top of page

SAVE Englewood Parks
 

Youth Member Needed for City of Englewood Boards & Commissions

 

The Englewood Parks and Recreation Commission has a position open for a Youth Member.

Please submit your online application prior to the June 8, 2015 deadline. The Englewood City 

Council will conduct interviews on Monday June 8, 2015

 

Click on the link below to apply:

http://www.englewoodgov.org/inside-city-hall/boards-and-commissions/board-commission-vacancies

For additional information or questions, please call 303-762-2684.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As you spend time with Family and Friends we hope you have the opportunity to enjoy the Holiday Lights and Our Englewood Parks! Enjoy the 2014 Englewood Holiday Lighting Awards:
http://englewoodgov.org/home/showdocument?id=11273

 

Mayor’s Choice:The Miller Family 5051 S. Fox St.

“Green Award”: David Alfred Lemay4600 S. Sherman St.

Traditional Christmas:Mark Manzanares 4226 S. Delaware St.

Honorable Mention: Doug Hass 4536 S. Sherman St.

Freda Fenton 3974 S. Sherman St

 

We wish each and everyone one a Merry Christmas and blessed Holiday Season!

Save Englewood Parks

 

 

 

Your Vote protected our Parks now its time to Support our Parks!


First, Thank you to the amazing Volunteers who worked so hard to get signatures, provide information and provide the Voters the opportunity to vote on this important issue.
 

Thanks to the wonderful Englewood Community for supporting our Parks and Recreation assets, preserving them for future generations to enjoy.
 

SAVE Englewood Parks Ballot Issue Election Results
 

Total votes: 7,326  YES   6,358    86.79%       No    968    13.21%                 

 

 

Second, in working for this issue we found out how important it is to support our Park Land in Englewood.

We have a wonderful network of neighborhood Parks. We have people who want to support our Parks, an amazing Parks and Recreation Dept, additional taxes paid to support open space but we need to know your ideas and the needs of your local parks.

Please let us know how we can best support your local parks.

Your ideas for events and projects will help focus efforts where they are needed most.

 

We will take the next couple of months to organize events, projects, funding and volunteers so 2014 will be the start of making the most of our Parkland.
 

To get involved please email SaveEnglewoodParks@gmail.com or visit our website

for information or sign up to volunteer 

 

Your Vote protected our Parks now its time to Support our Parks!
 

SAVE Englewood Parks

 

Please join us:

 

November 18th 2013  7:30 p.m.

Englewood City Council Chambers

2nd Floor Englewood City Center

 

Celebration of 2013 election:

Celebrating the Passage of Ballot Issue 300 and

The re-election of Rick Gillit Dist 4
 and election of Steve Yates our new Englewood City Council Member At Large
.

 

SAVE Englewood Parks endorsed Rick Gillit for his staunch support of our Parks. Rick Voted not to sell Depot Park land and supported the citizens right to protest.  We are grateful to have such a hard working, dedicated representative of his community re-elected to office.
contact Rick Gillit www.englewoodcitizen.com

SAVE Englewood Parks endorsed Steve Yates for his years of work in the community, his support of SAVE Englewood Parks and his passion to protect the rights of the Englewood Citizens and uphold our Charter.

contact Steve Yates http://www.yatesenglewood.com/

We Congratulate both of them for their successful elections and hope you will join us for the swearing in ceremony.

Please call Elaine Hults 303-781-0198 if you have any questions or need

additional information.

 

Thank You!

 

 

Brotzman case sites don't make his case these cases actually uphold our position!

An Ordinance is Legislative if it is Permanent

Why is Council still taking away our right to protest this Ordinance.

City Council needs to do the Right thing and put this Ordinance on the Ballot for the Citizens to Vote on the Sale of this Park Land and uphold our City Charter.

 

WE did a little looking into the situation where Englewood City Attorney Dan Brotzman claims that the action the citizens want to refer to the voters is administrative and not legislative.

We are not lawyers (but we can read) and have consulted several lawyers including the attorney handling the case in Denver. Read the sites Brotzman is using to justify taking away our right to protest this ordinance and decide for yourself.

 

In reading Witcher v Canon City (shown below in part) there is a 3 point check list of how to determine whether the ordinance is administrative or legislative.  The following is from 

 

CITY OF AURORA, Colorado, a municipal Corporation, Petitioner,

v.

Jack Zwerdlinger

This suit dealt with utility rates - 

 

Numerous tests have been employed by various courts to determine whether a particular ordinance is legislative or administrative. It has been held that an action that relates to subjects of a permanent or general character are legislative, while those which are temporary in operation and effect are not. Additionally, acts that are necessary to carry out existing legislative policies and purposes or which are properly characterized as executive are deemed to be administrative, while acts constituting a declaration of public policy are deemed to be legislative. Whitehead v. H and C Development Corp., 204 Va. 144, 129 S.E.2d 691 (1963)Keigley v. Bench, supraMonahan v. Funk, 137 Or. 580, 3 P.2d 778 (1931).

WITCHER v. CANON CITYNOS. 84SA111, 84SA204.

 

In Zwerdlinger and Margolis, three tests for determining whether a specific municipal act is legislative or administrative were set out. First, actions that relate to subjects of a permanent or general character are legislative, while those that are temporary in operation and effect are not. Zwerdlinger, 194 Colo. at 196, 571 P.2d at 1077; Margolis, 638 P.2d at 303; see also 5 E. McQuillin, Municipal Corporations § 16.55 n. 7 (collecting cases). Second, "acts that are necessary to carry out existing legislative policies and purposes or which are properly characterizedas executive are deemed to be administrative, while acts constituting a declaration of public policy are deemed to be legislative." Zwerdlinger, 194 Colo. at 196, 571 P.2d at 1077; Margolis, 638 P.2d at 303; see also 5 E. McQuillin, Municipal Corporations § 16.55 n. 12. Third, if an original act was legislative, then an amendment to the original act must also be legislative. Margolis, 638 P.2d at 304. In order to determine whether the resolution in question was legislative or administrative in character, we must apply the first and second tests to the lease amendment, and the third test to the lease itself.

 

This case had to do with a contract for the bridge over the Royal Gorge that was in its 8th amendment.  The act was deemed administrative because it was not permanent.

 

We may not be attorneys but again, we can read. We have a deep suspicion that the Englewood Council along with the City Attorney Dan Brotzman is misrepresenting the issue in a deliberate effort to thwart the actions of the Citizens of Englewood and deny our right to protest ordiances.  

 

This ordinance is legislative because it is permanent. Then why have we been denied the right to Protest this Ordinance selling our Park land???

 

City Council needs to do the Right thing and put this Ordinance on the Ballot for the Citizens to Vote on the Sale of this Park Land and uphold our City Charter.

 

 

DA's Office investigating City Council activity surrounding sale of Depot Park.

 

Stop City Council from Selling Park Land without OUR VOTE!

Attend City Council Meeting Mon 8-19  7:30 p.m. City Center

Several City Council members failed to disclose outside communications with ex council member Ray Tomasso and Parsons which has prompted an investigation into the activities surrounding the sale of Depot Park.
 

The Historic Depot has been park of Depot Park for 20 years. Why the rush to sell Depot Park for only $30k? Why do they claim it is not a Park, denying our right to vote on this issue? Why is City Council willing to ignore citizen petitions?  Why is Council taking away our right to protest the Land Sale Ordinance? Is selling Park Land Cheap to their friends more important than the oath they took to represent the citizens of Englewood?

 

Read this update on the continuing legal loopholes being used to deny your vote even after we collected over 950 signatures successfully putting this issue before the Englewood Voters.

 

Does City Council have more Legal Tricks Up their Sleeve?‏

Is Englewood City Attorney Brotzman really advising City Council to claim Depot Park is not a park so they can SELL the land and then turn around and claim IT IS a Park so they can get out of trouble with the Voters?

Read More: http://englewoodcitizens.org/

 

 

**IMPORTANT** Attend the City Council Meeting Monday August 19th 7:30 p.m. to STOP THEY SALE of DEPOT PARK!

 

The Sale of Park Land is our VOTE not Council's choice!

 

 

​Englewood City Council Closed Door Meeting Upsets Local Group

Citizens Question Sale of Park, Secrecy

July 24, 2013

by Laurett Barrentine

http://watchdogwire.com/colorado/2013/07/24/closed-door-englewood-city-council-meeting-upsets-local-group/

 

The Englewood City Council discussed selling Depot Park in a closed door Executive Session Monday night despite concerns that the Park Land cannot be sold without a vote of the people. A group known as Save Englewood Parks has been circulating a petition to recognize all Parks as “officially dedicated.” This recognition would close the loophole being used by the Englewood City Council to bypass the voters in their current attempt to sell Depot Park to private business owner Tom Parsons for only $30,000.

 

“No one can prove that any park has been ‘officially dedicated,’ so all are parks are at risk. That is why we need to stop this sale and have the people of Englewood vote in November to protect all our park land from the whims of politicians and put it back in the hands of the voters,” said Elaine Hults, one of the Save Englewood Parks petition sponsors.

 

Several City Council members are being questioned regarding off-the-record contact with Parsons, prior to and during the request for proposal process. Responses to Colorado Open Records requests for all City Council members to disclose any contact with Parsons claimed no private communication. However, documentation from a board meeting along with a council member admitting he deleted emails has the issue of “back door dealing” being raised again.

 

With all the controversy surrounding the Englewood City Council’s process and citizens upset at being denied a vote, the Save Englewood Parks sponsors are surprised that City Council is pushing ahead with selling Depot Park.

 

SAVE Englewood Parks Group asks, "Why won't Council let the People VOTE?"

 

Bev Cummins and Elaine Hults, sponsors of the SAVE ENGLEWOOD PARKS PETITION that seeks to prevent the sale of any Park property unless approved by the Englewood Voters, are questioning a July 8th, memo where the Englewood City Attorney states, "Sale of the Depot would be completed prior to the election in November. The Initiative would try to transfer property that the City no longer owns." 

 

Both women are asking, "What's the rush?"  City Council wants to sell Depot Park to a private business operation with ties to ex-councilman Ray Tomasso and his wife Diane for $30 thousand, $257 thousand less than Englewood wanted 15 years ago.

Read entire article: http://www.englewoodcitizens.org/

Hero of the Day:  Councilmember Rick Gillit

Please email him to thank him for his support: rgillit@englewoodgov.org

 

 

 

 

 

Englewood Discounts Depot Land in Sale to Ex-Council Member

shutterstock_75024814

 

Historic property sold $257,000 below value

 

 

A local government’s decision to give a former council member a steep discount on historic local property has raised concerns.

 

At the June 17 Englewood City Council meeting, Assistant City Manager Mike Flaherty said the historic Englewood Train Depot property returned to city control in 2000 when the now defunct Englewood Historical Society was unable to pay the city $287,000 for the property.

 

Now Ray Tamasso, an ex-council member and former member of the failed Historical Society, has the support of several council members to obtain the Depot and property for only $30,000 as part of a private printing venture with partner Tom Parson.

It is unclear why Englewood wants to devalue the property by $257,000. The city is struggling financially and could really use the money.

Financial trouble was the rationale the city used in a controversial decision to tax the “exempt” Englewood school district construction. The city council is also considering property tax increases to cover the deficit.

 

So giving up more than a quarter million dollars to a private business raises eyebrows.

The high-traffic Depot property, located at the intersection of Dartmouth and Santa Fe Avenues, is a prime retail location. Recently, city council approved an expansive Planned Unit Development (PUD) for the neighboring General Iron Works property. The Depot property is rumored to be a key part of the General Iron Works project.

 

The sudden rush to sell the property to private owners has prompted speculation that the City has another agenda.

Other difficulties plague the proposed sale. One of the concerns is that the city has no right to sell the property. The property is currently listed as park land, which would require a vote by Englewood citizens to sell.  At this time, the city has no plans to put the proposal on the ballot.

 

Another problem is speculation that the city of Englewood does not hold clear title to the property. The information provided that they could only provide a bill of sale, not title, is cause for additional concern.

 

Even if the city is allowed to bypass a citizen vote, to clear the title issues, and to explain the rush to sell, it will still need to justify selling the property at a $257,000 discount to an ex-council member.

.​http://watchdogwire.com/colorado/2013/06/20/englewood-council-discounts-depot-land-selling-to-ex-council-member/

 

 

 

 

 

Controversy Surrounds Depot and Park Sale

 

 

E-mail Print

With all the controversy surrounding the proposed sale of the Englewood Depot and Park Land the City Council has decided to include 2 citizens
along with City Employees and Council to conduct interviews. Please download the application below if you are interested in volunteering.

Only two remain interested in acquiring the property....

 

                                                      Read the full article here.

 

This is a copy of the email sent by Councilmember Rick Gillit

Save Englewood Parks commends him for supporting the Rights of our Englewood Citizens.

 

City Manager and City Attorney,

 

     It has been brought to my attention by our citizens that our 2006 Parks and Recreation Master Plan - An Official City Document, shows the Depot in three separate instances as a "PARK".  I have attached three exhibits of the "Parks and Recreation Master Plan" -  Page 18, 21, & Page 25.  I would ask that the sale of this property be delayed or "STAYED" until this matter is thoroughly discussed both in Study Session and in Public Hearings as well.

 

     Council has set a precedence on delaying major decisions in the past to give all parties the right to voice their concerns, as in the Delay of the Dissolvent of the Bid to verify Signatures, and this would be prudent and a duty to our residents to ensure that there are no errors in the City's part. 

 

     I prefer we act on the side of caution and prudence in ensuring the public that this sale is legal and does not require the Publics vote as stated in our Charter.  See Quote Below:

 

"Lands granted to or purchased by the City for park purposes, and so dedicated, shall not be sold or conveyed without majority vote of the electors voting thereon at any general or special election, subject to the limitations contained in Section 14 hereof. Nothing in this provision shall be so construed as to prevent the City from selling or conveying, as hereinafter provided, lands purchased for purposes other than parks and not so dedicated, even though such lands may be used for park purposes. Real property of the City may be sold, subject to the restrictions contained in Sections 72 and 121 of this Charter without a vote of the electors, but only by ordinance, enacted, not using the emergency provision. Real property of the City may be leased, provided that no lease of any real property shall exceed a period of twenty (20) years, except leases to other municipalities or governmental agencies, or leases approved by a vote of the electors at any general or special election, subject to the limitations contained in Section 14 hereof." (Amended 11-2-1965)

 

Please put this discussion on an upcoming Study Session so we can get complete understanding on why our city management says it is not a park when we have an official city document stating it three times.

 

Lets not rush into the wrong decision.  Lets take our time and ensure the public that we are making the right choices and have the legal precedent to proceed.  If we have not the precedent, then we also need to make those corrections.

 

This matter should be thoroughly resolved prior to sale in public discussion.

 

I have CC'd the concerned citizens in this email for transparency reasons.

 

Rick Gillit

City Council Member - District #4

Office: 303-762-2300

Direct: (303) 246-4780

Email: rgillit@englewoodgov.org

Personal Web Page - www.EnglewoodCitizen.com

1000 Englewood Parkway

Englewood, CO 80110-2373

bottom of page