ISSUE # 75: Gone Skiing: St. ANTon

"Snow: A form of precipitation that usually occurs three weeks prior to and the morning of departure for your ski vacation."     -- Unknown 

HYDRO: SIGNATURES ARE IN!

It was incredible. Nearly 50 local citizens voluntarily circulated petitions and garnered 953 signatures that were turned in yesterday. While the effort does not necessarily stop the hydro plant in its tracks, this certainly IS a referendum on the hydro plant! Gone are Skadron's and Torre's claims that opposition to the hydro plant is from just a "vocal minority." And more importantly, gone is Mick's favorite claim that there is a referendum on the hydro plant since 77% of voters supported the hydro plant in 2007. That particular election attracted just 800 local voters, and yes, there was overwhelming support for a $5.5 million bond to build the hydro plant. But now, at $10.5 million in costs (and counting), more people signed the petition than turned out to vote (either way) in 2007! It's abundantly clear, there is widespread outrage against the hydro plant, its environmental impacts, its ballooning costs and the city's failed process of building yet another disaster!

Now it falls to council. They have two choices. They can simply repeal Ordinance 30 that rezoned open space land for industrial use. Or, they can put it to a vote. The latter is clearly the preferred choice, but will council have the guts to go there? By law, they must conduct the special election no less than 30 days and no more than 90 days from the clerk's verification of the signatures. (Mick had been whining about wanting to possibly conduct the vote in November, but think of all the damage the city could do in 9 months!? Besides, it's not a legal option to wait.)

Councilman Adam Frisch signed the petition, citing the escalating costs and the need for citizens to again weigh in on a project that is far different today than the one approved 4 years ago. Thankfully, one of our representatives sees the value of citizen input on the issue of this runaway train. Let's hope he puts his vote where his signature is - with the citizens!!

Kudos to locals Ward Howenstein and Maurice Emmer who led the heroic community petition effort. Howenstein said upon submitting the petitions to the city clerk, "While we believe that giving the citizens of Aspen a say in the hydro project was important, we are humbled and heartened by the overwhelming support and enthusiasm we have encountered from citizens, business leaders and organizations in the Aspen community who also believe the public deserves the right to vote on this important matter."

Stay tuned. This one is about to get good.

FEAR AND LOATHING

It's always interesting to learn who will and who won't sign a petition, and why. This one was unique in that it wasn't political. It was civic. All it asked was whether or not one felt that another vote is in order given the outrageous fiscal, environmental and public policy behavior by the local government concerning the hydro plant. As a petition circulator, I had some interesting responses. Some people are STILL very frightened of the city and what will happen to them when "Mick sees that I have signed."

One friend wanted to sign, but felt that his role on the board of an organization that gets money from the city would jeopardize those funds. Puh-lease! Others who have pending development approvals in the works were frightened that these would be jeopardized. A city employee praised the effort but feared for her job if she signed. And still others feared that their subsidized housing would be affected. This, in a democracy! Isn't that amazing? Or is it? What has happened to put this genuine fear into so many citizens? It is widely "known" that there are reprisals, but are there? Really? Please be in touch and tell me your story. I will not identify you in anything I write. I'm just very curious. Is this myth or is it reality?

NO "COLD BEDS" FOR MICK

He is on a roll. Mick recently proposed to council that the land use codes be changed to prohibit free market condos, townhomes and single family homes in the downtown core. He says it's to enhance our tourist-based economy. But I know better. HERE is a letter that I wrote to the editor last week. Class warfare is indeed alive and kicking in Aspen.

NO CARS FOR MICK EITHER

Clearly the cold weather is keeping mayor Mick at his desk, dreaming of new ways to thwart the free market, especially local businesses. Yesterday's paper outlined Mick's dream of paving part of Galena Street and eliminating parking altogether on Galena and Cooper. This would result in the loss of up to 80 downtown parking places. Mick, ever the economist, told the Aspen Daily News that bigger sidewalks and better lines of sight thanks to fewer parked cars could be a boon to businesses on Galena. Ya think?

The big picture is that Mick wants to link the soon-to-be-repaired parking garage to downtown retail. And estimated costs are projected at $4.4 million. (Here we go again!) We all know that Mick hates cars - and those who drive them - so fewer cars are somehow a win for him. It surely won't be a win for local businesses. The idea is to bring people to town. And no, I don't mean by bicycle.

I will report back on how council reacts to these ridiculous ideas. And I will name names. The madness must stop.

GET YOUR $50 FROM THE CITY

Free money. It's not too often one can write that in these parts! For Aspen residents who lived within the city limits for the entire year of 2011, you are entitled to a $50 food sales tax refund. This is the result of a sales tax referendum that was passed several years ago that imposed a 1% city sales tax. It was deemed that $50 was the approximate amount of sales tax that locals would pay annually on their grocery purchases. Here's your chance to get that money back (so it's not actually free). Don't miss the deadline. Print THIS form and mail it in by Monday, April 16.

ISSUE # 74: Ant Alert: Sign the Hydro Petition

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

AN AUSPICIOUS START TO THE NEW YEAR!

A diverse group of citizens recently initiated a formal petition to repeal Ordinance 30 of 2011.  The ordinance, integrally related to the city's disastrous hydro plant project, re-zoned land in the Marolt Open Space subdivision for industrial use by the Castle Creek Energy Center and Hydro Plant.  At issue?  The city does not have federal approval to build the plant and will not for several years to come, if ever. 

This was a premature action and one in which City Council brazenly ignored all input except that from city staff before unanimously approving the land use change.

Led by Aspenites Ward Hauenstein and Maurice Emmer, an effort is underway to collect 600 signatures from REGISTERED CITY OF ASPEN VOTERS.  Upon reaching that threshold, city council will have two choices:  repeal the ordinance OR refer the issue to the electorate at a special election. 

I have recently volunteered to circulate a petition and collect signatures.  As you are well aware, The Red Ant is vehemently opposed to the city's management of the hydro plant project, primarily based on the fiscal picture.  We have seen a budget of $6.2M in 2007 balloon out of control to $10.5M in costs today, and this is certain to rise.  (HERE is a full-page ad I ran in the December 28 Aspen Daily News with cost details on the project.)  There are numerous serious environmental concerns as well.  Even the Daily News is in support of the petition effort, acknowledging that "the local press failed to do its job" educating the voters about the issue when it was approved in 2007.  Read their editorial HERE.

PLEASE sign the petition!  Just hit "reply" to this email and let me know when and where I can come to you for your signature.  There are 2 weeks left to collect the signatures and I would like to do my part!  See you soon!

Happy New Year!  May 2012 be the year we take our government back!

P.S. Voters in the County and elsewhere, please email your support for the effort to CitizensPetition81611@gmail.com  While these messages will not be counted in the "official" ordinance repeal process, your voices will be collected and heard as efforts continue to reign in this mess!  Thank you!

ISSUE #73: sANTa's Back: 2011

"Ring out the old, ring in the new

Ring happy bells, across  the snow.

The year is going, let him go

Ring out the false, ring in the true."

                  --- Alfred Lord Tennyson, 1850

'Twas winter in Aspen, it comes every year.

A long runway, more airlines and lots more to cheer!

We made it through '11 with some wins and some losses

But nothing's so bad as our corrupt city bosses.

To shine a bright light and cry-out upon news

The Red Ant is eager to email my views

I name names and wonder, what are they thinking?

The ethics, the corruption -- this boat is sinking!

The politics, they're nasty -- really, what's new?

Mick's leadership's lacking: so predicted, so true.

The boys they just sit there, scared to say boo

So the mayor steamrolls his agenda through.

We voted for Adam and got Skadron back

Independent thinkers -- still something we lack.

Torre's emotional, but he gets things done

But Derek, oh my, he is just dumb.

They don't do the reading; just sit there like fools

Their eyes? Glazed over like cold swimming pools.

Mick rants and he raves, and he yells at the folks

Council reacts like he's just telling jokes.

They ignore the public (who cares what we think?)

Steve Barwick and staff - they're tickled pink!

Council just looks to them for direction

All I can think of is the next election!

Grocery bags in plastic, they have been banned

The legislation was sloppy; the decision panned.

Now bring your own bag, or be prepared to pay

Paper bags will cost 20 cents every day.

The hydro plant faces its federal review

(An environmental study's the right thing to do.)

This slows things down, likely for years

Plus a lawsuit was filed, and the city has fears.

A decision in '58 to turn out the lights

Means the city abandoned its hydro plant rights.

The old plant was closed, pipes were ripped out

To rebuild the thing now is clearly in doubt!

We should stop now and just call it a loss

But the tab keeps on growing with Mick as the boss.

$10.5 million - today's estimated cost

It may never get built, and millions more will be lost.

Economic analyses - these were compiled

For taxpayers - wow, how we've been beguiled!

The experts, they say the project's a mess

But staff at the city will never confess.

They once again built -- with money from bonds

And when this was all gone, they just waved their wands.

Electrical rates -- these increased for us all

The costs keep on rising, the fall-out? Not small!

The "Sick of Mick" effort, while it didn't succeed

Showed disdain for the mayor, but nothing he'll heed.

Mick won his third term, thankfully his last

Let's hope that May '13 comes around fast!

Drug cartels reached our nice little town

Made clear when a major cocaine bust went down.

Several old locals were caught and were busted

The DEA made it happen; our Sheriff -- not trusted.

Occupy Aspen -- they came and they roared.

(Just 20 showed up and many looked bored.)

Of all who were there, I soon realized

Most live in housing -- yep, subsidized!

Marks won her appeal against the city

Their reaction was predictable: vengeful, not pretty.

They're hiding something from the '09 election

Courts say show ballots; city ignores the direction.

Now they appeal to the state's Supreme Court

Costing hundreds of thousands on unneeded tort.

So ironic to note that if the city should "win"

Honest elections will be over; not seen again.

It's likely they'll lose, they have a weak case

Mick vs Marilyn: looks personal on its face.

But the facts are important, no matter your side

It's abundantly clear the city's got something to hide.

Burlingame raises its big ugly head

The next phase is coming, or so it is said.

Never mind there aren't jobs nor demand for the places

The city's happy to build for imaginary faces.

They've been running an ad, begging for takers

Just sign on the list - who cares if they're fakers!?

The city just wants to break ground and dig

It's all about votes, folks, and Burlingame's BIG!

They're sneaking around, contracting to build

We don't even know if their coffers are filled.

Once again they have plans that ignore stuff like money

Want subsidized housing? Just sign up, honey!

Mick took a vacation (nothing wrong with that)

But charged us for expenses, that dirty rat!

City manager Barwick just cracked him a check

It's taxpayers' money - so what the heck!?

The bike racers came from over the Pass

In terms of spectators, we prepared for a mass.

But most were just locals, up on the hill

Restaurants went empty; no bellies to fill.

The city spent thousands, and took a big loss

What did you expect? Mick was the boss.

We're indulging Mick's fantasy (for tourism?) again

(The Red Ant personally thinks it's a sin.)

Little Annie's: a dive where we all like to eat

The menu's affordable, the façade western and sweet.

The building's in jeopardy, could be torn down

Can't we move Annie's elsewhere in town?

Below the earth's surface geo-thermal temps are hot

But drilling to harness these, a good idea? Not.

It's part of the "green" thing that pleases the city

The neighbors find the experiment noisy and gritty.

Weeks past the deadline, no water's been found

Maybe there's nothing in our under-ground!

No hot water, cold water, nothing's been hit

But the city keeps drilling; these guys just won't quit!

And then there's the Wheeler, our opera house prize

With a taxpayer subsidy - horrors, the size!

$3 mil a year for movies and shows

Nothing there makes money; that really blows.

Finally an approval for a lodge at 1A

Too bad in the process the Poma went away.

The city fought hard against new free market places

But settled when they got on-site worker housing spaces.

The Given, it's gone and the furor is done

CU sold the land and the impact was none.

Now on the site will be one private dwelling

The trees, they're all standing. The next fight? No telling.

Digging into our pockets whenever they can

The County concocted a spectacular plan:

Special non-profits now don't need to raise money

They've just upped our taxes! Don't laugh, it's not funny.

The city says rentals of your home or mine

Need to pay taxes or be guilty of crime.

They want a cut of our personal deals

Likely to spend it on staff parties and meals!

'12 is upon us and we'll be spending a lot

The city budget has 70 mil in its pot.

Capital expenditures increased the most

Fiscal responsibility? Nah! That thinking's toast.

The AACP threatens early next year

But the only answer we really need to hear:

Will it be regulatory or just serve as a guide?

If not the latter, the community's hands will be tied.

Planning & Zoning, they've been at it for years

Their draconian plans have justified fears.

Each draft in the process has met with jeers

They all prefer a return to The Quiet Years!

The Thrift Shop ladies (all volunteer)

Weeding through old stuff, garbage and gear

Made a silk purse from a sow's ear

And donated half a mil to the community this year!

Tony is back at the Hotel Jerome

The gem is again a great local home.

The J-Bar, The Library, The Antler Bar

The corner of Main & Mill: our historic star!

SkiCo stepped up and made some big changes

New lifts, new restaurants on our mountain ranges!

Better is best, and here skiing is GREAT --

The Crowns and the SkiCo -- what I call "first rate!"

Ever onward and upward in our cul-de-sac nest

We all love it in Aspen - it's simply the best!

The Red Ant's on the case; the fun never ends

Holiday blessings to you, your family and friends.

ISSUE # 72: From My vANTage Point

INEPTOCRACY (in-ep-toc'-ra-cy): A system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of achieving, and where the members of society least likely to succeed or even to sustain themselves are abundantly rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

 CARBON MONOXIDE IS POISON

I've had the Aspen Volunteer Fire Department (A.V.F.D.) on my mind a lot over the past few days. Yes, I do enjoy a regular coffee at Peach's, next door to the fire station, but it's more than just checking out the awesome fire equipment. It's Thanksgiving season, and this one marks 3 years since the carbon monoxide poisoning deaths of my dear friends the Lofgren family, who died tragically at a rental house in Aspen that they acquired at a school auction. This sad anniversary was exacerbated this year by the Thanksgiving Day suicide of local restaurateur Scott DeGraff, a married father of 2, who chose carbon monoxide as his means of escape from life's troubles. Many of the same firemen who were first-responders to the Lofgren tragedy also went out on the DeGraff call.

Our fire department is comprised of community volunteers. That's why it's called the Aspen VOLUNTEER Fire Department.

PLEASE be sure that you have carbon monoxide detectors in your home. No more senseless and preventable carbon monoxide-related tragedies for our fire department or our community, please.

Lofgren update: The criminal cases in the Lofgren matter were recently dismissed. Yep, thrown out. The judge (Judge Boyd) ruled that the statute of limitations on the charges had expired. A former city of Aspen building inspector and the owner of a Glenwood Springs-based plumbing and heating company walked, just weeks before they were scheduled for jury trials on four counts each of criminally negligent homicide. The city/county argument? Implementation of a building code is voluntary and shields the inspector from any civil or criminal liability. Swell, then why have an inspector?? A civil case remains. And don't forget, as a community, we paid the $250K+ in defense bills for the former building inspector with public funds.

As a result, there are still so many unanswered questions related to the Lofgren tragedy:

• Why was this home so lethal?
• Why was there no carbon monoxide detector as required by law?
• Why did this home have a certificate of occupancy?
• Who is responsible for their deaths?

And most notably, with no criminal trials, there will be no insight obtained as to what actually happened. The friends and family of Caroline, Parker, Owen and Sophie will never hear the evidence that the grand jury heard; evidence that compelled them to issue indictments. There were countless failures that led to this tragedy. By dismissing the cases, the judge, and we, as a community, have again failed the Lofgrens. Carbon monoxide detectors save lives. Get yours today. And give one to a friend.

(Side note: Judge Boyd is the same judge who dismissed Marilyn Marks' lawsuit against the city for refusing to disclose the anonymous voted ballots from the 2009 municipal election. His dismissal was recently slapped down when the Appellate court overturned his decision unanimously, 3-0.) 

HYDRO PLANT: THE ECONOMIC BASICS

I recently got so fed up with the ineptitude of those on city council who regularly continue to blindly grant more and more funding (today we're up to $9.5M on the $6.3M project, and FAR from finished) for the ill-conceived Hydro Plant and Castle Creek Energy Center that I did a top-line economic analysis of the project. When both papers refused to run my essay as a Guest Opinion (lest they give me any credibility), it was likely because the piece blew several enormous holes in the B.S. the city has been peddling in defense of this misguided endeavor. So, The Red Ant purchased a full-page ad in the paper and ran it anyway over Thanksgiving weekend. HERE it is: 

ASPEN'S WATER-GATE: THE HYDRO PLANT DEMONSTRATES HUBRIS WITHOUT PARALLEL

Aspen's exclusively political program of environmental hubris, funded by the bottomless pit of its underrepresented tax base and fueled by the misleading 2007 ballot measure promising clean energy at a construction cost of $6.3 million, is finally facing its Waterloo. If built, the Castle Creek Energy Center will for decades be defined as Aspen's "environmental loss leader," costing millions more to build and operate than it can recover in energy revenue over the next half century. Here are three important numbers:

• 2.83 cents: The 2010 actual direct cost per kilowatt hour (kwh) to generate 16.8 million kwh of hydropower from the City's two existing hydro facilities at Reudi Reservoir and Maroon Creek.
• 9.47 cents: The estimated direct cost per kwh to generate 5.6 million kwh (8% of the City's 2010 total energy load of 69 million kwh) of hydropower annually from Castle Creek. That's more than three times the 2010 actual cost.
• $1.9 million: The resulting - very, very conservatively estimated - loss in current year dollars of operating Castle Creek over the coming half century.

The City currently pays just 4.6 cents (plus a small charge for transmission services) per kwh for wind energy purchased from its primary energy provider, the Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska (MEAN). That's less than half of Castle Creek's projected cost. Why does the City insist on passing such costs along to its customers when far less costly yet still "renewable energy" options exist?

Because destiny trumps environmental stewardship, Aspen's leadership seeks not just political credit but political immortality. A permanent edifice to their wisdom, like a marble statue of a Greek tragedy, the Castle Creek Energy Center is their end goal. And when seeking immortality, cost becomes secondary when it's somebody else's money. Their arrogance enables the over-estimation of their own competence, resulting in tragically poor decisions despite overwhelming facts and recommendations to proceed differently; the very definition of hubris.

For those with the stomach for it, here are the underlying details, derived directly from information provided by the City through numerous Colorado Open Records Act requests. The most recently disclosed Castle Creek Energy Center construction budget, which includes a new 1.175 megawatt hydro plant, is $9.5 million. A 50% increase over the original budget, it is sure to increase, but $9.5 million provides a conservative starting point for this analysis.

Cost of Capital

Capital always comes at a price. Assigning a conservative 3% cost of capital and a 50-year life expectancy to this $9.5 million "investment," the resulting 6.64 cents per kwh cost of capital alone is over twice the total cost of power generation from the debt-free Reudi and Maroon Creek hydro facilities.

Operations

Let's conservatively assume the cost per kwh to operate Castle Creek will be the same as Reudi and Maroon Creek. The combined cost of capital and operations (6.64 + 2.83) brings the estimated direct cost for Castle Creek to 9.47 cents per kwh.

Loss Leader

At 9.47 cents per kwh, power from the Castle Creek hydro plant is so expensive it would cost more to generate than the City could charge under its 2010 rate structure. Specifically, Castle Creek power will be 43% and 12.7% more expensive than the City's 2010 residential and commercial base energy rates of 6.6 and 8.4 cents, respectively. This translates to an estimated loss of $38,000 per year, or $1.9 million in red ink over 50 years. And those are just the conservatively estimated direct costs of a facility designed to provide only 8% of the City's power load. This analysis does not reflect the very real additional costs of overhead and administration.

The financial shock from this new cost center has already resulted in rate increases for local residents and businesses. Earlier this year, city council increased electric rates an average of 16% over the next four years (for a residential customer using 1,350 kwh per month). The first phase of this increase became effective November 1, and future annual increases through 2015 have already been approved. Without this pricier new rate structure, the annual losses for the hydro plant would be an order of magnitude greater. Even with these rate increases, however, the hydro plant will still operate at a loss for its entire lifetime.

Not only will the Castle Creek Energy Center be a loss-leader for the City, it will be the most expensive source of power in the City's energy portfolio. Combining Castle Creek's cost with that of Reudi and Maroon Creek, and conservatively assuming the new hydro plant will run at full capacity, the "blended" cost for all City of Aspen hydro power generation will increase 58%, from 2.83 to 4.48 cents per kwh. In reality, however, this 4.48 cents per kwh rate will likely be much higher because Castle Creek will not initially and may never run at full capacity to produce the promised 8% of total power generation.

In Aspen's council chambers, political hubris reigns. City leaders seek the credit while we pay the ever-increasing costs and on-going subsidies. With cheaper and more environmentally friendly options at their fingertips, City leaders aspire to an expensive and ill-conceived "clean green" destiny despite the fundamental flaws in their plans. Why? Political credit outweighs public benefit. Ambition trumps principles. Immortality overshadows environmentalism. And political destiny, no matter how misguided, is worth more than any amount of other people's money necessary for its attainment.

STOP THE HYDRO PLANT TODAY! NO MORE SPENDING UNTIL THE LEGAL CHALLENGES ARE RESOLVED AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ARE KNOWN!

Immediately after this ad ran, council quickly postponed its impending meeting on rezoning a city-owned parcel of land along Castle Creek upon which the city intends to build the Castle Creek Energy Center from "residential" to "industrial use."  Council will now have a work session on December 12 to discuss "economics" and "water quality" issues pertaining to the Hydro Plant and Energy Center and will follow up on the rezoning issue in January. Of note, it appears that the city is now attempting to seperate one project (Hydro) from the other (Energy Center). I see this as positive indication that the city is fearful that its $9.5M investment in the Hydro Plant infrastructure (built prior to having a permit and with a current lawsuit challenging the water rights to even build one) is in serious jeopardy. But, while the Hydro Plant may get tied up, the rezoning of this specific parcel (amidst a residential neighborhood) for an undisclosed "industrial use" stands to proceed. If I had to speculate on what's going on, I'd guess this t.b.d. "industrial use" could at some point in the future be so intrusive to the neighborhood that the neighbors might regret not allowing a hydro plant there. How's that for vengeance? These guys are bad. Really bad.

**And a big THANK YOU to readers of The Red Ant who generously contributed to this impactful "strategic communication" (advertising) effort. I'd like to run the ad again. If you are interested in helping with the cost, please "reply" to this email.     

BALLOT BROU-HA-HA: THE CONDENSED VERSION

The legal fight continues with the city's recent appeal to the Colorado Supreme Court. It's really simple: the city attorneys argue that public disclosure of voted ballots will cause public harm because (in Aspen) ballots may not be anonymous, therefore they must remain secret, where only election officials and city staff can see them and know how people voted. Now remember, by law, if the city doesn't conduct an election that ensures anonymous untraceable ballots, that election is unconstitutional. Period. And an unconstitutional election can be nullified by the courts, even years after the election.  (Get the picture why city council might be a little worried about exposing the ballots?) Like I said, it's simple. Somehow, the city geniuses (this includes city council) feel that Aspen is special and our ballots SHOULD be traceable to the voter and available only to "insiders," therefore they cannot be made public and must be kept secret. The legal update: Marilyn's original case against the city (to disclose the 2009 ballots) was dismissed in bureaucracy-friendly district court (the case was deemed not worthy of being heard), but when she appealed to the State Appellate Court, surprise, they came down 3-0  strongly and clearly in her favor. The city is ignoring the appellate ruling while it appeals, likely risking hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars to keep whatever it was they did to those 2009 ballots in the dark. For now. THE PATTERN OF SECRECY LIVES ON I looked back at an earlier issue (#48) of The Red Ant that focused on "Secrecy at City Hall," the subject of a speech I made at a September 2010 Aspen Business Luncheon. It's frightening how little has changed. The city's legal obsession with "secret" vs "anonymous" ballots fits right in, underneath the big "secret" umbrella. I hate to pull a "Danforth" (the owner of the Aspen Daily News who regularly recycles old columns instead of writing new ones), but I thought the following excerpt from the Business Luncheon speech was worth running again amidst the latest goings-on: "I'm here today to talk for a few minutes about what I see as the "Culture of Secrecy" at Aspen's City Hall. In general, when I use the term "city hall," I am referring to city council, city attorneys John Worcester and Jim True, and city manager Steve Barwick. Now, it's no secret that I was appointed to be an Election Commissioner in 2009, just prior to the now infamous IRV election. In short, here's how it went ---- The public voted in 2007 to use Instant Run-off Voting in our elections. That there were multiple methodologies of the controversial vote-counting scheme was kept secret from the voters. The "rules" for Aspen's vote count were determined mostly in secret meetings of city staff, the city attorneys and the incumbents running for office -- Mick and Jack. Among other problems, as an election commissioner I witnessed messed up pre-election software testing. In one case, the candidate with lowest number of votes came out as the winner, while the candidate with the highest number of votes became the loser. Reminds me of the biblical reference "the first shall be last and the last shall be first."   ---- But I digress..... This precipitated some late-night last-minute software changes in the wee hours before the election. City attorney Jim True tested this software alone, in secret, in his office. And after the election, when the city's election contractor discovered a vote tabulation error, the city kept this secret until the deadline for a recount had passed. But when the election commissioners began to ask questions, we were swiftly "disappeared." Before I left ---- one big secret had been revealed: the city knows how you voted. It's been proven. Your constitutional right to an anonymous ballot has been violated, and this was likely not the first time. Now the city calls that election "the most transparent" in history. WRONG. It's all a big secret. It comes down to this fundamental question: Why won't the city show the same ballot images that they showed on television screens the night of the election? What are they hiding? It will be extremely difficult for the current election commission to make the changes that the city attorneys and city council don't want made. But laws were broken, and we must demand that integrity and honesty be returned to our local elections. That's no secret." Scary, huh? As true today as it was 15 months ago. THE "YOU CAN'T MAKE IT UP" FILE Remember the city's messy and loud $200K geo-thermal drilling experiment (See Issue #67)? A friend of The Red Ant informs me that "not only have they not hit ANY water, hot or cold, the city has asked them to drill down to 1500 feet. We were told that the contract was for 1000 feet. And they are to be finished by December 1. I hate to bitch, but .... Oh yeah, it's our city. Gotta trust them, right? You should know!" .... Like I said, you can't make this stuff up!! AND ONE MORE ADDITION TO THE "FILE" Check out this official agenda from the city clerk's office for the recent Election Commission meeting on November 29. Yes, you are seeing it right. I received an email the morning of November 29 with the following message: "Damn. We missed the meeting. It was at 1am. (City clerk) Kathryn Koch confirmed last night that it was at 1pm. In the dark of night is where city council does its business." Now at least we have the answer to all of the "darkness" that pervades local governance.

ISSUE # 71: RampANT Abuse in Subsidized Housing

"Subsidizing the markers of status doesn't produce the character traits that result in that status; it undermines them. It's easy to see why. If people don't need to defer gratification, work hard, etc., in order to achieve the status they desire, they'll be less inclined to do those things. The greater the government subsidy, the greater the effect, and the more net harm produced."  

                     --- "Philo of Alexandria," 2010, blogger 

SUBSIDIZED HOUSING: THE BIGGEST "GAME" IN TOWN Despite recent news of an unprecedented glut in local subsidized housing inventory, and ongoing record levels of foreclosures in the working-class neighborhoods of the mid-valley, the city of Aspen's plans for 167 more subsidized housing units at Burlingame phase 2 continue. There is $7.2 million proposed for infrastructure construction at Burlingame in the city's 2012 proposed budget. And the city is even planning to lease excess seasonal rental units at Burlingame to the Aspen Valley Medical Foundation for use by the local homeless. Remind me again why we need more subsidized housing?? Over 200 people have signed up for subsidized units at Burlingame 2 on the no-risk waiting list, but to-date, just 22 are both APCHA and bank loan pre-qualified. Council has indicated though that with 60 pre-qualified buyers (who still won't have to commit - financially or contractually), they will likely give the go-ahead to begin construction. Even if the plans are delayed a year, the city will spend $1.9M in 2012 "planning" Burlingame 2.  In the meantime, the city is currently running half-page 4-color ads in the local papers, imploring those interested to "Do your part (get qualified with APCHA and for a loan) so we can start digging in 2012."  Shameless. This is all before city council's promised "strategic review" of subsidized housing, allegedly an in-depth analysis of critical issues facing the program, including: retirees in housing created for workers, governance of the program, and the government's role in HOA solvency issues, among others. It seems that the bureaucrats at city hall simply intend to steam forward despite the economy, the enormous excess housing inventory and all matters of better judgment. *** I've been planning a multi-issue expose on housing, and there's no time like the present to launch it. Reader's Tip: In early 2009, Issue # 22 of The Red Ant "Affordable for Whom?" outlined the subsidized housing basics. I don't plan to bore you by repeating them. Please take a minute and glance back through that installment to refresh your memory on how subsidized housing works around here. The one key point is to recall that two-thirds of the 1.5% Real Estate Transfer Tax (RETT) goes to the subsidized housing fund. If this money was not thus dedicated, we would not be having this discussion. However, the use of "other people's money" has made it far too easy to be careless with this particular "marker of status." This issue will simply whet your appetite for what's to come, and several issues that follow (schedule to be determined by the events of the day) will explore and expose the corrupt underbelly of our subsidized housing program, focusing primarily on the ineptitude of the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA), its board and its rules, and demonstrating through blatant mismanagement, negligence, lack of proper oversight, and special favors for special people that the program is the embodiment of the law of unintended consequences. In short, we need more subsidized housing like we need a hole in the head. I am often challenged on my disdain for our subsidized housing program. It's true, I think it stinks. This fabulous community asset has been so horrendously mismanaged since its inception that gaming the system has become the rule vs. the exception, and as many subsidized housing complexes find themselves horribly underfunded for ongoing and deferred maintenance, it becomes ever more clear that the program was doomed from the start. The continual answer to compliance problems is simply to build more housing; somehow non-compliant dwellers and those who constantly want to move to newer units are seen as indicators of legitimate demand for the construction and funding of more and more units. The telling quote of the decade related to the substandard maintenance of subsidized housing came from former city councilwoman and Housing Frontiers Group member Jackie Kasabach, who asserted (4/18/11), "Nobody thought about it... that this program (subsidized housing in Aspen) would last 30 years and that these buildings would need to be maintained." (It's a naive perspective for sure, but indicative of how many residents of our subsidized housing projects actually think!) Of course nobody thought of it. And there's a long list of other things nobody thought of. Such as selling homes to people without explaining the responsibilities of home ownership (like paying association dues), and turning these multi-million dollar public housing complexes over to residents to manage (and theoretically collect association dues from their friends). Each complex's set of rules and declarations is different, and APCHA has no, zero, zip role in ongoing "management" once the units are sold, aside from "dealing with" compliance issues, which they do very very poorly. And this is not to mention APCHA's chain of title/custody dilemma: each time a unit is sold to a new buyer, APCHA oh-so-briefly holds title to the unit. As the rapid and unchecked deterioration of the housing stock continues, APCHA's responsibility for disclosure and overall liabilities increases. There is a troubling groundswell among various subsidized housing project residents that the deferred maintenance issues should be paid for by taxpayers, never mind it was the private property owners who subsidized these places to begin with and the deferred maintenance is solely because the residents neglected to contribute to and build up their own reserve accounts! So, as questions arise about funding more and more and more subsidized housing units, I feel strongly that it is far more important for this community to get a handle on just what it is we currently have in our inventory (APCHA cannot produce a comprehensive inventory list, just that we have approximately 2800 units), who lives there (APCHA's list is sketchy and not easily obtained - it should be a matter of public record), whether or not the current residents qualify (there are various income maximums, asset maximums and annual work requirements), what the unfunded HOA liabilities are across the portfolio, who is responsible for making up the shortfall(s), who is ultimately "in charge," and what can be done to better prepare ourselves and these complexes for the next 30 years. Clearly the status quo is an abject failure. In short, before we build more units, we must learn to take care of what we have. (Ya think?) And if that means blowing APCHA and its incompetent board up in the process, that's a start. To illustrate the caliber and quality of work done by the 12 members of the APCHA staff (at combined salaries totaling approximately $658K annually) and its equally dysfunctional board, here are a few colorful vignettes. Sadly, this is just a sample of the recent goings-on:  APCHA STAFF ATTEMPTS TO CONCEAL PUBLIC RECORDS/ALTER POLICY DOCUMENTS The Red Ant regularly employs the Colorado Open Records Act (CORA) to obtain public documents from our local government. In the process of trying to obtain APCHA materials, I was met with great push-back. When finally directed by the city to provide me with the requested information, APCHA director Tom McCabe went berserk. Wildly making hundreds of copies of documents and commissioning the county's outside council to review them, McCabe tried to charge The Red Ant nearly $1000 for the materials and legal advice --- a foolish attempt to punish The Red Ant for making an in-depth inquiry. (I am incidentally a member of the Colorado Press Association and enjoy all the rights and privileges of working press throughout the state.) When questioned about the $475 hourly rate paid to local attorney Tom Smith through yet another CORA request ("please show me all billing statements for Tom Smith in 2011"), ooops, APCHA was forced to admit that they lied. Mr. Smith apparently "only" gets paid $250/hour. APCHA was just trying to stick it to The Red Ant for digging around, and no, of course The Red Ant will not be paying one cent for that! And all those copies? Bummer. That's not how it works. After a CORA request, the requestor can review the materials but must only pay for any copies that are taken away - not the entire request before review! Another attempt to keep The Red Ant at bay. Best of all was the CORA request about APCHA's own CORA policies. When I received the document via email, it was hilarious to see in the embedded meta-data that the document had been conveniently edited THAT DAY! Hmmm. Wonder what it is they're hiding!?! The liars, cheaters and scofflaws at APCHA thought they were thwarting The Red Ant and my access to public information. But alas, they simply showed the caliber of their own professionalism. INMATES RUNNING THE ASYLUM In case you were wondering how the egregious decisions affecting our housing inventory are made, it's best to start by looking first at who makes those decisions. In the case of the APCHA board, this means Marcia Goshorn, Ron Erickson, Kristen Sabel and Erin Smiddy. And when you include APCHA director Tom McCabe, it is noteworthy that ALL live in subsidized housing -- the very inventory they are designated to oversee and whose rules they are responsible for enforcing. (At press time, congratulations are in order to former APCHA board member Cathy Markle who recently purchased a free market home in Eagle County, taking full advantage of the recent decline in real estate prices -- the original intention of the subsidized housing program!) Frankly, it's Aspen's very own "Peter Principle" in full force at APCHA: in a heirarchy, every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence.  All these entrenched bureaucrats with no place else to go, making the same mistakes and intentional oversights again and again and again.... A SPECIAL DEAL FOR AN OLD FRIEND When former county commissioner Wayne Ethridge was found in violation of his deed restriction (renting out one unit that he owns while living in another, owned by his ex-wife), the APCHA board voted to let this infraction slide. Even APCHA staffer Julie Kieffer who is a "qualifications specialist" to the tune of $52K annually, recommended that APCHA force Ethridge to sell his Aspen Village trailer or force his ex-wife to sell the W/J Ranch unit where he currently resides. (In his own defense for breaking the rules, Ethridge claimed he would lose most of his life savings if he sold in this market.) Kieffer reminded the board that "we never guaranteed a profit," but the board completely ignored her recommendations. They just kinda felt bad for their friend. RESIDENTS WASTE ENERGY WHEN THEY DON'T PAY THE BILLS! Tenants of the Truscott Place subsidized housing project (next to the golf course) have long had utilities included in their rent. But with no incentive to conserve energy, residents were known to often leave the heat on with windows open throughout the winter. In late 2010, APCHA decided to pass the electric costs along to tenants in addition to their rent in 148 of 198 units there. (50 units do not have individual meters so these will see 5% annual rent hikes beginning in 2012 to account for the electricity costs.) Sounds pretty reasonable, especially for a city with aggressive energy conservation goals! But wait, APCHA then decided to lower the rents for these new electricity customers since they might see a considerable jump in expenses if they have to pay rent plus electricity! APCHA director Tom McCabe somehow thinks that conserving energy will be "more apparent" to renters who pay their own bills, but I disagree -- not in this case. It won't happen if the rent is reduced accordingly "to make the cost of rent and electricity roughly equal to what tenants are paying now." C'mon! Theoretically, grown-up local workers live at Truscott. In order to get people to conserve energy, make them pay for their electricity usage just like the rest of us. Obviously. W/J RANCH vs ORDINANCE 22 (APCHA vs FREE MARKET) - TOTAL HYPOCRISY! Remember Ordinance 22 of 2008? (Read Issue #9) The punitive and anachronistic measure made certain that owners of adjoining condo/townhome units in the city of Aspen could not combine multiple units into a single larger space -- without building a subsidized housing unit on-site -- because this would create a "loss" of rental inventory, presumably for local workers. Many local residents own multiple units in in-town complexes and had intended to combine their units, but Big Brother stepped in and said No Way, No How. But then it happened in subsidized housing! Picture this up at the subsidized W/J Ranch (on McLain Flats Road): guy owns one side of a duplex, girl owns the other. They date, marry and adopt two kids. And then they knock out the common wall to make the duplex into a larger family home. APCHA thinks this is just great. Board member Ron Erickson even went so far as to endorse the violation, "I don't see this as a problem in keeping with the spirit of the housing code - to accommodate families as they grow. They just took a short cut." C'mon Ron, they broke the rules! Current housing guidelines do not allow a household to own two separate subsidized housing units. But the APCHA board didn't care. As long as the wall is replaced when the family moves, they can maintain their status quo. I wonder what would happen if someone tried this at South Point (free market) condos? What's good for the (silent tax-paying) goose is clearly not good for the (entitled) gander. And now there's one less subsidized housing unit available for a qualified employee or family as a result. Ahhh the hypocrisy! SCOFFLAWS WELCOME APCHA currently has no policy for background checks on applicants for subsidized housing. In late 2010, the idea was brought before the county commissioners by APCHA's attorney. Predictably, Jack Hatfield saw the concept of checks as "oppressive and draconian," but George Newman saw the wisdom, "Housing is not a right, it's a privilege." The permissive nature of the APCHA program has enabled several of our recently-busted alleged cocaine dealers to enjoy living in subsidized housing, and has even enabled a local scofflaw to rent a studio apartment at Truscott despite trashing her previous free-market rental and telling the judge that she couldn't/wouldn't pay the damages because she has no job and no income. How does this happen? How and why can she occupy a subsidized housing unit for local employees if she doesn't work? Strangely, she and her boyfriend (who listed his official address as the Pitkin County Jail) managed to pay rent at their free market rental, but she now claims (and collects) disability which she uses to pay $642/mo rent and live subsidized at Truscott. The judge has ordered her to pay her former landlord $3000 for repairs to the trashed apartment, but to-date she has merely sent in a $5 bill. But she's safe and warm in her APCHA studio. APCHA claims she provided proof of Pitkin County employment and disability, but these records were not kept. Puh-lease! Talk about corruption! The Red Ant is in possession of photos of this tenant's move-in to Truscott -- using a RFTA truck to do so. Apparently her brother works at RFTA. Hmmm. Is this why she gets a subsidized housing unit without working and doesn't have to pay court-ordered penalties?? LITTLE APCHA FACTIODS TO SHOCK AND AWE In 2009, 7 owned subsidized housing units went into default. Of these, 3 went through foreclosure. In 2010, these numbers were 9 and 4. When a subsidized housing owner forecloses on a unit, there are several little-known "special funds" at the city (#150: Affordable Housing/Daycare Fund and #160: Housing Authority, and perhaps others) that the city uses to buy the note (and thus the unit) from the foreclosing bank. In 2010, the city used at least $567K from these two funds to buy foreclosed subsidized housing units. The Red Ant is investigating these funds, the available balances for such purposes, and other interesting tidbits. Can this go on indefinitely? How soon until the foreclosing banks can sell the note(s) to just ANY buyer?  Stay tuned.... In 2008, a survey of APCHA owners and renters showed the average age of the owner as 48 and the average age of the renter as 44. It's late 2011, so these numbers are now approaching 52 and 48! APCHA does not know how many of its units are currently for sale. (Not all units are required to list with APCHA.) The weekly listing in the Aspen Daily News on Wednesdays used to fit into a vertical half-page spot. Today the listings fill a full page. There have been ZERO evictions for employment non-compliance (not working) by APCHA since the beginning of 2009. In 2010, APCHA was granted permission to "randomly audit" 100 owners of APCHA units for compliance. To date, APCHA has not audited any. APCHA has no idea the number of retirees currently occupying subsidized housing units. (This is distinctly one reason why I do not refer to the units as "employee housing.")

And like I said, this is only the beginning.  There is much more to come on the corrupt underbelly of our subsidized housing program.

** MY "RIDDICU-LIST" -- THE "YOU CAN'T MAKE IT UP" FILE

It was confirmed by Aspen's Sister Cities organization on October 14 that, in addition to the $2418 mayor Mick got from the Aspen taxpayers for his European vacation, Aspen's sister cities program gave him $500. (Yes, sister cities gets its $15,750 annual budget from the city of Aspen, so taxpayers paid twice!) I wonder where else the mayor finagled public money for his boondoggle.... The water fund? The housing fund? Let's face it. When lazy and incompetent city manager Steve Barwick approves such reimbursements, it's amazing there isn't more fraud. Or is there? 

Notably, when The Red Ant notified council of this additional stipend for the mayor, Mick suddenly announced at the October 24 council meeting that he would be returning the $500 -- not because he admitted wrong-doing (he would NEVER do that), rather, so that he could participate in a discussion over a local event that benefits the Sister Cities program.  I'll be following up to make sure he does return the cash!

ON A LIGHTER NOTE....

On the subject of mayor Mick's taxpayer-subsidized European vacation, local resident Denise Malcolm submitted one of the better letters to the editor I've read in a long time, entitled "Love the New City Program." For a good laugh:

Editor:

I was delighted to discover that Aspen has a new vacation subsidy program. I had a wonderful two week vacation last month with my two daughters in England and France and those 5 euro cokes at Parisian cafes start to add up. Like mayor Mick, I would estimate that I shared the "awesomeness of Aspen" message at least two out of three vacation days with local people that I met. Of course, in all fairness, I probably spent less than 1 percent of my total vacation time sharing that message, but it appears that the proration formula is that any day that you share the "awesomeness of Aspen" message, you can get a reimbursement of your total vacation expenses - excluding traffic tickets incurred by your loved ones - regardless of how much actual time was spent sharing the message. 

Since mayor Mick was not on pre-authorized city business, it would seem that all local residents should be eligible for this vacation subsidy program. Where should the residents of Aspen be directing their 2011 vacation invoices? How much detail should be included about our personal campaigns to promote the awesomeness of Aspen while on vacation?

I am getting ready to plan my vacation for the summer of 2012, so just to clarify, are all overseas destinations eligible for this vacation subsidy program, or just Europe? Will Aspen establish an Affordable Vacation Authority to run this new program?

Denise Malcolm
Aspen 

ISSUE # 70: IncessANT Taxation

"You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich. 

You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong. 

You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.

You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down.

You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.

You cannot build character and courage by taking away people's initiative and independence.

You cannot help people permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves."  

                                        --- Abraham Lincoln

Election season in Aspen never seems to end. This time, it's an off-year Pitkin County election, conducted solely by mail-in ballot. Remember, these must be received by the clerk no later than 7p local time on Tuesday, November 1. For more information, go to www.PitkinVotes.org THIS IS NO TIME FOR PUNITIVE ARROGANCE We have relatively few issues to decide on this election cycle. The biggie is Referendum 1A: Dedicated Property Tax for Healthy Community Fund. In short, we've had the Healthy Community Fund since 2002 with about $800K in annual funding from property taxes for its first 5 years.  In 2006, voters upped the take to $1.25M a year through 2012. The money supports a wide range of "social services" non-profits and cannot be used by the government for any other expenses. With the fund's expiration on the horizon, Referendum 1A is on the ballot, not as a renewal, but as an increase to about $1.9M annually.  That means a property tax hike. I briefly grappled with 1A but just can't support it. The county commissioners originally debated a simple renewal of the fund at its current funding level. Had they done this, I'd go along. However, when commissioner Rachel Richards pushed for a $3.5M funding level and the issue was later "compromised down" to a $446,000 increase ($1.9M annually), it made me sick. Why? She knows (as do you and I) that property tax measures regularly pass in Pitkin County. (It's because so many of the voters pay so little of the taxes.) In this economic environment, for Richards and her cohorts Michael Owsley and Jack Hatfield to simply up the ante just because they can is punitive arrogance; plucking the silent goose yet again. I REALLY don't like the government deciding which charities I MUST support either. My guess is that this, like other property tax measures before it, will pass. But not with my vote. FYI: THE GOVERNMENT "WINNERS" Referendum 1A can be viewed as a tax that makes select local non-profits into component units of government, reducing and potentially eliminating their need to fundraise, and replacing private donations with tax dollars.  This would make these non-profits subservient to the government's political mission rather than their own missions to serve people directly.  And who is the government to pick non-profit winners and losers anyway? The following is a list of local non-profits that the government has deemed "winners" - a bigger pot of gold with a new and bigger "fund" will add to these organizations' dependence on your tax dollars. Among others, you're already donating to these organizations, like it or not: Mountain Valley Developmental Services RESPONSE Family Visitor Programs Community Health Services Mountain Family Health Centers Planned Parenthood Sopris Therapy Centers Aspen Counseling Center The Right Door Valley Partnership for Drug Prevention Alpine Legal Services Colorado West Psychiatric Hospital Roaring Fork Early Learning Fund GRASSROOTS TV Aspen Public Radio Aspen Center for Environmental Services (ACES) Independence Pass Foundation Roaring Fork Outdoor Volunteers This is NOT a judgment of any kind on these entities, just an FYI to let you know that you already support them so you can now make your discretionary charitable donations to other worthy programs that are not on the government's list of "winners" and likely REALLY need your contributions! HERE'S HOW I'M VOTING To see a sample ballot, click HERE. State of Colorado Proposition 103: NO (I hate property tax increases and sales tax increases, and I especially hate throwing good money after bad at our failed education system.  HERE is an intelligent commentary by Joyce Rankin on why this measure and Garfield County's 3A won't change a thing, other than  your property taxes!) Referendum 1A: NO (I'm taking a stand and falling on my sword.) Referendum 1B: YES (Expands the current FM radio and TV translator tax to include wireless and internet when the technology is available and affordable. No tax increase today, just the ability to expand the category of services.) Referendum 1C: YES (House-keeping edits to County's Home Rule Charter.) Referendum 1D: YES (House-keeping edits to County's Home Rule Charter.) Referendum 3A: NO (I like term limits. A lot.) School Board: I do not have an educated opinion on any of the candidates. (Garfield County/Referendum 3E:  NO.  See Prop 103 above.) PITCO'S VOTER ROLLS Ever wonder how and why a county with a total population of 17,148 (according to the 2010 US Census) can have 14,000 people on its voter rolls? I wonder all the time. The reason is simple: our voter rolls are swollen with former residents, wanna-be residents and residents of the afterworld. No kidding. I know this because I acquired a copy of the list and was horrified to see the names of many people who simply should NOT be registered to vote here!  And they're all being sent ballots this week!  (WHERE will these end up!?!) AN ELECTION INTEGRITY EXERCISE -- EVERYONE CAN HELP! HERE is the hot-off-the-press list of all 14,000 registered voters in Pitkin County. Yep, 14,000 is a lot of names, but do me a favor. Glance through it online. (You know you're curious!!  I sure was!!)  It's easy - the names are alphabetical and it really goes quite fast. And yes, it is entirely legal that I have this list.  It's a public record.  Jot down the names that you believe to be on the list in error (for whatever reason) and please send these to me. This exercise won't remove anybody from the official list, but will likely demonstrate what I know to be true - our list isn't accurate. I plan to compile one comprehensive list of suspected "erroneous" names and provide them to the County Clerk. It will become that office's responsibility to look into these potential problems, if they so choose. I already have a list started. I'd like to add your findings to it. It won't be scientific by any stretch, but is intended to make the case that we have some spring cleaning to do! As you are all too aware, our local elections are hotly contested and every single vote counts. It is more important now than ever that we work to clean up our database. Besides, the 2012 general election is shaping up to where Colorado is highly likely to be a bell-weather state for the Presidential election. Voter integrity is of the utmost importance. Thanks in advance for your assistance with this unique grassroots exercise!

THE "YOU CAN'T MAKE IT UP" FILE As we all watch "Occupy Wall Street" across the country with varying degrees of bemusement and dismay, did you realize that we had a fledgling "Occupy Aspen" event last week in Wagner Park?  Thankfully the small handful of participants didn't camp out, but the sentiment was the same -- "People get so fed up and pissed when they don't have jobs and when they don't have money," according to one of the organizers.  The irony?  Their next organizing meeting is tomorrow at a home in the Burlingame subsidized housing project.  Yep, the same project for which the evil Aspen private property owners paid a $350K+ per unit subsidy.

ISSUE # 69: September bANTer

"We must be vigilant to guard against the hubris of elected officials."  -- Keith Self

"My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government."    -- Thomas Jefferson

**VOTER NOTE: NOV 1 COUNTY ELECTION IS MAIL-IN BALLOT ONLY

Take 2 minutes right now and go to www.PitkinVotes.org to verify your voter registration status and mailing address in the "Voter Services" section. If you do not show up in the system as an ACTIVE voter, you will not be sent a ballot.  Make any and all changes before October 3.  Ballots will be sent by October 14.

HYDRO: FINALLY, A LAWSUIT TO STOP THE MADNESS

Litigation. It's all they understand at city hall. Lazy and incompetent city manager Steve Barwick and his wingman, crooked city attorney John Worcester, regularly break the rules and frequently dare citizens to sue them, knowing that most won't. But when citizens do, it's often very bad news for city hall.

Think of the Wienerstube lawsuit (challenging the Aspen Area Community Plan), which the city settled (lest the document be deemed simply advisory), yielding what is now to become the new Aspen Art Museum complex at Spring St and Hyman Ave, to be designed and built without Planning & Zoning review, per the terms of the settlement.

Then there's the city's fight with the owners of the Hotel Jerome over nearly $500,000 in real estate transfer taxes. Despite the current owners acquiring the property though a "deed in lieu of foreclosure" proceeding, the city went after them for the cash as though it were a standard sale. This was a pure attempt at a money-grab by the city. The judge ruled in favor of the hotel owners in June, and refused to reconsider her ruling.

And don't forget Marilyn Marks' lawsuit challenging the city's adherence to Open Records laws, specifically pertaining to anonymous voted ballots from the 2009 municipal election. The city won the first round in our notoriously government-friendly district court, but a ruling on appeal is expected any day now. In the meantime, a state court judge in Saguache County (CO) has ruled that voted ballots are indeed public records as there is no way to link a voted ballot to a voter, that is, if the election was conducted fairly and legally. Advantage, Marilyn.

On Friday, a local non-profit called "Saving Our Streams," joined by a group of neighbors whose homes exist along Castle and Maroon Creeks, filed a lawsuit against the city to stop the beleaguered hydro plant dead in its tracks! Their case? It appears that regarding the Castle Creek flume ditch, the Midland flume ditch and Maroon flume ditch, "the city of Aspen has not used the water rights decreed for hydropower use for over fifty (50) years, the city of Aspen has shown its intent to abandon the water rights decreed for hydropower use by not using the water right for this purpose for over fifty (50) years, and the city of Aspen has shown its intent to abandon the water rights decreed for hydropower use by, among other things, deciding to decommission the hydropower plant for which the right was decreed, by dismantling the electrical generation equipment, by allowing the water delivery pipelines to deteriorate to an unusable condition, by failing to repair the water delivery pipelines to the hydro plant, and by purchasing its electrical energy from Holy Cross and others since 1957."

No one is questioning or challenging the city's municipal water rights to the streams for domestic or irrigation uses. Just for hydropower generation. In short, use it (for hydro) or lose it. And they haven't used it in over half a century. (According to abandonment lists maintained by the Colorado Department of Natural Resources, there is legal precedence where the State water courts have declared specific decreed uses within a larger water right abandoned.) Read the full complaint HERE.

But perhaps the juiciest and most colorful part of the whole hydro debacle is the "Mick vs the Koch Brothers" sideshow. Obsessed with the politically conservative Koch brothers of Wichita, KS, Charles and David, Mick regularly carries on about a vast right-wing conspiracy that he portends exists whereby the water from Castle Creek will be sold to the front range of the Rocky Mountains if somehow the city of Aspen does not harness it for hydropower. This is of course preposterous. Charles and David Koch have nothing political to do with Aspen or Pitkin County, and it's their brother Bill who owns the former Elk Mountain Lodge at the upper end of the Castle Creek Valley and is one of many plaintiffs in the lawsuit. The family ties simply send Mick into a tizzy. "It's an open mystery why someone would be concerned about water being diverted eight miles downstream from them," Mick recently told the Aspen Daily News. Hmmm. I wonder how SkiCo green guy Auden Schendler feels about such a strange statement. (Schendler spent the last week in Washington DC, trying to get lawmakers there to focus on environmental issues here. And that's quite a distance greater than 8 miles away!)

MICK'S SOLYNDRA

It sounded so "green." Hydro power. Vote for it (in 2007) and feel the love. (And we did.) Never mind the facility can never cover its costs, even over a 50-year lifespan. (And the costs have escalated from $6.3M to $8.3M, so far.) Build it without permits; nobody will notice. Lie about an "existing" conduit in order to get an exemption from federal environmental impact studies and oversight. Ahh, but the truth comes out in the end. While the neighbors have now tied up the project and any possible federal approvals (the feds certainly can't and won't grant approvals when the water rights are in question), the city's arrogant indifference continues:

• Inept city attorney John Worcester said of the lawsuit, "It's a shame that citizens have to sue each other and attack our water rights since they belong to everybody." Well Worcester, no citizens are suing each other. They're suing YOU, the city of Aspen. And they're suing over water rights for a hydro plant that apparently YOU no longer have after abandoning and decommissioning the previous hydro plant in 1957, more than 50 years ago. Worcester's inane statement vividly illustrates the city's willingness to sacrifice the environment in order to build its precious hydro plant in hopes of someday being able to say its energy is "100% green." The city's real political end-game? Green energy at ANY price, even if it turns out not to be so green. The environment be damned!

In response to the city's arrogance, Ken Neubecker, director of The Western Rivers Institute responded in a RECENT LETTER to the editor:

• "Save Our Streams, American Rivers, The Western Rivers Institute and others have all tried to work with the city on this project and create something that meets both the goals of clean energy and protecting the stream environments. The city has been nothing short of obstinate and disingenuous." He continues, "Aspen says it wants to set an example to the world on how to be environmentally responsible. They are doing a pretty poor job so far."

The Red Ant is all over the financial picture. It's bleak. What did they know and when did they know it? Stay tuned. I'm all over this one!

THE GROCERY BAG TAX

The latest is that the boys moved toward an outright ban on plastic bags (instead of levying a 20 cent "fee" on each one), but then they'll charge that same "fee" for PAPER bags. No plastic bag option, just paper bags - for 20 cents each. And only at grocery stores. Does this really solve anything? Perhaps the most intelligent thoughts on the matter were summed up in a recent Aspen Daily News guest column by former city finance director Paul Menter. Read it HERE. In short, Menter argues that the "assignment of an arbitrary economic value for bags is an illegitimate use of regulatory authority. Dollars collected will fund environmental programs rather than address the impact of the bags themselves. The bags will become like cigarettes, primarily a source of government 'sin tax' funding and bureaucracy expansion; only secondarily an environmental problem to be eliminated."

He continues with a thoughtful argument that this so-called "fee" is actually government-mandated price fixing, a government-assigned price for a private good. Next, he illustrates that the "fee" is not a "fee" at all. "Fees" are set to "cover the cost of services provided to individuals, such as water and sewer services." This government-imposed charge on purchase and sale transactions to provide community programs is "the very definition of a sales tax, not a fee." He concludes by pointing out that such a sales tax does not comply with the US Constitution's 14^th Amendment's equal protection provisions, nor does it comply with TABOR (Taxpayer's Bill of Rights). The "equal protection issue" relates to the "grocery stores only" aspect of Aspen's plan, and TABOR requires all new taxes and changes in tax policy be approved by the voters.

In a subsequent letter to councilmembers, Menter continued with his analysis: "Your policy approach seems fractured and based on something other than the law, environmental protection, or good governance. To ban plastic bags and charge a fee on paper bags that are arguably worse for the environment illustrates this point. You want to be seen as 'leaders' but don't want to take the risk required to lead. Plus you have been persuaded that it is proper policy to 'feed the bureaucratic beast' by collecting money from private businesses through this policy without asking the voters if this is their desire. Not only is this illegal, it is a deeply cynical act, rooted in the belief that conscripting private businesses to do your policy bidding is proper governance. Its magnitude keeps it below the radar, but it is really, really bad policy and a dangerous slippery slope. Be very careful what you agree to. You are being asked to carry water for people who don't care about the consequences."

I couldn't have said it better myself. The updated plastic bag ban / paper bag "fee" ordinance will come before council in October. In case you were wondering what our local Gestapo thinks about being able to enforce the bag ban amidst speculation of myriad legal issues, city attorney (my, he's gotten vocal lately) John Worcester told the Aspen Daily News that he is confident "the city of Aspen has the requisite police powers to ban plastic bags." Nice. Police powers. Just what we need. In the meantime, make your thoughts known through letters to the EDITOR and/or letters to COUNCIL.

A $2418 SUBSIDIZED VACATION FOR MICK? JUST SAY NO! 

The following is a Letter to the Editor of the Aspen Daily News than ran today: 

Upon learning that Mick charged the city $2418 for a portion of his summer vacation in Europe, I looked into the Sister Cities program to research their mission for a better understanding of why our mayor deserved this subsidized trip.

Ironically, Sister Cities does not endorse individual visits by elected officials between cities.  It endorses information sharing (brochures, city reports, videos), strong city hall and business support through committees made up of a wide range of citizens, officially planned delegation visits (including a high-ranking city official, representatives of the business community, an official of the Sister Cities program, an educator and someone such as a performing artist who can highlight local culture), and specific substantive exchange reports. 

When Mick visited Aspen's Sister Cities of Davos, Garmisch-Partenkirchen and Chamonix, it was clearly not an officially planned delegation visit.  He was just there with his girlfriend.  Inquiries to Aspen's Sister Cities organization have gone unanswered, but I highly doubt they knew Mick planned to charge taxpayers for portions of his European vacation under the auspices of their esteemed program.

I've consulted with a city councilman and the city clerk, and both say there was no council pre-authorization of such travel by the mayor, despite the city's travel policy which states that personal travel may be combined with business travel only with notice to the department head.  In the case of the mayor, it is reasonable to assume such notification would be to city council.  Regardless, Mick's trip gives no appearance of official business travel to begin with.  Mick simply returned home and arbitrarily divvied up his vacation expenses, charging 60 percent of his airfare, half of his rental car bill, two of six tanks of gas, toll road charges and dinner with the Sister Cities folks in Garmisch to the Aspen taxpayers.  And city manager Steve Barwick presumably approved the fraudulent reimbursal.  Such leadership at city hall!

Can't you just picture the courteous Europeans unwittingly entertaining Mick and his lady during these unofficial and unapproved visits?  And, you can bet that Mick took full advantage of the gracious trappings of their hospitality.  One can only wonder the monetary value of these gifts.

Mick, if you cannot afford a European vacation, don't take one.  Get a job, or take a vacation in Moab on your own dime.  In the meantime, reimburse the city the full $2418.  Your European boondoggle was not city business and we shouldn't pay a dime for it!

Elizabeth Milias

I will be relentless in my pursuit of this reimbursal.  Stay tuned.

MICK: A 4-LETTER WORD, BUT A 4-YEAR TERM TOO?

Just six months into his third term as mayor, Mick predictably moved to extend the mayoral term from two to four years. He has done this without success in each of his previous terms, but this time he threw in the plea for beefier salaries for himself and fellow councilmen, likely to buy the support of his buddies at the table. (Recall that Mick does nothing professionally except reign over us all, so he is likely a wee bit worried about May 2013 when he is term-limited out of office and will no longer receive the $27,900 mayoral stipend plus city employee health benefits that he lives on.)

Mick complains that the job has become a full-time commitment, and the mayoral races start earlier each cycle, requiring more and more fundraising. Most notably, he fears that every election could possibly yield 3 newcomers to the council table. (Two council seats are up every four years.) The Red Ant asks, since when is the ability to change the majority with each election a bad thing?? He wanted the election commission to take the issue on and theoretically recommend a ballot measure.

The good news is many-fold. The election commission wanted no part in Mick's highly politicized request, as their focus is on election conduct and integrity. And, despite what was written in the papers, council did not fall for Mick's bribe. Torre went so far as to submit a letter to the editor, reiterating that he does NOT support Mick's request to change the mayoral term! And, in a subsequent personal conversation with councilman Steve Skadron, I learned that he too feels that a two year term is just fine.  

Additionally, while many feared that Mick would finagle another couple of years onto his current term, this cannot happen. A change to the mayoral term would need to be approved by voters in the next municipal election, which marks the end of Mick's current term. If anything were to change, it wouldn't affect him because thankfully, he'll be gone. He does need to sit on the sidelines for a couple of years before running again thank goodness, but considering his employment prospects (after 18 years in elected office in the county and city), he'll be back. What else can he do? In the meantime, he's not giving up. Mick plans to try again with council soon, this time to propose a "citizen review committee" that will study his request. Look for a team of sychophants to comprise THAT panel!

The Red Ant says, "If the 435 members of the U.S. House of Representatives can run for re-election every 2 years, so too can Aspen's mayor!"

MY "RIDDICU-LIST" - THE "YOU CAN'T MAKE IT UP" FILE

You recently read about the city's desire to harness geothermal energy from beneath the earth's surface by drilling 1000' holes right here in Aspen (ISSUE # 67). Turns out the $200K test-drilling project has attracted a total of ZERO bids. Yep, ZERO. Apparently it's the first time in 10 years that NO BIDS have been received for a city project. Maybe it's just a REALLY bad idea. Ya think?

DESPITE THIS CITY HALL B.S., THERE'S A LOT TO LOOK FORWARD TO AND BE PROUD OF...

I attended the ACRA luncheon on Friday, Sept 9, at the Sundeck atop Aspen Mountain. In addition to culinary treats from various SkiCo on-mountain restaurants, there is much good news to share:

• World Cup returns to Aspen Thanksgiving weekend
• The benevolent SkiCo owners, the Crown Family, have invested $26 million in on-mountain capital improvements. These include:
  • $6M renovation of Merry-Go-Round restaurant at Highlands
  • $7M Tiehack Express chair will take 7 minutes from bottom to top; opens Dec 10
  • A new Elk Camp Restaurant at Snowmass, to open Winter 2012-13
  • 50 miles of biking terrain at Snowmass on the Free Ride Trail
• Aspen will welcome up to 30 daily flights into ASE from 6 hub cities:
  • American Airlines begins service into Aspen from DFW (its largest hub) and LAX
  • Frontier will offer 4 flights daily from Denver, its hub, through 4/15/12
  • United will offer 2 daily flights from Houston, 4 from LAX, 2 from SFO, plus 12 from Denver
• The discovery of mastodon and other prehistoric bones in the Ziegler Reservoir at Snowmass have put Aspen/Snowmass on the elite map in yet one more category:
  • According to the Denver Museum of Nature & Science, the skeletons (almost 5000 fossils were found) are like "tweets from deep time" 
  • Snowmass is "the richest mastodon site in the world, by far"
  • The Ziegler Reservoir site is "the best high level ice age site in the world"
  • Who knew?

Happy fall.

ISSUE # 68: MiscreANT - $1 Million Barwick Bailout

"Guilt is the price we pay willingly for doing what we are going to do anyway."   -- Isabelle Holland  

*** BREAKING NEWS *** What kind of defendant settles a lawsuit by giving the plaintiff everything they asked for? A GUILTY ONE!  Especially when the defendant can use other people's money and has zero accountability! Just prior to a sexual discrimination trial against the city of Aspen and city manager Steve Barwick (it was scheduled to begin Wednesday), the city settled. It's unconfirmed, but sources close to the case tell The Red Ant that the city has agreed to pay former Aspen police officer Melinda Calvano the full amount she sought PLUS all legal fees.  (Calvano sued the city and Barwick in 2007 following her termination over a controversial "use of force" incident, alleging that the city manager ignored her claims of sexual harassment in the Aspen Police Department. The lawsuit included claims of wrongful termination, gender bias, a hostile work environment, as well as sexual harassment.)  The settlement deal, inked late Tuesday night, is estimated to be worth as much as $1 million. Could there be any greater admission of guilt?   Mick and the boys on city council approved this last minute bail-out of our very own lazy and incompetent city manager with allegedly $1 million dollars of your tax money! Yep, just like when they voted to give the financial fraud-favoring city CEO a $170K annual contract, the boys once again voted to throw Barwick a bone, presumably because, as Torre likes to say, "He's a good guy."  Some good guy.... How much more of Barwick and his "leadership" can we take?  How much more can we afford?? The Red Ant has learned that the facts surrounding the case and the long list of witnesses chomping at the bit to testify against Barwick were far more damning than the case itself!  I'm hearing from many of them and it's shaping up to be a fascinating story!  (For $1 million, I suppose it'd better be!)  You'll read ALL about it here in upcoming issues -- this story is not going away! Rest assured, The Red Ant has sources everywhere, and distance is no excuse for not telling it like it is!  In the meantime, on nANTucket, we're battening down the hatches in ANTicipation of hurricane Irene's arrival later this weekend!