President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%↓

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

90%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

90%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks

40%

30%

20%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) J. Sonnenberg

(R) Ted Harvey

20%↑

15%↑

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank

(R) Doug Bruce

20%

20%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

90%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen

85%↑

 

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi

60%↑

40%↑

20%↑

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
January 26, 2010 01:15 AM UTC

At Least He's Not Your Mayor*

  • 37 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

*Longmont residents, so sorry. The Daily Times-Call reports:

Mayor Bryan Baum wants to limit the amount of time the public is allowed to address the City Council at the beginning of council meetings…

“Honestly, I get tired by the end of it, and when we do the city’s business, we need to be sharp,” said Baum. “I think the business of the council and the city has to be paramount.”

This was one of several procedural changes Baum suggested to fellow council members at the conclusion of its two-day retreat late Saturday afternoon…

But some council members expressed concern about people wanting to address council being shut out.

“The price tag of a transparent society is we have to let everybody speak,” said councilman Sean McCoy. “There’s going to be an equity issue.”

Councilman Brian Hansen said that some people have families or other commitments that would preclude them from sitting through an entire meeting if they miss out on the first public invited to be heard. He also noted that 90-minute public-invited-to-heard segments are “pretty rare,” and said that even though it does make for long meetings, it was important to hear from all residents who want to speak.

“We all signed up for that,” Hansen said.

“I just wanted to bring it up because I do think we need some changes,” replied Baum. “I just think it’s ridiculous to be there an hour and a half and listen to the same thing over and over again.”

Yeah–those annoying citizens and their piffling comments. Who can be bothered?

Another change suggested by Mayor Bryan Baum regarding public comments during council meetings would allow himself and city council members to interrupt “respond immediately to” citizens at the microphone, as opposed to the usual elementary school good manners approach of letting people finish their sentences.

Mayor Baum, if you recall, took power during last year’s GOP-backed triumph in Longmont’s local elections. Ironically, the main charge leveled against the former city government by Baum and the well-funded Republican message groups who descended on Longmont last fall was that the city was “not listening to the voters.” So much for that, eh?

If Baum’s little gesture of respect for the citizens reminds you of, for example, Republican Jefferson County commissioners installing a ‘mute’ button on the public-comment microphone in their chambers, it’s probably not a coincidence. Once you ride that angry populist wave into office, the best thing to do, apparently, is shut the rabble up.

Comments

37 thoughts on “At Least He’s Not Your Mayor*

  1. There really is nothing more annoying than being forced to listen, for hours on end, to the concerns of you know…the people you were elected to serve.  

  2. What’s the big deal? Citizens are not allowed to speak during regular council mtgs in Denver. When a public hearing is allowed for a bill, it is limited to one hour (two hours for comments about marijuana) and each speaker gets only three minutes to speak. Why aren’t you calling out Hickenlooper for these shocking anti-citizen limits?

    1. Longmont has a population of over 500,000 people now?

      Did Hickenlooper change the public comment policy three months after taking office? Has he ever once said that listening to his constituents “makes him tired?”

      Lame…

    2. Apparently the theme of the meeting escaped you or you just didn’t bother to read the article.

      Frustrated by last Tuesday night’s first “public invited to be heard” segment of the council meeting

      1. The reality of Hickenlooper’s position is that he never has to face the public in a meeting. There are no “public invited to be heard” segments of denver meetings, not unless council votes to allow a hearing for limited comment on a limited subject. Hickenlooper does not even attend city council meetings.

        He’s not your mayor, obviously. If he were, you’d know he doesn’t ever have to sit in a public meeting and listen to public comments. Unless he chooses to. And he doesn’t.

        Facts.

        1. Because your whiny ass bitch fest about Hickenlooper isn’t what this diary is about. It’s about Longmont. The above block quote you are responding to is about Longmont. You know, Longmont–north of Boulder, about 3 miles west of I25.

          But do feel free to write a big old opus about it. Who knows? I might even front page it.

          1. My, my. Awfully touchy. It’s fun to call out a Republican mayor of a Republican town and accuse him of being somehow anti-citizen… until you realize that the bigshot Democrat mayor of Democrat Denver has even less regard for citizen comments at public meetings.

            When a Republican does it, it’s brilliant front-page fodder on Pols. When a Democrat does it, it’s a “whiny ass bitch fest.”

            Heh heh.

            1. I hate to burst your bubble but no, you didn’t strike a nerve. I just have zero tolerance for stupid people. No offense Skippy, of course.  

            2. Last I heard, Hickenlooper (1) was not proposing changes to existing Denver laws and (2) was not elected on a promise of “listening to the voters.”

              You and your ilk are so quick to accuse others of not listening, shouting “You lie!” and the like, but then, when the Tea Party crowd gets elected, you try to shut everyone else up through threats, intimidation, and ridicule

              “Heh heh.” Indeed.

    3. What does Hickenlooper have to do with city council meetings?  Unlike the Longmont mayor apparently, the Denver mayor doesn’t sit on the council.  Thus, he doesn’t run the council’s meetings.  

    4. Colorado Gov. 101.  Denver has a strong mayor system, which in this case means he doesn’t have a seat, or a voice, on the city council but serves as an executive.  It’s like the governor not having any say over the legislature’s rules, got it.

        Suburban cities, including if memory serves, Longmont, have a council manager system.  In such cities, the “mayor” sits on the city council, votes on the council, and acts as the presiding officer of the council.  Mayor Baum’s equivalent, in terms of setting rules before city council, is thus city council president Michael Hancock, not Hickenlooper.

        Thus, the reason

      Why aren’t you calling out Hickenlooper for these shocking anti-citizen limits?

       is that we actually know what we’re talking about.

        1. that I can seldom resist when a blogger like Skip posts what amounts to a bit “Kick Me!” sign for public comment.  I guess it’s a character flaw on my part 😉

      1. Now, that you’re all in the post-climax, cigarette-smoking phase of this thread, let’s get back to the point:

        Why is limited public comment evil in Longmont, but laudable in Denver?

        1. which specifically was directed at the role of the mayor.  

          But that’s OK, I understand that it may be easier than acknowledging that you got schooled.  

  3. Most public meetings have some sort of limitation on the amount of public comment permitted, and essentially all preserve the right of the chair to end it if there is not a pre-set time.

    “Respond immediately to” sounds much preferred to the usual practice of letting everyone in the audience make a comment before providing any kind of response.

    It isn’t clear if there is a policy of accepting written comment by those not present, but that is a much better way to open up input than having hours of citizen comments (and while many are well informed, some are confused or rambling).

    1. I think this was more about appearances than legalisms. The article plainly says they have limits, Mayor Baum just wants to make them shorter. That looks bad to democracy liking people.

      And maybe you like the idea of interrupting citizens making comments, but aren’t you a lawyer?

      1. The way the current council meetings are run, the council can’t make any comment (except a “thank you”) to a speaker.  The council must wait until Council Comments at the very end of the meeting to respond.  The Mayor doesn’t want the power to interrupt a speaker, he wants to give the power to the council to respond to questions after the speaker is done speaking, but before the council comments (which is several hours after the question is asked) – to me this sounds like better governance, no?

  4. Do council business when everyone is sharp and then let the public have their say at the end.  The public gets an education in stupidity having to sit through a council meeting and are ready to tee it up when their turn comes.  It’s a win/win for the voters.  An education in civics and a chance to sound off.

    1. is if citizens speak last, the Council has already finished its business without their input.  Granted, if they speak first, the council may ignore their input.  But at least the possibility of affecting policy exists if citizens speak before the meeting.

  5. And I’m not talking about this new council.  Yes, everyone run over to http://www.freerangelongmont.com and read all the whimsical fancy dreamed up by the extreme Progresive Left in Longmont – all 12 of them – to try and make it look like the Conservatives who now rule are in trouble.  Far from it my friends!  Don’t be fooled by the shiny new webpage.  Fact is, our new Mayor threw out a suggestion during the council retreat and the left has jumped on it as if it was signed in to law.  They’re running so scared right now that they’re inventing things to get everyone whipped up in to a frenzy about in the hope that something will stick.  It was suggested that the first call for Public Invited to be Heard be limited to 30 minutes so that the business of the day could be attended to.  The public would still be called to speak at the public hearing for each agenda item being voted on and would still be called for the Final call for public invited to be heard at the end of the meeting when the business of the day has been done – as it is, the council listened to an hour and a half of the first call to be heard last week.  Does a town of 80,000 really need to spend 90 minutes listening to the same people say the same thing week after week?  The meeting went 4 hours and 47 minutes (starting at 7:00pm that’s ending just shy of midnight, folks)!  The Progressives are essentially filibustering and causing this council to have to move business back each week because they can’t get it done by midnight!  It’s time to end the silliness and let our council get to work!  And oh by the way, this council didn’t run on a platform of “listening to the people” – that was the last council – the one that had 1/2 of it voted out this past November and will have the other 1/2 voted out in 2011.  This council ran on a platform of making Longmont Business friendly once again.

      1. Guess you’re not from Longmont. Baum ran on a platform that Longmont was “open for business”.  I’m merely defining what he really was saying.

        1. Just a quick tip: Danny was replying to Mayor Baum’s errrrr, McGuillicuty’s comment, not yours. If you’re ever confused, you can click on “parent” and it will show you who was replying to whom.

  6. People are worried about the Mayor’s pattern of treating citizens here.

    Longmont has started an annual tradition where a City Council Session is converted to purely an open forum that anyone can participate in.  Citizens can come and talk to City Council about any subject they want.  Often Council will even engage in a thoughtful trading of ideas.  It is, dare I say it? … Progressive.  

    However things went a little awry this year.

    From Jan. 13 Times-Call


    The Longmont City Council held its third annual open forum Tuesday night, tossing out its usual formal agenda in order to give anybody the opportunity to come speak with their elected officials about, well, anything.

    The mood swung drastically from the start of the meeting, when council members and residents were jovial and joking, to the end when Steve King, a Nederland resident who recently lived in Longmont, told the council that its decision last week to not fund a rebate program for solar photovoltaic systems was “irresponsible.”

    King and Mayor Bryan Baum argued about the council’s decision to not pony up $150,000 in order to get $150,000 from the state to provide property owners with rebates to install solar photovoltaic systems.

    “It’s not fair to the rest of the community,” Baum said. “I don’t care what you say about that, I will vote that way 100 times over.”

    He added, “To say that we acted irresponsibly? I will debate that every time. ”

    King, who installs solar-energy systems, said there are other communities that are in “a lot more dire straits than Longmont that are offering better incentives.”

    Baum replied, “Then maybe you should go live there.”

    You can see the whole article here – http://www.timescall.com/News_

    I can understand a mayor saying, “I disagree with you.”  Or even saying “I think you’re wrong here, but I hope there are other parts of the City that will keep you coming back.”  I am sure that is what ousted Mayor Roger Lange would have done.  Instead, Mr. Baum essentially says, “Longmont.  Love it, or leave it.”

    At least the left wing in this town is approaching this with a sense of humor. http://www.freerangelongmont.com looks like they are  taking a cue from http://www.frontrangechickens.com and then turning it on its’ side.

    1. I guess that’s up to me.  The person speaking wasn’t a Longmont citizen, he was a Nederland citizen (he made that quite clear) and the Mayor wasn’t saying he should leave Longmont to move to another community, he was saying if he liked those other communities better, leave Nederland.  This was no “Longmont.  Love it, or leave it.” this was “Nederland:  Love it, or leave it.”.  Steve King came to the the council with a combative agenda for which he later wrote council a full letter of apology for his actions.  You can read that here: Steve King Apology Letter.

      1. Are you saying it did not disclose who Steve King was?

        In the Times-Call article I quoted, it specifically states

        Steve King, a Nederland resident who recently lived in Longmont

        .  

        My interpretation of the exchange was Longmont, love it or leave it.

        I agree with you that Steve showed some class by  apologizing for the way the interaction went.  But people can look at a clip of the “discussion” themselves at

        http://www.freerangelongmont.c

        for the short version.  Or the whole thing at

        http://65.49.32.143/maportal/p

        I just think the Mayor could have gotten his message across without interrupting as much and speaking positively about Longmont.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

95 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!