Country Side HOA

BBW

You must have read in the feasibility study that the 96 ballot question won by 68%. I guess you are not that informed about the question as this was a misquote in that study. The advisory question passed by 62%. And it
was simply an advisory question to "consider" the idea. Consider means to think about or to examine thoroughly. Council woman Anne Crouse is even directly quoted as saying that it was to study the idea not actually become a county. Many Broomfield voters voted yes on that question because yes they were interested in studying that idea, but not actually to do it. Roy Jones, co-chair of Vote No Broomfield County, was one of those people that voted yes only to consider the idea. This is why he was so alarmed that these city officials would actually use that 96 question to say that people actually wanted it at that time. I am fighting for the repeal of Broomfield County because I do not like what you are doing to the State of Colorado and because you have made a mockery of our senators and legislators. Word at that capitol is that Broomfield is slime! You are not in good standing at all.

By Joan

BR Anonymous

It sure is great that you are so up on all this Broomfield stuff. My documentation and yours agree.

By Joan

Bright side

We need to get moving on these signatures and we really need some press. Are Chris, Leo and others willing to get some coverage? We have got to get this out again. The press already knows about what Broomfield did and there is not a reporter I have met yet that does not agree that the whole referendum C process was shady and clearly indicates that we need some work done at the capitol.

Our goals are to get press, signatures and get this on the ballot. We only need to convince that 12% of the voters the about why this should be repealed. You will have more press on your side this time because more is coming out. Right now we need signatures. BBW is just a waste of time. Poor old soul, he/she does not know right from wrong. I hope he/she is not a politician.

It is time to call your senator and legislator and ask them to help you with this from the ethical standpoint.

By Joan

More to ponder

In a previous post in this track, BBW asked the following of Adrian:
"Name one instance where Interlocken has received favored treatment by Broomfield or any other governmental entity."
A simple answer is the NWP, which Interlocken and other big developers understandably want and support. The citizens of Broomfield don't (in fact, they voted against it before), but the BFCC has gone ahead and spent taxpayer money for joining the NWP authority and have expressed no intent to get voter approval. THIS is favored treatment.

Regarding the 1996 advisory question, it is simply a matter of understanding the English language. "Consider" has a specific meaning - there is ABSOLUTELY NO connotation of "do", "pursue" or "go forward" in any dictionary - it speaks for itself and cannot ETHICALLY be mis-construed.

Once again, I will ask BBW a question I asked before, but got no answer. If the BFCC is so forthright, why did they actualy misquote the advisory ballot by substituting the word "pursue" for "consider" in the City's Bulletin ad for Ref.C on October 30, 1998, just a couple days before the election?

Lastly, I would like to ask if there is any proof that the legislators came to BF and offered to sponsor Ref.C at the legislature. This is often claimed by BF supporters, but I have never seen any evidence supporting this claim --- it seems there should be a letter or something to prove this claim if it is true. How about that BBW? Or, are you just going to keep stating an unproven claim without any evidence whatsoever?

By BRF2