeast county to the U.S. 36 corridor.

* The completion of our Regional Trails system (15% of funds). This program will complete the final sections of the Coal Creek and Rock Creek Trail system, implement the planned St. Vrain Greenway Trail between Longmont and Lyons, continue work on the Feeder Canal Trail and the UP Rail Trail, and provide Nederland and Lyons with additional trail connections. The trails fund would also pay for the Boulder County sections of the U.S. 36 Bikeway to link Boulder with Superior, Louisville and on to Westminster and Denver.

Lastly, by leveraging these funds with state and federal dollars, we can complete an even greater number of projects than could otherwise be implemented.

You can find Will's biography and contact information on the Boulder County website.

Wednesday, September 19, 2007

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.