John Orr: November 2003 Election

Sun, 09 Nov 2003 16:15:37 GMT

Denver November 2003 Election Ed Quillen has an idea for solving the water problems in the South Metro area now that the voters have killed Referendum A [November 9, 2003, "A water solution that's not all wet"]. The solution that he is crafting centers on maintaining stream flows and making the beneficiaries of a project pay most of the costs. It was the first time I remember Quillen labeling Referendum A a "water grab." That was the argument I heard last weekend in Cortez. The referendum went down for two primary reasons. Metro area voters didn't trust the coalition supporting the referendum with a "Blank Check" and West Slope voters saw it as a "Water Grab." Quillen lives in Salida, not the West Slope. He is more aligned with a rainy side point of view with respect to Denver. Here's a look at voter participation and some of the effects of Tuesday's election from Fred Brown in today's Denver Post [November 9, 2003, "Election odds and ends"]. Gail Schoettler reviews some of the issues decided last Tuesday and pats Colorado voters on the back in her column in today's Denver Post [November 9, 2003, "Colorado voters got message across: Enough is enough"]. Says Schoettler, "As we go into the 2004 election, there will be another slew of ballot issues for voters to decide. While it would be more appropriate for our elected legislators to make some of these tough decisions during the legislative session, as they are elected to do, there will no doubt be a number of hard choices tossed back to voters. For those who will spend megabucks to influence voters one way or the other, it would be useful to look back to the election of 2003. Colorado voters aren't easily fooled. Most of us would be very grateful if you'd invest your money in really making our state better, not just the shams and scams we saw on our ballots this year."

Thu, 06 Nov 2003 13:09:42 GMT

Denver November 2003 Election Here's a story about Referendum A supporters, the day after the water proposal was defeated, from the Rocky Mountain News [November 6, 2003, "Water referendum leader pours heart out"]. From the article, "Referendum A, with strong support from Gov. Bill Owens, was touted as a way for Colorado to save water that now goes unused to other states, including California, Arizona and Nevada. But opponents - Western Slope interests, environmentalists and others, including Attorney General Ken Salazar and Republican Rep. Scott McInnis, R-Colo. - argued it was a blank check to build unknown projects with unknown impacts." Here's a story about Referendum A and it's defeat from the Denver Post [November 6, 2003, "Ref. A defeat could prove a victory"]. From the article, "The defeat of a statewide water bond issue Tuesday could ironically prove to be a victory for the supporters of water storage, activists on both sides said Wednesday." Attorney General, Ken Salazar, banked some new political capital at Governor Owens' expense, according to the Denver Post [November 6, 2003, "Salazar gains in Ref. A rout"]. Denver Public Schools officials were celebrating the passage of 3A and 3B on Wednesday, according to the Rocky Mountain News [November 6, 2003, "Votes please educators"]. The Denver Post editorial staff weighs in on Tuesday's school issues [November 6, 2003, "Schools score at polls"]. Here's a editorial about Tuesday's election from the Rocky Mountain News [November 5, 2003, "The voters' verdict: No, no, no"]. Mike Littwin voted for Initiative 101 on Tuesday and admits it in his column from yesterday's Rocky [November 5, 2003, "Littwin: This Election Day, peace had no chance"]. Says Littwin, "Maybe that's why so many voted for Initiative 101. It was fun in a time when we need a little fun. It was a goof in a time when, well, it feels good to be just a little goofy. The headline may say that the peace initiative was beaten - and, no, I checked, that doesn't mean we voted for war - but my headline is that one third of Denver voters went for for an initiative that 99 percent of the voters thought was just a hoot. This gives me some hope. There is increasing evidence that Denver has a sense of humor. That may not be good news for politicians - other than John Hickenlooper, who, incidentally, was a winner Tuesday in his personnel system overhaul. But it's great for those of us who write about them. Let's be honest. Everyone voting for Initiative 101 knew the risk, which included the inevitable Ravi Shankar Music, Peace and Whatever-Happened-to-Bangladesh Festival."

Wed, 05 Nov 2003 13:03:14 GMT

Denver November 2003 Election The Post has a nifty application that enables readers to search the election results. Colorado voters turned down Referedum A, Amendment 32, and Amendment 33 resoundingly, according to the Denver Post [November 5, 2003, "Colorado voters in 'no' mood"]. From the article, "Even with a big edge in advertising dollars, backers of all three statewide ballot issues - Referendum A and Amendments 32 and 33 - saw their proposals trounced by wide margins." Denver Auditor, Dennis Gallagher, probably slept well last night, after voters defeated Amendment 32. The article is from the Post [November 5, 2003, "Voters defeat effort to lift tax cap on residential property"]. Here's the coverage from the Rocky [November 5, 2003, "Voters topple Amendment 32 early, decisively"]. Another big loser at the polls was Initiative 101, according to the Denver Post [November 5, 2003, "Foes of stress-cutting initiative can relax"]. The initiative would have mandated city goverment to employ scientifically proven methods to reduce stress. Here's the coverage from the Rocky Mountain News [November 5, 2003, "Denver voters stress no on bid to require no stress around city"]. From the article, "Peckman says he spent all of $80 on the campaign run from his parents' basement, but managed to attract more coverage than other issues whose supporters spent millions, thanks in part to the continued verbal volleys lobbed by his nemesis, Brown, which kept the issue in the spotlight. So now that it's over, how will Peckman make peace with the councilman? 'Maybe,' Peckman said with a soothing smile, 'I could take him some incense.'" Reach out Mr. Peckman! More coverage from the Rocky Mountain News [November 5, 2003, "Three strikes for 'Big 3'"]. Denver voters elected Theresa Pena to the school board in the district's only contested race, according to the Denver Post [November 5, 2003, "Peña takes sole contested Denver school board race"]. Here's the coverage from the Rocky Mountain News [November 5, 2003, "Pena glides to DPS seat"]. Here's a story about Referendum A and it's defeat, from the Rocky [November 5, 2003, "Water plan is all washed up"]. Some see the defeat of Referendum A as a win for Attorney General, Ken Salazar, according Diane Carman in today's Denver Post [November 5, 2003, "Ref. A fight a big victory for Salazar"]. Here's another story about Referendum A from the Rocky Mountain News [November 5, 2003, "Lack of faith sinks bid for $2 billion in water bonds"]. Here's an article on Amendment 33, the proposal to put Video Lottery Terminals in some Colorado racetracks, from the Denver Post [November 5, 2003, "Gaming measure defeated soundly"]. Here's the coverage from the Rocky Mountain News [November 5, 2003, "Wembley loses wager on video slots at tracks"]. Voters were willing to part with their dough for schools and open space, according to the Denver Post [November 5, 2003, "Tax hikes triumph in most local elections"]. Both Referred Questions 3A and 3B for school financing in Denver passed. Here's another story from the Post [November, 5, 2003, "Denver, Douglas OK new facilities, repairs as charter expansions flop"] that mentions Questions 3A and 3B. Here's an editorial about the election from the Denver Post [November 5, 2003, "Election's unresolved issues"]. According to the Post editorial staff, "But whatever one thinks about the individual results, the fact remains that all three issues represented real problems. The solutions rejected by the voters Tuesday may have been the wrong solutions, but that doesn't mean that politicians can ignore the underlying dilemmas." Voter turnout was around 40%, according to the Rocky Mountain News [November 5, 2003, "Mail-ballot participation exceeds 40 percent in most metro-area counties"]. Denver had a 36% turnout according to today's The Stump from the Rocky Mountain News.

Tue, 04 Nov 2003 12:57:42 GMT

Denver November 2003 Election Update: Initiative 101 lost big today, according to the Rocky Mountain News. Update: The Rocky's nifty ballot builder application has been replaced by an app that reports results by city, county, and school district. Update: Here are the election results from the Rocky Mountain News. Update: DenverGov has the election results from today's, Coordinated and Regular Biennial School Election, but the web page only works in Internet Explorer so I killed the Coyote Gulch link. The big three, Referendum A, Amendment 32, and Amendment 33 all lost in Denver. Referred Question 1A passed by the wide margin predicted here on Coyote Gulch. Theresa Pena won the only contested school board seat. Referred Questions 3A and 3B both passed. Initiative 101 was defeated. Here's the Coyote Gulch coverage of the election issues and the Charter changes (Referred Question 1A). Here's a summary of the recommendations for voters from the Denver Post [November 4, 2003, "The Post's recommendations"]. Here's a listing of issues from the Rocky Mountain News. Here's an article about the issues voters will decide today from the Rocky Mountain News [November 4, 2003, "Ballot a palette of issues"]. From the article, "(Mayor) Hickenlooper is facing his first ballot test since taking over the Denver mayor's office in a landslide in the spring. Hickenlooper promised to reform the city's civil service system, arguing that it is inflexible and archaic." Voter turnout is expected to be around 40% in today's election, according to the Rocky Mountain News [November 4, 2003, "Denver election officials were sweating the returns last week, as only about 38,000 of the roughly 244,000 ballots mailed out had been returned. But by Monday afternoon, that number had climbed to about 70,000, according to Alan McBeth, spokesman for the Denver Election Commission. As of Monday, those numbers caused Denver turnout to fall behind all other metro counties voting by mail with a 28 percent turnout before Election Day. An additional 550 Denver voters won't have their ballots counted because they failed to sign the envelope. Under state law, mail ballots cannot be counted without a signature." Ed Quillen speaks out on mail-in ballots in his column today in the Denver Post [November 4, 2003, "Why empower the lazy?"]. Says Quillen, "Democracy has some costs, and we should be willing to pay them - even if it means standing in line once or twice a year."

Mon, 03 Nov 2003 13:21:01 GMT

Denver November 2003 Election Here's today's On Point from the Rocky Mountain News. They're talking about mail-in ballots and mail-in only elections. They also remind you that it is too late to mail your ballot for tomorrow's election. Instead take it to a drop off location. Here's a summary of the voting recommendations from the Denver Post editorial staff, from yesterday's edition.

Sun, 02 Nov 2003 13:33:52 GMT

Denver November 2003 Election Voters are not very engaged with respect to Tuesday's election, according to the Denver Post [November 2, 2003, "Experts: Little passion in vote"]. From the article, "So far, according to professional election watchers, the 2003 campaign has generated some spending records but aroused little civic passion." They obviously haven't been reading Coyote Gulch. Here's an editorial about voting practices and mail-in ballots from the Denver Post [November 2, 2003, "Mailbox or ballot box?"]. From the article, "Mail ballots have been used for a decade in Colorado and have become the most common voting method in the non-partisan elections held in odd-numbered years. In many jurisdictions, you now you have to vote by mail, except for the inconventient option of driving to a county office to drop your ballot in a box." The Post is running viewpoints on mail-in balloting, both pro and con.

Sat, 01 Nov 2003 14:17:58 GMT

Denver November 2003 Election It's way too late to mail your ballot for Tuesday's election. Here's an article with voting advice from the Rocky Mountain News [November 1, 2003, "EXTRA!, November 1"]. Vote early and vote often.

Fri, 31 Oct 2003 14:38:14 GMT

Denver November 2003 Election Proponents of Amendment 33 haven't given up, according to the Denver Post [October 31, 2003, "Video slots praised as state cash cow"]. From the article, "Video lottery terminals soon could be mining dollars from gamblers and spreading the take among open-space protectors and tourism promoters if Colorado voters approve Amendment 33. Support Colorado's Economy and Environment, which backs the initiative, promises that 2,500 of the slotlike VLTs at five struggling racetracks will generate more than $25 million for open-space protection and state parks and another $25 million for tourism promotion. The group has spent $6 million wooing voters. Nearly $5 million of that has come from Wembley USA, which stands to reap at least $28 million from video lottery terminals at the four racetracks it owns in Colorado Springs, Pueblo, unincorporated Arapahoe County and Commerce City." Here's an article about Amendment 32 from today's Denver Post [October 31, 2003, "Amend. 32 aims to undo cap"]. The amendment would effectively gut the Gallagher amendment. Opponents say that the fiscal situation in the state can't be fixed by merely fixing the assessment rate at 8%. They think that the state needs to deal with Gallagher, TABOR, and amendment 23 as a package. If you haven't yet mailed in your ballot it may too late according to today's The Stump from the Rocky Mountain News. Questions are being asked as to whether the Water Conservation Board is staffed and experienced enough to handle their new duties should Referendum A pass, according to the Rocky Mountain News [October 31, 2003, "Referendum A would put board in big league"].

Thu, 30 Oct 2003 14:49:19 GMT

Denver November 2003 Election Westword is helping you determine your election knowledge with this quiz. We finally have some poll results to look at with respect to Referendum A, Amendment 32, and Amendment 33. According to the Rocky Mountain News [October 30, 2003, "Poll: 'Big Three' are sinking"] all three are failing to woo enough voters for approval. From the article, "Opponents of the video-gambling initiative successfully labeled it "the big lie," he said, and tied it to the indictment of a British company that owns most of Colorado's animal racing tracks. Ciruli said most voters couldn't understand Amendment 32 - as evidenced by the the large number of undecideds - and said that shows how hard it could be to reform Colorado property-tax laws. He said the big surprise was the water measure - particularly that the poll indicated it was failing in the metro area, where proponents were counting on support. It also was failing by a huge margin on the Western Slope, a more expected result." Here's the coverage from the Denver Post [October 30, 2003, "Statewide ballot initiatives facing defeat, survey finds"]. Some businesses are backing Amendment 32, according to the Denver Post [October 30, 2003, "Amend. 32 garners business backing"]. Election officials are reporting problems with mail-in ballots, according to the Denver Post [October 30, 2003, "Hundreds of ballots to be tossed"]. Denver alone will be tossing 550 so far. Did I sign my name?.

Tue, 28 Oct 2003 17:29:36 GMT

Denver November 2003 Election From e-mail from Jeff Peckman (Author of Initiative 101): "Hi Mr. Orr, As the sponsor of Initiative 101 I have become a fan of Coyote Gulch and always look forward to your extra comments about it. Since you are at the summit, it seemed that you might have missed this other blurb (below) on Sunday. RMN is supposed to have something on it in the Stump or another section tomorrow, Tuesday. Channel 7 News also had an item on 101 this evening after our interview earlier. At the end they asked three voters about it. Two said they thought it was a good idea and the third did not think government could legislate this sort of thing. Granted, the sample size is small but I'm taking this as a legitimate poll showing us ahead 2 to 1 because the total expense of the "Vote Yes on Initiative 101" campaign will be less than $100 so this is about the extent of polling we are likely to see. Thanks for keeping up with so many issues. Best wishes. Jeff Peckman Vote Yes on Initiative 101*** Article Published: Sunday, October 26, 2003 "spin cycled." Good grief, Charlie Brown Denver's peacefulness initiative has been mocked both at home and abroad, and now on Comedy Central's "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart." "With a $70 million budget deficit, citywide layoffs and racial unrest, Denver is a city on the edge," says a female correspondent. She then points to the initiative's sponsor, Jeff Peckman, as the man who wants to use "meditation to combat murder." But it's City Councilman Charlie Brown that really makes Denver look a little unstable. "Jeff Peckman is louder than a jackass in a tin barn," he says to the correspondent after the Charlie Brown cartoon theme music is played. Then he says Peckman lives in a fantasy land. But Brown? "I deal in the real world - dirt, dogs and dust," he says. Finally, Brown points out the difficulties of his work as councilman. "This job is like loading bullfrogs in a pickup." This is where the show begins drowning out his voice with WAH-WAH-WAH-WAH noises like Charlie Brown's teacher in the cartoon. The closer? "You're in good hands, Denver," the correspondent says, barely rolling her eyes. Jeff Peckman biglions@earthlink.net" Ed Quillen weighs in on Initiative 101 in his column in today's Denver Post [October 28, 2003, "Stress and the city"]. Says Quillen, "To be sure, Denver's municipal government could work to reduce stress. But reducing stress is not what governments do. The more stressful things there are, the more government we think we need. More government means more confusing laws, tickets and sirens. It can never mean less stress. Peckman and his colleagues may mean well, but their goals can never be shared by the city. Besides, you don't need to take up transcendental meditation to reduce your personal stress levels. You just have to learn to see the parking ticket as a personalized souvenir from your peaceful journey to the enlightened city." Opponents of Referendum A are losing the funding battle, according to the Rocky Mountain News [October 28, 2003, "Water bond proponents raise double critics' total"]. From the article, "If the saying "water flows toward money" is true, then Referendum A is a winner. Backers of the $2 billion bond issue to erect dams and fill reservoirs have raised $788,254 to the opponents' $315,000, according to campaign finance reports filed Monday." Big money has come in on both sides of Amendment 33, according to the Rocky Mountain News [October 28, 2003, "Gambling measure attracts record $9.5 million"]. From the article, "The price tag on one of this year's statewide ballot initiatives - which would allow video lottery terminals at the state's five racetracks - keeps climbing. The final campaign finance report before Election Day next Tuesday shows that backers and opponents of Amendment 33 raised another $1.6 million combined, adding to the already record fund raising for a ballot measure. So far about $9.5 million has been raised by the two sides." Here's an editorial providing some background and analysis about Referendum A from the Rocky Mountain News [October 28, 2003, "Eagle County effort model for state"]. From the editorial, "No major diversion of water from west to east is likely in the future, either, without the active cooperation of Western Slope communities that might be affected. The latest evidence of this reality was the announcement last week that Denver and Aurora are cooperating with West Slope water groups to study a new reservoir in Eagle County. Far from imposing its will upon hapless mountain communities, Denver is apparently prepared to bargain away its longstanding legal right to a significant amount of Eagle River water in return for a reservoir deal. In an earlier era, of course, such a concession would have been unthinkable. If a jurisdiction had a legal right to water then the courts were likely to enforce an attempt to use it. But various state and federal laws have tipped the balance of power dramatically. Today, Denver has little chance of benefiting from its unused high-country water rights without the agreement of groups that in the past would rarely if ever have made common cause with the state's largest water utility."

Mon, 27 Oct 2003 13:19:28 GMT

Denver November 2003 Election There are openings on the Denver School Board to be filled in next week's election in addtion to Referred Qustions 3A & 3B. Here's an article about the only contested race, the contest for At-large, from the Rocky Mountain News [October 27, "3 seeking at-large seat on Denver school board"]. Here's an article about Referendum A from the Denver Post [October 27, 2003, "Growth is trade-off on water issue"]. From the article, "Colorado's booming population growth is both the cause and the solution for the state's water woes - starkly evident in Denver's south-metro communities. Many experts in those southern suburbs have been crafting successful plans to make sure there is enough water, but like Faust's deal with the devil, they may be trading away the future for good times today." Here's a historic look at the Two Forks Dam that was killed 13 years ago, from the Denver Post [October 27, 2003, "The legacy of Two Forks"]. The dam was killed due to the environmental impact. That event is shaping some of the conversation around Referendum A. Some North Denver Pastors are planning to speak out against Amendment 33 today, according to the Denver Post [October 27, 2003, "Religious groups target Amend. 33"]. One Ute tribe is also opposed to the amendment, says the Post [October 27, 2003, "Utes say Amendment 33 deceptive"]. The mountain casinos are warning that Video Lottery Terminals could lead to a push to raise the betting limits to compete, according to the Post [October 27, 2003, "VLTs may lead to higher bets"].

Sun, 26 Oct 2003 14:25:16 GMT

Denver November 2003 Election Here's an in-depth look at Referendum A from the Denver Post ["October 26, 2003, "Ref. A pits competing water interests"]. From the article, "Referendum A is hailed by backers as a tonic for struggling farms and country communities, but its strongest support comes from the wealthy, politically connected southern suburbs of Denver that have a water crisis on their horizon. Opponents claim the statewide ballot issue is really about allowing more sprawl south of Denver, pulling water from the Colorado River on the Western Slope instead of the South Platte River in the south metro area's basin. Southern and some western suburbs of Denver are home to the state's biggest concentration of water-poor Coloradans. The region from Centennial to Castle Rock has a population of roughly 140,000 today- people who rely on groundwater supplies that are being depleted faster than they are being replenished. The area's population is expected to grow to 420,000 by 2050, according to a water-depletion study released last December." Here's another article about Referendum A from the Denver Post [October 26, 2003, "Murky math, risky forecasts cloud state's water future"]. The article concentrates on the difficulty of predicting rainfall and making estimates based on snowpack. The Post editorial staff is urging voters to approve Referendum A [October 26, 2003, "Vote for win-win water plan"]. The Post recaps their picks for next week's ballots in another editorial [October 26, 2003, "The Post's recommendations"]. Ed Quillen presents his 10 reasons for voting for Referendum A in his column in today's Denver Post [October 26, 2003, "Ten reasons to support Referendum A"]. Keep in mind, however, Quillen is opposed to the referendum. Here's Quillen's #1 reason to vote yes, "Colorado needs more Republicans. Any water developed by Referendum A bonds will go toward the continued growth of the south metro suburbs. That's because they currently get their water from wells whose water table is falling. So they need to import water. That's Republican territory, so the more development there, the greater the GOP's political edge in Colorado. So you have a patriotic duty to support Referendum A. Otherwise, Colorado might suffer the horrors of, among other things, a divisive two-party political system." Here's a look at the current state of gambling in Colorado and the possible effects of Amendment 33 from the Denver Post [October 26, 2003, "Amendment 33 could turn tables"]. From the article, "Inside, perhaps 100 gamblers, mostly men 50 and older, pore over racing forms and debate whether the favored No. 8 dog will beat the pack to the rail. Grumbling about the track service, from its charge for pencils to its $5 hot dogs, they wander off to place their bets. Nobody is watching this recent day's only live Colorado dog races beside the track. The patrons cluster instead around indoor tables with miniature television sets that, on busier days, draw gamblers betting on televised horse races. Most of the men here expect this sleepy gambling scene to change dramatically if Colorado passes Amendment 33 on Nov. 4. The measure would allow video lottery terminals, similar to slot machines, at the racetracks." Bob Ewegen attempts to lay out the arguments for and against Amendment 33 in his column today in the Denver Post [October 26, 2003, "A new gamble"]. Robert S. Grant (district attorney for Colorado's 17th Judicial District) urges voters to turn down the amendment in today's Post [October 26, 2003, "NO: Local impact not considered"]. Dave Costlow (owner of Whitewater Adventures) argues in favor of the amendment in today's Post [October 26, 2003, "YES: Colorado tourism needs boost"]. Gail Schoettler, in her column in today's Post [October 26, 2003, "What's the truth behind the ads?"] is hoping that voters will turn down Amendment 33. Says Schoettler, "Isn't it a little odd that in the midst of lauding all the supposedly great advantages of Amendment 33, the supporters have virtually nothing to say about what Amendment 33 really does? If gambling is so good for Colorado, why don't they broadcast the wonders of gambling, too?" Diane Carman exhorts voters to take interest and make sure they mail in their ballots for the November election. She writes, in her column in today's Denver Post [October 26, 2003, "Frustrate the big shots by voting"] that she is worried that since there are no real sexy issues on the ballot that apathy will prevail. Says Carman, "This is not exactly stuff that inspires a new generation to pay any price and bear any burden. It's easy to see why voters might sit this one out. But every time we do that, we hand over a little more power to the guys with the big scams and the big bank accounts who count on us behaving like ignorant suckers. At the very least, we should take some delight in frustrating them. Don't kid yourself. The greatest threat to freedom is not terrorism. It's indifference. So fill out the ballot and put it in the mail while you still have the chance."

Sat, 25 Oct 2003 14:57:24 GMT

Denver November 2003 Election Update: Westword takes a humorous look at why voters are having trouble falling in line with state republicans regarding Referendum A. Opponents of Referendum A rallied yesterday in Fort Collins, according to the Denver Post [October 25, 2003, "Udall stumps against water referendum"]. From the article, "Local environmentalists on Friday joined with U.S. Rep. Mark Udall in denouncing Referendum A, repeating opponents' stand that the measure to finance water-storage projects is a "$4 billion blank check." Udall, a Democratic congressman from Boulder County, appeared at Fort Collins City Hall with members of the Sierra Club Poudre Canyon Group, the Colorado White Water Association, Trout Unlimited, the Colorado Rivers Alliance and Citizen Planners of Northern Colorado." Jeff Peckman is urging voters to pass Initiative 101 in an opinion piece in today's Rocky Mountain News [October 25, 203, "Speakout: Nothing to lose but stress in Initiative 101"]. Peckman is the author of the initiative. Says Peckman, "A few vocal politicians, consultants and commentators have attempted to discredit Initiative 101 by resorting to name-calling and ridicule but none has offered any logic or evidence to support their criticisms. They are like educated but frustrated adults who can't solve a Rubik's Cube puzzle even though a child can. Don't let them ruin our chance to make Denver and our lives better. Initiative 101 offers a risk-free means to increase public safety and save the city money. But it also has a built-in safeguard: If the City Council doesn't see the results it desires, it can amend or repeal the ordinance after only six months. That's why voters commonly remark, "what have we got to lose?" when asked about Initiative 101." The Rocky editorial staff has an editorial in today's Rocky [October 25, 2003, "Election favorites"] restating their recommendations for the November election. Over 200 ballots for the November election were sent to dead people by the Denver Election Commission, according to the Rocky Mountain News [October 25, 2003, "No Halloween prank: Ballots accidentally sent to the dead"]. From the article, "The Election Commission discovered the mistake after getting a number of calls from deceased voters' family members about what to do with the ballots." Vote early and vote often.

Fri, 24 Oct 2003 13:06:45 GMT

Denver November 2003 Election Referendum A and Colorado water is the subject of an article from today's Denver Post [October 24, 2003, "Visions of water projects clash"]. From the article, "Opponents see Union Park, the big reservoir proposed on the Gunnison River battled nearly to its death by environmentalists. They predict Referendum A money will go to reservoirs that drain mountain streams, dams that abuse flora and fauna, and private boondoggles that wind up in taxpayers' laps. Supporters describe smaller, more benign projects that provide water to farms, or at least keep cities from buying up agriculture's water rights. They cite an expansion of Red Mesa Reservoir in La Plata County, or building a new project in Conejos County to bail out hurting potato and alfalfa farmers." Here's an article from the Denver Post [October 24, 2003, "AdWatch: Question 1A"] about TV advertising around Referred Question 1A. Opponents of Amendment 33 are not pulling any punches is their latest TV ads, according to the Rocky Mountain News [October 24, 2003, "AdWatch: Latest anti-33 ads take aim at legal woes of backers"]. From the article, "The latest ads in the war over gambling-for-tourism are all-out attacks with no holds seemingly barred. The anti-33 radio ad, Indicted, is a sledgehammer that continues to pound on the legal difficulties of the principal backer of the amendment, Wembley of London, which owns four of the five racetracks in Colorado where 33 would permit slot machine-style gambling." Here's a link to today's The Stump from the Rocky Mountain News. If you're planning on going to the B'nai B'rith shindig you should call first. I'm pretty sure that the event was held yesterday. Mark Pachall, Jefferson County Treasurer, has been prohibited from using the countie's website in an effort to get voters to reject Amendment 32, according to the Rocky Mountain News [October 24, 2003, "Paschall shut down"]. From the article, "If he had been, it could have run counter to Colorado's Fair Campaign Practices Act, said a spokesman for Common Cause, a government watchdog group. The information Paschall wanted to post on the Web site, which is funded with public money, is a four-page "analysis" compiled by Deputy Treasurer Fred Holden." Mike Rosen offers up his picks for the November ballot in his column today in the Rocky Mountain News. The editorial staff of the Denver Post [October 24, 2003, "It's about the gambling"] is still against Amendment 33. From the editorial, "It's about gambling. This newspaper opposes any extension of gambling in Colorado, and we urge voters to do the same." Reggie Rivers chimes in on the issue in his column today in the Post [October 24, 2003, "Amend. 33 far from a fair deal"].

Thu, 23 Oct 2003 12:30:59 GMT

Denver November 2003 Election Here's an article that tries to get at the heart of the rhetoric from proponents of Referendum A from the Rocky Mountain News [October 23, 2003, "War of words on water"]. From the article, "What about Arizona then? Desert golf courses and Phoenix lawns have been another favorite whipping boy of Referendum A backers. In fact, Arizona has never surpassed its annual allotment of 2.8 million acre-feet from the Colorado River basin, and so can't be accused of wasting Colorado's unused water." Govenor Owens is still working hard pitching Referendum A, according to the Denver Post [October 23, 2003, "Owens: Ref. A crucial to future"]. From the article, "Speaking to more than 500 business and political leaders attending the Colorado Association of Commerce and Industry's annual luncheon, Owens said that the current heat wave, which is setting new record temperatures for October, is a strong indication that what some have called the worst drought in 300 years is not over." Here's a link to today's The Stump from the Rocky Mountain News. Here's an article about the increased workload for the Lottery Commission if Amendment 33 passes. The increased gambling would not be regulated by the Gambling Division as the mountain casinos are. Be careful filling out your mail-in ballot for the November 4th election. Election commissions around the metro area are reporting errors in ballots they've already received, according to the Rocky Mountain News [October 22, 2003, "Counties report mail ballot problems"]. I've never used a mail-in ballot to vote. The State is holding hearings on the budget and trying to work out a plan to deal with the effects of TABOR, Gallagher, and Amendment 23, according to the Denver Post [October 23, 2003, "Tangle of initiatives has sides snarling"]. The 3 constitutional amendments work together to squeeze government when revenues decline. Amendment 32, on the November ballot, is an attempt to mitigate the effects of Gallagher.

Wed, 22 Oct 2003 11:22:14 GMT

Denver November 2003 Election Amendment 33 opponents are the subject of this article from the Denver Post [October 22, 2003, "Casinos opposing Amend. 33 profit]. From the article, "Colorado's mountain casino owners are vehemently opposed to a ballot measure that would legalize slot-style gambling at five Front Range racetracks, but a handful of them are either benefiting from or pushing for similar 'racino' gaming in other states. The casinos say they are not opposed to VLTs but are against Amendment 33 because it would give Wembley, the British company that owns four of the state's five racetracks, a near monopoly on gaming along the Front Range." Govenor Owens speaks out in favor of Referendum A in this opinion piece from Sunday's Denver Post [October 19, 2003, "YES: Drought was a warning"]. From the essay, "In order to ensure our economic and environmental prosperity, present and future generations must recapture that vision for the future. Referendum A, with its purpose clearly directed at saving Colorado's water, does just that. For decades, the status quo for meeting Colorado's water needs has been the buy-up and dry-up of irrigated agricultural lands. But this unsustainable practice leaves local communities and wildlife habitat suffering. Add to this the threat of continued drought and increased demands on Colorado's unused water from burgeoning downstream states like Nevada and California, and our environment is clearly at risk. Meeting the state's water needs for future generations requires planning, initiative and new partnerships. Water storage must benefit not one but multiple uses, including drinking water, irrigation, hydropower, recreation and the environment." Attorney General, Ken Salazar, counters the govenor in this opinion piece about Referendum A also from Sunday's Denver Post [October 19, 2003, "NO: Measure an illusionary response"]. From the article, "As written, two major unknown water projects must be proposed in two years. One of those projects must then immediately be started. The water for those projects must unavoidably come from the Colorado River and its tributaries: the Rio Grande, the Arkansas River or the Gunnison River. Because agriculture cannot afford to pay for the revenue bonds contemplated by Referendum A, projects will be built to provide water only to fuel the growth of a few cities along the Front Range." Denver Auditor, Dennis Gallagher, posted the following comment about Amendment 32 on Coyote Gulch the other day: "I hope people will study Amendment 32 carefully before they vote. It is a honey covered lemon. It is a smoke screen. Amendment 32 is a tax increase on homes and apartments. Homeowners and renters will pay more taxes and higher rents when landlords pass those higher taxes on to tenants. Those in favor of Amendment 32 use very misleading language in talking about what it will do. The propaganda implies 32 freezes your homeowner taxes. It does nothing of the sort. Instead, it freezes the possibility of future rate reductions that cushion residential taxes from big business. That's why big corporations are donating to the bulging coffers in support of this shell game. Phillip Morris coughed up $25,000 to try to pass Amendment 32. Don't let the smoke get in your eyes as you read the fine print on 32. The proponents of this measure say I am only against changing the amendment because I am the Gallagher for which this section of the constitution is named. Let me assure you, if the amendment protecting homes from exorbitant tax increases had been christened 'the Schlimazel Amendment,' I would be against changing it by itself at this time. So, don't be tempted by the sugar-coated talk and foggy rhetoric, and don't vote to raise your home property taxes so corporate Colorado can pay less. The Denver Post and Rocky Mountain News editorial boards have said vote 'No' on Amendment 32. Even Governor Owens has announced he is voting 'No' too. Dennis Gallagher, Denver."

Tue, 21 Oct 2003 13:21:15 GMT

Denver November 2003 Election Three former governors of Colorado, Roy Romer, Dick Lamm, and John Vanderhoof, are urging voters to reject Referendum A, according to the Denver Post [October 21, 2003, "Ex-govs against water-bonds"].

Tue, 21 Oct 2003 03:07:02 GMT

Denver November 2003 Election Backers of Referendum A are on the streets knocking on doors and putting up yard signs, according to the Denver Post [October 20, 2003, "Water-measure backers reach out"]. Here's a link to an in-depth piece on the political currents around Referendum A from the Denver Post [October 19, 2003, "Owens uses Norton visit to push water ballot issue"]. From the article, "Colorado's debates over water this fall have become highly political. The state's highest-profile politicians have nearly all stepped into the fray. And for many of them, Referendum A provides a platform to showcase their ambitions for higher office. Many of the leading proponents and opponents are politicians on the rise." Money is coming in from business in support of Amendment 32, according to the Denver Post [October 19, 2003, "Corporations' gifts lead jump in funds for Amend. 32 backers"]. From thea article, "Amendment 32, a favorite of state Senate Majority Leader Norma Anderson, R-Lakewood, would raise the assessment rate of all residential property taxes in the state from 7.96 percent to 8 percent of their current market value. Currently, the assessment rate floats every two years and has been dropping steadily since the Gallagher Amendment was adopted in 1982. Amendment 32 would eliminate the floating assessment rate and freeze it at 8 percent. Businesses currently are assessed for taxing purposes at 29 percent of their market value. Amendment 32 also would abolish the requirement that residential property taxes be capped at supplying only 45 percent of all property taxes. Businesses now must make up the remaining 55 percent of revenue to be raised. The two factors combined have restricted the growth of residential property tax rates to the point that a business now must pay roughly four times more in taxes than would be charged to a residential property with the same market value." The Denver Post is urging voters to reject Amendment 32 [October 19, 2003, "Vote 'no' on Amendment 32"]. From the editiorial, "Amendment 32 on this fall's statewide ballot is a classic attempt to lock the barn door after the horse has already escaped. Intended to fix some of the fiscal problems created by the 1982 Gallagher Amendment, it could result in setting the state's fiscal crisis even more firmly into constitutional concrete." Constitutional concrete? Councilman Charlie Brown still opposes Jeff Peckman's ordinance, Initiative 101, but he doesn't doesn't seem as stressed about it, according to the Denver Post [October 20, 2003, "Peace initiative irks foes"]. Brown now says it will hur the image that Mayor Hickenlooper being crafted by Mayor Hickenlooper that Denver is "Open for business." The Rocky Mountain News [October 19, 2003, "Vote 'no' on the Big Three"] editorial staff has printed a summary of their posistions on the issues for the November 4th ballot. Joanne Ditmer is urging voters to reject Amendment 33 in her column this week in the Post [October 19, 2003, "Slot machines would cheat our history"]. She's opposed because the amendment will take money from the State Historical Fund and does not provide relief for communities where the race tracks are located.

Sat, 18 Oct 2003 14:16:11 GMT

Denver November 2003 Election Governor Owens and Attorney General Ken Salazar do not agree on the need for Referendum A, according to the Rocky Mountain News [October 18, 2003, "Colo. River pact divides officials"]. From the article, "Colorado's governor and attorney general disagreed sharply Friday on how voters should react to a recent landmark agreement by California to use less Colorado River water. Both praised the pact as a boon to Colorado, but differed on what it meant for Referendum A, the $2 billion water bonding issue on the Nov. 4 ballot." The Rocky also has a summary of the issues around the referendum. An official of the Colorado Water Conservation Board says that water projects under Referendum A will be much more expensive for borrowers than getting loans from the CWCB, according to the Rocky Mountain News [October 18, 2003, "Official defects from Owens' camp on water referendum"]. From the article, "A state water official has broken ranks with Gov. Bill Owens and publicly criticized Referendum A, asserting that it makes water projects costlier to build than they would be under existing financing tools. John Van Sciver, a staffer with the Colorado Water Conservation Board, wrote a letter dated Thursday to both sides of the campaign pointing out the higher interest rates associated with projects built under Referendum A." Ken Salazar was on the Aaron Harber show last night discussing the Referendum. The show will be re-broadcast Sunday, 2:00PM, KBDI Channel 12. The Rocky Mountain News [October 17, 2003, "Peña for Denver school board"] has endorsed Theresa Peña for the school board. From the editorial, "Peña has two opponents in the race. Former board member Rita Montero served from 1995 to 1999. Jose Silva, who graduated from West High School in 1998, is a student at the University of Colorado at Denver." Peña has also been endorsed by the Denver Post [October 18, 2003, "Pena for DPS board"]. The Denver Post [October 18, 2003, "OK 3A, 3B for Denver schools"] is urging voters to pass DPS Issues 3A and 3B. From the editorial, "Public school critics often dismiss bond issues and mill-levy increases as throwing good money after bad. But two Denver Public Schools tax issues before voters this fall are well thought-out, bare-bones strategies for dealing with areas that need the most improvement and help."

Fri, 17 Oct 2003 13:13:53 GMT

Denver November 2003 Election Mail-in ballots should start hitting mailboxes soon according to today's The Stump from the Rocky Mountain News. Here's an opinion piece in favor of Amendment 32 from the Rocky Mountain News [October 17, 2003, "Speakout: Amendment 32 would 'fix the roof'"]. From the article, written by Norma Anderson, "Special districts are suffering statewide and not only in the rural regions. Every time the assessment rate drops for residential property, so does the revenue to fire, library, parks and recreation districts, and everywhere else. Think of the special development districts that have bonding for their infrastructure. How do you pay the bonds with 75 percent of the property in the state being residential?"

Thu, 16 Oct 2003 12:38:10 GMT

Denver November 2003 Election One of the dog tracks that will benefit from Amendment 33 is Cloverleaf Greyhound Park in Loveland, according to the Rocky Mountain News [October 16, 2003, "Measure may alleviate track's dog days"]. It's not part of the Wembley organization but is family owned and struggling. From the article, "Becky Bever is beleaguered. She walked into the eye of a storm when she threw her support behind Amendment 33, a measure on the Nov. 4 ballot that would put video lottery terminals in existing dog and horse tracks." The Denver Post [October 16, 2003, "Mud flies on gaming issue"] is running a story about the attack ads now running from both sides over Amendment 33. From the article, "The slick, multimillion-dollar battle over video slot machines has turned into an all-out dogfight played out in prime time. With $7.7 million collected so far by both sides of Amendment 33 - the most ever on any Colorado ballot issue - the advocates' soft-sell approach has hardened to match the attacks of opponents. Call us liars, we'll call you greedy. That's the new punch starting to air from Support Colorado's Economy and Environment, the group that started its pro-Amendment 33 campaign with footage of a river and talk of tourism."

Wed, 15 Oct 2003 13:09:31 GMT

Denver November 2003 Election Al Knight says that voters should support Referendum A in his column today in the Denver Post [October 15, 2003, "Timing, after all, is everything"]. From the column, "Far from being a blank check, Referendum A appears to be nothing more than a rather limited, if timely, response to a drought that was for most Coloradans an awful experience." Isle of Capri Casino's, Inc. is against Amendment 33 and vlt games here in Colorado but for them in Florida where they also operate, according to the Rocky Mountain News [October 15, 2003, "Playing both sides of video-lottery issue"]. From the article, "'We're on one side of the issue in one state, and the other side of the issue in the other,' said Les McMackin, senior vice president of marketing for Isle of Capri Casinos Inc., based in Biloxi, Miss."

Tue, 14 Oct 2003 12:28:06 GMT

Denver November 2003 Election Proponents and opponents of Referendum A held rallies yesterday, according to the Rocky Mountain News [October 14, 2003, "2 sides beat drum on water"]. Here's the coverage from the Denver Post [October 13, 2003, "Both sides say water-bond fight crucial for Colo."]. Fundraising numbers for the November election are the subject of this article from the Rocky Mountain News [October 14, 2003, "Amendment 33 the costliest campaign"]. According to the Rocky the fight over Amendment 33 will cost $7.8 million. Here's the coverage from the Denver Post [October 14, 2003, "Big money on the ballot"]. Here's a link to today's The Stump from the Rocky Mountain News.

Mon, 13 Oct 2003 13:34:14 GMT

Denver November 2003 Election Here's an in-depth piece on school board issues, 3A and 3B from the Rocky Mountain News [October 13, 2003, "Hickenlooper joins DPS ballot efforts"]. From the article, "DPS' proposed $310 million school bond issue would build two K-8 schools in the areas known as Green Valley Ranch and Montbello, as well as refinance construction of a third K-8 school there. It also would pay for land in nearby Stapleton, where a new high school would be built. Other projects to serve the growing district include classroom additions at two elementaries in southwest Denver and partial funding for buildings for two charter schools, the Denver School of Science and Technology, also known as High Tech High, and the Knowledge Is Power Program or KIPP, a nationally recognized charter using extended learning time to boost the performance of low-income students. In addition to new buildings, half of the bond issue would go toward infrastructure projects that admittedly 'aren't high-speed and sexy,' said Mike Langley, DPS' executive director of facilities management. That includes new boilers for more than 50 schools, interior paint jobs in 30 schools and new athletic fields - five synthetic, five natural - for 10 high schools. More than three dozen schools would have their outdated fire-detection systems replaced and 40 schools would get duct systems that stop the spread of smoke in case of fire, rather than disperse it inside the building. Security also would get a boost, with all schools being outfitted with cameras. High schools would receive at least 16 cameras each, middle schools would have a minimum of eight and elementaries at least four. All elementary schools also would gain electronic door access, allowing staff to see visitors outside and control entry. A new radio security system would allow DPS officers to talk directly to Denver police. The largest chunk of DPS' proposed $20 million tax hike for educational programs would put an art or music teacher at every elementary school." The Rocky has a table listing some of the projects that will receive funding if 3A and 3B pass. Here's the DPS website with way more information than you'd ever want. Here's an article from the Denver Post [October 13, 2003, "Schools hope bonds survive hard times"] about statewide school issues. Denver's 3A and 3B are mentioned. Govenor Owens thinks that opponents of Referendum A are hypocritial is opposing the referred question, according to the Denver Post [October 13, 2003, "Owens: Ref. A foes hypocrites"]. Ouch. From the article, "Owens, Referendum A's biggest backer, likes to compare the water project vote to the successes of housing bonds while on the campaign stump. Those he accuses, however, call the comparison of the water and housing programs "ridiculous." His opponents say the differences are in the details of bonds that could be created by Referendum A on the statewide Nov. 4 ballot, and those administered by the Colorado Housing and Finance Authority. Opponents say that unlike the program that would be created by Referendum A, CHFA has a proven, 25-year history in the bond market and built-in measures to assure financing and real-estate expertise as well as written safeguards against conflicts of interest."

Sun, 12 Oct 2003 14:51:49 GMT

Denver November 2003 Election Here's an editorial in opposition to Amendment 32 from the Denver Post [October 12, 2003, "NO: Homeowners would suffer"]. According to Ron Stewart, the author of the opinion piece, "Amendment 32 is a tax increase on homes and residential property. It is an increase that will pile on, year after year after year. Homeowners will pay more taxes and renters will pay higher rents when landlords pass on tax increases. Non-residential property owners will pay less." Here's an opinion piece written by Norma Anderson in support of Amendment 32 running in today's Denver Post [October 12, 2003, "YES: Restore budget balance"]. Bob Ewegen tries to sort out the pros and cons of Amendment 32 in his column in today's Post [October 12, 2003, "What's the proper balance?]. One line jumped out at me however, "If market conditions returned to those existing in 1982, the Gallagher Amendment would return the residential rate to 21 percent." Talk about a desert island example, how could market conditions possibly return to those existing in 1982? That sort of fuzzy logic makes you wonder about all his points. Mail-in ballots will rule the day in November's election. If fact you must use a mail-in ballot if you are a Denver voter. Here's an article from the Denver Post [October 12, 2003, "Mail ballots' popularity double-edged for hopefuls"] about the effect of mail-in voting on elections. While increasing participation the ballots extend the period that a candidate must get out the word changing campaign strategy. In some cases mail-in ballots favor the better financed campaigns. Use weblogs y'all. The Denver Post [October 12, 2003, "State, local issues"] is running a slew of letters to the editor about election issues. Ed Quillen writes in opposition Referendum A in his column in today's Denver Post [October 12, 2003, "After the water rush"]. Says Quillen, "So there's the geography of Referendum A - tap the Western Slope to benefit south-metro developers and developments. Supporters tell us this will benefit the entire state. What it really does is change the location of our future ghost towns."