President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Kamala Harris
(R) Donald Trump
80%↑
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) V. Archuleta
98%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Marshall Dawson
95%
5%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Hurd
(D) Adam Frisch
50%
50%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(D) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank
(D) River Gassen
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) John Fabbricatore
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen
(R) Sergei Matveyuk
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
52%↑
48%↓
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
October 25, 2007 04:33 AM UTC
32 Comments
Are you working for A-I, one of the sponsers of ColoradoPols? A lot of money floating around supporting the A-I….
Maybe my terminology is off…are entities who advertise on ColoradoPols sponsors of the blog? or just advertisers? or is there a difference?
We’re not going to post any big dissertations on the benefits of Freight Rail.
Actually, I’ll be forthcoming: I’m not making a dime by posting this diary. I’m not sure how I’ll vote on all the issues, so I thought I’d solicit opinions.
Not sure, that is, except for the marijuana issue: a resounding YES from this voter.
It made me guffaw and then sigh: “the war on drugs makes the war on terror look winnable.”
We are being bombared with campaign literature…all pro a-1….so I asked, you replied, thanks.
For me, no on all the tax increases..too much too soon….i don’t know where the money went….so I am sure that there are legtimate targets in the alphabet soup…but right now I can’t sort it all out…let them come around again..without the big advertising bucks…and some answers instead of dances….money is a real concern for us…
I am absolutely with you on the marijuana issue. i know it is not specifcally medical marijuana….but that is cause for me and mine…
I’ve received a ton of mailers on A-1, too.
Former City Councilwoman At-Large Susan Barnes-Gelt’s take on the issues. She has been an outspoken critic of the mayor but is supporting on this issue because the money is vital to re-invigorate Denver’s infrastructure which is beginning to show serious signs of stress and age. . . .
http://www.denverpos…
I think that blurb is on one of the pieces of mail I received….
As a libertarian, I don’t believe in any drug laws/restrictions for adults. So, YES on dope.
As a fiscal conservative, I say: “no new taxes”. So, NO on A thru I.
My ballot has been sent in.
Unfortunately with all the Rockies hype, there was no attention paid to the endorsements Initiated Question 100 received today.
The measure was endorsed by:
– a retired 36-year veteran of the Denver PD
– ACLU of Colorado
– Colorado Criminal Defense Bar
– National Lawyers Guild Colorado Chapter
– Rocky Mountain Peace and Justice Center
– ProgressNow Action
– Libertarian Party of Colorado
– Green Party of Colorado
– Sensible Colorado
The legal director of the ACLU made it clear that this measure is totally legal and perfectly implementable. In fact, the City of Missoula, which passed a similar “lowest law enforcement priority” law last year, just implemented a policy directing police to not arrest adults for marijuana possession.
http://missoulian.co…
Those ARE big endorsements!
Too bad the cops enforce the State law. This is a waste of time on a dumb initiative.
While the law would not be a defense to an individual pot prosecution, it would likely have some rhetorical weight in budget decisions in the city budget for the Department of Safety and for the District Attorney’s office. A strong showing also is likely to encourage jury nullification in pot cases.
You can also expect to hear it from every defense attorney in sentencing arguing for a cheap to the city fine rather than an expensive to the city jail sentence.
I was at the DCPA the other night and you guys in Denver need to spend some bucks to fix the place up – I mean really you can’t expect me to spend MY money on YOUR facilities. Just because other cities drive your roads, use your facilities and then leave. Geez, you get all the perks of ownership .. like um – oh never mind. Just vote yes ok.
Signed,
Elbert Douglas
It’s rare that I agree with Gecko, but this orgy of tax increases is amazing. There’s an old saying, “Pigs get fat, hogs get slaughtered”!
As for the marijuana initiative, I rather see a question directing the city government to give writing parking tickets lowest priority.
Good point on the parking tickets. I’m not in Denver, but I wonder how much Denver spends on the meter monitors versus how much they get in ticket fees.
Depends on the time of year and the state of the city’s budget. Honestly, there are times when I park illegally all day with no ticket (fully expecting one) and other days where ticket writers are hiding in bushes throughout the city, waiting to pounce and ticket.
No rhyme or reason.
…that the general budget of Denver is supposed to be spent on infrastructure. Where has all that money gone?
Before I am willing to give them any more money, I want to know what they did the money they already got.
I already voted: NO on everything except Init. 100 (the pot thing). I am generally in favor of the de-criminalization of pot so I while the law before us is totally useless from a practical point of view, it is an opportunity to express my view on the bigger issue.
Dan, you closet conservative…….economic conservative, that is!
What next……joining the Independence Institute?
The city doesn’t even spend money on flowers in Civic Center Park, anymore, that form the numerical shape of the current year.
Historically, the City of Denver has gotten the maintenance contract on it, but in the Owens administration, the Governor arranged to have the City of Aurora do the job on a contract basis for the state instead.
Correct me if I’m wrong here people, but the SCFD only reimburses the counties a portion of what it costs to put their issue on the ballot. There was concern with the clerks/recorders in metro area counties about the 2004 election. SCFD claimed they only had to reimburse a pittance of what it cost to print the ballot language.
If the special district wishes to have language on the ballot, shouldn’t they have to pay the costs of putting it there? Makes me less willing to support their cause.
Regarding the other issues:
No on all except 1B.
Yes on Pot.
Thanks for prompting me to research it more.
Rocky Mountain New editorial on 1B:
http://www.rockymoun…
read this one too:
http://www.denverpos…
The SCFD doesn’t own the Denver Performing Arts Center. Those are City of Denver assets which the city rents to various arts organizations. For example, the ballet and opera companies cut rent checks to Denver to use the Ellie. Some of those organizations are in turn funded by SCFD.
That by passing these measures that would free up money for Carol Boigon to pay employees more than the exorbitant annual raise they are all ready getting. Her timing is perfect on this issue don’t you think Mayor Hickenlooper?
The money raised would go to capital funds.
http://www.denverpos…
I hate he idea of subsidizing boetcher (rich people’s hobby) with the property I own in denver, but the rest of them seem pretty reasonable. Residential property taxes are very low in denver (much lower than the surrounding counties). One property I own the tax will go up about $400-500 dollars and it will still be very low.
My issue with boetcher is that it serves a small community that has the ability to pay itself. If boetcher gets $$50 million can’t the Lion’s Lair get a couple of thousand dollars to fix the sound there? I’ve been to the Lair way more than Boetcher.
was designed for good sound. Even if they have a stage now…
For all of you asking “where did the money go” and voting no, I think the answer is that the money was never there. If the campaigners are to be believed, Denver has historically maintained its infrastructure through bond issues about once a decade, the last of which was about 10 years ago. So, this election includes the usual 10-year projects, plus a tax increase for continued maintenance instead of the 10-year scheme. Having money going into a capital fund, rather than having to borrow money at interest every 10 years, makes sense to me.
Because Boettcher it’s lumped in with other projects, it’s not possible to cast a pure pro/anti Boettcher vote. However, it’s noteworthy that there will be $30 million of private money going to the $90-100 million cost of renovating a public building. And while some characterize it as a “rich person’s hobby”, that could be said about almost any cultural facility. Tickets for the symphony start at $15 for most performances; the cheapest seat to a Broncos game is $39. Given that this will be a property tax increase, it’s likely to hit the rich harder than the poor anyway. CSO is not exactly getting a huge public subsidy already. Their SCFD funding was (in 05-06, latest from their website) 7% of their revenue. 48% came from performances (mostly ticket sales), 37% from contributions. That’s less than $1 million of public funds.
While I wish it were possible to vote on Boettcher separately, in the end I’m supporting all of the measures.
http://www.guardian….
$50-$60 bucks a year for the average homeowner in Denver is worth what A-I will provide.
Pot should be the lowest priority of the Denver Police.