Archived Ants
« ISSUE #82: Fall's fANTastic Follies | Main | ISSUE #80: ANT Alert - BOCC Primary Election »
Wednesday
Sep122012

ISSUE #81: Got My ANTennae Up!

"The accomplice to the crime of corruption is frequently our own indifference."

               -- Bess Myerson, former Miss America 

While the local shenanigans never seem to end, The Red Ant has noticed an interesting trend.  I won't call it "promising" just yet, but on a variety of "hot" topics, several news columnists have taken surprising stances against the city and its preposterous behavior(s).  This is vitally important because of the intentional indifference of our community at large.  For readers of The Red Ant, by choice you get the other side of the story.  But for those who blindly (or sporadically) read the local fish-wrappers, what they read is all they know!

 
LIBRARY EXPANSION

The Pitkin County Library wants to grow about 25% (from 32,000 sf to 40,000 sf), and in seeking to do this, wants to raise your property taxes this November in order to finance a $5M 30-year bond for the $10M project.  Included in that bond revenue would be operating revenue for utilities, cleaning and a capital replacement schedule for the new addition.  Note: the library already has $5.3M on hand in its endowment.  Do we really need a $10M addition to this relatively new (1991) public facility, especially when the cited rationale includes a new children's library, an expansion of the teen library, community meeting space, reconfiguration of pathways and book stacks (security concerns), renovation to maximize views and an upgrade of technological areas? Really?  

In general, I have one word to say about libraries in 2012: Kindle. The world is moving away from books, books and more books, in the traditional sense.  We are living in an increasingly electronic world and small town libraries stand to gain the most from this trend.  Besides, to spend this kind of money (that the library does not have) for a place for teenagers to hang out is redundant at best.  Less than 100 yards from the library is the same Aspen Youth Center that the electorate fought tooth and nail to keep from being sold to the Aspen Art Museum 4 short years ago!  People, let's take a look at the 32,000 sf of space we have, and with the library's $5.3M in the bank, do some proper refiguring of that space to accommodate the evolving needs of our community and the technology that best enhances the library's offerings.  Just because the library staff says they can't address their "challenges" with a $5.3M investment doesn't mean a thing.  They're just dreaming big and they want you to pay for their dream.  My friend Bill Pope said it best in his recent letter to the editor, "Focus on content, not concrete."

And sometimes the strangest things happen.  Aspen Times columnist Su Lum, with whom I rarely agree, said it best in her June 20 column: "I do not 'hang out' in the library, but I visit it at least once a week, and I've never had the impression that it was over-crowded or that small children were endangered.  Au contraire, it has always been my view that the second story was considerable wasted space and that it would be easier to get around the circular rim if it were a solid floor. I thought that that was the original plan if the library needed more room."  And it's not just about the money, she adds.  "The whole Galena Plaza project has gotten out of hand."  Spot on, Su.  I couldn't have said it better myself.  

Local Jerry Bovino echoed the sentiment with a letter recommending careful consideration of the library's "questionable plans," reiterated immediately thereafter by columnist Steve Skinner who pointed out that "the world wide web is the library now."  

The Library is currently conducting a phone poll to gauge local voters' opinions of placing a $5M bond measure on the November ballot.  Hopefully, for a variety of reasons including those above, the feedback will be outraged at best.  Besides, don't you just hate how they promote these tax increases: it will only be $12.21 per year for each $1M of assessed value.  Puh-lease.  Conduct a capital campaign.  I'll donate.  But the continual raising of property taxes for unneeded pie-in-the-sky projects is nothing short of insulting.  Hopefully it won't happen.  (Alas, at press time, it seems the phone poll of 300 citizens yielded a slim majority in favor of a ballot measure.  Look to vote on the bond in November. Ugh.)

 
BURLINGAME BUILD-OUT
 
Brace yourselves.  I said it was coming.  At this stage, 40% of Burlingame Phase 2 has been reserved.  Of course most of these are the lowest-priced units.  And the applicants?  All they had to do was qualify with APCHA and have financing, and put down a $500 refundable deposit.  The question of the day is How Much Interest In Burlingame 2 Is Enough?  At what point does city council proceed with the build-out?  $10M has already been committed to install infrastructure.  There is great bureaucratic debate regarding changing the higher-priced units to more in-demand lower priced ones, but that would entail a greater subsidy.  Anything to sell the things, right?  Remember, Burlingame 1 subsidized its units $350K/per.  Mick?  He wants to "build according to need."  Swell.  Look for a HUGE bond measure in the spring.

 
MARILYN WINS BUT MICK WON'T CONCEDE - UNTIL HE HAS TO
 
In a surprise move late last month, the Colorado Supreme Court reversed its decision to hear the case Marks vs Koch, Marilyn Marks' case against the city over a citizen's right to inspect anonymous voted ballots as open records. As you recall, this all stems from the 2009 mayoral election when Marilyn was narrowly defeated by Mick in an election decided by the controversial and subsequently repealed "Instant Run-Off Voting" method.  Sold to the populace as a cheap and easy way to electronically duplicate a traditional run-off election in a manner easily verified by the public, as soon as the votes were tallied, the city closed ranks and refused to let citizens have access to the ballots to confirm the city's tabulation of the results.  

Marilyn sued for access, and the city-friendly district court dismissed the case.  Marilyn appealed and won in a 3-0 decision.  The ballots were deemed to be public records.  But oh-no, Mick would not could not concede, so he steamrolled council into appealing to the state supreme court that initially said they'd hear the case, but then decided last week to let the appellate ruling stand -- and reward Marilyn reasonable attorney's fees!  In this case, these are in excess of $275K.  The city was contrite, initially accepting the ruling.  "Closure is a good thing," stated city clerk at the center of the brou-ha-ha Kathryn Koch.  But overnight, Mick cajoled city attorney Jim True into asking the supreme court to reconsider in a rare move.

In quick order, the Colorado supremes responded to the city.  They will not reconsider.  But the fight continues, with the city living up to Mick's promise upon learning of Marilyn's suit 3 years ago.  They will "fight to the last taxpayer dollar" to keep her from getting her supreme court mandated legal fees.

The community outrage is palpable, and not just among the community's citizen grown-ups.  Daily News owner Dave Danforth weighed in with his weekly column (7/8/12) that the "Powers That Be" were more interested in "beating Marks than they were in the electoral process."  It seems the "what are they hiding" question is too glaring for the citizens here, finally.  Danforth even asked what City Hall had to gain from refusing to release a flock of ballot images!  The ridiculous expenditure of public funds on Mick's hatred of his political nemesis has finally reached the tipping point.  Such a shame that it had to come this far (and it's not over yet), but when he can spend your money on a personal vendetta, don't you just know it, he will.

My favorite part?  And this should show you the intellectual quality of those we've elected to council.  Yes, that includes Adam (who is STILL more concerned with getting Mick to like him than actually governing).  Council simply couldn't (or wouldn't?) ask for independent counsel.  After the city's highly irregular recent appeal was submitted, despite no council or public meeting on the subject, Mick defended his actions by claiming that the papers were wrong in their coverage of the issue.  He whined that it would be "grossly unfair" to make the city pay ALL of Marilyn's attorney's fees, claiming that she only won at the appellate level.  Some lawyer Mick is -- she prevailed in the ENTIRE case!  But the dummies on council bought his argument.  They trusted both Mick and highly-conflicted city attorney Jim True and bit -- hook, line and sinker.  Then, in the most preposterous move yet, Mick claimed that since the city always "operated in good faith," they really don't owe Marilyn anything.  Hmmm, my copy of Title 24 of the state statute doesn't contain a "good faith of Aspen" safe harbor exemption. Rather, it emphatically states that the prevailing party SHALL be awarded reasonable attorney's fees.  But once again, Mick was successful in getting the council buffoons to buy into his nonsense.

I hate to say "I told ya so," but recall that Chris Bryan and I as election commissioners were publicly fired and vilified in 2009 amidst this very election mess when we asked city council for $7500 for independent counsel to advise us on the complicated and political mess that was rapidly unfolding before us.  We refused to certify the election, and felt that the city attorneys office was conflicted in advising the very body charged with overseeing the municipal elections. (Recall that the attorneys themselves had designed the vote counting methodology and were also the ones who decided not to release the ballots as public records once these were requested.)  To think now that this whole mess could have and should have been avoided for the measly sum of $7500 is appalling.  But you and I as taxpayers are on the hook because Mick, council and the bureaucrats at city hall just wanted to fight Marilyn.

 
ASPEN PUBLIC SCHOOLS: READY TO RATTLE THE TIN CUP
 
It seems that after 540 phone calls, the Aspen Education Foundation is ready to put a sales tax increase on the November ballot.  Supposedly 59.3% of respondents said they would support a 0.35% sales tax hike to support the public school system.  The big question remains, however: will this be a city of Aspen-only sales tax?  Or will it be county wide?  It matters because more than half the district's students live outside the city limits.  To date, the county commissioners have not embraced the tax measure, but you can be sure that mayor Mick's a big fan!

The Aspen Daily News interestingly covered the story with characteristic slant.  This time, however, it was "Proposed Sales Tax Increase For Local Schools Not Yet Fully Vetted."  Indeed it's not.

 
MY RIDDICU-LIST: THE "YOU CAN'T MAKE IT UP" FILE
 
He's foul.  And foul-mouthed.  And as Aspen's #1 ambassador, a disgrace. But mayor Mick reached a new low last month when addressing the incoming students of the Aspen Music Festival and School and their parents with what the Daily News called "his sage advice."  He told the students (average age 22) to "Use your marijuana card.  We have four pot shops.  It will be something to remember."  And, in a lame attempt to be even more charming, asked the students to refrain from doing so in the woods given the fire danger, but instead "go be secretive somewhere else."

Kudos to the Daily News for reporting on this act of idiocy.  In their coverage, entitled "Mayor Hits High Notes With Music Students," they also noted that no other speakers at the welcoming event encouraged the kids to do drugs, noting that "they also wore pants and shoes, while Mick stuck to shorts and birkenstocks."

Why do the proud institutions of this community continually give this reckless fool a microphone?  If this doesn't reflect poorly on our community, I don't know what does.  

 
HISTORIC PRESERVATION IRONY
 
In all of the furor over the new 28' height limit in the downtown core, I found it ironic to learn that HPC recently awarded the Crandall Building for making "an outstanding commitment to historic preservation in Aspen."  I certainly don't disagree.  But here's the rub:  The 1969-era building that houses Sandy's Office Supply (among other local businesses) was sold in 2009.  The new owners voluntarily designated the Tom Benton-designed building as a historic landmark in exchange for a 3rd floor rooftop addition and other upgrades.  With council's new height limit restrictions, this could not have happened.  Instead, the building would be in bits and pieces in the county dump, and a swishy new higher-rent building would stand in its place.  That's the direction we're headed without the room (upward) to negotiate.  Watch and see.

 
JOHN YOUNG -- THE BOCC CANDIDATE TO SUPPORT IN NOV
 
We did well, folks.  Or, more accurately, he did.  The Red Ant recently endorsed John Young for county commissioner in the June primary and is proud to report that John moves on to the run-off against Steve Child in November.  Thanks to all who voted for John.  You'll be seeing him out and about over the next 3 months  -- please introduce yourselves and get to know him.  You will surely be as impressed as I am!  And if you haven't already, please donate to his campaign.  Contact: jyoung@sopris.net

 
A MEMORIAL DAY HILARITY
 
According to several sources who were in attendance at the annual Memorial Day ceremonies at the Roaring Fork Veterans Memorial next to the courthouse, mayor Mick once again inserted himself into the solemn program.  At the podium, he began his diatribe with words to the effect of, "This is the last time I will address this group as mayor of Aspen" when he was interrupted by cheers from the audience.  Mick fatigue.  It's contagious.  Like a virus. Just 10 more months, friends!

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend