Finding the right mayor in a large field of candidates
Re: “Mike Johnston for mayor,” March 12 editorial
The Denver Post Editorial Board’s endorsement of Mike Johnston for mayor is a blatant continuation of the past 12 years of Michael Hancock’s power alliance with wealthy business owners and lobbyists. The contributions to Johnston’s campaign are proof that the imbalance of power would continue to the detriment of the needs of the masses.
As an owner of a commercial property with small business tenants and a community equity activist in Globeville for many years, it is another betrayal of promises, passions, and stakeholder investments of time and energy in low-income neighborhoods such as Globeville. I fear that with Johnston as mayor, the least-resourced neighborhoods will continue to bear the brunt of the most egregious problems in the city: homeless encampments, crime, drugs, non-existent basic infrastructure, toxic pollution, and more. Denver needs a mayor that has worked tirelessly in the trenches for its citizens and businesses and has the record to prove it: Debbie Ortega!
Nancy Grandys-Jones, Littleton
Talk about a straw man argument. The Post’s editorial argued the “All Lives Matter” slogan implies there is no police brutality in the United States.
What nonsense. The slogan means what it says in light of the fact that twice as many white people are killed by police each year. While police shoot and kill Black people at a per capita rate two to three times higher than white people, Black people also kill Black people at a higher rate — more than five times higher — than white people kill white people. In all, police kill 1,000 – 1,100 people per year.
We should explore laws and policies that reduce violence against everyone in our communities rather than race-baiting for political purposes.
Brad Rehak, Denver
The hot topic for candidates is addressing homelessness and affordable housing, and rightly so. Most of the candidates have been focusing on causes, mainly mental and substance issues. Additionally, a bill is in the works promoting rent stabilization in the legislature. In every article I have read, seniors have not been addressed by any candidate.
Seniors need help now. Recent articles have shown that more seniors are falling into poverty and that in order to sustain living in retirement, more than $1 million is needed. Just yesterday I met a senior working at a popular box store. In our conversation, she mentioned that after having retired, she is now working full-time to meet her obligations. What will happen to her when she can no longer work? Where is she and the rest of us seniors going to find help?
I want to hear from every candidate about how they plan to protect seniors during their administration. Is their plan to let us end up in a tent or homeless shelter? Huge rent increases in senior communities are eating up our money. We are a separate group and need specific protection.
Because of the pandemic, inflation, the war in Ukraine and supply issues, seniors are finding themselves in a crisis situation. Many of us can no longer afford to live, given our current monetary situation.
In your editorial endorsing Mike Johnston, I didn’t see the word senior mentioned once. One candidate who has mentioned seniors is Debbie Ortega.
I’m requesting The Post to interview each of the candidates regarding this issue.
Rochelle Padzensky, Denver
The election process for selecting Denver’s mayor is clearly flawed. Seventeen candidates, really? Under the guise of appearing to be more “democratic,” the process is anything but.
Denver now has a system in which a candidate may be able to reach the run-off stage with less than 20% of the vote in the first round. If elected in the second round, this could mean that Denver would end up with a mayor that more than 80% of the voters initially did not want.
One should be able to see how outside Independent Expenditure (IE) groups (Denver’s version of Super PACs) would be able to influence the election through their purchase of television ads. More than $800,00 has been spent by IEs so far. What we have created is a system that is prone to money manipulation by small groups of wealthy people.
When the number of candidates reaches the level that requires a spreadsheet to keep track of them, voters will be either unable or unwilling to sort through all the possibilities. It will be interesting to see if this drives down voter participation.
A possible solution is to raise the bar for candidates. What would be wrong with needing 3,500 signatures (0.5% of Denver’s population) and requiring the raising of $10,000 in campaign contributions of $20 or less (which could be done with 500 contributors) in order to qualify?
Guy Wroble, Denver
Look, without a doubt, affordable housing is a big issue, but it is not the only issue. We must applaud those throwing their hat into the ring. That being said, any candidate asking to become your city’s next leader had better bring the whole enchilada to the table. One has to be skeptical when everyone jumps on the affordability bandwagon, then offers a two-sentence response to the problem.
Thus far, the solutions proposed (for example –parks, homelessness, infrastructure, local business owners, law enforcement, city finances, city planning, treatment of the incarcerated, minorities, a place to raise your family, and the city’s approach leading the way for the metro area and all of Colorado) have been overall weak and seemingly without too much thought. Let your candidates show you what they’re really made of, and don’t let special interests tell you how to think.
I hope that Denver’s residents embrace this moment, think about what the next mayor needs to do to represent all of Denver, and cast their votes accordingly. The rest of us depend on it.
Gary Rauchenecker, Golden
Voting to take your own voice away
It’s not surprising that Denver City Council, which basically sold its soul to developers, is back at it again with a stealth Initiative 2M-N by making it nearly illegal to challenge them ever again. By voting yes, each formally prohibits any public control or getting a word in edgewise since it bans anyone but a property owner from even participating in zoning or changing its rules in their favor. Indeed it renders not only Initiative 20 moot if defeated again and is worse than it appears because it’s a throwback where only those of property have rights and make the rules for everyone else.
Richard L. Mattingly, Denver
Referred Measure 2O: ” pitting good people against good people”
As I grew up in Park Hill, my parents, recalling a time when Denver was largely locally fed, often lamented the dwindling number of truck farms on Denver’s outskirts. By the late 1970s, most of those farms were gone to development. That farmland gave Denver three gifts: local food, a livable local climate, and clean air.
Decades of planless metro growth, pushed by municipal and county governments in collusion with developers, have negatively impacted all three. Denver City Council members (along with many hopefuls in the current mayoral race) have determined that this is a trend worth continuing.
For pennies on the dollar the City Council has decided that the 155 acres of the former Park Hill Golf Course the people of Denver voted and paid $2,000,000 to protect should be ceded to development, colluding with a cynical divide and conquer ploy pitting conservation and livability against a detention pit park and the usually empty promise of affordable housing.
Those 155 acres offer Denver the opportunity to demonstrate that we are a city capable of mature and collective moral wisdom in balancing the needs of all its people.
It is time for a real discussion among all the stakeholders, not just fig-leaf forums covering a predetermination to repeat development mistakes that have long been eroding the quality of life in Denver.
There are better ways to make the land truly serve Denver than pitting good people against good people to further enrich developers.
Vote no on 20.
M. Paul Garrett, Denver
Right to go center on Putin’s war
Re: “Far right and far left are wrong on Ukraine,” March 12 commentary
In my long-time Denver Post past, I have, on occasion or two, opined on the adversarial side of Krista Kafer. For me, she carries the torch of the “My Rights” crowd too excessively. I once had such a brother. Having said that, I heartily endorse and applaud her views on the Putin War. Krista states a compelling case as a political centrist and a perspicacious student of history. She earns credibility by assessing much blame on the Right, and rightfully so, cautions against the extremes of the Left. Great piece, Ms. Kafer.
Barry Sharcot, Denver
Scooping up some good deeds
Re: “Be a good neighbor and scoop the poop,” March 12 commentary
Jo Ann Allen’s opinion piece is spot on. I couldn’t agree more with her. Indeed dog owners must pick up after their pets.
I would just like to add one thing to this subject. When you take your dog out for a walk, not only should you pick up after your pet, but if you see poop from other dogs, you should pick that up too. You’ll make the world a better place.
David Gesundheit, Denver
