Green Police ad rings locally

Any politically aware Boulder County resident could immediately relate to our own plague of enviro-Nazis when viewing Audi's clever Super Bowl TV commercial Sunday...



Look and sound familiar? How about the Boulder County commissioners and their Draconian land use policies? Or Czar Ron Stewart and his overbearing open space department? You know, the 95,000 acres, $200 million bond debt, and three running open space sales taxes for decades to come?

And don't forget the little goodie that nearly 80% of BoCo open space is off-limits to the public, same as Longmont's plans for its recent $8.1 million Adrian land purchase near Union Reservoir. How is my quality of life so wonderfully enhanced when I can't even set foot on all this open space paid for with my own tax dollars?

The latest fad from the Church of Green is city-sponsored collection programs for composting food and organics. Now I've got nothing against composting, don't care to do it myself (I gladly recycle otherwise), but do we really want every Longmont residence to have three different refuse bins? What's more, a stinking compost bin invites all kinds of problems for storage and animal intrusion.

The enviros squawk about air, water, noise and light pollution, sometimes rightfully so. Who wants to add more pollution with countless trash bins on the streets and at the homes of city dwellers? Plus I don't want my overall trash fees increasing in Longmont for another pie-in-the-sky program to appease the far left and earth-worshipers.

When is enough enough with this green utopian dream of zero waste?

Read more

Progressives grossly fail the Four-Way Test

When Mayor Bryan Baum first took office last November he expressed the desire for city council chambers to have the same guiding principles as the renowned "Four-Way Test" of the Rotarians International...

The Four-Way Test
Of the things we think, say or do

1. Is it the TRUTH?
2. Is it FAIR to all concerned?
3. Will it build GOODWILL and BETTER FRIENDSHIPS?
4. Will it be BENEFICIAL to all concerned?

Easily observable is how the insurgent Progressive Left in Longmont miserably fails this test of ethics on every count, all to the detriment of our once All-America City. In practically every form of discourse, especially the city council public invited podium of late, all we see from the Progressives is lies vs. truth, inequity vs. fairness, discord vs. goodwill, and adversarialness vs. friendship.

It's been said the only thing these radicals want to "progress" with their agenda is to progress beyond the U.S. Constitution--getting beyond the principles established for the good of America (and present-day Longmont) by our nation's Founding Fathers.

The far left in this country, on the national scene right down to Longmont, are truly the ones who are rigid and intolerant. A certain local blogger likes to embrace whatever is vulgar and profane, displaying a form of hatred toward whatever is wholesome. People with a spiritual sense can recognize such viciousness as a fundamental rebellion against God and His ways, certainly nothing new under the sun. It's been going on with mankind since Creation.

I respect Mayor Baum for standing for the truth and what is right for Longmont.

Read more

On thin skins and free speech

In an ever increasing attempt to get attention in any way possible, the loons in town are splashing their website name all over the place, throwing anything and everything at the wall to see if it will stick, and in a strange twist saying their speech is being stifled and they won't be silenced!

But lets get to this issue of their detractors, which I guess would include me, having thin skins.  I can only speak for myself but lets explore that a bit.  I've been doing this thing that I do for a while, as far as I can tell longer and more continuously than anyone else in town.  This includes writing online in one form or another, getting in to the Times-Call fairly regularly, speaking at city council and advisory board meetings, and being in somewhat continuous contact with elected officials and city staff.

Others have come and gone, usually with a shelf life of an election cycle, two tops.  I'd like to have the name of any non-elected person (and some elected) in town who has been attacked by name as often in the paper and online as myself.  There was one stretch of seven consecutive days in the Times-Call where people were writing Open Forum letters and making TC Line comments about me, half positive and half negative.  And the stuff you don't know about is even worse.  For any clown to say that I have a thin skin is uninformed and ignorant.  I guess they think I'm just supposed to take it - unfortunately (for them) I can dish it out just as well as I can take it.

People with thin skins don't last very long in my line of work, and the people who make these assertions are well aware of my occupation - as they've been known to stalk the place.  Ulcers, burnout, divorce, and premature aging are just some of the side effects common with my job.  Thankfully after 25 years none of those things have occurred to me.  Healthy and biting banter is commonplace, it can be brutal - and is probably why people outside of this profession (they do studies on such things) don't quite know how to handle hot potatoes like us - calling us cocky or smug.  Whatever.  But thin skinned we aint.  This stuff I do on this side is a cakewalk by comparison.

On the supposed stifling of free speech:  Seriously, the screwballs in town are the gift that keeps on giving.  How many times do I have to say it:  I don't know anyone who would want to silence these people, they are their own worst enemies.  I know they are trying to take a page right out of my own book with their latest antics.  But here's the difference:  I had facts, reason, and common sense to back me up.  Example:  even after being set straight during a council meeting by a councilmember and the city attorney about a meeting that was not some secret meeting and totally above board (and a posted meeting at that) one of these people still posts her speech on a website about how some investigation needs to be done.  And these same people often repeat the line about "repeat a lie often enough..." yet have no problem repeating something they know to be false.  Sort of like "saved or created jobs" as millions of jobs have been lost, same lame mindset - but if the right people hear it they may actually believe it!

I know I did a lot of things that really ticked them off, and they're copying it.  It's actually amusing to watch, but a little sad too as their feigned outrage is falling flat on its face one issue at a time.  First it was this whole solar issue, oh how they screamed for an apology by Mayor Baum - while I said they had it backwards, which of course they did, and it played out exactly as I said it would.  Then it was the Public Invited To Be Heard issue, boy did they think they had Mayor Baum by the short and curlies.  The danger in being very vocal (and very wrong) on an issue is when you spread your lies and propaganda all over the place and it comes crashing down around you, you look like the fools that you are.

In one fell swoop, and in the matter of just a few minutes, Mayor Baum stuck a pin in their plans just by speaking directly to the citizens of Longmont.  It was a win-win situation for the solar installer and his company, the mayor and city council, the residents of Longmont - everyone except for our leftwing lunatic fringe, what does that tell you?  That's right, as usual they are only in it for themselves, which ironically is not what's best for Longmont.

But please, continue to speak up and out.  Act like you know everything about anything just by attending a handful of meetings, or getting coached by those that think they know everything about everything - including getting the cold shoulder from voters.  You might get lucky and fool some of the people some of the time, but some of us have really good memories, and as they say "anything you say can and will be used against you".  It's called accountability and consequences.  I know I have to live with everything I've ever said and done - and I take back nothing.

...but know this:  I toy with you like a cat toys with a ball of yarn.

Read more

Truth about contributions buying votes

Alright, this issue needs to be cleared up once and for all.

There are people in town trying to rewrite history about contributions to city council members - or just don't know what they are talking about.  Part of the reason we are in this whole mess with the Longmont Fair Campaign Practices Act (LFCPA) and the Election Committee (EC) all comes down to a $5,000 contribution to Gabe Santos from the Longmont Association of Realtors.  But here's what the people who keep mentioning this either have conveniently forgotten or don't want you to know:

During the 2007 election cycle, Karen Benker, Sean McCoy, Brian Hansen, and Sarah Levison received a combined $4,800 from the Fraternal Order of Police and the Longmont Police Officers Association.  As some people may remember, I supported the police/firefighters in their first attempt to collectively bargain, but it lost at the ballot and we had to live with the results.  I gave each side of this issue a fair shake for the 2008 election, which the voters passed on the second attempt.


But here's the rub:  Gabe Santos never proposed or voted for anything that would favor the Longmont Association of Realtors.  The same can not be said for the former "Bloc of 4" when it came to the matter of placing the police/firefighter question on the ballot.  Without council's support and the votes of these 4 council members, they would have had to go through the petition process.  People can argue whether this was ethical or not - but the same people who keep mentioning money buying politicians and how they vote, including recent comments by Brian Hansen, need to remember this situation.  Using their logic, police/firefighter organization money bought the votes of Benker, Hansen, McCoy, and Levison.  Can't have it both ways.

I personally don't have a big issue with individuals or organizations lobbying their elected representatives.  But I do prefer those representatives to show a little independence, and they should at least make an attempt to not appear they were bought by certain contributors.  Gabe Santos has passed that test, but by the very definition of the former Bloc's supporters, they have not.

...or is this one of those double standards again?

Read more

Imitation sincerest form of flattery

When your brand is down and people think your concepts are disconnected from rational people (and reality), what's one to do?  Copy others that are successful of course!

And so it goes in Longmont with a new site and strategy every so often.  Regular readers of this site have seen the change to a look that is more like a newspaper, what a coincidence that a new site in town has picked a similar one!  I've had regular contributors that are often in the Times-Call, not some nobody hacks that no one knows or cares about, another coincidence as this new site has decided to copy that as well!  (The contributor part, they still are nobody hacks that no one cares about)

They even admit to getting their site name from another website (alas, I have no connection to that one, contrary to what they may think) and the irony of how they cry about people stealing their images yet they steal one themselves from said website and post it on theirs!  Somehow I doubt they got permission, but you never know.

The sad and eventual truth is that it's from the same old crowd (What's In It For Longmont, Stop Union Annex, etc) that make a new site which always devolves into profanity laced rants just like all their others.  New name, same modus operandi.  They can't help who they are, and right now they are angry and losing just about every political battle they engage in.  I would almost feel sorry for them if they weren't such loathsome creeps most of the time.

And they are stepping it up with violent imagery ("Baum Squad" with a picture of a hand grenade, and saying Mayor Baum "bombed photovoltaics"), and using the excuse "the other side did it first" doesn't cut it.  I never had to resort to such tactics to be seen and heard.  Nor did I ever have to apologize for making physical threats to my detractors, which they did - why would they feel the need to apologize (which wasn't asked for) if they thought it as just hyperbole and harmless banter?  This is the state of the Left in Longmont, unhinged and proud of it.

And they're recruiting!  Yes, if you are marginally literate and barely aware of actual issues in Longmont, as some of their newer "contributors" are - you may be perfect for them!  It's hilarious to watch people dispute "facts" that they gleaned from a couple of city council meetings or coaching from the truly disconnected that couldn't get elected (prairie) dog catcher.  But there is hope for these people:  maybe when they actually learn something they'll learn that they are hanging out with the worst Longmont has to offer.  Then again, that would take character and sober judgment (which if they had in the first place they'd avoid these people like the plague).

Thing is, as they devise their strategy to reclaim a council seat they think is theirs (mayor), they have 3 other seats to defend in 2011.  How it goes between now and then, and how it goes for those 3 councilmembers, is up to them.  I'm willing to work with those 3 for the betterment of Longmont, but not if they embrace the ideology and tactics of this group, which has been a disaster for Longmont for the last 2 years.  Distance from them would be smart for council members who are thinking of running for reelection.  An obvious tip: they don't help your chances, remember I said that.

The reasons why these people are so angry?  That would take up another entire entry, so stay tuned for that...

Read more

Cooling off a solar flare-up

Longmont had an Open Forum in council chambers back on January 12, 2010.  One of the more interesting moments came when a heated exchange occurred between Mayor Baum and Steve King, a solar installer.  Since that time, the usual merry band of screwballs that often parade in front of council with some of the most hair brained statements decided they were going to take Mayor Baum to task for how he treated Mr. King.  They've also made similar statements in the TC Line and on some websites.  

At the January 19th meeting during a Study Session it was a packed house and as expected they demanded Mayor Baum apologize to Mr. King and the residents of the city.  At one point, Mayor Pro-Tem Gabe Santos had to tell one of them to basically put a much needed sock in it.  You can see the others on the video at the city's website and witness their feigned outrage.  Oh, the humanity!  

I took a different tack and said Mr. King should be the one apologizing.  As much as I often disagree with some council members, I never showed the disrespect that the crowd in attendance that night showed city council.  These are sore losers and classless loudmouths, and as their platform goes down in flames here locally and nationally they only get more abrasive.

But that aside, before I spoke to council on the 19th (and before I witnessed this groups behavior that night) I attempted to make contact with Mr. King and try to douse the flames on the situation.  Like I said on the 12th and at other times, I'm in favor of solar, as are all of the city council members - just not this grant at this time, it doesn't make sense fiscally for us right now.  Mr. King responded immediately and also wanted to put this situation behind him, and we had a good dialogue on the best way to accomplish this and make it a win-win situation for the city, Mr. King, his company, and future solar possibilities.

While I was rough on him in my comments (which he is aware of) and others were not happy with his interaction with the mayor, I believe the following letter that he is sending the mayor and city council shows good faith and we should put this whole mess behind us and move on.

The sad part is that many in that group I referenced earlier will not be happy about this turn of events.  They really wanted this as a political football to toss around amongst each other for the next 2 years.  Sorry to pee in your Kool-Aid.  See, this is how adults act.  We see a problem, come up with constructive ways to solve it, actually solve it, and then shake hands and get on with life.  It's alright to admit it - you all were childish and wrong.  You don't do Mr. King, his company, or the city any good with your behavior - so go ahead and stop.

As always, glad to be of service.


----------------------------------------------------------------

Here is Mr. King's letter (emphasis his)

Greetings Mayor Baum and Longmont City Council Members,

I am writing in regards to my participation in the open forum on January 12^th.  I believe that the solar industry deserved a better spokesperson that night. Unfortunately for both of us, not many of my constituents showed up to speak, and so I considered it my duty to give it a try.  So you got stuck with me. I come from a working class background, and haven’t had many chances to cultivate poise or study diplomatic nuance. While I don’t retract my opinions, I do feel the need to apologize for any comments I made that should have been better articulated and less argumentative, particularly towards the Mayor. My intention was not to draw a line in the sand. It may seem laughable now, but I had actually hoped to speak with City Council Members personally and offer free site assessments for their homes!

As you can tell, I have a lot of passion for solar, and believe it to be a valuable component in the promising new energy economy that serves to strengthen America. This can only happen if America can continue to be a leader in energy technology. I was glad to hear that none of the city council members are anti-solar, and agree that the rebate program, as proposed, is exclusive in that the budget only allows a small portion of the town’s population to go solar with incentives, while others are left out. I think we all agree that it would be nice for the residents of Longmont to be able to afford some of the technology that is being produced here by several companies already.

An unfortunate case of timing that I’d like to point out is that the ClimateSmart Program is having three more rounds coming up this spring and summer, one round for commercial properties and two for residential.  This program has helped Longmont already and is just getting it’s feet off the ground. This program would have worked well in harmony with the Longmont Solar Rebate. ClimateSmart is a program that is drawing worldwide attention to Boulder County, and I believe that its success is something not only our county but our country can be proud of, so we should support it in any way that we can. Customers looking to install small projects in Longmont still have a reasonable financial incentive with the combo of ClimateSmart, the 30% federal tax credit and a $4,500 rebate from the state, but the combination of all these with the Longmont Solar Rebate could really boost business here and make Longmont an even more attractive place to live.  I would encourage you to work out a program that is agreeable to you soon, so that the Longmont Solar Rebate can share in the success of the ClimateSmart Program.

I have not paid attention to the bloggers or negative comments towards me on the internet because I am very focused on my job selling systems so that my friends can feed their families. But I have read some of the emails sent to me and my company. I ask for your help in moving on from the divisiveness and bickering that has risen from  my comments. In no way do I condone my comments being attached to any cause other than to promote green business in Longmont!!

In the future, if I get stuck with the task of having to speak in public again, I will be sure to deliver my point with professionalism. I regret the fact that the lesson I learned here comes at the price of polarizing peoples opinions on this issue, when my intention is always to draw people together for productive discussion.

I assure you that I am much better at designing and installing systems than at public speaking. Independent Power Systems is an incredible company that does the highest quality work in the industry. We recently completed several installations for our boys (and women) in Afghanistan and are currently working on a way to help in Haiti. We have approached our work with the utmost integrity since 1996 and have had the honor of providing energy independence and incredible investment opportunities to many Americans since then. We have a good reputation everywhere that we work, and we would love to do more work in Longmont. I would like to offer all of the City Council Members free site assessments for their homes!

Please accept my apology for my role in the way things transpired at last week’s meeting. I promise to learn to present my point of view with more tact. I wish the best for you and hold a lot of respect for the job that you do.

Best Regards,

Steve King

Read more

Neverending record correcting

In the January 17, 2010 Longmont Times-Call there was a guest opinion by Election Committee member Strider Benston that had some outright incorrect statements that need to be corrected.  Keep in mind, this is a member of the committee that just cost the city tens of thousands of dollars.  You'd think he'd at least want to check his facts before making such statements.

• 1) He said "this local group, led by Mr. Chris Rodriguez, sued the city in U.S. District Court."  Actually, I didn't lead this group, I was asked to join it after it had already begun organizing.
• 2) He said "a $68,500 settlement going to Mr. Rodriguez and his associates...which rests now in the pockets of the very people who brought the lawsuit..." Another lie, I did not get a penny of that money, nor did any of the plaintiffs as far as I'm aware of.  If anything, I spent my own money on this lawsuit.  We knew we would not personally financially benefit from this lawsuit, that wasn't the point.  As usual, the attorneys are the only people who make out in these situations.
• 3) He questioned my statement about being "the only member of the public who has attended every single Election Committee meeting."  At the time I wrote that, that statement was 100% completely true.  Then they started scheduling meetings on Fridays instead of the normal Monday nights, which I couldn't attend.  I seem to recall Mr. Benston coming in late on occasion, and there were meetings I was at that regular members were not.  It appears Mr. Benston took this statement as meaning it wasn't open to the public, which I never even hinted at.  He said he wants me to substantiate my claim, I recorded every single meeting and took notes.  That, and I'm on record publicly speaking at just about every meeting.  Also, I spoke to him personally at every single meeting.  I can't help it if they guys memory is scattered - mine isn't.
• 4) He claims I received only 1 vote to be on this committee - actually I received 3, one less than a majority.  For someone who has a lot to say, you'd think he'd have at least 1 suggestion in the recent "Items for discussion and potential revision to the LFCPA", but he had ZERO.  By comparison I had 6.
• 5) He said nothing in the LFCPA has been "formally ruled upon at all."  There was this thing the federal judge did called a Preliminary Injunction, it was actually pretty big news and lead to the city having to settle as it was a clear indication they would eventually lose in court.  How could someone in Mr. Benston's position overlook that very important development?

For someone who we are trusting on an important committee, one that can levy large fines against individuals and organizations, and who cost the taxpayers $40,000 in a blink of the eye - Mr. Benston shows frightening ignorance or at least a cavalier attitude towards speaking without knowing the facts.  This coincides with his endless bloviating during EC meetings, calling everything he disagrees with "spurious", while the attorney meter is running at $200-$400 an hour.

Mr. Benston and others on the committee took this lawsuit personally, and said as much, and many times in Mr. Benston's case.  They then coincidentally went after one of the plaintiffs (Longmont Leadership Committee) and fined no other entity.  I stand by every word I wrote and reiterate, based on actual events and not faulty memory, that some members of this group showed blatant bias and political favoritism.  It appears he still doesn't get the point of the lawsuit, which is sad and troubling for someone who is in such a position, that forced speech still goes against the First Amendment.  A federal judge agreed.  No judge has agreed with any statement Mr. Benston or anyone with his same opinion has made.  The city voted to change those 19 words - apparently they agree as well.

This is all the more reason to seriously gut the responsibilities of the Election Committee.  It should become an advisory board no more powerful or important than any other.  It should have no business as a quasi-judicial body, as has been clearly shown that they can't control themselves - to the detriment of taxpayers.  The only reasonable, objective, and non-blatant bias and favoritism I witnessed was displayed by Mrs. Champion, Mr. Tiger, and Mr. Bernard.  The others showed varying levels of spite, emotion that's not acceptable in a quasi-judicial setting, vengeful attitudes towards those of differing politics, and plain old ignorance of the ordinance.

If this committee continues in any kind of quasi-judicial role, it's pretty clear Mr. Benston doesn't deserve to be anywhere near it based on his guest editorial.  And in case you're wondering if his rants that have nothing to do with Longmont that he makes during Public Invited To Be Heard appear in his comments from his EC seat - yes they do.

Read more

Unabashed favoritism

(Copy of letter e-mailed to both publications.)

The way The Denver Post and Longmont Times-Call are promoting their favorite liberal politicians lately, giving them glowing publicity of the kind and extent that no conservative could ever hope for, I’m wondering what sort of ethical standard for journalistic fairness today’s newspapers follow.

The Post’s display of ecstasy over Mayor Hickenlooper’s gubernatorial candidacy defies description. The syrup oozed all over the front page and spilled over inside. It’s as if we had never seen nor heard of this fellow.

Under the headline “Call to order” (1-14-10 Times-Call), readers were exposed to similar fawning involving another liberal, this time it was State Senator Brandon Shaffer of Longmont, whose photo graced half the newspaper’s front page and the minutia-filled story with more photos went on and on to occupy nearly a whole page inside. And this is news?

While it is an honor for Shaffer to have been selected by his peer group to lead the Colorado Senate, it is not the first time that a Longmont resident was chosen by his fellow senators to serve in a leadership role.

Back before Art. IV of the Colorado Constitution was amended in 1974, the lieutenant governor automatically served as president of the senate. From 1877 to 1974, the senate leader, elected by members, bore the title of senate president pro tem. At the fourth legislative session in 1883, Rienzi Streeter of Longmont was selected by members to serve as leader (president pro tem) of the Colorado Senate. Streeter also had the distinction of serving as speaker of the house during the second session, in 1879. I doubt that he received 1 1/2 pages of glowing publicity.

I may be an old-fashioned journalist, but I still believe that political favoritism belongs on the opinion pages, not in news reports.

P.

Read more

DF please contact me

The mental patients in town can be so predictable.

I figured it was just a matter of time before some would hint that I was someone other than who I am, AGAIN.

First I was Longmont Report - FALSE

I'm sure they thought I was Front Range Chickens - FALSE

There's probably other accusations I've forgotten by now, but they were FALSE, too.

Now it's a poster on the Times-Call website named "DF" - FALSE

But I'm thoroughly enjoying this DF take the loons to task and invite him/her/it to contact me.  I know you probably can't contribute to this site as my contributors use their real name (or a moniker that doesn't hide their identity like Voice of Longmont or Longmont Examiner).  Just like I said at the City Council Open Forum, I don't have to promote my website (which was a joke meant for Jonathan Singer, not an insult.  To prove it, here's a link to his website), it does fairly well all by itself.  Nor do I have to hide behind false names.  And it was physically impossible for me to post some of those posts in question.  But logic rarely enters the argument with some people.

Of course these same people themselves are using nicknames on the Times-Call website, they may think they're being clever but they're sloppy.  We know who you are, some of it is painfully obvious.  Have fun, whatever, but spare the crocodile tears accusing others of doing exactly what you are doing.  I personally haven't forgotten the "anonymous" comments left at a now defunct website (thanks to these creeps) and the blatant racist comments they made towards me.  Ain't no taking that back, and I'm sure there's a special place being kept warm for you.

Read more

Required occasional housekeeping

Like I've said before, with every word you're either preaching to the choir or ticking off those that never agree with you.  Luckily that first group are the normal, decent people in the city and I've met a lot of them.  The latter group most of you don't know and wouldn't want to associate with.  From time to time, but not very often, I decide to deal with these cockroaches in one form or another.  (Fans of the site may get bored, my feelings won't be hurt if you stop reading here)

At a recent Longmont City Council meeting I put to rest a bunch of misinformation about my appointment to the Airport Advisory Board.  As if on cue, and probably practicing for hours or days, the same detractor who went to great lengths to question my appointment approached me.  In the expected rude and cowardly manner that these people operate she made some snotty comment (which was uninformed drivel) and then without wanting to hear any response practically ran out of council chambers.  Literally.

Then there's our local version of, hmm, I guess paparazzi?  You know the kind you see and love that follow people around, hound them, sniffing at their heels, taking their pictures, etc.  The leeches that latch on to people who matter in some way.  Well, I guess I've moved into the position of being hounded by these types.  The funniest part is all the stuff they attribute to me furthering this position; like attributing websites and comments I have nothing to do with.

It's hilarious how on one hand I'm accused of commenting under a nickname in all corners of the web, yet at the same time hear complaints that my actual name is getting too much ink!  Man, do I get around!  It's almost superhuman, and pretty much impossible as I have a life, family, and career.  And these losers know that as they try to pry into every part of your life in and out of politics.  See, cockroaches and leeches aren't too far off, right?

Let's set this straight.  When I want to be seen, heard, or read, I can make it happen.  I don't need to beg or hide in an anonymous fashion. Whether it be a Guest Editorial in the Times-Call, or this blog - which as soon as I publish gets an instant hundred views on average.  Not bragging, just the way it is.  When I wrote for Examiner.Com I was always in the Top 5 in the nation for my category, which was a pretty big and broad category.  When I submitted my suggestions to the Election Committee (EC) for changes to the Longmont Fair Campaign Practices Act (LFCPA), my name showed up more than any actual member in the communication to City Council on proposed changes - and I'm not even on the committee.  Was it because it was me?  No.  It's because they were good and common sense suggestions.  

I've been called the Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck of Longmont, but how about E.F. Hutton?  Their motto:  "When E.F. Hutton talks, people listen."

Apparently, if you read and believe what some of these detractors say, I'm mostly responsible for how this last election went!  Well, okay, if you say so.  I did volunteer to varying degrees, but mostly (if you believe what they say) I did the most damage right here from this keyboard.  Okay, I'll accept that, too.  It appears to be a winning formula, and one I intend to repeat as often as necessary.  And that is the issue, when you get right down to it.  They hate it when I'm right and when I win.  Whether it's the recent LFCPA lawsuit, the recent election, how their elected leaders are all falling flat on their face - see, I'm responsible for all of that!  If you recall, even a clueless councilmember credited me with lost jobs and slumping home sales.

How can one person do all this?  They can't, and these people are delusional to put it mildly, on top of being obsessed.  I don't read it all, I get emails about it, but why waste my time with the cretins of Longmont?  What purpose does it serve?  And why should I even respond to any of it?  The airport board thing, yeah, the record needed to be set straight there.  But the rest of this...it borders on the hysterical, as in nuts, not funny.  You probably won't see any of it unless you really go hunting as reputable online sites remove these comments, and NO, not by any of my doing (yet another charge hurled at me).  If only I had half the power and influence credited to me.  But thanks anyway.

The other beaut is this claim that I'm trying to silence people.  As I made very clear in comments at an EC Meeting (directed at local loon Kaye Fissinger, but applicable to them all), I'd never dream of wanting to silence any of them.  It's comedy gold and more fodder than I know what to do with.  I think they realize this, which when they get made fun of, or worse, not getting the attention they crave, they get even more abrasive.  Now I've been made aware of another local leftwing lunatic fringer that is mentioning me by name and taking pictures of me and posting them to a Flickr account.  This is the same clown that had to apologize for making a physical threat against me, and was told by the local police to stop referencing me - which lasted for a little while (sort of like that apology for threatening me with a 2x4) but apparently not enough people are paying attention to him lately.


Oh, did I mention they hate the name WRONGMONT?!  My crown jewel.

Anyway, you may or may not know who these people are.  If you do, you know they are some of the most hateful and miserable people you'd ever run across.  If it lacks common sense, they're for it.  If it's anything of a traditional nature, they're against it.  Some even claim to be Christian yet spew some of the nastiest anti-religious and anti-Christian hyperbole you'll ever hear.  And they aren't just merely losers, they're sore losers.  And I'm more than happy to help continue their losing streak.

See how this is a rare treat, this time being wasted on them - eh, it's a slow news day.

Read more

2009: What a year!

2009 was quite an eventful year for the City of Longmont, regardless of where you stand on the issues.  Obviously, it was better for some than others.  Personally, it was pretty busy but overall pretty satisfying, too.

So lets go through it, month by month:

January - Since I was still writing aviation related articles at Examiner.Com, the Longmont Examiner (my wife) picked up some of the slack of what was going on around town.  One of her first stories of the year was about the ongoing issue between George Marxmiller and the city over a ditch in his backyard.  As of the end of the year, it appears this situation has been resolved to Mr. Marxmillers liking.  The backyard chicken debate took a turn for the bizarre as a lady came to city council dressed like a chicken.  This issue took up far too much council time, but was eventually passed via ordinance.  On the day of President Obama's inauguration, a couple councilmembers, in particular a bumbling Sean McCoy, couldn't contain their soon to evaporate glee.  As the progressives in town tried to convince people they invented the theory of a "day of service", contributor Dave Larison reminded everyone of LifeBridge Church's ongoing activity in this area.

February - Feb 19th marked the day when normal people of the country (non-leftists, progressives, or liberals) decided to fight back against generational theft with Porkulus rallies around the country.  Longmont was represented by yours truly and future mayor Bryan Baum.  Around this same time, the nonstop parade of nuts continued their tirades at Public Invited To Be Heard, all caught on tape!  Longmont's State Senator Brandon Shaffer voted against transparency for school district financial reporting.  The Chamber of Commerce hosted "Unity in the Community", apparently some people didn't get the word.  Councilmember Sean McCoy said we should support paying for higher education for illegal aliens.

March - Rocky Mountain Chocolate Factory leaves the Twin Peaks Mall.  Maybe Councilmember Karen Benker should have used them instead of Doves when lobbying for state funding, which occurred around the same time.  Longmont's State Representative Jack Pommer sponsored yet another attempt at screwing with how Colorado splits up it's Electoral College votes.  FasTracks starts going off the rail, as former supporter Dave Larison explains why he can't support it any longer.  The Longmont Fair Campaign Practices Act becomes law and the politically charged issue of picking those on the Election Committee is discussed.  The never ending saga of prairie dogs at the airport starts up again, this time it lasts for months, and does not end well for the prairie dogs.  Another of the never ending saga's is the radicals assault on the LifeBridge/Union development - this time it's over a drainage culvert.  Vote!Longmont makes its concerns known about the LFCPA at Public Invited To Be Heard - they should have listened, would have saved hundreds of thousands of dollars.

April - Longmont's US Representative Betsy Markey got the first of what would be repeated attacks from her own people, this time over her vote against Obama's budget.  Later it would be healthcare, where local loons savaged her for not staying in line.  Jack Pommer gets caught breaking campaign rules and owed $20,000 in fines.  Dave Larison pointed out the purely political appointments to city boards.  As I started writing less about aviation and more about Longmont and politics, I pointed out how easily people were "Obamboozled".  This was less than 4 months into a presidency that would continue a downward slide.  In what became a front page story in the Times-Call, I exposed the shaky financial ground Thistle Community Housing was on, which was followed by a terminated agreement with them.

May - In the ongoing fiasco at Twin Peaks Mall, Councilmember Brian Hansen proclaims we don't need a new theater, we have Netflix!  I started my weekly Longmont Foreclosure report, things were not looking good.  Contributor Greg Burt writes of LIFT's frustration with the city over the mall.  FOXNews covers our airports prairie dog issue as the city sets aside $14,000 on a fence that will eventually be taken back down within months.  Longmont then begins to kill prairie dogs after being threatened of witheld funding by the FAA.

June - A judge declares Longmonts annexations near the Union project null and void, yet the Bloc of 4 press on blindly.  Councilmembers float the idea of pulling legal ads away from the Times-Call.  Councilmembers continue to ignore the Open Meetings requirement to forward emails to the city's server.  I did my first radio interview on the Amy Oliver Show.  In mid-June I resign as the Denver Aviation Examiner and devote more time to local politics.  Longmont Examiner takes on city council over their mosquito spraying policy, or lack thereof.  Brandon Shaffer gets caught having a Democrat-only retreat on our tax dime.  Contributor Nicolle Pratt slams leftist radical Kaye Fissinger and Karen Benker over the Union project.  Rubber stamping Betsy Markey goes along with the job killing "cap and trade" bill.  Councilmember Sarah Levison wants to find ways to collect taxes from estate sales, the dead can't even escape her.

July - Karen Benker pledges a whopping $66 towards furloughed city employees.  Dave Larison points out yet another $11 million spent on Boulder Co open space.  Longmont drops off the list of "best places to live".  Sarah Levison essentially drives the BMX track out of Longmont after requesting they pay a higher fee.  Contributor Stephanie Baum takes on a local leftwing slime machine after he gets shut down by Mayor Lange as the crowd applauded during a city council meeting.  Councilmember Gabe Santos tries to make a motion to end the lawsuits with Firestone as Sarah Levison interrupts and Mayor Lange refuses to allow it.  Council votes to direct staff to come up with a resolution to end the Clover Basin Fire Tax.

August - In what would later become a major point of a successful lawsuit against the city, I point out some problems with the recently amended campaign rules.  Karen Benker says Twin Peaks Mall is a "dying mall".  Greg Burt writes about Karen Benker using her poltical influence for a favored non-profit, HOPE.  The Times-Call sues the City of Longmont over a vote taken during one of the many executive sessions.  I took the first of many shots at our local Obama-love operation Organizing For America (OFA) as they spread their lies about healthcare.  Transparency becomes a major issue due to email rules being broken and the unprecedented number of secret executive sessions.  I wrote a primer for the upcoming election.  Longmont's chapter of OFA part of national issue over unsolicited emails.  Sean McCoy goes on a tirade calling members of the public all kinds of names.  I answered Karen Benkers ridiculous charge (which Sean McCoy repeated) about bloggers driving away businesses and jobs.  Contributor Rich Yale calls out Sean McCoy on his childish antics.  While playing Mayor, Karen Benker cuts off speakers at public invited to be heard.  Wrongmont revived for the upcoming election.

September - I first write about the LFCPA's restrictions on and forcing of certain kinds of speech.  After supporting a civility committee, Sean McCoy gets pretty uncivil.  Longmont Examiner demands that the city reveal the costs of all the current litigation.  In an obvious campaign stunt, Karen Benker says she ended the Clover Basin Fire tax, which of course was false.  Sean McCoy makes a non-apology apology for his recent antics.  I become part of a group of plaintiffs that sues the city over the LFCPA.  News of past open meetings problems for Karen Benker with RTD is uncovered.  Sean McCoy plays the blame game over the airport prairie dog issue.  Volunteers for Karen Benkers campaign take down Katie Witt signs or place Benker ones in front of them on private property without permission.

October - Karen Benker and I duel on the editorial page over her open records problems.  A push-poll becomes an issue as a Benker plant tries to catch Katie Witt off gaurd at a Chamber of Commerce debate.  The Boulder Weekly does a big story on the contentious Longmont election.  Karen Benker and Kaye Fissinger stalk citizens as they drive around town looking up certain addresses of political enemies.  Times-Call makes their endorsements for the upcoming election.  Karen Benker uses the Election Committee as her re-election committee filing one complaint after another (eventually costing the city tens of thousands of dollars).  Longmont finally votes to actually end the Clover Basin Fire tax, proving the earlier claims by Benker and her supporters false.  After making complaints about robo-calls, Karen Benker makes some of her own.  I point to all the reasons why Katie Witt should win in her race against Karen Benker - and I was right.  Candidate Bill Van Dusen makes incorrect assumptions on reasoning of LFCPA lawsuit, does not help his candidacy.  Federal court judge grants preliminary injunction against the city in the LFCPA lawsuit, which paved the way for the eventual succesful outcome for the plaintiffs.  Longmont Ledger comes on the scene to try to take some ad sales away from the Times-Call.  Longmont version of YourHub stops being printed.  I call out political favoritism and bias on the Election Committee.  Firestone gets creative with their annexations basically cutting off Longmont's legal attempts to stop Union.  My "Vote Out The Progressives" op-ed runs in the Times-Call, people took my advice.  As campaign reports roll in, it's obvious where the financial support was, and wasn't.  Karen Benker supporters resort to flat out lying in various publications.

November - Dave Larision writes "The Bloc is busted" as Karen Benker and Roger Lange are ousted from city council, and Katie Witt, Bryan Baum, and Alex Sammoury are elected and Gabe Santos is re-elected.  Longmont Area Democrats "pray for locusts" as they lick their wounds.  Wrongmont signs off after a successful campaign season run.  Pulling a Marilyn Musgrave, Karen Benker refuses to concede or congratulate Katie Witt, and basically disappears from sight.  I got invited back to the Amy Oliver Show to talk about our recent election.  On a KGNU radio show, the leftwing whiners come out in force, not always using their real names, and go after myself and others.  My guest editorial "Longmont never leaned left" runs in the Times-Call.  As the prairie dog problem slowly stops being a problem, I introduce "The Rodenator"!  Dave Larison answers 10 preposterous questions posed by the losers of the recent election.

December - I get appointed to the Airport Advisory Board - much crying and whining from Sarah Levison and some other nobody ensues.  Dave Larison writes of the Board of Environmental Affairs, and how their 3 year quest for more power is blunted by the new city council.  I call for a scrapping of the Longmont Fair Campaign Practices Act, or at least a major rewrite.  Airport prairie dog fence is pulled down, wasting around $14,000 on this foolish idea.  City hit with $40,000 bill for legal services during Election Committee meetings, all for around $700 in fines.
--------------------------------------------
 See what I mean?  What a year!  We'll call it "The Perfect Storm".  I have a hard time believing 2010 will be as eventful considering there is no local election this year.  Now, how about some predictions?  Maybe another time.

Read more

Staggering bill for Election Committee hearings

In my recent "Scrap the Longmont Fair Campaign Practices Act" I said "The financial cost to the city (special counsel and prosecutor) was in the thousands, while the fines levied were barely in the hundreds."  Apparently I was being too conservative.  The bill (up to this point) is in a city document that may make your jaw drop, even I was surprised.  Be prepared to be appalled.

Within the above document, there is a history of how we got here.  Readers digest version:  Then council candidate Gabe Santos received a $5,000 contribution, there was much crying and whining.  Council member Sarah Levison made the most noise on council and demanded something be done about it.  Along with the former bloc, she pushed through the idea of a Task Force who worked pretty hard at amending the ordinance.  Council member Levison, I'm told, inserted herself a little too much into these proceedings (many eyes rolled) and was heard to utter "Brennan Center" a few too many times for anyone's liking.  Figuring since she liked to hear herself talk endlessly, the others in the group must enjoy it as well (I'm told this was an incorrect assumption).

As predicted, City Council is presented with an ordinance, they discard this and that and end up with a lawsuit-inviting shipwreck.  They decide to invite a few people onboard the Titanic in the form of the Election Committee, what could go wrong?  Many on this committee aren't picked for actual election law knowledge, but because they're political buddies.  They (and this is said right in the city document) learn as they go along at an attorneys fee of around $400/hour.

Sarah Levison noted that to follow Brennan Center's example would give us a document with less of a chance of court challenges.  Well, we all know what happened there; in no time flat there was a court challenge and the City is eating it's lunch, a very expensive one to the tune of around $75,000.  Add to that some of the LFCPA is on the verge of being stripped of some of its language.  So much for the Brennan Center.

But it gets better, and back to the point of this story.  The Election Committee's kangaroo court collected a grand total of $700 in fines.  What were the attorney's fee's to collect that $700?  Estimated at $39,048.  That's right, almost 40 grand!

Council member Levison's mistake, or at least uneducated incompetence, has set back the City of Longmont over $110,000!
 

Karen Benker was partially done in with the failing Twin Peaks Mall.

Sarah Levison has the Longmont Fair Campaign Practices Act.  I'm not sure which is worse.

There is $14,467 left in the City Council Contingency fund, staff is asking for all of it to partially cover this looming legal bill.  And the spending is not done yet, they just got started.

Also within that city document are suggested changes to the LFCPA.  To help out Council member Brian Hansen - all those suggestions that say Rodriguez next to them, that would be me - you know, the guy who's suing the city over the LFCPA.  He was confused about that recently.  Even though I wasn't on the committee, I submitted a ton of suggestions to make this ordinance a little more acceptable and not so much of a lawsuit smorgasbord.

But Ms. Levison and her followers knew better - as we can all see by the staggering bill that's come due.  Imagine if someone did this not within a bureaucracy, where incompetence like this is somewhat expected and sheltered, but at a company. Not only would someone get fired for this kind of performance, but probably charged with some kind of crime or wages garnished for a very long time.  But this is how people act when it's not really their money.

So, two big numbers to remember:  $110,000 down the drain / 2011 election.  Recalls of sitting council members are just too expensive - wait, now it's starting to make sense!  Then again, people could always just resign, that would probably be cheaper in the long run.

Read more

Clueing in the easily puzzled

It's a rare treat for your loyal editor and publisher to respond to the occasional sniping from the pointless peanut gallery.  If I did it all the time, I'd have nothing else to do, and it's boring to argue with the ignorant.

But someone (you've never heard of) has gone out of her way to mention me a couple of times in reference to a recent board appointment, so let me answer.  Her name is Paula Burr (just by typing that, her name exposure just went up 100 fold), an Obamabot from Organizing For America (which probably explains why she doesn't care for me or my appointment) and has repeatedly said she's "puzzled".  I'll try to unpuzzle.

After attending Airport Advisory Board meetings for several years, and often asked why I didn't apply for it, I finally did recently.  The reason I never did, not that it's anyone's business, was due to work schedule conflicts, which has been resolved.  Unfortunately, the timing of the interview process couldn't have been worse: they asked me when I could be available on a particular day, to which I answered, and they assigned me a time right in the middle of when I said I could not attend.  I don't have bankers hours, can't take phone calls on the job, nor am easily pulled away while at work - simple as that.

But, I sent an extensive letter to all council members apologizing and explaining why it was impossible for me to attend this interview and went through my rather lengthy background in aviation.  For all of my critics in town, rest assured, whatever you may think of my political writings and positions, my aviation background, all 25+ years of it, is substantial and I'm more than qualified to serve on this board.

But I heard some stories about this so-called interview process, where one applicant said all the council members (I believe it was Sarah Levison and Sean McCoy) were interested in was what the applicant thought of Tom Zweck and the St. Vrain Greenway!   Yes, those should be good indicators of aviation and airport knowledge, if that's what they were looking for.  My application had all the information any serious council member would need to make a decision, but it's obvious from comments and actions before and after the vote that these two council members, along with Brian Hansen, weren't and aren't serious.

One went around spreading bald faced lies about me, one acted like he wasn't sure I was the same Chris Rodriguez that was suing the city (duhh), and another is busily causing discord within the current board and will likely make a third attempt in 3 weeks to undo my appointment.  And that's not even half the story, but I'll leave it there for now.

But the puzzlement really has nothing to do with experience and suitability for the position, it's all about politics.  If people want to play dumb and pretend it's anything else (or are really just dumb), try doing a better job.  Ironically, these same people say my appointment was purely because of politics.  See what I mean?  Now you see why I don't usually argue with the clueless, confused, and ignorant?

Read more

Despite petition drive, prairie dog fence at Vance Brand Airport in Longmont is removed

You knew something was up when many advocates for prairie dogs filed into the Longmont City Council chambers last Tuesday night to make pleas on behalf of the ongoing issue of prairie dogs at Longmont's Vance Brand Airport. Others channeled world leaders and one was very persistent in being disruptive and placing signs within camera view of the live meeting.

But, speakers also stated that 3,500 people had sent emails and letters in support of the prairie dogs.

Read the rest of the story at Examiner.com

Read more

Scrap the Longmont Fair Campaign Practices Act

A version of this ran in the Tuesday December 15, 2009 Longmont Times-Call 
 

The Longmont City Council has an important decision to make in the near future:  what to do about the Longmont Fair Campaign Practices Act (LFCPA).  Whatever honeymoon the new council enjoys will probably come to a screeching halt regardless of how they move forward on this.  Inaction is not an option because of their 7-0 vote to end the lawsuit between the city and multiple plaintiffs (including myself) over the LFCPA, and the terms of that probable settlement.

This was a good first step as it was clear the city would eventually lose this case, might as well stop the financial bleeding now.  Hopefully they will continue this thought process of ending the costly and losing litigation in the cases with Firestone and the Times-Call.  It will hurt a little bit now, but much more later if these pointless cases continue.

Options in this LFCPA matter:

1. Put the ordinance on hold while it is rewritten to reflect the Federal judge's preliminary injunction (Independent Expenditures, electioneering changes, etc)
2. Dissolve the LFCPA and the Election Committee (EC) completely and hit the "reset" button
   

Cold hard truths
Let's face some facts:  This entire exercise starting in early 2008 was a tool of the now deposed "bloc", with some outside help and cheerleading by Richard Juday and some loyal bloc mouthpieces.  It was a direct shot at Gabe Santos and the Longmont Association of Realtors (LAR) because of their (completely legal) $5,000 contribution to him.  LAR is also a plaintiff in this lawsuit, currently the legal bill to settle this case is $75,000!  That's what the City of Longmont will dish out to settle this case, and that bill goes up every day.  Thank you "Bloc et al"!

I believe most on the Election Task Force had the right idea (that's been tossed around for years) to decriminalize the election code, but some members of that task force and city council wanted to go way too far, coming up with the monstrosity we're now stuck with.  It's an ordinance that a federal judge and the Election Committee's legal counsel and prosecutor have told them repeatedly has some possible unconstitutional aspects to it.  And now we must deal with it.

The Election Committee

I'm the only member of the public that has attended every single Election Committee (EC) meeting, other than some of the members themselves.  It's a shame that current city councilmembers didn't witness these meetings, but probably a blessing that the general public didn't witness them.  These meetings ranged from excruciating, to interesting, to embarrassing - and I'm not just talking about the committee members, but also witnesses and complainants.  Far from a high point in Longmont's history, take my word for it.

Some of the members at times showed blatant bias and favoritism, complete ignorance of the LFCPA, or both.  The financial cost to the city (special counsel and prosecutor) was in the thousands, while the fines levied were barely in the hundreds.  The EC should be stripped of all enforcement actions involving violations and fines - and if there's still some version of an election code, just be tasked with amending it as necessary and then be dissolved.  This has turned into the kangaroo court I had predicted it would because of some, not all, of the members and their actions.

What to do with the LFCPA

This ordinance has been a monumental failure.

• It hasn't lowered the amount of contributions as desired, there was more money contributed.  
• It didn't lessen outside forces getting involved in our election, it increased them.  
• It didn't produce a fair and unbiased body to deliberate possible violations.
• It invited a huge and costly lawsuit to the City of Longmont.
• It got regional attention for its unconstitutionality.
• It echoes the disastrous McCain/Feingold federal campaign law and the headaches that has brought us.
• It will more than likely be used as case law and precedent for other lawsuits against municipalities with similar intentions.

Is this really what we want Longmont to be known for?

Luckily we can fix the mistakes of the past, but city council should not wait too long.  We're under more of a microscope than some people may realize, we need to do this quickly, and right.  End this fiasco, and put this ordinance temporarily or permanently out of its misery.  Or at least severely overhaul it.  Give us something we can be proud of, and not embarassed over.

Read more

Enviro board stopped in its tracks

It's becoming obvious that radical environmentalism is one of the chief weapons left-wing Progressives use to impose their socialistic will on individuals, businesses, and free markets. We see it on the national scene with a deluge of climate change propaganda and carbon cap & trade talk, and locally with green building mania and open space overkill.

It seems the city of Longmont's Board of Environmental Affairs (BEA) wanted to get in on the act as well, not surprisingly with lefty zealots Kaye Fissinger and Richard Juday onboard as dominating members. The BEA proposed an ordinance to change the municipal code so they could "proactively" provide input to city council. In other words, they could stick their noses in all city business and affairs as only enviro-Statist types know how to do.

But newly-elected Longmont Mayor Bryan Baum would have no part of this Progressive power play. In perhaps his finest moment to date as mayor, Baum put the BEA in its place as seen in this council meeting video...



The BEA ordinance was subsequently tabled on first reading with Councilmembers Baum, Santos, Witt, and Sammoury voting against the proposal, and three predictable votes in favor by Democrats McCoy, Hansen, and Levison. In a related move later in the meeting, Richard Juday's seat on the BEA was not extended by councilmembers voting in the same way.

Longmont is already reaping the rewards of a new conservative and principled council majority, not the mindless left-wing activism of the bygone Benker Bloc.

Read more