By Peter Marcus, DENVER DAILY NEWS
State Sen. Paula Sandoval took the City Council special election last night to fill the District 1 vacancy left by former Councilman Rick Garcia.
Sandoval, a Democrat who has represented northwest Denver for the past eight years at the State House, says her first priority is going to be dealing with the city’s new zoning code update.
But with the city facing an $80 million shortfall going into the next budget cycle, Sandoval also acknowledges that she will have her work cut out for her.
“Maintaining core city services in light of the budget issues is going to be challenging,” she told the Denver Daily News following her victory.
Sandoval, the wife of well-known former State Sen. Paul Sandoval, won the election last night with 23 percent of the vote, as of the last count by city elections officials last night at 9:18 p.m. Susan Shepherd, a former union political organizer, came in second with 17 percent of the vote, as of the last count last night. State Rep. Jerry Frangas, a Democrat, came in third with 15 percent of the vote.
Sandoval fills the seat left by Garcia as a result of his appointment by the Obama Administration to act as the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s new regional director. He was sworn in in March.
Sandoval says many issues face northwest Denver, including redevelopments and repairs along Colfax Avenue and Federal Boulevard within her district, as well as the relocation of St. Anthony Central Hospital to Lakewood. The vacant lot will be a large piece of land up for development.
Sandoval, who for the past 25 years has co-owned Tamales by La Casita, Inc. along with her husband, said she understands there will be a transition from the State House to city issues, but she says she is up to the task.
“I’m very excited and honored to have been elected the next City Councilperson for District 1,” she said following her victory. “I know I have a lot of work ahead of me transitioning from the Senate to the Council, but I’m up to the task.”

Stay ahead by signing up for State Bill E-News! >

Peter Marcus, DENVER DAILY NEWS
The Denver City Council last night gave approval to $65,000 in liability claims stemming from one incident described as “unwarranted police brutality” and a separate civil action against the Denver Public Library system for allegedly firing a disabled security guard after he complained about adverse working conditions.
Eric Winfield, 29, describes his “ordeal” as being about exposing police brutality incidents, especially those by the Denver Police Department. His self-described nightmare began after Game 3 of the Rockies-Boston Red Sox World Series game in Denver on Oct. 28, 2007 — an incident that left him badly beaten when police allegedly mistook him for another suspect.
Meanwhile, Denver Public Library security guard Kevin Thomas alleges in a complaint against the city that library officials refused to allow him to drink water while on duty, something he needs to do as a result of his condition known as renal dysfunction, a condition that affects the kidney. The black security guard claims that by the time he was fired in December 2007, he had experienced discrimination as a result of his disability and the color of his skin.

A brutal account
It was Winfield’s story, however, that made national headlines after photographs emerged of a badly bruised, bloodied and overall beaten Winfield who was on his way home with friends after watching Game 3 of the World Series back in 2007. Having just watched the game at the former Public House near Coors Field, Winfield and his friends and family headed to his sister’s apartment downtown for a little after-party, according to Winfield’s account of the incident. At around 1:45 a.m., Winfield and a few friends began heading home. As they walked past Le Rouge, a nightclub in LoDo, a fight had broken out by the club.
Winfield and his friends were navigating through the crowd in front of Le Rouge when he was pushed from behind into a car. Believing that Winfield was the suspect in the bar fight, Denver police punched Winfield in the face, threw him to the ground and repeatedly kneed him in the groin, according to Winfield’s account. The lead officer was Officer Antonio Milow, according to Winfield.
He was later beaten by several other officers, including Officers Glenn Martin and Thomas Johnston, according to the allegations.
With Winfield weighing in at around 160 pounds, he stood no match for the three officers, weighing at least 320 pounds, 180 pounds and 280 pounds, respectively, according to Winfield’s account.
Winfield, an oil painter, was transferred by ambulance to Denver Health following the incident where he was treated for a broken nose; lacerations above his eye and on the bridge of his nose; a burst blood vessel in his eye; bruised ribs; cracked and chipped teeth; and documented permanent nerve damage to both hands.
Winfield’s supporters established a Facebook page for him to raise awareness. At “Justice for Eric Winfield,” supporters talk about the concerns they have over police brutality, as well as concerns for Winfield himself. His painting has been affected by the permanent nerve damage, he says.
In the end, he spent more than a day locked up with felons before police charged him with assault on a peace officer. But when prosecutors reviewed the case five months later, the charges were mysteriously dropped without explanation.
“It’s coming to an end for me, but for the taxpayers and City and County of Denver citizens, it’s not coming to an end — it’s the same thing that’s been happening for years and years,” Winfield told the Denver Daily News prior to the City Council meeting last night. “It’s good for me that I can finally put this past me, but I still look forward to helping everyone else out with similar cases É this isn’t going to change anything.”
The Denver City Council last night gave approval to a $40,000 expenditure to settle Winfield’s claim.

Security guard alleges discrimination
An attorney for Kevin Thomas declined to share details of the disabled security guard’s complaint against the city. But court documents allege that Denver Public Library officials went out of their way to make life difficult for Thomas. One complaint is that Thomas asked to drink water on the job because of his medical condition, but that the request was denied.
When he complained about his treatment, Thomas was placed on disciplinary probation, according to the complaint. In November 2007, he was suspended for making his grievances known, according to the complaint.
Thomas was ultimately fired in December 2007.
He alleges that during his entire time working for the Denver Public Library system, library officials treated him differently because of the color of his skin, creating a “hostile work environment.”
Thomas’ attorney argued that he was denied due process, and city attorneys settled the case for $25,000, which the City Council gave approval to yesterday.
Councilwoman Jeanne Faatz, a steadfast fiscal conservative who always takes a close look at lawsuits against the city, said she backed the lawsuits last night because it seemed like the right thing for the city to do.
“I’m always hesitant to even approve them because I don’t want to encourage other people to file them, especially when I really don’t feel they’re meritorious,” said Faatz. “I can’t say that I really feel either one of these is meritorious, but I do feel that there are reasons that I can decide to go ahead and support it.”

Stay ahead by signing up for State Bill E-News! >

County commissioners in Colorado vowed to turn over control of their welfare programs to the state if Gov. Bill Ritter goes ahead with a threat to take over county programs that refuse to pay more for services, the Associated Press reports.

Weld County commissioner Barbara Kirkmeyer told a legislative hearing on child welfare Friday that county officials were blindsided by a proposal from Ritter to take over county programs that fail to pay 20 percent more for programs. Kirkmeyer said counties can`t afford it and they`ll be forced to give up programs that are working.

Stay ahead by signing up for State Bill E-News! >

County officials turned out in force Tuesday to help kill a bill that would have put county commissioners in charge of their salaries. The bill is now dead for the year, The Durango Herald reports.

The Colorado Constitution gives the Legislature the power to set salaries for county elected officials – commissioners, clerks, sheriffs, coroners, surveyors and assessors.

That has always frustrated House Majority Leader Paul Weissmann, D-Louisville. “We have no idea what their budgets look like, whether they can afford it, whether their constituents want it,” Weissmann said.

Stay ahead by signing up for State Bill E-News! >

A proposal in the Legislature would put on November’s ballot the question whether county commissioners should set their own salaries and those of other elected county officials, The Pueblo Chieftain reports. House Concurrent Resolution 1001 would give voters a chance to decide whether to amend Article XIV of the Colorado Constitution, which gives authority to the Legislature to set the salaries of elected county officials.

Stay ahead by signing up for State Bill E-News! >

By Gene Davis, DENVER DAILY NEWS
Many Denver business owners have been notified this month that they must pay a new $50 registration fee so the city can process a business tax that they have been required to pay for decades.
The City of Denver says the biannual fee will cover the costs of processing the occupational privilege tax, which is levied on employers and employees “for the right to work in Denver.” But a small business owner and city councilwoman say the registration fee will make it harder for small business owners to stay afloat in a down economy.
The registration fee is expected to generate an additional $1.4 million for the city. Businesses that owed less than $30 in the occupational privilege tax last year will be exempt from paying the fee, but all other businesses — from a one-person operation to an employer of hundreds of people — will have to pay the same $50 fee.
Gerald Trumbule, a Denverite who runs a business by himself, believes the registration fee unfairly targets small business owners like him.
“For a large company with 1,000 employees, that little $50 fee isn’t going to be a big deal,” he said. “But for a single entrepreneur, a single employee business, you will have to pay almost double (for the occupational tax) that first year.”
The Denver City Council in October passed a bill approving the registration fee. Before the council approved the bill on a 9-2 vote, City Director of Budget and Management Ed Scholz said that the fee would only cover the costs the city incurs when processing the occupational privilege tax. He added that $1.4 million would have to be cut from somewhere else in the budget if it weren’t for the new registration fee.
Councilwoman Marcia Johnson added that when she ran her own business in which she was the only employee, she probably wouldn’t have even noticed a biannual $50 fee compared to the multiple other expenses she incurred
“I believe we have to tax ourselves to provide the services that we in the city believe we should provide,” she said during the Oct. 19 council meeting.
But Councilwoman Jeanne Faatz believes that implementing a new fee at “a time when businesses are trying to survive” is not a good idea.
“This registration fee to me is not business friendly and I will not support it,” she said.
The occupational privilege tax requires employers to annually pay the city $48 for every worker they employ. The tax, which annually generates about $40 million for the city, has not been increased since 1983.
Council members like Peggy Lehmann support the tax because it helps the city cover the costs of maintaining infrastructure like roads that are used by people who work but don’t live, or pay taxes, in Denver.
But Faatz, Trumbule, and community activist Dave Felice believe the new registration fee is a backdoor attempt to raise the occupational tax without going through the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights, which requires voter approval fsor any tax increase.
“It is an example of the kind of frustration people felt when they passed TABOR in the first place,” said Felice. “They were just fed up with the government getting out of hand, and now the government has found another way to subvert the process.”
Business owners are required to pay the registration fee by June 1.

Stay ahead by signing up for State Bill E-News! >

Sam Mamet, executive director of the Colorado Municipal League, said about half of the 800 or so bills that will be proposed this year in Denver will affect the authority of municipalities in some way, and he used rules regarding medical marijuana as an example, The Durango Herald reports.

Stay ahead by signing up for State Bill E-News! >

A slew of potential mayoral candidates has emerged to succeed Hickenlooper if he wins. “Who’s eyeing the race?” political consultant Eric Sondermann told The Denver Post. “Get out the Denver phone book.”

Stay ahead by signing up for State Bill E-News! >

By Peter Marcus, DENVER DAILY NEWS
Parks officials will take a mixed-bag of public comments to city officials this morning concerning a proposal to allow admissions-based events in several of the city’s parks.
The comments come from a spirited Denver Parks and Recreation Advisory Board meeting held Thursday evening at the La Alma Recreation Center. Comments are divided between people who believe parks are for the public and therefore should remain free and open to the public at all times, and those who believe an admissions-based policy would be a good way to activate the city’s parks.
The advisory board has 45 days to vote on a recommendation for city officials. A vote is expected in February.
Supporters point out that more than 60 major cities across the nation have an admissions-based events policy.
The proposal identifies 10 parks, four facilities and five special occasion sites to be considered for admissions-based events. The parks have been the most controversial, including City Park, Civic Center Park, Confluence Park, Denver Performing Art Sculpture Park, Skyline Park, Sloan’s Lake Park, Central Park — Stapleton, Parkfield Park, Ruby Hill Park and Lowry Great Lawn.
Under the proposal, a party or organization would only be allowed to obtain an admissions-based permit once every 30 days. Also, only once every 15 days would an admissions-based event be allowed to take place in any one park.
The draft also calls for 80 percent of the park to remain free and open to the public when an admissions-based event is taking place.

Controversy started in 2007
The controversy began in 2007 after local AEG Live concert promoter Chuck Morris attempted to hold his two-day Mile High Music Festival in City Park. Concerns were immediately raised over noise disturbing nearby zoo animals, traffic interfering with neighbors and residents being unable to access their free and open public park. The festival was soon moved to Dick’s Sporting Goods Park in Commerce City.
A task force was then convened — including citizens — which examined fees, site plans, locations and policies.
Those on the opposing side believe parks are meant to remain free and open to the public at all times. They point to the City Charter, which the group says prohibits any admissions-based events at city parks without a vote of the people.
Former City Councilwoman Cathy Donahue read a sentence from the City Charter, which she believes proves the point.
“The sale and leasing of parks without the approval of a majority of those registered electors voting in an election held by the City and County of Denver, no park or portion of any park belonging to the city, as of Dec. 31st 1955, shall be sold or leased at any time,” Donahue said the City Charter states.
“If you as a body want to suggest to the City Council, or to the elector that we should vote on whether or not to lease part of our parks, you are certainly welcome to do that. But it is not your prerogative to decide what the electors of this city are to decide,” continued Donahue to a room full of applause.

Wavering opinion
A candid Morris took to the microphone where he bounced back and forth between being in support of an admissions-based policy and wanting to leave the decision up to voters. His wavering opinion came as a surprise to opponents of the proposal, who pointed out that Morris was the impetus for the proposal in the first place.
But the iconic concert promoter said he is torn between activating parks to raise money for the city, and leaving them free and open to the public at all times.
“We’re having a very tough time in this city É we all know the limitation financially of what’s going on with the city, so I have a lot of sympathy for the people on the board and the committee É But I don’t want to interfere with the beauty of our parks, I love our parks,” said Morris. “But I do think that what they came up with É I can’t argue with that, I really think that it’s the way to go.”
“But I do want to insist that if this is against City Charter, I will be opposed to it,” he continued.
The City Attorney’s office says an admissions-based policy would not require a vote of the people.
“The manager of Parks and Recreation has authority to grant permits to private individuals and groups to conduct events in city parks, and does so all the time,” David Broadwell, assistant city attorney, told the Denver Daily News in an e-mail. “The Denver Charter does not require a vote of the people every time the manager grants a permit for an event in a park. The fact that a fee or admission price may be charged to participate in an event in a park does not change the analysis. The admission-based event policy under discussion by the city complies with the city charter.”

Great way to activate parks?
Curtis Park resident John Hayden said he is supporting the proposal because he believes it would be an excellent way to activate many of the city’s parks.
“I would like to see the parks in my city used and enjoyed and as beautiful as they can be, and what I expect as a citizen is that my parks and rec department would be managing that resource in a way that would optimize the use and the beauty of the parks, and to me admissions-based events could be a way to raise additional funds to continue to make our parks a beautiful place and an active place,” said Hayden to jeers from opponents.
Donahue pointed out, however, that the money generated from the policy would need to go back into the general fund, which means it would not be earmarked for parks, according to her interpretation of the City Charter.
Meanwhile, Councilman Chris Nevitt said he is in support of the proposal as a means to activate his community’s Ruby Hill Park. Nevitt is actually calling for a less restrictive policy by lowering the number of days organizers would need to wait to obtain a second permit within a period of time. He also believes a park should be allowed to host an admissions-based event every other week, not every 15 days.
But Dave Felice, who for many months has been leading the charge against the policy, said the issue is about free and open parks, and any policy that would compromise that is not a policy the city should adopt.
“It is my mission to oppose fee-based events in city parks,” said Felice. “The parks are to be open and free to the public at all times.”

Distributed by Colorado Capitol Reporters

Stay ahead by signing up for State Bill E-News! >

For Colorado cities, dealing with the issue of medical marijuana in 2009 is a lot like being offered that first joint back in the 1960s – do you join the party or just pass it on? Pueblo City Council is stuck in that predicament at the moment, hoping that if it imposes a seven-month moratorium on licensing any medical marijuana businesses until July 1, the Legislature will get busy this spring and adopt statewide regulations on how to do just that, The Pueblo Chieftian reports.

Read the Colorado Municipal League’s survey of cities here.

Stay ahead by signing up for State Bill E-News! >