Denver November 2003 Election
Here's a column from Fred Brown in today's Post [October 5, 2003, "Voting act seeks 'honest, fair' elections"] explaining about new voting regulations under HAVA. The November election in Denver is a mail-in only. Don't forget the nifty ballot builder application on the Rocky Mountain News website.
My favorite issue on the November ballot is Initiative 101. City employees are constantly being reminded to "think outside the box." Initiative 101 will ask the same of our elected officials. Jeff Peckman, the author of the initiative, has an opinion piece in today's Denver Post [October 5, 2003, "Safety Through Peace can save lives, jobs"] asking voters to approve the inititative. Says Peckman, "Initiative 101 offers Denver a chance to lead the nation in using a proven, cost-effective approach for reducing crime, violence and the city budget deficit - simply by reducing society-wide stress. The devastating epidemic of stress is crushing our youth, crippling our econnomy and driving youths and adults to substance abuse, violence and poor health. Stress-related health problems are bankrupting health-care providers and burdening taxpayers while denying many taxpayers affordable and effective health care."
One reason that I love Initiative 101 so much is the stress that it's caused Councilman Charlie Brown. Here's his opinion piece against the Initiative from the Denver Post [October 5, 2003, "Ballot issue wants you to have a nice day or else
"]. According to Councilman Brown, "I don't think anyone can harvest enough loco weed and bake enough brownies to make clear-thinking Denverites bite on this issue. My best advice to all who believe government can solve their stress problems happens to also be the best advice for relieving stress: Go take a hike." Geez, you sound stressed out Councilman.
Dan Brown, a city employee from Denver International Airport, has an opinion piece about Referred Question 1A in today's Denver Post [October 5, 2003, "Measure opens door to corrupt government"]. His is a side of the argument that has received little coverage and is usually painted as typical coming from a government employee. From Mr. Brown's essay, "Referred Question 1A removes the Career Service Authority. Though the proposed charter language states that there will be a merit system, it has many loopholes that allow for abuse and favoritism. Favoritism leads to low morale and low productivity in a workforce because employees recognize corruption when they see it. Low morale and low productivity mean that residents suffer the consequences due to a reduction in city service levels. Supporters of this amendment will tell you that there is a budget crisis and the charter change will give politicians 'flexibility.' The truth is that they already have that flexibility and have exercised it. Employees pay 2 percent into their retirement; are taking seven days of leave without pay; gave up their pay raises for six months in 2003; will forgo pay raises next year; and are contributing a greater percentage toward their health insurance premiums. These sacrifices helped balance both the 2003 and the 2004 budgets - in fact, Career Service employees will have given back more than $23 million."
Mayor Hickenlooper has an opinion essay in today's Denver Post [October 5, 2003, "Untie Denver's hands over pay raises"] pushing for the charter amendments in Referred Question 1A. From the mayor's opinion piece, "In 1978, however, the burdensome minutiae of the present personnel system were added to the charter, creating an inflexible, restrictive system unable to respond to economic fluctuations. By legally binding the city to annual raises irrespective of the fiscal condition of the budget, the current system holds the budget hostage and forces city leaders to choose between layoffs and cuts in services during tough economic times. Our proposed amendment retains Quigg Newton's core principles of a merit system that protects workers, while providing the city with the flexibility it needs to handle tough financial times and improve service to our citizens."
Here's the Coyote Gulch coverage for 1A. The ol' Coyote predicted early on that this measure will pass easily. We'll see.
The Denver Post [October 5, 2003, "Denver Elections 2003"] is running an editorial explaining the importance of participating in the fall election. The last day to register for the election is tomorrow. Here's the Coyote Gulch coverage of the November election in Denver. Remember to vote early and vote often.
Ed Quillen urges voters to reject Amendment 33 in his column in today's Denver Post [October 5, 2003, "Amendment 33: A $10 million lemon"]. He hits the point that I think everyone has ignored, namely, do we want more tourism in Colorado? Says Mr. Quillen, " Then there's the promised $25 million a year to promote Colorado tourism. According to the pro-33 propaganda, Colorado has slipped in its popularity as a tourist destination ever since a state marketing program was abolished in 1993. This is costing $2.3 billion a year in economic activity, or so they say. Counting what might have been isn't exactly reliable. Note that even with Colorado's alleged decline as a tourist destination, I-70 is already so crowded that the state is looking into expansion possibilities - more noise, more exhaust, more strip malls, more fragmentation of wildlife habitat, etc. Tourism also offers low-paying seasonal jobs that seldom provide benefits, and we've been reading about how the rising number of Coloradans without health insurance - something that affects everyone here. Referendum 33 doesn't address that problem either. So even if Referendum 33 did what its supporters say it will - bring in a lot more tourists - we'd merely end up with more low-paying seasonal jobs along overcrowded highways. Somehow, that doesn't strike me as a way to improve our 'environment and economy."
Here's a story from the Rocky Mountain News about a potential conflict of interest regarding a State Legislator, Rep. Rob Fairbank, R-Littleton, with respect to Amendment 33. From the article, "Amendment 33 supporters say a state lawmaker should not have voted on wording in an official ballot guide because he works for the opposing campaign."
6:02:45 AM 
|
|
