Jump to content
This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
Having thoroughly studied Dave's letter, I totally agree with the recommendations contained in this Letter To The Editor, and I think it all constitutes common sense. To do any less than what is recommended would be irresponsible to say the least. Based on the totality of the allegations and the nature of some of them, it would be highly inappropriate for the City Manager to handle it, and way beyond the purview of the City Council. This calls for an independent, external review. The scope of the problem could very well extend beyond the Police Department itself. The wrongdoing that is alleged does not take place in a vacuum.
A More Comprehensive Definition of Blight from the Blight Study:
Please note the requirement that the area be "a menace to public health, safety, morals or welfare".
2.0 Definition of Blight
A determination of blight is a cumulative conclusion based on the presence of several physical, environmental, and social factors defined by state law. Indeed, blight is often attributable to a multiplicity of conditions, which, in combination, tend to contribute to the phenomenon of deterioration of an area. For purposes of this Survey, the definition of a blighted area is based upon the definition articulated in the Colorado Urban Renewal Law, as follows:
“Blighted area” means an area that, in its present condition and use and, by reason of the presence of at least four of the following factors, substantially impairs or arrests the sound growth of the municipality, retards the provision of housing accommodations, or constitutes an economic or social liability, and is a menace to the public health, safety, morals, or welfare:
(a) Slum, deteriorated, or deteriorating structures;
(b) Predominance of defective or inadequate street layout;
(c) Faulty lot layout in relation to size, adequacy, accessibility, or usefulness;
(d) Unsanitary or unsafe conditions;
(e) Deterioration of site or other improvements;
(f) Unusual topography or inadequate public improvements or utilities;
(g) Defective or unusual conditions of title rendering the title non-marketable;
(h) The existence of conditions that endanger life or property by fire or other causes;
(i) Buildings that are unsafe or unhealthy for persons to live or work in because of building code violations, dilapidations, deterioration, defective design, physical construction, or faulty or inadequate facilities;
(j) Environmental contamination of buildings or property;
(k.5) The existence of health, safety, or welfare factors requiring high levels of municipal services or substantial physical underutilization or vacancy of sites, buildings, or other improvements;
On last November's ballot, the Downtown stakeholders failed, for the second time, to approve a BID (Business Improvement District) Tax, in spite of a massive get-out-the-vote campaign. This would have helped maintain some of the proposed new infrastructure and demonstrated to Council that they are willing to put some skin in the game.
At their September 2nd meeting, the City Council majority approved a motion that stated, in part, that if the BID Tax failed, the URA/TIF discussion is over. Then they reneged on it. But they didn't stop there. At their March 3rd meeting, they engaged in one of the saddest episodes of historical revision I have ever witnessed. They all claimed to have not said, not meant, or not heard what they clearly said, and meant on September 2nd. The reason it's so tragic is that history is preserved, on line, for all to see. I could quote them, but I don't want to be accused of taking words out of context.
I suggest that citizens do their civic duty. Go to the City's website and watch your elected representatives in action. View the videotapes of the meetings. Read the Minutes. For those who only have time for the Cliff Notes version, go to the 3:34 mark in the September 2nd meeting and listen to the motion, the emphatic repetition of the motion, and the vote to approve it.
The Editor is selling dreams. Can she explain, in language that an intelligent voter can understand, exactly how a URA (Urban Renewal Authority) and TIF (Tax Increment Financing) actually work? If so, please do so.
Would it be a Zero-Waste Event?
This high tech solution might work. Imagine the benefits we'll get by combining the PooPrints database with the info from the new license plate readers.
George, I'm going to disagree with you on this one. I think Karen did the right thing. If there's one thing we have more of than errant poo, it's people not willing to stick their neck out for anything.
I don't find the Fur Lady or Cow Pie analogies quite accurate.
Especially when you can marinate in a flotation tank.
I've done this a few times. It's great! Sensory deprivation at its finest. Enhanced interrogation techniques for the masses. Nice to see military technology benefiting the consumer. You really should try this! Maybe there will be a mud season special.
I agree that any eventual proposal for a new police station must go to a public vote.
Last login: Monday, March 23, 2015
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2015 Steamboat Pilot & Today. All rights reserved.