Dear Shelly endorsement

Lisa Jones of Dear Denver has endorsed Shelly Watters in the District 7 runoff in an article entitled "Watters, please, in District 7." Her reasoning is mainly directed against the current frontrunner in the race:

I suppose I should start getting used to the idea of Chris Nevitt on Denver City Council. I'm among the few who aren't favorably impressed by him. Not that I'm jumping up and down about Shelly Watters, mind you. But I do think Watters is the better choice.

She prefers Watters for two reasons: first, because Watters has been a council aide for Carol Boigon (whom Jones likes), and second, because she is concerned that Nevitt may be too ideological, to wit:

we all love Jimmy Stewart-style politicians who stick to their principles. Sometimes, however, noble motives conflict with practicality and political reality. "Being right" doesn't always translate into "getting it done."

Connor declines to endorse in CD7

In Council District 7, Julie Connor has declined to endorse either of the remaining candidates. While the material effect of this decision is to put her supporters "up for grabs," Shelly Watters' candidacy suffers a greater harm. That's because Watters needed the support of Connor's entire base to stay within shouting distance of Chris Nevitt, yet now will have to make up the difference on her own.

Below is an excerpt from Connor's letter to supporters.

Voters groused that it was a field packed so full of smart choices that they couldn’t make up their minds, and indeed we are all experienced and deeply committed to community service. The field has narrowed, but the expertise has not.

For the runoff, rather than direct voters towards one candidate or the other, I am suggesting people think about what aspects are most important for a councilperson to get the job done (responsiveness, experience, philosophy, vision, fight, commitment, ambition, personality, connections, endorsements, confidence, whatever), and then have a conversation with each one to determine which one possesses those requirements/needs/qualifications...

Don’t be reluctant to talk to the candidates: After a five-minute talk with each of them one-on-one, you will get a clear picture of who is going to serve you better. And there aren’t many political candidates who you can actually call and talk to; a City Council race is one of the few with accessible candidates. Plus, regardless of who gets elected, it will be remembered that you were engaged enough to call and sound them out – that’s a constituent who it would be wise to pay attention to down the line.

Most importantly, whoever you decide to vote for, get that ballot back to the Election Commission by Tuesday, June 5 before 7:00 p.m.

Watters picks up endorsement

The Shelly Watters campaign issued a news release yesterday trumpeting the endorsement of Colorado State Senator Ken Gordon:

Denver, CO - Today, Senate Majority Leader Ken Gordon (D-Denver) endorsed Shelly Watters in the City Council District Seven Run-Off Election. Senator Gordon has worked with Shelly since 1999, when she was first an aide to Former Councilwoman Joyce Foster and then Councilwoman Carol Boigon.

"Shelly will be a great asset to Denver's City Council. She is balanced and thoughtful in her approach, and her experience with City processes makes her the best choice to represent the residents of District 7. I enthusiastically endorse Shelly Watters for City Council District 7," said Gordon.

Shelly added, "Senator Gordon is a well-respected public official and I am honored to have the support of someone who has worked so hard for the citizens of Colorado. He understands the issues facing the residents of Denver, from graffiti to improving our schools, and I am thrilled that he believes I am the best choice to address these issues."

Earlier this week, Shelly earned the endorsements of a majority of Neighborhood Association Presidents. Out of the ten Neighborhood Association Presidents, six are supporting Shelly's bid to be the next Councilwoman . The other four Neighborhood Association Presidents have chosen not to endorse a candidate to date.

For full list of Shelly's endorsements please visit www.shellywatters.com

Runoff election polls (May 15th update)

The current runoff election polls are pretty interesting.

In the Council District 3 poll, Paul Lopez leads JoAnne Phillips by 53% to 47%. However, the current margin of just 7% is a rather dramatic departure from Lopez's general election margin of 30%. The close online race is even more impressive given Phillips lack of online presence: she doesn't appear to have a website, has never responded to any posting online, and barely even registered 1% in our March poll of this district.

The real-world margin appears to be holding in our tally of Council District 7 preferences. Chris Nevitt leads by 20, with 60% against Shelly Watters' 40%. This is especially impressive as Nevitt was drubbed by Watters fans in the previous Denver Politics poll of District 7.

The most inverted results were found in the Council District 8 poll, in which Carla Madison leads frontrunner Sharon Bailey with 56% to 44%. This is likely due to the online presence of Madison troops. In the Denver Politics poll of District 8 leading up to the May general election, Madison had an even more commanding lead of 56% versus Bailey's 7%... yet we see how that turned out.

These polls will remain open until June 5th, so be sure to register your preference.

And as always, our disclaimer: "Internet polls are NOT scientific and anyone who suggests otherwise is a fool."

Neighborhood analysis, Council District 7

In Council District 7, Shelly Watters doesn't have a ghost of a chance of winning. As the graph below shows, she only challenged Nevitt's lead in three neighborhoods: Overland, Valverde, and Rosedale. Throughout the rest of the district, including her own Platt Park, she trails by 14% or more.

West Wash Park, Athmar Park, and College View weren't even competitive, with Chris dominating by a margin of more than 30%.

POLL: Council District 7 runoff

Opinion Polls & Market Research

Official Disclaimer: Internet polls are NOT scientific and anyone who suggests otherwise is a fool.

Ready, set, spend!

In the upcoming runoff election, the amount of money raised isn't as important as how much they have left.

The figures reflect each candidate's April 24th statement, so we should expect that the candidates spent some of this money before the general election ended. Still, the graph gives a good indicator both of the depth of their fundraising and the potential reserves for their upcoming runoff election.

For instance, although Nevitt raised significantly more funds than Watters, his financial reserves were just $2,400 more. Meanwhile, in District 3, Lopez retained an overwhelming advantage both in total fundraising and reserves.

Aide to winning seats on Denver City Council

Back in 2002, Peter Blake of the Rocky Mountain News offered a primary on "How To Win Seat On City Council." His answer? Become a council aide.

After all, it's worked in the past. Look at Jeanne Robb, Peggy Lehmann, Judy Montero, and Carol Boigon. They were all council aides before winning a seat in their own right. Yet so many more have tried and failed.

This year, aideship seems like a far less promising path to the Council. Just three aides were in the race, and none seem likely to join their former bosses at the dias.

• Julie Connor (aide to current Councilwoman Kathleen MacKenzie) went down to defeat in Council District 7.
  
• Shelly Watters (aide to current Councilwoman Carol Boigon) is in the runoff, but facing a daunting 20% deficit against frontrunner Chris Nevitt.
  
• JoAnn Phillips (aide to former Councilwoman Ramona Martinez) trails frontrunner Paul Lopez by 30%.

Nevertheless, I offer an excerpt from the April 24, 2002 article as found in the Rocky Mountain News for your historical reading pleasure:

There is no royal right of succession to seats on Denver City Council, but if you can't be born to the job, the next best way to land it is to work for the incumbent.

Just as many current council members served as aides to former ones, so do their aides hope to succeed them - or maybe another member - in the 2003 elections. To serve on council you have to live in the district you represent.

District 3 Councilwoman Ramona Martinez worked 10 years for the late Councilman Sam Sandos and now holds his job. When term limits force her out next year, among those hoping to succeed her is aide John Soto Jr. Her other aide, Bernadette Salazar, might also run...

Debbie Ortega succeeded to the council seat once held by Sal Carpio, and rumor has it that one of those who might run to succeed her is current aide Kim Kucera. A former Ortega aide, parks spokeswoman Judy Montero, might also run.

District 5 Councilwoman Polly Flobeck, who once worked for Paul Swalm, has two former aides who might run next year. Marcus Pachner, who just left her office, could run in the district; another former assistant, Jeanne Robb, might run in District 10 for Councilman Ed Thomas' seat.

District 11 Councilwoman Happy Haynes succeeded the man she had worked for, Bill Roberts. Her former aide, ex-school board member Bennie Milliner, might seek her job next year.

Sharon Elfenbein, assistant to Council President Joyce Foster in District 4, made an abortive run for the vacant District 6 seat that Charlie Brown won last year. But she said she's not likely to try again next year. A former Foster aide, Carol Boigon, is likely to run for an at-large seat next year.

A funny thing happened to Peggy Lehmann, who served in years gone by as an aide to former council members Mary DeGroot and Bill Himmelman. She came within just a few votes of beating Brown last year but the new redistricting map puts her in District 4 instead of 6. Brown is one of only three council members who can run again next year. Lehmann hasn't decided whether to run in 4.

Among those who never served as an aide is Councilwoman-at-large Cathy Reynolds. That's because there were no aides when she was first elected in 1975, and she takes credit for creating the system shortly thereafter. Each council member is entitled to 1.75 aides, a peculiar bureaucratic compromise...

It's obvious why aides have an edge when running for the top job. They've worked with local issues for years ``and can hit the ground running,'' said Reynolds. ``They know a heckuva lot more about how to do the job.''

And, if the council member likes the aide, he or she might get access to the contributor lists.

RMN runs down the election and previews the runoffs

And the big story of the day from the Rocky Mountain News? Well, of course "It's the Hickenlooper waltz" by Daniel Chacon.

After a brief rundown of the results, Chacon records "some memorable moments."

* A postal worker drove up to the Denver Election Commission office in his postal truck and dropped off his ballot in the all-mail contest.

"We thought it was kind of weird," worker Judy Hodges said.

• Voters complained that a pro-immigrant march prevented them from dropping off their ballots at commission headquarters.

"What incompetent idiot approved a parade down our street on Election Day?" asked Election Commissioner Susan Rogers. "Do you realize they're blaming us for it? Like we approve parades now, apparently. There's a posting on (a political blog) accusing us of disenfranchising voters by having a parade through here."

• People did double takes when they saw Gov. Bill Ritter standing in line at the Election Commission waiting to apply for an emergency ballot.

His ballot was mailed to his home in Platt Park. Ritter and his family moved into the Governor's Mansion this year, but he hadn't updated his address.

Ritter posed for pictures with election workers who were sporting festive boas and cowboy hats. Tuesday was "hat day" for commission workers, who wore exotic headgear while counting ballots.

Astoundingly, the News then did something uncharacteristic: provided more hard data about the issues now in front of the voters, profiling the 6 candidates still in the race for election in the June 5 runoff. Each candidate was briefly profiled and asked the following questions:

• Biggest challenge for Denver?
  
• Do you support a property tax increase to repair city assets?
  
• What would you do about gang crime in Denver?

Read the full article for details of Paul Lopez, JoAnn Phillips, Chris Nevitt, Shelly Watters, Sharon Bailey, and Carla Madison.

Predictions found in Westword comics

Westword's Kenny Be has weighed in on the upcoming election, playing on themes of boredom and silliness.

Prospective winners are indicated for all offices, included contested races as Council District 3 (Kathy Sandoval, Paul Lopez), Council District 7 (Shelly Watters, Julie Connor), and Council District 8 (Carla Madison, Darrell Watson).

Then there's the fun made of challengers Waldo Benevidez, Niccolo Casewit, and RJ Ours.

It seems to be all in good fun... and anything that helps to alert folks to the election is a good thing. View the original comic with all its caricatures at Westword's "Worst Case Scenario."

POLL: City Council District 7

Opinion Polls & Market Research

Official Disclaimer: Internet polls are NOT scientific and anyone who suggests otherwise is a fool.

Video Interview: Shelly Watters (CD7)

Colorado Confidential's Kerri Rebrush interviewed Shelly Watters, City Council candidate for Council District 7.

Watters speaks to her personal background and work with former City Council Councilwoman Joyce Foster and current Councilwoman Carol Boigon.

She speaks to her knowledge of zoning and constituent services, and discusses the fun of running for City Council.

As for the locus of her support, she indicates that she is the only candidate who served on a neighborhood board.

Her top issues are safety and graffiti. She indicates that the rebuilding of higher-density homes is a real issue on the east side of Council District 7 (in contrast, Julie Connor and Chris Nevitt see that as an issue on the west side of the district).

She goes on to talk about the public schools and the impact of city government on the daily lives of citizens.

She pledges to locate her Council office in the district itself, instead of downtown at the City & Council Building, as well as meet regularly with the presidents of registered neighborhood organizations.

Denver Politics endorses... Julie Connor in District 7

What do you look for in a City Council candidate? We think four things are paramount:

• Intelligence applied to real-world problems
  
• Commitment to public service
  
• Identification with ordinary citizens
  
• Experience in city government

City Council District 7 is fortunate to have several committed candidates. But in terms of the listed characteristics, one stands above the rest: Julie Connor.

Connor knows the ins and outs of city government, having worked in constituent services for outstanding representative Kathleen MacKenzie. She knows each and every major (and minor) question before our district, and she has developed the personal relationships necessary to achieve desired outcomes.

Even more importantly, she identifies with ordinary citizens, helping the advantaged and disadvantaged alike to participate in city government. As a historian, I was impressed by Connor's dedication in finding common ground in the contentious DeBoer Historic District, reconciling divergent interests so that a compromise could be reached.

And she is smart. Watch the forums, read the interviews, and talk with her. She is sharp, alert, and alive with the issues. That's the sort of person I want on City Council.

Chris Nevitt is also a great candidate, with both the "common man" viewpoint and the intelligence to carry through the work, but he has been on the fringes of public policymaking. Meanwhile, Shelly Watters has become a favored candidate, raising lots of money from development interests. But the trust of such well-heeled insiders and politicos leads to questions of access, fairness, and perspective. I want someone who will hear the rest of us: new participants and old hands, small donors and no donors, and previously-excluded as well as seasoned veterans.

Connor has been committed to public service from the Peace Corps to the present day, in wide-ranging issues facing the district in all of its complexity. For all these reasons, we enthusiastically endorse Julie Connor as our next City Councilwoman from Council District 7.

Divided Council District 7

Daniel Chacon of the Rocky Mountain News has written about the chasm between communities in City Council's District 7.

The article was entitled: "In divided District 7, there are two sides to everything: East, west zones split by wealth, development."

In some ways, [Councilwoman] MacKenzie said, District 7 is "like two different districts."

"On the east side of the river, I get constant complaints about scrape-offs and infill developments because there's so much private investment, and people want it to stop," she said.

"But on the west side of the district, they'd love to have pop tops and scrape-offs and that kind of investment that indicates that people want to stay in the community."

The candidates mainly offered platitudes about spreading the wealth, encouraging redevelopment in the western "areas of change" and supporting the eastern "areas of stability.

In terms of neighborhood character, three of the four were in agreement:

Connor, Watters and Nevitt said they support private investment but would work to preserve neighborhood character.

The fourth candidate, Dennis Smith, a teacher at South High School and the only Republican in the nonpartisan race, said the development in the east side is "a nice problem to have."

Watters was described as "supported by development interests," while "Nevitt and Connor have received campaign contributions from several labor interests" and "Smith is neither soliciting nor accepting campaign contributions."

Biographical sketches and forums below:

JULIE CONNOR
Age: 40
Occupation: Senior analyst for MacKenzie.
Family: Single, no children.
Etcetera: Speaks Spanish and served in the Peace Corps in Paraguay.

CHRIS NEVITT
Age: 45
Occupation: Political economist. Former executive director of the Front Range Economic Strategy Center.
Family: Married, no children.
Etcetera: Born in Thailand and has lived in Africa, Australia and Russia, among other places.

DENNIS SMITH:
Age: 48
Occupation: Teacher at South High School.
Family: Married, two sons, ages 12 and 8.
Etcetera: Serves on the Denver Parks and Recreation advisory board.

SHELLY WATTERS
Age: 61
Occupation: Former aide to at-large Denver City Councilwoman Carol Boigon and former Councilwoman Joyce Foster.
Family: Married, one adult daughter.
Etcetera: The New York native has lived in Denver for more than 30 years.

Political force in the Home Builders Association of Metro Denver

I have been openly (sometime unreservedly) critical of the Denver dailies. But occasionally critical and hard-working reporters do slip through the cracks. One such reporter is Stuart Steers of the Rocky Mountain News.

It takes more than a little gusto to rip through the campaign statements over every political candidate for municipal elections in Denver. But if you want to understand the power of such powerful organizations as the Home Builders Association of Metro Denver, that's what it takes.

Especially when one of the most important tasks of the next Denver City Council is going to be implementing the recommended changes of the Zoning Code Taskforce.

Review Steers' article entitled "Developers build campaign coffers: Elected officials bound to have say in major projects." Specific mention is provided to council candidates Marcia Johnson, Carol Boigon, Jeanne Faatz, Peggy Lehmann, Doug Linkhart, Shelly Watters, Carla Madison, and Charlie Brown.

CD7: In-depth analysis of campaign finances - and by extension, the race itself

Money tells a lot about a candidate. In that spirit, we have analyzed the contributions in the City Council District 7 race to tell a more complete story of this highly-competitive race.

Currently, Nevitt and Watters are battling for supremacy in terms of total dollars raised:

Chris Nevitt $65,209
Shelly Watters $52,723
Julie Connor $21,800

But of course, such raw numbers tell only a small part of the story. Trends over time and changes within the donor base are also crucial. For instance, even at the beginning of the race, there was a great deal of money ($41,775 to be exact). Since then, the scale of monthly contributions has risen somewhat unevenly: Shelly Watters' contributions have diminished while Nevitt has surged and Julie Connor is increasing the pace.

Chris Nevitt has the lead in the total number of contributions, with an especially big surge in March.

But the most significant difference between the candidates is their reliance on big-ticket donors. Whereas both Julie Connor and Chris Nevitt have a roughly even split among their donor base, more than 80% of the contributors to Shelly Watters campaign have donated $250 or more.

Who are the primary donors financing this race? A small number of stalwarts are the real power behind each candidacy, giving maximum $1000 contributions. Below is a list of "maxed out" donors for each candidate:

Shelly Watters: David Kenney, Brad Buchanan, Doug McKinnon, Elaine Berman, Eric Miller, Evan Makovsky, Foster Graham Milstein & Calisher, Greg Stevinson, Harold Grueskin, Harvey Deutsch, Howard Greinetz, Jay Kamlet, Jennifer Watters, Joyce Foster, Marcia Robinson, Marilyn Schwartz, Mark Goldberg, Medical Property Holdings, Norman Brownstein, Paradise Properties, Sage Hospitality, Sheldon Steinhauser, and Sherri Way

Chris Nevitt: Audrey Nevitt, Robert Nevitt, Carpenters Union 55, Chris Mygatt, Colorado Machinists, CSCEW, Firefighters Local 858, Int'l Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Int'l Union of Painters, James Mauro Jr, Jessica Brady, Joanie Condoret, Jon Condoret, Journeyman Plumbers, Kristen Stoever, Local 720 PAC, NECA, Refrigeration & AC Assoc, Service Employees Local 105, Sheetmetal Workers, Teamsters Municipal PAC, and Transit Union Workers #1001

Julie Connor: Ajay Kapoor, Denver Police, Michael Stratton, Tom Connor, United Food & Commercial Workers

These folks can no longer give. But will they support another candidate? It appears unlikely. Although we often assume that donors give money to multiple candidates ("playing the odds," as it were), that phenomenon has been remarkably limited in this campaign. Of the 799 contributors, only 14 have (so far) given money to more than one candidate.

David Cole ($200 to both Julie & Shelly, $50 to Chris)
Sherri Way ($1000 to Shelly, $250 to Chris)
Jim Jones ($500 to Shelly, $250 to Chris)
Rich Delanoy ($350 to Shelly, $250 to Julie)
Sharon Withers ($250 to Shelly, $50 to Chris)
Charlotte Winzenburg ($200 to Chris, $50 to Julie)
Gertie Grant ($200 to Chris, $25 to Julie)
Joe Cannata ($100 to both Chris & Shelly)
Lynn Pressnall ($100 to Chris, $75 to Julie)
Jeff Leventhal ($100 to Chris, $25 to Shelly)
Brenda McHenry ($50 to Julie, $25 to Shelly)
Sheila Robinson ($50 to Chris, $40 to Shelly)
Tom Parsons ($50 to both Chris & Julie)
Charlie Busch ($50 to both Julie & Shelly)

In the end, we are left with several strong impressions:

• Chris Nevitt has a strong lead in campaign financing, not only because he has the overall margin but because he has energized a wide base of donors. He also has the most institutional support through a variety of union connections.
  
• Shelly Watters' financial backing is dominated by wealthy, business-oriented contributors in the legal and land-development communities. Her initial lead is now lost, and neither the percentage of "maxed out" donors nor the small number of ordinary contributors bodes well.
  
• Julie Connor has the highest percentage of small dollar donations and the smallest percentage of "maxed out" donors. Her finance options are therefore the most promising, with an opportunity to exploit her attractiveness to ordinary voters and/or squeeze higher dollar values from her base. But this financial gap needs to be closed for uninvolved or undecided voters to hear her message.

Virtual bull-session at ColoradoPols

The folks over at ColoradoPols.com are having an virtual bull-session about several City Council races. Among the highlights:

• Mountain Man predicts victories for Shelly Watters in CD7 and Carla Madison in CD8. Others tout Chris Nevitt and Julie Connor.
  
• Is CD8 really a "black seat"?
  
• The under-the-radar CD3 race gets some attention.
  
• Cuervo71 dreams of Charlie Brown's defeat in CD6.
  
• Mtnpublius imagines a race between Rick Garcia and Andrew Romanoff in US Congressional District 1.

CD7: Shelly Watters phone calls

I received the following email, which I will post without comment:

I was troubled by a phone call I received earlier today. I am quite used to getting phone calls from candidates and parties, but they always immediately identify themselves. I received a phone call today from someone wanting to ask questions about the upcoming election, sort of making me think it was a think tank or newspaper, immediately asked about the race for District 7 and who I would vote for in that race, starting to list off names. I then asked whom she was calling on behalf of and was told they were paid by Shelly Watters. I had made no decision about that race, but now have about her. It may be legal, but I found it quite shady for her to have those calls made without having the caller immediately identify themselves as being with and/or hired by her campaign. She may just be naive, but that was really shady.

Profile: Shelly Watters (CD7)

DU Today has published an article outlining the policy positions of city council candidates in three areas. The article by Richard Chapman is entitled "Candidates vie to replace MacKenzie in District 7," and includes profiles of both Council District 6 and Council District 7 candidates.

Below is the response of CD7's Shelly Watters:

Experience you consider most relevant to Denver City Council service:
I have lived in the district for over 30 years and have raised a family here. I have been active on my neighborhood association and have served on the board for the last four years. I have been a council aide for seven years to two city councilwomen — Carol Boigon and Joyce Foster. I believe I have the most experience in understanding the issues of the district and city and have a record of bringing people together to find solutions.

The University of Denver describes itself as a “private institution for the public good.” If the University were to ask you for suggestions as to how this could be accomplished in the years ahead, how would you answer?
I would like to see more DU departments and schools working with city departments to offer students more hands on training. A lot of projects around the city could also benefit from the expertise of the faculty and should involve more of them on more taskforces and committees.

What are the top three issues affecting District 7 that you intend to tackle after being elected to City Council?
1) Safety: Fighting crime, from graffiti to gangs, to ensure the safety of our neighborhoods; 2) Neighborhood character: Maintaining our neighborhoods while allowing for thoughtful redevelopment; 3) Transportation: We need to make Denver more bike and pedestrian friendly and improve access to light-rail stations.

CD7: Candidates take on zoning issues

Kevin Dickson, chair of the Overland Neighborhood Association, sent all of the City Council District 7 candidates a set of question affecting his neighborhood. Among the questions were:

1. What is happening with zoning changes afoot in the District?
2. What do you think should be done?
3. How will the Zoning Code Update address the wishes of the neighborhoods?
4. What do you perceive are the wishes of the individual neighborhoods?
5. Do the wishes of the neighborhoods align with what's best for the city overall?

Each candidate provided a statement. The full statements from all District 8 City Council representatives has been posted online.

Below are excerpts from the candidates who are on the May 2007 ballot.

First, from Shelly Watters:

In 2001 the Denver City Council adopted Blue Print Denver as its land use and transportation plan. According to the Denver Regional Council of Governments, the Denver region is expected to grow over the next twenty years from 2.5 million to 4 million people. Blueprint Denver is an attempt to rationally plan for that growth. Blueprint Denver divides the City into areas of change and areas of stability. It calls for growth to be directed to areas of change and for tools to be developed to protect the character of our existing stable neighborhoods. Last year the Community Planning and Development Department convened a broad based task force to look at Denver’s outdated zoning code to eliminate barriers to implementing Blueprint Denver. I worked with my neighborhood, other neighborhoods and City Council members to successfully put pressure on the task force to make developing tools to preserve the character of our existing neighborhoods their first priority. I believe the task force which includes realtors, developers and neighborhood activists, among others, is the best place to deal with this issue. The Task Force seems to be headed in the right direction. It is currently looking at different neighborhood typologies to develop tools specific to that neighborhood rather than a generic one size fits all solution. I support Blueprint Denver and want to see it implemented.

I do not believe in freezing neighborhoods in time. Neighborhoods need to constantly change and regenerate in order to remain healthy. Families want larger houses than they did in the past. However, I do believe the diverse character of our neighborhoods is one of Denver’s greatest assets. We need to find ways to allow for growth and change while still maintaining the existing character and scale which attracted people to the neighborhood in the first place. Many of us do not want to see the same fake stone generic, suburban house throughout Denver.

Some neighborhoods are looking at rezoning from R2 to R1. R2 allows duplexes and triplexes and R1 only allows single family homes. These neighborhoods have had many single family homes scraped and replaced with duplexes that take up the whole lot. They see rezoning or historic preservation as the only tools available to them to protect their neighborhood’s character. Sloan’s Lake was directed by the Planning Department to submit an application for a defined area that included all properties in that area. West Washington Park is meeting with homeowners in a specific area (I don’t believe the area has totally been decided, it will be based on the amount of support.) The difference is West Washington Park will only include those homeowners who want to rezone. I believe this is the right approach, even if there are pockets of homes which do not have their zoning changed. I support the right of these homeowners to rezone their properties...

Second, from Chris Nevitt:

Zoning is one of the most important areas of responsibility for City Council. It lies at the heart of our aspirations for our city and our neighborhoods – how they look, how they feel, how they function. It’s wise, therefore, of the Overland Neighborhood to subject candidates for City Council to close scrutiny in this area.

... a good approach to “right” zoning is, I believe, an effort I am currently helping lead in my own neighborhood, West Washington Park. Ours is a grass-roots, entirely voluntary effort, pursued by individual home-owners, working together, to “right” zone their own properties in an effort to preserve the character of the neighborhood they love. Our effort respects individual property rights, and the inevitable disagreements among neighbors, while nonetheless moving forward to make the greatest possible impact on a widely-shared concern.

Here is the problem we face: much of the zoning in my neighborhood is R-2, which allows for multiplex units. For most of the last century, however, the neighborhood has maintained a stable single-family character more consistent with R-1 zoning. That character is now under serious pressure. The steady escalation in per-square-foot prices, combined with the much greater square-footage allowed by current zoning, has created a perverse incentive for developers to pursue a speculative scrape-and-flip business model.

Some of the new homes are welcome additions to the neighborhood; some of the homes we’ve lost won’t be particularly missed. More often, however, it is perfectly good old brick homes that are being knocked down, replaced by oversized, shoddily-built, poorly designed, multiplexes. This is neither good for the neighborhood nor sustainable as a longterm development pattern. We should be discouraging this kind of short-term land speculation, and encouraging, instead, long-term investments by residents in the value of both their property and their neighborhoods.

The problem faced by my neighborhood is not unique. With different local variations, it is a problem shared by many of our neighborhoods. I have always been a strong believer in the power and value of focused, intelligent, and determined local action. I am pursuing that action with my neighbors. I encourage others to follow suit, and I will help them every way I can. But such action also needs to be supported by the City. And the City needs to do more to make it easier for residents to improve their own properties, to make the kind of long-term investments that build stable, healthy, and attractive communities.

With some leadership, and some luck, we should be able to end up with both “good” zoning and “right” zoning – zoning that promotes the kind of quality, community-sustaining development we want to see, while preserving and protecting the unique character of the Denver neighborhoods we love. I look forward to working with all of you – and working constructively through the disputes and disagreements – to achieve those ends.

And finally, from Julie Connor:

1. What is happening with zoning changes afoot in the District?

...Zoning issues in Overland, Athmar Park, Godsman, Ruby Hill and College View have tended to revolve around out-of-date PUDs (i.e., Catholic Charities housing project in Ruby Hill), neglected opportunities (i.e., Evans light rail station area in Overland) and undesirable adjacency issues (i.e., RTD bus barn across the street from single-family homes in College View). Heretofore, these types of zoning issues have been dealt with on an ad hoc basis rather than by zoning language amendments or policy changes, and this is unlikely to change much in the near future. (Although problematic adjacencies are a citywide issue so it might be addressed in the zoning code update.)

All of these zoning issues require vigilance, creativity and persistence in trying to reconcile what’s permitted with what’s wanted so we can get to and encourage desirable investment in every neighborhood.

2. What do you think should be done?

One thing that needs to be recognized is that different neighborhoods have different needs and character. The current zoning code treats every R-2 in every neighborhood essentially the same. A common complaint of Quick Wins II is that it solved a problem for University Park and Hilltop neighborhoods, but created worse problems for others. Whether that is the general consensus or not, it is clear that zoning categories probably need to be differentiated in some way from neighborhood to neighborhood, in addition to having a transparent and predictable zoning code and maintaining private property rights.

Another measure requiring action is the creation of interim tools. The zoning code update is held up as a forthcoming panacea, but in the meantime, divisive battles are being fought with the paltry land use tools available. In neighborhoods concerned about the loss of neighborhood character, interim tools need to be employed or invented prior to the completion of the zoning code update. A couple possible intermediary steps between here and there might be conservation districts or pattern books.

As stated in the first question, industrial/residential and commercial/residential adjacency issues need to be addressed in the zoning code update. How they are addressed should be tackled by the consultants.

A final matter I think needs looking into is our public hearing process for rezonings. Although the City Planning department encourages public notification and input on rezonings prior to submitting an application, essentially the public hearing (and thus, the legal protest process) comes at the end of an arduous, expensive and time-consuming course. I would not support doing away with people’s right to protest at the last possible moment, but I think the process might be better organized with the aim being to reduce the number of contentious rezonings, which leave both sides battered and resentful.

3. How will the Zoning Code Update address the wishes of the neighborhoods?

There seems to be the intention to create more zoning categories, which would provide a wider range of options, and therefore, theoretically, provide better fits for various areas. For instance, there might be a residential zoning for narrow lots in the urban core (such as the Speer neighborhood) and a residential zoning for large lots in the suburban-like areas (such as College View). Additionally, as mentioned above, these various zoning categories could drill down to even more specificity to address the individual characteristics of a neighborhood while still providing the freedom to expand or scrape and rebuild.

4. What do you perceive are the wishes of the individual neighborhoods?

To protect their quality of life and maintain their property values seems to be what I hear most from residents. Typically, conversations revolving around what people want for their neighborhoods includes the desire to preserve trees, reduce vehicle traffic, maintain a residential character while having access to amenities nearby, diminish crime and graffiti, and support and improve our schools.

5. Do the wishes of the neighborhoods align with what's best for the city overall?

In the general sense that pretty much everybody’s looking for a good quality of life, yes. Where we diverge is when one person’s version of quality of life precludes another person’s version – and they’re both defining it for the same area. Those conflicts simply have to be dealt with as they arise, with respect for all perspectives.

Sometimes what's best for the city overall is a theoretical vision of what we would like to see 20 years from now. But implementing that vision can have impacts and consequences for residents living here today. Regardless how laudable the vision might be, the real-time, on-the-ground effects of implementation cannot be dismissed and need to be addressed. A council person should work to blend these sometimes disparate voices and visions into a coherent course of action that ideally is better than what was originally proposed because it achieves the vision while alleviating or mitigating the impacts. But if that synthesis cannot be achieved, at the end of the day, my job is to represent the concerns of District 7 residents.