Thursday, September 30, 2010
Acting Manager's Presentation to Transition From Outsourcing to Hiring City Employees
Here's a link to an audio file of the City's acting manager making a presentation about moving away from outsourcing to hiring employees. There's about 20 seconds of silence as he prepares to begin his 17 minute talk.
http://kiwi6.com/file?id=q4dhino7i3
If you click on this link, you can then download the file in ten seconds, and even listen to it on iTunes or your iPod.
It took about a minute to upload the file to the Internet, and about a minute to link to this blogsite. Cost was virtually free.
http://kiwi6.com/file?id=q4dhino7i3
If you click on this link, you can then download the file in ten seconds, and even listen to it on iTunes or your iPod.
It took about a minute to upload the file to the Internet, and about a minute to link to this blogsite. Cost was virtually free.
Monday, September 20, 2010
Parker's vacant retail space worries business leaders
Some say the rents for Parker retail space may be too high, but the town will host an event for real-estate brokers Sept. 30 to promote what's available.
Parker's vacant retail space — there are more than 65 spaces for rent or sale — is concerning community leaders and Realtors.
"It really is a black hole of retailing," said Tim Danahey, a Parker community activist.
There are 15 buildings for sale, according to the third- quarter 2010 Real Estate Resource and Development Report from the Parker Economic Development Council.
"What I'm afraid of in Parker from just looking at all the vacant storefronts is that there will be owners that walk away from their buildings because they don't have tenants," said Carole Schumacher, executive vice president of BRC Real Estate in Parker, which handles commercial properties.
Schumacher and Danahey say rental rates for retail properties are too high. She said that could be simply because building owners or developers don't understand what the market is like.
"Is Parker an island unto itself? I think some people that own real estate out there think that it is," Schumacher said. "It's their world, and they don't go out there very much."
Mitch Trevey, executive director of the PEDC and owner of a commercial-real-estate company, Trevey Co. LLC, said Parker has been slow to drop its rental rates but that many landlords also are in a bind because of the weak economy.
"Some of them are accountable to investors or partners, etc., who are not necessarily so willing to allow them to drop the rates just to get somebody in there because that also affects property value," Trevey said.
Joe Maxwell, co-founder of the Metro Parker Small Business Alliance, said he thinks business owners sometimes need to be smarter when they sign leases.
"I think it's a deeper problem," Maxwell said. "Any time you start failing in business, you start looking for a scapegoat: 'My rent is too high.' " (Other excueses may include, "My CAM charges are too high, or we need a URA, or the Metro District did it." - MS)
Becky Hogan, Parker's economic-development director, said there's not much the town can do about the rents, but she thinks the rents are very competitive.
On Sept. 30, the town of Parker will be participating in a virtual broker tour at the Wildlife Experience, which will show about 100 commercial-real-estate brokers properties in Doug las County.
"It's a matter of educating people (on) what's available," Hogan said. "We haven't really done that down here in the south metro Denver area. And that's always going to help. It may not help that next day, but it's always going to help in the future."
Read more: Parker's vacant retail space worries business leaders - The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_16119526#ixzz104a1QUZv
Parker's vacant retail space — there are more than 65 spaces for rent or sale — is concerning community leaders and Realtors.
"It really is a black hole of retailing," said Tim Danahey, a Parker community activist.
There are 15 buildings for sale, according to the third- quarter 2010 Real Estate Resource and Development Report from the Parker Economic Development Council.
"What I'm afraid of in Parker from just looking at all the vacant storefronts is that there will be owners that walk away from their buildings because they don't have tenants," said Carole Schumacher, executive vice president of BRC Real Estate in Parker, which handles commercial properties.
Schumacher and Danahey say rental rates for retail properties are too high. She said that could be simply because building owners or developers don't understand what the market is like.
"Is Parker an island unto itself? I think some people that own real estate out there think that it is," Schumacher said. "It's their world, and they don't go out there very much."
Mitch Trevey, executive director of the PEDC and owner of a commercial-real-estate company, Trevey Co. LLC, said Parker has been slow to drop its rental rates but that many landlords also are in a bind because of the weak economy.
"Some of them are accountable to investors or partners, etc., who are not necessarily so willing to allow them to drop the rates just to get somebody in there because that also affects property value," Trevey said.
Joe Maxwell, co-founder of the Metro Parker Small Business Alliance, said he thinks business owners sometimes need to be smarter when they sign leases.
"I think it's a deeper problem," Maxwell said. "Any time you start failing in business, you start looking for a scapegoat: 'My rent is too high.' " (Other excueses may include, "My CAM charges are too high, or we need a URA, or the Metro District did it." - MS)
Becky Hogan, Parker's economic-development director, said there's not much the town can do about the rents, but she thinks the rents are very competitive.
On Sept. 30, the town of Parker will be participating in a virtual broker tour at the Wildlife Experience, which will show about 100 commercial-real-estate brokers properties in Doug las County.
"It's a matter of educating people (on) what's available," Hogan said. "We haven't really done that down here in the south metro Denver area. And that's always going to help. It may not help that next day, but it's always going to help in the future."
Read more: Parker's vacant retail space worries business leaders - The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_16119526#ixzz104a1QUZv
Thursday, September 16, 2010
It's Your Dough, Water Slow!
Douglas County Water Resource Authority (www.DCWater.org) has just been awarded a grant for $250,000 by the Colorado Water Conservation Board to retrofit 1,000 yards with more efficient rotary sprinkler nozzles over the summer of 2011. The nozzles are about 30% more efficient that current designs, and that means a good deal of water demand can be reduced by use of these devices. The roots of the grass in our lawns will still receive the proper amount of water. It just takes less water to get to the roots. Traditional designs are prone to misting, as well as impacts of windy conditions and evaporation. Rotary nozzles shoot streams of water that are heavier, not as susceptible to these other problems, and so do a better job of irrigating our lawns. Use of the nozzles also means your water bill can be lowered by about 15% from what it would otherwise be with the old design sprinkler heads.
Water providers in the area are looking at migrating to a renewable surface water system in the near future. To give you an idea of cost savings, our community uses somewhere around 2,000 ac-ft of water every year. (Ac-ft is a common measurement for a lot of water, and every family of four uses about ½ an ac-ft of water every year.) If we have to pay $17,500 per ac-ft for renewable water rights to replace our existing water supply, we could be talking a lot of money. Saving 15% could reduce the cost of our renewable water future by around $5,250,000. While the City Council has not expressed interest in this sort of savings, the Metro District has. Rebates are now available through the Metro District for your installation of rotary sprinkler nozzles.
The DCWRA retrofit program will create several dozen summer jobs for high school students in the area. To get ready for this project, a pilot program featuring 50 yards is currently underway. Partners on the pilot project include the Douglas County School District, Arapahoe Douglas Works!, the Center for Resource Conservation, and DCWRA. DCWRA members participating in the pilot project include Town of Castle Rock, City of Lone Tree, Castle Pines Metropolitan District, and Castle Pines North Metropolitan District.
For those do it yourselfers who can’t wait to participate in next summer's retrofit project, go ahead and ask your local retailer now for money and water saving “rotary sprinkler nozzles”. For more information, please check out: http://www.dcwater.org/pages/sprinklers/sprinklers.html. It’s your dough, water slow!
Water providers in the area are looking at migrating to a renewable surface water system in the near future. To give you an idea of cost savings, our community uses somewhere around 2,000 ac-ft of water every year. (Ac-ft is a common measurement for a lot of water, and every family of four uses about ½ an ac-ft of water every year.) If we have to pay $17,500 per ac-ft for renewable water rights to replace our existing water supply, we could be talking a lot of money. Saving 15% could reduce the cost of our renewable water future by around $5,250,000. While the City Council has not expressed interest in this sort of savings, the Metro District has. Rebates are now available through the Metro District for your installation of rotary sprinkler nozzles.
The DCWRA retrofit program will create several dozen summer jobs for high school students in the area. To get ready for this project, a pilot program featuring 50 yards is currently underway. Partners on the pilot project include the Douglas County School District, Arapahoe Douglas Works!, the Center for Resource Conservation, and DCWRA. DCWRA members participating in the pilot project include Town of Castle Rock, City of Lone Tree, Castle Pines Metropolitan District, and Castle Pines North Metropolitan District.
For those do it yourselfers who can’t wait to participate in next summer's retrofit project, go ahead and ask your local retailer now for money and water saving “rotary sprinkler nozzles”. For more information, please check out: http://www.dcwater.org/pages/sprinklers/sprinklers.html. It’s your dough, water slow!
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
We Don’t Believe in Big Government
I attended the City Council meeting of 8/24. Highlights included approval of a large home day care center and a solar panel array. Former Councilmember Coppola asked the Council to appoint someone else in the community other than themselves to some of the commissions and boards created by the council. Acting Manager Suiter asked for input on the budget process calendar for 2011, but got no response. The ballot initiative to abolish the URA was approved by the City Council for inclusion in the November vote. (Just to be clear, the City Council acted to create the URA in May. Last night’s action puts the item on the ballot for voters to decide. A “YES” vote means you want to get rid of the URA. A “NO” vote means you want to keep the URA. The Council wasn’t saying they agree or not, they were just putting the item on the ballot for voters to decide.) There was some sort of preference item added to the November ballot after the legal session broke up. Something about asking homeowners a non-binding survey question as to whether they would rather have other water providers provide water to the community, or if they want to take a chance with the City doing it (the City has ZERO experience in these matters), or maybe none of the above, or something like that. Never heard of it before, so who knows what that is all about?
I invited two community leaders to attend a baseball game to talk about the URA. Some folks think the URA is a good idea, and don’t understand why other folks don’t like it. Some folks don’t like the idea, and don’t understand why other folks created the URA. I thought that maybe inviting these leaders to attend a baseball game could help to build a social relationship before diving into the pros and cons of the URA situation. The City’s consultant said the URA would be slightly positive to the County, but the County’s consultant said forgone tax revenues are over $17 million. Who knows where truth lies on projections that stretch out over decades, but it's safe to say there is no consensus on what the URA would bring. There is an arbitration process going on so another lawsuit over the matter will not have to be filed. I hope cooler heads prevail, Solomon can watch over the process, and both sides can come to agreement without spending even more money on legal fees. The folks thinking the URA should go away have a website. The City can't have an opinion on the issue one way or another, though individual members of Council can.
There was talk of putting the HOA takeover back on the Council’s agenda. I was hoping this notion had died. The City wants to save money by taking over all the functions of the subassociations – the folks who run your swimming pools, get your grass cut, get your trash collected, remove snow, appoint your architecture control committees – tasks like that where service levels vary from neighborhood to neighborhood. Saving money sounds good, but this idea was not well thought out. Our HOAs already do business with management firms who do business with a number of clients. Economies of scale have already been achieved. One reason given for our roads being in bad shape is the trash trucks running over them. The thought is, “If only we could consolidate garbage service, the roads would be better.” There is room for consolidation if numerous trash companies serve one subassociation. We faced this issue ten years ago in HOA, and addressed it easily, without forming a City. The Master Association could address this issue, if it chose to, but even that is likely not necessary. We also tried to share grass cutting services between the Metro District and some of the HOAs with a sizable amount of grass. We were told no thanks, “We don’t believe in big government.” Regretfully, homework was not done to ask the HOAs if they wanted to be consolidated by the City. It was just assumed of course this is a great idea. This is another tenet of incorporation that is not going to be a glorious as promised. Instead of trying to save a couple bucks on HOA consolidation, maybe we should spend the time figuring how to raise the tens of millions of dollars that may be needed in the not too distant future to keep our existing City assets in good order. Think about that the next time your run over a bumpy patch in the road.
I invited two community leaders to attend a baseball game to talk about the URA. Some folks think the URA is a good idea, and don’t understand why other folks don’t like it. Some folks don’t like the idea, and don’t understand why other folks created the URA. I thought that maybe inviting these leaders to attend a baseball game could help to build a social relationship before diving into the pros and cons of the URA situation. The City’s consultant said the URA would be slightly positive to the County, but the County’s consultant said forgone tax revenues are over $17 million. Who knows where truth lies on projections that stretch out over decades, but it's safe to say there is no consensus on what the URA would bring. There is an arbitration process going on so another lawsuit over the matter will not have to be filed. I hope cooler heads prevail, Solomon can watch over the process, and both sides can come to agreement without spending even more money on legal fees. The folks thinking the URA should go away have a website. The City can't have an opinion on the issue one way or another, though individual members of Council can.
There was talk of putting the HOA takeover back on the Council’s agenda. I was hoping this notion had died. The City wants to save money by taking over all the functions of the subassociations – the folks who run your swimming pools, get your grass cut, get your trash collected, remove snow, appoint your architecture control committees – tasks like that where service levels vary from neighborhood to neighborhood. Saving money sounds good, but this idea was not well thought out. Our HOAs already do business with management firms who do business with a number of clients. Economies of scale have already been achieved. One reason given for our roads being in bad shape is the trash trucks running over them. The thought is, “If only we could consolidate garbage service, the roads would be better.” There is room for consolidation if numerous trash companies serve one subassociation. We faced this issue ten years ago in HOA, and addressed it easily, without forming a City. The Master Association could address this issue, if it chose to, but even that is likely not necessary. We also tried to share grass cutting services between the Metro District and some of the HOAs with a sizable amount of grass. We were told no thanks, “We don’t believe in big government.” Regretfully, homework was not done to ask the HOAs if they wanted to be consolidated by the City. It was just assumed of course this is a great idea. This is another tenet of incorporation that is not going to be a glorious as promised. Instead of trying to save a couple bucks on HOA consolidation, maybe we should spend the time figuring how to raise the tens of millions of dollars that may be needed in the not too distant future to keep our existing City assets in good order. Think about that the next time your run over a bumpy patch in the road.
Monday, August 23, 2010
Costs of Stormwater Management Going Up?
The Highlands Ranch Metropolitan District Board is looking at implementing a stormwater fee
August 22, 2010
From the Highlands Ranch Herald:
Federal and state regulations for municipal stormwater systems have redefined the responsibilities associated with owning and maintaining facilities such as surface drainages, detention and water quality management ponds, and storms sewers and culverts. As the permit holder under the Clean Water Act, the metro district is responsible for public education and outreach, as well as participation.
Money from Centennial Water and Sanitation District, developers and the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District have for years helped fund the initial stormwater management projects in Highlands Ranch. However, the long-range plan for stormwater infrastructure, including capital and maintenance costs, requires approximately $30 million over the next 30 years. It is anticipated that UDFCD will continue to partner with the district, but will require matching funds for capital projects. “It is important that the metro district identify a reliable funding source to allow us to stabilize the channels in our natural open space lands and meet our requirements as the holder of the Clean Water Act permit,” a press release from the district says.
Metro district staff will conduct a public workshop at 6 p.m. Sept. 1 at the district office at South Broadway and Plaza Drive to explain the financial implications and the alternatives.
Those with questions should visit www.highlandsranch.org or contact director of public works Jeff Case at jcase@highlandsranch.org or at 303-791-0430.
(The CoCPN is looking at taking over stormwater functions in CPN from the Metro District. Little revenue is associated with this function, while potential financial liability is enormous. Has CoCPN evaluated the long-range plans and costs for stormwater, or are they looking to add legitimacy to CoCPN efforts? While the Metro District might be wise to dump this obligation, what's best for the citizens of CoCPN?)
August 22, 2010
From the Highlands Ranch Herald:
Federal and state regulations for municipal stormwater systems have redefined the responsibilities associated with owning and maintaining facilities such as surface drainages, detention and water quality management ponds, and storms sewers and culverts. As the permit holder under the Clean Water Act, the metro district is responsible for public education and outreach, as well as participation.
Money from Centennial Water and Sanitation District, developers and the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District have for years helped fund the initial stormwater management projects in Highlands Ranch. However, the long-range plan for stormwater infrastructure, including capital and maintenance costs, requires approximately $30 million over the next 30 years. It is anticipated that UDFCD will continue to partner with the district, but will require matching funds for capital projects. “It is important that the metro district identify a reliable funding source to allow us to stabilize the channels in our natural open space lands and meet our requirements as the holder of the Clean Water Act permit,” a press release from the district says.
Metro district staff will conduct a public workshop at 6 p.m. Sept. 1 at the district office at South Broadway and Plaza Drive to explain the financial implications and the alternatives.
Those with questions should visit www.highlandsranch.org or contact director of public works Jeff Case at jcase@highlandsranch.org or at 303-791-0430.
(The CoCPN is looking at taking over stormwater functions in CPN from the Metro District. Little revenue is associated with this function, while potential financial liability is enormous. Has CoCPN evaluated the long-range plans and costs for stormwater, or are they looking to add legitimacy to CoCPN efforts? While the Metro District might be wise to dump this obligation, what's best for the citizens of CoCPN?)
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
City Makes Front Page News Again!
Blight on the ballot
By Rhonda Moore
Published: 08.16.10
(Here's an excerpt of the front page story in the local paper.)
The debate over the Castle Pines North blight issue will continue to the polls with a ballot question to abolish the city’s council-driven urban renewal authority. Castle Pines North residents successfully petitioned for a ballot question to overturn city council’s decision to establish an urban renewal authority and accompanying plan that declared portions of the upscale community blighted.
The public outcry over council’s April decision began shortly after city council created the authority, which city council members laud as a tool to trigger economic development. Opponents express regret that the debate had to come down to a public vote. The action reflects a refusal on the part of city council to listen to its constituents, said Deanna Merrill, spokeswoman for Blight’s Not Right, the driving force behind the petition effort.
“It’s unfortunate that we had to get to this point, that so many people in the community distrust the efforts of the city council,” Merrill said. “The real concern is that the people are not being heard. We don’t feel we have a true voice. There’s definitely a disconnect between what city council is doing and have in motion and what people of Castle Pines North have in mind.”
Castle Pines North city council established the authority April 25, after conducting a study that concluded portions of the city met the state’s criteria as “blighted.” Included in the blighted area is more than 3,300 acres of vacant land slated for improvement by the Canyons development, the city’s first annexed property.
With the subsequent May 25 approval of the urban renewal plan, the city positioned itself to capture the increase in property taxes, otherwise earmarked for servicing taxing authorities, as property within the authority boundaries gains value. Approval of the plan triggered three legal filings by impacted taxing districts, positioning petitioners to challenge formation of the urban renewal authority.
The May 25 approval of the plan came days before a new state law went into effect, which calls for a 10-year waiting period to blight agricultural property and consensus among impacted taxing districts before a municipality can adopt an urban renewal plan.
Blight’s Not Right went into motion as public outcry rose over the city’s decision to move forward with the urban renewal authority. The effort was driven by a dual concern that the authority does not reflect the community’s wishes and that city council pushed the issue without adequate public notification, Merrill said.
With the help of representatives from every Castle Pines North neighborhood, Blight’s Not Right launched an effort for a ballot initiative to abolish the authority. Organizers needed at least 346 signatures to force a ballot question and in 10 days collected 495 signatures, Merrill said.
“In that sense, there’s some community pride,” she said. “Folks are saying ‘wait, let’s stop and talk about this a little bit more.’ The sad part is this was all said at public hearings in council meetings … and ignored. It’s really just trying to give the folks an opportunity to have a voice.”
By Aug. 9, the deputy city clerk ratified the petition signatures, about 20 days after the petitions were delivered to town hall. At the Aug. 10 council meeting, councilmembers asked staff to prepare ballot language to consider for the November ballot, said Carl Kollmar, Castle Pines North City Clerk. The council aims to consider the optional questions at the Aug. 24 meeting with a goal to approve a ballot initiative in time for the November general election Douglas County ballot, Kollmar said.
(The full article can be viewed in the current Castle Rock News Press.)
By Rhonda Moore
Published: 08.16.10
(Here's an excerpt of the front page story in the local paper.)
The debate over the Castle Pines North blight issue will continue to the polls with a ballot question to abolish the city’s council-driven urban renewal authority. Castle Pines North residents successfully petitioned for a ballot question to overturn city council’s decision to establish an urban renewal authority and accompanying plan that declared portions of the upscale community blighted.
The public outcry over council’s April decision began shortly after city council created the authority, which city council members laud as a tool to trigger economic development. Opponents express regret that the debate had to come down to a public vote. The action reflects a refusal on the part of city council to listen to its constituents, said Deanna Merrill, spokeswoman for Blight’s Not Right, the driving force behind the petition effort.
“It’s unfortunate that we had to get to this point, that so many people in the community distrust the efforts of the city council,” Merrill said. “The real concern is that the people are not being heard. We don’t feel we have a true voice. There’s definitely a disconnect between what city council is doing and have in motion and what people of Castle Pines North have in mind.”
Castle Pines North city council established the authority April 25, after conducting a study that concluded portions of the city met the state’s criteria as “blighted.” Included in the blighted area is more than 3,300 acres of vacant land slated for improvement by the Canyons development, the city’s first annexed property.
With the subsequent May 25 approval of the urban renewal plan, the city positioned itself to capture the increase in property taxes, otherwise earmarked for servicing taxing authorities, as property within the authority boundaries gains value. Approval of the plan triggered three legal filings by impacted taxing districts, positioning petitioners to challenge formation of the urban renewal authority.
The May 25 approval of the plan came days before a new state law went into effect, which calls for a 10-year waiting period to blight agricultural property and consensus among impacted taxing districts before a municipality can adopt an urban renewal plan.
Blight’s Not Right went into motion as public outcry rose over the city’s decision to move forward with the urban renewal authority. The effort was driven by a dual concern that the authority does not reflect the community’s wishes and that city council pushed the issue without adequate public notification, Merrill said.
With the help of representatives from every Castle Pines North neighborhood, Blight’s Not Right launched an effort for a ballot initiative to abolish the authority. Organizers needed at least 346 signatures to force a ballot question and in 10 days collected 495 signatures, Merrill said.
“In that sense, there’s some community pride,” she said. “Folks are saying ‘wait, let’s stop and talk about this a little bit more.’ The sad part is this was all said at public hearings in council meetings … and ignored. It’s really just trying to give the folks an opportunity to have a voice.”
By Aug. 9, the deputy city clerk ratified the petition signatures, about 20 days after the petitions were delivered to town hall. At the Aug. 10 council meeting, councilmembers asked staff to prepare ballot language to consider for the November ballot, said Carl Kollmar, Castle Pines North City Clerk. The council aims to consider the optional questions at the Aug. 24 meeting with a goal to approve a ballot initiative in time for the November general election Douglas County ballot, Kollmar said.
(The full article can be viewed in the current Castle Rock News Press.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
