4 BBW

On the jail issue:
Broomfield City Council has stated that if they were in someway stopped from becoming a county the jail would be built and used just the same. I think this means the jail would be an asset to the city - (like rental property ?) So why would they need re-imbursed by the state. If they WERE re-imbursed by the state - would the state own the jail? OOOOOO the plot thickens.

By WW

To BBW

I wish you would find another identity; this is fine referring to the cartoon; but as someone said; the cartoon is a cartoon. You are obviously knowledgeable about this city and not a cartoon character. To be on this board; you need a sense of humor.
Think about it.

In response to your conversation; I agree that BF is a progressive envious city with a strong high tech base, anticipated beautiful mall; and may be the envy of some other communities. But the older neighborhoods are in need of defined attention; and the newer developments (a few mentioned earlier); missed that detail of the Master Plan that would have classified as a unique; progressive community to be the envy of many. As I have said before; I have admiration for the city council; and total admiration for the city staff: Rosann, Kirk, Kevin, Charles, George, I have met them all and have been accepted with genuine kindness and assistance.

The council however, is experiencing bad vibes from me on this jail issue. Specifically, as representatives of the council (even though some council members may agree or disagree with these statements); Mayor Berens and Hank Stovall really sounded bad in the press. In the Denver Post, right after the jail vote; the sub-headline read something like Mayor berates jail oppponents; after a headline about talking tough to jail opponents. Good heavens; this is akin to "cockfights in Broomfield" (Camera) it sounds like we have a bunch of neandrathals in this city. The mayor in the above article complained that "we are tired of being lashed out at" and went on to say that he (understood council) would move the jail within half mile of Countryside homes; and add a waste treatment plant to boot. Come on BBW. this is ridiculous. Stovall in Westy Window promises "consequences" if this group continues. This is a jail issue, soon to become a waterplant issue, revenge never served anyone; but has always made the leaders of that revenge look very very bad. Someone on the board has suggested that give this group one reason to give up; and they will find a hundred to keep going. as long as our council keeps it alive.

And, no, I cannot make excuses for the Mayor and Stovall in my home, work, or social functions. Because I believe this is "bullying the others" and as the saying goes; "crying in the beer".

Flat out it is an embarrassment. If this falls within Webster's definition of ethics and ethical; "the disciplie dealing with what is good and bad and with moral duty and obligation; conforming to accepted standards of conduct; then I am in shock.

The appeal is almost as bad as the remarks. You explain (thank you) that the reason behind the appeal is monetary. I need to be educated in this area; my understanding is that the financing for the majority of required facilities will be through COPS; if the city is unable to repay; than the owners of the COPS would receive ownership. George DiCero has said that the jail will be built; if the county issue wins in the state; then this will be leased to other counties. (Personnally, I would like to see something like a home for the disabled or teen rehab but that is personal opinion). Where is the loss to the city for which you are asking reimbursement from the state. If we were seeking traditional loan services; this would be understandable. Also, the federal application for block grants is specifically targeted (70%) of dollars to low income areas. Tough to find in BF.


By Br Anonymous

To BBW ...cont

On the ballot question; our disagreement is on the actual purpose of the 96 vote. I voted yes, my message to you; do a study and let us know what it will cost. Bring it back to the citizens where we can talk, argue, and work out an agreement; take it to vote. and go forward.

I never voted yes for a county in 96. Also, somewhat disturbing to me; is the fact that a study was completed before the election in 96; and not everyone knew about this before the vote. Secondly, there was a second study reviewed in 98; this was used as the basis for the move to state assembly. Almost a fifteen month relapse after the vote; no feedback to the public; and "GUESS WHAT?" it is a state amendment. The council made a big assumption here; that the feasibility study would be good enough for the county vote. I went to the library immediately to get a copy; and there was none available yet. The copies were available later; but useless to anyone who wanted to challenge or question or "go for it" at that point.

Secondly, I challenge the representation at the State Assembly: The two councilpersons, the mayor and the city manager; are not objective "private citizens". Considering this had sat for five months; why not representatives from the five wards. That is a citizen's group.

As you can see, the fifteen month gap is an issue with me; and I know no vaild answer. Once done; off to state in less than two-three WEEKS. Fast moving; too fast without asking the questions I do. Ward meetings started in April; the process was in full motion by then. I remember asking my council person about it at the ward meeting; and was basically blown off. The decision was made. The other council member and I began to discuss it; had a couple of sentences, and was interrupted by the first. Seemed to be a topic not to be discussed.

By Br Anonymous

To BBW..cont

I just hate it when I hit that word limit; so am trying to avoid doing so.

About the committees; Last spring council did a review of 10 committees and ended up with five. The comment at that time was that some had gone in unacceptable directions; and the purpose of the committee needed to be reviewed. Among these was Open Space; BF schools Task Force; most of which I don't remember off hand. But these two I do. Open Space was split; now only meets twice a year; was meeting once a month. Granted, there is little open space left; and the areas have now been renamed open lands; allowing minimal develop (Aug. 1998 revision). BF Schools Task Force is one of the hardest working groups in this community; since at least 92 they sought one school district, went to state, everything. With Resolution 143-98 passed by the council in July, 98; "it is the official policy of the City Council not to pursue the creation of a school district for BR..."; how do we unify the schools; beyond having bands march in the parade (this was a good idea). This committees have been reduced to "politically correct tokens" with reduced meetings and little time to be effective. Whatever, the reduction in numbers and meeting time periods indicated to me that the council was taking further steps in "Consolidation of Power" (not my phrase, but read it somewhere and thought it fit) to become a city/county.

Which brings up another subject; in the feasibility study (98) there were no monies under salaries for council/mayor or council/commissioner/mayor. At the current time; council members/ mayor are payed 300/500 respectively. Why was this not noted. Granted it is not as expensive as the jail; but did deserve recognition. And what will the pay be in 2001? Following state rules, then the amount is more substancial.

I do not know the exact direction CVLEG is going; but I do know this; let us agree not to call either side names; or each other names. That is wasteful time; I personally do not know you or any members of the group. if you were standing in front of me at the grocery store; we would both be anonymous. So let us be respectful to each other. Deal??

By Br Anonymous